Mary Bell Final Draft 4.29.13

PERCEPTIONS OF AN ACQUANTANCE RAPE:
THE RAMIFICATIONS OF VICTIMS WEIGHT, SEXUAL HISTORY AND
CLOTHING
A Thesis
Presented to the faculty of the Department of Psychology
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of

the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in
Psychology
(Counseling Psychology)
by
Mary Dorene Bell
SPRING
2013
CLOTHING
A Thesis
by
Mary Dorene Bell
Approved by:
__________________________________, Committee Chair

Lisa Harrison, Ph.D.
__________________________________, Second Reader

Rebecca Cameron, Ph.D.
__________________________________, Third Reader

Kelly Cotter, Ph.D.
_____________________________
Date
ii
Student: Mary Dorene Bell
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to
be awarded for the thesis.
, Graduate Coordinator
JianJian Qin, Ph.D. Date
Department of Psychology
iii
Abstract
of
CLOTHING
by
Mary Dorene Bell
College students (N = 168) from northern California examined the influence of victim
weight, clothing, and sexual history on empathy, blame, and rape myth acceptance
toward a perpetrator and victim in an acquaintance rape. Participants read a fictional
interview of a rape victim describing events prior to the rape and completed
questionnaires. Victim weight (thin versus obese), clothing (revealing versus modest),
and sexual history (virgin versus promiscuous) were manipulated within the vignettes.
While participants believed the interview described a rape, no significant difference for
blame, empathy, or rape myth acceptance was found for the victim. For the perpetrator,
participants placed more blame and responsibility on the perpetrator of the obese victim,
and had higher empathy toward the perpetrator of the virgin victim. Results are discussed
in terms of blame attributions. Future research should continue to analyze the effect of
weight in cases of rape and increase awareness of rape biases.
, Committee Chair
Lisa Harrison, Ph.D.
Date
iv
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this thesis to my son, Samuel. He makes every day a joy.
I want him to grow up in a world where everyone is equal and has the same opportunities.
I want him to grow up in a safe world. I hope that by continuing to do studies like this,
the world will become a better place, because we can learn what triggers blame and
improve our treatment of victims. I never want anyone to be afraid to seek out help.
While I hope my son never experiences any type of abuse or assault, I want him to feel
safe to come forward, if he were to.
I would also like to dedicate this thesis to all past, current, and future victims of
rape. You are never at fault or to blame. Only perpetrators are to blame. It does not matter
how one dresses or acts, rape is never the victims fault. Please seek out help. And to all
victims, I believe you.
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank Dr. Lisa Harrison for all her help as my thesis chair. She gave me
encouragement when I needed it, and supported me the whole way through. I would like
to thank Dr. Rebecca Cameron for being my second reader and Dr. Kelly Cotter for being
my third reader. I would also like to think my mother, Brenda, for her help and
encouragement. She always believed in me and helped push me to finish my degree. I am
eternally grateful to all of you for your support.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication ..................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ................................................................................................................ x
List of Figures ............................................................................................................. xi
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION.1
Prevalence of Rape ........................................................................................... 3
Brief History of Rape and Laws ....................................................................... 6
Factors that Influence Rape Judgments .......................................................... 10
Rape Myths ..................................................................................................... 16
Rape Empathy ................................................................................................. 18
Present Study .................................................................................................. 20
2. METHOD ............................................................................................................. 24
Participants ...................................................................................................... 24
Design ............................................................................................................ 24
Materials ......................................................................................................... 25
Procedure ....................................................................................................... 28
3. RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 30
Effects of Victim Clothing on Victim Judgment ............................................ 30
Effects of Victim Clothing on Perpetrator Judgment ..................................... 31

vii
Effects of Victim Weight on Victim Judgment .............................................. 32
Effects of Victim Weight on Perpetrator Judgment ....................................... 34
Effects of Victim Sexual History on Victim Judgment .................................. 35
Effects of Victim Sexual History on Perpetrator Judgment ............................ 37
Interaction Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Victim
Judgment ......................................................................................................... 38
Interaction Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Perpetrator
Judgment ......................................................................................................... 40
Vignette Describing Rape .............................................................................. 41
4. DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................... 42
Effects of Victim Clothing on Victim Judgment ............................................ 42
Effects of Victim Clothing on Perpetrator Judgment ..................................... 44
Effects of Victim Weight on Victim Judgment .............................................. 44
Effects of Victim Weight on Perpetrator Judgment ....................................... 45
Effects of Victim Sexual History on Victim Judgment .................................. 47
Effects of Victim Sexual History on Perpetrator Judgment ............................ 47
Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Victim
Judgment ......................................................................................................... 48
Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Perpetrator
Judgment ......................................................................................................... 50
Vignette Describing Rape .............................................................................. 51
viii
Limitations ...................................................................................................... 52
Future Research ............................................................................................. 53
Conclusions and Implications ........................................................................ 55
Appendix A. Participant Characteristics ................................................................... 57
Appendix B. Vignettes .............................................................................................. 59
Appendix C. Blame Index ...................................................................................... 103
Appendix D. Empathy Scale ................................................................................... 105
Appendix E. Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale ................................................ 108
Appendix F. Consent Form ..................................................................................... 111
Appendix G. Debriefing.......................................................................................... 112
References ................................................................................................................. 114
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Tables Page
1. Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Clothing ........................... 31
2. Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Clothing ..................... 32
3. Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Weight .............................. 33
4. Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Weight ....................... 35
5. Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Sexual History.................. 36
6. Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Sexual History ........... 38
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page
1. Significant interaction effect of victim sexual history and clothing for
the perpetrator being justified in raping the victim ......................................... 41
xi
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
much of what was actuality of our lives went unnamed. We did not speak of
rape. If a woman was raped she was supposed to feel ashamed. She was shamed.
The very atmosphere around her said that she wanted this rape, drawn this to her.
And the atmosphere, like rape itself, seemed as if it had existed forever, were a
natural phenomenon, and not made up of man-made assum0ptions and prejudices
born of a particular social reality (Cuklanz, 1996, p. 14; Griffin, 1979, p. 25).
This quote describes something that one in six women will experience in their
lifetime (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network [RAINN], 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes,
1998). During a hearing on the lack of reporting and investigating of rape cases, Senator
Arlen Specter began by describing the statistics on rape in the United States, where over
20 million women or 18% of the population have been a victim of rape (United States,
2011). While women continue to be victimized at an alarming rate, few will report their
crime to the police (Campbell et al., 1999). A major barrier to reporting is the blame and
judgment victims experiences when reporting the rape to police, friends, and family
(Campbell, 2006, 2008; Campbell et al., 1999; Cuklanz, 1996; George & Martinez, 2002;
Hockett, Saucier, Hoffman, Smith, & Craig, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). For
example, many victims are judged on how they were dressed (Denim Day USA, 2012;
Hall, 1995; Moorti, 2002; Travis, 2003) and whether they were drinking alcohol prior to
2
the rape (Abbey & Harnish, 1995; Cuklanz, 1996; Finch & Munro, 2005; Krahe, Temkin,
Bieneck, & Berger, 2008), among other things.
Even the media and society has vilified victims of rape. For instance, when an
eleven year old girl was gang-raped by eighteen men, the media reported only the ages of
the alleged perpetrators, but described the victim as someone who dressed older than her
age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s and would
hang out with teenage boys (McKinley, 2011, para. 12). These types of views take the
blame of rape away from the perpetrator and place it solely on the victim. Instead of
holding perpetrators accountable, the victims are expected to justify all actions taken
before, during, and after their rape.
Research on rape blame attributions has extensively looked at the victims sexual
history (Brown, Hamilton, & ONeill, 2007; Temkin & Krahe, 2008), race (Aosved &
Long, 2006; George & Martinez, 2002; Varelas & Foley, 1998), clothing (Brown et al.,
2007; Klein, Kennedy, & Gorzalka, 2009; Shears, 2010), and alcohol/drug use (Abbey &
Harnish, 1995; Cuklanz, 1996; Krahe et al., 2008), but little research has been conducted
examining victim weight (Clarke & Stermac, 2011; Ryckman, Graham, Thornton, Gold,
& Lindner, 1998). Since some people believe that rape is caused by a lack of control
(Martin, 2005), it seems plausible that weight would influence their beliefs in a rape
scenario. For instance, some people view women wearing provocative clothing as
causing their own rape since they are viewed as irresistible (Abbey et al., 1987; Brown et
al., 2007; Hall, 1995; Martin, 2005; Maurer & Robinson, 2007). In the case of weight, a
3
thin rape victim may be seen as irresistible, while an obese victims may be viewed
differently, which could influence blame attributions in their rape cases.
Prevalence of Rape
For the purposes of this study, rape is defined as follows:
The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or
object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent
of the victim. (Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI], 2012, para. 1).
This definition was chosen because rape laws vary from state to state and study to study.
It represents the federal governments definition of rape.
In the United States, one out of every six women will be raped in their lifetime
(RAINN, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998). This equals out to be approximately 17.7
million women (Rennison, 2002). However, a more recent report by the US Senate states
that the total number of rape victims in the United States is approximately 20 million,
which equals 18% of women in the United States (United States, 2011). The most
common form of rape is penetration of the vagina by the penis (68.2%), followed by
penetration of the vagina or anus by objects or fingers (31.3%) (Tjaden & Thoennes,
2006).
When examining the race/ethnicity of rape victims, studies indicate that American
Indian women report significantly higher lifetime rates of rape (34%) than all other
racial/ethnic groups (18%) (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998, 2006) and that one out of three
American Indian women report being raped in their lifetime (United States, 2011). This is
believed to be related to the higher rates of violence that occurred in the Native American
4
population (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998, 2006). In these same studies, Asian American
women were found to be significantly less likely than other racial/ethnic groups to report
being raped (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998, 2006). However, some caution should be used
when viewing these results because of the small sample size of American Indian and
Asian American populations (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998, 2006). While it is possible that
the Asian American population has a significantly lower rape rate, it is also possible the
reported rate is affected by cultural values that prohibit sharing information with others
that could cause shame or dishonor the family (Lee, Pomeroy, Yoo, & Rheinboldt, 2005;
Schneider, Mori, Lambert, & Wong, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). In regards to
other racial/ethnic groups, African American (18.8%), White American (17.9%), and
Latina (14.6%) women report a similar lifetime rate of rapes (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998,
2006).
Victim age also influences rape prevalence rates. For example, girls under the age
of 18 are more likely to be raped than women over 18 years of age (Buchwald, Fletcher,
& Roth, 2005; Kilpatrick, Edmunds, & Seymour, 1992; Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998,
2006). In fact, rape is most likely to occur between the ages of 10 and 29 for females
(Brownmiller, 1975; Buchwald et al., 2005; Thornhill & Palmer, 2000), with 54% of rape
victims experiencing their first rape before the age of 18 and 29% between the ages of 18
to 24 (Kilpatrick et al., 1992; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). Numerous studies have shown
that women, who have been raped once, are more likely to be raped again (Brown, Testa,
& Messman-Moore, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998, 2006; Yeater, Treat, Viken, &
McFall, 2010). Some research suggests this is linked to a reduced ability to recognize risk
5
or the inability to recognize clues that suggest a high risk of victimization (Yeater et al.,
2010).
Few studies have examined the characteristics of the rapists such as their age,
ethnicity, or their attitudes on rape (Brownmiller, 1975; Bourke, 2007; Tjaden &
Thoennes, 1998, 2006). However, the limited available research indicates that typically a
rapist is likely to share the victims same social class and ethnicity (Brownmiller, 1975;
United States, 2011). Rapists are also likely to be about the same age as the rape victim
(Brownmiller, 1975; United States, 2011). In addition, most rape victims are familiar
with their rapist, with only 20 to 40 percent of rape of victims being raped by a stranger
(Buchwald et al., 2005; Hall, 1995; Martin, 2005; Rand, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes,
2006). Usually rape victims are raped by a current or former spouse, boyfriend, friend,
relative, or acquaintance (Buchwald et al., 2005; Martin, 2005; Tjaden & Thoennes,
2006; United States, 2011).
Lastly, most rapes occur in a private setting (84.5%) such as a home or car
(Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). This is contradictory to most peoples expectations that a
typical rape takes place outside, in the dark, and with the use of physical force (Anderson,
2007; Brownmiller, 1975; Chasteen, 2001; Hall, 1995). Despite this misperception, few
studies have been conducted to determine why this myth persists (Anderson, 2007). In
general, most women are not threatened with a weapon or beaten during the rape
(Anderson, 2007; Holleran, Beichner, & Spohn, 2010; McGregor, 2005; Rand, 2009;
Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). This could be because women are usually raped by someone
known to them so the perpetrator uses coercion instead of physical force. When a woman
6
is assaulted during a rape, it usually involves a slap or hit (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998,
2006), with 32% of victims being injured during the rape (Buchwald et al., 2005; Tjaden
& Thoennes, 1998; Travis, 2003). The most common injuries in rape were scratches and
bruises (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998, 2006).
Brief History of Rape and Laws
Prior to the 1970s, the concept of rape was not generally viewed as a social or
criminal problem in the United States society (Buck Doude, 2008; Chasteen, 2001) and
rarely was discussed by the public, media, or researchers (Chasteen, 2001). During this
time, rape was seen as a private issue which may be linked to historical beliefs that
women were the property of their fathers or husbands (Catty, 1999; Cuklanz, 1996;
McGregor, 2005). As such, the focus of proving a rape and the effects of rape differed
greatly from present-day rape cases. In the past, in order for a father to marry off his
daughter, or a husband to believe his children were biologically his own, he had to also
believe his daughter or wife was a virtuous woman. A major factor in determining
virtuousness was chastity. Chastity was considered highly important, helped a woman to
be viewed as trustworthy, and gave her a good reputation (Cuklanz, 1996; Hall, 1995;
McGregor, 2005). This virtue played a critical factor in rape trials because it influenced
whether a rapist was believed to be guilty for the rape and whether a victim was believed
to be trustworthy. This meant that not only did women fear being raped, but they also
feared not being believed if they did not uphold societys standard for chastity.
7
From 1671 until 1974, all juries in the United States were sent to deliberations of
rape trials after the reading of the following quote by English Lord Chief Justice Matthew
Hale:
It is true that rape is the most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and
impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an
accusation easily to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by
the party accused, tho never so innocent (Cuklanz, 1996, p. 19; Hall, 1995, p. 47;
Martin, 2005, p. 59; McGregor, 2005, p. 31; Moorti, 2002, p. 50).
While this quote was meant to be a warning to the jury, it also sent the message that
women are often untrustworthy and that the jurors should be highly skeptical of claims
made by purported rape victims. Besides questioning the motives of the rape victims, this
type of warning also influenced how jurors would evaluate the evidence in a rape trial if
the case was even brought to trial.
Until 1977, rape was considered a serious offense punishable by death (Hall,
1995). However, very few men were ever convicted of rape because of how the laws
were established in the United States. Because chastity was considered a high virtue,
women were expected to fight to the death, although not legally required, to prevent the
loss of their chastity and the shame of this loss (Hall, 1995; McGregor, 2005). Thus, rape
laws required that the rape victim fight back with utmost resistance (Cuklanz, 1996;
Hall, 1995; McGregor, 2005), which meant the rape victim was required to physically
fight her attacker, or else it would be considered consensual sex. Because it was assumed
8
that a woman would fight to the death to stop the rape if a woman stopped resisting it was
assumed she had consented to sex (Hall, 1995; Moorti, 2002).
In addition to the utmost resistance requirement, historically a rape victim was
required to prove she had fought back, yelled for help, had a good reputation, and
optimally have witnesses to corroborate her story (Cuklanz, 1996; Hall, 1995). Part of the
reasoning for this position was based on the popular idea by a prominent psychiatrist who
stated that:
Most women entertain more or less consciously at one time or another fleeting
fantasies or fears that they are being or will be attacked by a man. Of course, the
normal woman who has such fantasies does not confuse it with reality but it is
easy for some neurotic individuals to translate their fantasies into actual beliefs
and memory falsifications (Cuklanz, 1996, p. 26; Juviler, 1960, p. 674).
Thus, it was thought that men had to be protected from womens moments of fantasy or
confusion in delineating consensual sex and rape. Because of this distrust of women, a
rape victims history of sexual encounters was allowed to be presented during rape cases
(Brownmiller, 1975; Cuklanz, 1996; Hall, 1995).
The handling of rape cases in the United States began to change in the 1970s
because of changes to social and political structure. This change was influenced by the
feminist movement that sought to empower women and end violence against women
(Escobar & Hill, 2009). During this movement, rape began to be acknowledged as a
major social and health problem that negatively affected women (Buck Doude, 2008;
Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998, 2006). For feminists, rape is seen as a product of male
9
dominance (Buck Doude, 2008; Burt, 1980; Chasteen, 2001; Glick & Fiske, 1996),
gender role stereotypes (Buck Doude, 2008; Burt, 1980; Chasteen, 2001; Glick & Fiske,
1996), power (Brownmiller, 1975; Buck Doude, 2008; Chapleau, Oswald, & Russell,
2007; Chasteen, 2001; Glick & Fiske, 1996; Hockett et al., 2009; Thornhill & Palmer,
2000), and control (Brownmiller, 1975; Buck Doude, 2008; Chapleau et al., 2007;
Chasteen, 2001; Glick & Fiske, 1996; Hockett et al., 2009; Thornhill & Palmer, 2000).
Others have argued that rape is a consequence of men being unable to control their sexual
urges (Martin, 2005). The feminist movement brought rape to the nations attention and
resulted in the establishment of the National Center for the Prevention and Control of
Rape by the National Institute of Mental Health in 1975 (Moorti, 2002). With this
national focus, federal and state laws were changed to help protect rape victims by the
passing of rape shield laws, removing the utmost resistance clause in rape laws, and the
removal of the spousal rape exemption (Bourke, 2007; Cuklanz, 1996; Hall, 1995;
Martin, 2005; McGregor, 2005; Moorti, 2002; Russell & Bolen, 2000). Rape shield laws
have banned the inclusion of sexual history evidence from the rape victims (Cuklanz,
1996). These laws are based on Federal Rule 412, which is designed to protect a
sexual assault victim against defense counsels tactics of presenting degrading and
embarrassing disclosure of intimate details about the victims private life for the
purpose of biasing the court against her (Hall, 1995, p. 27). However, some states
currently require psychiatric evaluations and lie detectors tests of the rape victims. For
instance, a judge in Ohio ordered four teenage rape victims, in separate cases, to take
polygraph tests after their perpetrators were convicted of the rapes (Tarrant, 2010). While
10
women are no longer expected to fight their attacker to the death, they still must prove
the rape was against their will (McGregor, 2005). In addition, despite changes to spousal
rape laws, many states still view spousal rape differently from non-spousal rapes by
dispensing shorter sentences in cases of spousal rape or making the rape charges a
misdemeanor instead of a felony, as is the case with stranger rapes (Hall, 1995; Russell &
Bolen, 2000).
Factors that Influence Rape Judgments
Victim Sexual History
Research has found that many specific characteristics of rape victims influence
rape attributions (Deitz & Byrnes, 1981; Jones & Aronson, 1973; Kanekar & Kolsawalla,
1977; Temkin & Krahe, 2008). One such factor is a victims moral respectability as
viewed by others. In the 1970s and 1980s, this variable was measured by examining a
womans marital status such as whether the rape victim was single, married (Jones &
Aronson, 1973; Kanekar & Kolsawalla, 1977) or divorced (Kanekar & Kolsawalla,
1980). Using vignettes, these studies found that married women were perceived to be
significantly more responsible for their rape than unmarried virgins (Jones & Aronson,
1973), but their rape perpetrators were sentenced to significantly longer sentences than
the rape perpetrators of the unmarried virgins (Jones & Aronson, 1973; Kanekar &
Kolsawalla, 1977). The authors of these studies argued that the longer sentences for the
married women could be because participants believed the husband and children also
suffered when the women were raped (Jones & Aronson, 1973; Kanekar & Kolsawalla,
1977).
11
Studies from the 1990s to the present, have examined victim moral respectability
by having participants judge the womans sexual history, such as the number of previous
relationships that she had prior to the rape incident (Temkin & Krahe, 2008). For
instance, a woman with multiple monogamous relationships back-to-back might be
compared to a woman with only two monogamous relationships. Findings indicate that
women who are viewed as promiscuous because of having numerous monogamous
partners are less likely to be perceived as victims in rape situations (Brown et al., 2007;
Temkin & Krahe, 2008). These women are usually blamed for the rape and the men are
acquitted because these women are judged by their perceived flawed character rather than
the facts of how the rape occurred. For example, in one noted court case, two alleged
prostitutes were raped and robbed after eight men broke into the victims home (Hall,
1995). The victims were able to identify some of the men, and the case went to trial, but
the men were all acquitted. The jurors believed that because the women were suspected
to be prostitutes, they could not be trusted to tell the truth. This view is especially true of
women who were raped by someone with whom they had sex with previously (Simonson
& Subich, 1999; Temkin & Krahe, 2008). In those instances, some people argue that
when a woman has previously given consent to sex, then she is more likely to give
consent again (Krahe et al., 2008; McMahon-Howard, Clay-Warner, & Renzulli, 2009),
so her credibility is questioned about her claim of rape.
This type of bias can also be seen in the case of spousal rape. Previously, spouses
were legally exempted from being charged with the rape of their spouses because it was
believed that a married woman was legally obligated to consent to sexual relations with
12
her husband (Cuklanz, 1996; Hall, 1995). It was not until 1993 that all 50 states removed
spousal rape exemption laws from their legislation (Hall, 1995). Despite this removal,
numerous states still treat spousal rape and stranger rape differently. For instance, some
state laws only allow prosecution of spousal rape when the victim is physically injured
during the act of rape (McMahon-Howard et al., 2009). Other states fail to pursue rape
charges in instances when the spouse is physically or mentally impaired, unconscious, or
asleep because the victim did not have the ability to deny consent to sex. However, in
these same states a rape charge can be brought against a perpetrator of stranger rape if the
victim was unable to consent due to being physically or mentally impaired. The
persistence of leniency in spousal rape may be related to beliefs in rape myths. For
instance, some people believe that rape victims are less psychologically damaged when
raped by an acquaintance than a stranger (Hall, 1995; Simonson & Subich, 1999; Travis,
2003). In one study, participants examined vignettes describing stranger, date, marital, or
acquaintance rape and completed a scale describing their views about the amount of
violence during the rape, responsibility for the rape, desire for intercourse, psychological
damage caused by the rape, and the level of violation of the victims rights (Simonson &
Subich, 1999). The participants rated marital rape as significantly less violent and less of
a violation of a victims rights than stranger rape, despite the only difference in the
vignettes being the relationship status between the victim and perpetrator.
Victim Clothing
Another factor taken into consideration when making judgments about rape, is the
type of clothing worn by the victims (Brown et al., 2007; Klein, Kennedy, & Gorzalka,
13
2009; Shears, 2010). Some people who believe rape myths also believe that that rape
victims who wear more provocative clothing at the time of the rape are more responsible
for their rape because they had asked for it (Brown et al., 2007; Hall, 1995; Martin,
2005; Moorti, 2002; Osman, 2003). For example, the host of a show on CNN argued that
multiple rape victims at Daytona Beach shared some blame because they were wearing
bikinis (Claes, 2010). The manner of dress at the time of the rape is considered important
when making decisions about rape because it is believed that women who dress in a
promiscuous and seductive manner show poor judgment and must take some
responsibility for the rape. Researchers who are interested in examining this phenomenon
have used various photographs to study what constitutes provocative dress or clothing
(Cassidy & Hurrell, 1995; Whatley, 2005; Workman & Freeburg, 1999). In a study by
Workman and Freeburg (1999), the researchers took pictures of a woman with three
different skirt lengths, one that was three inches below the knee, one at the knee, and one
that was three inches above the knee. The rest of the picture was identical. The findings
indicate that men and women believed the rape victim with the shortest skirt was more
responsible for the rape than the two longer skirt victims. Other studies varied the type of
skirt by adding slits, or by adjusting the victims blouse by the number of buttons that
were unbuttoned (Abbey, Cozzarelli, McLaughlin, & Harnish, 1987; Johnson & Lee,
2000; Maurer & Robinson, 2007; Whatley, 2005). Participants believed that women in
rape cases who wore more provocative clothing were more sexual and were seeking a
sexual encounter with the perpetrator (Abbey et al., 1987; Maurer & Robinson, 2007). In
one court case, a perpetrator was found not guilty of committing a rape because the
14
victim was wearing tight jeans at the time of the rape (Denim Day USA, 2012; Shears,
2010). The jury stated that it could not have been rape because it would have been too
hard for the perpetrator to remove the rape victims tight jeans without her assistance and
this constituted consent in the eyes of the jurors. However, the victim stated during the
trial that the perpetrator ripped off her jeans in the rape attack.
Victim Weight
With obesity levels on the rise, bias against these victims is also likely to increase.
In recent years, obesity levels have continued to increase in the United States, with 36%
of its citizens being obese (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2012).
Despite the large number of obese citizens, and continued increase in obesity rates,
discrimination and negative views toward obese individuals continue to be widely
acceptable (Morrison & OConnor, 1999; McClure, Puhl, & Heuer, 2011). For instance,
obese individuals are typically viewed as unattractive (Legenbauer et al., 2009; Smith,
2012), lacking self-control (McClure et al., 2011), and lazy (Crandall, 1994; Gapinski,
Schwartz, & Brownell, 2006; McClure et al., 2011).
The media has also contributed to the biases against obese individuals by
portraying them in negative and stereotypical images when discussing obesity in the
news, and by placing obese actors and actresses in negative and stereotypical roles (Lin
& Reid, 2009; McClure et al., 2011). These biases can have damaging effects on obese
individuals. For instance, one study found that participants would be less likely to hire an
obese applicant, would start the obese applicant at a lower wage if hired, and would be
less likely to promote an obese applicant (OBrien et al., 2008). Even mental health
15
professionals are not immune to these biases. While most mental health professionals
agreed that the thin and obese clients described in a vignette would benefit from therapy,
they assigned the obese client more negative psychological symptoms, like self-injurious
behavior, suspiciousness, and egocentrism (Young & Powell, 1985).
Despite the prejudices held against obese individuals, few studies have examined
the influence of victim weight on rape judgments (Clarke & Stermac, 2011; Ryckman et
al., 1998). The two studies that have examined the effect of victim weight on blame
found conflicting results, with the obese victim being blamed more in one study
(Ryckman et al., 1998) and the thin victim being blamed more in the other study (Clarke
& Stermac, 2011). One explanation for these differences is the description of the victim
and perpetrator characteristics. Ryckman et al. (1998) compared the size of the rape
victim and perpetrator, while only the size of the victim was described in Clarke and
Stermacs study (2011). Another explanation is that participants judged the victims based
on their perceived level of sexual activity (Clarke & Stermac, 2011), since participants
might have viewed thin victims as more attractive and thus more sexually experienced.
Therefore, it might have been believed that the thin victims should have been more
careful or were deliberately seeking a sexual encounter. Because weight has been found
to influence attractiveness (Legenbauer et al., 2009; Smith, 2012) and thus could affect
blame in a rape case; studying the effects of blame attributions in rape cases involving
women of varying weights could help researchers and judicial courts prepare victims for
possible blame and how to counteract those beliefs.

