Social Distancing of College Students Toward Individuals Who Experienced Sexual Violence

Abstract

The study investigated social distancing toward victims of sexual violence among college students in Lagos, Nigeria. It was a cross-sectional descriptive survey using self-administered questionnaires. Two hundred and thirty students were surveyed from two higher institutions in Nigeria over a 4-month period (March to July 2013), 62.6% (144) of the participants were not willing to be socially close to individuals who experienced sexual violence in situations that involved family relationships, while 68.7% (158) would not consider dating or getting married to individuals who experienced sexual violence. Significant differences in views were expressed between the younger and older age groups in situations that required family ties and dating relationships. A higher percentage of those in the younger age group (68%) would feel ashamed if the individual was a member of the family, while 46% of those in the older age group expressed similar view. In considering dating, 82% of those in the younger age group would not date individuals who experienced sexual violence while 64% of those in the older age group expressed similar view. Differences in views were observed along marital status in situations that involved social closeness in conversations, dating, and maintaining friendly relationships with individuals with a history of sexual violence. Our study showed that although majority of college students were willing to maintain friendly relations with individuals with history of sexual violence, they were more socially distancing in situations that involved intimate and close family contacts. There is a need to help bridge social distancing toward individuals who experienced sexual violence among college students in Lagos, Nigeria.

Introduction

Sexual violence has increasingly been a topical issue in the public space. The continued dominance of the topic in public discourse has been due to the increasing number of cases reported by the global media. Sexual violence is a major type of violence that defies cultures and pervades every social climate. It occurs in both partner and nonpartner relationships.

The widespread nature of this kind of violence has arguably made the issue a global epidemic because of the increasing reports across nationalities and borders (World Health Organization 2013).

Sexual violence is defined as any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, unwanted sexual comments or advances, or acts to traffic or otherwise directed against a person's sexuality using coercion by any person regardless of their relationship to the victim, in any setting, including but not limited to home and work (World Health Organization 2002). Sexual violence includes all forms of sexual assault, rape, sexual coercion, harassment, intimidation, and nonphysical pressure such as blackmail, trickery, threat, which are usually degrading and humiliating (Watts and Zimmerman 2002).

Global estimates barely scratch the depth of the epidemic as many cases go unreported (Kennedy 2005; Watts and Zimmerman 2002). Worldwide estimates in 2013 showed that about 30% of girls over the age of 15 had experienced either physical or sexual violence or both in their lifetime (World Health Organization 2014). In the World Health Organization (WHO 2005) multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence against women they observed that between 3% and 24% of women in the countries surveyed reported that their first sexual experience was forced and for the majority of respondents this occurred in adolescence. In the African, Eastern Mediterranean and South-East Asia regions, studies report that over 37% of women in partnered relationship report physical and sexual violence in their lifetime (World Health Organization 2014).

Studies of sexual violence among men are rare in comparison to the female population. However, the rarity does not underlie the magnitude of the social malaise. In a few population-based studies conducted with adolescent boys in developing countries, the percentage of men who reported sexual assault and other forms of sexual victimization ranged from 3.4% in Tanzania to 20% in Peru (World Health Organization 2002). The statistics represents an underestimated prevalence because men are more unlikely to report sexual violence as compared to women.

Unfortunately in Nigeria, there are no official statistics and comparisons cannot be made with the statistics from other countries. Local surveys have reported prevalence estimates within their localities (Adeleke et al. 2012). For example, in a survey in several localities in Lagos, Nigeria, 1.3% (153) of 11,518 persons surveyed reported variety of acts of sexual victimization that included assault, attempted rape, and actual rape by household members in 2011 representing an increase of 0.3% over 2010 (Alemika 2013).

In a study of young female street traders in Bornu, Nigeria, 77.7% of 316 respondents reported various cases of sexual assault, victimization, and completed rape (Audu et al. 2009).

