Study Title-Based Framing Effects on Reports of Sexual Violence Factors in College Students

Objective: There are many methodological issues in studying sexual violence, including potential framing effects. Framing effects refer to how researchers communicate the purpose of a study to participants, such as, how the study is advertised or explained. The aim of the current study was to investigate if framing effects were associated with differences in participants’ self-reported experiences of sexual violence and related correlates. Methods: College students (N = 782) were recruited to participate in one of four identical studies that differed in the title: “Questionnaires about Alcohol,” “Questionnaires about Crime,” “Questionnaires about Health,” or “Questionnaires about Sexual Assault.” Participants chose one of the four studies and completed measures of sexual violence as well as attitudinal and behavioral measures in randomized order. Results: We found significantly more reports of childhood sexual abuse (33.6% vs. 18.5%), rape (33.9% vs. 21.1%), higher frequency of victimization (M = 11.35 vs. 5.44), and greater acknowledged rape for bisexual people (46.2% vs. 0.0%) in the Sexual Assault condition compared to other conditions. There were no differences in sexual violence perpetration or attitudinal or behavioral measures. Conclusion: These results revealed that framing effects, based on the study title, affect outcomes in sexual victimization research. Rape was reported 1.6x more in the “Sexual Assault” condition than in the “Health” condition. It is unclear whether these framing effects reflect self-selection bias or framing related increased reports in the Sexual Assault condition, suppression of reports in other conditions, or a combination thereof

Valid for Who? A Preliminary Investigation of the Validity of Two Sexual Victimization Questionnaires in Men and Sexual Minorities

The #MeToo movement illuminated vast numbers of people who experienced sexual violence, but the exact scope and impact, especially among under-studied populations (e.g., men and sexual minorities) is unclear, due in part to measurement issues. Our objective was to compare the validity of two measures of sexual violence victimization: The Sexual Experiences Survey – Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) and The Post-Refusal Sexual Persistence Scale – Victimization (PRSPS-V). Participants were 673 college students who first completed the Rape Empathy for Victims (REM-V) and then the SES-SFV and PRSPS-V (counter-balanced). We found strong evidence of convergent validity for the PRSPS-V with correlations ranging from r = .57–88. Convergent validity correlations were strongest for sexual minority women (r = .88) and weakest for heterosexual men (r = .57). We also found evidence of differential validity for the SES-SFV and PRSPS-V. For heterosexual women, rape empathy was correlated to victimization on both questionnaires (r = .25–.29). However, for heterosexual men, only scores on the SES-SFV were correlated with rape empathy for victims (r = .19). For sexual minorities there appeared to be differences between PRSPS-V only victims and those who reported victimization on both questionnaires in rape empathy (F = 2.65, p = .053). These results provide researchers a starting point for improving these questionnaires to collect more accurate data that helps improve the ability to detect cases of sexual victimization and thus, prevent and heal sexual victimization, especially in understudied populations such as men and sexual minorities

Participant Acceptability of Questionnaires Impacts Sexual Victimization Prevalence Rates

Obtaining accurate prevalence rates of sexual violence is made difficult by discrepancies in self-report questionnaires. Thus, the current study sought to explore participants’ perceptions of acceptability (i.e., perceived difficulty and preference) as a potential mechanism of discrepancy between different questionnaires. Participants were 673 college students who completed two frequently used sexual victimization questionnaires, the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) and the Post-Refusal Sexual Persistence Scales-Victimization (PRSPS-V). Participants then answered questions about each measure’s perceived difficulty and their preference between the two. Participants found the PRSPS-V easier to understand and preferred it 2.5 to 1 over the SES-SFV. Preference was related to reporting; participants who preferred the PRSPS-V reported more instances of sexual victimization on the PRSPS-V by 9.8%. Our results indicate that acceptability impacts reported prevalence rates and is one mechanism of discrepancy between questionnaires. Thus, researchers may wish to consider acceptability when choosing sexual victimization questionnaires