Title: Gender, gender identity, rape myth acceptance, and time of initial resistance
on the perception of acquaintance rape blame and avoidability.
Date: 1996
Author: Beverly A. Kopper
Publication: Sex Roles: A Journal of Research. Volume: 34. Issue: 1-2
With an estimated 109,062 forcible rapes reported to law enforcement agencies in the
United States during 1992 (FBI, 1992), it is clear that rape has a pervasive impact on
many lives. The need to investigate this topic is underscored by the fact that since 1988,
the female forcible rape rate has risen 15% (FBI, 1992).
It has been proposed that only 10% to 50% of rapes are ever reported to authorities (Koss,
1985). The most likely perpetrator of sexual assaults (86% to 99%) will be an
acquaintance, not a stranger (Byers, Eastman, Nilson & Roehl, 1977; Mynatt & Allgeier,
1990; Parcell & Kanin, 1976). Reports of acquaintance rape are considered to be
extremely low as evidenced by Mynatt and Allgeier's (1990) study of college women
indicating a 6% report rate.
Although there was a proliferation of research focusing on subjects' perceptions of rape
victims and perpetrators during the 1970 and 1980s, questions remain regarding the role
of gender and concerning assessment methodology in affecting perceptions regarding
acquaintance rape. Pollard (1992) reviewed the research in this area and indicated there is
considerable evidence for gender differences in judgments of rape depiction. He reported
that many studies have found females attributing less responsibility to a rape victim than
males (Brekke & Borgida, 1988; Calhoun, Selby & Waring, 1976; Cann, Calhoun &
Selby, 1979; Deitz, Littman & Bentley, 1984; Edmonds & Cahoon, 1986; Gerdes,
Dammann & Heilig, 1988; Gilmartin-Zena, 1983; Johnson & Jackson, 1988; Johnson,
Jackson & Smith, 1989; Kanekar & Kolsawalla, 1977; Kanekar & Nazareth, 1988;
Kleinke & Meyer, 1990; Luginbuhl & Mullin, 1981; Selby, Calhoun & Brock, 1977).
However, he also indicated that other studies have reported no gender differences (Acock
& Ireland, 1983; Calhoun, Cann, Selby & Magee, 1981; Check & Malamuth, 1983;
Feldman-Summers & Lindner, 1976; Jones & Aronson, 1973; Krahe, 1988; L'Armand &
Pepitone, 1982; Paulsen, 1979; Yarmey, 1985). Thus, the role of gender in perceptions
related to rape remains unclear. A major purpose of the present study was to further
investigate the role of gender in perceptions of blame and avoidability of an acquaintance
rape.
Another major purpose of this study was to investigate the role of gender role identity in
perceptions of blame and avoidability following an acquaintance rape utilizing the Bem
Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI, Bem, 1974). Pollard (1992) concluded that when gender
differences are observed, females and individuals with nontraditional gender role

