Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 41, Issue 3–4, pp 261–277 | Cite as

An Examination of Date Rape, Victim Dress, and Perceiver Variables Within the Context of Attribution Theory

  • Jane E. Workman
  • Elizabeth W. Freeburg
Article

Abstract

Researchers examined the influence of victimdress, perceiver gender, situational relevance, andpersonal relevance on attributions of responsibility fordate rape. Participants were from a campus population described as 75% White non-Hispanic, 14% Blacknon-Hispanic, 2% Asian, 2% Hispanic, 4% nonresidentaliens, and 3% other, and were characterized asprimarily middle class. Participants read a date rapescenario, viewed a photograph of the victim, attributedresponsibility to victim and perpetrator, and estimatedsituational relevance and personal relevance.Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) indicated a significant difference between groups(perceiver gender, victim dress) on the two dependentvariables (responsibility of victim and perpetrator) andthe covariates. There were significant differences in attribution of responsibility to the femalevictim due to perceiver gender, victim dress, and thecovariate personal relevance, accounting for a smallproportion of variance. Men attributed moreresponsibility to the victim than women. Both men and womenwho viewed a photograph of the victim in a short skirtattributed more responsibility to the victim than thosewho viewed a photograph of the victim in a moderate or long skirt. As womens' personal relevanceincreased, attribution of responsibility to the victimdecreased. Men attributed less responsibility to themale perpetrator than women. As mens' situational relevance increased, attribution ofresponsibility to the perpetrator decreased. Presumably,participants' attributed responsibility was motivated byblame avoidance. Theoretical and practical implications are presented.

