性暴力施暴行为的性别差异与施暴报告的有效性:混合方法研究

IF 2.7 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Journal of Sex Research Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-28 DOI:10.1080/00224499.2024.2322591
Nicole K Jeffrey, Charlene Y Senn
{"title":"性暴力施暴行为的性别差异与施暴报告的有效性:混合方法研究","authors":"Nicole K Jeffrey, Charlene Y Senn","doi":"10.1080/00224499.2024.2322591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The current mixed-method study examined gender differences in sexual violence (SV) perpetration behaviors and the validity of perpetration reports made on the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Perpetration (SES-SFP). Fifty-four university students (31 women and 23 men) were asked to think out loud while privately completing an online version of the SES-SFP and to describe (typed response) behaviors that they reported having engaged in on the SES. Those who reported no such behavior were asked to describe any similar behaviors they may have engaged in. Integration of the quantitative responses on the SES and the qualitative descriptions of the events reported showed that men's SV perpetration was more frequent and severe than women's. The qualitative event descriptions further suggested that men's verbal coercion was often harsher in tone and that men more often than women used physical force (including in events only reported as verbal coercion on the SES). Unlike men, women often reported that their response to a refusal was not intended to pressure their partner or obtain the sexual activity. Two women also mistakenly reported experiences of their own victimization or compliance (giving in to unwanted sex) on SES perpetration items, which inflated women's SV perpetration rate. Findings suggest that quantitative measurement can miss important qualitative differences in women and men's behaviors and may underestimate men's and overestimate women's SV perpetration. Participants also sometimes misinterpreted or described confusion around the SES items, suggesting a need for updated language on this and other quantitative measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":51361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sex Research","volume":" ","pages":"208-223"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gender Differences in Sexual Violence Perpetration Behaviors and Validity of Perpetration Reports: A Mixed-Method Study.\",\"authors\":\"Nicole K Jeffrey, Charlene Y Senn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00224499.2024.2322591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The current mixed-method study examined gender differences in sexual violence (SV) perpetration behaviors and the validity of perpetration reports made on the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Perpetration (SES-SFP). Fifty-four university students (31 women and 23 men) were asked to think out loud while privately completing an online version of the SES-SFP and to describe (typed response) behaviors that they reported having engaged in on the SES. Those who reported no such behavior were asked to describe any similar behaviors they may have engaged in. Integration of the quantitative responses on the SES and the qualitative descriptions of the events reported showed that men's SV perpetration was more frequent and severe than women's. The qualitative event descriptions further suggested that men's verbal coercion was often harsher in tone and that men more often than women used physical force (including in events only reported as verbal coercion on the SES). Unlike men, women often reported that their response to a refusal was not intended to pressure their partner or obtain the sexual activity. Two women also mistakenly reported experiences of their own victimization or compliance (giving in to unwanted sex) on SES perpetration items, which inflated women's SV perpetration rate. Findings suggest that quantitative measurement can miss important qualitative differences in women and men's behaviors and may underestimate men's and overestimate women's SV perpetration. Participants also sometimes misinterpreted or described confusion around the SES items, suggesting a need for updated language on this and other quantitative measures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sex Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"208-223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sex Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2024.2322591\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sex Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2024.2322591","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本项混合方法研究考察了性暴力(SV)实施行为的性别差异以及在性经历调查-实施行为简表(SES-SFP)中所作的实施行为报告的有效性。54 名大学生(31 名女性和 23 名男性)被要求在私下完成在线版 SES-SFP 的同时大声思考,并描述(打字回答)他们在 SES 上报告的行为。那些没有报告此类行为的人则被要求描述他们可能有过的任何类似行为。综合 SES 的定量回答和对所报告事件的定性描述,结果显示男性 SV 行为比女性更频繁、更严重。对事件的定性描述进一步表明,男性的口头胁迫往往语气更严厉,而且男性比女性更经常使用暴力(包括在 SES 上仅报告为口头胁迫的事件)。与男性不同的是,女性经常报告说,她们对拒绝的反应并不是为了向伴侣施压或获得性活动。在 SES 行为项目中,有两名女性还错误地报告了自己受害或顺从(屈服于不想要的性行为)的经历,从而夸大了女性的 SV 行为发生率。研究结果表明,定量测量可能会忽略女性和男性行为在质量上的重要差异,并可能低估男性和高估女性的 SV 施行率。参与者有时也会对社会经济地位项目产生误解或混淆,这表明有必要对该项目和其他定量测量的语言进行更新。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gender Differences in Sexual Violence Perpetration Behaviors and Validity of Perpetration Reports: A Mixed-Method Study.

The current mixed-method study examined gender differences in sexual violence (SV) perpetration behaviors and the validity of perpetration reports made on the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Perpetration (SES-SFP). Fifty-four university students (31 women and 23 men) were asked to think out loud while privately completing an online version of the SES-SFP and to describe (typed response) behaviors that they reported having engaged in on the SES. Those who reported no such behavior were asked to describe any similar behaviors they may have engaged in. Integration of the quantitative responses on the SES and the qualitative descriptions of the events reported showed that men's SV perpetration was more frequent and severe than women's. The qualitative event descriptions further suggested that men's verbal coercion was often harsher in tone and that men more often than women used physical force (including in events only reported as verbal coercion on the SES). Unlike men, women often reported that their response to a refusal was not intended to pressure their partner or obtain the sexual activity. Two women also mistakenly reported experiences of their own victimization or compliance (giving in to unwanted sex) on SES perpetration items, which inflated women's SV perpetration rate. Findings suggest that quantitative measurement can miss important qualitative differences in women and men's behaviors and may underestimate men's and overestimate women's SV perpetration. Participants also sometimes misinterpreted or described confusion around the SES items, suggesting a need for updated language on this and other quantitative measures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sex Research (JSR) is a scholarly journal devoted to the publication of articles relevant to the variety of disciplines involved in the scientific study of sexuality. JSR is designed to stimulate research and promote an interdisciplinary understanding of the diverse topics in contemporary sexual science. JSR publishes empirical reports, theoretical essays, literature reviews, methodological articles, historical articles, teaching papers, book reviews, and letters to the editor. JSR actively seeks submissions from researchers outside of North America.
×
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