---

attitudes make more pro-victim judgments than do males and individuals with traditional
gender roles. Pollard also reported that females are less accepting of rape myths than
males (Burt, 1980; Check & Malamuth, 1983; Costin, 1985; Field, 1978; Giacopassi &
Dull, 1986; Muehlenhard & Linton, 1987; Ward, 1988) and traditional gender role
attitudes and rape myth acceptance are related (Check & Malamuth, 1983, 1985; Costin,
1985; Costin & Schwarz, 1987; Field, 1978; Hall, Howard & Boezio, 1986; Mayerson &
Taylor, 1987; Schwartz & Brand, 1983).
In his review, Pollard (1992) pointed out that subjects' gender role attitudes are usually
measured using either Burt's (1980) Sex Role Stereotyping Scale, or the Attitudes Toward
Women Scale (Spence, Helmreich & Stapp, 1973). The BSRI was utilized in the present
study to offer a detailed examination of the role of gender role identity by providing a
gender role classification for each participant, thus expanding the information offered by
previous studies which have focused on the Sex Role Stereotyping Scale and the
Attitudes Toward Women Scale. It was hypothesized that traditional gender role types
(masculine and feminine) would be more likely to blame the victim following an
acquaintance rape than nontraditional gender role types (androgynous and
undifferentiated).
The relationship of rape myth acceptance and time of initial resistance to the assignment
of blame was also examined. It was hypothesized that participants with low rape myth
acceptance would be less likely to blame the victim. Early resistance by the victim was
also hypothesized to be related to less victim blame. The role of gender, gender role
identity, rape myth acceptance, and time of initial resistance was also examined relative
to the participant's belief that the assault could have been avoided.
The present study utilized the Rape Myth Acceptance Scale (Burt, 1980) including its
recent scoring revisions. Thus, a secondary purpose of this study was to determine if this
new version of the Rape Myth Acceptance Scale yields results similar to the old version
and those reflected in past research.
The final major goal of the present study was to investigate the role of blame attributed to
the situation and chance. Previous studies have mainly focused on victim characteristics
and perpetrator blame, thus by including situation and chance variables, the present study
sought to expand the current body of knowledge.
METHOD
Participants
Participants were 534 undergraduate students (355 women and 179 men), enrolled in
introductory psychology courses at a large midwestern university. Participants ranged in
age from 16 to 39 years; however, 97% of the sample was younger than 25 years of age.
Of the participants, approximately 94% were White, 2% were African American or
Asian, 1% were Hispanic, and 1% were of other races. The majority (94%) of participants
had never married.

---

Instruments
Acquaintance Rape Scenario. The acquaintance scenarios were originally designed by
L'Armand and Pepitone (1982), modified by Janssens and Kopper (1993) and further
adapted for the purposes of the present study. Both scenarios described an acquaintance
rape situation in which the female knew the male from a class and had invited him into
her home to study. The assault occurred on their third official date when they had rented a
video (comedy) and were watching it at the female's apartment. The scenarios were
identical with the exception of when the victim resisted the perpetrator's advances. In the
first scenario, the victim resisted early in the encounter, after one kiss. In the second
scenario, the victim resisted the perpetrator's advances later in the encounter, after both
were undressed.
Rape Scenario Questions. The rape scenario questions consisted of several questions
designed to identify the respondent's opinions regarding the scenario. These served as the
dependent measures. The first question asked participants to respond on a 6 point Likert
scale how much the victim was responsible for what happened. Similarly, question two
asked respondents to indicate how responsible the perpetrator was for what happened
using the same scale. The third question asked participants to indicate in terms of
percentages (with totals equaling 100%) how much each of the following factors were to
blame for the incident: victim, perpetrator, situation and chance. Finally, respondents
were asked to indicate on the 6 point Likert scale to what extent they believed the victim
could have avoided what happened. These questions were originally developed by
Bulman and Wortman (1977) for their study on attributions of blame and coping in
severe accident victims and adapted by Janssens and Kopper (1993) for their study of
victim blame following sexual assaults.
Rape Myth Acceptance Scale. The Rape Myth Acceptance Scale was developed by Burt
(1980) to assess a person's attitude regarding sexual assault. The Cronbach's alpha for the
original Scale was .88 and the item-to-item total correlation of each of the 19 items with
the total scale excluding the particular item ranged from .27 to .62. Since its original
development, the scoring procedures for the Rape Myth Acceptance Scale have been
revised. All questions from the revised Scale are now scored on a seven point Likert
scale. Questions examine the respondent's opinion regarding a variety of rape myths, e.g.,
what a woman wears means she is asking for trouble, some women who get raped get
what they deserve, etc. A person's rape myth acceptance score is the total of all responses.
Classification of rape myth acceptance was based on a median split of the sample (M. R.
Burt, personal communication, November 19, 1991).
Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI). The original BSRI, consisting of 60 items, was
developed by Bem (1974) to treat masculinity and femininity as independent dimensions.
The BSRI short form, consisting of the first 30 items of the original form, was used in the
present study. Respondents indicate on a 7-point scale how true each of 30 characteristics
is of them. Scores for the femininity and masculinity scales are determined by the average
item rating for each scale. The four gender role classifications (feminine, masculine,

