Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Sexual Coercion in Men and Women: Similar Behaviors, Different Predictors

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A growing body of literature supports the contention that both women and men employ various seductive, manipulative, intoxication, and even forceful tactics of sexual coercion to obtain sexual contact from unwilling partners. Although the self-reported coercive behavior of men and women may appear similar in many respects, predictors of such behavior seem to vary in important ways across gender. In addition to examining the prevalence of coercive behaviors reported across gender, the present study examined the extent to which four variables found in models of male sexual coercion predicted self-reported use of sexual coercion in a sample (n = 186) of college men and women: prior sexual abuse, sexual dominance, sociosexuality, and sexual compulsivity. Although prior sexual abuse seemed to be part of a cycle of sexual coercion among both men and women, key predictors of sexual coercion among men were sexual dominance and sociosexuality, whereas the key predictor of sexual coercion among women was sexual compulsivity. These findings support the notion that whereas men may behave coercively to obtain or maintain an impersonal sense of power and control, women may behave coercively to achieve some level of interpersonal connection when feeling out of control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, P. B. (1996). Correlates of college women’s self-reports of heterosexual aggression. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 8, 121–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, P. B. (1998). Variations in college women’s self-reported heterosexual aggression. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 10, 283–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, P. B., & Newton, M. (2004). Predicting the use of sexual initiation tactics in a sample of college women. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, 7. Available at http://www.ejhs.org/volume7/Anderson/text.html.

  • Anderson, P. B., & Struckman-Johnson, C. (Eds.). (1998). Sexually aggressive women: Current perspectives and controversies. New York: Guilford.

  • Bailey, J. M., Kirk, K. M., Zhu, G., Dunne, M., & Martin, N. G. (2000). Do individual differences in sociosexuality represent genetic or environmentally contingent strategies? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 537–545.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Black, K. A., & Gold, D. (2003). Men’s and women’s reactions to hypothetical sexual advances: The role of initiator socioeconomic status and level of coercion. Sex Roles, 49, 173–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 445–455). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Men, women, and rape. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. (1996). Sexual conflict: Evolutionary insights into feminism and the “Battle of the Sexes”. In D. M. Buss & N. M. Malamuth (Eds.), Sex, power, conflict: Evolutionary and feminist perspectives (pp. 296–318). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. (1993). Men, women, and aggression. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnes, P. (1997). Sexual anorexia: Overcoming sexual self-hatred. Center City, MN: Hazelden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, F. S., Madura, M., & Weaver, L. (1998). Premarital sexual aggressors: A multivariate analysis of social, relational and individual variables. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60, 56–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J. (1976). Sex and personality. London: Open Books Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelhor, D., Hotaling, G., Lewis, I. A., & Smith, C. (1990). Sexual abuse in a national survey of adult men and women: Prevalence, characteristics, and risk factors. Child Abuse and Neglect, 14, 19–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gold, S. R. (1999). Sex, power, conflict: Evolutionary and feminist perspectives. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 28, 390–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabell, A., & Knight, R. (in press). Examining childhood abuse patterns and sensitive periods in juvenile sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment.

  • Hogben, M., & Waterman, C. K. (2000). Patterns of conflict resolution within relationships and coercive sexual behavior of men and women. Sex Roles, 43, 341–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. A., & Mathews, R. (1997). Sexual deviance in females. In D. R. Laws & W. O’Donohue (Eds.), Sexual deviance: Theory, assessment, and treatment (pp. 465–480). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall-Tackett, K. A., Williams, L. M., & Finkelhor, D. (1993). Impact of sexual abuse on children: A review and synthesis of recent empirical studies. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 164–180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, R. A., & Cerce, D. D. (1999). Validation and revision of the Multidimensional Assessment of Sex and Aggression. Psychologica Belgica, 39, 187–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, R. A., Prentky, R. A., & Cerce, D. D. (1994). The development, reliability, and validity of an inventory for the multidimensional assessment of sex and aggression. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 21, 72–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, R. A., & Sims-Knight, J. E. (2003). The developmental antecedents of sexual coercion against women: Testing alternative hypotheses with structural equation modeling. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 989, 72–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krahé, B., Scheinberger-Olwig, R., & Bieneck, S. (2003a). Men’s reports of nonconsensual sexual interactions with women: Prevalence and impact. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 165–175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krahé, B., Waizenhofer, E., & Moller, I. (2003b). Women’s sexual aggression against men: Prevalence and predictors. Sex Roles, 49, 219–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lisak, D. (1991). Sexual aggression, masculinity, and fathers. Signs, 16, 238–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malamuth, N. M. (1996). The confluence model of sexual aggression: Feminist and evolutionary perspectives. In D. M. Buss & N. M. Malamuth (Eds.), Sex, power, conflict: Evolutionary and feminist perspectives (pp. 269–295). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malamuth, N. M. (1998). An evolutionary-based model integrating research on the characteristics of sexually aggressive men. In J. G. Adair, D. Belanger, & K. L. Dion (Eds.), Advances in psychological science (Vol. 1, pp. 151–184). Hove, UK: Psychology Press Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malamuth, N. M., Heavey, C., & Linz, D. (1993). Predicting men’s antisocial behavior against women: The “interaction model” of sexual aggression. In G. N. Hall, R. Hirschmann, J. R. Graham, & M. S. Zaragoza (Eds.), Sexual aggression: Issues in etiology, assessment, and treatment (pp. 63–97). New York: Hemisphere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muehlenhard, C. L., & Cook, S. W. (1988). Men’s self-reports of unwanted sexual activity. Journal of Sex Research, 24, 58–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, L. F., & Byers, E. S. (1993). Eroding stereotypes: College women’s attempts to influence reluctant male sexual partners. Journal of Sex Research, 30, 270–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, L. F., Byers, E. S., & Finkelman, L. (1998). A comparison of male and female college students’ experiences of sexual coercion. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 177–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paolucci, E. O., Genuis, M. L., & Violato, C. (2001). A meta-analysis of the published research on the effects of child sexual abuse. Journal of Psychology, 135, 17–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. L., & Oswald, D. L. (2001). Strategies and dispositional correlates of sexual coercion perpetrated by women: An exploratory investigation. Sex Roles, 45, 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarrel, P., & Masters, W. H. (1982). Sexual molestation of men by women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 11, 117–131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shakelford, T. K., & Goetz, A. T. (2004). Men’s sexual coercion in intimate relationships: Development and initial validation of the Sexual Coercion in Intimate Relationships Scale. Violence and Victims, 19, 541–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, B. L., & Schwarz, J. C. (1997). Date rape: Its relationship to trauma symptoms and sexual self-esteem. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 407–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, C. M. (1999). Effects of childhood sexual abuse on risky sexual behaviors among adolescent and young adult females. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences & Engineering, 59(9-B), 5171.

  • Shea, M. E. C. (1998). When the tables are turned: Verbal sexual coercion among college women. In P. Anderson & C. Struckman-Johnson (Eds.), Sexually aggressive women: Current perspectives and controversies (pp. 94–104). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Struckman-Johnson, C. (1988). Forced sex on dates: It happens to men, too. Journal of Sex Research, 24, 234–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Struckman-Johnson, C., Anderson, P. B., & Struckman-Johnson, D. (2000, August). Tactics and motives of sexually aggressive men and women. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.

  • Struckman-Johnson, C., & Struckman-Johnson, D. (1994). Men pressured and forced into sexual experience. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23, 93–114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Struckman-Johnson, C., & Struckman-Johnson, D. (1998). The dynamics and impact of sexual coercion of men by women. In P. B. Anderson & C. Struckman-Johnson (Eds.), Sexually aggressive women: Current perspectives and controversies (pp. 121–169). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Struckman-Johnson, C., Struckman-Johnson, P. B., & Anderson, D. (2003). Tactics of sexual coercion: When men and women won’t take no for an answer. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 76–86.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waldner, L. K., Vaden-Goad, L., & Sikka, A. (1999). Sexual coercion in India: An exploratory analysis using demographic variables. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 28, 523–538.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waldner-Haugrud, L. K., & Magruder, M. (1995). Male and female sexual victimization in dating relationships: Gender differences in coercion techniques and outcomes. Violence and Victims, 10, 203–215.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walser, R. D., & Kern, J. M. (1996). Relationships among childhood sexual abuse, sex guilt, and sexual behavior in adult clinical samples. Journal of Sex Research, 33, 321–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widom, C. S., & Morris, S. (1997). Accuracy of adult recollections of childhood victimization: Part 2. Childhood sexual abuse. Psychological Assessment, 9, 34–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yost, M. R., & Zurbriggen, E. L. (2006). Gender differences in the enactment of sociosexuality: An examination of implicit social motives, sexual fantasies, coercive sexual attitudes, and aggressive sexual behavior. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 163–173.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zurbriggen, E. L. (2000). Social motives and cognitive power–sex associations: Predictors of aggressive sexual behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 559–581.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Brandeis University Undergraduate Research Program, the Brandeis University Psychology Department, and the University of Massachusetts, Boston Clinical Psychology Program. I gratefully acknowledge Caryn Regen and Jeffrey Vernon for their time and insights during data collection and Joan Liem, David Lisak, and Alice Frye for their guidance and suggestions on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts, Boston, MA, 02125-3393, USA

    Elizabeth A. Schatzel-Murphy & Michael A. Milburn

  2. Department of Justice Studies, San José State University, San Jose, CA, USA

    Danielle A. Harris

  3. Department of Psychology, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA

    Raymond A. Knight

Authors
  1. Elizabeth A. Schatzel-Murphy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Danielle A. Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Raymond A. Knight
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael A. Milburn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth A. Schatzel-Murphy.

Appendix

Appendix

Unless otherwise noted, the response scale for all items used in the present study was a 5-point scale ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (very often) or 0 (definitely false) to 4 (definitely true). Items that were added to the MASA for the present study are marked with an asterisk.

Sexual Coercion Items

Each sexual coercion tactic was assessed for each of the following forms of sexual contact: sex play (fondling, kissing or petting); oral sex; sexual intercourse (vaginal or anal sex).

Seductive Tactics

I have tried to persuade an unwilling person to engage in the following sexual acts by doing such things as flirting, complimenting them, emphasizing how good it would be, moving my body seductively, or disrobing.*

I have tried to persuade an unwilling person to engage in the following sexual acts by using gentle physical means such as petting, stroking, massaging, tickling, or pinching.*

Manipulative Tactics

I have tried to persuade an unwilling person to engage in the following sexual acts by saying things I thought they wanted to hear (ex. I love you) or making false promises (ex. we’ll stay together).*

I have tried to persuade an unwilling person to engage in the following sexual acts by doing such things as discontinuing all physical activity, moving away from them, refusing to talk to them, or pouting and sulking.*

I have tried to persuade an unwilling person to engage in the following sexual acts by making them feel guilty or jealous by doing such things as crying, questioning their feelings for me, or comparing them to someone else.*

I have tried to persuade an unwilling person to engage in the following sexual acts by doing such things as insulting them, questioning their sexuality, threatening to end the relationship, or threatening to tell others something unflattering.*

Intoxication Tactics

I have done the following sexual acts with a person who was so drunk or high on drugs that they could not object.

I have deliberately given a person alcohol or drugs so that they would not object to my doing the following sexual acts with them that they did not want to do.

Physical Force Tactics

I have used physical force, such as pinning a person against a wall, grabbing, hitting, holding down, or hurting them to try or to succeed at making them do the following sexual acts.

Sexual Dominance Items

It turns me on to think about overpowering someone sexually.

I have become sexually aroused while emotionally manipulating someone.*

I have become sexually aroused by emotionally dominating someone.*

I enjoy dominating someone in a sexual situation.*

Sociosexuality Items

For me, sex without love (impersonal sex) is highly unsatisfactory.* (reverse scored)

Absolute faithfulness to one’s partner throughout life is nearly as silly as celibacy.*

Group sex appeals to me.*

If I were invited to take part in an orgy with people I found attractive, I would probably accept.*

I can imagine myself being comfortable and enjoying “casual” sex with different partners.*

I would have to be closely attached to someone (both emotionally and psychologically) before I could feel comfortable and fully enjoy having sex with him or her.* (reverse scored)

It would be difficult for me to enjoy having sex with someone I did not know very well.* (reverse scored)

I could enjoy having sex with someone I was attracted to, even if I did not feel anything emotionally for him or her.*

Sexual Compulsivity Items

I am not able to control my sexual behavior.

I have not been able to stop myself from a sexual act, even when I wanted to stop.

I have had a problem controlling my sexual feelings.

I have to fight sexual urges.

Sexual feelings overpower me.

I can’t stop thinking about sex.

I have felt an overpowering urge to do a sexual behavior that I had thought about.

Prior Sexual Abuse Items

When I was a child (through age 12), the following people had sexual contact with me:

  • Mother

  • Stepmother

  • Father

  • Stepfather

  • Sister

  • Stepsister

  • Brother

  • Stepbrother

  • Grandmother

  • Grandfather

  • Other relative

  • Friend of parents

  • Babysitter

  • Neighbor (not friend of parents)

  • Some professional person (such as, priest, teacher, doctor, Scout leader)

  • Stranger

  • Girlfriend

  • Boyfriend

  • Friend of mine

When I had sexual contact as a child (through age 12) with [previously endorsed contact] I was willing to have sex.

When I was a teenager (age 13 to 17th birthday), the following people had sexual contact with me: [same options as listed above].

When I had sexual contact as a teenager (age 13 to 17) with [previously endorsed contact] I was willing to have sex.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schatzel-Murphy, E.A., Harris, D.A., Knight, R.A. et al. Sexual Coercion in Men and Women: Similar Behaviors, Different Predictors. Arch Sex Behav 38, 974–986 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9481-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9481-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation