Affective disgust predicts blame for gay male homicide victims

Journal of Clinical NursingVolume 29, Issue 13-14 p. 2730-2730 CORRIGENDUMFree Access Corrigendum This article corrects the following: Attributions of victim blame in stranger and acquaintance rape: A quantitative study Sofia Persson MSc, PhD, Katie Dhingra PhD, Sarah Grogan PhD, Volume 27Issue 13-14Journal of Clinical Nursing pages: 2640-2649 First Published online: April 17, 2018 First published: 05 May 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15241AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL In “Attributions of victim blame in stranger and acquaintance rape: A quantitative study” by Persson, Dhingra, and Grogan (2018) which was published in volume 27, issue 13–14 in July 2018, the original Table 1 (descriptive results) contained some incorrect numbers. The correction has revised this. While the results of the paper are the same, the revised version below now provides a more accurate descriptive overview of the findings. TABLE 1. Means and standard deviations for each key variable N M SD Stranger victim blame 48 1.76 0.89 Acquaintance victim blame 33 2.59 1.01 Ambivalent Sexism Inventory 78 1.42 0.62 Benevolent Sexism 77 1.53 6.78 Hostile Sexism 78 1.31 0.74 AMMSA 78 2.30 0.97 REFERENCE Persson, S., Dhingra, K., & Grogan, S. (2018). Attributions of victim blame in stranger and acquaintance rape: A quantitative study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 27, 2640– 2649. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.14351 Volume29, Issue13-14July 2020Pages 2730-2730 ReferencesRelatedInformation

To, on a sample of nurses and the general public, examine whether victim blame varies according to level of familiarly between victim and perpetrator. It also examines how Ambivalent Sexism and Rape Myth Acceptance impact on this. Around one in five women will be victims of sexual assault during their lifetime. The majority are acquaintance rapes, and these victims are generally attributed more blame than victims of stranger rape. Research indicates that nurses hold similar attitudes on gender roles and victim blame as do the general public. Eighty-one participants read a story depicting a sexual assault of a woman by either a stranger or an acquaintance and completed scales measuring victim blame, Ambivalent Sexism and Rape Myth Acceptance. The results of this study indicated that victim-perpetrator relationship, Benevolent Sexism, Hostile Sexism and whether the participant was a nurse contributed to the variance in attributed victim blame. Hierarchical regressions revealed that whether or not the participant was a nurse contributed to the variance in victim blame in the acquaintance rape condition, and Hostile Sexism and Benevolent Sexism contributed to the variance in victim blame in the stranger rape condition. This paper gives a novel insight into attitudes involved in victim blame in rape cases and makes a unique comparison between nurses and the general public. Findings suggest that victim blame correlates primarily with aggressively sexist attitudes and that nurses generally attribute more blame to the victim of acquaintance rape. This study has practical implications for the provision of medical services for victims of sexual assault, as it highlights problems in identifying and accessing rape victims, as well as recommending the sexual assault training of all practicing nurses.

Blame attribution is a valuable mechanism explaining decision making. However, present literature mainly employs blame attribution as a dependent variable. The shortcoming of this fact is that blame attribution offers a potentially valuable explanatory mechanism for decision making. The authors designed two studies to investigate blame attribution as a moderator of sentencing decisions in sexual orientation-based hate crimes. Study 1 showed that mock jurors punished perpetrators of hate crimes more severely than a control condition. Also, degree of victim blame influenced punitive decision making. In Study 2, mock jurors extended findings that perpetrators of hate crimes are more harshly punished than those of other types of crimes. Victim and perpetrator blame failed to moderate decision making in this more complex scenario. Results are discussed in relation to hate crimes definitions and attribution theory.

ABSTRACTSeveral decades of research have found that just world beliefs (BJW) predict the blaming of innocent victims and are associated with various forms of prejudice. We tested whether anti-transgender prejudice (a) uniquely predicts victim blame for a victim perceived to be of transgender spectrum experience (or trans*), apart from BJW, and (b) whether anti-transgender prejudice is a mediator of the association between BJW and victim blame. U.S. participants (N = 311) read a hypothetical crime vignette in which the victim was either perceived to be trans* by perpetrators or not, then completed measures of victim blame, BJW, and anti-transgender prejudice. In a multiple linear regression analysis, anti-transgender prejudice and the interactions of vignette with BJW and with anti-transgender prejudice were significant predictors of victim blame. There was no independent main effect for BJW, gender, or vignette. BJW was associated with victim blame only for the trans* victim. Anti-transgender prejudice was associated with victim blame for both vignettes; however, this relationship was stronger for the trans* victim. Further, anti-transgender prejudice fully mediated the relation between BJW and victim blame in both conditions. Findings suggest that anti-transgender prejudice uniquely predicts victim blaming, even for innocent victims who are not perceived to be trans*.

Bisexual men are one of the least studied populations within the sexual intimate partner violence (SIPV) literature, despite the prevalence of SIPV being equivalent between bisexual and gay men, and greater in bisexual than heterosexual men. Consequently, it remains unclear as to what factors contribute to SIPV–related victim blame toward bisexual men. The current study utilized a mixed–methods design to investigate prejudiced attitudes toward bisexual and gay men as predictors of victim blame in the context of SIPV. Participants (N = 124) were randomly assigned to read a vignette wherein a bisexual or gay man disclosed an experience of SIPV. Participants then completed measures of victim blame and prejudiced attitudes toward bisexual or gay men. As a means of contextualizing the quantitative analyses, participants also completed a qualitative stereotype task. Results indicated that prejudiced attitudes toward both bisexual and gay men predicted victim blame, and that victim blame attributions toward bisexual and gay men did not differ. Qualitative findings indicated that there was overlap between the stereotypes attributed to bisexual and gay men, which may explain the lack of difference in victim blame toward the two groups. These results implicate prejudice reduction and controlled stereotype processing strategies as a means of reducing victim blame attributions toward sexual minority men.

Previous research has consistently shown that rape victims may be blamed for the assault but little is known about victim blaming in other sexual crimes. In the present experiment, we examined blame attributions for sexual assault and online sexual harassment. The study also investigated the effects of victim behavior, participants' belief in a just world, and participant gender on attributions of both victim and perpetrator blame. A vignette methodology was employed and a community sample (N = 200) answered questions of victim and perpetrator blame after reading one of four different scenarios (which manipulated crime type and victim behavior). Crime type and victim behavior affected participants blame attributions: the participants attributed least blame to the non-flirtatious sexual assault victim and most blame was attributed to the flirtatious sexual harassment victim. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

A jury simulation paradigm was employed for two studies exploring levels of victim blame in a case of bias-motivated assault based on sexual orientation. In the first study, participants were grouped according to their score on the Index of Homophobia (IHP) scale as either reporting high or low support for gay and lesbian community members. The label of the crime (i.e., bias-motivated assault versus first-degree assault) as well as the gender of the victim were systematically varied. Results indicated that attributions of blame against the victim varied as a function of participants' attitudes toward minority sexual orientation. As extra-legal factors likely contribute to victim blame in these cases, the second study explored such factors as location and “provocation.” Jurors in the second study read a transcript depicting an attack on a gay man by a man in either a local bar (i.e., not a gay bar) or a gay bar. Within location conditions, jurors were presented with either “provocation” by the victim (i.e., asking the perpetrator to dance and putting his arm around him) or alternatively no provocation was presented. Results revealed significant differences of victim blame depending on condition. Participants in both the local bar and provocation present conditions were more likely to blame the victim for the attack than those in the gay bar or provocation-absent conditions. Implications for hate crime law and attribution theory within the courtroom are discussed.

Although research has found that between 5% to 20% of adult men in non-institutionalized and non-military populations have been the victimes of a sexual assault, these victims are largely ignored by society and mental health professionals. Factos that may account for this lack of attention may be due to the small number of victims (as compared to female victims) and rape myths that promote the denial that male rape can occur. The psychological literature also reflects this neglect as the majority of this literature has focused on female and child victims, largely ignoring adult male victims. The purpose of the present research was to address some of the limitations of the literature regarding the attribution of victim blame towards male victims of sexual assault. The study investigated how the independent variables of 1.) victim gender, 2.) victim sexual orientation, and 3.) participant sexual orientation influence the dependent variables of attribution of blame and participant's perceived similarity to the victim. The results indicated that the participants' sexual orientation, the victims' sexual orientation, and the victims' gender were found to be related to the particpant perceived similarity to the victim. However, participants' perceived similarity to the victim did not influence their attribution of blame towards the victims. The results were not consistent with Defensive Attribution Theory (Shaver, 1970; Walster, 1966).

Prior research has explored victim blaming in the context of hate, often depicting hate crime victims as relatively passive recipients of harassment and violence. In reality, victims often do engage with their perpetrators, and the present research explored the effect that victim behavior might have on observer reactions to Islamophobic hate crimes. Participants completed a measure of Islamophobia and read a scenario in which a White man verbally harassed a victim in the park before physically assaulting him. We manipulated both the victim's identity (White or South Asian Muslim) and the victim's response to the perpetrator's verbal harassment (the victim either ignored the offensive comments, verbally reacted to them, or became physically confrontational). When the victim was portrayed as passive and nonresponding, the South Asian Muslim victim attracted lower victim blame, higher perpetrator blame, and increased certainty that the offense was a hate crime. As the victim's behavior became more aggressive, victim blaming increased and perpetrator blaming decreased, but only for the South Asian Muslim victim. It appeared that observers scrutinized the behavior of the South Asian Muslim victim in a way they did not for the White victim, such that sympathy toward the Muslim hate crime victim was tied to his "good behavior." We propose that observers hold expectations of the model hate crime victim, one who is a racialized, religious, or sexual minority who accepts harassment passively and with good behavior; deviation from this script results in a loss of sympathy and an increase in victim blaming. Finally, those higher in Islamophobia displayed reduced perpetrator blame, guilt, and sentences but greater victim blame when the crime targeted a South Asian Muslim as opposed to White victim.

If heterosexual male victims had been more active in the #MeToo movement, how might they have been judged? Although the #MeToo movement has been regarded as an historic milestone for women who were victimized by men in positions of power, participation in the movement by male victims has been noticeably absent. Research indicates that victims may avoid disclosure if they anticipate negative social reactions, and male victims may attract greater levels of victim blaming than female victims, particularly if their perpetrator was female. The current study investigated attributions of victim blame against a fictional heterosexual male in a between-subjects vignette design. Perpetrator gender and their social influence were manipulated in a sample of 208 college students. Results did not support the hypothesized main effects of perpetrator gender or social influence. Greater blame attributions were made against victims of a male perpetrator compared to one of an unspecified gender. Male participants attributed greater blame than females, and the relationship between shame proneness and blame was moderated by participant gender, males experiencing higher levels of shame engaged in less victim blame. Blame increased when participants believed the court case to be more distressing than the victimizing act. Results support the male rape myth framework, which posits that beliefs about a male victim's experience of his own violation, particularly whether he experienced distress or pleasure, are related to gendered norms of masculinity, which include normative traits of toughness, dominance, and high sexual performance. Implications on the role of gender as a barrier to disclosure by male victims are discussed.

An overview discusses feminist analyses of oppression, attitudes toward rape victims, and previously studied predictors of individuals' attitudes toward rape victims. To better understand such attitudes, this meta-analysis examines the moderating influences of various rape victim, perpetrator, and crime characteristics' rape myth consistency on gender differences in individuals' perceptions of rape victims (i.e., victim responsibility and blame attributions and rape minimizing attitudes). Consistent with feminist theoretical predictions, results indicated that, overall, men perceived rape victims more negatively than women did. However, this sex difference was moderated by the rape myth consistency within the rape vignettes. Implications for research are discussed.

Victims of rape are sometimes blamed for the assaults against them. Research has examined primarily female victims; much less is known about men as victims and whether victim age affects attributions of victim blame. Furthermore, the study investigated the effects of Belief in a Just World (BJW) on blame attributions. Employing a vignette-type experimental study with a 2 (gender of participant)×2 (victim's gender)×2 (victim's age)×2 (participant BJW score) between-subjects design and several measures of blame attributions towards victim and perpetrator as dependent variables, a community sample (n = 164) participated. The main results were as hypothesised, namely that young male victims were attributed more blame, particularly by participants scoring high on BJW. Overall, victim blame level was low and perpetrator blame was high, and BJW was a powerful predictor of blame attributions.

Although research has been conducted on rape myth acceptance (RMA) and other factors associated with attribution formation, researchers have not yet determined how the combination of such factors simultaneously affects levels of victim blame and perpetrator blame. The current investigation recruited 221 students from an all-women's college to examine differences in blame attributions across RMA, victim gender, and perpetrator gender, and the relationship between the two parties (i.e., stranger vs. acquaintance). Results suggested that RMA, victim gender, and perpetrator gender account for a significant amount of variance in blame attributions for both victims and perpetrators. In sum, victim blame with female perpetrators was relatively consistent across levels of RMA, but increased substantially for male perpetrators as individuals endorsed higher levels of RMA. Perpetrator blame, however, was highest with male perpetrators when individuals endorsed low levels of RMA and lowest for male perpetrators when individuals endorsed relatively higher levels of RMA. Findings demonstrate the continued influence of RMA on blame attributions for both victims and perpetrators, and the stigma faced by male victims. More research is needed on the differing attributions of male and female victims and perpetrators, as well as differing attributions based on type of relationship. Such research will lead to a better and more thorough understanding of sexual assault and rape.

Recent state and federal legislation such as the Hate Crimes Prevention Act (HCPA) addresses hate crime prevention and punishment. Two pivotal questions that arise in the development of such legislation are (a) should hate crime perpetrators be subject to penalty enhancements? and (b) should protections be extended to sexual and transgender minority individuals? This article presents two studies addressing these questions employing a two-step vignette methodology. Jury-eligible community members provided sentencing and blame attribution ratings for one of three hate crime scenarios (i.e., anti-African American, antigay, or antitransgender), as well as penalty enhancement agreement (i.e., yes/no) and measures of need for affect (Study 1) and need for cognition (Study 2). Patterns of findings across studies suggest that participants comply with hate crime legislation instructions in general, but sentencing decisions are consistently moderated by whether a participant agrees with the penalty enhancement aspect of hate crime legislation. Moreover, need for affect and need for cognition differentially impact perceptions of hate crimes; need for affect demonstrated predictive associations with victim blame, whereas need for cognition moderated relations with perpetrator sentence and blame judgments. Results are discussed with emphasis on the state of federal hate crime legislation, antigay and antitransgender prejudice, and future directions in research and policy.

The present study investigated the attribution of responsibility to victims and perpetrators in rape compared to robbery cases in Turkey. Each participant read three short case scenarios (vignettes) and completed items pertaining to the female victim and male perpetrator. The vignettes were systematically varied with regard to the type of crime that was committed (rape or robbery), the perpetrator’s coercive strategy (physical force or exploiting the victim’s alcohol-induced defenselessness), and the victim-perpetrator relationship prior to the incident (stranger, acquaintance, or ex-partner). Furthermore, participant gender and acceptance of rape myths (beliefs that justify or trivialize sexual violence) were taken into account. One half of the participants completed the rape myth acceptance (RMA) scales first and then received the vignettes, while the other half were given the vignettes first and then completed the RMA scales. As expected, more blame was attributed to victims of rape than to victims of robbery. Conversely, perpetrators of rape were blamed less than perpetrators of robbery. The more participants endorsed rape myths, the more blame was attributed to the victim and the less blame was attributed to the perpetrators. Increasing levels of RMA were associated with an increase in victim blame (VB) in both rape and robbery cases, but the increase in rape VB was significantly more pronounced than in robbery VB. Increasing RMA was associated with an attenuation of perpetrator blame (PB) that was more pronounced for rape than for robbery cases, but the difference was not significant. As expected, victims of rape were blamed more when the perpetrator exploited their defenselessness due to alcohol intoxication than when they were overpowered by physical force. Contrary to the hypothesis, this was also true for robbery victims. Rape victims who knew their attacker (ex-partner or acquaintance) were blamed more than victims who were assaulted by strangers. Contrary to the hypothesis, robbery victims who were assaulted by an ex-partner were blamed more than acquaintance or stranger robbery victims. As predicted, the closer the relationship between victim and perpetrator, the less blame was attributed to perpetrators of rape while this factor had no effect on PB in robbery cases. Men compared to women attributed more blame to the victims and less blame to the perpetrators. As expected, these gender differences in blame attributions were partially mediated by gender differences in RMA: After RMA was taken into account, the gender differences disappeared nearly completely for VB and were significantly reduced in PB. The order of presentation of the vignettes and the RMA measures was systematically varied to test the causal influence of RMA on rape blame attributions. The hypothesis that RMA causes VB and PB in rape cases (as opposed to the other way around or both are caused by a third variable) was not supported. Possible reasons for this failed manipulation and its implications for the mediation model are discussed. With regard to blame attribution in rape cases, the present results match what was expected from previous studies which were mainly conducted in “Western” countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, or Germany. The present results support the notion that the victim-perpetrator relationship and the victim’s alcohol consumption are cross-culturally stable factors for blame attribution in rape cases. It was expected that blame attribution in robbery cases would be unaffected by the perpetrator’s coercive strategy and the victim-perpetrator relationship, but the results were inconsistent. One unexpected effect is particularly noteworthy: When the perpetrator used physical force, more blame was attributed to rape than to robbery victims, but intoxicated victims were blamed more and almost equally so for both types of crime. Perpetrators who exploited drunk victims were blamed less in both rape and robbery cases. These results contradict German results collected with the German version of the same instruments (Bieneck & Krahe, 2011). Turkey is a Muslim country and alcohol is surrounded by a certain taboo. Possibly, the results reflect a cultural difference in that intoxicated victims are generally blamed more for their victimization and this factor is not limited to rape cases.