This study explores sexual assault victimization in virtual worlds (virtual sexual assault; VSA), immersive environments where users interact through avatars. As these spaces expand, concerns about negative experiences akin to real-world sexual assault also grow. Despite this, quantitative analyses of VSA victimization remain limited. This research addresses this gap by exploring the prevalence of VSA victimization over the previous year and identifying potential predictors of VSA victimization through the lens of cyberlifestyle-routine activity theory (CLRAT). To achieve this, the current research recruited 829 English-speaking adult participants, who used/have used virtual worlds via Mechanical Turk (MTurk) using CloudResearch, which uses the sample population within MTurk but produces better-quality data. The study found that 46.44% of participants reported at least one instance of VSA victimization. VSA behaviors were categorized into unwanted sexual advances, image-based sexual abuse, and non-consensual sexual avatar manipulation. Unwanted sexual advances were reported by 35.71% of participants, image-based sexual abuse by 33.29%, and non-consensual sexual avatar manipulation by 27.99%. Applying CLRAT, the study found that higher levels of online exposure, online proximity, online deviant lifestyle, and lower levels of online guardianship were correlated with increased VSA victimization. Limitations, suggestions for future studies, and implications are provided based on these findings.
BarlettC. P.ScottJ. E. (2023). Racism behind the screen: Examining the mediating and moderating relationships between anonymity, online disinhibition, and cyber-racism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 125(6), 1332–1350.
2.
BasileK. C.SmithS. G.KresnowM.KhatiwadaS.LeemisR. W. (2022). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2016/2017 Report on sexual violence. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
3.
BlackwellL.EllisonN.Elliott-DefloN.SchwartzR. (2019). Harassment in social virtual reality: Challenges for platform governance. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW), Article 100. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359202
4.
BorgmanR.GoodnightB.SwartoutK. (2020). The Virtual Violence Against Women Scale (VVAWS): A measure of players’ experiences of violence against women in video games. Psychology of Popular Media, 9(4), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000242.supp
5.
BurgwalA.Van WieleJ.MotmansJ. (2023). The impact of sexual violence on quality of life and mental wellbeing in transgender and gender-diverse adolescents and young adults: A mixed-methods approach. Healthcare, 11(16), 2281.
6.
ChoH.Rivera-SánchezM.LimS. S. (2009). A multinational study on online privacy: Global concerns and local responses. New Media & Society, 11(3), 395–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444808101618
7.
ChoiK. S.EarlK.LeeJ. R.ChoS. (2019). Diagnosis of cyber and non-physical bullying victimization: A lifestyles and routine activities theory approach to constructing effective preventative measures. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 11–19.
8.
ChoiK. S.LeeJ. R. (2017). Theoretical analysis of cyber-interpersonal violence victimization and offending using cyber-routine activities theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 394–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.061
9.
CrippsJ.StermacL. (2018). Cyber-sexual violence and negative emotional states among women in a Canadian university. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 12(1), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1467891
10.
DanaherJ. (2018). The law and ethics of virtual sexual assault. In BarfieldW.BlitzM. J. (Eds.), Research handbook on the law of virtual and augmented reality (pp. 363–388). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786438591.00021
11.
DimondJ. P.FieslerC.BruckmanA. S. (2011). Domestic violence and information communication technologies. Interacting with Computers, 23(5), 413–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2011.04.006
12.
DouglasB. D.EwellP. J.BrauerM. (2023). Data quality in online human-subjects research: Comparisons between MTurk, Prolific, CloudResearch, Qualtrics, and SONA. PLoS One, 18(3), Article e0279720.
13.
DworkinE. R.KrahéB.ZinzowH. (2021). The global prevalence of sexual assault: A systematic review of international research since 2010. Psychology of Violence, 11(5), 497–508. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000374.supp
14.
FinkelhorD.AsdigianN. L. (1996). Risk factors for youth victimization: Beyond a lifestyles/routine activities theory approach. Violence and victims, 11(1), 3.
15.
FisselE. R.GrahamA.ButlerL. C.FisherB. S. (2022). A new frontier: The development and validation of the intimate partner cyber abuse instrument. Social Science Computer Review, 40(4), 974–993.
16.
Gámez-GuadixM.De SantistebanP.WachsS.WrightM. (2021). Unraveling cyber sexual abuse of minors: Psychometrics properties of the Multidimensional Online Grooming Questionnaire and prevalence by sex and age. Child Abuse & Neglect, 120, 105250.
17.
GirvanC. (2018). What is a virtual world? Definition and classification. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1087–1100.
18.
IBM Corp. (2017). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0.
19.
HuiskesP.DinisM. A. P.CaridadeS. (2022). Technology-facilitated sexual violence victimization during the COVID-19 pandemic: Behaviors and attitudes. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 31(9), 1148–1167.
