Gán nhãn cho các hành vi bạo lực tình dục: Các đặc điểm của vụ tấn công, thái độ và kinh nghiệm sống đóng vai trò gì?

Sapir Sasson1, Lisa A. Paul1
1Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, USA

Tóm tắt

Nhãn được gán cho một hành vi bạo lực tình dục nhất định (ví dụ: hiếp dâm, tấn công tình dục) có thể có ảnh hưởng đáng kể đến nhận thức về sự cố và vai trò của các cá nhân liên quan. Nghiên cứu đã chỉ ra rằng các kịch bản hiếp dâm cá nhân và các đặc điểm tấn công là những yếu tố ảnh hưởng đến việc gán nhãn bạo lực tình dục. Nghiên cứu này thúc đẩy lĩnh vực này bằng cách cung cấp thông tin về ảnh hưởng của các biến liên quan đến người tham gia (ví dụ: kinh nghiệm sống, thái độ cá nhân) đối với việc gán nhãn một ví dụ về bạo lực tình dục. Kết quả từ nghiên cứu trực tuyến với 379 người tham gia cho thấy rằng đồng cảm với nạn nhân, đồng cảm với thủ phạm, chấp nhận những huyền thoại về hiếp dâm (RMA) và việc nhận được thông báo về hiếp dâm có liên quan đến việc gán nhãn đúng cách một ví dụ bạo lực tình dục là hiếp dâm; RMA vẫn là một yếu tố tiên đoán quan trọng trong việc gán nhãn sau khi tất cả các biến được đưa vào hồi quy đồng thời. Các đặc điểm của vụ tấn công, lịch sử bị tấn công, công nhận việc bị tấn công và giới tính không có liên quan đến nhãn gán cho ví dụ trong hồi quy, mặc dù việc xem xét lý do định tính được đưa ra để gán nhãn ví dụ cho thấy rằng một số yếu tố này có thể ảnh hưởng đến sự lựa chọn nhãn. Quan trọng là, những người tham gia đã gán nhãn sự kiện là hiếp dâm ít có khả năng đổ lỗi cho nạn nhân về vụ tấn công. Các ý nghĩa của việc xác định và gán nhãn đúng các trải nghiệm bạo lực tình dục, cả cho nạn nhân và cho nhà cung cấp hỗ trợ, được thảo luận.

Từ khóa

#bạo lực tình dục #hiếp dâm #gán nhãn #thái độ #kinh nghiệm sống

Tài liệu tham khảo

Adams-Curtis, L. E., & Forbes, G. B. (2004). College women’s experiences of sexual coercion: A review of cultural, perpetrator, victim, and situational variables. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 5, 91–122. doi: 10.1177/1524838003262331 Ahrens, C. E. (2006). Being silenced: The impact of negative social reactions on the disclosure of rape. American Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 263–274. doi: 10.1007/s10464-006-9069-9 Ahrens, C. E., Campbell, R., Ternier-Thames, N. K., Wasco, S. M., & Sefl, T. (2007). Deciding whom to tell: Expectations and outcomes of rape survivors’ first disclosures. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 38–49. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00329.x Ahrens, C. E., Stansell, J., & Jennings, A. (2010). To tell or not to tell: The impact of disclosure on sexual assault survivors’ recovery. Violence and Victims, 25, 631–648. doi: 10.1891/0886-6708.25.5.631 Alderden, M. A., & Ullman, S. E. (2012). Gender difference or indifference? Detective decision making in sexual assault cases. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 3–22. doi: 10.1177/0886260511416465 Allen, W. D. (2007). The reporting and underreporting of rape. Southern Economic Journal, 73(3), 623–641. Banyard, V. L., Moynihan, M. M., Walsh, W. A., Cohn, E. S., & Ward, S. (2010). Friends of survivors: The community impact of unwanted sexual experiences. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 242–256. doi: 10.1177/0886260509334407 Bell, K. M., & Naugle, A. E. (2007). Effects of social desirability on students’ self-reporting of partner abuse perpetration and victimization. Violence and Victims, 22, 243–256. doi: 10.1891/088667007780477348 Black, M. C., Basile, K. C., Breiding, M. J., Smith, S. G., Walters, M. L., Merrick, M. T., …Stevens, M. R. (2011). The national intimate partner and sexual violence survey: 2010 summary report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Bogart, L. M., Cecil, H., Wagstaff, D. A., Pinkerton, S. D., & Abramson, P. R. (2000). Is it “sex”? College students’ interpretations of sexual behavior terminology. The Journal of Sex Research, 37, 108–116. doi: 10.1080/00224490009552027 Bondurant, B. (2001). University women’s acknowledgement of rape: Individual, situational, and social factors. Violence Against Women, 7, 294–314. doi: 10.1177/1077801201007003004 Clay-Warner, J., & McMahon-Howard, J. (2009). Rape reporting: “Classic rape” and the behavior of the law. Violence and Victims, 24, 723–743. doi: 10.1891/0886-6708.24.6.723 Crome, S. A., & McCabe, M. P. (2001). Adult rape scripting within a victimological perspective. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6, 395–413. doi: 10.1016/S1359-1789(00)00013-6 Davis, R. C., Brickman, E., & Baker, T. (1991). Supportive and unsupportive responses of others to rape victims: Effects on concurrent victim adjustment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 443–451. doi: 10.1007/BF00938035 DuMont, J., & Parnis, D. (2006). The uses and impacts of medico-legal evidence in sexual assault cases: A global review. Unpublished document prepared for the Gender Health Unit, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. Edwards, K. M., Turchik, J. A., Dardis, C. M., Reynolds, N., & Gidycz, C. A. (2011). Rape myths: History, individual and institutional-level presence, and implications for change. Sex Roles, 65, 761–773. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-9943-2 Estrich, S. (1987). Real rape. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 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. doi: 10.1177/0886260507313947 Foubert, J. D. (2000). The longitudinal effects of a rape-prevention program on fraternity men’s attitudes, behavioral intent, and behavior. Journal of American College Health, 48, 158–163. doi: 10.1080/07448480009595691 Gerger, H., Kley, H., Bohner, G., & Siebler, F. (2007). The acceptance of modern myths about sexual aggression scale: Development and validation in German and English. Aggressive Behavior, 33, 422–440. doi: 10.1002/ab.20195 Gidycz, C. A., Layman, M. J., Rich, C. L., Crothers, M., Matorin, A., & Jacobs, C. D. (2001). An evaluation of an acquaintance rape prevention program: Impact on attitudes, sexual aggression, and sexual victimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 1120–1138. doi: 10.1177/088626001016011002 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. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2008.06.006 Grubb, A., & Turner, E. (2012). Attribution of blame in rape cases: A review of the impact of rape myth acceptance, gender role conformity and substance use on victim blaming. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 443–452. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.002 Hamby, S. L., & Koss, M. P. (2003). Shades of gray: A qualitative study of terms used in the measurement of sexual victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 243–255. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.00104 Hammond, C. B., & Calhoun, K. S. (2007). Labeling of abuse experiences and rates of victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 371–380. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00386.x Hannon, R., Kuntz, T., Van Laar, S., Williams, J., & Hall, D. S. (1996). College students’ judgments regarding sexual aggression during a date. Sex Roles, 35, 765–780. doi: 10.1007/BF01544091 Kahn, A. S., Jackson, J., Kully, C., Badger, K., & Halvorsen, J. (2003). Calling it rape: Differences in experiences of women who do or do not label their sexual assault as rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 233–242. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.00103 Kahn, A. S., Mathie, V. A., & Torgler, C. (1994). Rape scripts and rape acknowledgement. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 53–66. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb00296.x Kilpatrick, D. G., Resnick, H. S., Ruggiero, K. J., Conoscenti, L. M., & McCauley, J. (2007). Drug-facilitated, incapacitated, and forcible rape: A national study. (National Institute of Justice Publication No. NCJ 219181). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Kittur, A., Chi, E., & Suh, B. (2008). Crowdsourcing for usability: Using micro-task markets for rapid, remote and low-cost user measurements. In Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI 2008), 453–456. Kolivas, E. D., & Gross, A. M. (2007). Assessing sexual aggression: Addressing the gap between rape victimization and perpetration prevalence rates. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12, 315–328. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2006.10.002 Koss, M. P. (1993). Detecting the scope of rape: A review of prevalence research methods. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8, 198–222. doi: 10.1177/088626093008002004 Koss, M. P., Abbey, A., Campbell, R., Cook, S; Norris, J., Testa, C., Ullman, S., West, C., & White, J. (2007). Revising the SES: A collaborative process to improve assessment of sexual aggression and victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 357–370. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00385.x Koss, M. P., Abbey, A., Campbell, R., Cook, S; Norris, J., Testa, C., Ullman, S., West, C., & White, J. (2008). Erratum. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 493–493. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00468.x Koss, M. P., Dinero, T. E., Seibel, C. A., & Cox, S. L. (1988). Stranger and acquaintance rape: Are there differences in the victim’s experience? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12, 1–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1988.tb00924.x Koss, M. P., Heise, L., & Russo, N. F. (1994). The global health burden of rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 509–537. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01046.x Krulewitz, J. E., & Payne, E. J. (1978). Attributions about rape: Effects of rapist force, observer sex and sex role attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 8, 291–305. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1978.tb00784.x Layman, M. J., Gidycz, C. A., & Lynn, S. J. (1996). Unacknowledged versus acknowledged rape victims: Situational factors and posttraumatic stress. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105, 124–131. doi: 10.1037//0021-843X.105.1.124 Lisak, D., & Miller, P. M. (2002). Repeat rape and multiple offending among undetected rapists. Violence and Victims, 17, 73–84. doi: 10.1891/vivi.17.1.73.33638 Littleton, H. L., Axsom, D., & Grills-Taquechel, A. (2009). Sexual assault victims’ acknowledgement status and revictimization risk. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 34–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.01472.x Littleton, H. L., Axsom, D., Radecki Breitkopf, C., & Berenson, A. (2006). Rape acknowledgement and postassault experiences: How acknowledgement status relates to disclosure, coping, worldview, and reactions received from others. Violence and Victims, 21, 761–778. doi: 10.1891/0886-6708.21.6.761 Littleton, H. L., Rhatigan, D. L., & Axsom, D. (2007). Unacknowledged rape: How much do we know about the hidden rape victim? Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, and Trauma, 14, 57–74. doi: 10.1300/J146v14n04_04 Littleton, H., Tabernik, H., Canales, E. J., & Backstrom, T. (2009). Risky situation or harmless fun? A qualitative examination of college women’s bad hook-up and rape scripts. Sex Roles, 60, 793–804. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9586-8 Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1–23. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0124-6 McMahon, S. (2011, October). Changing Perceptions of Sexual Violence Over Time. Harrisburg, PA: VAWnet, a project of the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/www.vawnet.org. McMullin, D., & White, J. W. (2006). Long-term effects of labeling a rape experience. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 96–105. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00266.x Muehlenhard, C. L., Powch, I. G., Phelps, J. L., & Giusti, L. M. (1992). Definitions of rape: Scientific and political implications. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 23–44. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01155.x QSR International. (2012). NVivo 10 [Computer software]. Available from https://doi.org/www.qsrinternational.com O’Neil, M., & Morgan, P. (2010). American perceptions of sexual violence: A FrameWorks research report. Washington, D.C.: FrameWorks Institute. Orchowski, L. M., Untied, A. S., & Gidycz, C. A. (2013). Factors associated with college women’s labeling of sexual victimization. Violence and Victims, 28, 940–958. doi: 10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-12-00049 Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(5), 411–419. Patterson, D. (2011). The linkage between secondary victimization by law enforcement and rape case outcomes. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 328–347. doi: 10.1177/0886260510362889 Patterson, D., Greeson, M., & Campbell, R. (2009). Understanding rape survivors’ decisions not to seek help from formal social systems. Health & Social Work, 34, 127–136. doi: 10.1093/hsw/34.2.127 Paul, L. A., & Sasson, S. (2013). Post-assault social support: The role of others in helping victims recover. In K. Bletzer (Ed.), Assaults: Interventions, preventive strategies and societal implications (pp. 51–82). Nova Publishers: New York. Paul, L. A., Walsh, K., McCauley, J. L., Ruggiero, K. J., Resnick, H. S., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2013). College women’s experiences with rape disclosure: A national study. Violence Against Women, 19, 486–502. doi: 10.1177/1077801213487746 Paul, L. A., Walsh, K., McCauley, J. L., Ruggiero, K. J., Resnick, H. S., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2014). Characteristics and life experiences associated with receiving a rape disclosure within a national telephone household probability sample of women. Journal of Community Psychology, 42, 583–592. doi: 10.1002/jcop.21639 Peterson, Z. D., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (2004). Was it rape? The function of women’s rape myth acceptance and definitions of sex in labeling their own experiences. Sex Roles, 51, 129–144. doi: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000037758.95376.00 Peterson, Z. D., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (2011). A match-and-motivation model of how women label their nonconsensual sexual experiences. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 558–570. doi: 10.1177/0361684311410210 Ryan, K. M. (1988). Rape and seduction scripts. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12, 237–245. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1988.tb00939.x Ryan, K. M. (2011). The relationship between rape myths and sexual scripts: The social construction of rape. Sex Roles, 65, 774–782. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0033-2 Sarmiento, I. (2011). Rape stereotypes and labeling: Awareness of victimization and trauma. Psychological Reports, 108, 141–148. doi: 10.2466/07.13.16.PR0.108.1.141-148 Shotland, R. L., & Goodstein, L. (1983). Just because she doesn’t want to doesn’t mean it’s rape: An experimentally based causal model of the perception of rape in a dating situation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 46, 220–232. doi: 10.2307/3033793 Smith, C. A., & Frieze, I. H. (2003). Examining rape empathy from the perspective of the victim and the assailant. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 476–498. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01907.x Sugarman, D. B., & Hotaling, G. T. (1997). Intimate violence and social desirability: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 275–290. doi: 10.1177/088626097012002008 Tetreault, P. A., & Barnett, M. A. (1987). Reactions to stranger and acquaintance rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11, 353–358. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1987.tb00909.x Ullman, S. E. (1996). Social reactions, coping strategies, and self-blame attributions in adjustment to sexual assault. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 505–526. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1996.tb00319.x Ullman, S. E. (2010). Talking about sexual assault: Society’s response to survivors. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Ullman, S. E., & Filipas, H. H. (2001). Predictors of PTSD symptoms severity and social reactions in sexual assault victims. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 14, 369–389. doi: 10.1023/A:1011125220522 Wilkinson, C. (2008). Unwanted sex versus rape: How the language used to describe sexual assault impacts perceptions of perpetrator guilt, victim blame and reporting. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3315391)