Perpetrator Responsibility Research Articles

Factors influencing beliefs about intimate partner violence among adults in South Korea.

This study aimed to identify factors influencing beliefs about intimate partner violence among Korean adults. This is a cross-sectional descriptive study that analyzed data from 466 adults. Beliefs about intimate partner violence were measured using a self-report questionnaire with a total of 28 items consisting of four subscales: perpetrator's justification for beating women, blaming women for violence against them, perpetrator's responsibility for violence, and giving help to victims. Men and women had significantly different beliefs about intimate partner violence (t=-7.19, p<.001). Some characteristics were identified that led to unhealthy beliefs about intimate partner violence. Four variables-gender, age, educational level, and witnessing parental violence-had an explanatory power of 20% with regard to beliefs about IPV (F=10.50, p=.000). In South Korea, men, older individuals, and those with less formal education or who have witnessed parental violence need education to foster healthier beliefs about intimate partner violence. Nurses can play a vital role in efforts to decrease intimate partner violence.

The impact of victim-perpetrator relationship, reputation and initial point of resistance on officers' responsibility and authenticity ratings towards hypothetical rape cases

PurposePrevious studies suggest that judgments of responsibility and authenticity made towards hypothetical rape cases differ when specific case factors are varied. However, few studies have examined whether police officers exhibit similar variations in judgment. MethodsSixteen vignettes depicting a hypothetical rape scenario were created. Vignettes varied on victim-perpetrator relationship, victim reputation, and initial point of resistance. Police officers from a large police force in the United Kingdom (n=808) provided judgments of victim and perpetrator responsibility, as well as rape authenticity. ResultsOfficers rated perpetrators as less responsible and gave lower rape authenticity ratings when a partner was the perpetrator, and in ‘late’ resistance scenarios. Officers rated victims as more responsible in ‘bad’ reputation conditions and in ‘late’ resistance conditions. Additional effects of officer sex and receipt of specialist training were also found (i.e., male officers rated the victim as more responsible than female officers), as were several interactions between factors. ConclusionsResults suggest that police officers in the UK may judge victims of rape differentially based on extra-legal case factors. The potential impact on the investigation of rape cases is discussed, and a recommendation for thorough and prompt review of specialist and non-specialist training is made.

A Mixed Method Study of Intimate Partner Violence: How Sex and Severity Impact Perpetrator Prior Involvement, Abnormality, and Responsibility.

This study employed a mixed method approach to examine the effects of participant sex, perpetrator sex, and severity of violence on perceptions of intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators. Quantitative participants (n = 449) completed a survey and qualitative participants (n = 31) participated in a focus group or an interview. Participants believed that it was more likely male perpetrators had prior involvement in IPV. Participants rated stories of female perpetrators as more abnormal than stories of male perpetrators. Participants in the weak severity of violence condition had lower evaluations of responsibility than the strong or fatal severity of violence conditions and only women were discerning about perpetrator sex in their ratings of responsibility. Theoretical implications extend intimate terrorism and defensive attribution theory.

The experience of anger and sadness in response to hurtful behavior: Effects of gender-pairing and national culture

We report a study of recalled experiences of anger and sadness following hurtful events, focusing on the differentiated effects of cognitive appraisals, culture, and gender of perpetrator and subject. Results from a sample of 321 participants recruited in Hong Kong and the United States show that emotional experiences in response to hurt differ cross-nationally. We found that participants’ reports of hurtful experiences were related to their experience of anger and sadness, with anger responses proportional to the perception of perpetrator responsibility for the hurt. Compared to Hong Kong participants, Americans reported experiencing more anger, whereas Hong Kong participants’ experience of anger was ameliorated by familiarity with the perpetrator. The results for gender pair effects showed that male participants reported their experience of anger following a hurtful event was reduced when the perpetrator was female, while their experience of sadness was reduced when the perpetrator was another male. We discuss the implications of our findings for emotion management in Hong Kong and the United States.

Do beliefs about psychologists’ political biases matter? Perceived political ideology moderates how laypeople construe research on wrongdoing

Two studies examine a possible consequence – namely, unwanted reactions to psychological research on wrongdoing – if laypeople perceive psychologists to have liberal tendencies. Study 1 replicated previous research by showing that when psychologists presented findings demonstrating situational (compared to dispositional or interactionist) influences on wrongdoing, they were perceived as assigning less responsibility to perpetrators. Further, this effect was stronger among participants who perceived psychologists to be politically liberal. Study 2 revealed that when psychologists were explicitly identified as liberals, participants believed they would downplay perpetrator responsibility across the board, but particularly when the responsibility attributional account was situational. Psychologists should be aware that laypeople’s perception of their political leanings could lead to discrepant construal of psychologists’ actual perspectives on human behavior.

College Women's Assignment of Blame Versus Responsibility for Sexual Assault Experiences.

The present study investigated in a sample of college women ( N = 154) (a) assignment of self-blame, perpetrator blame, personal responsibility, and perpetrator responsibility for sexual assault; (b) differences in how women assigned blame versus responsibility toward themselves and the perpetrator; (c) significant correlations between blame and responsibility of self and the perpetrator and positive and negative post-assault outcomes; and (d) the underlying factors that explained different forms of blame and responsibility. The present study suggests a need for future sexual assault research to delineate and further examine the constructs of blame and responsibility. Implications for practice are also discussed.

Attitudes of Dutch citizens towards male victims of sexual coercion by a female perpetrator

ABSTRACTThis vignette study examines the differences in Dutch people's attitudes towards sexual coercion perpetrated by a male against a female versus sexual coercion perpetrated by a female against a male. In total, 583 Dutch citizens (16–86 years, 59.7% female) evaluated a control scenario and three sexually coercive scenarios (verbal coercion, purposeful intoxication and force), in which the sex of perpetrator and victim was purposely varied. The variables studied include: (1) scenario acceptability, (2) victim responsibility, (3) perpetrator responsibility, (4) victim pleasure, (5) victim distress and (6) support for filing a police report. The results indicate that sexual coercion of men is taken less seriously than sexual coercion of women, especially among Dutch men. However, most differences between attitudes towards male and female victims were found only in the physical force scenario. The findings highlight the importance of educational programmes to raise awareness and reduce stereotypical views on male sexual victimisation.

Judge me, judge me not: The role of eye size and observer gender on acquaintance rape

&lt;p&gt;The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of eye size and observer gender on perceived initial attraction, honesty, and attributions of responsibility for rape. A 3 (eye size: small vs. normal vs. large) x 2 (observer gender: female vs. male) experimental design was tested. Ninety participants (45 women and 45 men) observed one of three randomly assigned female faces (with eye size manipulation), and rated initial attraction and honesty. They were then asked to read an acquaintance rape scenario with a traditional woman, rating the victim and perpetrator responsibility. Eye size was shown to affect all the study variables: the female face with large eyes was seen as more attractive and honest, was held less responsible for her own victimization, and the offender was held more responsible. Gender was proven to affect perceived initial attraction and victim responsibility. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.&lt;/p&gt;

Does Screening or Providing Information on Resources for Intimate Partner Violence Increase Women's Knowledge? Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Screening for IPV in health care settings might increase women's knowledge or awareness around its frequency and its impact on health. When IPV is disclosed, assuring women it is not their fault should improve their knowledge that IPV is the perpetrator's responsibility. Providing information about IPV resources may also increase women's knowledge about the availability of solutions. Women (n=2708) were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) partner violence screen plus video referral and list of local partner violence resources if screening was positive (n=909); (2) partner violence resource list only without screen (n=893); and (3) a no-screen, no-partner violence resource list control group (n=898). One year later, 2364 women (87%) were re-contacted and asked questions assessing their knowledge of the frequency of partner violence, its impact on physical and mental health, the availability of resources to help women experiencing partner violence, and that it is the perpetrator's fault. There were no differences between women screened and provided with a partner violence resource list compared to a control group as to women's knowledge of the frequency of IPV, its impact on physical or mental health, or the availability of IPV services in their community. However, among women who experienced IPV in the year before or year after enrolling in the trial, those who were provided a list of IPV resources without screening were significantly less likely to know that IPV is not the victim's fault than those in the control or list plus screening conditions. The results of this study suggest that providing information on partner violence resources, with or without asking questions about partner violence, did not result in improved knowledge.

The Role of Perpetrator Motivation in Two Crime Scenarios

Undergraduate volunteers (n = 134) were randomly assigned in a 2 × 2 design that manipulated type of crime (rape vs. robbery) and perpetrator motivation (anger vs. desire). After reading one of the crime scenarios, participants responded to a series of attitude items regarding responsibility for the crime, assigned blame to agents mentioned in the scenario, and assigned a prison sentence to the perpetrator. A two-way ANOVA showed a significant interaction of motivation and crime (p = .026), with the victim rated least responsible in the anger-motivated rape scenario. Likewise, the assignment of blame produced a significant interaction of motivation and crime (p = .034); the victim was blamed the least in the anger-motivated rape scenario. Although the perpetrator was viewed as more responsible for the crime of rape than robbery (p = .022) and received a significantly longer sentence for rape (p < .001), perpetrator motivation did not affect perceptions of the perpetrator's responsibility for either crime. These results stand in contrast to those of Mitchell, Angelone, Kohlberger, and Hirschman (2009) and suggest their findings may have been the result of homophobic statements by the perpetrator rather than anger per se.