Beyond these grim statistics lays a health epidemic that usually affects adolescents and women unfavorably. Majority of the victims are adolescents who often suffer from the short- and long-term health consequences of sexual violence (World Health Organization 2005). These consequences affect the physical, emotional, and mental health of victims. Several studies have reported on the negative consequences of sexual violence (Reza et al. 2009; Sadler et al. 2000). These consequences cut across all types of sexual assault, victimization, attempted rape, and completed rape. Physical consequences include injuries, bleeding, scars, and deaths from completed rape. Gynecological complications can result from attempted and completed rape such as vaginal lacerations, sexually transmitted diseases, forced abortions, and unwanted pregnancies. Psychological consequences are more long lasting and include fear, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorders, depression, somatic complaints, sleep complaints, and varied behavioral problems that are associated with various forms of sexual victimization, especially rape (World Health Organization 2002).

The resulting social consequences of sexual violence are socially ostracizing and bear a heavy stigma especially in African societies (White House Council on Women and Girls 2014).

Social stigma, distancing, and blame of individuals who experienced sexual violence are some of the underlying reasons for the under-reporting of such crimes. These social consequences fuel the rising epidemic in many Nigerian communities (Awosusi and Ogundara, 2015). These social attitudes constitute major emotional burden for these individuals.

Social stigma thrives on culturally sanctioned stereotypic perceptions and tendencies to blame individuals who experience sexual violence based on rape myths (Burt 1998). It often limits formal reports and help-seeking behaviors within such communities among friends, family, and colleagues (Bachman 1993; Bieneck and Krahé 2011; Denno 1992). For adolescents and youths who form major victims, social ostractization within their communities can affect their social interactions and integration and have long-term deleterious consequences on their emotional health.

A unique community that attracts a large number of youths and adolescents in the Nigerian society are higher institutions. College communities are a major agent of socialization for youth due to the common objective of acquisition of knowledge and skills for the manpower needs of a developing nation. The high degree of socialization and freedom that the college environment affords gives opportunities for high degree of sexual intimacies, experimentation with sex, and risky sexual behaviors among youths (Anette et al. 2011). Additionally, studies have reported that a higher rate of sexual assault occurs in higher institutions than in any other startum of the society (Hill and Silva 2005; Kullima et al. 2014). Regardless of the high rates few cases ever get reported to school authorities. The fear of stigmatization, social distancing, and blame by friends and authorities have been given as reasons for the under-reporting among students (Alarape and Lawal 2011). More often, colleagues of these individuals may not be in the know. The resulting consequence promotes the silently growing epidemic that challenges authoritative action and leaves affected individuals frustrated and socially distanced within the college walls.

Presently, no major effort or program to stem the tidal surges of sexual violence has or is being carried out by any higher institution in Nigeria.

To our knowledge studies that explored views of social distancing in Nigeria are at best rare. The dearth of studies and neglect of college students in research on social distancing and perception of individuals who experienced sexual violence has hampered the orchestration of the epidemic to the attention of authorities and the need for efforts to build peer-support groups, encourage nonstigmatizing views of individuals with sexual experience and rape prevention programs among college students. This can help in promoting supportive environment for individuals with history of sexual violence and understanding from colleagues and administrators (Foshee, Bauman & Ennett 2004; Foubert et al. 2007).

The aim of this study was to determine social distancing among college students toward individuals who experienced sexual violence. Our framework was to view social distancing as any action or behavior that socially excludes or informally ostracizes any individual or minority group perceived to be social deviants and sanctioned by a larger group or society (Westphal and Khanna 2003). In this study, social distancing revolved around six social situations based on similar construct by Adewuya and Makanjuola (2008). These involved (1) feeling ashamed of victims if they are members of the family, (2) avoidance of conversation with victims, (3) maintaining friendship with victims, (4) sharing a room with victims, (5) attitude toward dating or marrying victims, and (6) blaming victims.

In this view we formed researchable questions: (1) What is the view of college students toward individuals who experienced violence in these six social situations? (2) Are there differences in perception of social distance across age, marital status gender and levels of study among college students? Our operational definition of sexual violence included all forms of sexual molestation, abuse, harassment, and rape of women or men.

