Ambivalent sexism and the impact of victim attractiveness on believability

Abstract

Evidence suggests that one in five college women will be sexually victimized during their time in higher education. In spite of this prevalence, it is still one of the most underreported crimes. One major factor that prevents victims from coming forward about their experiences is the fear of not being believed. Several different factors may contribute to people's likelihood of believing accounts of sexual assault. Personal perception, rape myth acceptance, and physical appearance can all contribute to believing victims. The presence of ambivalent sexism can also play a role in this. Ambivalent sexism is made up of two separate constructs: benevolence and hostility. The current research investigated the impact of victims' attractiveness on the believability of their sexual assault accounts when moderated by ambivalent sexism. Based on the halo effect, I hypothesized that a more attractive victim may be believed more than a less attractive victim (H1a). Based on victim blaming, I hypothesized that a more attractive victim may be believed less than a less attractive victim (H1b). Additionally, I hypothesized that those with high levels of hostile sexism would be more inclined to believe a more attractive victim than the less attractive victim (H2a), and those with high levels of benevolent sexism would be more likely to believe the less attractive victim compared to the more attractive victim (H2b). Participants (N = 177) read a mock sexual assault testimony paired with a confederate photograph of the supposed victim. These photographs were normed based on perceived attractiveness from the Chicago Face Database. The photographs with the highest and lowest ratings were used for the more and less attractive victim conditions, respectively. Participants then completed a believability questionnaire, the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, and some demographic information. The entire study was completed online through Qualtrics. Hypotheses 1a and 1b were tested through an independent samples t-test; the results were not significant. Hypotheses 2a and 2b were tested using simple slope analysis. Hypothesis 2a was not supported statistically. The test for Hypothesis 2b reached marginal significance, but in the opposite direction as predicted. Those high in benevolent sexism were more likely to believe the more attractive confederate victim compared to the less attractive victim. These results could hold implications primarily for case solvability and jury selection. Limitations included a possible ceiling effect, limiting the ability to find a statistically significant effect. The population also skewed young with an average age of 25. Future research should include measures for rape myth acceptance, feminism, religiosity, and political affiliation.