Club Drug Use and Intentionality in Perceptions of Rape Victims

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to examine whether intentionality of alcohol or club drug use would affect observer attributions of a victim and a perpetrator after a sexual assault. Participants were 198 male and female college students sampled from a small college located in the United States. In general, participants attributed less blame to the victim, more guilt to the perpetrator, and were more likely to define the assault as rape and convict the perpetrator when the substance use was involuntary as opposed to voluntary. Participants also attributed more blame to the victim and less pleasure to the perpetrator when the sexual assault involved GHB as opposed to Everclear. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Review: The involvement of gamma-hydroxybutyrate in reported sexual assaults: a systematic review

“…Involuntary ingestion of drugs, however, basically modifies the social judgment of victims' culpability or responsibility. Girard and Senn (2008) and Angelone et al (2007) highlight the fact that women who are assaulted while under the effect of GHB are not considered responsible; involuntary sedation of victims relieves them of the unjust social stigma. This might be a reason why victims tend to live with the suspicion that GHB had been spiked into their drinks and in this way they might raise the prevalence of GHB-related sexual assault.…”

A systematic literature review of “rape victims” versus “rape survivors”: Implications for theory, research, and practice

“…For example, both validated measures (e.g., Jones & Aronson, 1973;Langhinrichsen-Rohling & Monson, 1998;Schult & Schneider, 1991) and unvalidated measures (e.g., Angelone, Mitchell, & Pilafova, 2007;Deitz & Byrnes, 1981;Gerdes, Dammann, & Heilig, 1988;Howells et al, 1984;Katz, Moore, & Tkachuk, 2007;Kowalski, 1992;Levett & Kuhn, 1991;MacRae & Shepherd, 1989;Maurer & Robinson, 2008;McLendon et al, 1994;Monson, Byrd, & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, 1996;Schneider, 1992;Schneider, Mori, Lambert, & Wong, 2008;Sheldon-Keller, Lloyd-McGarvey, West, & Canterbury, 1994;Sims, Noel, & Maisto, 2007;Sleed, Durrheim, Kriel, Solomon, & Baxter, 2002;Stacy, Prisbell, & Tollefsrud, 1992;Szymanski, Devlin, Chrisler, & Vyse, 1993;Tieger, 1981;Wakelin & Long, 2003) have assessed the extents to which individuals perceive specific rape victims to have accepted (or should have accepted) blame/responsibility and/or blamed the assailant; contributed to, encouraged, caused, and/or provoked the assault through their immediate behaviors, general habits, intrinsic characteristics, unconscious desires to be sexually assaulted, and/or judgments; controlled the situation, could have prevented it, enjoyed it, found it pleasurable, and/or found it traumatic; and were obligated to engage in sexual relations, interested in having sexual relations, and/or psychologically damaged by the event. Measures have also assessed the extents to which participants perceive specific rape scenarios as being violent, serious, a violation of the victim's rights, and/or appropriately considered rape at all.…”

Men’s Perceptions of an Acquaintance Rape

“…Attributions about the victim and perpetrator were measured with a 10-point Likert-type questionnaire based on one developed by George and Martinez (2002) that had been previously used in a number of other studies (Angelone et al, 2012;Angelone et al, 2007;Mitchell et al, 2009;Sizemore, 2013). Attributions about the victim and perpetrator were measured with a 10-point Likert-type questionnaire based on one developed by George and Martinez (2002) that had been previously used in a number of other studies (Angelone et al, 2012;Angelone et al, 2007;Mitchell et al, 2009;Sizemore, 2013).…”

“…These variables include the gender, race, physical appearance, relationship status, or substance use of the victim and/or perpetrator, as well as the perpetrator's motivation for the assault, and the resistance displayed by the victim (Angelone, Mitchell, & Pilafova, 2007;Feild, 1979;George & Martinez, 2002;Mitchell, Angelone, Kohlberger, & Hirschman, 2009;Pollard, 1992;Ward, 1995). These variables include the gender, race, physical appearance, relationship status, or substance use of the victim and/or perpetrator, as well as the perpetrator's motivation for the assault, and the resistance displayed by the victim (Angelone, Mitchell, & Pilafova, 2007;Feild, 1979;George & Martinez, 2002;Mitchell, Angelone, Kohlberger, & Hirschman, 2009;Pollard, 1992;Ward, 1995).…”