Attitudes towards victims and perpetrators of hypothetical rape scenarios involving intoxication: an application to the UK

PurposeThe aim of this study is to investigate the influence of binge drinking behaviour and ambivalent sexism on attitudes towards hypothetical victims and perpetrators of acquaintance rape.Design/methodology/approachThe research sample comprised 189 students. All were provided with a fictional rape scenario, depicting varying levels of perpetrator intoxication or varying extents to which an intoxicated victim was able to recall providing consent. Participants were then asked to rate their opinions of victim and perpetrator responsibility. They also completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), the Attitudes towards Rape Victim Scale (ARVS), and a measure to assess respondent binge drinking behaviour.FindingsRespondents attributed more responsibility to intoxicated victims of acquaintance rape than victims who were not intoxicated. Respondents classified as non‐sexist had more victim empathy than respondents classified as ambivalent sexists. Respondents' binge drinking behaviour did not impact on attributions of victim responsibility.Research limitations/implicationsFictional rape scenarios are utilised in the current research. The research literature highlights the difficulties posed by the presence of uncontrolled variables (such as the description of the victim) within hypothetical scenarios. The findings reported here should therefore be generalised with caution. Recommendations for future research are suggested.Practical implicationsThe study has practical implications in developing an understanding of legal decision making and factors influencing the potential secondary victimisation of victims.Originality/valueThe paper adds to the current literature in attempting to explore the influence of respondents' binge drinking behaviour on attitudes towards intoxicated victims.

College Students’ Social Reactions to the Victim in a Hypothetical Sexual Assault Scenario: The Role of Victim and Perpetrator Alcohol Use

College students' responses to a hypothetical sexual assault scenario involving alcohol use by the victim and/or perpetrator were examined (N = 295). Participants reported on victim/perpetrator responsibility, the extent to which the scenario would be considered rape, and their likelihood of providing positive or negative responses to the victim. Compared to women, men indicated that they would provide more negative and less positive social reactions to the victim, were less likely to identify the scenario as rape, and endorsed less perpetrator responsibility. When the victim was drinking, participants endorsed greater victim responsibility and lower perpetrator responsibility for the assault. Participants indicated that they would provide the victim with less emotional support when only the perpetrator was drinking, compared to when both the individuals were drinking.

In the Eye of the Beholder: Do Behavior and Character Affect Victim and Perpetrator Responsibility for Acquaintance Rape?1

Acquaintance rape attributions of responsibility were investigated. In Study 1, participants viewed videotapes that varied the female victim's resistance (verbal, physical, verbal/physical) and the reaction of the perpetrator (anger, no reaction) or a control videotape. The victim was held less responsible and the perpetrator was held more responsible when the victim resisted. In Study 2, participants viewed videotapes that manipulated victim and perpetrator reputation. Victims were held more responsible when they had a bad reputation; perpetrators were held more responsible when the victim had a good reputation or the perpetrator had a bad reputation. Hostile sexism predicted victim responsibility in both studies; rape myth predicted victim and perpetrator responsibility in Study 2. Implications for the legal system are discussed.

The Neural Correlates of Third-Party Punishment

Legal decision-making in criminal contexts includes two essential functions performed by impartial "third parties:" assessing responsibility and determining an appropriate punishment. To explore the neural underpinnings of these processes, we scanned subjects with fMRI while they determined the appropriate punishment for crimes that varied in perpetrator responsibility and crime severity. Activity within regions linked to affective processing (amygdala, medial prefrontal and posterior cingulate cortex) predicted punishment magnitude for a range of criminal scenarios. By contrast, activity in right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex distinguished between scenarios on the basis of criminal responsibility, suggesting that it plays a key role in third-party punishment. The same prefrontal region has previously been shown to be involved in punishing unfair economic behavior in two-party interactions, raising the possibility that the cognitive processes supporting third-party legal decision-making and second-party economic norm enforcement may be supported by a common neural mechanism in human prefrontal cortex.

You Shouldn't Have: Your Brain on Others' Crimes

Our legal system requires assigning responsibility for crimes and deciding on appropriate punishments. A new fMRI study by Buckholtz et al. in this issue of Neuron reveals that the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (rDLPFC) plays a key role in these cognitive processes. This finding sheds light on the neural mechanisms underlying moral judgment from a third-party perspective.

