IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0311983.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions of sexual assault perpetrators, victims, and event depend on system justification beliefs and perpetrator atonement

Author

Listed:
  • Brianna C Delker
  • Kira K Means
  • Allison Schwam
  • Aubrie L Patterson
  • Camille A Fogel
  • Amelita Brown
  • Alex M Czopp
  • Kate C McLean

Abstract

When accused of wrongdoing, a sexual assault perpetrator may express atonement, i.e., he may acknowledge harm done, take responsibility, and make amends. Anecdotal observations suggest that mainstream U.S. audiences respond favorably when high-status perpetrators express less atonement, such as telling stories that minimize harm, or place responsibility on the victim. However, empirically, little is known about how perpetrator status and atonement influence audience responses. Informed by system justification theory, this vignette-based experiment tested the hypothesis that the more audiences are psychologically invested in an unequal status quo (i.e., the greater their system justification beliefs), the more they will favor perpetrators (vs. victims), especially when high-status perpetrators atone less, and low-status perpetrators atone more. In a pre-registered 2(perpetrator status: low, high) x 3(perpetrator narrative atonement: low, medium, high) x continuous(participant system justification) between-subjects design, U.S. adults (N = 895) were randomly assigned to read 1 of 6 first-person stories by a white male who has been accused of sexual assault by a female acquaintance. Dependent measures included perceived severity of and relative responsibility for the assault, empathy toward perpetrator and victim, and ratings of their likeability and positive personality traits. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that, instead of the hypothesized interactive effects, there were consistent main effects of system justification and atonement across perpetrator status levels. The greater their system justification beliefs, the more participants favored perpetrators, the less severe they rated the assault, and the less they favored victims. Greater perpetrator atonement boosted favorability ratings for him and the victim. Conversely, less perpetrator atonement diminished his favorability ratings, but also made the assault appear less severe and less his (vs. the victim’s) responsibility. Findings underscore the strong influences that perpetrator stories and psychological investment in an unequal status quo have on perceptions of sexual violence.

Suggested Citation

  • Brianna C Delker & Kira K Means & Allison Schwam & Aubrie L Patterson & Camille A Fogel & Amelita Brown & Alex M Czopp & Kate C McLean, 2024. "Perceptions of sexual assault perpetrators, victims, and event depend on system justification beliefs and perpetrator atonement," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(12), pages 1-24, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0311983
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0311983
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0311983&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0311983?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0311983. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.