Aspects of Selective Sexual Assault Disclosure: Qualitative Interviews With Survivors and Their Informal Supports

Abstract

Two-thirds of survivors typically disclose their experience to informal supports (e.g., friends, family, partners) at some point following sexual assault, but little in-depth research has addressed specific aspects of disclosure. In the current study, a diverse sample of 45 sexual assault survivors and their informal support providers (SP; e.g., family, friends, romantic partners) were interviewed separately about experiences of disclosure, social reactions, and help-seeking following the assault. Narrative data on the overarching thematic category of selective disclosure were analyzed using thematic analysis methods. Several subthemes emerged specific to (a) the circumstances of disclosure (prompted or coerced), (b) withholding details (framing disclosures to avoid rape myths and blame, strategic use of language, protecting others by not disclosing or limiting details), and (c) sharing details (selecting who was told, selecting trusted others for disclosure, selective details told to specific people, sharing with strangers easier). Implications are drawn for future research on aspects of selective disclosure of sexual assault and clinical practice implications for supporting survivors and their informal support networks.

Research shows significant variability in disclosure post-sexual assault including the nature of the disclosure experience, who is told, and what details are included when telling other people (Ullman, 2023). Research has focused primarily on rates of disclosure, motives for disclosing and not disclosing, characteristics of disclosures including timing, detail, and impact of the disclosure, as well as social reactions to disclosures. While qualitative research shows a wide range of survivor experiences when disclosing sexual assault (see Gorissen et al., 2023; Gueta et al., 2022 for reviews), work is still needed to understand why survivors tell, what detail they provide, and to whom survivors disclose. This topic is important to study to learn how we can facilitate disclosures in spaces and with people who are likely to be supportive. Researchers can use this information to design and/or adapt interventions to help informal supports respond better to survivors (e.g., Edwards, Waterman et al., 2022), as they are most often told, but often do not know how to respond. Also, such information can help professionals, like therapists, who are not all trained to work with survivors, to support and help them navigate support-seeking and recovery (see Tener & Murphy’s, 2015 review recommending further study of adult sexual assault disclosure).

Many survivors are aware of the hazards of disclosing sexual assault given the prevalence of rape myths in the population and the likelihood that they may be questioned about the assault by others (Ullman, 2011; Ullman et al., 2020), particularly if the assault was not a stereotypic stranger rape. Given that stranger sexual assaults are a minority of incidents (20% or less) and most victims are assaulted by persons they know and trust (approximately 80%; Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2017), these concerns are widespread.

Anticipated negative social reactions are reported by survivors to be a major reason for withholding information about their assaults and sometimes for not disclosing it to others at all (Ahrens, 2006; Moschella et al., 2020).

Disclosure is important for the recovery of many survivors and also for exposing the prevalence of this crime (see Ullman, 2011). Thus, survivors need safe outlets, including online spaces, where they are able to the disclose details of their assaults, as well as the impacts of doing so, including their emotional reactions. Such disclosures are vital so that survivors can be heard, hopefully receive supportive responses, and access professional help as needed. Research is needed documenting survivors’ thought processes about why and who they tell from their own perspectives as well as from disclosure recipients. Persons told are mostly informal support sources, including family, friends, and romantic partners. Of those survivors telling informal sources, about one-third of those also seek formal support (e.g., mental health, medical/healthcare, religious, police, rape crisis; Ullman (2023). Factors such as timing, detail, and who is told appear to affect the impact of disclosure on survivors. Greater detail, telling sooner after the assault, and disclosing to friends are linked to less posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms and better post-assault social support (Ahrens et al., 2009; Ullman & Filipas, 2001; Ullman et al., 2007).

Survivors also have varied motivations for disclosing sexual assault, including needing to tell someone what happened, let out their feelings, and obtain support and assistance (Demers et al., 2017). The disclosure process model (DPM) is a theoretical model of self-disclosure for people with concealable stigmatized identities (Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010), which are identities that can be hidden from others and are socially devalued and negatively stereotyped. Chaudoir and Fisher (2010) posited that when people with a concealable stigmatized identity disclose this information to others, they risk experiencing negative outcomes or being targeted by prejudice. This makes such disclosures more complex, as they may yield negative outcomes such as social rejection and discrimination. This concept has also been applied to sexual assault (Gueta et al., 2022), as one cannot tell who is a sexual assault survivor by looking at them and research shows disclosing to others can lead to negative social reactions including stigma, rejection, and discriminatory treatment (Ullman, 2023).

The DPM examines the disclosure process from motivation to post-disclosure outcomes and posits that individuals have different motivations for disclosure including approach goals (e.g., improving emotional well-being) or avoidance goals (e.g., avoiding blame). In addition, disclosure outcomes occur at several levels: individual (psychological and physical well-being), interpersonal (trust and intimacy), and social context (stigma and norms). This model can be used to aid in understanding and interpreting survivors’ stated motivations and experiences of telling others about their assaults and their impacts (Gueta et al., 2022). For example, various factors beyond survivors’ motivations may play a role, including various constraints on or circumstances of the disclosure which may lead it to be made voluntarily or involuntarily. This can include prompted disclosures by others, circumstances, or people who coerce disclosures out of survivors and were told by others or tell others without the survivor’s permission. Specifically, research on sexual assault and abuse shows this voluntary or prompted aspect of the nature of disclosures can be important in affecting how and whether disclosures occur as well as their impacts (Mauer et al., 2022). On the positive side, when informal support network members ask if the survivor is okay when sensing something is wrong, this can open the door to the survivor feeling safe to tell that person. On the negative side, some individuals may be nosy and/or pushy and try to coerce survivors to tell them what happened when they do not wish to do so. In other instances, professionals, like doctors treating teens after sexual assault, may also tell a parent what happened, or university employees may be compelled to report sexual assault disclosed to them by students not wanting it to be disclosed further, by institutions with mandatory reporting polices (Holland et al., 2018). Coerced disclosures and/or mandatory reporting by others can further reinforce survivors’ loss of control experienced during sexual assault (Frazier, 2003; Peter-Hagene & Ullman, 2014). Other factors influencing disclosure decisions include the following: who will be receptive and respond supportively and the potential impact the disclosure might have on the person told (see Carson et al., 2021; Ullman et al., 2020).

