ArticlePloS one2024
Perceptions of sexual assault perpetrators, victims, and event depend on system justification beliefs and perpetrator atonement.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When accused of wrongdoing, a sexual assault perpetrator may express atonement, i.e., he may acknowledge harm done, take responsibility, and make amends. Anecdotal observations suggest that mainstream U.S. audiences respond favorably when high-status perpetrators express less atonement, such as telling stories that minimize harm, or place responsibility on the victim. However, empirically, little is known about how perpetrator status and atonement influence audience responses. Informed by system justification theory, this vignette-based experiment tested the hypothesis that the more audiences are psychologically invested in an unequal status quo (i.e., the greater their system justification beliefs), the more they will favor perpetrators (vs. victims), especially when high-status perpetrators atone less, and low-status perpetrators atone more. In a pre-registered 2(perpetrator status: low, high) x 3(perpetrator narrative atonement: low, medium, high) x continuous(participant system justification) between-subjects design, U.S. adults (N = 895) were randomly assigned to read 1 of 6 first-person stories by a white male who has been accused of sexual assault by a female acquaintance. Dependent measures included perceived severity of and relative responsibility for the assault, empathy toward perpetrator and victim, and ratings of their likeability and positive personality traits. Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that, instead of the hypothesized interactive effects, there were consistent main effects of system justification and atonement across perpetrator status levels. The greater their system justification beliefs, the more participants favored perpetrators, the less severe they rated the assault, and the less they favored victims. Greater perpetrator atonement boosted favorability ratings for him and the victim. Conversely, less perpetrator atonement diminished his favorability ratings, but also made the assault appear less severe and less his (vs. the victim's) responsibility. Findings underscore the strong influences that perpetrator stories and psychological investment in an unequal status quo have on perceptions of sexual violence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.