Rape Myth Acceptance and Judgments of Vulnerability to Sexual Assault: An Internet Experiment
Processing strategies in risk assessment were studied in an Internet experiment. Women ( N = 399) who were either low or high in rape myth acceptance (RMA) were asked to recall either two or six behaviors that either increase or decrease the risk of being sexually assaulted. Later they judged their...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Experimental psychology 2002, Vol.49 (4), p.257-269 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 269 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 257 |
| container_title | Experimental psychology |
| container_volume | 49 |
| creator | Bohner, Gerd Danner, Unna N Siebler, Frank Samson, Gary B |
| description | Processing strategies in risk assessment were studied in an Internet experiment. Women (
N
= 399) who were either low or high in rape myth acceptance (RMA) were asked to recall either two or six behaviors that either increase or decrease the risk of being sexually assaulted. Later they judged their personal vulnerability to sexual assault under either no time pressure (no response deadline) or time pressure (response deadline of 5 s). Without time pressure, the results were opposite to previous research: Women low in RMA relied on ease of recall and reported higher vulnerability after recalling few rather than many risk increasing behaviors, or many rather than few risk-decreasing behaviors; women high in RMA relied on the amount of information recalled, which resulted in an opposite pattern of vulnerability judgments. No influences of ease of recall or amount recalled on vulnerability judgments were detected under time pressure. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1026//1618-3169.49.4.257 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72729779</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>614386675</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a222t-13bfcdebcff2fdd69a0d151ff1820f55f3264dc6723bd78a9ec919e3894675e83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkNtKxDAURYMoOl6-QJAg4lvHnqRNm8dBvKII3l5DmpxopdPWJgXHrzfDDArChvOy9uawCDmEdAopE2dnIKBMOAg5zWKmLC82yISBTJMcMrZJJr_ADtn1_iNNoSwFbJMdYFmec84m5OJR90jvF-GdzozBPujWINWtpbejfZtjGzztHH0dmxYHXdVNHRY0dPQJv0bd0Jn3emzCPtlyuvF4sL575OXy4vn8Orl7uLo5n90lmjEWEuCVMxYr4xxz1gqpUws5OAclS12eO85EZo0oGK9sUWqJRoJEXspMFDmWfI-crnb7ofsc0Qc1r73BptEtdqNXBSuYLAoZweN_4Ec3Dm38TQnIeCniXoT4CjJD5_2ATvVDPdfDQkGqloqVWhpUS4Mqi1FRcWwdrafHao72r7N2GoGTFaB7rXq_MHoItWnQq2_Ufzs_inSC0g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>614386675</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rape Myth Acceptance and Judgments of Vulnerability to Sexual Assault: An Internet Experiment</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Bohner, Gerd ; Danner, Unna N ; Siebler, Frank ; Samson, Gary B</creator><creatorcontrib>Bohner, Gerd ; Danner, Unna N ; Siebler, Frank ; Samson, Gary B</creatorcontrib><description>Processing strategies in risk assessment were studied in an Internet experiment. Women (
N
= 399) who were either low or high in rape myth acceptance (RMA) were asked to recall either two or six behaviors that either increase or decrease the risk of being sexually assaulted. Later they judged their personal vulnerability to sexual assault under either no time pressure (no response deadline) or time pressure (response deadline of 5 s). Without time pressure, the results were opposite to previous research: Women low in RMA relied on ease of recall and reported higher vulnerability after recalling few rather than many risk increasing behaviors, or many rather than few risk-decreasing behaviors; women high in RMA relied on the amount of information recalled, which resulted in an opposite pattern of vulnerability judgments. No influences of ease of recall or amount recalled on vulnerability judgments were detected under time pressure.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1618-3169</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2190-5142</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1026//1618-3169.49.4.257</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12455332</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Cognitive Processes ; Female ; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice ; Human ; Human Females ; Humans ; Internet ; Judgment ; Mental Recall ; Middle Aged ; Myths ; Public Opinion ; Rape ; Rape - prevention & control ; Rape - psychology ; Recall (Learning) ; Research Design ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Perception ; Students - psychology ; Time ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Experimental psychology, 2002, Vol.49 (4), p.257-269</ispartof><rights>2002 Hogrefe & Huber Publishers</rights><rights>2002, Hogrefe & Huber Publishers</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a222t-13bfcdebcff2fdd69a0d151ff1820f55f3264dc6723bd78a9ec919e3894675e83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,4025,27928,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12455332$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bohner, Gerd</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Danner, Unna N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siebler, Frank</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Samson, Gary B</creatorcontrib><title>Rape Myth Acceptance and Judgments of Vulnerability to Sexual Assault: An Internet Experiment</title><title>Experimental psychology</title><addtitle>Exp Psychol</addtitle><description>Processing strategies in risk assessment were studied in an Internet experiment. Women (
N
