Powerful stereotypes exist about how female rape victims should act. For example, victims are expected to physically resist their attacker and immediately report their assault. In reality, some victims are too shocked to physically resist or too traumatized to immediately go to police. Nevertheless, counterstereotypic-victim behavior can undermine fair prosecution outcomes, especially for acquaintance-rape victims. In the current research, we examined the influence of perceivers’ cultural similarity to the perpetrator, and the stereotypicality of rape-victim behaviour, on victim and perpetrator blame, punishment severity, and guilt likelihood. We varied an acquaintance-rape scenario, to present stereotypical/counterstereotypical rape-victim behaviour, and the cultural similarity/dissimilarity of perpetrators to participants, who were White-Australian women and men, aged between 18 and 74 (N = 237). In the victim-stereotypic condition, reactions did not vary as a function of perpetrator-cultural similarity. However, in the counterstereotypic-victim condition, culturally similar (compared to culturally dissimilar) perpetrators were considered less guilty and less deserving of punishment. Moderated mediation indicated that the greater leniency shown towards culturally similar perpetrators was explained by increases in victim blame and decreases in perpetrator blame. To decrease bias when prosecuting rape perpetrators, we recommend challenging the selective use of counterstereotypic-victim behaviour to defend culturally similar perpetrators.
AndersM. C.ChristopherF. S. (2011). A socioecological model of rape survivors’ decisions to aid in case prosecution. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 92–106. doi:10.1177/0361684310394802
2.
AndersonK. B.CooperH.OkamuraL. (1997). Individual differences and attitudes toward rape: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 295–315. doi:10.1177/0146167297233008
3.
ArnasonJ. P. (2003). East and West: From invidious dichotomy to incomplete destruction. In DelantyG.IsinE. F. (Eds.), Handbook of Historical Sociology (pp. 220–234). London, England: Sage.
4.
AskK. (2009). A survey of police officers’ and prosecutors’ beliefs about crime victim behaviors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 1132–1149. doi:10.1177/0886260509340535
5.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2008). Australian social trends: Education across Australia (Cat. No. 4102). Canberra, Australia: Author.
6.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012a). Census of population and housing—Counts of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, 2011 (Cat. No. 2075). Canberra, Australia: Author.
7.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012b). Personal safety survey (Cat. No. 4906, ABS). Canberra, Australia: Author.
8.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012c). Reflecting a nation: Stories from the 2011 census, 2012–2013 (Cat. No. 2071). Canberra, Australia: Author.
9.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2014a). Household use of information technology, Australia, 2012–2013 (Cat. No. 8146). Canberra, Australia: Author.
10.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2014b). Population by age and sex, regions of Australia, 2013 (Cat. No. 3235) Canberra, Australia: Author.
11.
BalM.van den BosK. (2010). The role of perpetrator similarity in reactions toward innocent victims. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 957–969. doi:10.1002/ejsp.668
12.
BanyardV. L.MoynihanM. M.CrossmanM. T. (2009). Reducing sexual violence on campus: The role of student leaders as empowered bystanders. Journal of College Student Development, 50, 446–457. doi:10.1353/csd.0.0083
13.
BasowS. A.MinieriA. (2010). “You owe me”: Effects of date cost, who pays, participant gender, and rape myth beliefs on perceptions of rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 479–497. doi:10.1177/0886260510363421
14.
BieneckS.KraheB. (2010). Blaming the victim and exonerating the perpetrator in cases of rape and robbery: Is there a double standard?Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 1785–1797. doi:10.1177/0886260510372945
15.
BlascovichJ.LoomisJ.BeallA. C.SwinthK. R.HoytC. L.BailensonJ. N. (2002). Immersive virtual environment technology as a methodological tool for social psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 103–124. doi:10.2307/1449167
16.
BrewerM. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love and outgroup hate?Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00126
17.
BrubakerR. (2001). The return of assimilation? Changing perspectives on immigration and its sequels in France, Germany, and the United States. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24, 531–548. doi:10.1080/01419870120049770
18.
ClarkH.QuadaraA. (2010). Insights into sexual assault perpetration: Giving voice to victim/survivors’ knowledge. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
19.
DalyK.BouhoursB. (2010). Rape and attrition in the legal process: A comparative analysis of five countries. Crime and Justice, 39, 565–650. doi:10.1086/653101
20.
DillehayR. C.NietzelM. T. (1985). Juror experience and jury verdicts. Law and Human Behavior, 9, 179–191. doi:10.1007/BF01067050
21.
DoosjeB.BranscombeN. R.SpearsR.MansteadA. S. R. (1998). Guilty by association: When one’s group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872–886. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.4.872
22.
Du MontJ.MillerK.-L.MyhrT. L. (2003). The role of “real rape” and “real victim” stereotypes in the police reporting practices of sexually assaulted women. Violence Against Women, 9, 466–486. doi:10.1177/1077801202250960
23.
DunnK.ForrestJ.BurnleyI.McDonaldA. (2004). Constructing racism in Australia. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 39, 409–430. doi:10.1080=00420980601185676
24.
