Abstract
There is evidence to suggest that in an acquaintance rape the victim is perceived less favorably and there is more leniency toward the perpetrator than in a stranger rape. The purpose of the present study was to assess the perceptual effects of factors that might underlie this differential perception. Victim-perpetrator attraction and ambiguity in victim's desire for intercourse were varied since both are often perceived to occur at a much higher frequency in acquaintance rape than stranger rape. The design of the study was a 3 (victim-perpetrator attraction — minimal, moderate, maximal) × 2 (ambiguity in desire for intercourse — ambiguous, relatively unambiguous) × 2 (gender of subject — male, female) factorial. The results indicated that ambiguity had a significant effect on perceptions. More specifically, perception tended to be less favorable toward the victim and more lenient toward the defendant when there was ambiguity in the victim's desire for intercourse. Additionally, when compared to females, males' perception tended to be less favorable toward the victim and more lenient toward the perpetrator. There were no other significant main effects or interactions. The implications of these findings for the differential perception of acquaintance and stranger rape are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amir, M. Patterns in forcible rape. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966.
Burt, M. R. Cultural myths and support for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 38, 217–230.
Check, J. P., & Malamuth, N. Sex role stereotyping and reactions to depictions of stranger versus acquaintance rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1983, 45, 344–356.
Clark, L., & Lewis, D. Rape: The price of coercive sexuality. Toronto: The Women's Press, 1977.
Cobb, K., & Schaver, N. Michigan criminal assault law. In D. Chappel, R. Geis, & G. Geis (Eds.), Forcible rape: The crime, the victim, and the offender. New York: Columbia University Press, 1971.
Deitz, S. R. Double jeopardy: The rape victim in court. Rocky Mountain Psychologist, Fall 1980, pp. 1–11.
Deitz, S. R., Blackwell, K. T., Daley, P. C., & Bertley, B. Measurement of empathy towards rape victim and rapist. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 43, 372–384.
Duncan, B. Differential social perception and attribution of intergroup violence: Testing the lower limits of stereotyping of blacks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 34, 590–598.
Fischer, G. College student attitudes towards forcible date rape: I. Cognitive predictors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1986, 15, 457–466.
Fischer, G. Hispanic and majority student attitudes towards forcible date rape as a function of differences in attitudes towards women. Sex Roles, 1987, 17, 93–101.
Jenkins, M., & Dambrot, F. The attribution of date rape: Observers' attitudes and sexual experiences and the dating situation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1987, 17, 875–895.
Kalven, H., & Zaisel, H. The American jury. Toronto: Little Brown Company, 1966.
Kanin, E. J. Male aggression in dating-courtship relations. American Journal of Sociology, 1957, 63, 197–204.
Klemmack, S. H., & Klemmack, D. L. The social definition of rape. In M. J. Walker & S. C. Brodsky (Eds.), Sexual assault. Lexington, MA: D. C. Health and Co., 1976.
Legrand, C. Rape and rape law: Sexism in society and law. In D. Chappel, R. Geis, & G. Geis (Eds.), Forcible rape: The crime, the victim, the offender. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.
Malamuth, N., & Check, J. The effects of mass media exposure on acceptance of violence against women. Journal of Research in Personality, 1981, 15, 435–466.
Mynatt, C., Allgeir, E. Attribution of responsibility by victims of sexual coercion. In E. R. Allgeir (Chair) Sexual coercion: Political issues and empirical findings. Symposium presented at annual meeting for the scientific study of sex, 1985.
Reyes, R. M., Thompson, W. C., & Bower, G. H. Judgemental biases resulting from differing availabilities of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 39, 2–12.
Richardson, D. C., & Campbell, J. C. Alcohol and rape: The effect of alcohol on attribution of blame for rape. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1982, 8, 468–476.
Russel, D. Sexual exploitation: Rape, child sexual abuse, and workplace harassment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1984.
Sagarin, E. Forcible rape and the problem of the rights of the accused. In D. Chappel, R. Geis, & G. Geis (Eds.), Forcible rape: The crime, the victim, the offender. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.
Sagar, S., & Schofield, J. Racial and behavioral cues in black and white childrens perception of ambiguously aggressive acts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980, 39, 590–598.
Seligman, C., Brickman, J., & Koulack, D. Rape and physical attractiveness: Assigning responsibility to victims. Journal of Personality, 1977, 45, 555–563.
Shotland, R. L., & Strau, M. K. Bystander response to assault: When a man attacks a woman. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976, 34, 990–999.
Taylor, S., & Fiske, S. Point of view and perceptions of causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 32, 439–455.
Zillman, D., & Bryant, J. Massive exposure to pornography. In N. Malamuath & E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and sexual aggression. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, 1984.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Johnson, J.D., Jackson, L.A. Assessing the effects of factors that might underlie the differential perception of acquaintance and stranger rape. Sex Roles 19, 37–45 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00292462
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00292462