Effects of Offender Motivation, Victim Gender, and Participant Gender on Perceptions of Rape Victims and Offenders

The primary purpose of the present study was to examine whether knowledge of the motivation of an offender can influence participant perceptions of victim and perpetrator responsibility for a sexual assault. In addition, the synergistic influence of victim gender and participant gender with offender motivation was explored. Participants were 171 men and women from a small Northeastern college exposed to a stimulus in which a rapist's motivation was varied as either sexual or violent. Participants were more certain that the stimulus described a rape, recommended a longer prison sentence for the offender, and assigned less blame to the victim when exposed to an offender motivated by violence as opposed to an offender motivated by sex. Offender motivation also interacted with participant gender and victim gender on participants' perceptions of victim blame and offender responsibility. The results suggest that an offender's motivation for rape can influence perceptions of the offender's and victim's responsibility for the assault.

The Role of the New “Date Rape Drugs” in Attributions About Date Rape

This study investigates the effect of voluntary and involuntary drug use on attributions about sexual assault. The sample was composed of 280 randomly selected male and female undergraduate students. The type of drug used (GHB, alcohol, or none) and the voluntariness of the administration were varied in an unambiguous date rape scenario. Participants viewed sexual assault facilitated by alcohol or drugs similarly to sexual assault without drug or alcohol involvement, assigning the highest levels of responsibility and blame to the perpetrator and the lowest levels of both to the victim in these situations. In contrast, women's voluntary consumption of drugs prior to a sexual assault reduced perpetrator responsibility and blame and increased blame to the victim compared to other situations (except in some cases, voluntary drunkenness). These findings extend the limited research on date rape drugs and previous work on the influence of alcohol on date rape attributions.

Telling it Like it isn’t: Obscuring Perpetrator Responsibility for Violent Crime

Part I of this article introduces the interactional and discursive view of violence and resistance, part II illustrates its application to the analysis of sexual assault trial judgments, and part III provides a detailed analysis of an entire judgment. In giving their reasons for verdicts and sentences, the majority of judges accounted for the assaults by drawing on psychological concepts and constructs. These psychological explanations or causal attributions were grouped into one or more of eight categories: alcohol and drug abuse, biological or sexual drive, psychopathology, dysfunctional family upbringing, stress and trauma, character or personality trait, emotional state, and loss of control. The causal attributions in all categories systematically reformulated deliberate acts of violence into non-deliberate and non-violent acts. Psychologizing attributions, that is, causal attributions that functioned to conceal the violence and mitigate the perpetrator’s responsibility, accounted for 97 percent of attributions. Through line-by-line analyses of the full text of one judgment, we show how psychologizing attributions are combined in use with other linguistic devices to (i) conceal violence, (ii) mitigate perpetrators’ responsibility, (iii) conceal victims’ resistance, and (iv) blame or pathologize victims.

Attributions of Responsibility in Cases of Sexual Harassment: The Person and the Situation1

When observers learn about a case of sexual harassment, it is common for them to assign responsibility to the victim and perpetrator. However, attributions of responsibility are complex judgments often based on variables beyond the case's details (e.g., attitudes). The present study examined how victim response, victim and perpetrator gender, and participant gender and gender‐role attitudes influenced participants' attributions. Victim and perpetrator responsibility were measured before and after participants knew the victim's reaction in order to examine whether new information would alter participants' attributions. Consistent with previous research, gender differences were found for attributions and attitudes. Victim and perpetrator gender did not affect attributions. However, biases appeared in open‐ended responses. Finally, only females made distinctions of responsibility across victim reaction condition.

Social perception of rape: how rape myth acceptance modulates the influence of situational factors.

This study assessed the role of rape myth acceptance (RMA) and situational factors in the perception of three different rape scenarios (date rape, marital rape, and stranger rape). One hundred and eighty-two psychology undergraduates were asked to emit four judgements about each rape situation: victim responsibility, perpetrator responsibility, intensity of trauma, and likelihood to report the crime to the police. It was hypothesized that neither RMA nor situational factors alone can explain how rape is perceived; it is the interaction between these two factors that best account for social reactions to sexual aggression. The results generally supported the authors' hypothesis: Victim blame, estimation of trauma, and the likelihood of reporting the crime to the police were best explained by the interaction between observer characteristics, such as RMA, and situational clues. That is, the less stereotypic the rape situation was, the greater was the influence of attitudes toward rape on attributions.