Priming Self-Affirmation Reduces the Negative Impact of High Rape Myth Acceptance: Assessing Women’s Perceptions and Judgments of Sexual Assault

Abstract

Researchers have theorized and empirically shown that compared with low rape myth acceptance (RMA) individuals, those high in RMA are more likely to discount rape prevention messages. These researchers have urged the development of approaches to counteract the defensiveness and related processes that are presumed to cause such discounting. In the present research we empirically tested the effectiveness of a self-affirmation approach designed to reduce defensiveness to and increase engagement with important but potentially self-threatening information about sexual assault. Female participants classified as low or high in RMA were randomly assigned to either a self-affirmation or no-affirmation control condition and then read about a controversial case of campus sexual assault. We found support for the effectiveness of such a self-affirmation intervention for high-RMA women. Specifically, on a questionnaire administered after the exposure, affirmed high-RMA women relative to the control group reported greater endorsement of the realistic use of the “yes means yes” standard of consent, higher self-standards in defining consensual sexual behavior, increases in perceived knowledge of available resources for sexual assault victims, lower support of rape myths, and greater support for punishing someone convicted of sexual assault. As expected, for women low in RMA there were no significant differences in reporting on these measures between the affirmation condition and the no-affirmation condition. From an agentic perspective these results are encouraging. This approach may merit further development as part of an intervention for reducing biased processing and increasing the effectiveness of consent campaigns and other sexual violence prevention programs.