Perceptions of rape victims and assailants: Effects of physical attractiveness,acquaintance, and subject gender

Subjects read different versions of a rape case in which the victim was walking alone at night and the defendant was obviously guilty. Female subjects saw the crime as more debilitating for the victim and were more punitive than male subjects. Female subjects considered the victim less responsible when the defendant was unattractive than when the defendant was attractive. Presence or absence of prior casual acquaintance between the victim and assailant interacted with other factors. With prior acquaintance, male subjects considered the victim more responsible than female subjects, unattractive victims were considered more responsible than attractive victims, and unattractive defendants were considered more likely to engage in future antisocial behavior than attractive defendants. Although biased by other factors, level of victim blame was low overall. Yet subjects seemed reluctant to believe the rapist and his victim were unacquainted and seemed to consider the rape as sexually, rather than aggressively, motivated.The authors gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of Andrea R. Halpern and T. Joel Wade. Portions of this paper were presented at the meetings of the Eastern Psychological Association, Buffalo, New York, April 1988.     

Effects of victim's and defendant's physical attractiveness on subjects' judgments in a rape case

Physical attractiveness of the victim and defendant in a rape case were varied along with sex of subject in a 2×2×2 factorial design. It was found that both the attractive defendant and the rapist of an unattractive victim were less likely to be seen as guilty and that the attractive defendant received a shorter recommended prison term than the unattractive defendant. Victim attractiveness had no effect on attributions of her degree of responsibility. Females were more likely to see the defendant as guilty and recommended longer prison terms than males. Results are discussed in terms of specificity of victim and defendant and the beauty is good stereotype.     

The Determinants of Mock Jurors' Verdicts in a Rape Case1

The determinants of verdicts in a rape case were examined. Pretrial attitudes (rape empathy, juror bias, belief in a just world, and authoritarianism) were measured to ascertain both the intercorrelations among the attitudes and their predictive value of verdicts. The eye contact (staring, avoiding, or random) of the alleged rape victim with the defendant was also examined. Results showed that rape empathy was predictive of verdict. The eye contact of the alleged victim with the defendant also affected verdicts of female mock jurors. Specifically, when eye contact was avoided, more guilty verdicts were rendered. Furthermore, interpretation of eye contact was found to be a function of mock jurors' reported rape empathy. Specifically, subjects who reported empathy with the victim tended to interpret the victim's behavior as consistent with being raped. Finally, differences were found between high and low empathizers for the rape victim in what aspects of the trial were important to mock jurors' decisions.     

The Effects of Victim’s Substance Use and Relationship Closeness on Mock Jurors’ Judgments in an Acquaintance Rape Case

Previous research has demonstrated that jurors perceive a female victim who is drunk at the time when she is sexually assaulted as less credible and more deserving of such punishment than a sober victim. In this experiment, we investigated the effect of an alleged acquaintance rape victim’s type of substance use and closeness of relationship with the defendant on the judgments of 152 student mock jurors. Participants read a case summary and answered a series of questions about their impressions of the actors and actions involved in the case. Participants perceived a victim who was sober at the time of the incident as more credible than a victim who was intoxicated due to illegal substance use (alcohol or LSD), and convictions were also most likely when the victim was sober. Women perceived the victim as more credible than men did. Higher victim credibility judgments were associated with less rape myth acceptance (RMA) on the part of participants.     

Effects of physical attractiveness on evaluations of a male employee's allegation of sexual harassment by his female employer

College students (N = 324) served as mock jurors in a simulated civil case in which a male plaintiff accused a female defendant of sexual harassment. The authors experimentally manipulated the physical attractiveness of the litigants. The authors asked mock jurors to decide whether the defendant was guilty and to rate their certainty of belief in the defendant's guilt (or lack of guilt). Jurors were more certain of the guilt of the defendant when the plaintiff was attractive than when he was unattractive. Plaintiff attractiveness significantly affected female jurors' individual recommended verdicts when the defendant was unattractive but not when she was attractive. With male jurors, plaintiff attractiveness significantly affected their verdicts when the defendant was attractive but not when she was unattractive. Female jurors were more likely than male jurors to conclude that sexual harassment had taken place but only when the litigants were different in attractiveness.     

