Abstract
This study applied system justification theory to understand the function of rape myth acceptance. Participants read a rape scenario that manipulated the difference in status between the perpetrator and victim, as well as the potential threat to perpetrator as depicted by whom the victim told about the rape. People’s opposition to equality and gender separately and together predicted rape myth acceptance. People with higher opposition to equality reported less rape myth acceptance when a higher-status perpetrator got away with rape than when he was reported to police. Conversely, people with lower opposition to equality reported more rape myth acceptance when the higher-status perpetrator got away with rape. People’s opposition to equality and gender interacted such that men with lower opposition to equality also reported more rape myth acceptance when the equal- and lower-status perpetrator got away with rape. Gender predicted rape myth acceptance such that when the lower-status perpetrator was reported to the police, women reported more rape myth acceptance whereas men reported less rape myth acceptance. This is the first study to show that rape myth acceptance is malleable and strategically motivated. These findings have implications for not only understanding rape myth acceptance, but also other ideologies that explain unethical behavior by advantaged groups.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Masser, B., & Bohner, G. (2003). Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 111–125. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.111.
Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other ‘authoritarian personality’. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47–91. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2.
Ashburn-Nardo, L., Knowles, M. L., & Monteith, M. J. (2003). Black Americans’ implicit racial associations and their implications for intergroup judgment. Social Cognition, 21, 61–87. doi:10.1521/soco.21.1.61.21192.
Benedict, H. (1992). Virgin or vamp: How the press covers sex crimes. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bohner, L., & Lampridis, E. (2004). Expecting to meet a rape victim affects women’s self-esteem: The moderating role of rape myth acceptance. Group Process and Intergroup Relations, 7, 77–88. doi:10.1177/1368430204039974.
Bohner, G., Reinhard, M., Rutz, S., Sturm, S., Kerschbaum, B., & Effler, D. (1998). Rape myths as neutralizing cognitions: Evidence for a causal impact of anti-victim attitudes on men’s self-reported likelihood of raping. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 257–268. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199803/04)28:2<257:AID-EJSP871>3.0.CO;2-1.
Bohner, G., Siebler, F., & Schmelcher, J. (2006). Social norms and the likelihood of raping: Perceived rape myth acceptance of others affects men’s rape proclivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 286–297. doi:10.1177/0146167205280912.
Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217–230. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.217.
Caricati, L. (2007). The relationship between social dominance orientation and gender: The mediating role of social values. Sex Roles, 57, 159–171. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9231-3.
Chapleau, K. M., & Oswald, D. L. (2010). Power, sex, and rape myth acceptance: Testing two models of rape proclivity. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 66–78. doi:10.1080/00224490902954323.
Chapleau, K. M., Oswald, D. L., & Russell, B. L. (2007). How ambivalent sexism toward women and men support rape myth acceptance. Sex Roles, 57, 131–136. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9196-2.
Conway, M., Pizzamiglio, M. T., & Mount, L. (1996). Status, communality, and agency: Implications for stereotypes of gender and other groups. Journal of Personality Social Psychology, 71, 25–38.
Currier, D., & Carlson, J. (2009). Creating attitudinal change through teaching: How a course on “women and violence” changes students’ attitudes about violence against women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 1735–1754. doi:10.1177/0886260509335239.
Du Mont, J., Miller, K. L., & Myhr, T. L. (2003). The role of “real rape” and “real victim” stereotypes in the police reporting practices of sexually assaulted women. Violence Against Women, 9, 466–486.
Eagly, A. H., Diekman, A. B., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Koenig, A. M. (2004). Gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes: A social psychological analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 796–816. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.796.
Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1989). Gender stereotypes and attitudes toward women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 543–558.
Eagly, A., & Steffen, V. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality Social Psychology, 46, 735–754.
Eyssel, F., & Bohner, G. (2011). Schema effects of rape myth acceptance on judgments of guilt and blame in rape cases: The role of perceived entitlement to judge. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 1579–1605. doi:10.1177/0886260510370593.
Garcia-Marques, L., Santos, A. S. C., & Mackie, D. M. (2006). Stereotypes: Static abstractions or dynamic knowledge structures? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 814–831. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.814.
George, W. H., & Martinez, L. J. (2002). Victim blaming in rape: Effects of victim and perpetrator race, type of rape, and participant racism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 110–119. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00049.
Gerger, H., Kley, H., Bohner, G., & Siebler, F. (2007). The acceptance of modern myths about sexual aggression scale: Development and validation in German and English. Aggressive Behavior, 33, 422–440. doi:10.1002/ab.20195.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). Ambivalent stereotypes as legitimizing ideologies: Differentiating paternalistic and envious prejudice. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 278–306). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Green, E. G. T., Thomsen, L., Sidanius, J., Staerklé, C., & Potanina, P. (2009). Reactions to crime as a hierarchy regulating strategy: The moderating role of social dominance orientation. Social Justice Research, 22, 416–436. doi:10/1007/s11211-009-0106-3.
Groth, A. N., & Burgess, A. W. (1978). Rape: A pseudosexual act. International Journal of Women’s Studies, 1, 207–210. doi:10.1016/S0148-0685(78)90935-1.
Jackman, M. R. (2001). License to kill: Violence and legitimacy in expropriative social relations. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 437–467). New York: Cambridge University Press.
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. doi:10.1037/h0034463.
Jost, J. T. (1997). An experimental replication of the depressed-entitlement effect among women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 387–393. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00120.x.
Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x.
Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2002). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111–153. doi:10.1080/10463280240000046.
Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 498–509.
Jost, J. T., Kivetz, Y., Rubini, M., Guermandi, G., & Mosso, C. (2005). System-justifying functions of complementary regional and ethnic stereotype: Cross-national evidence. Social Justice Research, 18, 305–333. doi:10.1007/s11211-005-6827-z.
Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., & Carvallo, M. R. (2002). Non-conscious forms of system justification: Implicit and behavioral preferences for higher status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 586–602.
Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Sheldon, O., & Ni Sullivan, B. (2003). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: Evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13–36. doi:10.1002/ejsp.127.
Jost, J. T., & Thompson, E. P. (2000). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality as independent predictors of self-esteem, ethnocentrism and social policy attitudes among African Americans and European Americans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 209–232. doi:10.1006/jesp.1999.1403.
Kay, A. C., & Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 823–837.
Kay, A. C., Jost, J. T., Mandisodza, A. N., Sherman, S. J., Petrocelli, J. V., & Johnson, A. L. (2007). Panglossian ideology in the service of system justification: How complementary stereotypes help us to rationalize inequality. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 305–358). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
Knowles, E. D., Lowery, B. S., Hogan, C. H., & Chow, R. M. (2009). On the malleability of ideology: Motivated construals of color blindness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 857–869. doi:10.1037/a0013595.
Kugler, M. B., Cooper, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2010). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality correspond to different psychological motives. Social Justice Research, 23, 117–155. doi:10.1007/s11211-010-0112-5.
LaFree, G. D. (1980). The effect of sexual stratification by race on official reactions to rape. American Sociological Review, 45, 842–854. doi:10.2307/2094898.
Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030–1051. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.85.5.1030.
Lisak, D., & Miller, P. M. (2002). Repeat rape and multiple offending among undetected rapists. Violence and Victims, 17, 73–84. doi:10.1891/vivi.17.1.73.33638.
Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1994). Rape myths: In review. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 133–164. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb00448.x.
Mirels, H. L., & Garrett, J. B. (1971). The Protestant ethic as a personality variable. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36, 40–44. doi:10.1037/h0030477.
Nail, P. R., McGregor, I., Drinkwater, A. E., Steele, G. M., & Thompson, A. W. (2009). Threat causes liberals to think like conservatives. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 901–907. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.013.
Overbeck, J., Jost, J. T., Mosso, C., & Flizik, A. (2004). Resistant vs. acquiescent responses to group inferiority as a function of social dominance orientation in the USA and Italy. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 7, 35–54. doi:10.1177/1368430204039972.
Patton, T. O., & Snyder-Yuly, J. (2007). Any four black men will do: Rape, race, and the ultimate scapegoat. Journal of Black Studies, 37, 859–895. doi:10.1177/0021934706296025.
Payne, D. L., Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the Illinois rape myth acceptance scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 27–68. doi:10.1006/jrpe.1998.2238.
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741.
Pratto, F., Stallworth, L. M., & Sidanius, J. (1997). The gender gap: Differences in political attitudes and social dominance orientation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 49–68. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1997.tb01118.x.
Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448. doi:10.3102/10769986031004437.
Pula, K., McPherson, S., & Parks, C. D. (2012). Invariance of a two-factor model of social dominance orientation across gender. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 385–389. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.10.046.
Ståhl, T., Eek, D., & Kazemi, A. (2010). Rape victim blaming as system justification: The role of gender and activation of complementary stereotypes. Social Justice Research, 23, 239–258. doi:10.1007/s11211-010-0117-0.
Törnblom, K., & Kazemi, A. (2010). Justice judgments of physical abuse and theft: The importance of outcome and procedure. Social Justice Research, 23, 308–328. doi:10.1007/s11211-010-0121-4.
Uhlmann, E. L., Brescoll, V. L., & Machery, E. (2010). The motives underlying stereotype-based discrimination against members of stigmatized groups. Social Justice Research, 23, 1–16. doi:10.1007/s11211-010-0110-7.
Viki, G. T., Abrams, D., & Masser, B. (2004). Evaluating stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent sexism in perpetrator blame and recommended sentence length. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 295–303. doi:10.1023/B:LAHU.0000029140.72880.69.
Wakslak, C., Jost, J. T., Tyler, T. R., & Chen, E. (2007). Moral outrage mediates the dampening effect of system justification on support for redistributive policies. Psychological Science, 18, 267–274. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01887.x.
West, S. G., Aiken, L. S., & Krull, J. L. (1996). Experimental personality designs: Analyzing categorical by continuous variable interactions. Journal of Personality, 64, 1–48. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00813.x.
Wolfgang, M. E., & Riedel, M. (1975). Rape, race and the death penalty in Georgia. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 45, 658–668. doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1975.tb01193.x.
Yamawaki, N., Darby, R., & Queiroz, A. (2007). The moderating role of ambivalent sexism: The influence of power status on perception of rape victim and rapist. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 41–56. doi:10.3200/SOCP.147.1.41-56.
Acknowledgements
This study was part of a larger study that was conducted as a dissertation for the clinical psychology graduate program at Marquette University. The results were presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association (2011, May). The authors thank Kristine Nichols, Brian Forman, Britney Parish, Kelly Brutto, Molly Arenburg, Lillian Figg-Franzoi, Kelly McClendon, and Alicia Ali for their assistance with data collection.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chapleau, K.M., Oswald, D.L. Status, Threat, and Stereotypes: Understanding the Function of Rape Myth Acceptance. Soc Just Res 26, 18–41 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-013-0177-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-013-0177-z