Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T17:02:57.322Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Victim Blaming and Exoneration of the Perpetrator in Domestic Violence: The Role of Beliefs in a Just World and Ambivalent Sexism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Inmaculada Valor-Segura ,
Francisca Expósito  and
Miguel Moya
Inmaculada Valor-Segura*
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Francisca Expósito
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Miguel Moya
Affiliation:
Universidad de Granada (Spain)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Inmaculada Valor-Segura. Departamento de Psicología Social, Facultad de Psicología. Universidad de Granada. Campus de Cartuja. 18011 Granada. (Spain). Phone: +34-958244259. Fax: +34-958243746 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The existence of domestic violence is closely linked to several ideological factors that include sexism and other beliefs about society in general, namely the belief in a just world. In this study, which involved 485 people of both sexes aged between 18 and 70 years, we analyzed the influence of these ideological variables of the perceivers and characteristics of the situation on judgments of a gender aggression – blaming the victim and exonerating the perpetrator. Results showed differences in the reactions of observers depending on the cause that triggered the aggression. Participants blamed the victim and exonerated the aggressor more when no cause of the aggression was mentioned than when a cause was mentioned (the woman wanted to separate, to see an old male friend, or simply to take a trip with her female friends). We also found clear effects of hostile sexism and just world beliefs on the dependent variables. Results showed that the influence of just world beliefs depended on the fact of mention or not a cause for the aggression.

La existencia de violencia doméstica está estrechamente relacionada con una serie de factores ideológicos entre los que se encuentran el sexismo y otras creencias sobre la sociedad en general como son las creencias en el mundo justo. En este estudio, en el que participaron 485 personas de ambos sexos con edades comprendidas entre los 18 y 70 años, se analizó la influencia que en los juicios sobre una agresión de género (culpar a la víctima y minimizar la importancia de la agresión) tenían tanto algunas variables ideológicas de los perceptores como ciertas características de la situación. Los resultados mostraron diferencias en las reacciones de los observadores en función de la causa desencadenante de la agresión descrita. Los participantes culparon más a la víctima y exoneraban más al agresor cuando no se presentaba causa de la agresión que cuando la causa era mencionada (la mujer quería separarse, iba a ver a un viejo amigo o simplemente hacer un viaje con amigas). También se obtuvieron claros efectos del sexismo hostil y de las creencias en el mundo justo en las variables dependientes. Los resultados mostraron que la influencia de las creencias en el mundo justo dependía del hecho de mencionar o no la posible causa de la agresión.

Keywords

domestic violenceambivalent sexismjust world beliefsviolencia domésticasexismo ambivalentecreencias en el mundo justo
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , May 2011 , pp. 195 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Masser, B., & Bohner, G. (2003). Perception of a stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 111–125. doi:10.1177/1077801206291663CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Adelman, M. (2000). No way out. Divorce-related domestic violence in Israel. Violence Against Women, 6, 1223–1254. doi:10.1177/10778010022183613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Alberdi, I., & Matas, N. (2002). La violencia doméstica. Informe sobre los malos tratos a mujeres en España. [Domestic violence. Report on woman abuse in Spain]. Barcelona: Fundación La Caixa.Google Scholar
Babcock, J. C., Costa, D. M., Green, C. E., & Eckhardt, C. I. (2004). What situations induce intimate partner violence? A reliability and validity study of the proximal antecedents to violent episodes (PAVE) Scale. Journal of Family Psychology, 18, 433–442. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.18.3.433CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhanot, S., & Senn, Y. (2007). Attitudes towards violence against women in men of south Asian ancestry: Are acculturation and gender role attitudes important factors? Journal of Family Violence, 22, 25–31. doi:10.1007/s10896-006-9060-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Capezza, N. M., & Arriaga, X. B. (2008). Factors associated with acceptance of psychological aggression against women. Violence Against Women, 14, 612–633. doi:10.1177/1077801208319004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castillo, J. C., Asún, D., & Aceituno, M. (2002). Atribución. Creencias en la justicia en el mundo: un estudio preliminar en relación a actitudes de intolerancia y discriminación. [Attribution. Beliefs in justice in the world: a preliminary study of attitudes of intolerance and discrimination]. In Morales, J. F., Páez, D., Kornblit, A. L., & Asún, D., (Eds.). Psicología Social (pp. 139–144). Buenos Aires: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