Cognitive mediators of reactions to rape

Subjects were exposed to slides that primed different concepts associated with aggression, close personal interactions between men and women, and women as sex objects. Then, as part of an ostensibly unrelated study, they read the testimonies of several rape victims and made judgments concerning both the victim and the alleged rapist. Exposure to negative consequences of aggression apparently threatened subjects' beliefs in a just world, leading subjects to interpret rape incidents in ways that reaffirm this belief (i.e., it strengthened subjects' beliefs that the defendant should be punished, but it also caused them to attribute more responsibility for the incident to the victim). Portrayals of close personal relationships between men and women increased male subjects' beliefs that rape victims were responsible for the incident, but had the opposite effect on female subjects' beliefs. Portrayals of women as sex objects decreased male subjects' beliefs in the victim's credibility and increased their beliefs that she was responsible for the incident; however, it had the opposite effects on female subjects' judgments. Despite their effects on judgments of the rape victim, priming manipulations did not affect beliefs that the defendant should be convicted. Implications of these results for the effects of the public media on attitudes and beliefs about rape are discussed.     

Attribution of responsibility for rape: The influence of observer empathy,victim resistance,and victim attractiveness

The purpose of the present study was to investigate the influence of a rape victim's physical attractiveness and resistance to rape on subjects' attributions of responsibility for the crime, certainty of the defendant's guilt, and social perceptions of the rape victim and defendant. Subjects' pretrial empathy toward rape victims and rapists was assessed by scores on the Rape Empathy Scale (RES). In addition to significant sex differences in attributions of responsibility for the incident, subjects' pretrial empathy toward rape victims and rapists was predictive of their perceptions of the rape victim, the defendant, and the rape incident. Victim resistance and attractiveness effects were significant in that subjects responded least favorably to the unattractive rape victim, particularly when she resisted the rape by fighting with her attacker. Male subjects and subjects who exhibited low empathy toward the rape victim were more responsive to subtle manipulations of victim resistance and attractiveness than were females and high RES subjects. Several explanations for these results focus on the cognitive and affective responses of subjects. The implications of the study are discussed in relation to societal attitudes toward rape and the role of sexrole stereotyping, which fosters these attitudes.The present research was supported by National Institutes of Health Biomedical Research Support Grant #5-SO7-RRO7127-09 and National Science Foundation Grant #SES-8012316 to Sheila R. Deitz. The authors express their appreciation to Nancy Williams, Joanne Moran, Bill Willging, David Small, David Waldman, and Robert Kingsley for their assistance in data collection and analysis.Correspondence should be sent to Sheila R. Deitz, now at Institute of Law, Psychiatry, and Public Policy, University of Virginia, Box 100, Blue Ridge Hospital, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901. Copies of the Rape Empathy Scale and an extended report on the reliability and validity of scale are available from this author.     

The Consideration of Rape: The Effect of Target Information Disparity on Judgments of Guilt1

We hypothesized that increasing the amount of individuating but case‐irrelevant information about a target in a date‐rape trial (i.e., either the defendant or the victim/witness) would increase attributions of responsibility for that target and would thus influence judgments of defendant guilt. As predicted, merely adding trivial information, such as the victim's age, college major, and city of residence, to the rape trial vignette decreased judgments of guilt for the defendant; whereas adding corresponding information regarding the defendant increased judgments of his guilt. Ratings of perceived similarity to defendant and victim correlated significantly with responsibility and guilt, but were unaffected by the information manipulation. We suggest that target information increases target salience, which results in an increase of attributions of responsibility.     

