Unsolicited interpretation of child sexual abuse media reports

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of the study was to investigate the extent and nature of spontaneous attributional activity elicited by a newspaper report of child sexual abuse. Method: One hundred and seventy-six respondents, who were recruited through appeals placed in the letters column of a local newspaper, were presented with a newspaper report that described either a stereotype-congruent (rape by stranger in a public place) or a stereotype-incongruent (indecent assault by father at home) abuse incident. Respondents were asked to provide written descriptions of their thoughts and feeling about the abuse incident, which were analysed for attributional content. Results: Ninety-three percent of respondents provided one or more attributional statement, with attributional statements comprising 27% of all statements. Statements implying offender culpability were the most frequently employed attributional category (78% of all attributional judgments) while statements implying victim culpability comprised less than 2% of attributional judgments. Respondents who read the stereotype-incongruent description made more unsolicited causal and moral attributions than did respondents who read the stereotype-congruent description. Conclusions: The results suggest that newspaper reports of child sexual abuse do elicit spontaneous attributional activity, that statements implying offender culpability are the most frequently employed attributional category, and that attributional activity is inhibited by stereotype congruent depictions of abuse. Implications for research and for prevention are discussed.