Sex Roles

, Volume 12, Issue 9–10, pp 981–992 | Cite as

Nonstranger sexual aggression: A discriminant analysis of the psychological characteristics of undetected offenders

  • Mary P. Koss
  • Kenneth E. Leonard
  • Dana A. Beezley
  • Cheryl J. Oros


Rape is an underreported and underconvicted crime. Therefore, many highly sexually aggressive men are missed by research employing judicial identification for sample selection. The present study examined the psychological characteristics of three types of undetected sexually aggressive men who had assaulted female acquaintances. Subjects were selected on the basis of their responses to the Sexual Experiences Survey and completed questionnaires that reflected psychological variables relevant to two major theoretical models of rape, the psychopathology model and the social control/social conflict model. Data were analyzed via discriminant analysis. The groups were significantly discriminated by seven variables, including six rape-supportive attitudes. The findings support a social control/social conflict explanation of nonstranger sexual aggression.


Theoretical Model Social Psychology Discriminant Analysis Sample Selection Sexual Experience 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amir, M. Patterns in forcible rape. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.Google Scholar
  2. Brownmiller, S. Against our will: Men, women and rape. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1975.Google Scholar
  3. Burt, M. R. Attitudes supportive of rape in American culture. In House Committee on Science and Technology, Subcommittee on Domestic and International Scientific Planning, Analysis, and Cooperation, Research into Violent Behavior: Sexual Assaults (Hearing, 95th Congress, 2nd Session, January 10–12, 1978). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978). Pp. 277–322.Google Scholar
  4. Burt, M. R. Cultural myths and support for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 38, 217–230.Google Scholar
  5. Buss, A. H., & Durkee, A. An inventory for assessing different kinds of hostility. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 1957, 21, 343–349.Google Scholar
  6. Clark, L., & Lewis, D. Rape: The price of coercive sexuality. Toronto: Women's Press, 1977.Google Scholar
  7. Deming, M. P., & Eppy, A. The sociology of rape. Sociology and Social Research, 1981, 65, 357–380.Google Scholar
  8. Feild, H. S. Attitudes toward rape: A comparative analysis of police, rapists, crisis counselors, and citizens. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1978, 36, 156–179.Google Scholar
  9. Glaser, D. Crime in our changing society. New York: Holt, Winston, 1978.Google Scholar
  10. Groth, A. N., & Birnbaum, H. J. Men who rape: The psychology of the offender. New York: Plenum, 1979.Google Scholar
  11. Hare, R. D. Psychopathy: The theory and research. New York: Wiley, 1970.Google Scholar
  12. Klecka, W. R. Discriminant analysis. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1980.Google Scholar
  13. Koss, M. P., & Oros, C. J. The Sexual experiences Survey: A research instrument investigating sexual aggression and victimization. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1982, 50, 455–457.Google Scholar
  14. Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. Criminal victimization surveys in 13 American cities. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.Google Scholar
  15. Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. Forcible rape: A National study of response by prosecutors. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.Google Scholar
  16. Malamuth, N. M. Rape proclivity among males. Journal of Social Issues, 1981, 37, 138–157.Google Scholar
  17. Malamuth, N. H., & Check, J. V. P. Sexual arousal to rape depictions. Journal of Abnormal psychology, 1983, 92, 55–67.Google Scholar
  18. Predue, W. C., & Lester, D. Personality characteristics of rapists. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1972, 35, 514.Google Scholar
  19. Rabkin, J. G. The epidemiology of forcible rape. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1979, 49, 634–647.Google Scholar
  20. Rader, C. M. MMPI profile types of exposers, rapists, and assaulters in a court services population. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1977, 45, 61–69.Google Scholar
  21. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. A short version of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1973, 2, 219–220.Google Scholar
  22. Tieger, T. Self-rated likelihood of raping and social perception of rape. Journal of Research in Personality, 1981, 15, 147–158.Google Scholar
  23. Weis, K., & Borges, S. S. Victimology and rape: The case of the legitimate victim. Issues in Criminology, 1973, 8, 71–115.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary P. Koss
    • 1
  • Kenneth E. Leonard
    • 2
  • Dana A. Beezley
    • 1
  • Cheryl J. Oros
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyKent State UniversityKent
  2. 2.Western Psychiatric Institute and University of PittsburghUSA
  3. 3.U.S. General Accounting OfficeUSA

Personalised recommendations