Salience of rape affects self-esteem: The moderating role of gender and rape myth acceptance

In two experiments, conducted in Germany and the U.S.A., it was found that exposure to a rape report lowered self-esteem and positive affect in women who do not accept ‘rape myths’ (stereotypical beliefs which blame the victim and exonerate the rapist; Burt, 1980). Men high in rape myth acceptance (RMA) showed an increase in positive affect and self-esteem as a function of exposure to rape; men low in RMA and women high in RMA were largely unaffected. Both experiments demonstrated that these effects were specific to rape, as opposed to violence in general. These results support the feminist hypothesis that the threat of rape serves the function to exert social control over women and to sustain men's dominance. Potential cognitive mechanisms mediating the observed effects are discussed.     

Social norms and the likelihood of raping: Perceived rape myth acceptance of others affects men's rape proclivity

Research showing that rape myth acceptance (RMA) causally affects rape proclivity (RP) was extended by examining the impact of RMA-related norms on RP. Male students (total N = 264) received feedback about the alleged responses of other students to RMA items either before (Experiment 1) or after (Experiment 2) they reported their own RMA, and then their RP was assessed using acquaintance-rape scenarios. The level of RMA feedback was varied. Results showed that higher norms led to higher RP. In Experiment 1, this effect was mediated via self-reported RMA. Experiment 2 yielded main effects of both RMA feedback and self-reported RMA and an interaction effect showing that RMA feedback was particularly influential at higher levels of own RMA. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Schematic influences of rape myth acceptance on visual information processing: An eye-tracking approach

Schematic influences of rape myth acceptance (RMA) on visual information processing were studied. After reading a short text on a rape case, students viewed a “police photograph” of the plaintiff's living room, where the rape allegedly happened, while their eye-movements were recorded. The photograph contained two myth-consistent cues, one being expected in the situation (wine bottle and glasses), the other unexpected (poster of a nude male). Results of Study 1 (N = 60) showed that participants higher in RMA fixated the expected cue both earlier and less long, which may indicate hypervigilance and greater ease of processing, respectively. Higher RMA also predicted longer initial fixation of the unexpected cue. These processing differences mediated participants' verdicts and blame judgments. In Study 2 (N = 30), participants' level of RMA was manipulated experimentally via social norm feedback. This manipulation significantly affected eye-movement patterns for the expected myth-consistent cue. Results support the notion that RMA actively guides visual information processing of relevant stimuli.     

Rape myth acceptance and judgments of vulnerability to sexual assault: an Internet experiment

Processing strategies in risk assessment were studied in an Internet experiment. Women (N = 399) who were either low or high in rape myth acceptance (RMA) were asked to recall either two or six behaviors that either increase or decrease the risk of being sexually assaulted. Later they judged their personal vulnerability to sexual assault under either no time pressure (no response deadline) or time pressure (response deadline of 5 s). Without time pressure, the results were opposite to previous research: Women low in RMA relied on ease of recall and reported higher vulnerability after recalling few rather than many risk increasing behaviors, or many rather than few risk-decreasing behaviors; women high in RMA relied on the amount of information recalled, which resulted in an opposite pattern of vulnerability judgments. No influences of ease of recall or amount recalled on vulnerability judgments were detected under time pressure.     

Effects of gender and sexuality on judgements of victim blame and rape myth acceptance in a depicted male rape

Relatively few studies have investigated judgements towards male rape, and no published studies have investigated gay men's judgements towards this offence. The current study investigated the effects of gender and sexuality on victim blame and male rape myth acceptance in the depicted rape of a gay man. It was predicted that heterosexual men would make the most anti‐victim judgements, while gay men would make the most pro‐victim judgements. One hundred and fifty members of the UK population read a scenario that depicted a male rape, and then completed a questionnaire that measured blame and rape myths. As predicted, heterosexual men endorsed more rape myths and blamed the victim more than heterosexual women or gay men. Gay men made the most pro‐victim judgements overall. Results are discussed in relation to homophobia and traditional gender roles. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Attribution of blame in rape cases: A review of the impact of rape myth acceptance,gender role conformity and substance use on victim blaming

This article reviews research literature examining the effects of key factors that influence individual's attitudes towards victims of rape. The impact of rape myths, gender roles and substance use on attributions of blame in cases of rape are discussed. The phenomenon of victim-blaming within such cases is explored with reference to the attribution theory to help explain why rape victims are sometimes seen as deserving of their misfortune. Findings indicate that men demonstrate higher rape myth acceptance than women and attribute higher levels of blame to victims than women; women who violate traditional gender roles are attributed more blame than those women who do not; and women who consume alcohol prior to their attack are attributed higher levels of blame than those who are not intoxicated. The findings are discussed with reference to the implications for the Criminal Justice System and future interventions for both victims and perpetrators of rape.     

Expert testimony in pornography trials: A role for the social scientist

This article attempts to clarify the concepts of law, pornography, and the special role of the expert witness in pornography. Different conceptual frameworks taken by experts in this field are addressed, as are the shortcomings of various approaches. Finally, the critical role of ethics in giving expert witness testimony in pornography is discussed.     

When a kiss is not just a kiss: Relating violations of consent in kissing to rape myth acceptance

This study examined the relationship rape attitudes have to violations of consent in kissing. We found that the association between rape myth acceptance and responses to violations of consent in kissing was significant regardless of whether these violations took place within the context of a first date, long-term dating, or marriage. We also found that male subjects had higher rape myth acceptance than females and were more supportive of a man's right to violate a woman's consent in kissing. Finally, the association between gender and responses to forced kissing was significant independent of the context in which the forced kiss occurred.     

The role of death qualification and need for cognition in venirepersons' evaluations of expert scientific testimony in capital trials

The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of death qualification in venirepersons' evaluations of expert scientific testimony in capital trials. 200 venirepersons from the 12th Judicial Circuit in Bradenton, FL completed a booklet that contained the following: one question that measured their attitudes toward the death penalty; one question that categorized their death-qualification status; the Need for Cognition (NFC) scale (Cacioppo, Petty & Kao, 1984); a summary of the guilt phase of a capital case (which included the cross-examination of the state's expert witness); verdict preference; five questions concerning participants' evaluations of the expert's testimony; the penalty phase of a capital case; sentence preference; and standard demographic questions. Results indicated that death-qualified venirepersons were more likely to demonstrate a low need for cognition and view ambiguous expert scientific testimony as valid, important in their decision-making processes, unbiased, and of high quality. Finally, death-qualified participants were more conviction- and death- prone than their excludable counterparts. Surprisingly, death-qualified and excludable jurors did not differ with respect to whether or not they felt that the expert followed correct procedures. Legal implications and applications are discussed.     

Bias and expert testimony of mental health professionals in adversarial proceedings: A preliminary investigation

The role of mental health professionals testifying as expert witnesses has been the subject of increasing criticism. Cases in which opposing experts reach different conclusions are dismissed as “battles of the experts” and psychologists and psychiatrists are described as “hired guns.” This preliminary, analogue study examined the degree to which the opinions and testimony of mental health professionals may differ according to which side retains the expert. Results provided some support for the proposition that mental health professionals' testimony may vary according to the side by which they are retained.     

The case for guidance: testimony before Congress

The author, as a member of APGA's Federal Relations Committee, recently presented testimony on counseling and, guidance services before the U.S. House of Representatives' Subcommittee on Labor, Health, Education and Welfare and Related Agencies. This testimony, on behalf of APGA and ASCA, concerned fiscal year 1973 appropriations for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title III (ESEA, III)—Counseling, Guidance and Testing. This article is drawn from the author's testimony and is directed toward reporting some of the positive outcomes of counseling and guidance, the dilemma of cutbacks in services, and the need for substantial expansion of fiscal and. personal support for counseling and guidance.     

The effects of labelling,expert testimony,and information processing mode on juror decisions in SVP civil commitment trials

Expert witnesses offering testimony in sexually violent predator civil commitment trials may use diagnostic labels that are either familiar (e.g. ‘psychopath’) or unfamiliar (e.g. ‘paraphilia’) to jurors. Using predictions based on cognitive experiential self-theory, we explored the influence of testimony type (clinical versus actuarial) and diagnostic label (psychopath versus paraphilia) on jurors motivated to adopt either an experiential processing mode (PM; in which heuristic cues may be strongly relied upon) or an analytic rational PM. Consistent with previous research, our results indicated that when given a psychopathic diagnostic label, mock jurors motivated to process information experientially were more influenced by clinical testimony, whereas mock jurors induced into a rational mode were more influenced by actuarial testimony. However, experientially oriented jurors given a paraphilia diagnostic label did not show the expected influence of clinical expert testimony, and instead were more persuaded by actuarial testimony. These findings are discussed from a judgement and heuristics cues framework. The implications of several procedural suggestions are examined. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

CECoS: A case experience combination system for knowledge acquisition for expert systems

This paper presents a new knowledge-acquisition system—the Case Experience Combination System (CECoS). With CECoS, two information or knowledge sources are jointly analyzed. Previously recorded problem solutions (individual cases) are combined with an expert’s high-level understanding of the global structure of a task domain. By combining the detailed case information with an expert’s general insights, CECoS provides the domain knowledge with which skeletal plans can be automatically constructed.     

Determining dangerousness in sexually violent predator evaluations: cognitive-experiential self-theory and juror judgments of expert testimony

Past research examining the effects of expert testimony on the future dangerousness of a defendant in death penalty sentencing found that jurors are more influenced by less scientific clinical expert testimony and tend to devalue scientific actuarial testimony. This study was designed to determine whether these findings extend to civil commitment trials for sexual offenders and to test a theoretical rationale for this effect. In addition, we investigated the influence of a recently developed innovation in risk assessment procedures, Guided Professional Judgment (GPJ) instruments. Consistent with a cognitive-experiential self-theory based explanation, mock jurors motivated to process information in an experiential condition were more influenced by clinical testimony, while mock jurors in a rational mode were more influenced by actuarial testimony. Participants responded to clinical and GPJ testimony in a similar manner. However, participants' gender exerted important interactive effects on dangerousness decisions, with male jurors showing the predicted effect while females did not. The policy implications of these findings are discussed.