Despite increasing uptake of bystander intervention programs to prevent sexual aggression, rates of sexual violence have remained persistently high. Those who witness sexual aggression among their peers can provide another vantage point regarding the strategies that perpetrators use and valuable information about ways in which perpetrators divert bystanders’ intervention—all information that can inform prevention programs. Participants (N = 247) completed structured and open-ended items about occasions they had witnessed that involved efforts to force sex on a non-consenting individual. Reports were content coded for strategies leading to sexual aggression for 99 participants who had witnessed a recent alleged act of sexual aggression. Most (93%) reported perpetrators’ use of early physical pressure (e.g., unwanted grinding, following, isolating, violating personal space, pulling, blocking others) that typically escalated into more overt physical pressure and force. Verbal coercion (e.g., arguing, insisting, begging) was witnessed by 40% of participants, and 14% of participants reported witnessing the target being pressured to consume excessive levels of alcohol. Coded themes captured perpetrators’ defensive interactions with concerned bystanders, such as making excuses, minimizing their intentions, feigning innocence, and using humour to divert attention from sexually aggressive efforts. Results have implications for prevention efforts incorporating bystanders as well as education about the risk of assault.
Articles
Examining how bystanders intervene and perpetrators respond to intervention during experiences of sexual aggression
Kate B. Metcalfe , Lucia F. O’Sullivan , Scott T. Ronis Related information
Department of Psychology, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The work was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (435–2017-1166; O’Sullivan, Principal Investigator) and by a University Research grant from the University of New Brunswick (RF-Exp-2020–09; Ronis, Principal Investigator)
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST : The authors have no known conflict of interest to disclose.
Abstract
Article History
Received: 27 October 2022
Revised: 16 May 2023
Accepted: 2 May 2023
First published: 26 October 2023
Version of record: 26 October 2023
Related Content Search
SUBMIT
To submit your article to the journal, please click the link above.
Top Articles
-
Advance AccessPhillip Joy, Kinda Wassef, Olivia Bonardi, Megan Aston and Olivier Ferlatte
-
Volume: 33, Issue: 1, pp. 33-43The moderating role of parenting stress when it comes to romantic attachment and sexual satisfactionMariève Vandervoort, Michelle Lonergan, Marie-France Lafontaine and Jean-François Bureau
-
Volume: 33, Issue: 1, pp. 1-14Todd A. Coleman, Samson Tse, Lucas Gergyek, Ruth Cameron, Simon Coulombe, Charlie Davis, Robb Travers, Ciann Wilson and Michael Woodford
-
Volume: 24, Issue: 2, pp. 184-196Beverley Chalmers
-
Volume: 26, Issue: 3, pp. 196-204Jessica Wood, Sara Crann, Shannon Cunningham, Deborah Money and Kieran O'Doherty
-
Volume: 23, Issue: 3, pp. 167-177Jocelyn J. Wentland and Elke Reissing
-
Volume: 26, Issue: 3, pp. 216-225Chantelle Ivanski and Taylor Kohut
-
Volume: 28, Issue: 3, pp. 243-256
-
Volume: 24, Issue: 2, pp. 120-130Kristen P. Mark, Justin R. Garcia and Helen E. Fisher
-
Volume: 25, Issue: 2, pp. 86-98Pablo Santos-Iglesias, E. Sandra Byers and Ronald Moglia
-
Volume: 27, Issue: 3, pp. 248-260Erin J. Shumlich and William A. Fisher
-
Volume: 23, Issue: 3, pp. 159-166Alexander McKay, E. Sandra Byers, Susan D. Voyer, Terry P. Humphreys and Chris Markham
-
Volume: 24, Issue: 1, pp. 1-11Greta R. Bauer and Rebecca Hammond