Erceg-HurnD. M.MirosevichV. M. (2008). Modern robust statistical methods: An easy way to maximize the accuracy and power of your research. American Psychologist, 63, 591–601. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.591
25.
EstrichS. (1987). Real rape. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26.
FabianoP.PerkinsW.BerkowitzA.LinkenbachJ.StarkC. (2003). Engaging men as social justice allies in ending violence against women: Evidence for a social norms approach. Journal of American College Health, 52, 105–112. doi:10.1080/07448480309595732
27.
FisherB. S. (2005). The discovery of acquaintance rape: The salience of methodological innovation and rigor. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 493–500. doi:10.1177/0886260504267761
28.
ForrestJ.DunnK. (2007). Constructing racism in Sydney, Australia’s largest EthniCity. Urban Studies, 44, 699–721. doi:10.1080/00420980601185676
29.
FoubertJ. D.GodinE. E.TatumJ. L. (2009). In their own words: Sophomore college men describe attitude and behavior changes resulting from a rape prevention program 2 years after their participation. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 2237–2257. doi:10.1177/0886260509354881
30.
FraniukR.SeefeltJ. L.CepressS. L.VandelloJ. A. (2008). Prevalence and effects of rape myths in print journalism: The Kobe Bryant case. Violence Against Women, 14, 287–309. doi:10.1177/1077801207313971
31.
FreyD. L.GaertnerS. L. (1986). Helping and the avoidance of inappropriate interracial behavior: A strategy that perpetuates a nonprejudiced self-image. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1083–1090. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1083
32.
GallianoG.NobleL. M.TravisL. A.PuechlC. (1993). Victim reactions during rape/sexual assault: A preliminary study of the immobility response and its correlates. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8, 109–114. doi:10.1177/088626093008001008
33.
GeorgeW. H.MartinezL. J. (2002). Victim blaming in rape: Effects of victim and perpetrator race, type of rape, and participant racism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 110–119. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00049
34.
GidyczC. A.OrchowskiL. M.BerkowitzA. D. (2011). Preventing sexual aggression among college men: An evaluation of a social norms and bystander intervention program. Violence Against Women, 17, 720–742. doi:10.1177/1077801211409727
35.
GirardA. L.SennC. Y. (2008). The role of the new “date rape drugs” in attributions about date rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 3–20. doi:10.1177/0886260507307648
36.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
37.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464
38.
GrubbA.HarrowerJ. (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
39.
GrubbA.TurnerE. (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
40.
GunnR.LindenR. (1997). The impact of law reform on the processing of sexual assault cases. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 34, 155–174. doi:10.1111/j.1755-618X.1997.tb00205.x
41.
HannafordA. (1996). Race: The history of an idea in the West. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
42.
HarrisonL. A.HowertonD. M.SecareaA. M.NguyenC. Q. (2008). Effects of ingroup bias and gender role violations on acquaintance rape attributions. Sex Roles, 59, 713–725. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9472-9
43.
HaslamN.RothschildL.ErnstD. (2002). Are essentialist beliefs associated with prejudice?British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 87. doi:10.1348/014466602165072
44.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
45.
HeathN. M.LynchS. M.FritchA. M.McArthurL. N.SmithS. L. (2011). Silent survivors: Rape myth acceptance in incarcerated women’s narratives of disclosure and reporting of rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 596–610. doi:10.1177/0361684311407870
46.
HimeleinM. J.NietzelM. T.DillehayR. C. (1991). Effects of prior juror experience on jury sentencing. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 9, 97–106. doi:10.1002/bsl.2370090111
47.
HoC. (2007). Muslim women’s new defenders: Women’s rights, nationalism and Islamophobia in contemporary Australia. Women’s Studies International Forum, 30, 290–298. doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2007.05.002
48.
HunterJ. A.StringerM.WatsonR. P. (1991). Intergroup violence and intergroup attributions. British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 261–266. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1991.tb00943.x
49.
IyerA.JettenJ.HaslamS. A. (2012). Sugaring o’er the devil: Moral superiority and group identification help individuals downplay the implications of ingroup rule-breaking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 141–149. doi:10.1002/ejsp.864
50.
KrautR.OlsonJ.BanajiM.BruckmanA.CohenJ.CouperM. (2004). Psychological research online: Report of Board of Scientific Affairs’ Advisory Group on the conduct of research on the internet. American Psychologist, 59, 105–117. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.2.105
51.
LeachC. W.Bou ZeineddineF.Cehajic-ClancyS. (2013). Moral immemorial: The rarity of self-criticism for previous generations’ genocide or mass violence. Journal of Social Issues, 69, 34–53. doi:10.1111/josi.12002
52.
LonswayK. A. (1996). Preventing acquaintance rape through education. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 229–265. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1996.tb00469.x
53.
