Demographic Differences in Public Attitudes Towards Sex Offenders

Willis, Gwenda M.; Malinen, Sanna; Johnston, Lucy

doi:10.1080/13218719.2012.658206

Cited by 70 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the more consistent findings is that females typically report greater fear of and punitiveness toward sex offenders (Brown, Deakin, & Spencer, 2008;Craig, 2005;Kernsmith et al, 2009;Levenson, Brannon, et al, 2007;Phillips, 1998;Pickett et al, 2013;Willis, Malinen, & Johnston, 2013). Some researchers have also found that older, less educated individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely to harbor negative attitudes toward sex offenders (Brown, 1999;Mears et al, 2008;Pickett et al, 2013;Willis et al, 2013).…”

Section: Respondent Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…A somewhat surprising correlate is previous victimization, which has been shown to predict more lenient attitudes toward sex offenders in some studies (Ferguson & Ireland, 2006;Nelson, Herlihy, & Oescher, 2002). It has been posited that since individuals are more likely to be sexually assaulted by someone they know, their attitudes may be based less on misconceptions and stereotypical images of sexual offending (Brown, 2009;Nelson et al, 2002;Willis et al, 2013).…”

Section: Respondent Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Complexity of Public Attitudes Toward Sex Crimes

King

Roberts

2015

Victims & Offenders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Respondent Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Respondent Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Complexity of Public Attitudes Toward Sex Crimes

King

Roberts

2015

Victims & Offenders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Therefore, media coverage about sexual offenders is likely to play a major role in shaping the public's attitude towards sexual offenders (Craun & Theriot, 2009;Galeste, Fradella, & Vogel, 2012;Harper & Hogue, 2015a;Malinen, Willis, & Johnston, 2013;McCartan, 2010;Quinn, Forsyth, & Mullen-Quinn, 2004;Thakker, 2012). This is because such information is sensationalized, selective, and biased, creating a skewed representation of whom or what a sexual offender is (Greer, 2012;Harper & Hogue, 2014).…”

Section: Implicit Theories and Offender Representativeness In Judgmenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit Theories and Offender Representativeness in Judgments About Sexual Crime

Harper

Bartels

2016

Sex Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implicit theories structure the way people understand and respond to various human actions.Typically, people believe attributes are either fixed (entitists) or malleable (incrementalists).The present study aimed to examine: (a) whether attitudes towards sexual offenders differ depending upon one's implicit theory about human nature and sexual offenders, and (b) whether implicit theories are associated with judgments made about different types of child abuser. A sample of 252 community participants was recruited. Their attitudes, implicit theories, and political orientation were assessed via self-report. One of three vignettes describing an incidence of child sexual abuse was then presented. The cases were identical except the perpetrator was either an adult male, an adult female, or a male juvenile. Participants then made judgments about the offender's deserved sentence and moral character. Entitists (across both domains) held more negative attitudes than incrementalists, although the magnitude of the difference was greatest when examining implicit theories about sexual offenders. Compared to those with an incremental theory of sexual offenders, entity theorists judged sexual offending to be more: (a) indicative of the perpetrator's moral character, and (b) deserving of punishment. However, scores were greater towards the adult male relative to the adult female and juvenile. The findings suggest that implicit theories about sexual offenders are domain-specific. They also indicate that judgments made by those with an entity theory (about sexual offenders) are affected by whether a case is representative of a stereotypical sexual offender. Implications of the findings are discussed, along with limitations and future research.Keywords: implicit theories; representativeness heuristic; sexual offenders; public attitudes; schema 3 Implicit theories and offender representativeness in judgments about sexual crimeMuch research has demonstrated that people generally hold more negative attitudes towards sexual offenders than perpetrators of other crime types (e.g., Rogers & Ferguson, 2011;Willis, Levenson, & Ward, 2010). Given the nature and damaging consequences of sexual crime, it is not surprising that people within society hold such attitudes. Sexual offenders and the type of offenses they commit elicit negative affective reactions, such as fear, disgust, and moral outrage (Kernsmith, Craun, & Foster, 2009;Vess, 2009;Willis et al., 2010), which can provide the basis for one's negative attitude towards sexual offenders; a phenomenon known as 'affect-as-information' (Clore, Gasper, & Garvin, 2001).People have a striking ability to effortlessly form attitudes on the basis of "media exposure, and other forms of socially-supplied information" (Crano, Cooper, & Forgas, 2010, p.3). Therefore, media coverage about sexual offenders is likely to play a major role in shaping the public's attitude towards sexual offenders (Craun & Theriot, 2009;Galeste, Fradella, & Vogel, 2012;Harper & Hogue, 2015a;Malinen, Willis, & ...

show abstract

“…Gender -It appears that women hold more punitive attitudes to sexual offenders on both affective and behavioral measures than men (Kernsmith et al, 2009;Willis et al, 2013).…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%