Finally, various factors may influence who survivors tell including characteristics of the assault, the relationship with the person one is considering whether to tell, and what one needs or wishes to disclose in terms of assault details and circumstances (Ullman, 2023). Research shows that past experiences disclosing earlier child or adolescent sexual assault, as well as responses from others to earlier disclosures may affect survivors’ willingness to disclose adult sexual assault experiences (Ahrens, 2006; Illes et al., 2018; Stepleton et al., 2019). Victim characteristics such as age, race, and sexual identity may affect disclosure likelihood and whom is told (Edwards et al., 2023). Assault characteristics such as severity, relationship to the perpetrator, alcohol use, and other assault circumstances, may all affect whether survivors decide to tell others and who they tell (Ullman, 2023).

Current Study

Few in-depth studies of specific aspects of the sexual assault disclosure experience exist examining both survivors and their informal supports. Yet, beyond whether or not survivors disclose, there are various factors related to survivors’ disclosures including motivating factors that facilitate disclosure, selectivity of what and whom is told, and disclosure decisions. Limited dyadic research exists on how informal supports deal with survivors’ disclosures and navigate supporting them post-assault (but see Mauer et al., 2022). Therefore, this study sought to address this gap by exploring women’s sexual assault disclosure experiences with data from both survivors and their informal supports’ perspectives. For the current study, various terms related to aspects of disclosure experiences were coded from qualitative interviews to study disclosure in informal dyads, and the DPM was used to interpret results where possible. Research questions were as follows: What does selective disclosure look like in terms of (a) survivor motivations for telling others? (b) details revealed in survivor disclosures? and (c) survivor choices of whom they disclose to and what they tell specific persons from survivor and informal support provider (SP) perspectives?

Method

Participants

The sample included adult female sexual assault survivors who disclosed their assault to an informal SP. Survivors had previously participated in a 3-year longitudinal survey (N = 1,863) regarding unwanted sexual experiences and the social reactions they received when disclosing these experiences (see Ullman & Peter-Hagene, 2016, for study description). Survivors who indicated an interest in being contacted for an interview were also asked to provide contact information for a friend, family member, or significant other they told about an unwanted sexual experience. SPs were contacted later for a separate interview that focused on their experience responding to and helping the survivor. Separate interviews with survivors and SPs (N = 90) took place over 2 years, resulting in 45 matched pairs. The current study subsample had 27 survivors, 15 SPs, in addition to 9 dyadic S/SP pairs who mentioned disclosure themes. Survivors and SPs included survivor–SP matched pairs but also some survivors and SPs without dyadic data. Demographic and background data for the survivors in this study come from the survey portion of the larger study. The average age of women in the subsample (who spoke about a history of disclosure during the interviews) was 42 years old; ranging from 20 to 59; N = 27). This subsample was mostly comprised of Black women (66%) while about 14% identified as multiracial or White (one respondent did not report their race). In addition, about 62% of the sample had children, 21% were employed at least part-time, and 72% had attended some college or graduated college. Participants in our study reported CSA at a rate of 80%, 43% reported an alcohol-facilitated sexual assault, and all participants reported multiple (>1) adult sexual assault experiences. Sexual assault and child sexual abuse (CSA) were measured with a modified version of the Sexual Experiences Survey–Revised (Testa et al., 2004).

The subsample of SPs (N = 15) was an average of 45 years old, ranging from ages 20 to 71. The majority of SPs in this sample were female (58%). Most SPs also had children (72%). The SP subsample was majority Black (64%). Most had some or graduated from college (70%), although only 45% were currently employed. Three SPs were romantic partners of the survivor (all male), four were family members, and five were friends.

Procedures

Written informed consent was obtained for all interviews immediately prior to the interview. All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards and approved by the University’s IRB. Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted by one of three trained interviewers on the research team. Interviews lasted an average of 1 hour but ranged from 30 minutes to 3 hours. Participants were compensated USD 30 for the interview portion of the study. After each interview, interviewers created “summary” documents, which included interesting points, questions raised, final thoughts, and unanticipated feelings emerging from the interview. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and checked for accuracy by other members of the research team. The interview protocol for survivors and SPs focused on survivors’ sexual assault disclosures, social support provided/received, and appraisals of the survivor–SP relationship. This study focused on survivors’ disclosures, including motives, detail included, and selectivity of who was told.

Data Analysis

Research team members summarized each interview transcript to identify patterns and themes, which were later discussed among the team following guidelines for thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006; 2022). The team conducted several trials of interview coding and refinement to develop a codebook that covered the content of individual interviews and themes reflecting the matched pair relationships. Coding trials resulted in several revisions of the codebook whereby codes were added, renamed, redefined, and/or combined. The codes were descriptive in nature and were used to summarize and describe the primary topic of the excerpt (Saldana, 2012). We examined the context of the codes by reviewing transcripts and interviewer summaries when identifying relevant interview excerpts (i.e., quotes).