De Judicibus, M., & McCabe, M. P. (2001). Blaming the target of sexual harassment: Impact of gender role, sexist attitudes, and work role. Sex Roles, 44, 401–417. doi:10.1023/A:1011926027920CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durán, M., Moya, M., Megías, J. L. & Viki, G. T. (2010). Social perception of rape victims in dating and married relationships: the role of perpetrator's benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 62, 505–519. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9676-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Expósito, F., Moya, M., & Glick, P. (1998) Sexismo ambivalente: medición y correlatos. [Ambivalent sexism: measurement and correlates]. Revista de Psicología Social, 13, 159–170. doi:10.1174/021347498760350641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foran, H. M., & O'Leary, K. D. (2008). Problem drinking, jealousy, and anger control: Variables predicting physical aggression against a partner. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 141–148. doi:10.1007/s10896-007-9136-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, G. B., Jobe, R. L., White, K. B., Bloesch, E., & Adams-Curtis, L. E. (2005). Perceptions of dating violence following a sexual or nonsexual betrayal of trust: Effects of gender, sexism, acceptance of rape myths, and vengeance motivation. Sex Roles, 52, 165–173. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-1292-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frese, B., Moya, M., & Megías, J. L. (2004). Social perception of rape: How rape myth acceptance modulates the influence of situational factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 143–161. doi:10.1177/0886260503260245CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: Research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 795–817. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00072-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmartin-Zena, P. (1983). Attribution theory and rape victim responsibility. Deviant Behavior, 4, 357–374. doi:10.1080/01639625.1983.9967622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glick, P., Sakalli-Ugurlu, N., Ferreira, M. C., & Aguiar de Souza, M. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 291–296. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J, Abrams, D., Masser, B., … López, W. L. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.763CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gracia, E., García, F., & Lila, M. (2009). Public responses to intimate partner violence against women: The influence of perceived severity and personal responsibility. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12, 648–656.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hafer, C. L., & Bégue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory: Problems, developments, and future challenges. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 128–167. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.128CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haj-Yahia, M. M. (2003). Beliefs about wife beating among Arab men from Israel: The influence of their patriarchal ideology. Journal of Family Violence, 18, 193–206. doi:10.1023/A:1024012229984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haj-Yahia, M. M., & Uysal, A. (2008). Beliefs about wife beating among medical students from Turkey. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 119–123. doi:10.1007/s10896-007-9134-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammock, G. S., & Richardson, D. R. (1993). Blaming drunk victims: Is it just world or sex role violation? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1574–1586. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01048.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillier, L., & Foddy, M. (1993). The role of observer attitudes in judgements of blame in cases of wife assault. Sex Roles, 29, 629–644. doi:10.1007/BF00289209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, I. W., & Gutek, B. A. (1982). Attributions and assignment of responsibility in sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 38, 121–136. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1982.tb01914.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C., & Aronson, E. (1973). Attribution of fault to a rape victim as a function of respectability of the victim. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 415–419. doi:10.1037/h0034463CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khawaja, M., Linos, N., & El-Roueiheb, Z. (2008). Attitudes of men and women towards wife beating: Findings from Palestinian refugee camps in Jordan. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 211–218. doi:10.1007/s10896-007-9146-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleinke, C. L., & Meyer, C. (1990). Evaluation of rape victims by men and women with high and low belief in a just world. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 343–353. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1990.tb00024.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristiansen, C. M., & Giulietti, R. (1990). Perceptions of wife abuse: Effects of gender, attitudes toward women, and just world beliefs among college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 177–189. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1990.tb00013.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurz, D. (1996). Separation, divorce, and woman abuse. Violence Against Women, 2, 63–81. doi:10.1177/1077801296002001004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lambert, A. J., & Raichle, K. (2000). The role of political ideology in mediating judgments of blame in rape victims and their assailants: A test of the just world, personal responsibility, and legitimization hypotheses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 853–863. doi:10.1177/0146167200269010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, M. J. (1977). The justice motive: Some hypotheses as to its origins and forms. Journal of Personality, 45, 1–52. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1977.tb00591.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York, NY: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, M. J. (1998). The two forms of belief in a just world. In Montada, L., & Lerner, M. J. (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 247–269). New York, NY: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, M. J. (2003). The justice motive: where social psychologists found it, how they lost it, and why they may not find it again. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 388–399. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0704_10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lerner, M. J., & Miller, D. T. (1978). Just world research and the attribution process: Looking back and ahead. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 1030–1051. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.85.5.1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, M. J., Miller, D. T., & Holmes, J. G. (1976). Deserving and the emergence of forms of justice. In Berkowitz, L., & Walster, E. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 133–162). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lipkus, I. (1991). The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 1171–1178. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(91)90081-LCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montada, L. (1998). Belief in a just world: a hybrid of justice motive and self-interest. In Montada, L., & Lerner, M. (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in the just world (pp. 217–245). New York, NY: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moya, M., Glick, P., Expósito, F., De Lemus, S., & Hart, J. (2007). It's for your own good: Benevolent Sexism and women's reactions to protectively justified restrictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1421–1434. doi:10.1177/0146167207304790CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nayak, M. B., Byrne, C. A., Martin, M. K., & Abraham, A. G. (2003). Attitudes toward violence against women: a cross-nation study. Sex Roles, 49, 333–342. doi:10.1023/A:1025108103617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newcombe, P., van den Eynde, J., Hafner, D., & Jolly, L (2008). Attributions of responsibility for rape: Differences across familiarity of situation, gender, and acceptance of rape myths. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 1736–1754. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00367.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Connor, W., Morrison, T., McLeod, L., & Anderson, D. (1996). A meta-analitic review of the relationship between gender and belief in a just world. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 11, 141–148.Google Scholar
Pavlou, M., & Knowles, A. (2001). Domestic violence: Attributions, recommended punishments and reporting behavior related to provocation by the victim. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 8, 76–85. doi:10.1080/13218710109525006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1975). Who believes in a just world? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 65–89. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1975.tb00997.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. L., & Trigg, K. Y. (2004). Tolerance of sexual harassment: An examination of gender differences, ambivalent sexism, social dominance, and gender roles. Sex Roles, 50, 565–573. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000023075.32252.fdCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakalli, N. (2001). Beliefs about wife beating among Turkish college students: the effects of patriarchy, sexism and sex differences. Sex Roles, 44, 599–610. doi:10.1023/A:1012295109711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakalli-Ugurlu, N., & Glick, P. (2003). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex in Turkey. The Journal of Sex Research, 40, 296–302. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9313-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sakalli-Ugurlu, N., Glick, P., & Yalcin, Z. S. (2007). Ambivalent sexism, Belief in a Just World, and empathy as predictors of Turkish students' attitudes toward rape victims. Sex Roles, 57, 889–895. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9313-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuller, R. A., Smith, V. L., & Olson, J. M. (1994). Juror's decision in trials of battered women who kill: The role of prior beliefs and expert testimony. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 316–337. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb00585.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaver, K. G. (1970). Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 101–113. doi:10.1037/h0028777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, M., & Ickes, W. (1985). Personality and social behavior. In Lindzey, G., & Aronson, E. (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology: Third edition (Vol. 2, pp. 883–947). New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
Straus, M. A. (2006). Future research on gender symmetry in physical assaults on partners. Violence Against Women, 12, 1086–1097. doi:10.1177/1077801206293335CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Valor-Segura, I., Expósito, F., & Moya, M. (2008). Atribución del comportamiento del agresor y consejo a la víctima en un caso de violencia doméstica [Attribution of the aggressor's behavior and advice to the victim in a case of domestic violence]. Revista de Psicología Social, 23, 171–180. doi:10.1174/021347408784135896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vieraitis, L. M., Brito, S., & Kovandzic, T. V. (2007). The impact of women's status and gender inequality on female homicide victimization rates: Evidence from U.S. Counties. Feminist Criminology, 2, 57–73. doi:10.1177/1557085106294187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viki, G. T., & Abrams, D. (2002). But she was unfaithful: Benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 289–293. doi:10.1023/A:1021342912248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Health Organization (2005). WHO multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence against women. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Willis, C. E., Hallinan, M. N., & Melby, J. (1996). Effects of sex role stereotyping among European American students on domestic violence culpability attributions. Sex Roles, 34, 475–491. doi:10.1007/BF01545027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamawaki, N., Darby, R., & Queiroz, A. (2007). The moderating roles of ambivalent sexism: The influence of power status on perception of rape victim and rapist. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 41–56. doi:10.3200/SOCP.147.1.41-56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoshihama, M. (2005). Web in the patriarchal clan system: Tactics of intimate partners in the sociocultural context. Violence Against Women, 11, 1236–1262. doi:10.1177/1077801205280179CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoshioka, M. R., Dinoia, J., & Ullah, K. (2001). Attitudes toward marital violence: An examination of four Asian communities. Violence Against Women, 7, 900–926. doi:10.1177/10778010122182820CrossRefGoogle Scholar