---

androgynous, undifferentiated) were determined using Bem's (1981) procedure of gender
role classification based on a median split. As advocated by Bem (1981), the median
scores for the present sample (5.7 for the femininity scale and 4.7 for the masculinity
scale) were used. Payne (1985) suggested using the short form of the BSRI, noting its
good test-retest (.76 to .91) and internal consistency (.84 to .87) reliability. Lippa (1985)
reported that in numerous studies, the femininity and masculinity scales were correlated
with gender-related behaviors.
Procedure
After giving informed consent, participants, in groups of approximately 25, read one of
two acquaintance rape scenarios, varying on timing of resistance. Then, each participant
completed the rape scenario questions, Bem Sex-Role Inventory (Bem, 1974), revised
Rape Myth Acceptance Scale (Burt, 1980), and the demographic questionnaire.
RESULTS
A 4 x 2 x 2 multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted within each
gender, with main effects of gender role identity, rape myth acceptance, and time of
initial resistance, and dependent variables of blame attributed to the victim, perpetrator,
situation, chance, and perceived degree of avoidability of the assault. Women obtained a
lower mean rape myth acceptance score (35.57) than males (42.63). The mean rape myth
acceptance score for the entire sample was 37.98 (standard deviation = 12.42).
Relation of Gender Role Identity, Rape Myth Acceptance, and Time of Initial Resistance
to Perceptions of Blame and Avoidability of An Acquaintance Rape for Women
Significant multivariate effects determined with Wilk's Lambda were found for women
for rape myth acceptance F(5,284) = 8.84, p [less than] .0001, time of initial resistance
F(5,284) = 16.26, p [less than] .0001, and the gender role and time of initial resistance
interaction F(15,784) = 2.45, p [less than] .0016. Test statistics and means are presented
in Tables I and II.
[TABULAR DATA FOR TABLE I OMITTED]
[TABULAR DATA FOR TABLE II OMITTED]
The results of univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant effect for
rape myth acceptance and time of initial resistance, for victim blame (F(1,288) = 21.29, p
[less than] .0001; F(1,288) = 34.03, p [less than] .0001); perpetrator blame (F(1,288) =
37.65, p [less than! .0001; F(1,288) = 24.62, p [less than] .0001); and blame attributed to
the situation (F(1,288) = 8.87, p [less than] .0031; F(1,288) = 8.24, p [less than! .0044).
When women scored low in rape myth acceptance and time of initial resistance occurred
early in the encounter, they attributed significantly less blame for the assault to the victim
and the situation, and more blame to the perpetrator.