16
Rape Myths
Due to the high prevalence of rape and the long-term consequences (Campbell,
2006; Campbell et al., 1999; George & Martinez, 2002; Hall, 1995; RAINN, 2009;
Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998, 2006), researchers have been studying why rape victims are
continually vilified by the media and public. For instance, recently a Notre Dame student
reported to campus police that she had been sexually assaulted by a Notre Dame football
player (Henneberger, 2010). Despite the victim and her friend reporting the sexual assault
to campus police, the campus police did not begin an investigation into the case or even
question the alleged perpetrator for fifteen days. During this time, a school employee
threatened the victim, via text message, about her continuing to pursue the case. Soon
after, the victim committed suicide.
In fact, few perpetrators are ever prosecuted or convicted of rape (Brown et al.,
2007, RAINN, 2009; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). Research by Tjaden and Thoennes
(2006), found that of all the cases of women who were raped after the age of 18, only
7.8 percent said their rapist was criminally prosecuted, 3.3 percent said their rapist was
convicted of a crime, and a mere 2.2 percent said their rapist was incarcerated (p. 33).
Other studies have found similar rates, with only 6.8% of rapists spending any time in jail
(Brown et al., 2007; RAINN, 2009). While this is a shocking statistic, it should not be so
surprising considering the views that people hold about rape.
When the average person envisions a rape, he or she imagines a woman walking
down a dimly lit street at night when a man suddenly appears and pulls the woman down
an alleyway where he proceeds to rape her (Anderson, 2007; Chasteen, 2001; Ferro,
17
Cermele, & Saltzman, 2008; Varelas & Foley, 1998). However, most women are raped
by a known acquaintance (Buck Doude, 2008; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006; Yeater et al.,
2010) in a private area (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). For example, a college student was
raped in a dormitory by an acquaintance in Sacramento, California (Accused Rapist,
2010). While the perpetrator admitted to the police that the victim had told him no to
his sexual advances, the case was not prosecuted by the Sacramento County District
Attorneys Office. The District Attorney refused to file charges, due to a lack of
evidence, because while the perpetrator agreed his first sexual contact with the victim
was rape, he argued that shortly thereafter, they had consensual sex.
A major reason this perception of rape continues dominate is due the acceptance
of general rape myths in society. Rape myths are beliefs or stereotypes involving rape,
victims, and perpetrators (Buck Doude, 2008; Burt, 1980; Kahlor & Morrison, 2007).
Specifically, these are false beliefs that influence how a person judges a rape; such as
who is to blame for this act (Aosved & Long, 2006; Ferro et al., 2008). Examples or rape
myths are women who go to a mans home after the first date want to have sex, only
bad women are raped, and all women want to be raped (Brownmiller, 1975; Burt,
1980; Hall, 1995; Moorti, 2002).
Studies that have examined rape myths frequently use vignettes to describe a rape
situation and then ask participants to judge the responsibility of the rape victim and
perpetrator. For example, Deitz and Barnes (1981) asked participants to read a vignette
describing an attractive or unattractive janitor or scientist who raped a woman. In this
study, details about the woman remained constant in all vignettes. The participants were
18
then asked to determine who was at fault for the rape and to assign a jail sentence.
Findings indicated that participants issued shorter sentences for the attractive scientist
because they believed the victim caused the rape to occur. They also did not believe that
an attractive person would need to rape someone because their attractiveness would more
likely cause women to seek them out
Rape Empathy
Typically researchers who study rape judgments have focused primarily on
understanding how blame is attributed. However, in recent years researchers have begun
to examine factors that influence empathy for rape perpetrators and victims (Feldman,
Ullman, & Denkel-Schetter, 1998; Jimenez & Abreu, 2003; Osman, 2011). Rape
empathy is defined as the ability to understand the victim and/or perpetrator of a rape by
reflecting on the victims and/or perpetrators experience, emotions, and actions at the
time of the rape (Deitz, Blackwell, Daley, & Bentley, 1982; Osman, 2011; Smith &
Frieze, 2003). One study found that participants who shared similar characteristics with a
rape victim described in a news article, such as both being college students, had higher
empathy toward the victim than those without shared characteristics (Feldman et al.,
1998). Similarly participants with prior sexual victimization history were more
empathetic toward the rape victim than perpetrator (Miller, Amacker, & King, 2011;
Osman, 2011). Interestingly, male participants with prior sexual victimization history
showed no difference in empathy levels toward male or female victims (Osman, 2011). In
regards to perpetrator empathy, males tend to be significantly more empathetic toward

