Abstract
Labeling sexual assault and rape involves how individuals classify sexual assault and rape based on legal definitions. In addition to labeling, this study also examined different measures of accuracy (i.e., correctly identifying a behavioral description as rape and/or sexual assault) from singular and dual perspectives. The present exploratory study examined how social support, rape myth endorsement, and sexual conservatism were associated with rape and sexual assault labeling and accuracy when outcomes were measured continuously and dichotomously. Different ways of measuring both rape and sexual assault labeling and accuracy were examined. Participants were 241 women who completed measures of rape myth acceptance and sexual conservatism and evaluated vignettes depicting rape and sexual assault scenarios with validating or invalidating social support responses. Findings revealed differences between labeling sexual assault and rape. Support type significantly predicted dichotomous rape labeling only, and was associated with greater accuracy on several measures. Assault type significantly predicted both dichotomous and continuous rape labeling, and was associated with greater accuracy on several measures as well. All support and assault type interactions were non-significant in predicting both labeling and accuracy across all measures. Sexual conservatism and the Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance: It Wasn’t Really Rape subscale were the most consistent predictors of incorrect labeling and poorer accuracy. Contrary to the study’s hypothesis, higher scores on the “She Lied” subscale of the Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance scale were associated with greater accuracy. Overall, findings suggest that participants were better at identifying sexual assault than rape, and that rape myth endorsement and sexual conservatism may play important roles in the recognition of sexual violence. Results and suggestions of different accuracy measures will be discussed.