---

The results of the ANOVA for blame attributed to chance revealed a significant effect for
rape myth acceptance F(1,288) = 6.50, p [less than] .0113. Women scoring low in rape
myth acceptance attributed significantly less blame for the assault to chance.
The results of the ANOVA for avoidability of the assault revealed a significant effect for
rape myth acceptance, F(1,288) = 24.88, p [less than] .0001, time of initial resistance,
F(1,288) = 72.10, p [less than] .0001, and the interaction of gender role and time of initial
resistance F(3,288) = 6.27, p [less than] .0004. Women were less likely to believe the
sexual assault could have been avoided when they scored low in rape myth acceptance
and when the time of initial resistance occurred early in the encounter. Androgynous
women, more than any other gender role type, were least likely to believe the assault
could have been avoided when time of initial resistance occurred early in the encounter
and most likely to believe the assault could have been avoided when the time of initial
resistance occurred later in the encounter.
Relation of Gender Role Identity, Rape Myth Acceptance, and Time of Initial Resistance
to Perceptions of Blame and Avoidability of An Acquaintance Rape for Men
Significant multivariate effects determined with Wilk's Lambda were found for men for
rape myth acceptance F(5,132) = 4.37, p [less than] .001, and time of initial resistance
F(5,132) = 11.84, p [less than] .0001. Test statistics and means are presented in Table III.
The results of a univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed a significant effect for
rape myth acceptance and time of initial resistance for victim blame (F(1,136) = 13.32, p
[less than] .0004; F(1,136) = 38.29, p [less than] .0001); perpetrator blame (F(1,136) =
20.01, p [less than! .0001; F(1,136) = 28.70, p [less than] .0001); blame attributed to the
situation (F(1,136) = 7.75, p [less than] .0061; F(1,136) = 14.53, p [less than! .0002), and
avoidability of the assault (F(1,136) = 4.198, p [less than] .0427; F(1,136) = 30.53, p [less
than] .0001. When men scored low in rape myth acceptance and time of initial resistance
occurred early in the [TABULAR DATA FOR TABLE III OMITTED] encounter, they
attributed significantly less blame for the assault to the victim and the situation, more
blame to the perpetrator, and were less likely to believe the sexual assault could have
been avoided.
Regression Analysis
Finally, a regression analysis was performed to examine the relative contributions of
gender and rape myth acceptance to the prediction of blame and avoidability. This
analysis indicated that victim, perpetrator and situation blame (p [less than] .0001), and
avoidability (p [less than! .0001) could be predicted by only rape myth acceptance.
Chance blame could be predicted by gender (p [less than] .0478) and rape myth
acceptance (p [less than] .0012).
DISCUSSION
Rape myth acceptance and time of initial resistance appeared to be determining factors in

---

the assignment of blame and perception of avoidability of a sexual assault for both men
and women. Consistent with the literature, women in this study obtained a lower mean
rape myth acceptance score than men. As hypothesized, men and women with low rape
myth acceptance attributed significantly less blame to the victim and situation, more
blame to the perpetrator, and were less likely to believe the assault could have been
avoided. Likewise, when time of initial resistance occurred early in the encounter, men
and women attributed significantly less blame to the victim and situation, more blame to
the perpetrator, and were less likely to believe the sexual assault could have been
avoided.
The hypothesis that traditional gender-role types (masculine and feminine) would be
more likely to blame the victim following an acquaintance rape than nontraditional
gender-role types (androgynous and undifferentiated) was unsupported. Interestingly, the
gender role variable was only significant for women in interaction with the time of initial
resistance. Androgynous women, more than any other gender role type, were least likely
to believe the assault could have been avoided when time of initial resistance occurred
early in the encounter, and most likely to believe the assault could have been avoided
when the time of initial resistance occurred later in the encounter.
As previously indicated, the newly revised version of the Rape Myth Acceptance Scale
was used in the present study to determine if it yields results similar to the old version
and those reflected in past research. Consistent with previous studies, women in the
present study obtained lower mean rape myth acceptance scores than men. This finding
might help explain the contradictory results evident in the literature regarding the role of
gender and gender role identity. Although consistent predictions regarding the
perceptions that men and women have regarding acquaintance rape may be impossible to
make based on their gender or gender role, the critical variable appears to be their level of
rape myth acceptance, which appears lower for women.
Time of initial resistance was also significantly associated with blame attributed to the
victim, perpetrator, and situation following an acquaintance rape, and perceptions of the
avoidability of the assault. As hypothesized, when time of initial resistance occurred early
in the encounter, men and women attributed significantly less blame to the victim and
situation, more blame to the perpetrator, and were more likely to believe the sexual
assault could not have been avoided. This finding may help explain the extremely low
report rate for acquaintance rape. In an acquaintance rape situation, the victim knows her
attacker, possibly quite well. This knowledge may in fact encourage her, and those
around her, to attribute more blame to the victim, especially if she fails to resist
immediately. Even if she does resist early in the encounter, she may still be plagued by
significant rape myths, e.g., a woman who goes to a man's residence on the first date
implies that she is willing to have sex, healthy women can resist a rapist if they really
want to, etc.
Further research regarding the relationship of gender and gender role identity and
attitudes toward sexual assault needs to be conducted utilizing a variety of assessment
instruments. Likewise, expanding this study's participants beyond the college student

