Adam J. Beam, Lauren N. Jordan, Katherine E. Purdom, C. Veronica Smith
{"title":"Do I have to blame the perpetrator if I can't blame the victim anymore? Bystander responsibility in contact sexual violence scenarios","authors":"Adam J. Beam, Lauren N. Jordan, Katherine E. Purdom, C. Veronica Smith","doi":"10.1111/asap.12422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sexual violence is far too common in the U.S. and across the world (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). Bystander interventions are one type of intervention that aim to reduce contact sexual violence incidence as well as other problematic features of sexual violence like victim blame. Despite bystander intervention popularity, research has yet to address what people think about bystanders themselves and if people blame them in sexual violence scenarios. Across three sets of studies (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 887), participants read a simple vignette that explicitly stated a man had raped/sexually assaulted a woman and participants were then asked to allocate blame to the perpetrator, victim, and bystanders. In some studies, bystanders were not explicitly mentioned, and participants had to self‐nominate others who they thought could be responsible. In other studies, possible bystanders were listed by the researchers. Our results replicated across all sets of studies and indicated that people rarely thought to allocate blame to bystanders when they were not explicitly mentioned. When bystanders were explicitly mentioned, participants gave some blame to the bystanders and consequently reduced blame to the perpetrator. Our results have important implications for both legal settings and sexual assault prevention.","PeriodicalId":46799,"journal":{"name":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12422","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Sexual violence is far too common in the U.S. and across the world (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014). Bystander interventions are one type of intervention that aim to reduce contact sexual violence incidence as well as other problematic features of sexual violence like victim blame. Despite bystander intervention popularity, research has yet to address what people think about bystanders themselves and if people blame them in sexual violence scenarios. Across three sets of studies (N = 887), participants read a simple vignette that explicitly stated a man had raped/sexually assaulted a woman and participants were then asked to allocate blame to the perpetrator, victim, and bystanders. In some studies, bystanders were not explicitly mentioned, and participants had to self‐nominate others who they thought could be responsible. In other studies, possible bystanders were listed by the researchers. Our results replicated across all sets of studies and indicated that people rarely thought to allocate blame to bystanders when they were not explicitly mentioned. When bystanders were explicitly mentioned, participants gave some blame to the bystanders and consequently reduced blame to the perpetrator. Our results have important implications for both legal settings and sexual assault prevention.
期刊介绍:
Recent articles in ASAP have examined social psychological methods in the study of economic and social justice including ageism, heterosexism, racism, sexism, status quo bias and other forms of discrimination, social problems such as climate change, extremism, homelessness, inter-group conflict, natural disasters, poverty, and terrorism, and social ideals such as democracy, empowerment, equality, health, and trust.