LynchK. R.WasarhaleyN. E.GoldingJ. M.SimcicT. (2013). Who bought the drinks? Juror perceptions of intoxication in a rape trial. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28, 3205–3222. doi:10.1177/0886260513496900
54.
MarquesJ. M.PaezD. (1994). The “black sheep effect”: Social categorization, rejection of ingroup deviates, and perception of group variability. European Review of Social Psychology, 5, 37–68. doi:10.1080/14792779543000011
55.
MarquesJ. M.YzerbytV. Y.LeyensJ.-P. (1988). The “black sheep effect”: Extremity of judgments towards ingroup members as a function of group identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 1–16. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420180102
56.
MasserB. M.LeeK.McKimmieB. M. (2010). Bad woman, bad victim? Disentangling the effects of victim stereotypicality, gender stereotypicality and benevolent sexism on acquaintance rape victim blame. Sex Roles, 62, 494–504. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9648-y
57.
McKimmieB. M.MasserB. M.BongiornoR. (2014). What counts as rape? The effect of offense prototypes, victim stereotypes, and participant gender on how the complainant and defendant are perceived. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29, 2273–2303. doi:10.1177/0886260513518843
MonsonC. M.Langhinrichsen-RohlingJ.BinderupT. (2000). Does “no” really mean “no” after you say “yes”?: Attributions about date and marital rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 1156–1174. doi:10.1177/088626000015011003
60.
NorrisP.InglehartR. (2011). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
61.
PeakeL.KobayashiA. (2000). Racism out of place: Thoughts on whiteness and an antiracist geography in the new millennium. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90, 392–403. doi:10.1111/0004-5608.00202
62.
PoyntingS.MasonV. (2006). “Tolerance, freedom, justice and peace”?: Britain, Australia and anti-Muslim racism since 11 September 2001. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 27, 365–391. doi:10.1080/07256860600934973
63.
ReicherS.HopkinsN. (2001). Self and nation. London, England: Sage.
64.
ResickP. A. (1993). The psychological impact of rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8, 223–255. doi:10.1177/088626093008002005
65.
ScheelE. D.JohnsonE. J.SchneiderM.SmithB. (2001). Making rape education meaningful for men: The case for eliminating the emphasis on men as perpetrators, protectors, or victims. Sociological Practice, 3, 257–278. doi:10.1023/A:1013050219853
66.
SchruijerS.BlanzM.MummendeyA.TedeschiJ.BanfaiB.DittmarH.…PetillonX. (1994). The group-serving bias in evaluating and explaining harmful behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 47–53. doi:10.1080/00224545.1994.9710882
67.
StarzynskiL. L.UllmanS. E.FilipasH. H.TownsendS. M. (2005). Correlates of women’s sexual assault disclosure to informal and formal support sources. Violence and Victims, 20, 417–432. doi:10.1177/088626001016010004
68.
SuarezE.GadallaT. M. (2010). Stop blaming the victim: A meta-analysis on rape myths. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 2010–2035. doi:10.1177/0886260509354503
69.
TabachnickB. G.FidelL. S. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
70.
TajfelH. (Ed.). (1978). Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London, England: Academic Press.
71.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (Rev. ed., pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
72.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (1998). Prevalence, incidence, and consequences of violence against women: Findings from the National Violence against Women Survey. (Research in Brief NCJ 172837). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
73.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS.WetherellM. S. (Eds.). (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
van ProoijenJ. W. (2006). Retributive reactions to suspected offenders: The importance of social categorizations and guilt probability. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 715–726. doi:10.1177/0146167205284964
76.
VikiG. T.AbramsD.MasserB. M. (2004). Evaluating stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent sexism in perpetrator blame and recommended sentence length. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 295–303. doi:10.1023/B: LAHU.0000029140.72880.69
77.
VoloderL. (2012). Secularism, society, and symbols of religion: Bosnian Muslim Australians encounter Christmas. In MandersonL.SmithW.TomlinsonM. (Eds.), Flows of faith: Religious reach and community in Asia and the Pacific (pp. 71–86). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
78.
WarnerK. (2004). Gang rape in Sydney: Crime, the media, politics, race and sentencing. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 37, 344–361. doi:10.1375/acri.37.3.344
79.
WeberJ. G. (1994). The nature of ethnocentric attribution bias: Ingroup protection or enhancement?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 482–504. doi:10.1006/jesp.1994.1023
80.
WhatleyM. A. (1996). Victim characteristics influencing attributions of responsibility to rape victims: A meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 1, 81–95. doi:10.1016/1359-1789(95)00011-9
81.
WinkelF. W.KoppelaarL. (1991). Rape victims’ style of self-presentation and secondary victimization by the environment: An experiment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6, 29–40. doi:10.1177/088626091006001003
82.
WorellJ.RobinsonD. (1994). Reinventing analogue methods for research with women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 463–476. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01043.x
83.
WorkmanJ. E.FreeburgE. W. (1999). An examination of date rape, victim dress, and perceiver variables within the context of attribution theory. Sex Roles, 41, 261–277. doi:10.1023/A:1018858313267
