SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-David, S., & Schneider, O. (2005). Rape perceptions, gender role attitudes, and victim-perpetrator acquaintance. Sex Roles, 53, 385–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 ra**. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 257–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohner, G., Siebler, F., & Schmelcher, J. (2006). Social norms and the likelihood of ra**: perceived rape myth acceptance of others affects men’s rape proclivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 286–297.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, M. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217–230.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Check, J., & Malamuth, N. M. (1983). Sex role stereoty** and reactions to depictions of stranger versus acquaintance rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 344–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, G. (2000). Beliefs about the causes of four types of rape. Sex Roles, 42, 807–823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Expósito, F., Moya, M., & Glick, P. (1998). Sexismo ambivalente: medición y correlatos [Ambivalent sexism: Measurements and correlations]. Revista de Psicología Social, 13, 159–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fineran, S., & Bolen, R. M. (2006). Risk factors for peer sexual harassment in schools. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21, 1169–1190.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001b). An ambivalent alliance: hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • Higgins, E. T. (1996). The “self digest”: self-knowledge serving self-regulatory functions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 1062–1083.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., & Wan, C. K. (1990). Interaction effects in multiple regression. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koss, M. P. (1992). The underdetection of rape: methodological choices influence incidence estimates. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 61–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krahe, B. (1988). Victim and observer characteristics as determinants of responsibility attributions to victims of rape. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 50–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masser, B., Viki, G. T., & Power, C. (2006). Hostile sexism and rape proclivity among men. Sex Roles, 54, 565–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Ullman, S. E. (1996). Social reactions, co** strategies, and self-blame attributions in adjustment to sexual assault. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 505–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations (2006). In-depth study on all forms of violence against women. Report of the Secretary-General. /A/61/122/ Add.1.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viki, G. T., Abrams, D., & Hutchison, P. (2003). The “true” Romantic: Benevolent Sexism and Paternalistic Chivalry. Sex Roles, 49, 533–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, L. E. A. (1979). The battered woman. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, L. E. A. (2000). The battered woman syndrome. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamawaki, N. (2007). Rape perception and the function of ambivalent sexism and gender-role traditionality. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 406–423.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by the award of a predoctoral studentship (FPU Grant No, AP/2006-612) by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science (Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia) to the first author, and Grants No. SEJ2007-65816/PSIC from the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science and No. P06-HUM-01437 from the Andalucian Regional Government. Portions of this research were presented at the XVth General Meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology in Opatija, Croatia, June, 2008. We gratefully acknowledge the helpful feedback from the anonymous reviewer and the editor, and especially the feedback and suggestions from Peter Glick.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Psychology, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain

    Mercedes Durán

  2. Department of Social Psychology, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain

    Miguel Moya

  3. Department of Experimental Psychology, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain

    Jesús L. Megías

  4. Department of Psychology, University of Kent at Canterbury, Canterbury, England

    G. Tendayi Viki

  5. Department of Social Psychology, Facultad de Psicología, Campus de Cartuja S/N, 18011, Granada, Spain

    Miguel Moya

Authors
  1. Mercedes Durán
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miguel Moya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jesús L. Megías
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. Tendayi Viki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Miguel Moya.

Appendices

Appendix A

In the first part of the scenario, the benevolent sexist perpetrator was described as follows:

Spanish wording

Pablo y Eva están casados desde hace 4 años (son novios y llevan viviendo juntos desde hace 4 años).Pablo piensa que todo hombre debe tener una mujer a quien amar ya que el hombre está incompleto sin la mujer. Pablo tiene a su mujer (novia) en un pedestal ya que piensa que ella, al igual que otras muchas mujeres, tiene una pureza que pocos hombres poseen. El piensa que Eva, al igual que la mayoría de las mujeres, tiene un sentido más refinado del buen gusto y de la cultura, así como una mayor sensibilidad moral.

English translation

Pablo and Eva are husband and wife (boyfriend and girlfriend). They have been married and living together for the last four years (they have been living together for the last four years). Pablo thinks that every man ought to have a woman he adores, because despite their accomplishments, men are incomplete without women. Pablo puts his wife (girlfriend) on a pedestal, because he thinks that she, like other women, has a quality of purity few men possess. He thinks that Eva, the same as other women, has a more refined sense of taste, and a superior moral sensibility.

The second part of the scenarios (four scenarios) was described as follows:

Spanish wording

Como siempre, desde que se casaron (desde que son novios), han celebrado su aniversario en la intimidad. Eva le compra un regalo a su marido (novio) y Pablo la invita a cenar a un buen restaurante. Para ellos es una fecha muy especial. Quedaron para cenar el sábado a las 9:30. Por la tarde, unas amigas llamaron a Eva invitándola a celebrar el cumpleaños de una de ellas. Eva pensó en no ir y quedarse preparandose para la cena, pero tras la insistencia de éstas, decidió ir solo un rato. Como llevaba tanto tiempo sin verlas, la tarde pasó muy rápido Cuando Eva miró el reloj, eran las 9 de la noche. Ya no tenía tiempo para arreglarse. Pensó que lo mejor sería comer algo en casa y dejar la cena para otro momento. Se marchó corriendo y cuando llegó a su casa se encontró a su marido (novio) esperándola. Discutieron un buen rato. Pablo se había enfadado mucho. La cena fue un poco tensa. Pablo no esperaba ese comportamiento de su esposa (novia). En casa apenas se miraron. Tampoco hablaron. Cuando terminaron de cenar, aún decepcionado, Pablo se acercó cariñosamente a su esposa (novia) y le dio un beso. Le susurró al oído que deberían terminar ya la discusión. Después de todo, “no ha sido para tanto”, pensó Pablo. Era una fecha especial y quería mantener relaciones sexuales con su mujer (novia). Eva le respondió que en ese momento y tras haber discutido no le apetecía, que sería mejor dejarlo para otro momento. Pablo volvió a insistir. Ante la insistencia de Pablo, se enzarzaron de nuevo en una larga discusión en la que ambos se insultaron y gritaron. Él insistió en mantener relaciones con ella, pues quería “celebrar su aniversario”. Eva volvió a repetirle que no le apetecía. Pablo se enfureció y la zarandeó. Le quitó la ropa. Finalmente, y venciendo la resistencia de su esposa (novia), mantuvieron relaciones sexuales en contra de la voluntad de ella.

