Attribution theory and rape victim responsibility

The topic of rape victimization emerged in the last decade as an important social problem. Using a sample of medical students, this paper attempts to unravel the attribution of responsibility imputed to the victim of rape. Victim characteristics were varied by using vignettes in order to create an “ideal” and a “non‐ideal” rape victim.

A testing of the attribution models of the just world and defensive attribution found that respondents assigned low levels of culpability to both victim types. Additionally, sex differences in perceptions of victim responsibility were found, with females according both victim types less blame than did males. Thus, partial support was found for the defensive attribution model.     

Attributing Responsibility to Female Victims After Exposure to Sexually Violent Films1

We investigate the possibility that the degree to which female abuse victims are held accountable by other women who have been exposed to sexually violent mass media is primarily dependent upon 3 factors: situational relevance, personal similarity, and emotional arousal. Female subjects participated in an experiment. Factors were: film dose; film viewing/victim judgment time interval; victim-subject similarity; and situational relevance of the assault. The results showed less attribution of responsibility to similar victims and high attributions of responsibility to dissimilar victims in the personally relevant assault situation (rape). Women identified least with dissimilar rape victims and most with similar victims when they had not been desensitized. When subjects were desensitized, the defensive attribution effect failed to emerge. There was also a significant tendency among low film dose subjects to perceive more psychological injury and to attribute more distress to the victim than among high film dose subjects.     

An information-processing approach to attribution of responsibility

The research literature on defensive attribution of responsibility is reviewed within the framework of a nonmotivational information-processing model which proposes that attributed responsibility is a function of the difference between the perceived contingent probability (congruence) of an outcome, given a perpertrator's behavior, and the noncontingent probability (prior expectancy) of that outcome. Results of previous research on effects of the characteristics of outcomes, perpetrator, and victim on responsibility ratings are reinterpreted in terms of the influence these factors have on estimates of congruence and prior expectancy. Secondary analyses of data from a recent study of causal reasoning resulted in a correlation of .78 between attribution of responsibility and a simple additive model of estimated contingent and prior probabilities of an accident.     

Reaction to Self-Attributed Victim Responsibility: A Comparative Analysis of Rape Crisis Counselors and Lay Observers1

This research examined observers' reactions to sexual assault victims engaging in different forms of self-attributed responsibility. Theory and research suggests that behavioral responsibility contributes positively to the coping process of victims, whereas characterological responsibility impedes it. For observers in the present study, the expression of either type of self-responsibility by a rape victim resulted in a more negative impression of the victim's emotional well-being and greater attribution of responsibility to the victim in comparison to a victim relying solely on chance explanations. Moreover, this bias was evident among rape crisis counselors as well as lay observers. Discussion considered the implications of such biased perceptions for sexual assault victims and the need for a fuller understanding of the nature of self-attributions of responsibility by victims.     

Responsibility Attributions for Drunken Behavior: The Role of Expectancy Violation1

Research on attributions about drunken aggression has suggested that intoxication serves to excuse the aggressor while increasing blame to the victim. In this study, we examined subjects' responses to a scenario depicting a violent interaction in which intoxication of aggressor and victim, victim's behavior, and aggressor's previous violent background were varied. We predicted that to the extent that the violent act violated the expectations of the observer, alcohol intoxication would serve to decrease dispositional and responsibility attributions to the aggressor. Instead, the findings showed that alcohol use led to increased attributions of causality, blame, and responsibility for both aggressor and victim. The results are discussed in terms of both attribution theory and societal factors influencing the acceptability of excuses involving alcohol.     

Understanding Attributions of Blame in Stranger Rape and Date Rape Situations: An Examination of Gender,Race, Identification,and Students' Social Perceptions of Rape Victims1

This study examined factors that may influence attributions of rape victims. Three hundred and three university students completed a questionnaire, which included a measure of dispositional empathy and a vignette depicted either a date rape or a stranger rape situation. Subjects rated the extent that they blamed the rape victim as well as the degree to which they identified with the victim and perpetrator. Results indicated that male students blamed the victim to a greater extent than did female students; students consistently attributed more blame to the victim in date rape situations than they did in stranger rape situations; and, while empathy was not associated with students' attributions, perceptions of similarity to the rape victim and perpetrator were both related to attributions of blame. These findings are consistent with the notion of “judgmental leniency” presented in Shaver's defensive attribution theory (1970). Implications for rape prevention efforts and future research are also discussed.     