Keywords

Covariance Social Psychology Middle Class Practical Implication Personal Relevance 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Amick, A., & Calhoun, K. (1987). Resistance of sexual aggression: Personality, attitudinal, and situational factors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16(2), 153–163.Google Scholar
  2. Best, J., & Kahn, J. (1998). Research in education (8th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  3. Bradbury, T. N., & Fincham, F. D. (1990). Attributions in marriage: Review and critique. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 3–33.Google Scholar
  4. Bridges, J. (1991). Perceptions of date and stranger rape: A difference in sex role expectations and rape-supportive beliefs. Sex Roles, 24(56), 291–307.Google Scholar
  5. Calhoun, K., & Townsley, R. (1991). Attributions of re sponsibility for acquaintance rape. In A. Parrot & L. Bechhofer (Eds.), Acquaintance rape: The hidden crime (pp. 57–70). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Cassidy, L., & Hurrell, R. (1995). The influence of victim's attire on adolescents' judgments of date rape. Adolescence, 30(118), 319–323.Google Scholar
  7. Chaikin, A. L., & Darley, J. M. (1973). Victim or perpetrator?: Defensive attribution of responsibility and the need for order and justice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(2), 268–275.Google Scholar
  8. Dull, R., & Giacopassi, D. (1987). Demographic corre lates of sexual and dating attitudes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 14(2), 175–193.Google Scholar
  9. Enrollment classification of students' ethnic origin. (1998). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University, Office of Admissions and Re cords.Google Scholar
  10. Fairstein, L. (1993). Sexual violence: Our war against rape. New York: William Morrow & Company.Google Scholar
  11. Feild, H. (1978). Attitudes toward rape: A comparative analysis of police, rapists, crisis counse lors, and citizens. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(2), 156–179.Google Scholar
  12. Fulero, S., & Delara, C. (1976). Rape victims and attributed responsibility: A defensive attribution approach. Victimology: An International Journal, 1(4), 551–563.Google Scholar
  13. Harris, L. (1996, Septembe r 22). The hidden world of dating violence. Parade, pp. 4–6.Google Scholar
  14. Holcomb, D., Holcomb, L., Sondag, K., & Williams, N. (1991). Attitudes about date rape: Gender difference s among college students. College Student Journal, 25(4), 434–439.Google Scholar
  15. Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) survey. (1999). Carbondale: Southe rn Illinois Univrsity, Institutional Research and Studies.Google Scholar
  16. Kanekar, S., & Kolsawalla, M. (1980). Responsibility of a rape victim in relation to her re spectability, attractiveness, and provocativeness. The Jo urn al of Social Psychology, 112, 153–154.Google Scholar
  17. Koss, M. (1988). Hidden rape: Sexual aggre ssion and victimization in a national sample of students in higher education. In A. W. Burgess (Ed.), Rape and sexual assault (Vol. 2, pp. 3–25). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  18. Koss, M., Leonard, K., Beezley, D., & Oros, C. (1985). Nonstrange r sexual aggression: A discriminant analysis of the psychological characteristics of undetected offenders. Sex Roles, 12(9/10), 981–992.Google Scholar
  19. Koss, M. P., & Oros, C. (1982). Sexual experiences survey: A re search instrument investigating sexual aggression and victimization. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 455–457.Google Scholar
  20. Krulewitz, J. (1982). Reactions to rape victims: Effects of rape circumstance s, victim's emotional re sponse, and sex of helper. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29(6), 645–654.Google Scholar
  21. Langley, T., Beatty, G., Yost, E., O'Neal, E., Faucett, J., Taylor, S., Franke l, P., & Craig, K. 1991). How behavioral cue s in a date rape scenario influence judgments regarding victim and perpetrator. Forensic Reports, 4(3), 355–358.Google Scholar
  22. Miller, B., & Marshall, J. (1987). Coercive sex on the university campus. Journal of College Student Personnel, 93(2), 216–221.Google Scholar
  23. Muehlenhard, C. (1988). Misinterpreted dating behaviors and the risk of date rape. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 6, 20–37.Google Scholar
  24. Muehlenhard, C., Friedman, D., & Thomas, C. (1985). Is date rape justifiable? The effects of dating activity, who initiated, who paid, and men's attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9(3), 297–310.Google Scholar
  25. Muehlenhard, C., & Hollabaugh, L. (1988). Do women sometimes say no when they mean yes? The prevalence and correlates of women's token resistance to sex. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 872–879.Google Scholar
  26. Muehlenhard, C., & Linton, M. (1987). Date rape and sexual aggression in dating situations: Incidence and risk factors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34(2), 186–196.Google Scholar
  27. Muehlenhard, C., & MacNaughton, J. (1988). Women's beliefs about women who ``lead men on”. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 7(1), 65–79.Google Scholar
  28. Newman, B., & Colon, I. (1994). Beliefs about rape among college males: A revision of the rape myth acceptance scale. College Student Journal, 28(1), 10–17.Google Scholar
  29. Quackenbush, R. (1991). Attitudes of college men toward women and rape. Journal of College Student Development, 32, 376–377.Google Scholar
  30. Richards, L., Rollerson, B., & Phillips, J. (1991). Perceptions of submissiveness: Implications for victimization. The Journal of Psychology, 125(4), 407–411.Google Scholar
  31. Shaver, K.G. (1970).Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned to an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 380–383.Google Scholar
  32. Shaver, K. G. (1985). The attribution of blame: Causality, responsibility, and blameworthiness. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Tieger, T. (1981). Self-rated likelihood of raping and the social perception of rape. Journal of Research in Personality, 15, 147–158.Google Scholar
  34. White, J., & Humphrey, J. (1991). Young people's attitudes toward acquaintance rape. In A. Parrot & L. Bechhofer (Eds.), Acquaintance rape: The hidden crime (pp. 96–111). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  35. Williams, N. (1989, October 10). Date rape devastates victim by violating sense of trust. Daily Egyptian, p. 6.Google Scholar
  36. Workman, J., & Orr, R. (1996).Clothing, sex of subject, and rape myth acceptance as factors affecting attributions about an incident of acquaintance rape. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 14(4), 276–284.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jane E. Workman
  • Elizabeth W. Freeburg

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations