Validation of the Greek Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression (AMMSA) Scale: Examining Its Relationships with Sexist and Conservative Political Beliefs

IF 0.4 4区 社会学 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
A. Hantzi, Lampridis Efthymios, Tsantila Katerina, G. Bohner
{"title":"Validation of the Greek Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression (AMMSA) Scale: Examining Its Relationships with Sexist and Conservative Political Beliefs","authors":"A. Hantzi, Lampridis Efthymios, Tsantila Katerina, G. Bohner","doi":"10.4119/UNIBI/IJCV.498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression scale measures contemporary beliefs about sexual aggression that tend to blame victims and exonerate perpetrators. A Greek version of the thirty-item AMMSA scale was administered to two diverse convenience samples, one in Greece and one in Cyprus. Convergent and discriminant construct validity were assessed via correlations with other constructs that were hypothesized to be strongly related to AMMSA (Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance; hostile sexism) or moderately related (benevolent sexism; social dominance orientation; right-wing authoritarianism). It was found that the Greek AMMSA was unidimensional, highly internally consistent, normally distributed, and showed good construct validity. When sociodemographic data were analyzed, age, gender, and nationality turned out to be significant predictors of AMMSA, with a U-shaped trend for age, higher scores for men than women, and higher scores for Cypriots than Greeks. In sum, the Greek AMMSA scale provides a highly useful instrument for further research on sexual aggression myths, their correlates, and effects on judgment and behavior.","PeriodicalId":45781,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Conflict and Violence","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4119/UNIBI/IJCV.498","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Conflict and Violence","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4119/UNIBI/IJCV.498","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

The Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression scale measures contemporary beliefs about sexual aggression that tend to blame victims and exonerate perpetrators. A Greek version of the thirty-item AMMSA scale was administered to two diverse convenience samples, one in Greece and one in Cyprus. Convergent and discriminant construct validity were assessed via correlations with other constructs that were hypothesized to be strongly related to AMMSA (Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance; hostile sexism) or moderately related (benevolent sexism; social dominance orientation; right-wing authoritarianism). It was found that the Greek AMMSA was unidimensional, highly internally consistent, normally distributed, and showed good construct validity. When sociodemographic data were analyzed, age, gender, and nationality turned out to be significant predictors of AMMSA, with a U-shaped trend for age, higher scores for men than women, and higher scores for Cypriots than Greeks. In sum, the Greek AMMSA scale provides a highly useful instrument for further research on sexual aggression myths, their correlates, and effects on judgment and behavior.
希腊人对现代性侵犯神话的接受度(AMMSA)量表:检视其与性别歧视和保守政治信仰的关系
《对性侵犯现代神话的接受度》量表衡量的是当代人对性侵犯的看法,这些看法倾向于指责受害者,为加害者开脱。希腊版本的30项AMMSA量表被用于两个不同的方便样本,一个在希腊,一个在塞浦路斯。通过与其他假设与AMMSA(伊利诺伊州强奸神话接受度;敌意性别歧视)或适度相关(善意性别歧视;社会支配倾向;右翼独裁主义)。结果表明,希腊AMMSA具有单向度、高度内部一致性、正态分布和良好的构念效度。当分析社会人口统计数据时,年龄、性别和国籍被证明是AMMSA的重要预测因素,年龄呈u型趋势,男性比女性得分高,塞浦路斯人比希腊人得分高。总而言之,希腊AMMSA量表为进一步研究性侵犯神话及其相关因素以及对判断和行为的影响提供了一个非常有用的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
32 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信