Alcohol and Acquaintance Rape in Australia: Testing the Presupposition Model of Attributions About Responsibility and Blame1

According to the presupposition model of attributions about responsibility and blame (Bradbury & Fincham, 1990), an attribution of blame presupposes an attribution of responsibility. Both constructs share the dimensions of choice, intention, and accountability, but an additional dimension of liability relates only to blame. Reactions of 260 university students to acquaintance‐rape scenarios portraying different levels of alcohol intoxication were examined. Results showed that the model's dimensions explained much of the variance in attributions of responsibility and blame, although the hierarchical structure was not supported. Mediational analyses suggest that different attributional principles apply when assigning victim and perpetrator responsibility, which may explain why intoxicated victims are assigned more responsibility than sober victims, but intoxicated perpetrators are assigned less responsibility than sober perpetrators.     

Self-serving bias in the attribution of responsibility: Cognitive versus motivational explanations

The purpose of this study is to compare the cognitive and motivational explanations of differences in the responsibility assigned to the victim of a crime. It has generally been found that the victim of a crime is assigned more responsibility for that crime by similar others if its consequences are severe. The motivational explanation for this finding is that subjects are threatened by the idea that a serious crime can happen by chance. The cognitive explanation is that serious crimes are rarer and subjects attribute more of the responsibility for rarer events to those who experience them. This study tested these two explanations by independently varying the severity and the likelihood of a crime and examining attributions of responsibility to its victim. The results of the study support the cognitive explanation. Similar others were found to attribute more responsibility for a crime to the victim when that crime was presented as rare, irrespective of whether its consequences were mild or severe. In addition, when likelihood was controlled experimentally no effect of severity upon attributions of responsibility was found. These results suggest that, within the context of attributions of responsibility to victims, patterns of attribution consistent with those predicted by theories suggesting motivational influences upon attribution may actually represent the operation of cognitive processes.     

Does the distinction between causal and moral responsibility really salvage the defensive attribution hypothesis?: A critique of Nogami and Streufert's thesis

Nogami and Streufert's (1983) thesis, that the distinction between causal and moral responsibility accounts for contradictory data in the defensive attribution literature, is criticized on empirical and conceptual grounds. It is argued that the results reported may be idiosyncratic to their study given the procedures they used. Moreover, close examination reveals several problems in using their results to account for previous contradictory research findings.     

Evaluation of a victim as a function of fate similarity/dissimilarity

Upon observing a peer (victim) receive painful electric shocks as punishment for making errors in a serial learning task, subjects who anticipated a similar fate (n = 21) were significantly less likely to devalue the victim than those who did not anticipate a similar fate (n = 22). This finding supports the contention that an observer's devaluation of a suffering victim may vary as a function of anticipated fate similarity rather than perceived attitude or attribute similarity per se. Further, the data in conjunction with an additional, albeit marginally significant finding, suggest that derogation of the victim was more likely to be motivated by defensive attribution than a need to believe in a just world.     

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

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.     

Gender Versus Gender Role in Attributions of Blame for a Sexual Assault1

To examine whether gender differences in attributions of blame for a sexual assault are a result of gender differences in identification with members of their own gender or identification with gender roles (men identifying with the powerful assailant and women with the less powerful victim), women (n = 177) and men (n = 128) made attributions of blame for an assault in which the assailant's gender and the victim's gender were factorially manipulated. Regardless of the gender of the assailant and victim, women identified more with the victim, while men identified more with the assailant. Consistent with a modified defensive attribution hypothesis, women blamed the assailant more than did men; however, no significant effects were found for victim blame.     

Attenuating the Attribution of Responsibility: The Lay Perception of Jealousy as a Motive for Wife Battery1

Jealousy can consist of a broad range of experiences, from an everyday feeling to a pathology that causes abuse and crime. Although historically jealousy has been positively valued, century has seen an antijealousy crusade the effects of which can be noticed everywhere–with the exception of the legal system. Using Weiner's attributional model as theoretical background, a questionnaire research survey was conducted to determine if lay perception considers jealousy to be a justification of wife battery. Results show that current views of jealousy are negative and do not justify a mitigation in responsibility. Additionally differences by age and education can be found in the victim's attributed responsibility independently of the motivation. Implications for the legal system as well as for defensive attribution theory are discussed.     

Counterfactual thinking and stereotypes: The nonconformity effect

Past research has shown that counterfactual thinking (‘if only…’) is related to judgements of responsibility for negative events. It has also shown that behaviours deviating from the target's own behavioural standard (intrapersonal norm) are likely to trigger counterfactuals—the so‐called exceptional‐routine effect. In the present research, we demonstrate that behaviours deviating from a social category's behavioural standard (social norm) are also likely to trigger counterfactuals—what may be called the nonconformity effect. Two studies investigated counterfactual thinking regarding a rape case, classifying counterfactuals according to their conformity versus nonconformity to relevant social norms, and their focus on actions versus inactions. In Study 1, participants with higher endorsement of the rape victim stereotype generated more counterfactuals on the victim's non‐conforming inactions than did participants with lower stereotype endorsement. The presence of a nonconformity effect was confirmed in Study 2, where participants rated their agreement with externally generated counterfactuals. Moreover, in Study 2, counterfactuals focused on the victim's non‐conforming inactions predicted responsibility attribution to the victim through the mediating role of perceived avoidability of the event. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Workplace mobbing and bystanders' helping behaviour towards victims: The role of gender,perceived responsibility and anticipated stigma by association

We examined victims' perceived responsibility and bystanders' anticipated risk of being victimized themselves when others associate them with the victim (stigma by association, SBA) as possible antecedents of bystanders' helping behaviour towards a victim of workplace mobbing, and explored the effects of gender. Guided by the attribution model of social conduct (Weiner, 2006), a 2 × 2 vignette experiment was conducted. Participants were Dutch regional government employees (N = 161). Path analyses generally supported the hypotheses, but showed different results for women and men. In the strong (Vs. weak) responsibility condition, women reported less sympathy and more anger and men only more anger, which resulted in lower helping intention. Additionally, for men the results showed an unexpected direct positive effect of responsibility on helping intention. Furthermore, in the strong SBA condition, women and men reported more fear and men, unexpectedly, more anger. Consequently, helping intention decreased. The findings on gender are discussed in the context of social role theory, gender and emotion. Our findings suggest that to prevent and tackle mobbing, organizations and professionals should be aware of the attributional and emotional processes and gender differences in bystanders' helping behaviour.     

Attributions of responsibility for an incident of sexual harassment in a university setting

The present study replicated and extended research on the effects of observer characteristics (i.e., gender and traditional vs. less traditional attitudes) on attributions of responsibility in a case of sexual harassment. Participants (120 males, 120 females) were randomly assigned to one of six conditions that varied the gender of the victim and the victim's reaction. A sexual harassment scenario involving a university student and professor of the opposite gender was presented as an audiotape of the victim's account. Participants with less traditional attitudes attributed less responsibility to the victim than did participants with traditional attitudes. Females attributed more responsibility to the perpetrator and the victim of the same gender than did males. Victim reaction interacted with participant gender; males responded in a manner that was consistent with the reaction manipulation, whereas females attributed less responsibility to the self-blaming victim than to either the perpetrator-blaming or control victims. The results are discussed in the light of attribution theory and previous research.     

Coping With Threats to Just‐World Beliefs: Derogate,Blame, or Help?1

The present research investigated Lerner's (1970, 1980) just‐world theory by manipulating victim‐related factors in a scenario and measuring several possible strategies for dealing with the threat to participants' just‐world beliefs created by the victim's intense suffering. Participants read a story about a victim who varied in terms of his character (likeable vs. unlikeable) and behavioral responsibility for causing his accident (high vs. low). The general pattern of results showed that for the unlikeable low‐responsibility victim, the primary response to protect justice beliefs appeared to be character derogation; for the likeable high‐responsibility victim, the primary protective strategy appeared to be blame; and for the likeable low‐responsibility victim, the primary protective strategy appeared to be compensation. Implications for just‐world theory are discussed.     

Men's likelihood of sexual aggression: the influence of alcohol,sexual arousal,and violent pornography

Previous research findings have indicated that both alcohol intoxication and violent pornography exposure may contribute to increased sexual aggression by men. This study used an experimental paradigm to examine the effects of a moderate alcohol dose, alcohol‐related beliefs, and victim response on men's self‐reported likelihood of committing sexual aggression. A community sample of male social drinkers (N=84) participated in an experiment in which they read an eroticized rape depiction after completing an alcohol administration protocol. The stimulus story varied whether the victim, who initially expressed unwillingness to engage in sexual activity, expressed pleasure or distress in response to the man physically forcing her to perform several explicit sex acts. A path analytic model illustrated that participants' self‐reported likelihood of behaving like the sexual aggressor in the story was directly related to their own sexual arousal. Heightened sexual arousal was reported by participants who had consumed alcohol, those who read the victim‐pleasure story, and those who believed that drinking women are sexually vulnerable. Results suggest that sexual arousal to violent pornography, as influenced by acute alcohol intoxication and other factors, may be an important component of men's perceptions of their own sexual aggression likelihood. Aggr. Behav. 32:581–589, 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.