We used Atlas.ti Version 7 qualitative analysis software for coding and analysis. We identified codes that made the most analytic sense of the data (termed “focused” coding; Charmaz, 2006) and used the identified codes to pair with segments of the transcript. Specifically, we selected codes that best represented what was happening in the interview text. We coded the data separately and compared our interpretations of the content with other team members to achieve consensus (Eisikovits & Koren, 2010). This process took place in several stages. First, pairs of coders separately coded each interview S/SP matched pair using the codebook. Second, one coder in the pair then reviewed both coded transcripts to identify any inconsistencies in the assigned codes. Third, the coders discussed these disagreements until reaching a joint consensed version by both parties (Patton, 2009). In cases where agreement was not obtained, double coding (i.e., simultaneous coding; Saldana, 2009) was used as a compromise between the two codes. Fourth, the original interviewer reviewed the coded transcript for agreement with the assigned codes. The coders and interviewer discussed any disagreements and corrected the coded transcripts until a consensus was reached between the three parties. During the coding process, researchers created memos within the transcripts to highlight any relationships or inconsistencies within and between the survivor and SP interviews, or to capture unanticipated themes in the data (Charmaz, 2006). The inclusion of memos allowed coders to pay attention to the relationships between different matched pair interviews.

The analysis took place using an iterative process in several stages after coding was completed. We analyzed the interview at both the individual level and at the level of the matched pair (i.e., dyadic). First, we conducted queries in Atlas.ti software to identify the number of times each interviewee endorsed a particular code related to aspects of the disclosure and who was told. We also noted the type of survivor–SP relationship (i.e., friends, family members, significant others). Second, like that of thematic analysis, research team members reviewed the quotes for each query in search of patterns and noteworthy findings (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Third, the team met several times to review identified themes and patterns, looking for similarities and contrasts within and between the matched pairs. For the subsample used in this study, this iterative process was repeated to identify themes related to quotes from participants under the code used. Due to the small sample of both survivors and SPs, themes were considered if at least two individuals spoke of similar experiences.

Results

Eight themes were identified related to disclosure experiences of sexual assault survivors in this study. In some cases, both survivors and SPs mentioned disclosure, but other times only one person spoke about the disclosure experience, possibly because that was the interview’s focus. Abbreviations next to participant quotes refer to demographics (survivor/SP relationship, gender, age, race/ethnicity): SO = significant other, F = family, FR = friend, M = male, F = female, AA = African American, WH = White, N = Native American, H = Hispanic, Multi = Multiracial, and U = unknown. Subthemes were identified specific to (a) the circumstances of disclosure (prompted or coerced), (b) withholding details (framing disclosures to avoid rape myths and blame, strategic use of language, protecting others by nondisclosure/limiting details), and (c) sharing details (selectivity about who was told, selecting trusted others to tell, and sharing with strangers easier)

Circumstances of Sexual Assault Disclosure

Prompted and coerced disclosure

The circumstances under which disclosures were made was a theme reflecting whether they were voluntarily disclosed by survivors or prompted and/or coerced by other people or circumstances (e.g., police reporting). Some survivors only disclosed due to prompting by other people or circumstances which precluded them from keeping it a secret. In some cases, others tried to coerce them into disclosing the assault. For example, one survivor said a friend was trying to pry the information out of her, which made her question if telling this friend was a good idea:

I spoke with a friend last night and told her that I had the day off work. She asked if I wanted to go to lunch and I told her I had this meeting, and she just kept like prying and prying, and I don’t know if she’s a friend that I want to confide. (S, FA, F, 48, WH)

In another case, the SP said the survivor disclosed the assault due to HIV, surmising that without the HIV, the survivor would likely not have done so willingly, as she was a private person:

I think she told me because of the HIV. I don’t think she would’ve just like willingly told me. For the most part, she can be private and she or I, probably mostly me, would’ve felt as though that’s her personal business and she don’t have to share her sexual experiences with me. (SP, F, FA, 42, AA)

In another case, a daughter (the SP) prompted a disclosure by her mother (the survivor), who tried to withhold the disclosure but ended up telling her daughter. However, in doing so, she also made it a point to not cross a boundary that she felt was important between mother and daughter, by avoiding telling her what exactly it was that happened to her:

She said, “Momma what?” So that’s when I told her, I didn’t tell her, I just told her that they’re going to talk about unwanted sexual experience, and then she said, “Who?”, then I said, “Me”, and she said, “Oh, you don’t want to talk about it?” I said, “No, just answer the questions that she ask you”, she said, “OK Momma.” But she’s been trying to get it out of me. I: You don’t want to tell her? S: No, No. (S, F, F, 59, AA).

The survivor explained why she ended up telling her daughter about the assault but nothing more:

If I had somebody else that I could trust, I wouldn’t have involved her because to me it’s just some areas between mother and daughter you don’t cross, but I know that she’s 43 years old and I know that she can handle it, and I know she understands, but as far as detailed, I don’t think she deserves to know, I mean not deserve, I don’t think she needs to know, you know, it’s enough that she knows that it happened. (S, F, F, 59, AA).

This theme is an important one that may impact not only whether the survivor wanted to disclose at all but also the impacts on the survivor and others around her. Prompting from others may be helpful if done in a caring and sensitive way, but not if someone is pushing the survivor to tell.

Withholding Details

Many survivors discussed how they used strategies to avoid giving details of their assaults when disclosing for various reasons including framing disclosures to avoid blame/judgment, strategic use of language, and protecting others as a part of the decision-making process about how and who to tell.

Framing disclosures to avoid rape myths and blame

Survivors used strategies to restrict giving details of their assaults when disclosing. A common reason was that survivors withheld all or certain details about the assault or its circumstances to avoid any judgment or criticism including others blaming them and/or questioning their behavior or the assault situation itself. This survivor left out information about a condom being involved or that she was pressured, details that may have undermined her believability that her experience was sexual assault and not her fault. Her SP also said that the survivor told them about the assault but no one else, thus taking care to keep it from those who might judge her entirely:

I didn’t tell anybody else about the condom or about how I felt being pressured. I just aid it hurt, it was unpleasant, and I could a waited. (S, SO, F, 42, AA)

She tell me you know she said I never told anybody and you know her sister, I be around a lot one of her sisters and her sister doesn’t know. (SP, SO, M, 46, AA)

A couple of other survivors spoke of not disclosing assault details and/or information about the context of the assault that was degrading or delegitimating, likely to limit the negative judgments and blaming responses that others would make based on that information:

I told her degrading stuff. I would not tell any of my family members about this, because I don’t have a close relationship with my immediate family and I know they’re the type of people that tend to judge people based on what their profession is. (S, FR, F, 25, Multi)

Some people I selectively chose bits and pieces to tell, but especially this girl in my English class. I told her distinctly [offender name] and I had met once very briefly. I went to his dorm room and I thought there were gonna be other people there and there wasn’t.

So I just felt like I needed to explain to her what happened. (S, FA, F, 30, Multi)

This theme is important in showing how survivors carefully frame how they tell the story of what happened to them to avoid being judged and blamed.

Strategic use of language

A second subtheme about withholding details during the disclosure process entailed how survivors selectively framed the content of their disclosures using specific language:

I emphasized that my mom kept me really sheltered. When I told her, she asked [why] would you get yourself in a situation like [that]. [I said], you didn’t expose me to real life experiences [or] tell me what to expect. I drink and this is what happened. So, I’ve told and explained a lot, but it definitely convinced me to shut up for a while. And still to this day if I tell new people, it’s, I’d say, like 50/50 I bring that up. (S, SO, F, 23, WH)

This quote shows how survivors use language strategically to tell the story focusing on offender behavior and/or harm done to them, instead of their own behavior that might be questioned:

I find it’s better to go with simple facts and not go into the details because it just adds a whole new layer of drama. So I don’t know necessarily that it’s just the alcohol but I think it’s more detail. It’s easier to just say, I woke up and this guy was raping me, instead of, I was drinking and then this happened. I think once I trust the person more and know that they’re generally not a judgmental person, I reveal the alcohol. (S, SO, F, 23, WH)

This survivor elaborated further regarding stereotypes of girls who drink and how she regretted taking a drink made by the perpetrator before the assault. However, she also reframed the narrative, explaining her naïveté and inexperience that facilitated him taking advantage of her:

It’s such a stereotype of: You’re asking for it. How do you know what really happened? Why you would put yourself in a situation, why would you drink? Why. . . there’s always why questions. It’s just easier to leave it out. I did get just a little more understanding of, oh, he did this to you? instead of well you did this. Even though I definitely don’t think what happened was my fault. There’s a lot of regret, like I wish I hadn’t let him make the drink. I wish I hadn’t done this, it plagues me to this day and it’s the number one thing we work on with my therapist. I was a naïve girl, never drank before, didn’t know what was going on, thought I was in a safe situation. It’s not like I can go back. There’s no point I didn’t make a really stupid decision. I didn’t know what was going on. (S, SO, F, 23, WH)

This survivor also explained her varying disclosure process including the perpetrator’s behavior post-assault, which complicated both her ability to disclose and her recovery process:

I‘d say at first I left that part of the story out because I was so mad at myself and then I went through a phase where I told everything and learned that wasn’t okay and people didn’t accept that. Now I’m much wiser and want to tell. I mean it’s not necessarily that it was just alcohol, after I was raped, the guy made me like comfort him all night, he made me cuddle with him and tell him that he didn’t rape me. That has probably affected me more than the actual rape itself. A lot of times I leave that out as well, because it just compounds the story when people first hear about this. (S, SO, F, 23, WH)

Some survivors mentioned telling others generally or briefly, limiting details of the sexual assault or not mentioning details that might lead others to judge them for being drunk:

I may have [mentioned it to other people]. Like not really friends, but acquaintances and not in a serious conversation, but just talk. But nothing serious though. No conversation that was really going there so. . .(S, FR, F, 23, WH)

I told my mom, but really like um. . . vaguely. If I was telling my mom I would not have mentioned alcohol. I would have mentioned the situation and how it happened. I don’t think it’s important. I don’t really give it any. . . um. . . validity. You know what I’m saying? It’s not like “oh, I was stumbling drunk.” If I had blacked out I would definitely attribute that to alcohol, but I think it would’ve depended on who I was telling the story to and only my mom and my best friend know about it. (S, FR, F, 38, AA)

This theme shows how some survivors strategically manage the linguistic content, and timing of their disclosures based on the assault details, context, and person they are telling.

Protecting others by not disclosing/limiting details

This theme reflects how survivors disclose in strategic ways to shield those close to them from the psychological impacts or burdens of the disclosure. Survivors’ concern is focused on direct and/or indirect impacts on those learning of the assault. One survivor expressing this theme, withheld telling her son about exactly how the perpetrator raped her so as not to shock him and also mentioned relying on professionals predominantly as opposed to friends. Her assailant was a stranger who broke into the survivor’s home. As it was an overwhelming experience, she expressed fear of upsetting her son, and also felt that it would be too burdensome to expect a friend to handle:

The exact way he did the rape, I held back, cause I didn’t want to shock my son and upset him. I don’t think they [her kids] were equipped to handle it. In my situation, I couldn’t really rely on a friend. . .At that point, it was mostly professionals. It’s an overwhelming experience for me, but imagine for a friend of mine. . .(S, FA, F, 54, W, H)

Another survivor spoke of confronting the perpetrator (her older brother), but not wanting to speak her truth about what happened out of fear of hurting his grown children:

