No abstract

No abstract

In this study, we tested the hypothesis that a woman who claims sexual assault would be evaluated more negatively, and the suspected man would be judged more leniently, when the woman is agentic. In addition, we expected that this phenomenon would occur because the agentic accuser does not conform to the 'sexual crime victim' stereotype or feminine norms, and considered these as mediator variables. We also postulated that male (vs. female) participants would have a less positive regard of the agentic accuser and tested participant gender's moderating effects. Contrary to our hypothesis, participants criticized the agentic (vs. non-agentic) woman who claims sexual assault less and perceived her more positively and truthfully, and more likely to judged the suspected man to be guilty and recommended longer sentences. However, we observed the expected moderating effects of participant gender, so that male (vs. female) participants evaluated the agentic accuser more negatively. Mediation analyses yielded results on perceived truthfulness that were consistent with our hypothesis: Participants thought of agentic accuser as less feminine, which predicted less perceived truthfulness. Also, the less the agentic accuser was perceived to be feminine, male participants blamed her more while female participants had more positive impressions of her.

No abstract

No abstract