English translation

Since they have been together, Pablo and Eva celebrate their anniversary in private. Eva buys a gift for her husband (boyfriend) and Pablo invites her to have dinner out. It’s a very special day for them. Pablo told Eva that they would leave their house on Saturday at 8.00 pm to go to have dinner. On Saturday afternoon, Eva’s friends phoned her to invite her to a birthday party. Eva thought not to go, but her friends insisted and she decided to go for a short while. The afternoon passed very quickly and when Eva looked at her watch, it was already 7.30 pm. She was very late. She thought the best she could do would be to go to have dinner out with her husband (boyfriend) on another day. Today she would rather stay at home with him. She couldn’t get ready for their anniversary date now. She ran to her house and when she arrived she found her husband (boyfriend) at home. They had a huge argument because Pablo was very angry with her. The dinner they had at home was very strained. Pablo couldn’t believe the behavior of his wife (girlfriend). They didn’t look at each other and they didn’t talk. He was very disappointed. Two hours after they finished having dinner at home, Pablo was still disappointed but walked up to his wife (girlfriend) and, affectionately, kissed her. He whispered in her ear that they should stop the arguing. It’s not that bad, he said. It was a special day for them and he wanted to have sex with his wife (girlfriend). Eva said to him that she didn’t want to at this time, especially after the argument. She told Pablo that the best would be to have sex another time. However, Pablo insisted. Pablo asked one time and then another time to have sex with his wife (girlfriend). But she said “no” again. They started arguing again, shouting and insulting each other. Pablo insisted because he wanted to “celebrate their anniversary”. Eva told him “no” again. Pablo got furious at his wife (girlfriend) and he grabbed her. She tried to resist but Pablo undressed her, and finally, forced her to have sex with him.

Appendix B

In the first part of the scenario the benevolent sexist perpetrator was described as follows:

Peter and Kate are husband and wife (boyfriend and girlfriend). They have been married and living together for the last four years (they have been living together for the last four years). Peter thinks that every man ought to have a woman he adores, because despite their accomplishments, men are incomplete without women. Peter puts his wife (girlfriend) on a pedestal, because he thinks that she, like other women, has a quality of purity few men possess. He thinks that Kate, the same as other women, has a more refined sense of taste, and a superior moral sensibility.

The hostile sexist perpetrator was described as follows:

Peter and Kate are husband and wife (boyfriend and girlfriend). They have been married and living together for the last four years (they have been living together for the last four years). Peter is worried because in the last few years, things have been changing. He thinks that women are seeking power by gaining control over men. He thinks that feminists are making unreasonable demands and that they are seeking more power than men. He thinks that some women, for example his wife (girlfriend), are too easily offended and they interpret innocent remarks as sexist, and that they also exaggerate problems at work. Peter feels that when women lose fairly in work and other environments, they claim discrimination.

The second part of the scenarios was described as follows:

Since they have been together, Peter and Kate celebrate their anniversary in private. Kate buys a gift for her husband (boyfriend) and Peter invites her to have dinner out. It’s a very special day for them. Peter told Kate that they would leave their house on Saturday at 8.00 pm to go to have dinner. On Saturday afternoon, Kate’s friends phoned her to invite her to a birthday’s party. Kate thought not to go, but her friends insisted and she decided to go for a short while. The afternoon passed very quickly and when Kate looked at her watch, it was already 7.30 pm. She was very late. She thought the best she could do would be to go to have dinner out with her husband (boyfriend) on another day. Today she would rather stay at home with him. She couldn’t get ready for their anniversary date now. She ran to her house and when she arrived, she found her husband (boyfriend) at home. They had a huge argument because Peter was very angry with her. The dinner they had at home was very strained. Peter couldn’t believe the behavior of his wife (girlfriend). They didn’t look at each other and they didn’t talk. He was very disappointed. Two hours after they finished having dinner at home, Peter was still disappointed but walked up to his wife (girlfriend) and, affectionately, kissed her. He whispered in her ear that they should stop the arguing. It’s not that bad, he said. It was a special day for them and he wanted to have sex with his wife (girlfriend). Kate said to him that she didn’t want to at this time, especially after the argument. She told Peter that the best would be to have sex another time. However, Peter insisted. Peter asked one time and then another time to have sex with his wife (girlfriend). But she said “no” again. They started arguing again, shouting and insulting each other. Peter insisted because he wanted to “celebrate their anniversary”. He thought he had the right. Kate told him “no” again. Peter got furious at his wife (girlfriend) and he grabbed her. She tried to resist but Peter undressed her, and finally, forced her to have sex with him.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Durán, M., Moya, M., Megías, J.L. et al. Social Perception of Rape Victims in Dating and Married Relationships: The Role of Perpetrator’s Benevolent Sexism. Sex Roles 62, 505–519 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9676-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9676-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation