RATINGS OF CONSENT IN LESBIAN, GAY, AND HETEROSEXUAL SEXUAL ASSAULT SITUATIONS

Abstract

Introduction: Rates of sexual violence on college campuses are highest among individuals who identify as sexual minorities. However, bystander intervention programs on campuses (programs aimed at targeting individuals’ beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge about sexual violence to increase engagement in intervention behaviors) are not inclusive of sexual minority experiences. That is, bystander intervention programs that have been evaluated for efficacy appear not to include sexual violence experiences of sexual minorities nor are program outcomes assessed among sexual minority populations. This lack of inclusivity is important as it is likely that many of the barriers to bystander intervention (e.g., situational or environmental factors) may be worsened by biases against sexual minority populations. However, no research to date has examined how such factors influence bystanders’ assessment of a sexual violence situation, particularly among sexual minority relationship type dyads (e.g., lesbian, gay). Thus, the purpose of the present study was to examine factors (i.e., relationship type, bystander intentions, heteronormative attitudes, rape beliefs, alcohol beliefs and behaviors) impacting bystanders’ assignment of responsibility and consent in a sexual violence vignette. Methods: Participants (N = 300) had a mean age of 19.69 years, were undergraduate students, and primarily self-identified as women (77.7%) and heterosexual (84.0%). Participants completed a 30-40-minute online survey and were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions where they read a sexual violence vignette depicting a lesbian (n = 100), gay (n = 96), or heterosexual (n = 104) relationship type dyad; they then completed a series of survey items about consent and responsibility, and questionnaires regarding bystander intentions, heteronormative attitudes, rape attitudes, and alcohol beliefs and behaviors. Results: Overall, participants rated the sexual violence situation in the vignettes as not consensual. Logistic regression analysis revealed no significant associations between experimental condition and rating of consent, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed no significant difference in the rating of consent scores across conditions. Next, paired samples t-tests revealed that, for all three relationship type dyad conditions, participants assigned significantly greater responsibility to the perpetrator compared to the victim. However, two one-way ANOVAs revealed that those who read the heterosexual vignette assigned significantly more responsibility to the perpetrator and significantly less responsibility to the victim, compared to those who read the lesbian and gay vignettes. Finally, hypothesized predictors (i.e., bystander intentions, heteronormative attitudes, rape beliefs, alcohol beliefs and behaviors, responsibility ratings, and consent ratings) were entered into a structural regression model to establish a