19
rape perpetrators than they are toward rape victim (Osman, 2011; Sinclair & Bourne,
1998).
Most studies analyzing rape empathy have used the Rape Empathy Scale (Deitz et
al., 1982; Deitz, Littman, & Bentley, 1984; Jimenez & Abreu, 2003; ODonohue, Yeater,
& Fanetti, 2003). Studies using this scale have found that female participants have higher
empathy toward rape victims than do male participants (Jimenez & Abreu, 2003; Sinclair
& Bourne, 1998). In addition, participants with low empathy for rape victims view
unattractive rape victims as more responsible for the rape and are more likely to blame
them than they are to blame attractive victims (Deitz, et al., 1984). While the Rape
Empathy Scale has provided some useful data, critics have pointed out that a major
problem with this scale is that it is unilateral and thus requires empathizing with only the
victim or perpetrator (Osman, 2011; Smith & Frieze, 2003). Another problem is that
some of the scale items describe rape myths, such as I feel that it is (not) possible for a
man to rape a woman against her will (Smith & Frieze, 2003, p. 477). Because rape
myths reflect biases held by participants it is possible that these scale items are not
actually measuring empathy and thus could skew the results of the scale. In order to fix
these problems Smith and Frieze (2003) created the Rape-Victim Empathy Scale and the
Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale. These scales allow participants to judge empathy for
the victim and perpetrator independently of one another. Thus, participants can express
empathy with the victim, the perpetrator, or both. Results using this scale have had
similar results to other studies on rape empathy, with men showing greater empathy to
the perpetrator and women showing greater empathy to the victim (Osman, 2011; Smith
20
& Frieze, 2003). However, when Osman (2011) conducted a study having participants
complete the Rape-Victim Empathy Scale and the Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale while
imagining a woman raped by a man, or a man raped by a woman, she found that while
male participants were usually empathetic with the male perpetrator; male participants
were more empathic with the female victim than the male victim. In addition, female
participants were more empathetic of female perpetrators than male perpetrators.
Present Study
With one in six women being victims of rape annually (RAINN, 2009) and 36%
of the population being obese (CDC, 2012), it is surprising that little research has
examined the degree of blame or empathy attributed to obese victims of rape. The present
study seeks to examine the effect a victims weight can have on a judgment of blame and
empathy in a case of acquaintance rape. Furthermore, the influence of victims clothing
and sexual history will also be analyzed because these two factors have been found to
influence participants blame attributions and empathy toward victims of rape (Brown et
al., 2007; Hall, 1995; Klein et al., 2009; Shears, 2010; Temkin & Krahe, 2008). Lastly,
the research will determine whether victim weight, sexual history, and clothing
influences whether the victim is perceived as conforming to general rape myths (Feldman
et al., 1998; Jimenez & Abreu, 2003; Osman, 2011).
In this study, participants read a vignette that described an acquaintance rape. The
victims weight (thin or obese), sexual history (chaste or promiscuous), and the type of
clothing (revealing or covered) worn prior to the rape were manipulated within the
vignettes. After reading the vignettes in each study, participants completed a

21
questionnaire that measured judgments about rape, empathy toward the victim and
perpetrator, and rape myths in regard to the rape depicted in the vignettes.
Hypothesis 1. Previous research has found that rape victims who wear revealing
clothing are likely to be judged negatively (Brown et al., 2007; Hall, 1995; Osman,
2003). Therefore, it is predicted that participants will blame date rape victims more,
experience less empathy toward them, and believe the rape victims conform to general
rape myths if they wear provocative clothing rather than modest clothing.
Hypothesis 2. Previous research has found that judgments of rape perpetrators are
influenced by the clothing worn by rape victims (Brown et al., 2007; Hall, 1995; Osman,
2003). Therefore, it is predicted that participants will blame date rape perpetrators less,
experience more empathy toward them, and be less likely to believe they conform to
general rape myths if the rape victim was wearing provocative clothing rather than
modest clothing.
Hypothesis 3. Previous research has found that judgments of overweight rape
victims are negatively influenced by weight (Clarke & Stermac, 2011; Ryckman et al.,
1998) and that general empathy toward obese individuals has been found to be low
(Gapinski et al., 2006; Lin & Reid, 2009; Teachman et al. 2003). Therefore, it is
predicted that participants will blame obese rape victims more, experience less empathy
toward them, and believe the rape victims conform to general rape myths if they are
obese rather than thin.
influenced by the weight of their victims (Clarke & Stermac, 2011; Ryckman et al.,
22
general rape myths if the rape victim is obese rather than thin.
Hypothesis 5. Previous research has found that rape victims who are promiscuous
are likely to be judged negatively (Aosved & Long, 2006; Miller et al., 2011; Osman,
2011; Temkin & Krahe, 2008). Therefore, it is predicted that participants will blame date
rape victims more, experience less empathy toward them, and believe the rape victims
conform to general rape myths if they are promiscuous rather than virgin.
influenced by their victims sexual history (Clarke & Stermac, 2011; Ryckman et al.,
general rape myths if the rape victim is promiscuous rather than a virgin.
Hypothesis 7. While no previous study has been conducted to compare the weight
of the rape victim to other victim characteristics, it is predicted that the rape victims
clothing, sexual history, and weight interact to influence rape judgments. Thus, it is
expected that participants will blame date rape victims more, experience less empathy
toward them, and believe the rape victims conform to general rape myths if they are
obese, promiscuous and wear provocative clothing rather than thin, virgin and wear
modest clothing.
Hypothesis 8. It is predicted that participants will blame date rape perpetrators
less, experience more empathy toward them, and be less likely to believe they conform to
23
general rape myths if the rape victim is obese, promiscuous and wear provocative
clothing rather than thin, a virgin and wear modest clothing.
Hypothesis 9. Previous research concerning judgments about rape and resistance,
have suggested than verbal resistance would influence judgments about a rape scenario.
Thus, the researcher expected the scenario to be described as depicting an acquaintance
rape.
24
CHAPTER 2
METHOD
Participants
Participants were 214 students from a northern California university. The
participants received class credit for participation in the study, which partially satisfied a
requirement in their psychology undergraduate class. Due to failed manipulation checks
regarding victim clothing, sexual history, and weight, 46 participants were eliminated
from the study. This resulted in a sample of 168 participants (37 men, 130 women, 1
gender unspecified). The participants ranged in age from 17 to 54 years old (M = 21.98,
SD = 5.74). The participants racially/ethnically identified as White (n = 65), Black (n =
11), Asian (n = 35), Hispanic (n = 27), Native American (n = 1), Arab American (n = 4),
other (n = 22), and did not answer (n = 3). Lastly, the participants identified their
religious preference as Protestant/Christian (n = 49), Catholic (n = 49), Hindu (n = 1),
Muslim (n = 2), Atheist/Agnostic (n = 13), Buddhist (n = 2), other (n = 12), did not
answer (n = 2).
Design
The experiment was a 2 (Victim weight: thin versus obese) x 2 (Victim clothing:
revealing versus modest) x 2 (Victim sexual history: virgin versus promiscuous) between
participants design. The dependent variables were victim blame, perpetrator blame,
whether participants perceived the incident to be rape, empathy for the victim, empathy
25
for the perpetrator, and participants acceptance of rape myths in relation to the victim
and perpetrator.
Materials
Vignettes
Eight vignettes were used to depict a fictional acquaintance rape that occurred
after a college party. The vignettes were adapted from a study by Harrison, Howerton,
Secarea, and Nguyen (2008). The vignettes were exactly the same, except that they varied
the victims weight, sexual history, and clothing. The victims weight was manipulated
by describing the victim as thin or obese. The victims clothes were manipulated by
describing her as wearing either revealing or modest clothes the night of the rape. Lastly,
the victims sexual history was manipulated by describing the victim as either a virgin or
as promiscuous.
The vignettes were presented as an interview between a rape victim and an
assistant district attorney. In the vignettes, the victim described attending a graduation
party with a friend when she met a man she liked. Throughout the evening, the victim and
the man danced and talked. When the victim was ready to leave, she discovered that her
friend, who had driven them to the party, had already left. The man offered her a ride
home and she accepted. After arriving home, she invited him inside the apartment and the
two watched television. Eventually she allowed him to kiss her twice. However, when he
continued kissing her, she repeatedly said no and told him to leave. Despite her
protests, he raped her. (see Appendix A)

26
Blame Index
To examine participants perceptions concerning victim blame, perpetrator blame,
and whether the incident was rape, participants completed the Blame Index (see
Appendix B). The Blame Index contained 21 Likert-type questions adapted from
previous research (Anderson & Bissell, 2011; Langhinrichsen-Rohling & Monson, 1998).
Eleven items were used to form the Victim Blame Index. Nine items were used to form
the Perpetrator Blame Index. All items used a 7-point scale ranging from Not at all to
Very Much. Higher scores indicated that more blame was attributed to the victim or
perpetrator. In addition, a single question measured whether participants perceived the
incident to be rape (Bridges, 1991). The question was measured with a 7-point Likert-
scale ranging from Definitely not rape to Definitely rape, with a higher score indicating
acceptance of the description of the sexual assault as a rape. Internal reliability for the
victim blame measure was acceptable (Cronbachs alpha = .87). Internal reliability for
the perpetrator blame was not unacceptable (Cronbachs alpha = .64), therefore three
items were separately used in the analysis.
Empathy Scales
To examine participants empathy toward the rape victim and the perpetrator (see
Appendix C), participants were asked to complete the Rape-Victim Empathy Scale and
the Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale (Smith & Frieze, 2003). Each measure contained 18
Likert-type statements that were measured with a 7-point Likert scale ranging from
Strongly disagree to Strongly agree. A lower score indicated higher empathy. This scale
was used because it allows participants to demonstrate their empathy toward the victim,
27
the perpetrator, and/or both. Previous scales used to measure empathy in rape cases, like
the Rape Empathy Scale (Deitz et al., 1982), only allowed participants to empathize with
the victim or the perpetrator. Internal reliability for the Rape-Victim Empathy Scale part
of the scale was acceptable (Cronbachs alpha = .90). The internal reliability for the
Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale was also acceptable (Cronbachs alpha = .91).
Revised Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale
To examine participants acceptance of rape myths in relation to the rape victim
and perpetrator described in the vignette, participants were asked to complete a revised
version of Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale (Payne, Lonsway, & Fitzgerald, 1999).
See Appendix D. The original measure contains 45 Likert-type statements measured with
a 7-point Likert scale ranging from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. A higher score
on the scale indicated an acceptance of rape myths.
For this study, thirty-four items from the Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale
were modified to make them specifically about the rape victim and perpetrator described
in the vignettes. This was similar to a previous study that modified the Illinois Rape Myth
Acceptance scale to examine rape myths beliefs about the victim described in vignettes
(Harrison et al., 2008). The resulting measure was measured with a 7-point Likert scale
ranging from Not at all agree to Very much agree. The measure was also analyzed using
the seven subscales created by Payne et al. (1999). The seven subscales are She Asked
For It, It Wasnt Really Rape, He Didnt Mean To, She Wanted It, She Lied, Rape is a
Trivial Event, and Rape is a Deviant Event. The data was recoded so that higher scores
would indicate higher acceptance with rape myths. Internal reliability for the full rape
28
myth measure was acceptable (Cronbachs alpha = .96). Internal reliability was
acceptable for the following six subscales: She Asked For It (Cronbachs alpha = .88), It
Wasnt Really Rape (Cronbachs alpha = .82), He Didnt Mean To (Cronbachs alpha =
.75), She Wanted It (Cronbachs alpha = .90), She Lied (Cronbachs alpha = .89), and
Rape is a Deviant Event (Cronbachs alpha = .70). Internal reliability was unacceptable
for the Rape is a Trivial Event subscale (Cronbachs alpha = .67), so this subscale was
not used in the analysis.
Demographic Questionnaire
Participants completed a demographic questionnaire (see Appendix E). No
personal identifying information was collected.
Manipulation Checks
Manipulation checks were included on the demographic questionnaire (see
Appendix E). The manipulation checks were designed to check participants awareness of
victim weight, sexual history, and clothing using forced choice responses. Data were not
used in the analysis if a participants manipulation check did not match his or her
assigned vignette.
Procedure
A female experimenter conducted the research in multiple sessions at a university
laboratory. Each session included one to six participants. All research sessions were
conducted by the same researcher.
When participants arrived for the study, they were greeted by the researcher. After
signing consent forms, participants were told the purpose of the study was to examine
29
perceptions of criminal behavior. Then, participants received one of the eight vignettes.
The manipulations of victim weight, clothes, and sexual promiscuity were contained in
the vignettes. Each participant was instructed to read the vignette and complete a
questionnaire packet containing the Blame Index, the Rape-Victim Empathy Scale, the
Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale, the Revised Illinois Rape Myth Scale, and the
demographic questionnaire. Afterwards the participants were debriefed about the true
purpose of the study and given course credit for their participation.
30
CHAPTER 3
RESULTS
Multiple factorial ANOVAs were conducted to examine the effects of victim
weight, sexual history, and clothing on judgments of rape victims and rape perpetrators.
The independent variables were victim weight (thin versus obese), victim sexual history
(virgin versus promiscuous) and victim clothing (revealing versus modest). The
dependent variables were victim blame, perpetrator blame, whether participants
perceived the incident to be rape, empathy for the victim, empathy for the perpetrator,
and participants acceptance of rape myths in relation to the victim and perpetrator.
Effects of Victim Clothing on Victim Judgment
Hypothesis 1 predicted that participants would blame date rape victims more,
experience less empathy toward them, and be more likely to believe rape victims conform
to general rape myths if they wear provocative clothing rather than modest clothing.
Contrary to predictions, victim clothing did not significantly influence judgments of
victim blame, F (1, 160) = 1.75, p = .19 or participants empathy for the rape victim, F
(1, 159) = .52, p = .47. Likewise, victim clothing did not significantly influence beliefs
that the victim lied about the rape, F (1, 160) = .03, p = .86, that the victim asked for it, F
(1, 159) = .29, p = .59, or that she wanted to be raped, F (1, 160) = .002, p = .97. In
addition, victim clothing did not significantly influence participants beliefs that the rape
was a deviant act, F (1, 160) = 2.62, p = .11, or that it was not really rape, F (1, 160) =
.57, p = .45. See Table 1.