Materials and Methods

Study setting and design

The study was a cross -sectional descriptive survey. Respondents were recruited from two higher institutions situated within the mainland area of Lagos, southwest Nigeria. Two institutions were chosen out of three major higher institutions within the mainland based on (1) ongoing academic session during the period of study, (2) ease of recruitment of participants for the study and accessibility, (3) and federally funded institutions due to diverse student population from different parts of the country. These institutions run 3–4 years courses leading to certificates and degrees in a host of different science-based fields.

Participants

Respondents were recruited from students who were attendees at the compulsory lectures for each department at each year of study in both institutions at the lecture halls. The selection of respondents was done using the ballot box method after due permission was obtained from the lecturers. A brief 5- to 6 min presentation on the purpose of the study was always given before inviting participants within the class to enlist their matriculation numbers on the participant's list. Procedure starts with the assigning of numbers to all participants on the list. The passing of the ballot box containing carefully concealed papers marked with either a “YES” or “NO” among the participants was always done. A “YES” pick from the ballot box will ensure recruitment into the study after verbal review before signing the consent form. In all, 230 respondents fully participated out of 303 who were recruited, this was due to discard of incorrectly filled questionnaires, for example, missing ages, levels, and so on (done by List-wise deletion) and those who opted out of the interview. Response rate was 76%. Trained assistants were used in conducting the survey in both institutions within similar period. These assistants verbally reviewed the purpose of the study, study protocol, and assurance of confidentiality and assurance of no penalties for dropping out. The survey was conducted within a 4-month period between March and July 2014. There was privacy given to the participants in such a way that participants were unaware of the responses of their colleagues as they were separated from sitting close to each other while filling the questionnaires. Participants were given writing materials (pens) for their participation. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the State Mainland Hospital.

Instruments

The self-administered questionnaire had two sections. The first section covered basic socio-demographics such as age, level, sex, tribe, department, and year at school. The next section assessed social distancing of respondents using a questionnaire based on the modified version of a social distance scale (Borgadus Social Distance scale) as used by Adewuya and Makanjoula (2008) in a Nigerian study to measure social distance toward the mentally ill. The modified version of the scale had been used severally in many studies in Nigeria and had been adapted for use in different study population (Adewuya and Makanjuola 2008; Adewuya and Oguntade 2007; Ani et al. 2011). The modified version of Borgadus Social Distance scale was a six-item measure different from the traditional seven-item scale. The modified version was scored on a 4-point scale (Adewuya and Makanjuola 2008).

The authors adopted the format of the scale as used by Adewuya and Makanjuola (2008) for this study. Responses were on a 4-point options as follows: (1) definitely not, (2) probably not, (3) definitely yes, and (4) probably yes. Initially, we had a Focus Group Discussion on the modified scale and reworded it to direct the focus on sexual violence. A pilot study was then done among 500 level students in a tertiary institution (Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago Iwoye, Nigeria), which helped us to reword few items for better clarity and understanding, also it helped us in training assistants for the main study.

Data analysis

The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 17. Significance was taken at 5% probability level (p < 0.05). Missing data were excluded by list wise deletion in statistical analyses. Socio-demographic variables were tabulated using frequency tables. Responses were grouped into yes or no for ease of analysis. Yes included responses that indicated either definitely yes or probably yes on the questionnaire while No included responses that were either definitely no or probably no. Responses from participants were compared across socio-demographic variables using Chi-square and Fisher exact test. Effect sizes were also calculated.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of participants

The socio-demographic characteristics of the students are as highlighted in Table 1.

Table 1.

Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents (N = 230)

Variables	Frequency n (%)
Age
16–26	173 (75.2%)
27–37	57 (24.8%)
Sex
Male	110 (47.8%)
Female	120 (52.2%)
Marital status
Never married	184 (80.0%)
Married	43 (18.7%)
Divorced/separated	3 (1.3%)
Year at school
1–2	163 (71.0%)
3–4	67 (29.0%)
Department
Science	212 (92.2%)
Non-science	18 (7.8%)
Tribe
Yoruba	146 (63.5%)
Ibos/bini/dfik	75 (32.5%)
Igbira.igala/Tiv	9 (3.9%)

The average age of the respondents was 22.90 ± 4.00. The majority (75.2%) were within the range of 16–26 years of age (Table 1). There were slightly more women (52.2%, N = 120), than men (47.8%, N = 110), 71.0% of the participants were either in their first or second year at school (Table 1). The majority were never married (80%, n = 184). Most (80%) of those who were married were within the 27–37 age category, 65% of those who were married were female (n = 28), while all the divorced/separated/widowed were male. Yorubas' were the most prominent tribal group among our participants. The rest of the ethnic groups were from the south eastern, south-south, middle-belt, and northern parts of Nigeria.

Views of participants on social distancing questionnaire

Participants' view on the six social situations involving individuals who experienced sexual violence and rape are as shown in Table 2. Participants' were more negative in their views on the social situation assessed in item 1 (Would you feel ashamed if someone in your family was raped or was sexually molested?), 62.6% (n = 144) either responded with probable or definite yes. In item 4 (Would you date or consider marriage to someone who had been raped or molested?), 68.7% would definitely or probably not consider dating individuals with such history additionally, about half of participants (50.4%, n = 116) would probably or definitely blame individuals with such experiences. Positive distancing were observed in participants views in item 3 (would you maintain friendship with someone who was raped or sexually molested?), 82.2% (n = 189) were more willing to maintain friendships.

Table 2.

Views of Respondents on Social Distancing Questionnaire (N = 230)

Social situation	Definitely/probably yes	Definitely/probably not
(1) Feel ashamed if someone in your family was raped or was sexually molested	144 (62.6%)	86 (37.4%)
(2) Afraid to have conversation with someone who was raped or sexually molested	96 (41.7%)	134 (58.3%)
(3) Would you maintain friendship with someone who was raped or sexually molested?	189 (82.2%)	41 (17.8%)
(4) Would you date or consider marriage to someone who had been raped or molested?	72 (31.3%)	158 (68.7%)
(5) Would you share a room with someone who had been raped or sexually molested?	129 (56.1%)	101 (43.9%)
(6) Would you blame someone for being raped or sexually molested?	116 (50.4%)	114 (49.6%)

Views of social distancing and association with socio-demographic parameters

Table 3 shows the relationship between participants' socio-demographic variables (age, sex, level of education, and marital status) and their views on social distancing.

Table 3.