The Impact of Defendant Gender and Relationship to Victim on Juror Decisions in a Child Sexual Abuse Case

We examined the impact of defendant gender and relationship to victim on verdict decisions and ratings of witness believability in a case of alleged child sexual assault. Mock jurors ( N  = 256) read 1 of 4 extensive case summaries. The cases varied the gender of the defendant and his or her relationship to the child (parent or stranger). Data revealed that participants were significantly more likely to find male defendants (especially the father) guilty than female defendants. Female jurors rated the victim as more believable and the defendant as less believable than did male jurors. All mock jurors rated the victim as more believable if the defendant was male, and they saw the female defendants as more believable than the male defendants.     

Effects of long-term exposure to violent and sexually degrading depictions of women

In this study we investigated the effects of emotional desensitization to films of violence against women and the effects of sexually degrading explicit and nonexplicit films on beliefs about rape and the sexual objectification of women. Male subjects viewed either two or five R-rated violent "slasher," X-rated nonviolent "pornographic," or R-rated nonviolent teenage-oriented ("teen sex") films. Affective reactions and cognitive perceptions were measured after each exposure. Later, these men and no-exposure control subjects completed a voir dire questionnaire, viewed a reenacted acquaintance or nonacquaintance sexual assault trial, and judged the defendant and alleged rape victim. Subjects in the violent condition became less anxious and depressed and showed declines in negative affective responses. They were also less sympathetic to the victim and less empathetic toward rape victims in general. However, longer film exposure was necessary to affect general empathy. There were no differences in response between the R-rated teen sex film and the X-rated, sexually explicit, nonviolent film, and the no-exposure control conditions on the objectification or the rape trial variables. A model of desensitization to media violence and the carryover to decision making about victims is proposed.     

Prior Allegations of Harassment Impact Mock Jurors’ Perceptions of Sexual Harassment in a Criminal Trial

The current study examined factors that may influence jurors’ judgments in a criminal sexual harassment case with Canadian undergraduate students. Undergraduate students (n?=?268) examined whether defendant’s gender, victim’s gender, and whether the victim had made similar accusations in the past were influential in mock jurors’ judgments. Participants read a case summary describing an alleged sexual harassment and answered questions concerning defendant’s guilt, defendant’s culpability, and perceptions of the victim. Additionally, attitudes concerning sexual harassment and sexism were measured. The presence of prior allegations was a driving force in mock juror decisions, with mock jurors providing more guilty verdicts, more favorable perceptions of the victim, and less favorable perceptions of the defendant when no prior allegations of harassment had been made by the victim. The results of the current study suggest that the presence of prior allegations have a large impact on mock jurors’ decisions, suggesting that prior allegations may need to be considered more closely in court before they can be used as evidence.

     

Defendant characteristics and juridic decisions

Research has demonstrated that attractive defendants receive more preferential treatment than do less attractive defendants. The present study examined two explanations for this finding (liking-leniency and causal inference models). It varied both the attractiveness of the defendant's traits and their relevance to the likelihood of committing a traffic felony. Results indicated that the attractive defendant was found less guilty than the unattractive defendant only when the traits were associated with the likelihood of acting criminally. This suggests that a causal inference model was appropriate when subjects decided guilt. However, a liking-leniency model was supported for decisions on severity of punishment as the attractive defendant was treated more leniently than the unattractive defendant, regardless of the relevancy of the traits to the crime.     

Support Person Presence and Child Victim Testimony: Believe it or Not

This study examined the effects of support person presence on participants’ perceptions of an alleged child sexual abuse victim and defendant. Two hundred jury-eligible community members (n = 100 males) viewed a DVD of an 11-year-old girl's simulated courtroom testimony either with or without a female support person seated next to her. Participants found the child victim to be less accurate and trustworthy, and the defendant to be less guilty and less likely to have sexually abused children, when the support person was present. Participants who viewed the female support person (n = 100) believed that she had probably coached and spent a great deal of time with the child victim before testifying. Female participants perceived the child to be more accurate, and the defendant to be more guilty and likely to have sexually abused children, than male participants. The degree to which the child victim's testimonial behavior violated participants’ expectancies mediated the negative relation between support person presence and child victim accuracy and trustworthiness. Support person presence was positively associated with expectancy violation, which in turn was negatively associated with child victim accuracy and trustworthiness. These preliminary findings suggest that seating a support person next to an alleged child victim in court may have the unintended effect of decreasing the child's perceived credibility and, if replicated, suggest that alternative seating arrangements might be necessary. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effect of multiple childhood sexual assaults on mock-jurors' perceptions of repressed memories