One day I’m gunna take a trip and give him a piece of my mind. I know it’s best not to interfere with family as that would really destroy something, and I’m not that type of person. I could get my point across with a one on one with him. I’d be satisfied because I don’t want anybody else involved. as it’ll hurt too bad for his grown children to think he would do this and then they won’t want him around their children. (S, FR, F, 52, B)

She also had two friends she told, one of whom was very a supportive and reliable friend. When asked if she told others, she replied: “Well like not really. No one that I could. . . very few people that I can confide in. Not too many but I have a few friends.” Another survivor only disclosed a little bit to avoid making her father sad and/or stressed, thus trying to protect him from the distress he might feel at the disclosure, as well as any possible revenge he might seek if he knew more:

He knows that stuff happened, but I never told him too much. I probably stopped because I don’t want to make my dad sad. I don’t want him to, like, he’ll probably want to kill them too. So I don’t want to make him stressed him out. (S, FR, F, 20, WH)

Her friend (SP) echoed that she told some of what happened but not everything to her father, as the rape involved alcohol, which would lead her father to feel ashamed of her for what happened. The SP also mentioned that the survivor shared it with a lot of other people, but not close friends as she does not have many, and that she likely did not mention alcohol due to her own self-blame:

There were some things that she did tell her dad, not everything, but I would guess there are certain people she might be more hesitant to tell that because she’s pretty familiar with the whole like alcohol-shame thing from having alcoholic parents. I don’t think it’s something she talks about a lot. She also doesn’t have a lot of other really close friends. But, she’s shared it with a lot of people, but I would guess there are people she’s less likely to say that, because I know how she tends to blame herself for things. (SP, FR, F, 26, WH)

In another case, a survivor described telling friends, but not the whole story of all she went through. She explained that she did not think they would understand given that they attributed her assault’s occurrence to the fact that she had run away from home:

I’ve told other friends in my life, but they don’t really know everything, cause I haven’t really opened up to them. They don’t know the full situations that I went through, but I did tell them that I went through a lot when I was running away. But they still feel that if I hadn’t run away from home, it wouldn’t have happened. (S, FR, F, 27, AA)

Finally, one survivor’s SP wondered if the survivor would tell their mother, because of past instances where she would tell things disclosed to the SP to the mother. Also, the SP was concerned that the mother would not believe her and about the reverberating impacts of the disclosure if the mother was eventually told about it:

No, she didn’t mention to me on the phone that she had said anything to anyone else. Unfortunately one of the major thoughts that came into my head that we discussed was are you going to tell Mom? Because that had been a big sticking point in past experiences we share with some trauma. My fear was that her sharing it with her was going to be number one, not easy, number two, just that she wouldn’t believe her. (SP, FA, F, 34, Multi)

In summary, this theme illustrates how survivor disclosures are constructed taking into account how they will impact the person told.

Sharing Details

Selecting who was told

The next subtheme identified was focused on who survivors chose to tell about sexual assault. Selectivity was most common where survivors mentioned who they told but did not tell, why, and how important that was for them:

I’m just glad they were there to listen and share with me, cuz a lot of people might say, “It’s not my business.” You know, people do that. That’s why I picked certain people to tell things to where I want to share that much. Even though my brothers and sisters are good, certain things you don’t feel comfortable talking to people about. (S, F, SO, 54, AA)

She didn’t tell her other two brothers about the whole situation, I guess she confides in her middle brother more than she do her oldest brother and her youngest brother because they probably would of went on and did what they, you know. (SP, SO, M, 49, AA)

A survivor told college friends, and did not tell “us” immediately according to her SP:

I think she was talking to some friends that she went to college with. She didn’t really talk to us immediately, I think she did talk to them more. (SP, FR, F, 28, WH)

Another survivor said she could not tell an older person specifically:

I always kept those other [experiences] ones to myself. You know, and it’s nothing I could really tell an older person, but I just sometimes like to let people know about my experiences, what I have gone through in my life, you know. (S, FA, F, 50, AA)

Another pair mentioned limiting the number of people told:

There’s not many people that I have shared it with – my brother, my mother, my therapist and that’s about it right now. (S, FR, F, 43, AA)

She talked about her problems to me, nobody else. (SP, FR, FA, 47, AA)

Selecting who was told and not told about the assault was based on the specific person and sometimes their demographics, such as age or generation. This may help others to know in assessing and guiding survivors how to disclose with discretion and minimize negative reactions.

Selecting trusted others for disclosure

Another selectivity subtheme was telling “trusted other” people. One survivor explained her fear and embarrassment of what people would think about her family, as she was raped by her grandfather. Thus, she avoided telling many people, feeling she must be cautious and only tell those she could trust:

I feel like it’s embarrassing for me cause maybe I still feel like maybe I did something wrong. Maybe I’m afraid people will think my family is weird, you know? You know, I never really thought about why I wouldn’t want like a ton of people to know, I just kind of always feel, like you said, be cautious about who I tell. . .. (S, FA, F, 48, WH)

Her sister (SP) explained how they were protective of her and that she was also a therapist, so understood the risk and explained how the pair (S-SP) pulled back after sharing it with the family:

I know I’ve been protective of it. I think because too, of being a therapist. . . I’ve told people I know I can really trust, especially, my family, who had the shared experiences. I’m trying to think, it was after we talked about it as a family and then shared it with other family members and their response, I know that we all pulled back. (SP, FA, F, 53, WH)

Other survivors and SPs explained that survivors could only tell close trusted family members or romantic partners:

Unfortunately, people that I’ve told—my husband, mom, and sister are the only ones I could trust with some information and I don’t have many friends or confidantes. (S, FA, F, 44, H)

With that incident I think it would be select people, you know, whoever her current boyfriend was at the time or that may have been, if she was still talking to some previous boyfriend she would have, it would have been select. (SP, FA, F, 62, AA)

