Effects of ambivalent sexism, sexism norms, victim behavior, and type of violence on male students’ reactions to male violence against women in intimate relationships were examined. Participants judged a scenario depicting an act of sexual or non-sexual violence against a female partner who had either shown overtly sexual or non-sexual behavior toward another man. Generally, high (vs. low) hostile sexism, high (vs. low) hostile sexism norm feedback, and victim’s overtly sexual (vs. non-sexual) behavior led to stronger victim blame and perceived approval of the aggressor’s behavior. The victim of non-sexual violence was blamed more than the rape victim, particularly if she had behaved in an overtly sexual manner.
AbramsD.VikiG. T.MasserB.BohnerG. (2003). Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 111-125.
2.
BohnerG.AhlbornK.SteinerR. (2010). How sexy are sexist men? Women’s perception of male response profiles in the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory. Sex Roles, 62, 568-582.
3.
BohnerG.JarvisC. I.EysselF.SieblerF. (2005). The causal impact of rape myth acceptance on men’s rape proclivity: Comparing sexually coercive and noncoercive men. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 819-828.
4.
BohnerG.PinaA.VikiG. T.SieblerF. (2010). Using social norms to reduce men’s rape proclivity: Perceived rape myth acceptance of out-groups may be more influential than that of in-groups. Psychology, Crime & Law, 16, 671-693.
5.
BohnerG.ReinhardM.-A.RutzS.SturmS.KerschbaumB.EfflerD. (1998). Rape myths as neutralizing cognitions: Evidence for a causal impact of anti-victim attitudes on men’s self-reported likelihood of raping. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 257-268.
6.
BohnerG.SieblerF.SchmelcherJ. (2006). Social norms and the likelihood of raping: Perceived rape myth acceptance of others affects men’s rape proclivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 286-297.
7.
CialdiniR. B.TrostM. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In GilbertD. T.FiskeS. T.GardnerL. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, 4th ed., pp. 151-192). New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
DalyM.WilsonM. (1988). Homicide. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyer.
9.
DalyM.WilsonM. (1998). Lethal and nonlethal violence against wives and the evolutionary psychology of male sexual proprietariness. In DobashR. E.DobashR. P. (Eds.), Rethinking violence against women (pp. 199-230). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
10.
EckesT. (1994). Features of men, features of women: Assessing stereotypic beliefs about gender subtypes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 107-123.
11.
EckesT.Six-MaternaI. (1999). Hostilität und Benevolenz: Eine Skala zur Erfassung des ambivalenten Sexismus [Hostility and benevolence: A scale measuring ambivalent sexism]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 30, 211-228.
12.
EysselF.BohnerG.SieblerF. (2006). Perceived rape myth acceptance of others predicts rape proclivity: Social norm or judgmental anchoring?Swiss Journal of Psychology, 65, 93-99.
13.
GentemannK. M. (1984). Wife beating: Attitudes of a non-clinical population. Victimology, 9, 109-119.
14.
GergerH.KleyH.BohnerG.SieblerF. (2007). The acceptance of modern myths about Sexual Aggression Scale: Development and validation in German and English. Aggressive Behavior, 33, 422-440.
15.
GlickP. (2006). Ambivalent sexism, power distance, and gender inequality across cultures. In GuimondS. (Ed.), Social comparison and social psychology (pp. 283-302). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16.
GlickP.DieboldJ.Bailey-WernerB.ZhuL. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323-1334.
17.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491-512.
18.
GlickP.FiskeS. T.MladinicA.SaizJ.AbramsD.MasserB.. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763-775.
19.
GlickP.Sakallı-UğurluN.FerreiraM. C.de SouzaM. A. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 292-297.
20.
GrahamD. L. R.RawlingsE. I. (1999). Observers’ blaming of battered wives: Who, what, when, and why? In PaludiM. A. (Ed.), The psychology of sexual victimization: A handbook (pp. 55-94). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
21.
GrothA. N.BurgessW.HolmstromL. L. (1977). Rape: Power, anger, and sexuality. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 134, 1239-1243.
22.
HeiseL.EllsbergM.GottemoellerM. (1999). Ending violence against women. Population Reports, Series L, No. ll. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, Population Information Program, December1999.
23.
HillierL.FoddyM. (1993). The role of observer attitudes in judgments of blame in cases of wife assault. Sex Roles, 29, 629-644.
24.
KrahéB. (1985). Die Zuschreibung von Verantwortlichkeit nach Vergewaltigungen: Opfer und Täter im Dickicht der attributionstheoretischen Forschung [Responsibility attributions in rape cases: Perpetrator and victim in the light of attribution theory research]. Psychologische Rundschau, 36, 67-82.
25.
MarinA. J.RussoN. F. (1999). Feminist perspectives on male violence against women. In HarwayM.NeilJ. M. O’ (Eds.), What causes men’s violence against women? (pp. 18-35). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
26.
MasserB.VikiG. T.PowerC. (2006). Hostile sexism and rape proclivity amongst men. Sex Roles, 54, 565-574.
27.
MichaelisU.BohnerG. (2005, July). Sexism as a social norm for judgments of rape proclivity and victim blame. Symposium presentation at the 14th General Meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, Würzburg, Germany.
28.
PollardP. (1992). Judgements about victims and attackers in depicted rapes: A review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 307-326.
29.
RozeeP. D. (1993). Forbidden or forgiven? Rape in cross-cultural perspective. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17, 499-514.
30.
Sakallı-UğurluN. (2001). Beliefs about wife beating among Turkish college students: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and sex differences. Sex Roles, 44, 599-610.
31.
SaundersD.SizeP. (1986). Attitudes about woman abuse among police officers, victims, and victim advocates. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1, 25-42.
32.
SibleyC. G.WilsonM. S. (2004). Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes toward positive and negative sexual female subtypes. Sex Roles, 51, 687-696.
33.
SixB.EckesT. (1991). A closer look at the complex structure of gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 24, 57-71.
34.
VikiG. T.AbramsD. (2002a). Against their will: Benevolent sexism and rape victims. Relational Justice Bulletin, 15, 4-5.
35.
VikiG. T.AbramsD. (2002b). But she was unfaithful: Benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 289-293.
36.
WhatleyM. A. (1996). Victim characteristics influencing attributions of responsibility to rape victims: A meta-analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 1, 81-95.
37.
WhatleyM. A. (2005). The effect of participant sex, victim dress, and traditional attitudes on causal judgments for marital rape victims. Journal of Family Violence, 20, 191-200.
38.
WilsonM. I.JohnsonH.DalyM. (1995). Lethal and nonlethal violence against wives. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 37, 331-336.
