Gender Differences in Sexual Violence Victimization Experiences and Validity of Victimization Reports: A Think-Aloud Study.
Saved in:
| Title: | Gender Differences in Sexual Violence Victimization Experiences and Validity of Victimization Reports: A Think-Aloud Study. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Jeffrey, Nicole K., Senn, Charlene Y. |
| Source: | Journal of Sex Research. Nov/Dec2025, Vol. 62 Issue 9, p1820-1836. 17p. |
| Subjects: | Protocol analysis (Cognition), Sexual abuse victims, Gender differences in crime, Psychological distress, Victimization rates, Quantitative research |
| Abstract: | This study compared the qualitative nature of women and men's sexual violence (SV) victimization, the types of experiences captured and missed on the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) across genders, and common interpretations of the SES-SFV items. Fifty-four university students (31 women, 21 cis men, 2 trans men) who had recent unwanted (but not necessarily nonconsensual) sexual experiences thought out loud while privately completing the SES-SFV. They also typed descriptions of experiences reported on SES-SFV items or similar experiences when nothing was reported on an item. Results indicated that women's victimization was more frequent and severe than cis men's, except when men were victimized by men. Although verbal coercion was common across genders, event descriptions indicated that women's verbal coercion experiences were more often harsh and part of a partner's ongoing SV or coercive control. The findings suggest that quantitative measurement can mask important gender differences in victimization and (based on analysis of false positives and negatives) may underestimate rape and attempted rape experiences, especially women's. Findings suggested that responding to the SES-SFV was not traumatic or distressing. However, participants sometimes expressed confusion about the items and interpreted them in unintended ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Sex Research is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | This study compared the qualitative nature of women and men's sexual violence (SV) victimization, the types of experiences captured and missed on the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) across genders, and common interpretations of the SES-SFV items. Fifty-four university students (31 women, 21 cis men, 2 trans men) who had recent unwanted (but not necessarily nonconsensual) sexual experiences thought out loud while privately completing the SES-SFV. They also typed descriptions of experiences reported on SES-SFV items or similar experiences when nothing was reported on an item. Results indicated that women's victimization was more frequent and severe than cis men's, except when men were victimized by men. Although verbal coercion was common across genders, event descriptions indicated that women's verbal coercion experiences were more often harsh and part of a partner's ongoing SV or coercive control. The findings suggest that quantitative measurement can mask important gender differences in victimization and (based on analysis of false positives and negatives) may underestimate rape and attempted rape experiences, especially women's. Findings suggested that responding to the SES-SFV was not traumatic or distressing. However, participants sometimes expressed confusion about the items and interpreted them in unintended ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00224499 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/00224499.2024.2397496 |
