The influence of prior credibility information about a rape victim on the subsequent questioning and assessment of the victim by the police was studied in two related experiments. It was hypothesized that the number and type of questions asked would be influenced by the type of prior information the subjects had received. Furthermore, evaluation of the victims’ report was expected to be biased toward the manipulated level of victim credibility. In Experiment 1 law students were either given negative, positive or no victim credibility information before participating in a simulated victim interview. Analysis of the number and type of questions asked during the interview, and the attributed victim or assailant responsibility measured after the interview confirmed the hypothesis for the number and type of questions. The expected bias with regard to the final evaluation of the victim and the assailant was only partially confirmed. Irrespective of the prior information on victim credibility, attributions of responsibility were related to stereotypical beliefs about rape and estimated percentage of false crime reports. In Experiment 2 these results were partially replicated using a sample of vice squad detectives. These police officers appeared to be more sympathetic towards rape victims than were the law students. The discussion focused on the complexity of expectancy confirmation research and the rather positive results found in this study.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AschS.E.(1946). Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.
2.
Beaufort, Commissie De (1979). Rapport van de werkgroep sexuele geweldmisdrijven. Ministerie van Justitie; Den Haag.
3.
BestJ.B.DemminH.S.(1982). Victim's provocativeness and victim's attractiveness as determinants for blame in rape. Psychological Reports, 51, 255–258.
4.
BijlP.A.(1986). Waarom wilt u dat weten? — Het slachtofferverhoor van een zedendelict gesimuleerd. Doctoraalscriptie. Vrije Universteit, Vakgroep Sociale Psychologie; Amsterdam.
5.
BrophyJ.(1983). Research on the self-fulfilling prophecy and teacher expectations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 365–374.
6.
BunnikK.KuijperE.(1989). Het zedenverhoor beoordeeld: een onderzoek naar de manier van verhoren van een slachtoffer van verkrachting., Doctoraalscriptie. Amsterdam; Universiteit van Amsterdam, Vakgroep Klinische Psychologie/Vrije Universiteit, Vakgroep Sociale Psychologie.
7.
BurtM.R.(1980). Cultural myths and support for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217–230.
8.
CannA.CalhounL.C.SelbyJ.W.KingH.E.(1981). Rape. Journal of Social Issues, 37, 1–162.
9.
DarleyJ.M.GrossP.H.(1983). A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 20–33.
10.
DenkersA.J.M.(1996). Psychological reactions of victims of crime: the influence of pre-crime, crime, and post-crime factors. Doctoral Dissertation. Vakgroep Sociale psychologie/Vrije Universiteit; Amsterdam.
11.
EdenD.ShaniA.B.(1982). Pygmalion goes to boot camp: expectancy, leadership and trainee performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 194–199.
12.
GoffmanE.(1961). Asylums. Doubleday Anchor; Garden City, New York.
13.
GoffmanE.(1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Prentice Hall; Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
14.
GulottaG.de Cataldo NeubergerL.(1983). A systemic and attributional approach to victimology. Victimology, 8, 5–16.
15.
KateJ. tenKoppenP.J. van (1984). Determinanten van privaat-rechtelijke beslissingen. Gouda Quint; Arnhem.
16.
KelleyH.H.(1950). The warm-cold variable in experimentally created hierarchies. Human Relations, 4, 39–56.
17.
KlemmackS.H.KlemmackD.L.(1976). The social definition of rape. Walker & Broesky; New York.
18.
KoppelaarL.WinkelF.W.(1986). Slachtoffers van sexueel geweld: stijl van zelfpresentatie en hulp van anderen. In Vrouw en criminaliteit (BruinsmaG.LeuwE.LissenbergE.van VlietA., eds.) pp. 101–109. Boom; Meppel/Amsterdam.
19.
KoppelaarL.SteenJ.C. van der(1987). Conflicthantering door de politie: Een kwalitatieve en kwantitatieve analyse. Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken, Directie Politie/Vrije Universiteit, Vakgroep Sociale Psychologie/CIRCON, Organisatie- en Trainingsontwikkeling; Den Haag—Amsterdam.
20.
KoppelaarL.BijlP.A.SteenJ.C. van derVrijA.(1987). Slachtofferverhoor bij zedendelicten. Algemeen Politieblad, 18, 420–423.
21.
KrahéB.(1988). Victim and observer characteristics as determinants of responsibility attributions to victims of rape. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 50–58.
22.
LandyD.AronsonE.(1969). The influence of the character of the criminal and his victim on the decisions of simulated jurors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5, 141–152.
23.
LangeA.BeursE. deHanewaldG.KoppelaarL.(1991). The influence of prior information about clients on evaluations and responses of clinicians during family therapy. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 10, 21–36.
24.
MazelanP.(1980). Stereotypes and perceptions of the victims of rape. Victimology, 5, 121–132.
25.
MetzG.RijpkemaH.(1979). Mythen en feiten over verkrachting. Criminologisch Instituut; Groningen.
26.
PettyR.E.CacioppoJ.T.(1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 19. (BerkowitzL., ed.) Academic Press; Orlando.
27.
RosenthalR.JacobsonL.(1968). Pygmalion in the classroom: teacher expectation and student intellectual development. Holt, Rinehart and Winston; New York.
28.
RyanW.(1971). Blaming the victim. Pantheon; New York.
29.
ScheffT.J.(1966). Being mortally ill: A sociological theory. Aldine; New York.
30.
SelbyJ.W.CalhounL.G.BrockT.A.(1977). Sex differences in the social perception of victims. Personality an Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 412–415.
31.
SigallH.OstroveN.(1975). Beautiful but dangerous: effects of offender attractiveness and nature of the crime on juridic judgment. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 31, 410–414.
32.
SkovR.B.ShermanS.J.(1986). Information-gathering processes: diagnosticity, hypothesis-confirmatory strategies and perceived hypothesis confirmation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 93–121.
33.
SnyderM.SwannW.B.Jr.(1978). Behavioral conformation in social interaction: from social perception to social reality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 148–162.
34.
Terwee-van HiltenC.A.(1988). Wettelijke voorzieningen slachtoffers in het strafproces: rapport van de Commissie Wettelijke Voorzieningen Slachtoffers in het Strafproces. SDU uitgeverij; 's-Gravenhage.
35.
TropeY.BassokM.(1982). Confirmatory and diagnosing strategies in social information gathering. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 22–34.
36.
VianoE.C.(1989). Crime and its victims: international research and public policy issues. Hemisphere; New York.
37.
WinkelF.W.KoppelaarL.(1992). Perceived credibility of the communicator: studies of perceptual bias in police officers conducting rape interviews. In Psychology and Law (LoselF.BenderD.BliesenerT., eds.) Walter de Gruyter; Berlin.
38.
WinterS. deWinkelF.W.(1993). De gepercipieerde geloofwaardigheid van slachtoffers van verkrachting tijdens het verhoor: een experiment onder hulpverleners. In Sociale Psychologie en haar Toepassingen (VerplankenB.LangeP.A.M. vanMeertensR.W.SieroF.W., eds.) pp. 153–165. Eburon; Delft.
