Sex Roles

, Volume 62, Issue 7–8, pp 505–519 | Cite as

Social Perception of Rape Victims in Dating and Married Relationships: The Role of Perpetrator’s Benevolent Sexism

  • Mercedes Durán
  • Miguel Moya
  • Jesús L. Megías
  • G. Tendayi Viki
Original Article

Abstract

Two hypothetical scenario studies examined how situational, perpetrator, and observer factors affect blame towards rape victims. In Study 1, Spanish high school students (N = 206) read about a rape committed by a boyfriend or husband who was described as benevolently sexist or not. Study 2 (N = 201 British college students) replicated and extended Study 1 by adding a condition in which the rapist was described as a hostile sexist. In both studies, participants’ benevolent sexism scores predicted more victim blame when the rapist was described as a husband (but not a boyfriend) who held benevolently sexist attitudes. Study 2 showed that participants’ hostile sexism scores predicted more victim blame when the rapist was described as a hostile sexist.

Keywords

Ambivalent sexism Intimate relationships Rape Victim blame 

References

  1. Abbey, A., Zawacki, T., Buck, P. O., Clinton, A. M., & McAuslan, P. (2004). Sexual assault and alcohol consumption: what do we know about their relationship and what types of research are still needed? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 9, 271–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Masser, B., & Bohner, G. (2003). Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance rape: the role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 111–125.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, I., & Swainson, V. (2001). Perceived motivation for rape: gender differences in beliefs about female and male rape. Current Research in Social Psychology, 6, 107–122.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, K. B., Cooper, H., & Okamura, L. (1997). Individual differences and attitudes toward rape: a meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 295–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2005). The burden of benevolent sexism: how it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 633–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bell, S. T., Kuriloff, P. J., & Lottes, I. (1994). Understanding attributions of blame in stranger rape and date rape situations: an examination of gender, race, identification, and students’ social perceptions of rape victims. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14, 1719–1734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ben-David, S., & Schneider, O. (2005). Rape perceptions, gender role attitudes, and victim-perpetrator acquaintance. Sex Roles, 53, 385–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bohner, G., Reinhard, M.-A., Rutz, S., Sturm, S., Kerschbaum, B., & Effler, D. (1998). Rape myths as neutralizing cognitions: evidence for a causal impact of anti-victim attitudes on men’s self-reported likelihood of raping. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bohner, G., Jarvis, C. I., Eyssel, F., & Siebler, F. (2005). The causal impact of rape myth acceptance on men’s rape proclivity: comparing sexually coercive and noncoercive men. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 819–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bohner, G., Siebler, F., & Schmelcher, J. (2006). Social norms and the likelihood of raping: perceived rape myth acceptance of others affects men’s rape proclivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 286–297.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Burt, M. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217–230.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Check, J., & Malamuth, N. M. (1983). Sex role stereotyping and reactions to depictions of stranger versus acquaintance rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 344–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cowan, G. (2000). Beliefs about the causes of four types of rape. Sex Roles, 42, 807–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Durán, M., & Moya, M. (2007, July). The role of ambivalent sexist attitudes in social perception of rape committed by heterosexual intimate partners: attribution of guilt. Prague: Xth European Congress of Psychology, Prague.Google Scholar
  16. Expósito, F., Moya, M., & Glick, P. (1998). Sexismo ambivalente: medición y correlatos [Ambivalent sexism: Measurements and correlations]. Revista de Psicología Social, 13, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ferro, C., Cermele, J., & Saltzman, A. (2008). Current perceptions of marital rape. Some good and not-so-good news. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 764–779.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fineran, S., & Bolen, R. M. (2006). Risk factors for peer sexual harassment in schools. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21, 1169–1190.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Forbes, G. B., Jobe, R. L., White, K. B., Bloesch, E., & Adams-Curtis, L. E. (2007). Perceptions of dating violence following a sexual or nonsexual betrayal of trust: effects of gender, sexism, acceptance of rape myths, and vengeance motivation. Sex Roles, 52, 165–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frese, B., Moya, M., & Megías, J. L. (2004). Social perception of rape. How rape myth acceptance modulates the influence of situational factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 143–161.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. George, W. H., & Martinez, L. J. (2002). Victim blaming in rape: effects of victim and perpetrator race, type of rape, and participant racism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 110–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001a). Ambivalent sexism. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, 33 (pp. 115–188). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  24. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001b). An ambivalent alliance: hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J., Abrams, D., Masser, B., et al. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Glick, P., Lameiras, M., Fiske, S. T., Eckes, T., Masser, B., Volpato, C., et al. (2004). Bad but bold: ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 713–728.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Grubb, A., & Harrower, J. (2008). Attribution of blame in cases of rape: an analysis of participant gender, type of rape and perceived similarity to the victim. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13, 396–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Halpern, C. T., Oslak, S. G., Young, M. L., Martin, S. L., & Kupper, L. L. (2001). Partner violence among adolescents in opposite-sex romantic relationships: findings from the national longitudinal study of adolescents’ health. American Journal of Public Health, 91, 1679–1685.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Herrera, M. C. & Expósito, F. (2009). Responsabilidad compartida: influencia de los medios de comunicación en la atribución de culpabilidad y justificación de la violencia de género [Shared responsibility: the influence of mass media in attributions of guilt and justification of gender violence]. Anuario de Psicología Jurídica.Google Scholar
