This article examines the development of Mary Koss’s influential Sexual Experiences Survey and defends her then-controversial interpretive choice to endorse a broad-scope definition of rape. Koss’s choice was informed by an empirical recognition of how unjust power dynamics could confound measurement strategies. By adopting a feminist standpoint, Koss and her colleagues recognized how many measurement procedures implicitly disempowered respondents’ capacity to express inquiry-relevant data. Ultimately, the iterative development of a valid and reliable measurement system is compatible with, and quite comparable to, the feminist project of identifying how gendered relations of power enable the persistence and concealment of sexual violence.
AllenAmy. 2008. “Power and the Politics of Difference: Oppression, Empowerment, and Transnational Justice.” Hypatia23 (3): 156–72.
4.
BradburnNorman M.CartwrightNancy L.FullerJonathan. 2017. “A Theory of Measurement.” In Measurement in Medicine: Philosophical Essays on Assessment and Evaluation, edited by McClimansLeah, 73–88. Rowman and Littlefield.
5.
BrightLiam Kofi. 2024. “Duboisian Leadership Through Standpoint Epistemology.” The Monist107 (1): 82–97.
6.
BrisonSusan J.2002. Aftermath: Violence and the Remaking of a Self. Princeton University Press.
7.
BrownmillerSusan. 1976. Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape. Bantam Books.
8.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1984. Criminal Victimization in the United States, 1982. US Department of Justice.
9.
CartwrightNancyRunhardtRosa. 2014. “Measurement.” In Philosophy of Social Science: A New Introduction, edited by CartwrightNancyMontuschiEleanora, 265–87. Oxford University Press.
10.
ChangHasok. 2004. Inventing Temperature: Measurement and Scientific Progress. Oxford University Press.
ChangHasok. 2012. Is Water H2O? Evidence, Realism and Pluralism. Springer.
13.
CollinsPatricia H. 1997. “Comment on Hekman’s ‘Truth and Method: Feminist Standpoint Theory Revisited’: Where’s the Power?” Signs22 (2): 375–81.
14.
CrasnowSharon. 2008. “Feminist Philosophy of Science: ‘Standpoint’ and Knowledge.” Science & Education17 (10): 1089–110.
15.
CrasnowSharon. 2021. “Coherence Objectivity and Measurement: The Example of Democracy.” Synthese199 (1–2): 1207–29.
16.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. 1986. Crime in the United States: Uniform Crime Reports. US Department of Justice.
17.
FisherBonnie S.CullenFrancis T.TurnerMichael G.. 2000. The Sexual Victimization of College Women. National Institute of Justice.
18.
FrickerMiranda. 2007. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press.
19.
GaveyNicola. 2005. Just Sex? The Cultural Scaffolding of Rape. Routledge.
20.
GilbertNeil. 1991. “The Phantom Epidemic of Sexual Assault.” Public Interest103: 54–65.
21.
GilbertNeil. 1993. “The Wrong Response to Rape.” Wall Street Journal2 (9): A18.
22.
GilbertNeil. 1994. “Was It Rape? An Examination of Sexual Abuse Statistics.” The American Enterprise5 (5): 68–77.
23.
GilbertNeil. 1998. “Realities and Mythologies of Rape.” Society35: 356–62.
24.
GolembiewskiRobert T.BillingsleyKeithYeagerSamuel. 1976. “Measuring Change and Persistence in Human Affairs: Types of Change Generated by OD Designs.” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science12 (2): 133–57.
25.
GraefrathMoritz S.JahnMarcel. 2025. “Concepts in Context: Ontological Coherence in Political Science Research.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences55 (1): 24–60.
26.
HackingIan. 1999. The Social Construction of What?Harvard University Press.
27.
HarawayDonna. 1988. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies14 (3): 575–99.
28.
HartsockNancy C. M.1983. “The Feminist Standpoint: Developing the Ground for a Specifically Feminist Historical Materialism.” In Discovering Reality: Feminist Perspectives on Epistemology, Metaphysics, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, edited by HardingSandraHintikkaMerrill B., 283–310. Springer.
29.
HesterMarianneDonovanCatherine. 2009. “Researching Domestic Violence in Same-Sex Relationships—A Feminist Epistemological Approach to Survey Development.” Journal of Lesbian Studies13 (2): 161–73.
30.
IntemannKristen. 2016. “Feminist Standpoint.” In The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, edited by DischLisaHawkesworthMary, 261–82. Oxford University Press.
31.
KossMary P.1985. “The Hidden Rape Victim: Personality, Attitudinal, and Situational Characteristics.” Psychology of Women Quarterly9 (2): 193–212.
32.
KossMary P.2011. “Hidden, Unacknowledged, Acquaintance, and Date Rape: Looking Back, Looking Forward.” Psychology of Women Quarterly35 (2): 348–54.
33.
KossMary P.OrosCheryl J.. 1982. “Sexual Experiences Survey: A Research Instrument Investigating Sexual Aggression and Victimization.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology50 (3): 455–57.
34.
KossMary P.GidyczChristine A.WisniewskiNadine. 1987. “The Scope of Rape: Incidence and Prevalence of Sexual Aggression and Victimization in a National Sample of Higher Education Students.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology55 (2): 162–70.
