Evaluative Attitudes May Explain the Link Between Injunctive Norms and Sexual Aggression

Abstract

The current study examined the extent to which evaluative attitudes toward sexual aggression (i.e., positive or negative evaluative judgments about sexually aggressive behavior) mediate the association between injunctive norms (i.e., extent to which peers approve or disapprove of sexually aggressive behavior) and self-reported sexual aggression against women. Participants were 200 male undergraduate students. Approximately one in four males reported engaging in at least one sexually aggressive act since the age of 16. Participants with a history of sexual aggression also reported the highest likelihood of engaging in sexually aggressive behavior in the future. We tested two separate mediation models to examine the extent to which evaluative attitudes account for the link between injunctive norms and sexual aggression: one model with self-reported history of sexual aggression as the outcome and the other with likelihood of engaging in sexually aggressive behavior as the outcome. Results showed that more positive evaluative attitudes toward sexual aggression accounted for the association between injunctive norms and self-reported history of sexual aggression. Similarly, evaluative attitudes accounted for the link between injunctive norms and self-reported likelihood of engaging in sexually aggressive behavior in the future. Overall, these findings are consistent with theoretical and empirical explanations of sexual offending and general criminal behavior; however, this is the first study to explore the relationship between injunctive norms and evaluative attitudes in the context of explaining sexually aggressive behavior. If more rigorous research establishes a causal relationship between injunctive norms, evaluative attitudes, and sexually aggressive behavior, this would suggest that targeting these factors in prevention programs may reduce sexual aggression by male undergraduate students.

Disentangling Cognitions About Sexual Aggression

“…Other studies have also found that sexually aggressive men have more positive evaluative attitudes toward sexual aggression than non-sexually aggressive men Nunes et al, 2018). Interestingly, preliminary research suggests that evaluative attitudes may mediate the relationship between positive social norms regarding sexual aggression against women and sexual aggression among male university students (Pedneault et al, 2020). More generally, meta-analyses from the social psychological literature have found moderate to large associations between evaluative attitudes and subsequent nonviolent behavior (Glasman & Albarracín, 2006;Kraus, 1995).…”

First steps in the development of a new measure of attitudes toward sexual offending against children

“…Extrapolating from the general social psychological literature (e.g., Ajzen, 1991Ajzen, , 2001Fazio, 1990;Glasman & Albarracín, 2006;Kraus, 1995) and research on general violence and sexual aggression against women (e.g., Anderson & Bushman, 2002;Nunes et al, 2013Nunes et al, , 2015Nunes et al, , 2018Nunes et al, , 2021Nunes et al, , 2022Nunes et al, , 2023Pedneault et al, 2021Pedneault et al, , 2022, we expect that evaluative attitudes toward sexual offending against children would provide important complementary information for explaining, predicting, and reducing sexual offending against children. The purpose of the current study was to take the first steps toward developing a measure of evaluative attitudes toward sexual offending against children.…”

“…Though definitions have been fuzzy and inconsistent (e.g., Ó Ciardha & Ward, 2013;Szumski et al, 2018), both attitudes and cognitive distortions often appear to be used-explicitly or implicitly-to refer to a wide range of thoughts and beliefs that may condone, justify, excuse, minimize, rationalize, or other wise support sexual offending (e.g., Abel et al, 1989;Bumby, 1996;Gannon & Polaschek, 2006;Gannon et al, 2007;Hanson et al, 1994;Mann & Beech, 2003;Mann, Hanson, & Thornton, 2010;Maruna & Mann, 2006;Nunes et al, 2018;Ó Ciardha & Gannon, 2011;Ó Ciardha & Ward, 2013;Szumski et al, 2018;Ward et al, 2006). Attitudes and cognitive distortions have been hypothesized in theories to play a causal role in sexual offending (for reviews, see Ward, 2013, andSzumski et al, 2018), generally have been found to correlate with and predict sexual offending (e.g., Helmus et al, 2013;Nunes et al, 2013Nunes et al, , 2018Pedneault et al, 2021Pedneault et al, , 2022Whitaker et al, 2008), and are often addressed in risk assessment (e.g., Olver et al, 2007) and treatment (e.g., McGrath et al, 2010) aimed at reducing further sexual offending.…”

Measurement Invariance across Sexual Orientation for Measures of Sexual Attitudes

“…In this sense, while erotophilia implies an attitude toward sexuality in general, specific sexual attitudes refer to behaviors or specific psychological processes related to sexuality (e.g., attitudes toward sexual fantasies or masturbation). Both erotophilia and attitudes toward specific sexual behaviors are associated with sexual health indicators such as sexual victimization [4][5][6], sexual aggression [7,8], sexual risk behaviors [9,10], the subjective experience of orgasm [11,12], and sexual functioning [3,13,14]. This relationship pattern indicates that sex-positive attitudes are associated with greater desire toward a sexual partner [15][16][17]; greater subjective and objective sexual arousal [18,19]; and greater facility in obtaining orgasm [3], along with greater intensity in its subjective experience [11,20] and greater satisfaction with it [21] as well as greater sexual satisfaction in general [15,22].…”