31
Table 1
Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Clothing
____Victim Clothing____
Measure Modest Revealing SD N
Victim is to Blame for the Rape 2.34a 2.59a .95 168
Victim Empathy for the Rape 2.34a 2.47a .95 167
Victim Lied About the Rape 2.12a 2.15a 1.29 167
Victim Asked to be Raped 2.39a 2.54a 1.33 168
Victim Wanted to be Raped 1.82a 1.85a 1.18 168
Victims Rape Was a Deviant Act 1.58a 1.80a .76 168
Victim Was Not Really Raped 1.94a 1.87a 1.08 168
Note: Row means with different subscripts differ significantly at p < .05. Item scores
ranged from 1 to 7. Higher means indicate greater attributions.
Effects of Victim Clothing on Perpetrator Judgment
Hypothesis 2 predicted that participants would blame date rape perpetrators less,
general rape myths if the rape victim was wearing provocative clothing rather than
modest clothing. Because internal reliability was unacceptable (Cronbachs alpha = .64),
the Perpetrator Blame measure was not used in the analysis. Therefore, three items
measuring perpetrator blame, perpetrator responsibility, and the justifiability of the
perpetrators actions were analyzed individually to determine whether victim clothing
influenced perpetrator blame. However, victim clothing did not significantly influence
32
perceived perpetrator responsibility, F (1, 160) = .65, p = .42, perpetrator blame, F (1,
160) = .03, p = .87, or participants belief that the perpetrator was justified in his actions,
F (1, 160) = .81, p = .37. In addition, victim clothing did not significantly influence
perpetrator empathy, F (1, 159) = .42, p = .52, or participants beliefs concerning whether
the perpetrator meant to rape the victim, F (1, 160) = .45, p = .51. See Table 2.
Table 2
Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Clothing
____Victim Clothing____
Measure Modest Revealing SD N
Perpetrator Responsible for the Rape 6.51a 6.53a .89 168
Perpetrator is to Blame for the Rape 5.20a 5.45a 2.35 168
Perpetrators Actions Justified 6.42a 6.25a 1.39 168
Perpetrator Empathy for the Rape 4.90a 4.99a 1.23 168
Perpetrator Did Not Mean to Rape 3.46a 3.32a 1.41 168
Effects of Victim Weight on Victim Judgment
Hypothesis 3 predicted that participants would blame obese rape victims more,
experience less empathy toward them, and believe obese rape victims conform to general
rape myths more than thin rape victims. Contrary to predictions, victim weight did not
significantly influence judgments of victim blame, F (1, 160) = 2.44, p = .12 or victim
empathy, F (1, 159) = .03, p = .87. In addition, victim weight did not significantly
33
influence participants beliefs that the victim asked for it, F (1, 160) = 1.21, p = .27, that
the victim wanted it, F (1, 160) = .32, p = .57, that she lied about the rape, F (1, 160) =
.72, p =.40, or that rape was a deviant act, F (1, 160) = 1.89, p = .17. See Table 3.
The analysis of the measure of participants belief that it was not really raped did
approach statistical significance, F (1, 160) = 2.83, p = .09, d = .25. Participants were
somewhat more likely to believe that the incident was not really rape when the victim
was thin rather obese.
Table 3
Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Weight
___Victim Weight___
Measure Thin Obese SD N
Victim is to Blame for the Rape 2.56a 2.32a 1.08 168
34
Effects of Victim Weight on Perpetrator Judgment
general rape myths if the rape victim is obese rather than thin. Because the internal
reliability of the Perpetrator Blame index was unacceptable (Cronbachs alpha = .64),
this measure was not used in the analysis. However, three items measuring perpetrator
blame, perpetrator responsibility, and the justifiability of the perpetrators actions were
analyzed individually to determine whether victim clothing influenced perpetrator blame.
As expected, victim weight significantly influenced perpetrator responsibility for the
rape, F (1, 160) = 6.97, p = .01, and perpetrator blame for the rape, F (1, 160) = 4.77, p =
.03. Participants believed that the perpetrator was more responsible for raping the obese
victim than the thin victim. Additionally, participants blamed the perpetrator more for the
situation when the victim was obese rather than thin. Also, victim weight did approach
significance to influence the justifiability of the perpetrators actions, F (1, 160) = 2.98, p
= .09. Participants believed that the perpetrator was more justified in raping the obese
victim, than the thin victim. See Table 4.
Contrary to predictions, victim weight did not significantly influence perpetrator
empathy, F (1, 159) = 2.07, p = .15. However, analysis indicated that participants belief
the perpetrator did not mean to rape the victim was significant, F (1, 160) = 8.47, p =
.004, d = .44. Participants were more likely to believe the perpetrator did not mean to
rape the thin victim than the obese victim.

35
Table 4
Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Weight
___Victim Weight___
Measure Thin Obese SD N
Perpetrator Responsible for the Rape 6.39a 6.69b .89 168
Perpetrator is to Blame for the Rape 4.92a 5.87b 2.35 168
Perpetrator Empathy for the Rape 4.83a 5.10a 1.23 167
Perpetrator Did Not Mean to Rape 3.65a 3.04b 1.41 168
Effects of Victim Sexual History on Victim Judgment
experience less empathy toward them, and believe rape victims conform to general rape
myths if they are promiscuous rather than virgins. Contrary to predictions, victim sexual
history did not significantly influence judgments of victim blame, F (1, 160) = 2.57, p =
.11 or victim empathy, F (1, 159) = .002, p = .96. Likewise, victim sexual history did not
significantly influence participants view that it was not really rape, F (1, 160) = 2.19, p =
.14. See Table 5.
The analysis did indicate that participants belief that rape was a deviant act
approached significance, F (1, 160) = 3.35, p = .07, d = .28. Participants were more likely
to believe that rape is a deviant act if the victim was promiscuous rather than a virgin.
36
Also, the analysis indicated that participants belief that the rape victim asked for the rape
approached significance, F (1, 160) = 3.35, p = .07, d = .28. Participants were more likely
to believe that the promiscuous victim asked for it than the virgin victim. Likewise, the
analysis indicated that participants belief the rape victim wanted the rape, F (1, 160) =
3.54, p = .06, d = .26, as did their belief that she lied about the, F (1, 159) = 2.86, p = .09,
d = .23. Participants were more likely to believe she wanted it and that she lied about the
rape if she was promiscuous than a virgin.
Table 5
Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Sexual History
___Victim Sexual History___
Measure Virgin Promiscuous SD N
Victim is to Blame for the Rape 2.34a 2.59a .95 168
37
Effects of Victim Sexual History on Perpetrator Judgment
general rape myths if the rape victim was promiscuous rather than a virgin. Because
internal reliability was unacceptable (Cronbachs alpha = .64), the perpetrator blame
measure was not used in the analysis. However, three items measuring perpetrator blame,
perpetrator responsibility, and the justifiability of the perpetrators actions were analyzed
individually to determine whether victim sexual history influenced perpetrator blame.
Unexpectedly, victim sexual history did not significantly influence perpetrator
responsibility, F (1, 160) = .43, p = .52, perpetrator blame, F (1, 160) = .16, p = .69, or
participants believe that the perpetrator was justified in his actions, F (1, 160) = .80, p =
.37. See Table 6.
As expected, victim sexual history did significantly influence perpetrator
empathy, F (1, 159) = 5.67, p = .02, d = .36, with participants showing higher empathy
toward the perpetrator of the virgin rape victim than the promsicuous rape victim. In
addition, the analysis indicated that participants belief that the perpetrator did not mean
to rape the victim was significant, F (1, 160) = 4.82, p = .03, d = .31. Participants were
more likely to believe that he did not mean to rape the promiscuous victim than the virgin
victim.
38
Table 6
Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Sexual History
___Victim Sexual History___
Measure Virgin Promiscuous SD N
Perpetrator Responsible for the Rape 6.55a 6.48a .89 168
Perpetrator is to Blame for the Rape 5.39a 5.25a 2.35 168
Perpetrator Empathy for the Rape 5.16a 4.71b 1.23 167
Perpetrator Did Not Mean to Rape 3.18a 3.61b 1.41 168
Interaction Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Victim Judgment
experience less empathy toward them, and believe rape victims conform to general rape
myths if they are obese, promiscuous and wear provocative clothing rather than thin,
virgin and wear modest clothing. This hypothesis would be supported by an interaction of
victim weight, clothing, and sexual history.
Unexpectedly victim weight, sexual history, and clothing did not significantly
interact to influence judgments of victim blame, F (1, 160) = 2.15, p = .15 or victim
empathy F (1, 159) = 2.50, p = .12. Likewise, victim weight, sexual history, and clothing
did not significantly interact to influence participants beliefs that it was not really rape, F
(1, 160) = .64, p = .43, that the victim lied about the rape, F (1, 159) = 1.76, p = .19, that
39
the victim asked for the rape, F (1, 160) = .97, p = .33, or that she wanted to be raped, F
(1, 160) = 1.61, p = .21. Also, victim weight, sexual history, and clothing did not
significantly interact to influence participants beliefs that the rape was a deviant act, F
(1, 160) = 1.22, p = .27. However, there were several two-way interactions that neared
significance. These are discussed below.
The analysis revealed a near significant interaction of victim weight and clothing
on the measure of participants belief that the incident was not really rape F (1, 160) =
3.28, p = .07. Follow-up tests indicated participants were more likely to believe the
incident was not rape when the victim wearing revealing clothing was thin (M = 2.11)
rather than obese (M = 1.54), F (1, 81) = 6.02, p = .01, d = .64. However, when the
victim wore modest clothing there was no significant difference on this measure for the
thin victim (M = 2.11) and the obese victim (M =1.54), F (1, 83) = .02, p = .87.
The interaction of victim sexual history and clothing also approached
significance on the measure of whether participants believed the victim wanted the
incident to occur, F (1, 160) = 2.86, p = .09. Follow-up tests indicated participants were
more likely to believe the victim wanted to have sex with the perpetrator when the victim
wearing revealing clothing was promiscuous (M = 2.13) rather than a virgin (M = 1.55),
F (1, 81) = 4.49, p = .03, d = .47. However, when the victim wore modest clothing there
was no significant difference on this measure for the promiscuous victim (M = 1.83) and
the virgin victim (M =1.80), F (1, 83) = .02, p = .87.

40
Interaction Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Perpetrator
Judgment
experience more empathy toward them, and be less likely to believe they conformed to
general rape myths if the rape victim was obese, promiscuous and wore provocative
clothing rather than thin, virgin and wore modest clothing.
Unexpectedly victim weight, sexual history, and clothing did not significantly
interact to influence participants empathy for the perpetrator, F (1, 159) = .48, p = .49 or
participants belief that the perpetrator did not mean to rape the victim, F (1, 160) = .000,
p = .98. Likewise, victim weight, sexual history, and clothing did not significantly
interact to influence participants belief that the perpetrator was responsible for the rape,
F (1, 160) = .01, p = .91, that the perpetrator was to blame for the rape, F (1, 160) = .35, p
= .56, or that the perpetrator was justified in his actions, F (1, 160) = 06, p = .81.
There was a significant two-way interaction of victim sexual history and clothing
on the measure of whether participants believed the perpetrator was justified in his
actions, F (1, 160) = 3.76, p = .05, Follow-up tests indicated participants were more
likely to believe the perpetrator was justified in his actions when the promiscuous victim
wore revealing clothing rather than modest clothing, F (1, 81) = 4.13, p = .04, d = .44.
However, this effect was not significant when the victim was a virgin, F (1, 83) = .76, p =
.38. See Figure 1.

41
6.7
6.6
6.5
6.4
Perceived Justification
6.3
6.2
Modest
6.1
Revealing
6
5.9
5.8
5.7
5.6
Virgin Promiscuous
Figure 1. Significant interaction effect of victim sexual history and clothing for
the perpetrator being justified in raping the victim.
Vignette Describing Rape
Hypothesis 9 predicted that participants would judge the interview as depicting an
acquaintance rape. As expected, participants did believe the interview described an
acquaintance rape, t (25.24) = .2.51, p < .0001, d = 3.91, (M = 6.01, SD = 1.29).

42
CHAPTER 4
DISCUSSION
Victims of rape are often vilified by family, friends, media, medical professionals
and the judicial system (Campbell et al., 1999; Hockett et al., 2009). They are blamed for
actions they took before, during, and after the rape. Everything they do is up for
scrutinizing, from what they wear to what they drink. Nothing is off limits. With so much
research focusing on victim blame and the causes of it, little research has looked at the
effects victim weight has on victim blame or empathy. This study sought to investigate
the repercussions ones weight can have on being believed or judged after a rape. In
addition, victim dress and sexual history were also examined, because these
characteristics have been shown in previous studies to influence blame and empathy
toward the victim, but little is known as to whether these variables interaction with victim
rape to influence rape attributions (Brown et al., 2007; Feldman et al., 1998; Jimenez &
Abreu, 2003; Klein, Kennedy, & Gorzalka, 2009; Osman, 2011; Shears, 2010; Temkin &
Krahe, 2008). Additionally, the perpetrator was also studied because most studies only
focus on judgments toward the victim, but perpetrator blame and empathy are likely to be
influenced by victim characteristics as well, so analysis of the perpetrator was included.
Effects of Victim Clothing on Victim Judgment
Contrary to predictions, victim clothing did not significantly influence blame,
empathy, or rape myth acceptance toward the victim. Prior studies on clothing have
found participants to have high rape myth acceptance when a rape victim is wearing
43
provocative clothing (Brown et al., 2007; Klein et al., 2009; Shears, 2010) and to blame
the rape victim wearing provocative clothing (Workman & Freeburg, 1999). Because the
victim described in the research vignette was described as wearing a halter top and mini
skirt, it was expected that participants would judge this victim more severely due to her
provocative attire.
One explanation for the non-significant findings is that participants did not judge
the victims clothing choice, when evaluating the rape interview. This could be because
participants are of a similar age to the rape victim, and have worn similar clothes to
parties, so perhaps they did not perceive the described outfit as particularly provocative
for a party setting. However, if this played a part in their judgments of the rape victim,
would have been likely that participants would have had higher empathy for a victim in
this situation, since they could see themselves in this situation, so this does not fully
explain the results.
Another explanation for these results is that wearing provocative clothing is
becoming mainstream and acceptable attire, so participants were not influenced by it.
Over the last few decades, clothing attire has become more provocative and the media
now routinely portrays women in provocative or sexualized clothing (Collins, 2011).
Even childrens attire could be described as provocative (Lamb & Brown, 2006; Levine
& Kilbourne, 2008). For instance, similar Halloween costumes are marketed to toddlers,
teenagers, and adults, with the only difference being the size and color (Buckley, 2012;
Siddiquee, 2012). As exposure to provocative clothing becomes acceptable, peoples
negative judgment against women who wear such clothing could be decreasing.
44
Effects of Victim Clothing on Perpetrator Judgment
Contrary to predictions, victim clothing did not significantly influence blame,
empathy, or rape myth acceptance toward the perpetrator. Prior studies on clothing have
found participants believe that a rape victim wearing provocative clothing wanted to have
sex with the perpetrator (Abbey et al., 1987; Maurer & Robinson, 2007). In addition,
prior studies have found male participants to show more empathy toward the perpetrator
than the victim (Osman, 2011; Sinclair & Bourne, 1998).
An explanation for this studys non-significant findings may be that as media
portrayals of women have become sexualized (Lamb & Brown, 2006), people have
become more accustomed to women wearing provocative clothing and thus do not judge
them as negatively as they have in the past. Plus, because the media believes that sex
sells, and has used this motto to sell items, it would also make sense for participants to
not judge perpetrators of rape victims wearing provocative clothing, since men are often
perceived as having limited control over their sexual urges (Martin, 2005) and to be
physically aroused by visually stimulating women wearing provocative clothing (Brown
et al., 2007; Hall, 1995; Martin, 2005; Moorti, 2002; Osman, 2003).
Effects of Victim Weight on Victim Judgment
Contrary to predictions, participants were not influenced by the victims weight in
relation to victim blame, empathy, or rape myth acceptance. While the obese victim was
expected to be blamed for the rape, generate little empathy from participants, and
increase participants acceptance of rape myths the data did not support these
expectations. One possible explanation is that participants did not factor the victims
45
weight into their analysis of the rape interview. However, because research has shown
that people view obese individuals as lazy (Crandall, 1994; Gapinski, Schwartz, &
Brownell, 2006; McClure et al., 2011) and lacking self-control (McClure et al., 2011), it
is surprising that the victims weight did not seem to affect participants view of the
victim. Another possible explanation is that the participants became distracted by other
factors in the rape interview, like the victim clothing and sexual history, and thus were
more focused on these victim characteristics instead of the victims weight. This may
have occurred given that the interview with the rape victim only included two short
sentences mentioning the victims weight, but there was a whole paragraph discussing the
victims clothing, and multiple sentences discussing the victims sexual history.
Consistent with Clarke and Stermacs study (2011) victim weight influenced
participants beliefs that the thin rape victim was not really raped. A possible explanation
for this result is that participants believed a person would not be interested in having a
sexual encounter with someone who is obese, because in this society, obese individuals
are not seen as attractive (Clarke and Stermac, 2011). However, because being perceived
as attractive participants may have believed that more men would be interested in having
a sexual encounter with the thin victim.
Effects of Victim Weight on Perpetrator Judgment
Unexpectedly, participants were not influenced by victim weight in relation to
perpetrator empathy. No other study has examined the effects of victims weight and
empathy toward a rape victim or perpetrator. However, previous studies on participants
empathy toward obese individuals has found that increasing empathy levels toward obese
46
individuals is hard to accomplish (Gapinski et al., 2006; Teachman et al., 2003), and
researchers have only been able to increase empathy levels in obese participants
(Teachman et al., 2003). One possible explanation for this result is that participants had
low empathy toward the perpetrators in both scenarios because they could not put
themselves in the place of a rapist.
Contrary to predictions, participants did believe the perpetrator was responsible
for raping the obese victim and blamed more for raping the obese victim than the thin
victim. It is possible that because obese individuals are seen as unattractive and
undeserving of sexual interest, participants would believe the victim would be willing to
accept most interest and sexual offers. This hypothesis is partly supported by the
participants belief that the perpetrator was justified in raping the obese victim. Because
obese individuals are not seen as attractive as thin victims and thus not as sexual,
participants may have believed the obese victim was more interested in a sexual
encounter than the thin victim, so they may have viewed her rape as more justified.
Finally, the participants believed the perpetrator did not mean to rape the thin
victim. Because a thin victim is likely to be seen as more attractive than the obese victim,
it is possible that participants believed the perpetrator could not control his attraction to
the thin victim and raped her. This could explain why the perpetrator was seen as
responsible and to blame for raping the obese victim. Since an obese victim would not be
seen as attractive, the perpetrator must have had other motives for raping the victim and
must have been seen as having control over himself.

47
Effects of Victim Sexual History on Victim Judgment
As hypothesized, victim sexual history did influence participants rape myth
acceptance. Participants who read the interview about the promiscuous rape victim
reported higher rape myth acceptance in regard to the specific incidence described in the
vignette. In relation to the rape myth acceptance subscales, participants perceived the
promiscuous victim wanted the rape, asked for the rape, and lied about the rape more
than the virgin rape victim. It is often believed that once a person consents to sex, they
will always consent to sex (Krahe et al., 2008; McMahon-Howard et al., 2009), so if the
promiscuous victim stated that she did not consent to sex, participants are likely to
perceive her as lying..
Contrary to the hypothesis, participants belief about victim blame or empathy was
not influenced by the victims sexual history This was surprising, because women are
not expected to be interested in sex (Buchwald et al., 2005; Buck Doude, 2008), and are
usually scrutinized and judged when showing interest to sex. A possible explanation for
this result is that as values have evolved, people have become more accepting of women
breaking out of gender norms. This may be especially relevant since most participants
were between the age of 18 and 24 and thus from a younger demographic. Researchers
(Brooks & Bolzendahl, 2004; Ciabattari, 2001) have found that younger individuals tend
to be more accepting, tolerant, and less influenced by gender norms.
Effects of Victim Sexual History on Perpetrator Judgment
As hypothesized, participants believed the perpetrator did not mean to rape the
promiscuous victim. Since a promiscuous victim is expected to submit to sex, any time
48
after the first sexual experience (Krahe et al., 2008; McMahon-Howard et al., 2009), most
participants probably believed she was interested in sex or acted in a manner that led the
perpetrator to believe she was interested in sex .
Unexpectedly, participants showed the perpetrator more empathy when he raped
the virgin victim, than the promiscuous rape victim. A possible explanation for this is that
participants view sex with a virgin as highly valued and could empathize with the
perpetrator wanting to have sex with a virgin.
However, participants were not influenced by the victims sexual history, in
relation to the perpetrators blame, perpetrators responsibility, or how justified he was in
raping the victim. A possible explanation for this result is that participants were not
influenced by the victims sexual history, because sexual history is not seen as a defining
characteristic of people anymore. In addition, participants may have had similar
experiences as the perpetrator, and thus did not judge the perpetrator for his actions.
Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Victim Judgment
While weight and clothing was found to interact for victims wearing provocative
clothing, it did not significantly interact for the victims wearing modest clothing. In fact,
the results showed that the participants were more likely to believe the obese victim
wearing revealing clothing was raped, than the thin victim wearing revealing clothing.
One explanation for this is that attractiveness and rape myths acceptance interacted to
influence the results. Rape myths suggest that victims wearing provocative clothing
deserve to be raped or caused the rape to happen, since only women wanting to have sex
would dress provocatively (Brownmiller, 1975; Burt, 1980; Hall, 1995; Moorti, 2002;
49
Payne, et al., 1999). Because rape is usually viewed, as caused by a need for sex and not
control (Martin, 2005), participants evaluated the rape interview using this rape myth.
Thus, participants blamed the thin victim wearing revealing clothing more, because she
fit the stereotype, or rape myth, more than the obese victim wearing revealing clothing.
In order to process why a perpetrator would be interested in raping a victim, the
participants decided that the perpetrator who raped the thin rape victim wearing revealing
clothing was not in control of himself and thus it was not really rape, because women
wearing revealing clothing want to have sex. However, the participants believed it was
rape in the interview of the obese victim wearing revealing clothing, because even though
they thought women wearing revealing clothing would be interested in having sex, they
could not see how a perpetrator would be interested in having sex with an obese victim.
In order to continue to believe their rape myths, they label the rape of an obese victim
wearing revealing clothing as really a rape, because they believe the perpetrator must
have had some other motive for raping the obese victim wearing revealing clothing, than
sex. However, by labeling the thin victim wearing revealing clothing as not a rape, they
can keep their views if the world as a just place, since the thin victim should have been
more careful and brought the rape onto herself.
This view can also be used to explain why participants believed the promiscuous
victim wearing revealing clothing wanted to be raped, and the virgin victim wearing
revealing clothing did not want to be raped. Since participants tend to believe the rape
myth acceptance that women wearing revealing clothing are interested in sex
(Brownmiller, 1975; Burt, 1980; Hall, 1995; Moorti, 2002; Payne, et al., 1999), they
50
judge these victims negatively. However, since the participants belief that a virgin victim
dressed provocatively would break gender norms (Abrams et al., 2003; Krahe et al.,
2008; Chapleau et al., 2007; Temkin & Krahe, 2008) and rape myths, they probably
believed, the victim was nave, and gave her the benefit of the doubt. This resulted in
them believing the promiscuous rape victim wearing revealing clothing want to be raped,
and the virgin victim wearing revealing clothing did not want to be raped.
Finally participants had high empathy toward the promiscuous victim wearing
revealing clothing and the virgin victim wearing modest clothing but low empathy toward
the virgin victim wearing revealing clothing and the promiscuous victim wearing modest
clothing. This is consistent with the results for the victim asked for it and it was not really
rape. As with those results, rape myth acceptance could explain the results. Participants
had high empathy toward the two victims that matched the rape myth views, but low
empathy toward the two victims that did not match the participants rape myth views.
Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Perpetrator Judgment
Participants believed the perpetrator was justified in raping the virgin victim
wearing revealing clothing, and the promiscuous victim wearing modest clothing, but not
the promiscuous victim wearing revealing clothing, or the virgin victim wearing modest
clothing. One possible explanation for these results is that the participants believed the
virgin victim was responsible for her rape, since she was wearing revealing clothing.
Thus the perpetrator was justified in raping the victim, since she broke gender norms
(Abrams et al., 2003; Krahe et al., 2008; Chapleau et al., 2007; Temkin & Krahe, 2008).
51
Another possible explanation is that participants were evaluating the rape
interview using rape myths they accept, but found the rape interview to contradict these
rape myths, when the interview described the virgin victim wearing revealing clothing
and the promiscuous victim wearing modest clothing. Since rape myths hold that virgin
victims wear modest clothes and promiscuous victims wear revealing clothing
(Brownmiller, 1975; Burt, 1980; Hall, 1995; Moorti, 2002; Payne, et al., 1999),
participants had to search for a way to either accept that their rape myths as false, or to
modify make their values and beliefs. This resulted in the participants believing the
perpetrator was justified in raping these victims, because they broke their expected roles,
and thus brought the rape onto themselves.
Vignette Describing Rape
As hypothesized, participants did believe the rape interview described a rape.
Even though most participants believed the interview described a rape, it is interesting to
note that participants believed the victim was raped, but that the perpetrator was justified
in raping the victim, or that the victim was to blame depending on the weight and/or
sexual history of the victim. Considering victims of other crimes are typically not blamed
or seen as deserving of their victimization, it is interesting that rape victims continue to
be seen as deserving the rape. One possible explanation, based on the just world
hypothesis, is that the participants want to believe that the world is a just place and that
only bad things happen to bad people, so they believe that the victim must have been a
bad person, and thus deserved to be raped (Abrams et al., 2003; Franiuk et al., 2008;
Lerner, 1980) Another explanation is that people view rape as a sexual act, and not one
52
about control (Archer & Vaughan, 2001; Bourke, 2007). Seeing that rape is seen as
sexual and women are viewed as sexual objects and men are incapable of controlling
themselves, then it is only natural for rape to occur, and the only way to prevent it is to
control women. But, when we allow victim blaming and rape myth acceptance to
continue, we give all the power to the perpetrators. We deny women control over their
bodies and deny men control over their actions. We not only put down women by
declaring them to be sexual objects, but men by viewing them as being incapable of
controlling their urges. In the end, the only person held accountable is the victim.
Limitations
Because this study used a convenience sample of college students, the results of
the study cannot be generalized to the general public. However, considering college
students have a one in four rate of victimization (Fischer, Cullen, & Turner, 2000; Hirsch,
1990), while the general population has a one in six rate of victimization (RAINN, 2009;
Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998), college students are an appropriate population to study.
Another limitation of this study is the number of participants that were eliminated
due to getting their manipulation check wrong. Of the 46 participants eliminated from the
study, 31 were because they marked the participant as average weight when she was
actually obese. One possible explanation for this is that participants did not remember the
weight of the victim and thus guessed wrong. However, most participants made the same
mistake, so it is unlikely that participants guessed wrong. Another more plausible
explanation is that since obesity levels are on the rise and 36% of the United States
population is obese (CDC, 2012), the participants viewed the obese victim as average
53
weight since a large percentage is now obese. The obesity levels and participants
interaction with people who are obese could result in them viewing obesity as average
weight.
The last limitation of the study is the small sample size of male participants,
which prevented an analysis of whether participant gender influenced the findings.
Numerous studies examining rape have found male participants often blame rape victims
more than female participants do (Abrams et al., 2003; Krahe et al., 2008; Chapleau et
al., 2007; Temkin & Krahe, 2008). One reason for the low number of male participants is
the population the participants were derived. At this university, the majority of students
that are taking psychology classes are female, so the pool of male students is small.
Future research should work on having equal numbers of male and female participants.
Future Research
While this study has made a good start at examining the effect of victim weight
on blame and empathy, more research needs to continue to this exploration. One step to
accomplish this would be to conduct a study using pictures of the rape victim. In this
study, the researcher would use a picture of a thin victim and an obese victim in addition
to including a description of the victim in the interview. If possible, the research should
also adjust the clothes to depict a victim wearing modest clothing or revealing clothing.
One way to accomplish this feat, without using more than one model for the victim,
would be to use Photoshop or similar software to edit the weight and clothes of the
victim. This will reduce the possibility of other victim characteristics influencing the
participants.
54
Another study should compare the weight of the victim and the victims
relationship to the perpetrator. For example, the study could compare a stranger rape to
and acquaintance rape; because participants from previous studies have judged victims of
stranger and acquaintance rape differently (Krahe et al., 2008). Researchers should
examine if victim weight affects blame and empathy toward the rape victim in these two
scenarios.
Additionally, researchers analyzing victim weight should also ask participants, as
part of their demographic questionnaire, their height and weight. Considering this can be
a sensitive subject, researchers should stress the anonymity of the study. The researcher
should then examine if the participants weight influences his or her judgment of the
victim. Teachman et al. (2003) found empathy toward obese individuals only increased in
obese participants, so researchers should examine if victim empathy and blame is
influenced by victims weight.
Finally, most research focuses on victim characteristics when assigning blame or
empathy. While this study, showed that blame and empathy can be influenced by weight
and sexual history, in relation to the victim and perpetrator, more research should focus
on characteristics of the perpetrator that effect blame and empathy. Too many victims are
blamed for their rape because of actions they took before and during their rape, but
perpetrators are seldom blamed for their actions. However, since most studies do not
analyze the perpetrator characteristics, it is not possible to know which characteristics
influence participants views on blame and empathy toward the perpetrator. This
55
information could help researchers and sexual assault organizations devise strategies for
reducing victim blame and increasing perpetrator blame.
Conclusions and Implications
While research on rape has continued to evolve to keep up with the societys
changing views on what constitutes respectability, and while obesity rates continue to
rise, it was expected that weight would influence participants blame and empathy toward
the victim and perpetrator. As expected, weight and sexual history did influence
participants beliefs toward blame, empathy, and rape myth acceptance.
It is interesting to note that the victim was blamed for the rape, despite
participants believing the victim was raped. However, this should not be surprising given
participants had applied traditional rape myths to the victim. Thus they endorsed the
notion that rape is justified in certain situations, that the victim brought the rape onto
herself, and the perpetrator was justified in raping her. It should not be surprising that
people continue to judge victims of rape differently from victims of other crimes, when
the media and legislators continue to promote rape myth acceptance and even blame
victims of rape themselves. For example, when legislators argue that there is such a
thing as legitimate rape or that real rape victims cannot become pregnant because
the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down (Moore, 2012). This
teaches people that not all women deserve protection, and that assaulting certain women
is acceptable and legal. In addition, people learn that victims of rape should be
scrutinized and judged to determine if they are trustworthy and real rape victims. As
56
long as beliefs like this are perpetuated; victims of rape will continue to be blamed and
demonized for being raped, and few victims will come forward.
The researcher hopes this study will increase awareness of the biases people hold
about rape victims. Too many victims are afraid to come forward for fear of being
blamed or judged. While others believe it is their fault, that they deserved the rape, or
caused it to happen. By acknowledging rape myths and the factors that result in victim
blame we can begin to recognize our biases and work to correct them. Each time a person
reads or hears a rape case, they should evaluate their reactions to the story. What are your
immediate reactions? Did you think, why was the victim there? Did you judge her
action, clothes, etc.? Did you judge the perpetrators actions? Acknowledging these biases
and working to change them can improve the way victims are treated. Finally, if a rape
victim tells you they were raped, one important thing you can do is to say I believe
you.
In additions, the researcher hopes this research will be used as an aid to help
therapists working with victims of rape, by helping the therapists understand their own
biases and the biases of other people the victim may be interacting with. With this
knowledge, therapists can help rape victims cope and prepare to deal with people who
blame or judge them. Therapists can also help victims not blame themselves.
Finally, it is hoped that this research can be utilized by rape victim advocates.
This research can prepare them for what victims of rape may be experiencing and feeling,
and for reactions rape victims may receive from medical staff and police.
57
Appendix A
Participant Characteristics
Measure
1. Did anyone other than the researcher tell you anything about this study before you
participated in it? _________
If yes, what had you been told?
2. What is the purpose of this study?
3. What is your gender? _____________________________
4. What is you ethnicity/race? ________________________
5. What is your age? _______________________________
6. What is your major? _____________________________
7. What is your religious preference? __________________
8. What is your familys socioeconomic status?
Lower class Working class Middle class Upper class
9. How would you describe your political beliefs?
Very Liberal Liberal Moderate Conservative Very
Conservative
10. Please describe the alleged rape victims weight.
Dont Know Thin Obese
11. Please describe the alleged rape victims sexual history.
Dont Know Virgin Multiple Partners

58
12. How would you describe the type of clothing the alleged rape victim was wearing
the night of the alleged rape?
Dont Know Revealing Modest

59
Appendix B
Vignettes
Thin, Virgin, Provocatively Dressed
On May 29, 2011, an Assistant District Attorney interviewed an alleged rape

victim, Cindy Hall. The district attorney interviewed Cindy in order to prepare the
criminal case against the alleged rapist. Below is a transcript of the interview
between the Assistant District Attorney and Cindy Hall.
Interview with Cindy Hall
Assistant District Attorney: Ms. Hall we are currently investigating your case
and are gathering evidence to determine if we will be able to prosecute the man
who raped you. I need to ask you some questions and you have to be completely
open and honest with me. Some of the questions will be very personal, but I have
to learn as much I possibly can about you, and about what happened to you if we
are going to successfully prosecute the man who hurt you. Do you understand? I
need you to tell me everything, even if it makes you uncomfortable.
Cindy Hall: Ok, Ill try.
Assistant District Attorney: Ok, Cindy, to begin with I want to read an excerpt
from the police officer who took the report on the night of your rape. The
complainant is a twenty year old Caucasian woman. She is five feet four inches
tall and weighs 115 pounds. She has long blonde hair and blue eyes. She is
dressed in a skimpy blue halter top and a very short mini skirt. Does this
accurately describe you on that night?
Cindy Hall: Yes, that sounds right, although, I actually weigh 110 pounds.
Assistant District Attorney: The report also indicated you were wearing skimpy
clothes the night of the party. Is that correct?
Cindy Hall: Well, I mean, it was a party and I wanted to look good. I was
wearing a mini skirt and a halter top. My skirt was short, and my shirt, well, it
was short too and my breasts did show some. I mean, you could see my belly
button and cleavage.
Assistant District Attorney: Thank you for confirming. Ok, Cindy, now I need
to ask you a few questions about your personal life. I need to ask you about your
sexual history in case it comes up in court.
60
Cindy Hall: But, I thought they couldnt ask about that in court.
Assistant District Attorney: Technically they cant. However, sometimes the

defendants lawyer gets around that. So, we need to prepare. I need to ask you
some personal questions, ok?
Cindy Hall: Ok.
Assistant District Attorney: Lets start with your recent sexual history. How
many men have you been with recently?
Cindy Hall: Well, its been kind of a quiet year for me. I havent had a steady
boyfriend for awhile so Ive been hanging out a lot with my friend Sarah and
some of my other friends.
Assistant District Attorney: Ok, Cindy I want you to be honest with me. How
many men have you had sexual relations within the past year?
Cindy Hall: I dont see why this is relevant. It has absolutely nothing to do with
Michael raping me. He had no right! I told him NO!
Assistant District Attorney: Cindy, I have to ask you questions so that I can
properly prepare you case. Im not here to judge you. I just need to make sure that
I have all of my bases covered. I want to make sure that when we go to court there
are no surprises. Now, tell me, how many men have you had sexual relations with
during the past year.
Cindy Hall: Im a virgin, OK! Ive never had sex. Im waiting until I get married.
Assistant District Attorney: Cindy, I appreciate your honesty. This is really

helpful. Now, I need you to tell me what happened to you that night.
Cindy Hall: Well, I went to this party on Saturday night about 9:00. My friend
Tom had just graduated and he was celebrating.
Assistant District Attorney: Are you very close friends with Tom?
Cindy Hall: No, not really. We just had that one class together. We never dated
or anything, but I liked him. We used to have lunch sometimes after class. Tom is
nice. Hes a good guy, so when he asked me to his graduation party, I wanted to
go.
Assistant District Attorney: Where was the party held?

61
Cindy Hall: It was at Toms apartment, a few miles from school.
Assistant District Attorney: Have you ever been to Toms apartment before?
Cindy Hall: No, like I said, I had just met him last semester, and we never dated
or anything. We just had lunch sometimes.
Assistant District Attorney: Did you go to the party alone?
Cindy Hall: No, I didnt want to go alone so I asked my friend Sarah to go with
me. She didnt know Tom or anything, but she is really outgoing and she likes
parties and meeting new people.
Assistant District Attorney: When you got to the party did you know anyone
there besides Tom?
Cindy Hall: No, there were a bunch of people there, but I only knew Tom.
Assistant District Attorney: How many people were there?
Cindy Hall: I guess there were about 20 people there, but I cant be sure, because
some people were inside and some people were hanging outside near the pool.
Assistant District Attorney: Were people drinking at the party?
Cindy Hall: Well, Tom had a beer keg.
Assistant District Attorney: Were you drinking?
Cindy Hall: No, I wasnt drinking at all.
Assistant District Attorney: Why not?
Cindy Hall: Well, Sarah drove, but Ive gone to parties with Sarah before, and
sometimes she drinks too much and I was afraid I would have to drive home.
Assistant District Attorney: Were there drugs at the party?
Cindy Hall: I didnt see anyone using drugs and I never use them.
Assistant District Attorney: So what happened during the party?

62
Cindy Hall: Well, people were hanging out, dancing, laughing. It was a good
party.
Assistant District Attorney: Who did you spend most of your time with?
Cindy Hall: Well, I was hanging Sarah and Tom for awhile, but it became
apparent that they were really into each other. So, I gave them some space.
Assistant District Attorney: What happened next?
Cindy Hall: Well, I was mingling and thats when I met Michael. He asked me if
I wanted to dance. We must have danced for at least a half of hour. Then we went
to get a soda. I always get me own beverages at parties, you know in case
someone tries to slip me something.
Assistant District Attorney: Was Michael drinking?
Cindy Hall: I dont think so. I mean, I didnt see him drinking.
Assistant District Attorney: Ok, go on.
Cindy Hall: Well, it was getting late, it was almost 1:00 in the morning and I was
ready to go home. So, I went to look for Sarah, and she was gone! I couldnt
believe it! Tom told me they had an argument and she just left. I couldnt believe
that she would leave me like that.
Assistant District Attorney: What did you do next?
Cindy Hall: Well, I was stranded and I didnt have any money. So, I started
looking for a ride home. But it seemed like everyone was drunk. I was furious at
Sarah. I tried to call my roommate, but she wasnt home. Tom offered to let me
stay the night at his place. A bunch of people were going to stay there because
they were drunk. But, I didnt want to stay. So, when Michael offered to give me
a ride home I accepted.
Assistant District Attorney: What happened when you got to the apartment?
Cindy Hall: Well, Michael walked me to the door and he asked if he could come
in for awhile to talk. I had spent most of the evening with him and I thought he
was a good guy. He was so sweet and cute. I wanted him to like me, so I let him
in.

63
Cindy Hall: Well, we sat down on the couch and watched TV for a little while
and then he kissed me on the mouth. It was nice, so I let him kiss me a second
time. But, after the second kiss it became clear that he wanted to go further, and
that he wanted to have sex. Please, I dont want to talk about the details.
Assistant District Attorney: You dont have to right now. But, did you let him
know that you didnt want to have sex with him?
Cindy Hall: Yes, I told him no several times. I screamed it at him, but he just
wouldnt listen. He kept telling me to relax, that I wanted it and I was a tease. But,
he just didnt care what I wanted. He raped me.
Assistant District Attorney: Ok, Cindy after Michael left what happened next?
Cindy Hall: Well, when he left I just sat there. ] I couldnt believe what had
happened to me. I was so angry and ashamed. I knew I needed to call the police,
but I just didnt have the energy to do anything. Then my roommate came home a
little while later. She saw that I was upset and she asked me what happened. I told
her everything. Then, she called the police for me, and stayed with my while they
interviewed me. Then she went to hospital with me for the rape exam. She was so
great. I dont think I would have been able to get through this without her help.
Assistant District Attorney: Cindy I know this is hard for you and, and I
appreciate your being open with me. Well talk again later, ok?
Cindy Hall: Ok.

64
Thin, Virgin, Modestly Dressed


Assistant District Attorney: Ok, Cindy, before we continue, I want to read an

excerpt from the police officer who took the report on the night of your rape. The
dressed in a blue long-sleeve turtleneck shirt and tan baggy pants. Does this
Assistant District Attorney: The report also indicated that you were not wearing
skimpy clothes the night of the party. Is that correct?
Cindy Hall: Well, I mean, it was a party and I wanted to look good but my jeans
werent tight or anything. Also, my shirt covered me pretty well, I mean, my
stomach and breasts were covered you know.

65
Cindy Hall: Ok.

go.
66
there besides Tom?
party.
67
in.
68
Cindy Hall: Well, when he left I just sat there. I couldnt believe what had
Cindy Hall: Ok.

69
Thin, Promiscuous, Modestly Dressed


skimpy clothed the night of the party. Is that correct?
70

Cindy Hall: Ok.
Cindy Hall: Well, its been kind of a wild year for me. I havent had a steady
some of my other friends. Sometimes we would go out to parties and hook up
with someone for the evening, usually guys from school.
Assistant District Attorney: What do you mean by hook up?
Cindy Hall: You know, hang out and maybe mess around.
Assistant District Attorney: You mean you would have sexual intercourse with
these men?
Cindy Hall: Yes, we would have sex.
properly prepare you case. Im not here to judge you. I just need to make sure
that I have all of my bases covered. I want to make sure that when we go to court
there are no surprises. Now, tell me, how many men have you had sexual relations
with during the past year.
Cindy Hall: 15, OK! I had sex with 15 men this year.
Assistant District Attorney: Did you date any of these men or see them more
than once?
Cindy Hall: No, we never really dated. It was a casual thing. We would hook up
at a party at someones house, spend the evening dancing and hanging out.
71
Assistant District Attorney: Did you take them back to your apartment or go to
their homes?
Cindy Hall: No, never! We would just hang out at the parties and find some
privacy. I was afraid to go to their homes or to bring them to my place.

go.
there besides Tom?
72
party.
73
in.
74
Cindy Hall: Ok.

75
Thin, Promiscuous, Provocatively Dressed


dressed in a skimpy blue halter top and very short mini skirt. Does this
Assistant District Attorney: The report also indicated that you were wearing
Cindy Hall: Well, I means, it was a party and I wanted to look good. I was
wearing a mini shirt and a halter top. My skirt was short, and my shirt, well, it
76

Cindy Hall: Ok.
these men?
than once?
77
their homes?

go.
there besides Tom?
78
party.
79
in.
80
Cindy Hall: Ok.

81
Obese, Virgin, Provocatively Dressed


Assistant District Attorney: The report also indicates that you were wearing
82

Cindy Hall: Ok.

go.

83
there besides Tom?
party.
84
in.
85
Cindy Hall: Ok.

86
Obese, Virgin, Modestly Dressed


87

Cindy Hall: Ok.

go.

88
there besides Tom?
party.
89
in.
90
little while later. She saw that I was upset and she asked me what happened. I
told her everything. Then, she called the police for me, and stayed with my while
they interviewed me. Then she went to hospital with me for the rape exam. She
was so great. I dont think I would have been able to get through this without her
help.
Cindy Hall: Ok.

91
Obese, Promiscuous, Modestly Dressed


92

Cindy Hall: Ok.
these men?
than once?
93
their homes?

go.
there besides Tom?
94
party.
95
in.
96
Cindy Hall: Ok.

97
Obese, Promiscuous, Provocatively Dressed


Assistant District Attorney: The report also indicated that you were wearing
98

Cindy Hall: Ok.
these men?
than once?
99
their homes?

go.
there besides Tom?
100
party.
101
in.
102
Cindy Hall: Ok.
Note. Adapted from Effects of Ingroup Bias and Gender Role Violations on
Acquaintance Rape Attributions by L. A. Harrison, D. M. Howerton, A. M. Secarea and
C. Q. Nguyen, 2008, Sex Roles, 59, p. 717. Copyright 2008 by Lisa A. Harrison, Dawn
M. Howerton, Ashley M. Secarea and Chau Q. Nguyen.
103
Appendix C
Blame Index
Measure
Victim Blame
1. How responsible was Cindy for this situation?
2. How much was Cindy to blame for this situation?
3. How much should Cindy blame herself in this situation?
4. How much control did Cindy have in this situation?
5. How much should Cindy feel guilty for this situation?
6. How much should Cindy feel ashamed for this situation?
7. How psychologically damaged do you feel Cindy will be from this
experience?
8. How much did Cindy enjoy this situation?
9. How obligated was Cindy to engage in sexual relations in this case?
10. Do you believe that Cindy acted in a way that showed she was interested
in having sexual intercourse with Michael?
11. How believable do you think Cindy is in her description of what actually
occurred during the evening?
Perpetrator Blame
1. How responsible was Michael for this situation?
2. How much was Michael to blame for this situation?
3. How much should Michael blame himself for this situation?

104
4. How much control did Michael have in this situation?
5. How much should Michael feel guilty for this situation?
6. How much should Michael feel ashamed for this situation?
7. To what degree were Michaels actions a violation of Cindys rights?
8. Do you believe that Michael thought sexual advances of any kind would
be welcomed by Cindy?
9. Do you believe that Michaels behavior toward Cindy was justified?
Rape Index
1. How certain are you that this incident would be considered rape?
Note. Adapted from Blame and Fault Attributions in Sexual Violence: Are These
Distinct? by I. Anderson and H. Bissell, 2011, Journal of Aggression, Conflict, and
Peace Research, 3(4), p. 225, Marital Rape: Is the Crime Taken Seriously Without Co-
occurring Physical Abuse? by J. Langhinrichsen-Rohling and C. M. Monson, 1998,
Journal of Family Violence, 13(4), p. 439, and Perceptions of Date and Stranger Rape:
Difference in Sex Role Expectations and Rape-supportive Beliefs by J. S. Bridges, 1991,
Sex Roles, 24, p. 297.
105
Appendix D
Empathy Scale
Measure
Rape-Victim Empathy
1. I find it easy to take the perspective of a rape victim.
2. I can imagine how a victim feels during an actual rape.
3. I get really involved with the feelings of a rape victim in a movie.
4. I can understand how helpless a rape victim might feel.
5. I can feel a persons humiliation at being forced to have sex against their
will.
6. Hearing about someone who has been raped makes me feel that persons
upset.
7. Its not hard to understand the feelings of someone who is forced to have
sex.
8. I can empathize with the shame and humiliation a rape victim feels during
a trial to prove rape.
9. I know if I talked to someone who was raped Id become upset.
10. I imagine the emotional trauma a rape victim might feel if the rape trial
were publicized in the press.
11. I imagine the courage it takes to accuse a person in a court of rape.
12. I can understand why a rape victim feels bad for a long time.
13. I imagine the anger a person would feel after being raped.
106
14. I find it difficult to know what goes on in the mind of a rape victim.
15. I dont understand how a person who is raped would be upset.
16. I cant understand how someone who has been raped can blame their
partner and not take some of the responsibility.
17. I can see how someone who had been raped would get upset at their rape
trial.
18. I can feel the emotional torment a rape victim suffers when dealing with
the police.
Rape-Perpetrator Empathy
1. I find it easy to take the perspective of a person who rapes.
2. I can imagine how a person who rapes might feel during an actual rape.
3. I get really involved with the feelings of a rapist in a movie.
4. I can understand how powerful a rapist might feel.
5. Hearing about a rape, I can imagine the feelings the rapist felt.
6. Its not hard to understand the feelings that would drive someone to force
sex on another person.
7. I know if I talked to someone accused of rape Id become upset at their
upset.
8. I can feel a persons humiliation at being accused of forcing someone to
have sex.
9. I can empathize with the shame and humiliation an accused rapist feels
during a trial to prove rape.

