Expectancy violation and perceptions of rape victim credibility

Abstract

Purpose. Rape victims have been found to have a heightened risk of secondary victimization in the legal system through biased perceptions of their credibility. In this study, participants observed a video of a rape victim reporting the crime and evaluated her credibility, to establish the influence of victim emotional expressiveness on evaluations of victim credibility. Methods. The nonverbal (eye‐contact, crying) and paralinguistic (tone of voice) behaviour of the rape victim was manipulated such that the emotional presentation viewed by observers was either expressive, or not expressive. One hundred and thirty seven participants were randomly allocated to observe a videotape of either an expressive or a non‐expressive victim. Participants’ specific expectations about the emotional expressiveness of rape victims in general were also measured. Results. Results revealed no significant main effect of emotional expressiveness on perceptions of credibility. However, among participants with a strong expectation of emotional expressiveness, a rape victim who was emotionally expressive was perceived to be significantly more credible than a victim who was not emotionally expressive. Conclusions. It appears to be expectancy violation rather than emotional expressiveness per se that biases observers’ perceptions of rape victim credibility.

Expectations about victim and offender behaviour during stranger rape

“…As Hackett et al (2008) found, heuristics function in conjunction with these expectations such that when the expectation is met (e.g., an emotionally expressive victim where a participant has an expectation that rape victims will be emotionally expressive), this is associated with truthfulness and credibility. The issue is that when this expectation is not met, it reduces the credibility of the rape victim and may be wrongfully attributed to the victim lying.…”

“…For example, Ask and Landstrom (2010) established that, in relation to the emotional expressiveness of a rape victim, some people have expectations about the emotions a rape victim will display when reporting their rape to the police. For those participants who held these expectations, the emotionally expressive victim was assessed as more credible compared to the non-emotionally expressive victim (see also Hackett, Day, & Mohr, 2008;Klippenstein & Schuller, 2012). These findings are explained via Expectancy Violation Theory (see Burgoon & Hale, 1988;White, 2008).…”

“…These findings are explained via Expectancy Violation Theory (see Burgoon & Hale, 1988;White, 2008). This theory suggests that it is not the actual behaviour of the rape victim that affects the assessment of credibility, rather it is whether this behaviour corresponds with the observers' expectations of that behaviour (Hackett et al, 2008;Olson, Roese, & Zanna, 1996). Therefore, the non-emotionally expressive victim was viewed as less credible because of the violation of the expectancy of emotional expressiveness, rather than a judgment about the behaviour itself.…”

Trials and Tribulations: Psychopathic Traits, Emotion, and Decision-Making in an Ambiguous Case of Sexual Assault

“…When an expectancy violation is made, attention is drawn away from the content of the situation and toward the individual in violation, and the possible reasons for that violation (Burgoon, 1993). Therefore, the expectancy of an emotional response (i.e., should the person be expressing emotion) may be a more important determinant of truthfulness than emotional displays on their own (e.g., Ask & Landström, 2010;Klippenstine & Schuller, 2012;Hackett, Day, & Mohr, 2008).…”

You shouldn't feel that way! Extending the emotional victim effect through the mediating role of expectancy violation

“…More specifically, whereas most EVE studies have dealt with the nonverbal expression of emotions and showed that victims who react in an emotional manner (e.g., crying, sobbing) are perceived as more truthful than victims who react in a controlled, calm, numb, or unemotional manner (e.g., Ask & Landströ m, 2010;Baldry & Winkel, 1998;Bollingmo et al, 2008;Hackett, Day, & Mohr, 2008;Winkel & Koppelaar, 1991), we examine credibility penalties to highly emotional, written Victim Impact Statements (VISs) for different crime types. That is, we measured the influence of crime severity on observers' judgments, by holding constant the emotionality of the VIS.…”