35.
KossMary P.DineroThomas E.SeibelCynthia A.CoxSusan L.. 1988. “Stranger and Acquaintance Rape: Are There Differences in the Victim’s Experience?” Psychology of Women Quarterly12 (1): 1–24.
36.
KuklaQuill R.2021. “Situated Knowledge, Purity, and Moral Panic.” In Applied Epistemology, edited by LackeyJennifer, 37–66. Oxford University Press.
37.
KuklaQuill R.2024. “Epistemic Diversity, Ignorance, and Non-Ideal Philosophy of Science.” In The Routledge Handbook of Non-Ideal Theory, edited by HänelHilkje C.MüllerJohanna M., 382–400. Routledge.
38.
Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. 1975. Criminal Victimization Surveys in 13 American Cities: National Crime Panel Surveys in Boston, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Houston, Miami, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New Orleans, Oakland, Pittsburgh, San Diego, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. US Government Printing Office.
39.
LevineEthan Czuy. 2021. Rape by the Numbers: Producing and Contesting Scientific Knowledge About Sexual Violence. Rutgers University Press.
40.
LloydElisabeth A. 1995. “Objectivity and the Double Standard for Feminist Epistemologies.” Synthese104 (3): 351–81.
41.
LonginoHelen E.1990. Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton University Press.
42.
LonginoHelen E.DoellRuth. 1983. “Body, Bias, and Behavior: A Comparative Analysis of Reasoning in Two Areas of Biological Science.” Signs9 (2): 206–27.
43.
LukesSteven. 1974. Power: A Radical View. Macmillan.
44.
MertonRobert K.1972. “Insiders and Outsiders: A Chapter in the Sociology of Knowledge.” American Journal of Sociology78 (1): 9–47.
45.
MilanovichKai.2025. “Distinguishing Situated Knowledge and Standpoint Theory: Defending the Achievement Thesis.” Hypatia, 1–20. Published ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1017/hyp.2025.10021
46.
NarayanUma. 1988. “Working Together Across Difference: Some Considerations on Emotions and Political Practice.” Hypatia3 (2): 31–47.
47.
NelsonLynn Hankinson. 1993. “A Question of Evidence.” Hypatia8 (2): 172–89.
48.
RoipheKatie.1993a. “Date Rape’s Other Victim: In Their Claims of a Date-Rape Epidemic on Campus, Feminist Subvert Their Own Cause.” New York Times Sunday Magazine. 13June. 26.
49.
RoipheKatie. 1993b. The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism. Little, Brown and Co.
50.
RolinKristina. 2009. “Standpoint Theory as a Methodology for the Study of Power Relations.” Hypatia24 (4): 218–26.
51.
RunhardtRosa W.2021. “Reactivity in Measuring Depression.” European Journal for Philosophy of Science11 (3): 77.
52.
RussellDiane E. H.1984. Sexual Exploitation: Rape, Child Sexual Abuse, and Workplace Harassment. Sage.
53.
RutherfordAlexandra. 2017. “Surveying Rape: Feminist Social Science and the Ontological Politics of Sexual Assault.” History of the Human Sciences30 (4): 100–23.
54.
SmithDorothy E.1974. “Women’s Perspective as a Radical Critique of Sociology.” Sociological Inquiry44 (1): 7–13.
55.
SommersChristina Hoff. 1994. Who Stole Feminism? How Women Have Betrayed Women. Simon & Schuster.
56.
SweetEllen. 1985. “Date Rape: The Story of an Epidemic and Those Who Deny It.” Ms.14 (4): 50–56.
TanesiniAlessandra. 2020. “Standpoint Then and now.” In The Routledge Handbook of Social Epistemology, edited by FrickerMirandaGrahamPeter J.HendersonDavidPedersenNikolaj J. L. L., 335–43. Routledge.
59.
TiltonE. C.2024. “‘That’s Above My Paygrade’: Woke Excuses for Ignorance.” Philosophers’ Imprint24 (8): 1–19.
60.
TooleBriana. 2024. “Standpoint Epistemology and Epistemic Peerhood: A Defense of Epistemic Privilege.” Journal of the American Philosophical Association10 (3): 409–26.
61.
US Senate Committee on the Judiciary. 1991. Women and Violence: Hearings Before the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate, One Hundred First Congress, Second Session, on Legislation to Reduce the Growing Problem of Violent Crime Against Women, August 29 and December 11, 1990, Part 2. US Government Printing Office.
62.
WarshawRobin. 1988 (2019). I Never Called It Rape: The Ms. Report on Recognizing, Fighting, and Surviving Date and Acquaintance Rape. Updated ed.Harper Perennial.
63.
WartenbergThomas E. 1990. The Forms of Power: From Domination to Transformation. Temple University Press.
64.
WeeksKathi. 1998. Constituting Feminist Subjects. Cornell University Press.
65.
WylieAlison. 2004. “Why Standpoint Matters.” In The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies, edited by HardingSandra, 339–51. Routledge.
66.
WylieAlison. 2012. “Feminist Philosophy of Science: Standpoint Matters.” Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophy Association82 (2): 47–76.