Finally, another survivor mentioned how survivor groups were a great place to disclose because everyone understood the issue and it was safe to talk without worrying about negative responses in a supportive and caring environment:

So it’s kinda the reason survivor groups are so great, cuz we don’t have to explain to the other survivors that we just need to talk. I wish I could give you a clear answer, but it’s been good and bad. I think on my own I would’ve been still stuck in my denial and avoidance stage of just not dealing with it. So telling certain people that have been supportive, caring, and wanting to help has been the thing that has saved me. They’re the people that have pushed me to get outside of myself. I was trapped in too much hurt. I needed a not hurting person to kind of pull me along for a while. So yeah, if there weren’t people out there that hadn’t cared, it wouldn’t be pretty. But telling some people and getting those negative comments has set me back. (S, SO, F, 23, WH)

Finally, a survivor told others based on who was supportive, thus avoiding negative responses:

I told certain people. I was selective of who I told because certain people I knew I couldn’t tell, because they would have said it was my fault. So if certain ones that I did tell, they was there for me and there wasn’t nothing negative, everything was positive, but certain people that I couldn’t tell, I already knew there was going to be a negative vibe and I couldn’t go through that again, so, I just didn’t tell them. (S, FA, F, 44, AA)

An SP, who was the survivor’s fiancé, spoke about the fact that the survivor had multiple sexual assault experiences including being a survivor of CSA by her grandfather. The survivor had also told her best friend, first husband, and other family members. Her fiancé commented on how she told others, but he picked up on it in bits and pieces from what he overhead and did not bring it up himself with the survivor due to concerns about how it would make her feel, including possible fears he would become more distant from her because of her victimization history:

I think she don’t want to tell me as she thinks it might change my opinion and feelings toward her. In time maybe she’ll talk about it, maybe not. Sometimes I pick up on bits and pieces when she’s telling stories to her girlfriend. Well, how come you don’t tell me that story. Well, I didn’t want to talk about it. You know maybe she’s a little worried about how I would feel about her after something bad like that happened to her, maybe I might get a more negative feeling or get more distant from her, I don’t know. Me, that would just make me bond closer to her. (SP, SO, M, 53, WH)

Trusted others were critical for survivors to be able to disclose such a personal traumatic experience and both they and their SPs recognized this and how vital discretion was for telling.

Selective details told to specific people

Finally, in some cases, survivors explicitly linked how much and which assault details they shared with the specific persons they told. In some cases, this was a person they were comfortable with and knew and trusted well, while in others it was based on their anticipated reaction to the disclosure:

I will talk about in depth, but I have my picks and choices of people and basically I stick to my therapist with that. I have told some other people, but my experiences are so long ago, I’ve lost contact with a lot of those people. I have told some other people more in depth than what I’ve told these ladies. I knew how far to go with her. I think it has to really be the stage has to be set just perfect if you want to go into details, and nobody want to ever know details of the act itself—I mean who, where, when, and how it came to be, you know what I’m saying, like I’m doing with you [Interviewer]. (S, FR, F, 51, AA, H)

This survivor anticipated blame based on rape myths from her mother, so to protect herself could not tell her all of what had happened to her, as she could with others, like her cousin:

I could never tell my mother everything that happened to me because of her reactions. So therefore I never told her everything. I could never really tell her all the things that had happened. I just didn’t know how they would feel [about] some of it. I didn’t think they would care or somebody would respond like my mom “Oh it was your fault”. So, I just kept it to myself and the ones that I trusted to tell. My cousin whose deceased—me and her were able to talk to each other about stuff that we went through. (S, FA, F, 46, AA)

She talk to me about all the unwanted sex as far as I knew, like I know like of maybe two. (SP, FA, M, 30, AA)

Another survivor only fully confided in her sister, so even though others knew about it, including her SP, there was a specific person—her sister—to whom she disclosed the most:

Yeah, she has her mom, her stepsisters, cousins, and uncles. But I mean, she really don’t confide. . . She used to talk to her sister, but she passed now. But that’s the one she really confided in. She would call her up and be talking to her and then when she met me, you know, her sister would call her saying you don’t call me no more. (SP, FR, M, 49, H)

In another case, selective disclosure to one person was driven by what that person—a doctor—might tell the survivors’ mother:

What I told the doctor, it didn’t matter.. Interviewer: You weren’t worried about that getting back to Survivor: Nope. Well, yes, certain stuff I told the doctor, but I wasn’t telling the doctor anything that shouldn’t have gotten back to my mom basically. (S, FA, F, 22, AA)

Finally, omitting certain assault details, such as sexual acts that may not be received well, was mentioned with regard to older generations with more conservative sexual attitudes:

I didn’t really tell my mother exactly how that happened. I just told her that that happened. But I didn’t tell her that I was doing oral sex. Cause oral sex to my mother is like the nastiest thing in the world. Oh my god, you might as well kiss a dog’s ass if you. . .Oh my god. I’m like mama, you don’t have to be like that. You know the generations, some things only God and you need to know about. So it’s not a lot of people that you can talk to about everything because they don’t accept it in a way that you’re expecting them. (S, FA, F, 49, AA)

She opened up to her father a lot of times. If her husband knew about all the things she did he probably would’ve been gone, but he don’t, she comes and tells me. (SP, FA, F, 72, AA)

Several survivors and SPs spoke about the unfolding process of disclosure over time, revealing that it was not a one-time thing and that the story came out gradually over time:

I know that she began to open up somewhat, just bits and pieces like layers on a onion. She’s spilling some layers because with the 5 young ladies, we have a monthly group because they each have something that they can give to each other. (SP, FR, F, 58, AA)

In further elaborating, the survivor explained how one cannot share the same way with everyone:

I felt very supported, in spite of everything. I always feel respected or felt supported by certain people. I did with my son, but not my daughters, it was kind of hard for me to share any information with them about that, as to me they just totally wouldn’t understand, they’ll talk to me, but they just wouldn’t understand. (S, FA, F, 54, AA)

I: Has it helped to tell people? S: Yeah, but some people have the tendency of judging. You wouldn’t know who, if it felt right to you anyway, talking to certain people. You can’t talk to everybody like that, but when you talk to maybe one or two, you going to pretty much know which one you was feeling comfortable sharing with. (S, FA, F, 54, AA)

He can’t [know], I’m the only one that know. I: your sister’s dad, does he know? SP: Yeah, but he’s not the dad. I: Does he know the circumstances? SP: Yeah (SP, FA, F, 35, AA)

Some survivors said that disclosures about their assault to specific people were linked with the specific details about the assault they would tell, which often varied with different people. This suggests that disclosures vary and are formulated based on who survivors are telling.

Sharing with strangers is easier

Finally, a novel selective disclosure theme was telling strangers, seemingly the opposite of the previous “telling trusted others they know” theme.

Several survivors noted that it was easier to share their sexual assault experiences with strangers, likely due to the lack of a shared relationship history, which meant less fear of being judged or rejected. Also, even if a stranger blamed the survivor, it would be less consequential as there is no relationship to the risk losing. Conversely, telling family and friends could result in shaming and blaming responses, and possibly even rejection and loss of these important relationships:

It’s helped more sharing with strangers because, like when I told you about [it], I revealed to my family that I’ve been [sexually assaulted]. (S, FR, F, 41, AA)

I got an older lady I talk to every now and again, but I don’t think this gonna come up cuz she not the person I wanna share [with]. I share with so many people, sometime with people I don’t even know. I don’t have to know them to say what happened. (S, FR, F, 47, AA)

You feel safer talking to a stranger than someone you know because you’re not judging, and I’m able to be honest. But then my mom, it was a lot of things I couldn’t talk to her about because she wouldn’t talk. So like everything was a secret. (S, SO, F, 45, AA)

Another survivor explained that she felt it was okay for her to tell the interviewer [in this study] because she was a stranger, so the survivor felt safe, whereas telling a friend was harder in having to have to explain the assault:

I just wouldn’t tell her, the guy, the girl—we used to hangout, the girl I’m telling you is a jerk. I wouldn’t tell her (SP friend), cuz she probably would be so crazy about it and want to know details and I don’t want to keep going through that again. I never really told nobody about the choking part, but I had to tell somebody about how I met this guy, brought him home, and it got really crazy. They say, what do you mean crazy? I said, girl, just believe me it was crazy. I’m gonna tell you something [Interviewer name]. I won’t tell nobody else about the choking, because I feel really crazy about that and at this point, you’re a stranger, I don’t know you. The chances of you meeting somebody I know. . .Outside of me telling people, you could probably tell this incident to somebody else, but you wouldn’t have my name or nothing to tell, so that’s fine, but that’s why I guess I told you. (S, FR, F, 56, AA)

Telling strangers was a novel theme, quite the opposite of telling trusted others, but understandable in being a distinctive strategy for safe disclosure to a person where the stakes were low.

Discussion

This qualitative interview study of survivors and their informal supports illuminated specific experiences of survivors’ disclosure decisions in a racially diverse sample (two-thirds of African American). Few studies of sexual assault survivors have examined their experiences in relationships or studied both survivors and their informal supports told post-assault. We identified several themes and subthemes of aspects of disclosure and persons told.

Consistent with the DPM (Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010), various factors motivated survivors to tell others such as the need to tell someone and distress due to the assault experience. However, the need to protect others from the impacts of disclosure constrained disclosures in some cases and/or led survivors not to tell certain people, consistent with past work showing fear of burdening others as a reason for nondisclosure in other contexts of concealable stigmatized identities (e.g., sexual and gender minorities; Bry et al., 2017).

In particular, telling parents or children was mentioned as possibly problematic as survivors feared they might also be overwhelmed like the survivor was due to the assault. Some feared telling parents or limited what they told them to avoid them being upset, angry, or judgmental of the survivor. Some disclosures were in the survivors’ control but others were not, a circumstantial aspect of disclosure that also affects disclosure’s impact both on survivors and those around them. Generally, disclosures that were prompted by concerned others were better experiences than those where people tried to coerce the survivor to tell them what happened or those who got information indirectly from someone besides the survivor. Survivors also controlled the disclosure by only selectively disclosing details to those they deemed to be trustworthy and understanding. In other cases, survivors only made general disclosures to reduce any burden on the person told. Consistent with DPM, survivors also were motivated to protect themselves from negative social reactions of blame or judgment of their behavior or the assault situation. The way the story was framed and told was also something that some survivors mentioned thinking about and planning so that the narrative minimized the survivor’s responsibility and maximized the likelihood of being viewed as a sympathetic victim, likely due to their awareness of and need to protect themselves from victim-blaming based on rape myths (Suarez & Gadalla, 2010). For example, focusing on the perpetrator’s behavior by saying, “I woke up to find I was being raped or had been raped” is more likely to elicit horror and sympathy than saying, “I was drinking and went home with the person who then raped me,” behavior often used to blame the victim for sexual assault (Ullman et al., 2018).

Survivors also made strategic decisions about who they told and who they did not tell about their assaults. They were selective in picking the best people based on being close to that person, having trust in the person (similar to literature on adult disclosure of child sexual abuse; Tener & Murphy, 2015), and thus expecting and often receiving a positive response. In contrast to this approach, some said they mostly told strangers because it is lower risk as even a negative reaction would have less impact on the survivor, thus little risk of being hurt or losing a valued relationship. This latter theme appears to be a novel one, not previously reported in the sexual assault disclosure literature.