The effect of multiple childhood sexual assaults on the believability of a repressed memory of the assault was assessed using mock jurors. Participants read a fictional civil trial summary about a child sexual assault case presented in one of three reporting conditions: (a) immediate condition-the alleged victim testified immediately after the assault(s); (b) repressed condition-the alleged victim reported the assault(s) 20 years later, after remembering it/them for the first time; or (c) no-repressed condition-the alleged victim reported the assault(s) 20 years later, but the memory of the assault(s) had been present for those years. The number of assaults was either one or 30. The results showed that for all reporting conditions 30 alleged assaults led to relatively more decisions for the plaintiff than the defendant, and greater believability of the plaintiff. The increases in decisions rendered and believability were also generally true for the immediate condition compared to when there was a delay in reporting. The results are discussed in terms of mock jurors' perceptions of child sexual assault, both those reported immediately and those reported after many years.     

THE EFFECTS OF DEFENDANT AND COMPLAINANT INTOXICATION ON MOCK JURORS' JUDGMENTS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT

The present study investigates the impact of participant gender, rape-myth beliefs, and alcohol intoxication on the part of either the defendant and/or alleged victim on mock jurors' decisions within the context of a sexual-assault trial. Participants ( N = 152) were exposed to a sexual-assault case in which the beverage consumption (alcohol, cola) on the part of both the defendant and complainant prior to the sexual intercourse was varied systematically. Results indicated that when the defendant had consumed alcohol, as opposed to cola, participants were more likely to view the case as one of assault, to perceive the defendant as less credible, and to find the defendant guilty. When the complainant had consumed alcohol, as opposed to cola, participants found the complainant's claim less credible and were less likely to view the defendant as guilty. In addition, participants' rape-myth acceptance, which was related to guilt, mediated the relation between gender of participant and guilt.     

Criminal sentence recommendations in a simulated rape trial: Examining juror prejudice in Canada

This experiment examined the moderating influence of judicial instructions on prejudicial sentencing recornmendations in a simulated videotaped rape trial. Subjects were 243 Canadian university students who were randomly assigned to one of eight conditions and asked to assume the role of juror. In the rape trial, the race of the defendant and victim were varied (either White or Black) and in half of the conditions the judge's instructions to the jury were excluded. Results indicated a 2 (defendant race) × 2 (victim race) × 2 (judicial instructions) interaction with interracial rape generating longer sentence recommendations in the presence of judicial instructions and intra-racial rape eliciting longer sentence allotment in the absence of judicial instructions. Results are contrasted with reports on juror decision-making in the U.S.     

The effect of sex role stereotype,victim and defendant race,and prior relationship on rape culpability attributions

The research addressed the influence of sex role stereotypes, victim and defendant's race, and the participants' relationship on perceptions of rape culpability by white respondents. Those who held traditional sex role stereotypes believed a rape victim to be more culpable than those with egalitarian stereotypes. In addition, respondents with traditional stereotypes perceived the defendant to be less culpable and less likely to commit a similar offense. Traditional stereotypes may contribute to a more stringent criteria for deciding that rape has occurred. Overall, respondents showed a bias against black rape victims and victims who had dated a black defendant. Rape defendants who had dated a black female were considered to be less likely to commit a similar act in future; thus, the propensity to rape was considered situationally specific.Appreciation is extended to Lawrence S. Wrightsman, Nyla Branscombe, Mark Barnett, and an anonymous reviewer for comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Data was collected at Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas.