Gender Differences in Sexual Violence Victimization Experiences and Validity of Victimization Reports: A Think-Aloud Study

This study compared the qualitative nature of women and men's sexual violence (SV) victimization, the types of experiences captured and missed on the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) across genders, and common interpretations of the SES-SFV items. Fifty-four university students (31 women, 21 cis men, 2 trans men) who had recent unwanted (but not necessarily nonconsensual) sexual experiences thought out loud while privately completing the SES-SFV. They also typed descriptions of experiences reported on SES-SFV items or similar experiences when nothing was reported on an item. Results indicated that women's victimization was more frequent and severe than cis men's, except when men were victimized by men. Although verbal coercion was common across genders, event descriptions indicated that women's verbal coercion experiences were more often harsh and part of a partner's ongoing SV or coercive control. The findings suggest that quantitative measurement can mask important gender differences in victimization and (based on analysis of false positives and negatives) may underestimate rape and attempted rape experiences, especially women's. Findings suggested that responding to the SES-SFV was not traumatic or distressing. However, participants sometimes expressed confusion about the items and interpreted them in unintended ways.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Sex Research
Published
2024-09-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2024.2397496
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.86

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Gender Differences in Sexual Violence Victimization Experiences and Validity of Victimization Reports: A Think-Aloud Study

Charlene Y. Senn, Nicole Jeffrey
2 citations
The Journal of Sex Research
Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
1.86
article

Gender Differences in Sexual Violence Victimization Experiences and Validity of Victimization Reports: A Think-Aloud Study

Charlene Y. Senn, Nicole Jeffrey
article en
2 citations

Abstract

This study compared the qualitative nature of women and men's sexual violence (SV) victimization, the types of experiences captured and missed on the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) across genders, and common interpretations of the SES-SFV items. Fifty-four university students (31 women, 21 cis men, 2 trans men) who had recent unwanted (but not necessarily nonconsensual) sexual experiences thought out loud while privately completing the SES-SFV. They also typed descriptions of experiences reported on SES-SFV items or similar experiences when nothing was reported on an item. Results indicated that women's victimization was more frequent and severe than cis men's, except when men were victimized by men. Although verbal coercion was common across genders, event descriptions indicated that women's verbal coercion experiences were more often harsh and part of a partner's ongoing SV or coercive control. The findings suggest that quantitative measurement can mask important gender differences in victimization and (based on analysis of false positives and negatives) may underestimate rape and attempted rape experiences, especially women's. Findings suggested that responding to the SES-SFV was not traumatic or distressing. However, participants sometimes expressed confusion about the items and interpreted them in unintended ways.

The Journal of Sex ResearchVol. 62(9)
Gender Studies (CZ), University of Windsor (CA)
University of Windsor, Canada Research Chairs, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
1.86
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.