107
10. I imagine the anger a person would feel at being accused.
11. I can feel the emotional trauma that a person accused of rape might feel if
the rape trial were publicized in the press.
12. I imagine the courage it takes to defend oneself in a court against the
charge of rape.
13. I can understand a rapists feelings after a rape.
14. I find it difficult to know what goes on in the mind of a rapist.
15. I dont see how a person accused of rape could be upset.
16. I cant understand how someone accused of rape can blame their victim.
17. I can see how someone accused of rape would become upset at their rape
trial.
18. I can feel the emotional torment a person accused of rape suffers when
dealing with the police.
Note: From Examining Rape Empathy from the Perspective of the Victim and the
Assailant by C. A. Smith and I. H. Frieze, 2003, Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
33, pps. 497-498.
108
Appendix E
Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale
Measure
1. If this woman is raped while she is drunk, she is at least somewhat responsible for
letting things get out of control.
2. Although this woman wouldnt admit it, she generally finds being physically
forced into sex a real turn-on.
3. When this man raped, it was because of his strong desire for sex.
4. If that woman is willing to make out with a guy, then its no big deal if he goes
a little further and has sex.
5. This woman was caught having an illicit affair and claimed that it was rape.
6. Newspapers should not release the name of a rape victim to the public.
7. This so-called rape victim is actually a woman who had sex and changed her
mind afterwards.
8. This woman secretly desired to be raped.
9. Rape mainly occurs on the bad side of town.
10. This woman does things like hang out in bars and sleeps around, so she was
raped.
11. Most rapists are not caught by the police.
12. If this woman didnt physically fight back, you cant really say that it was rape.
13. This man from a nice middle-class home never rapes.
14. Rape isnt as big a problem as some feminists would like people to think.
109
15. When this woman goes around wearing low-cut tops or short skirts, shes just
asking for trouble.
16. A rape accusation was used as a way of getting back at this man.
17. A rape probably didnt happen if this woman has no bruises or marks.
18. This woman finds being forced to have sex very arousing.
19. If this woman goes home with a man she doesnt know, it is her own fault if she is
raped.
20. Rapists are usually sexually frustrated individuals.
21. All women should have access to self-defense classes.
22. This woman was raped because she dressed suggestively.
23. This woman prefers to have sex forced on her so she doesnt have to feel guilty
about it.
24. If this man didnt have a weapon, you really cant call it a rape.
25. When this woman is a sexual tease, eventually she is going to get into trouble.
26. Being raped isnt as bad as being mugged and beaten.
27. Rape is unlikely to happen in this womans own familiar neighborhood.
28. In reality, women are almost never raped by their boyfriends.
29. This woman tends to exaggerate how much rape affects her.
30. When this man is very sexually aroused, he may not even realize that the woman
is resisting.
31. This woman led this man on and then she cried rape.
110
32. It is preferable that a female police officer conduct the questioning when a woman
reports a rape.
33. This woman claimed she was raped because she has emotional problems.
34. If this woman didnt physically resist sex-even when protesting verbally-it really
cant be considered rape.
35. Rape almost never happens in the womans own home.
36. This woman teased the man and deserves anything that might happen.
37. When this woman was raped, its because the way she said no was ambiguous.
38. This man doesnt usually intend to force sex on a woman, but sometimes he gets
too sexually carried away.
39. This society should devote more effort to preventing rape.
40. When this woman dresses in skimpy clothes she should not be surprised if a man
tries to force her to have sex.
41. Rape happened because this mans sex drive got out of control.
42. This woman who invited a man to her apartment is implying that she wants to
have sex.
43. This woman actually enjoys sex after a guy uses a little force.
44. If this woman claims to have been raped but has no bruises or scrapes, she
probably shouldnt be taken too seriously.
Note. Adapted from Rape Myth Acceptance: Exploration of Its Structure and Its
Measurement Using the Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale by D. L. Payne, K. A.
Lonsway, and L. F. Fitzgerald, 1999, Journal of Research in Personality, 33, pps. 49-50.
111
Appendix F
CONSENT FORM
I hereby agree to participate in research that will be conducted by Mary Bell, a

graduate student in psychology. In this research, I will receive a packet of materials
containing some demographic questions, a transcript of an interview between an
Assistant District Attorney and crime victim and four questionnaires assessing my views
on the crime.
The research will take place in one of the research rooms on the third floor of
Amador Hall and will require 30 minutes of my time.
I understand that I will receive one half-hour of credit toward satisfying the
Psychology Departments research participation requirement by participating in this
study.
I understand that I may not personally benefit from participating in this research, but
it is hoped that the research may lead to a better understanding of how people develop
beliefs about crimes and crime victims.
I understand that this research may cause me to feel uncomfortable and that I may
discontinue my participation at any time without any penalty other than loss of research
credit and that the researcher may discontinue my participation at any time.
This information was explained to me by Mary Bell. I understand that she will
answer any questions I may have now or later about this research. Mary Bell can be
reached at sac38369@csus.edu.
Signature: _____________________________ Date: _______________________

112
Appendix G
Debriefing
Research Purpose and Procedure

The purpose of the study was to investigate the effect victims weight, clothing, and
sexual history can have on the evaluation of a rape case. Specifically, the study was
looking at how these three manipulations affected the degree of blame and empathy
toward the victim and perpetrator. The study was also analyzing how these three
manipulations influence rape myth beliefs. Therefore, participants began the study by
reading a transcript that varied the rape victims weight, clothing, and sexual history.
Following this, participants completed a measure evaluating the rape victims and
perpetrators degree of blame for the rape. After this task, participants completed a
measure examining their beliefs on rape myths. Finally, participants completed a measure
evaluating their degree of empathy toward the rape victim and perpetrator.
Theoretical Implications
While blame against rape victims has been studied extensively, little research has been
conducted examining rape victims weight (Clarke & Stermac, 2011; Ryckman, Graham,
Thornton, Gold, & Lindner, 1998). Prior research on rape has found that obese rape
victims (Ryckman et al., 1998), victims wearing provocative clothing (Brown, Hamilton,
& ONeill, 2007; Klein, Kennedy, & Gorzalka, 2009), and sexually promiscuous victims
(Brown et al., 2007; Temkin & Krahe, 2008) are held more responsible and blamed more
for their rape. Thus it is hypothesized that blame against rape victims will be higher when
she is obese, promiscuous, and wearing revealing clothing.
While few studies have been conducted examining empathy in instances of rape depicted
in a story, those that did found woman in general, but especially victims of rape, to be
more empathic towards rape victims than men (Iong-Szeto, 1999; Osman, 2011) and that
blame of the victim affected empathy levels with increased empathy toward the
perpetrator when the victim was blamed for the rape (Smith & Frieze, 2003). Studies on
empathy toward the obese have not had positive results, with most participants not being
empathic toward obese individuals, even after conducting programs to increase empathy
(Gapinski, Schwartz, & Brownell, 2006; Teachman, Gapinski, Brownell, Rawlins, &
Jeyaram, 2003). Thus it is hypothesized that empathy toward rape victims will be lower
when she is obese, promiscuous, and wearing revealing clothing.
Lastly, numerous studies has shown that participants who hold rape myth beliefs to blame
rape victims significantly more than those without rape myth beliefs (Cohn, Dupois, &
Brown, 2009; Ferro, Cemele, & Saltzman, 2008). Thus it is hypothesized that rape myth
beliefs will be higher when the rape victim is obese, promiscuous, and wearing revealing
clothing.
PLEASE, DONT DISCUSS THIS RESEARCH WITH OTHERS!
113
It is very important that you do not discuss this research with your fellow students. If you
discuss the research with others that might be in the research at a future date, it may
influence the way they respond to the research. Or, if you make them aware of the
hypothesis, they may try to give the answers they think the experimenter wants.
PLEASE DONT DISCUSS THIS RESEARCH WITH OTHERS.
Further Information
The results of this study will be available by May 17, 2013. If you have any questions or
concerns regarding this study, please contact Mary Bell at sac38369@csus.edu at your
convenience.
If you found any of this material to be personally troubling and you would like to speak
to a counselor, you are encouraged to contact CSUS Psychological Services (278-6416).
114
References
Abbey, A. & Harnish, R. J. (1995). Perception of sexual intent: The role of gender,
alcohol consumption, and rape supportive attitudes. Sex Roles, 32, 297-313.
Abbey, A., Cozzarelli, C., McLaughlin, K., & Harnish, R. J. (1987). The effects of
clothing and dyad sex composition on perceptions of sexual intent: Do women
and men evaluate these cues differently. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
17(2), 108-126.
Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Masser, B., & Bohner, G. (2003). Perceptions of stranger and
acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and
rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(1), 111-125.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.111
Accused rapist admits to being told no. (2010, November 30). KCRA.COM. Retrieved
from http://www.kcra.com/news/25954947/detail.html.
Anderson, I. (2007). What is a typical rape? Effects of victim and participant gender in
female and male rape perception. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 225-
245. doi: 10.1348/014466606X101780
Anderson, I., & Bissell, H. (2011). Blame and fault attributions in sexual violence: Are
these distinct? Journal of Aggression, Conflict, and Peace Research, 3(4), 222-
229.
Aosved, A. C., & Long, P. J. (2006). Co-occurrence of rape myth acceptance, sexism,
racism, homophobia, ageism, classism, and religious intolerance. Sex Roles, 55,
481-492. doi: 10.1007/s11199-006-9101-4

115
Archer, J., & Vaughan, A. E. (2001). Evolutionary theories of rape. Psychology,
Evolution & Gender, 3(1), 95-101. doi: 10.1080/1461666011004960 9
Bourke, J. (2007). Rape: Sex, violence, history. Great Britain: Virago Press.
Bridges, J. S. (1991). Perceptions of date and stranger rape: A difference in sex role
expectations and rape-supportive beliefs. Sex Roles, 24, 291-307.
Brooks, C. & Bolzendahl, C. (2004). The transformation of us gender role attitudes:
Cohort replacement, social-structural change, and ideological learning. Social
Science Research, 33(1), 106-133. doi: 10.1016/S0049-089X(03)00041-3
Brown, A. L., Testa, M., & Messman-Moore, T. L. (2009). Psychological consequences
of sexual victimization resulting from force, incapacitation, or verbal coercion.
Violence Against Women, 15, 898-919. doi: 10.1177/1077801209335491
Brown, J. M., Hamilton, C., & ONeill, D. (2007). Characteristics associated with rape
attrition and the role played by skepticism or legal rationality by investigators and
prosecutors. Psychology, Crime & Law, 13(4), 355-370. doi:
10.1080/10683160601060507
Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will. New York: Random House Publishing.
Buchwald, E., Fletcher, P. R., & Roth, M. (Eds.). (2005). Transforming a rape culture.
Minneapolis, MN: Milkweed Editions.
Buck Doude, S. E. (2008). Defining acquaintance rape: College students perceptions of
sexual consent and coercion. (Doctoral Dissertation) Retrieved from Dissertations
Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences database.
(UMI No. 2009-99030-349)

116
Buckley, K. (2012, October 29). Buckley: Halloween costumes should not be subjected
to gender stereotypes. The Daily Nebraskan. Retrieved from
http://www.dailynebraskan.com/opinion/article_c6b90186-217a-11e2-a07a-
001a4bcf6878.html
Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 38(2), 217-230. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.217
Campbell, R. (2006). Rape survivors experiences with the legal and medical systems.
Violence Against Women, 12(1), 30-45. doi: 10.1177/1077801205277539
Campbell, R. (2008). The psychological impact of rape victims. American Psychologist,
63(8), 702-717. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.8.702
Campbell, R., Sefl, T., Barnes, H. E., Ahrens, C. E., Wasco, S.M., & Zaragoza-Diesfeld,
Y. (1999). Community services for rape survivors: Enhancing psychological well-
being or increasing trauma? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
67(6), 847-858.
Cassidy, L. & Hurrell, R. M. (1995). The influence of victims attire on adolescents
judgments of date rape. Adolescence, 30(118), 319-323.
Catty, J. (1999). Writing rape, writing women in early modern england. New York: St.
Martins Press.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2012). Defining overweight and
obesity. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/adult/defining.html

117
Chapleau, K. M., Oswald, D. L., & Russell, B. L. (2007). How ambivalent sexism toward
women and men support rape myth acceptance. Sex Roles, 57, 131-136. doi:
10.1007/s11199-007-9196-2
Chasteen, A. L. (2001). Constricting rape: feminism, change, and womens everyday
understandings of sexual assault. Sociological Spectrum, 21(2), 101-139. doi:
10.1080/02732170121403
Ciabattari, T. (2001). Changes in mens conservative gender ideologies: Cohort and
period influences. Gender and Society, 15(4), 574-591.
Claes, C. (2010, March 22). HLN: Wearing a bikini on spring break is asking for rape
[Web log post]. Retrieved from
http://open.salon.com//blog//colleenclaes/2010/03/22/hln_bikinis_on_spring_brea
k_are_to_blame_for_rape
Clarke, A. K., & Stermac, L. (2011). The influence of stereotypical beliefs, participant
gender, and survivor weight on sexual assault response. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 26, 2285-2302.
Cohn, E. S., Dupois, E. C., & Brown, T. M. (2009). In the eye of the beholder: Do
behavior and character affect victim and perpetrator responsibility for
acquaintance rape? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(7), 1513-1535. doi:
10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00493.x
Collins, R. L. (2011). Content analysis of gender roles in media: Where are we now and
where should we go? Sex Roles, 64(3-4), 290-298.

118
Cuklanz, L. M. (1996). Rape on trial: How the mass media construct legal reform and
social change. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Deitz, S. R., & Byrnes, L. E. (1981). Attribution of responsibility for sexual assault: The
influence of observer empathy and defendant occupation and attractiveness.
Journal of Psychology, 108, 17-29.
Deitz, S. R., Blackwell, K. T., Daley, P. C., & Bentley, B. J. (1982). Measurement of
empathy toward rape victims and rapists. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 43(2), 372-384.
Deitz, S. R., Littman, M., & Bentley, B. J. (1984). Attribution of responsibility for rape:
The influence of observer empathy, victim resistance, and victim attractiveness.
Sex Roles, 10(3/4), 261-280.
Denim Day USA (2012). Italy 1990s. Retrieved from
http://denimdayusa.org/about/history
Escobar, An., & Hill, J. (Eds.). Take back the night foundation event guidebook.
Retrieved from www.takebackthenight.org
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). (2012, January 6). Attorney general eric holder
announces revisions to the uniform crime reports definition of rape: data reported
on rape will better reflect state criminal codes, victim experiences. Federal
Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved from fbi.gov
Feldman, P. J., Ullman, J. B., & Dunkel-Schetter, C. (1998). Womens reactions to rape
victims: motivational processes associated with blame and social support. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 469-503.

119
Ferro, C., Cermele, J., & Saltzman, A. (2008). Current perceptions of marital rape: Some
good and not-so-good news. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 764-779. doi:
10.1177/0886260507313947
Finch, E. & Munro, V. E. (2005). Juror stereotypes and blame attribution in rape cases
involving intoxicants. British Journal of Criminology, 45, 25-38. doi:
10.1093/bjc/azh055
Fischer, B. S., Cullen, F. T., & Turner, M. G. (2000). The sexual victimization of college
women. National Institute of Justice.
Franiuk, R., Seefelt, J. L., Cepress, S. L., & Vandello, J. A. (2008). Prevalence and
effects of rape myths in print journalism: The kobe bryant case. Violence Against
Women, 14, 287-309. DOI: 10.1177/1077801207313971
Gapinski, K. D., Schwartz, M. B., & Brownell, K. D. (2006). Can television change anti-
fat attitudes and behavior? Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 11, 1-28.
George, W. H., & Martinez, L. J. (2002). Victim blaming in rape: Effects of victim and
perpetrator race, type of rape, and participant racism. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 26, 110-119. doi: 10.1111/1471-6402.00049
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile
and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491-
512. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
Griffin, S. (Ed.). (1979). Rape, the power of consciousness. San Francisco: Harper &
Row.
Hall, R. (1995). Rape in america. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

120
Harrison, L. A., Howerton, D. M., Secarea, A. M., & Nguyen, C. Q. (2008). Effects of
ingroup bias and gender role violations on acquaintance rape attribution s. Sex
Roles, 59, 713-725. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9472-9
Henneberger, M. (2010, December 27). Notre dame fr. jenkins pins delays in lizzy
seeberg case on discrepancies. Woman Up @ Politics Daily. Retrieved from
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/27/notre-dames-fr-jenkins-pins-delays-in-
lizzy-seeberg-case-on-d/
Hirsch, K. (1990). Fraternities of fear: Gang rape, male bolding, and the silencing of
women. Ms., 1(2), 52-56.
Hockett, J. M., Saucier, D. A., Hoffman, B. H., Smith, S. J., & Craig, A. W. (2009).
Oppression through acceptance?: Predicting rape myth acceptance and attitudes
toward rape victims. Violence Against Women, 15, 877-897. doi:
10.1177/1077801209335489
Holleran, D., Beichner, D., & Spohn, C. (2010). Examining charging agreement between
police and prosecutors in rape cases. Crime & Delinquency, 56(3), 385-413. doi:
10.1177/0011128707308977
Iong-Szeto, A. (1999). Effects of victimization, just world beliefs, empathy, and
stereotypes on the attribution of blame. Doctoral Dissertation) Retrieved from
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses: The Humanities and Social Sciences database.
(UMI No. 9934171)

121
Jimenez, J. A., & Abreu, J. M. (2003). Race and sex effects on attitudinal perceptions of
acquaintance rape. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50(2), 252-256. doi:
10.1037/0022-0167.50.2.252
Johnson, K. K. P. & Lee, M. (2000). Effects of clothing and behavior on perceptions
concerning an alleged date rape. Family and Consumer Sciences Research
Journal, 28(3), 332-356.
Jones, C. & Aronson, E. (1973). Attribution of fault to a rape victim as a function of
respectability of the victim. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26(3),
415-419.
Juviler, M. (1960). Psychiatric opinions as to credibility of witnesses: A suggested
approach. California Law Review, 48, 648-683.
Kahlor, L., & Morrison, D. (2007). Television viewing and rape myth acceptance among
college women. Sex Roles, 56, 729-739. doi: 10:1007/s11199-007-9232-2
Kanekar, S. & Kolsawalla, M. B. (1977). Responsibility in relation to respectability. The
Journal of Social Psychology, 102(2), 183-188.
Kanekar, S. & Kolsawalla, M. B. (1980). Responsibility of a rape victim in relation to her
respectability, attractiveness, and provocativeness. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 112, 153-154.
Kilpatrick, D. G., Edmunds, C. N., & Seymour, A. E. (1992). Rape in america: A report
to the nation. Arlington, VA: National Crime Victims Center.

122
Klein, C., Kennedy, M. A., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2009). Rape myth acceptance in men who
completed the prostitution offender program of british columbia. International
Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 53, 305-315. doi:
10.1177/0306624X08316969
Krahe, B., Temkin, J., Bieneck, S., & Berger, A. (2008). Prospective lawyers rape
stereotypes and schematic decision making about rape cases. Psychology, Crime
& Law, 14(5), 461-479. doi: 10.1080/10683160801932380
Lamb, S. & Brown, L. M. (2006). Packaging our girlhood: Rescuing our daughters from
marketers schemes. New York: St. Martins Press.
Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., & Monson, C. M. (1998). Marital rape: Is the crime taken
seriously without co-occurring physical abuse? Journal of Family Violence, 13(4),
433-443.
Lee, J., Pomeroy, E. C., Yoo, S., & Rheinboldt, K. T. (2005). Attitudes toward rape: A
comparison between asian and Caucasian college students. Violence Against
Women, 11(2), 177-196. doi: 10.1177/1077801204271663
Legenbauer, T., Vocks, S., Schafer, C., Schutt-Stromel, S., Hiller, W., Wagner, C.,
Vogele, C. (2009). Preference for attractiveness and thinness in a partner:
Influence of internalization of the thin ideal and shape/weight dissatisfaction in
heterosexual women, heterosexual men, lesbians, and gay men. Body Image, 6,
228-234. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2009.04.002
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York:
Pienam.
123
Levine, D. E. & Kilbourne, J. (2008). So sexy so soon: The new sexualized childhood and
what parents can do to protect their kids. New York: Ballentine Books.
Lin, L., & Reid, K. (2009). The relationship between media exposure and antifat
attitudes: The role of dysfunctional appearance beliefs. Body Image, 6, 52-55. doi:
10.1016/j.bodyim.2008.09.001
Martin, P. Y. (2005). Rape work: Victims, gender, and emotions in organization and
community context. New York: Routledge.
Maurer, T. W., & Robinson, D. W. (2007). Effects of attire, alcohol, and gender on
perceptions of date rape. Sex Roles, 58, 423-434. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9343-9
McClure, K. J., Puhl, R. M., & Heuer, C. A. (2011). Obesity in the news: Do
photographic images of obese persons influence antifat attitudes? Journal of
Health Communication, 16, 359-371. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2010.535108
McGregor, J. (2005). Is it rape? Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company.
McKinley, J. C. (2011, March 8). Vicious assault shakes texas town. The New York
Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/us/09assault.html?_r=1&emc=eta1
McMahon-Howard, J., Clay-Warner, J., & Renzulli, L. (2009). Criminalizing spousal
rape: The diffusion of legal reforms. Sociological Perspectives, 52(4), 505-531.
doi: 10.1525/sop.2009.52.4.505
Messman-Moore, T. L. & Brown, A. L. (2006). Risk perception, rape, and sexual
revictimization: A prospective study of college women. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 30, 159-172.

124
Miller, A. K., Amacker, A. M., & King, A. R. (2011). Sexual victimization and perceived
similarity to a sexual assault victim: a path model of perceiver variables
predicting victim culpability attributions. Sex Roles, 64, 372-381.
Moore, L. (2012). Rep. todd akin: The statement and the reaction. New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/us/politics/rep-todd-akin-
legitimate-rape-statement-and-reaction.html
Moorti, S. (2002). Color of rape: Gender and race in televisions public spheres. Albany,
NY: State University of New York Press.
Morrison, T. G., & OConnor, W. E. (1999). Psychometric properties of a scale
measuring negative attitudes toward overweight individuals. The Journal of
Social Psychology, 139(4), 436-445.
OBrien, K. S., Latner, J. D., Halberstadt, J., Hunter, J. A., Anderson, J., & Caputi, P.
(2008). Do antifat attitudes predict antifat behaviors? Obesity, 16, 87-92.
ODonohue, W., Yeater, E. A., & Fanetti, M. (2003). Rape prevention with college
males: The roles of rape myth acceptance, victim empathy, and outcome
expectancies. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 513531.
Osman, S. L. (2003). Predicting mens rape perceptions based on the belief that no
really means yes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(4), 683-692.
Osman, S. L. (2011). Predicting rape empathy based on victim, perpetrator, and
participant gender, and history of sexual aggression. Sex Roles, 64, 506-515. doi:
10.1007/s11199-010-9919-7
125
Payne, D. L., Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1999). Rape myth acceptance:
Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the illinois rape myth
acceptance scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 27-68. doi:
10.1006/jrpe.1998.2238
Rand, M. R. (2009). Criminal victimization. Findings from the national crime
victimization survey. National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=1975
Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN). (2009). Statistics. Retrieved from
http://www.rainn.org
Rennison, C. M. (2002). Rape and sexual assault: Reporting to police and medical
attention. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=317
Russell, D. E. H., & Bolen, R. M. (2000). The epidemic of rape and child sexual abuse in
the united states. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Ryckman, R. M., Graham, S. S., Thornton, B., Gold, J. A., & Lindner, M. A. (1998).
Physical size stereotyping as a mediator of attributions of responsibility in an
alleged date-rape situation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1876-1888.
Schneider, L. J., Mori, L. T., Lambert, P. L., & Wong, A. O. (2009). The role of gender
and ethnicity in perceptions of rape and its aftereffects. Sex Roles, 60, 410-421.
doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9545-9
126
Shears, R. (2010, May 1). Youre not guilty of rape: Those skinny jeans were too tight to
remove by yourself, jury rules. Mail Online. Retrieved from
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1270113/Youre-guilty-rape-Those-
skinny-jeans-tight-remove-jury-rules.html
Siddique, I. (2012, October 19). #notbuyingit: Spirit halloweens costumes for girls.
Retrieved from http://www.missrepresentation.org/media/nbi/notbuyingit-spirit-
halloweens-costumes-for-teen-girls/
Simonson, K., & Subich, L. M. (1999). Rape perceptions as a function of gender-role
traditionality and victim-perpetrator association. Sex Roles, 40(7/8), 617-634. doi:
10.1023/A:1018844231555
Sinclair, H. C., & Bourne, L. E. (1998). Cycle of blame or just world: Effects of legal
verdicts on gender patterns in rape-myth acceptance and victim empathy.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 575-588.
Smith, C. A. (2012). The confounding of fat, control, and physical attractiveness for
women. Sex Roles, 66, 628-631. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0111-5
Smith, C. A., & Frieze, I. H. (2003). Examining rape empathy from the perspective of the
victim and the assailant. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(3), 476-498.
Tarrant, S. (2010, March 19). Judge orders rape survivors to take lie-detector test. Ms.
Magazine. Retrieved from msmagazine.com

127
Teachman, B. A., Gapinski, K. D., Brownell, K. D., Rawlins, M., & Jeyaram, S. (2003).
Demonstrations of implicit anti-fat bias: The impact of providing causal
information and evoking empathy. Health Psychology, 22(1), 68-78. doi:
10.1037/0278-6133.22.1.68
Temkin, J., & Krahe, B. (2008). Sexual assault and the justice gap: A question of
attitude. Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.
Thornhill, R. & Palmer, C. T. (2000). A natural history of rape. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (1998). Prevalence, incidence, and consequences of violence
against women: Findings from the national violence against women survey.
National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-
sum/172837.htm
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2006). Extent, nature, and consequences of rape
victimization: Findings from the national violence against women survey.
National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-
sum/210346.htm
Travis, C. B. (Ed.) (2003). Evolution, gender, and rape. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts
Institute of Technology Press.
United States. (2011). Rape in the United States: The chronic failure to report and
investigate rape cases : hearing before the Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs of
the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Eleventh
Congress, second session, September 14, 2010. Washington: U.S. G.P.O.

128
Varelas, N., & Foley, L. A. (1998) Blacks and whites perceptions of interracial and
intraracial date rape. Journal of Social Psychology, 138(3), 392-400.
Whatley, M. A. (2005). The effect of participant sex, victim dress, and traditional
attitudes on casual judgments for marital rape victims. Journal of Family
Violence, 20(3), 191-200. doi: 10.1007/s10896-005-3655-8
Workman, J. E. & Freeburg, E. W. (1999). An examination of date rape, victim dress,
and perceiver variables within the context of attribution theory. Sex Roles, 41,
261-277.
Yeater, E. A., Treat, T. A., Viken, R. J., & McFall, R. M. (2010). Cognitive processes
underlying womens risk judgments: Associations with sexual victimization
history and rape myth acceptance. Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology,
78(3), 375-386. doi: 10.1037/a0019297
Young, L. M., & Powell, B. (1985). The effects of obesity on the clinical judgments of
mental health professionals. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 26(3), 233-
246.

Mary Bell Final Draft 4.29.13

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mary Bell Final Draft 4.29.13

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PERCEPTIONS OF AN ACQUANTANCE RAPE:

THE RAMIFICATIONS OF VICTIMS WEIGHT, SEXUAL HISTORY AND

Presented to the faculty of the Department of Psychology

California State University, Sacramento

Submitted in partial satisfaction of

Mary Dorene Bell

THE RAMIFICATIONS OF VICTIMS WEIGHT, SEXUAL HISTORY AND

Mary Dorene Bell

__________________________________, Committee Chair

__________________________________, Second Reader

__________________________________, Third Reader

be awarded for the thesis.

PERCEPTIONS OF AN ACQUANTANCE RAPE:

THE RAMIFICATIONS OF VICTIMS WEIGHT, SEXUAL HISTORY AND

Mary Dorene Bell

toward a perpetrator and victim in an acquaintance rape. Participants read a fictional

weight in cases of rape and increase awareness of rape biases.

safe to come forward, if he were to.

victims, I believe you.

encouragement. She always believed in me and helped push me to finish my degree. I am

eternally grateful to all of you for your support.

List of Tables ................................................................................................................ x

List of Figures ............................................................................................................. xi

Prevalence of Rape ........................................................................................... 3

Brief History of Rape and Laws ....................................................................... 6

Factors that Influence Rape Judgments .......................................................... 10

Rape Myths ..................................................................................................... 16

Rape Empathy ................................................................................................. 18

Present Study .................................................................................................. 20

Effects of Victim Clothing on Victim Judgment ............................................ 30

Effects of Victim Clothing on Perpetrator Judgment ..................................... 31

Effects of Victim Weight on Perpetrator Judgment ....................................... 34

Effects of Victim Sexual History on Victim Judgment .................................. 35

Effects of Victim Sexual History on Perpetrator Judgment ............................ 37

Interaction Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Victim

Interaction Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Perpetrator

Vignette Describing Rape .............................................................................. 41

Effects of Victim Clothing on Victim Judgment ............................................ 42

Effects of Victim Clothing on Perpetrator Judgment ..................................... 44

Effects of Victim Weight on Victim Judgment .............................................. 44

Effects of Victim Weight on Perpetrator Judgment ....................................... 45

Effects of Victim Sexual History on Victim Judgment .................................. 47

Effects of Victim Sexual History on Perpetrator Judgment ............................ 47

Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Victim

Effects of Weight, Clothing, and Sexual History on Perpetrator

Vignette Describing Rape .............................................................................. 51

Future Research ............................................................................................. 53

Conclusions and Implications ........................................................................ 55

Appendix A. Participant Characteristics ................................................................... 57

Appendix B. Vignettes .............................................................................................. 59

Appendix C. Blame Index ...................................................................................... 103

Appendix D. Empathy Scale ................................................................................... 105

Appendix E. Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale ................................................ 108

Appendix F. Consent Form ..................................................................................... 111

Appendix G. Debriefing.......................................................................................... 112

References ................................................................................................................. 114

1. Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Clothing ........................... 31

2. Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Clothing ..................... 32

3. Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Weight .............................. 33

4. Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Weight ....................... 35

5. Mean Victim Judgments as a Function of Victim Sexual History.................. 36

6. Mean Perpetrator Judgments as a Function of Victim Sexual History ........... 38

1. Significant interaction effect of victim sexual history and clothing for

the perpetrator being justified in raping the victim ......................................... 41