Finally, survivors planned their disclosures such that they told specific people differing assault details, depending on who they were telling about the assault. For example, some avoided telling older people or mothers details about sexual acts they knew those individuals would judge as wrong or bad regardless of the nature of the sexual experience. Conversely, they were more likely to tell friends about assault details and circumstances, as well as romantic partners or spouses (typically about past assaults), who they felt would be less judgmental, and hopefully supportive, consistent with some past research with college women (Demers et al., 2017).

In this study, survivor interviews were complemented in some cases by SP perspectives on their disclosure experiences. Often SPs knew less about the survivors’ disclosures and details than survivors; however, they knew what survivors had told them about the assault, as well as who the survivors had confided in and often who was and was not supportive and/or was still in the survivor’s life. SPs often tried to support and advise the survivor where opportunities existed and clearly were also supportive in that they were participating in this study and thus had a relationship that was intact at the time of the study. Supporters also showed concern for the survivor’s well-being and tried to help them where possible in their current lives in general, including seeking other forms of formal support as needed. Research shows that encouraging survivors to seek formal help such as mental health counseling, medical treatment, or police reporting can be very important for survivors actually getting that help either after the assault or even much later on when they are ready to deal with it (Paul et al., 2013; Ullman, 2023).

Limitations

There are several limitations to this study that should be noted. First, this study was a volunteer, convenience sample of survivors and their primary SPs. Future studies collecting information about selective disclosure among sexual assault survivors should obtain a broader range of information with greater depth about these experiences from survivors and their SPs. Second, this study is limited by the retrospective design. Time elapsed since the assault could have influenced what survivors and SPs recalled about the survivors’ experiences with disclosure. On average, the survivors in the larger sample had experienced sexual assault 14 years prior to being involved in the study (SD = 12.22; Median = 11). However, the retrospective design may have also allowed participants to gain perspective on their post-assault experiences. In addition, a majority of participants were African American survivors, but it is unknown to what extent their experiences are unique or reflective of the race, region of the study, and/or higher levels of violence and poverty. This finding suggests that more research is needed with diverse survivors, with larger subgroups of Asian, Latina, Native American, African American, and mixed/multiracial ethnic survivors to better understand how race, culture, religion, neighborhood, and socioeconomic status differences influence survivors’ sexual assault experiences (Dworkin & Weaver, 2021). This study is also limited by the lack of inclusion of male survivors, who also require further in-depth interviews examining their sexual assault disclosure experiences. Both diverse race and gender groups require larger quantitative survey research on disclosure experiences, including motivations and outcomes, ideally designed to take into account racial/ethnic, gender, cultural, and contextual factors to expand on the DPM’s application to sexual assault from a broader socioecological perspective. The DPM was only applied to this study’s findings in a limited post hoc manner and could not address how stigmatized identities (e.g., race/ethnicity) may affect sexual assault disclosure and experiences of social reactions from others. In fact, some writing and emerging evidence suggest that they do (Bedera et al., 2023, Slatton & Richard, 2020. Despite these limitations, this study provides valuable data on survivors’ disclosures of unwanted sexual experiences from survivor and SP perspectives in a somewhat racially diverse (African American) sample.

Implications for Theory and Research and Clinical Practice

This study of aspects of disclosure revealed that survivors expend considerable effort determining how, what, and to whom they disclose sexual assault, often driven by the need to protect themselves from blame and others from the burden of disclosure. Research is needed to expand on this work to better understand the experiences of disclosure-related decision-making and its impacts on survivors of sexual assault. In addition, research is needed to ask survivors more about the process of disclosure and how it came about as well as their thoughts and feelings about what ensued. The DPM may be useful for framing the motivations and contexts of disclosure of the stigmatized experience of sexual assault (Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010), especially in survivors that may have other stigmatized conditions and identities (e.g., sexual minority survivors, HIV-infected survivors, sex worker survivors). A variety of facilitators and barriers may come into play for survivors of diverse racial/ethnic and sexual identities (Edwards et al., 2023; Zinzow et al., 2022), so more work is needed to understand their motivations and experiences of disclosure and disclosure-related outcomes. Such research can inform education and prevention encouraging disclosure of sexual assault for survivors and training people on how to better respond to such disclosures (Edwards et al., 2022).

Clinical implications include that professionals need to help survivors navigate the disclosure process taking into account their sexual assault experiences and available informal supports. In this way, they can help survivors choose when, how, and to whom they disclose their experiences. In particular, clinicians knowledgeable about sexual assault can help survivors to assess their motivations for disclosure, who may be the best person(s) to tell, how much/what to tell them, and especially, how to prepare for potentially unexpected negative responses from others. They can also offer traditional psychotherapy and other trauma-related treatments for survivors experiencing PTSD and other psychological impacts and suggest other forms of help. Advocacy, healthcare, and/or support groups specific to survivors’ identities and specific sexual assault experiences and post-assault needs should be assessed and referrals offered. Most important, clinicians can provide a safe space for survivors who may not have disclosed or be ready to do so or who have already experienced negative social reactions from others (Starzynski et al., 2017). Survivors can talk about what happened to them in a nonjudgmental clinical setting where unconditional support is provided. Clinicians knowledgeable about sexual assault can offer survivors various options such as individual or group counseling, including providing information about available free confidential online support sources, where survivors can talk about sexual assault and other issues. Clinicians can also help survivors to assess the decisions they need to make post-assault, including how to manage potential health and safety risks if assaulted by romantic partners while also healing from the traumatic impacts of their experiences. Most survivors simply wish to have a nonjudgmental listener to tell their story without having to worry about others’ reactions or the impacts on the person being told. This fact makes professionals, such as clinicians and advocates trained in the area of sexual assault, ideal sources of support.