= 399) who were either low or high in rape myth acceptance (RMA) were asked to recall either two or six behaviors that either increase or decrease the risk of being sexually assaulted. Later they judged their personal vulnerability to sexual assault under either no time pressure (no response deadline) or time pressure (response deadline of 5 s). Without time pressure, the results were opposite to previous research: Women low in RMA relied on ease of recall and reported higher vulnerability after recalling few rather than many risk increasing behaviors, or many rather than few risk-decreasing behaviors; women high in RMA relied on the amount of information recalled, which resulted in an opposite pattern of vulnerability judgments. No influences of ease of recall or amount recalled on vulnerability judgments were detected under time pressure.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Cognitive Processes</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Human Females</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internet</subject><subject>Judgment</subject><subject>Mental Recall</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Myths</subject><subject>Public Opinion</subject><subject>Rape</subject><subject>Rape - prevention & control</subject><subject>Rape - psychology</subject><subject>Recall (Learning)</subject><subject>Research Design</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Risk Perception</subject><subject>Students - psychology</subject><subject>Time</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1618-3169</issn><issn>2190-5142</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkNtKxDAURYMoOl6-QJAg4lvHnqRNm8dBvKII3l5DmpxopdPWJgXHrzfDDArChvOy9uawCDmEdAopE2dnIKBMOAg5zWKmLC82yISBTJMcMrZJJr_ADtn1_iNNoSwFbJMdYFmec84m5OJR90jvF-GdzozBPujWINWtpbejfZtjGzztHH0dmxYHXdVNHRY0dPQJv0bd0Jn3emzCPtlyuvF4sL575OXy4vn8Orl7uLo5n90lmjEWEuCVMxYr4xxz1gqpUws5OAclS12eO85EZo0oGK9sUWqJRoJEXspMFDmWfI-crnb7ofsc0Qc1r73BptEtdqNXBSuYLAoZweN_4Ec3Dm38TQnIeCniXoT4CjJD5_2ATvVDPdfDQkGqloqVWhpUS4Mqi1FRcWwdrafHao72r7N2GoGTFaB7rXq_MHoItWnQq2_Ufzs_inSC0g</recordid><startdate>2002</startdate><enddate>2002</enddate><creator>Bohner, Gerd</creator><creator>Danner, Unna N</creator><creator>Siebler, Frank</creator><creator>Samson, Gary B</creator><general>Hogrefe & Huber Publishers</general><general>Hogrefe Publishing</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2002</creationdate><title>Rape Myth Acceptance and Judgments of Vulnerability to Sexual Assault</title><author>Bohner, Gerd ; Danner, Unna N ; Siebler, Frank ; Samson, Gary B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a222t-13bfcdebcff2fdd69a0d151ff1820f55f3264dc6723bd78a9ec919e3894675e83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Cognitive Processes</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Human Females</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internet</topic><topic>Judgment</topic><topic>Mental Recall</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Myths</topic><topic>Public Opinion</topic><topic>Rape</topic><topic>Rape - prevention & control</topic><topic>Rape - psychology</topic><topic>Recall (Learning)</topic><topic>Research Design</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Risk Perception</topic><topic>Students - psychology</topic><topic>Time</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bohner, Gerd</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Danner, Unna N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siebler, Frank</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Samson, Gary B</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Experimental psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bohner, Gerd</au><au>Danner, Unna N</au><au>Siebler, Frank</au><au>Samson, Gary B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rape Myth Acceptance and Judgments of Vulnerability to Sexual Assault: An Internet Experiment</atitle><jtitle>Experimental psychology</jtitle><addtitle>Exp Psychol</addtitle><date>2002</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>257</spage><epage>269</epage><pages>257-269</pages><issn>1618-3169</issn><eissn>2190-5142</eissn><abstract>Processing strategies in risk assessment were studied in an Internet experiment. Women (
N
= 399) who were either low or high in rape myth acceptance (RMA) were asked to recall either two or six behaviors that either increase or decrease the risk of being sexually assaulted. Later they judged their personal vulnerability to sexual assault under either no time pressure (no response deadline) or time pressure (response deadline of 5 s). Without time pressure, the results were opposite to previous research: Women low in RMA relied on ease of recall and reported higher vulnerability after recalling few rather than many risk increasing behaviors, or many rather than few risk-decreasing behaviors; women high in RMA relied on the amount of information recalled, which resulted in an opposite pattern of vulnerability judgments. No influences of ease of recall or amount recalled on vulnerability judgments were detected under time pressure.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pub>Hogrefe & Huber Publishers</pub><pmid>12455332</pmid><doi>10.1026//1618-3169.49.4.257</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1618-3169 |
| ispartof | Experimental psychology, 2002, Vol.49 (4), p.257-269 |
| issn | 1618-3169 2190-5142 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72729779 |
| source | MEDLINE; APA PsycARTICLES |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Cognitive Processes Female Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice Human Human Females Humans Internet Judgment Mental Recall Middle Aged Myths Public Opinion Rape Rape - prevention & control Rape - psychology Recall (Learning) Research Design Risk Assessment Risk Perception Students - psychology Time Time Factors |
| title | Rape Myth Acceptance and Judgments of Vulnerability to Sexual Assault: An Internet Experiment |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-14T13%3A43%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rape%20Myth%20Acceptance%20and%20Judgments%20of%20Vulnerability%20to%20Sexual%20Assault:%20An%20Internet%20Experiment&rft.jtitle=Experimental%20psychology&rft.au=Bohner,%20Gerd&rft.date=2002&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=257&rft.epage=269&rft.pages=257-269&rft.issn=1618-3169&rft.eissn=2190-5142&rft_id=info:doi/10.1026//1618-3169.49.4.257&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E614386675%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=614386675&rft_id=info:pmid/12455332&rfr_iscdi=true |