20.
JoinsonA. (2003). Understanding the psychology of internet behavior: Virtual worlds, real lives. Palgrave Macmillan.
21.
KrasnovaH.GüntherO.SpiekermannS.KorolevaK. (2009). Privacy concerns and identity in online social networks. Identity in the Information Society, 2(1), 39–63.
22.
LiJ. C. M.JiaC. X.MlyakadoB. P. (2024). Assessing online sexual exploitation among secondary school students in Tanzania from a routine activity theory perspective. Child Abuse & Neglect, 147, Article 106597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2023.106597
23.
LinH.WangH. (2014). Avatar creation in virtual worlds: Behaviors and motivations. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 213–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.005
24.
LipsonJ. (2001). Hostile hallways: Bullying, teasing, and sexual harassment in school. AAUW Educational Foundation.
25.
Martínez-BacaicoaJ.Real-BriosoN.Mateos-PérezE.Gámez-GuadixM. (2024). The role of gender and sexism in the moral disengagement mechanisms of technology-facilitated sexual violence. Computers in Human Behavior, 152, Article 108060.
26.
MelanderL. A.MarganskiA. J. (2020). Cyber and in-person intimate partner violence victimization: Examining maladaptive psychosocial and behavioral correlates. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 14(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2020-1-1
27.
MitchellK. J.FinkelhorD.JonesL. M.WolakJ. (2012). Prevalence and characteristics of youth sexting: A national study. Pediatrics, 129(1), 13–20.
28.
NgoF. T.PiqueroA. R.LaPradeJ.DuongB. (2020). Victimization in cyberspace: Is it how long we spend online, what we do online, or what we post online?Criminal Justice Review, 45(4), 430–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734016820934175
29.
OgbanufeO. (2023). Securing online accounts and assets: An examination of personal investments and protection motivation. International Journal of Information Management, 68, Article 102590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102590
PowellA.HenryN. (2019). Technology-facilitated sexual violence victimization: Results from an online survey of Australian adults. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(17), 3637–3665. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516672055
32.
PrattT. C.HoltfreterK.ReisigM. D. (2010). Routine online activity and internet fraud targeting: Extending the generality of routine activity theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427810365903
33.
ReynaldD. M. (2010). Guardians on guardianship: Factors affecting the willingness to supervise, the ability to detect potential offenders, and the willingness to intervene. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 47(3), 358–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427810365904
34.
ReynaldD. M. (2019). Guardianship in the digital age. Criminal Justice Review, 44(1), 11–24.
35.
ReynsB. W.HensonB.FisherB. S. (2011). Being pursued online: Applying cyberlifestyle–Routine activities theory to cyberstalking victimization. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(11), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854811421448
36.
SticcaF.PerrenS. (2013). Is cyberbullying worse than traditional bullying? Examining the differential roles of medium, publicity, and anonymity for the perceived severity of bullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(5), 739–750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9867-3
TuranS. G. (2024). Chapter two—Cyberbullying: Problematic internet behaviors among children and youths. In BensonV. (Ed.), Handbook of social media use online relationships, security, privacy, and society (Vol. 2, pp. 37–50). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-28804-3.00004-1
39.
WachsS.MichelsenA.WrightM. F.Gámez-GuadixM.AlmendrosC.KwonY.NaE. Y.SittichaiR.SinghR.BiswalR.GörzigA.YanagidaT. (2020). A routine activity approach to understand cybergrooming victimization among adolescents from six countries. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 23(4), 218–224. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0426
40.
WalkerK.SleathE.HatcherR. M.HineB.CrookesR. L. (2021). Nonconsensual sharing of private sexually explicit media among university students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(17–18), NP9078–NP9108.
41.
WilliamsD.DucheneautN.XiongL.ZhangY.YeeN.NickellE. (2006). From tree house to barracks: The social life of guilds in world of warcraft. Games and Culture, 1(4), 338–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412006292616
42.
WolakJ.FinkelhorD.MitchellK. J.YbarraM. L. (2008). Online “predators” and their victims: Myths, realities, and implications for prevention and treatment. American Psychologist, 63(2), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.2.111
43.
YbarraM. L.MitchellK. J. (2004). Youth engaging in online harassment: Associations with caregiver–child relationships, Internet use, and personal characteristics. Journal of Adolescence, 27(3), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2004.03.007
44.
YbarraM. L.MitchellK. J. (2008). How risky are social networking sites? A comparison of places online where youth sexual solicitation and harassment occurs. Pediatrics, 121(2), e350–e357. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-0693
45.
YeeN. (2006). The psychology of massively multi-user online role-playing games: Motivations, emotional investment, relationships and problematic usage. In SchroederR.AxelssonA. S. (Eds.), Avatars at work and play (Vol. 34, pp. 187–207). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3898-4_9