---

population is also recommended. Although the generalizability of this study's results
beyond the college student population is limited, the results are of interest in further
exploring the critical variables involved in attitudes toward acquaintance rape.
REFERENCES
Acock, A. C., & Ireland, N. K. (1983). Attribution of blame in rape cases. The impact of
norm violation, gender, and sex role attitude. Sex Roles, 9, 179-193.
Bern, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
Bem, S. L. (1981). Bern Sex-Role Inventory: Professional manual. Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Brekke, N., & Borgida, E. (1988). Expert psychological testimony in rape trials: A
social-cognitive analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 372-386.
Bulman, R. J., & Wortman, C. B. (1977). Attribution of blame and coping in the "real
world". Severe accident victims react to their lot. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 35, 351-363.
Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 38, 217-230.
Byers, E. S., Eastman, A. M., Nilson, B. G., & Roehl, C. E. (1977, August). Relationship
between degree of sexual assault, antecedent conditions, and victim-offender relationship.
Paper presented at the convention of the American Psychological Association, San
Francisco, CA.
Calhoun, L. G., Cann, A., Selby, J. W., & Magee, D. L. (1981). Victim emotional
response: Effects on social reaction to victims of rape. British Journal of Social
Psychology, 20, 17-21.
Calhoun, L. G., Selby, J. W., & Waring, L. J. (1976). Social perception of the victim's
casual role in rape: An exploratory examination of four factors. Human Relations, 29,
517-526.
Cann, A., Calhoun, L. G., & Selby, J. W. (1979). Attributing responsibility to the victim
of rape: Influence of information regarding past sexual experience. Human Relations, 32,
57-68.
Check, J. V. P., & Malamuth, N. M. (1983). Sex role stereotyping and reactions to
depictions of stranger versus acquaintance rape. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 45, 344-356.

---

Check, J. V. P., & Malamuth, N. M. (1985). An empirical assessment of some feminist
hypotheses about rape. International Journal of Women's Studies, 8, 414-423.
Costin, F. (1985). Beliefs about rape and women's social roles. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 14, 319-325.
Costin, F., & Schwarz, N. (1987). Beliefs about rape and women's social roles: A
four-nation study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2, 46-56.
Deitz, S. R., Littman, M., & Bentley, B. J. (1984). Attribution of responsibility for rape:
The influence of observer empathy, victim resistance, and victim attractiveness. Sex
Roles, 10, 261-280.
Edmonds, E. M., & Cahoon, D. D. (1986). Attitudes concerning crimes related to
clothing worn by female victims. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 24, 444-446.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1992). Uniform Crime Reports. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice.
Feldman-Summers, S., & Lindner, K. (1976). Perceptions of victims and defendants in
criminal assault cases. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 3, 135-150.
Field, H. S. (1978). Attitudes toward rape: A comparative analysis of police, rapists,
crisis counselors, and citizens. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36,
156-179.
Gerdes, E. P., Dammann, E. J., & Heilig, K. E. (1988). Perceptions of rape victims and
assailants: Effects of physical attractiveness, acquaintance, and subject gender. Sex Roles,
19, 141-153.
Giacopassi, D. J., & Dull, R. T. (1986). Gender and racial differences in the acceptance of
rape myths within a college population. Sex Roles, 15, 63-75.
Gilmartin-Zena, P. (1983). Attribution theory and rape victim responsibility. Deviant
Behavior, 4, 357-374.
Hall, E. R., Howard, J. A., & Boezio, S. L. (1986). Tolerance of rape: A sexist or
antisocial attitude? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 10, 101-118.
Janssens, L. A., & Kopper, B. A. (1993, August). The role of victim blame following
sexual assault. Paper presented at the 101st annual convention of the American
Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Johnson, J. D., & Jackson, L. A., Jr. (1988). Assessing the effects of factors that might
underlie the differential perception of acquaintance and stranger rape. Sex Roles, 19,
37-45.

---

Johnson, J. D., Jackson, L. A., Jr., & Smith, G. J. (1989). The role of ambiguity and
gender in mediating the effects of salient cognitions. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 15, 52-60.
Jones, C., & Aronson, E. (1973). Attribution of fault to a rape victim as a function of
respectability of the victim. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 415-419.
Kanekar, S., & Kolsawalla, M. B. (1977). Responsibility in relation to respectability.
Journal of Social Psychology, 102, 183-188.
Kanekar, S., & Nazareth, A. M. (1988). Attributed rape victim's fault as a function of her
attractiveness, physical hurt, and emotional disturbance. Social Behavior, 3, 37-40.
Kleinke, C. L., & Meyer, C. (1990). Evaluation of rape victim by men and women with
high and low belief in a just world. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 343-353.
Koss, M. P. (1985). The hidden rape victim: Personality, attitudinal, and situational
characteristics. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 8, 193-212.
Krahe, B. (1988). Victim and observer characteristics as determinants of responsibility
attributions to victims of rape. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 50-58.
L'Armand, K., & Pepitone, A. (1982). Judgements of rape a study of victim-rapist
relationship and victim sexual history. Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 134-139.
Lippa, R. (1985). Review of the Bern Sex-Role Inventory. In J. V. Mitchell, Jr. (Ed.), The
ninth mental measurements yearbook (Vol. 1). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Luginbuhl, J., & Mullin, C. (1981). Rape and responsibility: How and how much is the
victim blamed? Sex Roles, 7, 547-559.
Mayerson, S. E., & Taylor, D. A. (1987). The effects of rape myth pornography on
women's attitudes and the mediating role of sex role stereotyping. Sex Roles, 17,
321-338.
Muehlenhard, C. L., & Linton, M. A. (1987). Date rape and sexual aggression in dating
situations: Incidence and risk factors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34, 186-196.
Mynatt, C. R., & Allgeier, E. R. (1990). Risk factors, self attributions and adjustment
problems among victims of sexual coercion. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20,
130-153.
National Victims Center. (1992, April). Rape in America: A report to the nation.
Arlington, VA: Author.

---

Parcell, S. R., & Kanin, E. J. (1976). Male sex aggression: A survey of victimized college
women. Paper presented at the Second International Symposium on Victimology, Boston,
MA.
Paulsen, K. (1979). Attribution of fault to a rape victim as a function of locus of control.
Journal of Social Psychology, 107, 131-132.
Payne, F. D. (1985). Review of Bem Sex-Role Inventory. In J. V. Mitchell, Jr. (Ed.), The
ninth mental measurements yearbook (Vol. 1). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Pollard, P. (1992). Judgements about victims and attackers in depicted rapes: A review.
British Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 307-326.
Schwartz, N., & Brand, J. F. (1983). Effects of salience of rape on sex role attitudes, trust,
and self-esteem in non-raped women. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 71-76.
Selby, J., Calhoun, L., & Brock, T. (1977). Sex differences in the social perception of
rape victims. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 412-415.
Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1973). A short version of the Attitudes Toward
Women Scale (AWS). Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2, 219-220.
Ward, C. (1988). The Attitudes Toward Rape Victims Scale: Construction, validation and
cross-cultural applicability. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 12, 127-146.
Yarmey, A. D. (1985). Older and younger adults' attributions of responsibility toward
rape victims and rapists. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 17, 327-338.

---