Abstract
Building on Carroll and Clark (Sex Roles 55:469–480, 2006), the current study examined whether women’s scripts overlap or diverge from acquaintance rape scripts reported by men. Using a preset rape scenario, scripts were elicited from a sample of 292 women and 125 men from the United States. A mixed-methods approach was utilized, including a content analysis of script themes as well as modeling analyses to examine gender differences in underlying latent structures. The findings confirm that, for both women and men, there is not a single rape script. However, when looking at latent structures, there is clear evidence of the diverging conceptualization of rape for women and men. Findings highlight how the Traditional Sexual Script continues to influence one’s understanding of cultural scenarios.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abbey, A., & McAuslan, P. (2004). A longitudinal examination of male college students’ perpetration of sexual assault. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 747–756.
Abbey, A., McAuslan, P., & Ross, L. T. (1998). Sexual assault perpetration by college men: The role of alcohol misperception of sexual intent, and sexual beliefs and experiences. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 17, 167–195.
Abbey, A., McAuslan, P., Zawacki, T., Clinton, A. M., & Buck, P. O. (2001). Attitudinal, experiential, and situational predictors of sexual assault perpetration. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 784–807.
Abbey, A., Parkhill, M. R., & Koss, M. P. (2005). The effects of frame of reference on responses to questions about sexual assault victimization and perpetration. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 364–373.
Alksnis, C., Desmarais, S., & Wood, E. (1996). Gender differences in scripts for different types of dates. Sex Roles, 34, 321–336.
Bartoli, A. M., & Clark, M. D. (2006). The dating game: Similarities and differences in dating scripts among college students. Sexuality and Culture, 10, 54–80.
Bondurant, B. (2001). University women’s acknowledgment of rape. Violence Against Women, 7, 294–314.
Bower, G. H., Black, J. B., & Turner, T. J. (1979). Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology, 11, 177–220.
Brener, N. D., McMahon, P. M., Warren, C. W., & Douglas, K. A. (1999). Forced sexual intercourse and associated health-risk behaviors among female college students in the United States. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 252–259.
Burt, M. R. (1991). Rape myths and acquaintance rape. In A. Parrot & L. Bechhofer (Eds.), Acquaintance rape: The hidden crime. New York: Wiley.
Byers, E. S. (1996). How well does the Traditional Sexual Script explain sexual coercion? Review of a program of research. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 8, 7–25.
Carroll, M. H., & Clark, M. D. (2006). Men’s acquaintance rape scripts: A comparison between a regional university and a military academy. Sex Roles, 55, 469–480.
Clark, M. D., Miller, M. S., Moore, D. L., & Waugh, C. K. (1992). Scripts for date rape: Similarities and differences in males and females scripts. Eric document 345155.
Crome, S. A., & McCabe, M. P. (2001). Adult rape scripting within a victimological perspective. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6, 395–413.
Ferraro, K. F. (1996). Women’s fear of victimization: Shadow of sexual assault? Social Forces, 75, 667–690.
Fisher, B. S., & Sloan, J. J. (2003). Unraveling the fear of victimization among college women: Is the “shadow of sexual assault hypothesis” supported? Justice Quarterly, 20, 633–659.
Frese, B., Moya, M., & Megías, J. L. (2004). Social perception of rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 143–161.
Gagnon, J. H. (1990). The explicit and implicit use of the scripting perspective in sex research. Annual Review of Sex Research, 1, 1–43.
Harned, M. S. (2004). Does it matter what you call it? The relationship between labeling unwanted sexual experiences and distress. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 1090–1099.
Hickman, S. E., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (1997). College women’s fears and precautionary behaviors relating to acquaintance rape and stranger rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 527–547.
Kahn, A. S., Mathie, V. A., & Torgler, C. (1994). Rape scripts and rape acknowledgment. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 53–66.
Koss, M. P., Dinero, T. E., Seible, C. A., & Cox, S. L. (1988). Stranger and acquaintance rape: Are there differences in the victim’s experience? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12, 1–24.
Koss, M. P., Gidycz, C. A., & Wisniewski, N. (1987). The scope of rape: Incidence and prevalence of sexual aggression and victimization in a national sample of higher education students. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 55, 162–170.
Lenton, A. P., & Bryan, A. (2005). An affair to remember: The role of sexual scripts in perceptions of sexual intent. Personal Relationships, 12, 483–498.
Littleton, H. L., & Axsom, D. (2003). Rape and seduction scripts of university students: Implications for rape attributions and unacknowledged rape. Sex Roles, 49, 465–475.
Littleton, H. L., Breikopf, C. R., & Berenson, A. B. (2007). Rape scripts of low-income European American and Latina women. Sex Roles, 56, 509–516.
Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1994). Rape myths: In review. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 133–164.
Muehlenhard, C. L., & Linton, M. A. (1987). Date rape and sexual aggression in dating situations: Incidence and risk factors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34, 186–196.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2005). Mplus user’s guide (3rd ed.). Los Angles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Norris, J., Nurius, P. S., & Dimeff, L. A. (1996). Through her eyes: Factors affecting women’s perception and resistance to acquaintance sexual aggression threat. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 123–145.
Nurius, P. S., & Norris, J. (1996). A cognitive ecological model of women’s response to male sexual aggression in dating. Journal of Personality and Human Sexuality, 8, 117–139.
Peterson, Z., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (2004). Was it rape? The function of women’s rape myth acceptance and definitions of sex in labeling their own experiences. Sex Roles, 51, 129–144.
Popovich, P. M., Jolton, J. A., Mastrangelo, P. M., Everton, W. J., & Somers, J. M. (1995). Sexual harassment scripts: A means to understanding a phenomenon. Sex Roles, 32, 315–335.
Rose, S., & Frieze, I. H. (1989). Young singles scripts for a first date. Gender & Society, 3, 258–268.
Rose, S., & Frieze, I. H. (1993). Young singles’ contemporary dating scripts. Sex Roles, 28, 499–509.
Rozee, P. D., & Koss, M. P. (2001). Rape: A century of resistance. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25, 295–311.
Rubenzahl, S. A., & Corcoran, K. J. (1998). The prevalence and characteristics of male perpetrators of acquaintance rape: New research methodology reveals new findings. Violence Against Women, 4, 713–735.
Ryan, K. M. (1988). Rape and seduction scripts. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12, 237–245.
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1987). A sexual scripts approach. In J. H. Geer & W. T. O’Donohue (Eds.), Theories of human sexuality (pp. 363–383). New York: Plenum.
Testa, M., VanZile-Tamsen, C., Livingston, J. A., & Koss, M. P. (2004). Assessing women’s experiences of sexual aggression using the sexual experiences survey: Evidence for validity and implications for research. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 256–265.
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Full report of the prevalence, incidence, and consequences of violence against women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NCJ 183781). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
Zweig, J. M., Crockett, L. J., Sayer, A., & Vicary, J. R. (1999). A longitudinal examination of the consequences of sexual victimization for rural young adult women. The Journal of Sex Research, 36, 396–409.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Clark, M.D., Carroll, M.H. Acquaintance Rape Scripts of Women and Men: Similarities and Differences. Sex Roles 58, 616–625 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9373-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9373-3