The purpose of this research is to explore the negotiation strategies of college women as they interpret ambiguous rape scenarios. In focus groups, 1st- and 4th-year college women were presented with a series of three vignettes depicting incidents that meet the legal criteria for rape yet are ambiguous due to the presence of cultural rape myths, contexts involving alcohol consumption, varying degrees of consent, and a known perpetrator. These contexts are critical in understanding how college women define rape. Key findings indicated many of these college women utilized rape myths and norms within their peer groups to interpret rape scenarios.
AbbeyA. (1991). Acquaintance rape and alcohol consumption on college campuses: How are they linked?Journal of American College Health, 39, 165-169.
2.
BanyardV. L.PlanteE. G.CohnE. S.MoorheadC.WardS.WalshW. (2005). Revisiting unwanted sexual experiences on campus: A 12-year follow-up. Violence Against Women, 11, 426-446.
3.
BelknapJ. (2010). Rape: Too hard to report and too easy to discredit victims. Violence Against Women, 16, 1335-1344.
4.
BrownmillerS. (1975). Against our will: Men, women and rape. New York: Simon and Schuster.
5.
BurtM. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217-230.
6.
BurtM. R.AlbinR. S. (1981). Rape myths, rape definitions, and probability of conviction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11, 212-230.
7.
ChasteenA. L. (2001). Constructing rape: Feminism, change, and women’s everyday understandings of sexual assault. Sociological Spectrum, 21, 101-139.
8.
ChenY.UllmanS. E. (2010). Women’s reporting of sexual and physical assaults to police in the National Violence Against Women Survey. Violence Against Women, 16, 262-279.
9.
Clay-WarnerJ.BurtC. H. (2005). Rape reporting after reforms: Have times really changed?Violence Against Women, 11, 150-176.
10.
CookS. L.GidyczC. A.KossM. P.MurphyM. (2011). Emergent issues in the measurement of rape victimization. Violence Against Women, 17, 201-218.
11.
DonovanR. A. (2007). To blame or not to blame: Influences of target race and observer sex on rape blame attribution. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 722-736.
12.
EllisL. (1989). Theories of rape: Inquiries into the causes of sexual aggression. New York, NY: Hemisphere.
13.
EllsbergM.HeiseL. (2005). Researching violence against women: A practical guide for researchers and activists. Washington, DC: World Health Organization.
14.
FisherB. S.CullenF. T.DaigleL. E. (2005). The discovery of acquaintance rape: The salience of methodological innovation and rigor. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 493-500.
15.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
16.
HarnedM. S. (2005). Understanding women’s labeling of unwanted sexual experiences with dating partners. Violence Against Women, 11, 374-413.
17.
JohnsonB. E.KuckD. L.SchanderP. R. (1997). Rape myth acceptance and sociodemographic characteristics: A multidimensional analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 693-707.
18.
KahnA. S.JacksonJ.KullyC.BadgerK.HalvorsenJ. (2003). Calling it rape: Differences in experiences of women who do or do not label their sexual assault as rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 233-242.
19.
KilpatrickD. (2004). What is violence against women: Defining and measuring the problem. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1209-1234.
20.
KossM. P.OrosC. J. (1982). Sexual Experiences Survey: A research instrument investigating sexual aggression and victimization. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 455-457.
21.
LeeJ.PomeroyE. C.YooS.RheinboldtK. T. (2005). Attitudes toward rape. Violence Against Women, 11, 177-196.
22.
LittletonH. A.AxsomD. (2003). Rape and seduction scripts of university students: Implications for rape attributions and unacknowledged rape. Sex Roles, 49, 465-475.
23.
LonswayK. A.FitzgeraldL. F. (1994). Rape myths. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 133-164.
24.
MadrizE. (1997). Nothing bad happens to good girls. Berkeley: University of California Press.
25.
MardorossianC. M. (2002). Toward a new feminist theory of rape. Signs, 27, 743-775.
26.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
PayneD. J.LonswayK. L.FitzgeraldL. F. (1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the Illinois rape myth acceptance scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 27-68.
28.
PazzaniL. M. (2007). The factors affecting sexual assaults committed by strangers and acquaintances. Violence Against Women, 13, 717-749.
29.
PetersonZ. D.MuehlenhardC. L. (2004). Was it rape? The function of women’s rape myth acceptance and definitions of sex in labeling their own experiences. Sex Roles, 51, 129-144.
30.
PineauL. (1989). Date rape: A feminist analysis. Law and Philosophy, 8, 217-243.
31.
SchwartzM. D.DeKeseredyW. S. (1997). Sexual assault on the college campus: The role of male peer support. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (2006). Extent, nature, and consequences of rape victimization: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
33.
WeissK. G. (2009). “Boys will be boys” and other gendered accounts: An exploration of victims’ excuses and justifications for unwanted sexual contact and coercion. Violence Against Women, 15, 810-834.