  30. Higgins, E. T. (1996). The “self digest”: self-knowledge serving self-regulatory functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 1062–1083.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., & Wan, C. K. (1990). Interaction effects in multiple regression. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Johnson, J. D., & Russ, I. (1989). Effects of salience of consciousness-raising information on perception of acquaintance versus stranger rape. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1182–1197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Koss, M. P. (1992). The underdetection of rape: methodological choices influence incidence estimates. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 61–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Krahe, B. (1988). Victim and observer characteristics as determinants of responsibility attributions to victims of rape. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 50–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lameiras, F. M., Rodriguez, C. Y., & Gonzalez, M. (2004). Evolution of hostile sexism and benevolent sexism in a Spanish sample. Social Indicators Research, 66, 197–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Masser, B., Viki, G. T., & Power, C. (2006). Hostile sexism and rape proclivity among men. Sex Roles, 54, 565–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Monson, C. M., Byrd, G. R., & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J. (1996). To have and to hold. Perceptions of marital rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11, 410–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Moya, M., Megías, J. L., & Frese, B. (2005, July). The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in affective and ideological responses of men and women to rape. Würzburg: XIV General Meeting European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, Würzburg.Google Scholar
  39. Newcombe, P. A., Van Den Eynde, J., Hafner, D., & Jolly, L. (2008). Attributions of responsibility for rape: differences across familiarity of situation, gender, and acceptance of rape myths. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 1736–1754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ong, A. S. J., & Ward, C. A. (1999). The effects of sex and power schemas, attitudes toward women, and victim resistance on rape attributions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 362–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Robert, T. A. (2006). Predictors of partner abuse in a nationally representative sample of adolescents involved in heterosexual dating relationships. Violence and Victims, 21, 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ryckman, R. M., Kaczor, L. M., & Thornton, B. (1992). Traditional and nontraditional women’s attributions of responsibility to physically resistive and nonresistive rape victims. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1453–1463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schuller, R. A., & Klippenstine, M. A. (2004). The impact of complainant sexual history evidence on jurors’ decisions: considerations from a psychological perspective. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 10, 321–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sullivan, J. P., & Mosher, D. L. (1990). Acceptance of guided imagery of marital rape as a function of macho personality. Violence & Victims, 5, 275–286.Google Scholar
  45. Ullman, S. E. (1996). Social reactions, coping strategies, and self-blame attributions in adjustment to sexual assault. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 505–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. United Nations (2006). In-depth study on all forms of violence against women. Report of the Secretary-General. /A/61/122/ Add.1.Google Scholar
  47. Vézina, J., & Hébert, M. (2007). Risk factors for victimization in romantic relationships of young women. A review of empirical studies and implications for prevention. Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 8, 33–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Viki, G. T., & Abrams, D. (2002). But she was unfaithful: benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 289–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Viki, G. T., Abrams, D., & Hutchison, P. (2003). The “true” Romantic: Benevolent Sexism and Paternalistic Chivalry. Sex Roles, 49, 533–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Walker, L. E. A. (1979). The battered woman. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  51. Walker, L. E. A. (2000). The battered woman syndrome. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  52. Whatley, M. A. (2005). The effect of participant sex, victim dress, and traditional attitudes on causal judgments for marital rape victims. Journal of Family Violence, 20, 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yamawaki, N. (2007). Rape perception and the function of ambivalent sexism and gender-role traditionality. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 406–423.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mercedes Durán
    • 1
  • Miguel Moya
    • 2
    • 5
  • Jesús L. Megías
    • 3
  • G. Tendayi Viki
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Social PsychologyUniversidad de GranadaGranadaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Social PsychologyUniversidad de GranadaGranadaSpain
  3. 3.Department of Experimental PsychologyUniversidad de GranadaGranadaSpain
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Kent at CanterburyCanterburyEngland
  5. 5.Department of Social Psychology, Facultad de PsicologíaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations