Sexual violence is ubiquitous in the history of human relationships, with the victim being perceived as responsible for their own misfortune. This phenomenon is labelled secondary victimization and is manifested in blaming, minimizing the suffering, and avoiding the victim. This article presents evidence of the validity of a scale that measures individual differences in these three types of secondary victimization of rape victims. In Study 1, we developed the scale items and analyzed their content validity. In Study 2, we carried out an exploratory analysis of its factorial structure and verified the set-up of the items in three theoretically predicted factors (blaming, minimizing the suffering, and avoiding the victim), which had convergent validity with the Rape Myth Acceptance Scale, and discriminant validity with the Big Five Personality Traits, in addition to having concurrent validity with the Belief in a Just World Scale (BJWS). In Study 3, we confirmed this tri-factor structure using confirmatory analysis. In Study 4, we analyzed the predictive validity of the Secondary Victimization Scale (SVS), proposing the hypothesis that secondary victimization mediates the effect of BJWS on the participants' behavior towards a rape victim. The summary of the results shows consistent evidence of the SVS’s validity.
AlvesH. (2013). Sobre a descoberta da normatividade injuntiva da expressão da crença no mundo justo – uma aventura em psicologia social. In PereiraC. R.Costa-LopesR. (eds.), Normas, atitudes e comportamentos sociais (pp. 73–107). Imprensa de Ciências Sociais.
2.
AsparouhovT.MuthénB. (2016). Modelagem de variáveis latentes com efeito aleatório geral: assuntos, itens, contextos e parâmetros aleatórios. In Em HarringJ. R eStapletonL. M.BeretvasS. N. (eds.), Avanços na modelagem multinível para pesquisa educacional: Abordando questões práticas encontradas em aplicações do mundo real (pp. 163–192). Information Age Publishing, Inc.
3.
BakerF. B. (2001). The basics of item response theory. ERIC.
4.
BlandJ.AltmanD. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 327(8476), 307–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8
5.
BoatengG. O.NeilandsT. B.FrongilloE. A. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Front Public Health, 6(149), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
6.
BrickmanR.RabinowitzV. CKaruzaJ.CoatesD.CohenE.KidderL. (1982). Models of helping and coping. American Psychologist, 37(4), 368–384. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.4.368
7.
BrownR. P.BaughmanK.CarvalloM. (2018). Culture, masculine honor, and violence toward women. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(4), 538–549. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217744195
8.
BurgessD.BorgidaE. (1999). Who women are, who women should be: Descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotyping in sex discrimination. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5(3), 665–692. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.5.3.665
9.
ByrneB. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with Amos: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Routledge.
10.
CampbellR.SeflT.BarnesH. E.AhrensC. E.WascoS. M.Zaragoza-DiesfeldY. (1999). Community services for rape survivors: Enhancing psychological well-being or increasing trauma?Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(6), 847–858. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.67.6.847
11.
CampbellR.RajaS. (1999). Secondary victimization of rape victims: insights from mental health professionals who treat survivors of violence. Violence and Victims, 14(3), 261–275. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.14.3.261
12.
CicchettiD. VSparrowS. A. (1981). Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: Applications to assessment of adaptive behavior. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86(2), 127–137.
13.
CorreiaI.PereiraC. R.ValaJ. (2018). Under victimization by an outgroup: Belief in a just world, national identification, and ingroup blame. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(JUL), 1160. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01160
14.
CorreiaI.ValaJ. (2003). Crença no mundo justo e vitimização secundária: O papel moderador da inocência da vítima e da persistência do sofrimento. Análise Psicológica, 3(21), 341–352. https://doi.org/10.14417/ap.15
15.
CorreiaI. F. (2000). A teoria da crença no mundo justo e a vitimização secundária: Estudos empíricos e desenvolvimentos teóricos. Psicologia, 14(2), 253–283. https://doi.org/10.17575/rpsicol.v14i2.514
16.
Costa-LopesR.DovidioJ. F.PereiraC. R.JostJ. T. (2013). Social psychological perspectives on the legitimation of social inequality: Past, present and future. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(4), 229-237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1966.
17.
DalbertC.LipkusI.SallayH.GochI. (2001). A just and an unjust world: Structure and validity of different world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(4), 561–577. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0191-8869(00)00055-6
18.
DalbertC.MontadaL.SchmittM. (1987). Glaube an eine gerechte Welt als motiv: Validierungskorrelate zweier Skalen. Psychologische Beitrage, 29(4), 596–615. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11780/743.
19.
De keersmaeckerJ.RoetsA. (2020). All victims are equally innocent, but some are more innocent than others: The role of group membership on victim blaming. Current Psychology, 39(1), 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-017-9763-9
20.
DimitrovD. M. (2012). Statistical methods for validation of assessment scale data in counseling and related fields. American Counseling Association.
21.
EidM.GeiserC.KochT.HeeneM. (2017). Anomalous results in G-factor models: Explanations and alternatives. Psychological Methods, 22(3), 541–562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/met0000083
22.
FelsonR. B.PalmoreC. (2018). Biases in blaming victims of rape and other crime. Parasites & Vectors, 8(3), 390–399. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/vio0000168
23.
FetchenhauerD.JacobsG.BelschakF. (2005). Belief in a just world, causal attributions, and adjustment to sexual violence. Social Justice Research, 18(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-005-3369-1
GoslingS. D.RentfrowP. J.SwannW. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the big-five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
26.
GrometD. M.DarleyJ. M. (2006). Restoration and retribution: How including retributive components affects the acceptability of restorative justice procedures. In Social Justice Research (19, Issue 4) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-006-0023-7
27.
HairJ.AndersonR., E.TathamR.BlackW. (2005). Análise multivariada de dados. Bookman.
28.
HayesA. F.RockwoodN. J. (2017). Regression-based statistical mediation and moderation analysis in clinical research: Observations, recommendations, and implementation. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 98(1), 39–57.
KleinkeC. L.MeyerC. (1990). Evaluation of rape victim by men and women with high and low belief in a just world. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14(3), 343–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1990.tb00024.x
33.
KossM. P.AbbeyA.CampbellR.CookS.NorrisJ.TestaM.UllmanS.WestC.WhiteJ. (2007). Revising the SES: A collaborative process to improve assessment of sexual aggression and victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(4), 357–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00385.x
34.
KyriazosT. A.StalikasA. (2018). Applied psychometrics: The steps of scale development and standardization process. Psychology, 09(11), 2531–2560. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.911145
35.
LaskeyP.BatesE. A.TaylorJ. C. (2019). A systematic literature review of intimate partner violence victimisation: An inclusive review across gender and sexuality. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 47(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2019.02.014
LernerM. J. (1980). Belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. Plenum Publishing Corporation. https://doi.org/10.2307/2067083
38.
MendonçaR. D.Gouveia-PereiraM.MirandaM. (2016). Belief in a just world and secondary victimization: The role of adolescent deviant behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 97(1), 82–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.021
PayneD. L.LonswayK. A.FitzgeraldL. F. (1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the Illinois rape myth acceptance scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 33(1), 27–68. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1998.2238