Respondents' Views Across Socio-Demographic Variables

	Age						Sex						Years							Married
	16–26 N = 173	27–37 N = 57	N	χ² df = 1	p	Phi	Male N = 110	Female N = 120	N	χ²	p	Phi	1–2 N = 163	3–4 N = 67	N	χ²	p	Phi	Never n = 184	Married n = 43	Divorced n = 3	N	p
(1) Feel ashamed if someone in your family was sexually molested or rape
Yes, n (%)	118 (68.0)	26 (46.0)	144	8.83	0.00^*	0.20	74 (67.0)	70 (58.0)	144	0.172	0.68	0.027	106 (74.0)	38 (26.0)	144	1.56	0.21	0.08	120 (83.3)	22 (15.3)	2 (1.4)	144	0.07
No, n (%)	55 (32.0)	31 (54.0)	86				36 (33.0)	50 (42.0)	86				57 (66.0)	29 (34.0)	86				64 (74.4)	21 (24.4)	1 (1.2)	86
(2) Be afraid to have conversation with someone who was raped or sexually molested
Yes, n (%)	53 (31.0)	43 (75.0)	96	2.96	0.81	0.12	39 (41.0)	57 (59.0)	96	0.79	0.38	−0.058	49 (51.0)	47 (49.0)	96	3.23	0.07	0.12	68 (71.0)	25 (26.0)	3 (3.0)	96	0.01^*
No, n (%)	120 (69.0)	14 (25.0)	134				71 (53.0)	63 (47.0)	134				114 (85.0)	20 (15.0)	134				116 (87.0)	18 (13.0)	0	134
(3) Maintain friendship with someone who was raped or sexually molested?
Yes, n (%)	144 (83)	45 (79.0)	189	3.35	0.07	0.12	89 (81.0)	100 (83.0)	189	0.03	0.87	−0.012	147 (78.0)	42 (22.0)	189	3.29	0.07	0.12	165 (89.7)	24 (55.8)	0	189	0.03^*
No, n (%)	29 (17)	12 (21.0)	41				21 (19.0)	20 (17.0)	41				26 (63.0)	15 (27.0)	41				19 (46.3)	19 (46.3)	3 (7.4)	41
(4) Consider dating or marriage to someone who was raped or molested?
Yes, n (%)	62 (36.0)	10 (18.0)	72	13.14	0.00^*	0.24	36 (50.0)	36 (50.0)	72	0.13	0.71	−0.070	62 (86.0)	10 (14.0)	72	3.79	0.05	0.05	69 (96.0)	3 (4.0)	0	72	0.03^*
No, n (%)	111 (64.0)	47 (82.0)	158				74 (47.0)	84 (53.0)	158				101 (64.0)	57 (36.0)	158				115 (73.0)	40 (25.0)	3 (2.0)	158
(5) Share a room with someone who was raped or sexually molested?
Yes, n (%)	113 (88.0)	16 (12.0)	129	1.56	0.21	0	61 (47.3)	68 (52.7)	129	1.59	0.21	−0.083	106 (65.0)	23 (34.0)	129	1.56	0.21	0.04	119 (92.0)	10 (8.0)	0	129	0.8
No, n (%)	60 (59.0)	41 (41.0)	101				49 (48.5)	52 (51.5)	101				57 (56.0)	44 (44) 0	101				65 (64.0)	33 (33.0)	3 (3.0)	101
(6) Blame someone for being raped or sexually molested?
Yes, n (%)	92 (79.0)	24 (21.0)	116	0.61	0.43	0.05	49 (42.0)	67 (58.0)	116	2.50	0.11	−0.1	87 (75.0)	29 (25.0)	116	1.67	0.20	0.08	93 (80.0)	22 (19.0)	1 (1.0)	116	0.47
No, n (%)	81 (71.0)	33 (29.0)	114				61 (54.0)	53 (46.0)	114				23 (20.0)	91 (80.0)					91 (80.0)	21 (18.0)	2 (2.0)	114

No, includes definitely no/maybe no; Yes, includes definitely yes/maybe no.

Significant at p < 0.05.

As shown in Table 3, significant differences in views on social distancing among age groups were seen in response to the social situation that assessed the feeling of shame if a family member is sexually assaulted or raped as described in item 1 with those in the younger age group (16–26) having more proportion of those who will feel shame (68%, n = 118) than those with older age group (46%, n = 26) at χ²(1, N = 230) = 8.83, p = 0.00, effect size(phi) = 0.20.

Also, there were significant differences in views among the age groups. They differed in responses that assessed dating or getting married to individuals who had been raped or sexually molested as in item 4 at χ²(1, N = 230) = 13.14, p = 0.00, effect size(phi) = 0.24.

Significant differences were also observed in views along marital status (Never married, married, divorced/widowed/separated) toward the social situation in that assessed the fear of having conversation with individuals who were sexually molested or raped using Fisher exact test (N = 230) at p = 0.01, crammer V = 0.200 in item 2. Differences were also significant in social situation that assessed maintaining friendships with individuals who were sexually molested or raped using Fisher exact test at p = 0.03, phi = 0.170 and in social situation that assessed dating or getting married to individuals with history of sexual molestation or rape as in item 4, at p = 0.03, phi = 0.18 as seen in Table 3.

Discussion

The main focus of our study was to determine the views of college students toward individuals who experienced sexual violence in social settings. We sought to find social situations that can affect the acceptance and social integration of individuals who experienced sexual violence within the college campus.

The respondents were within a relatively young age group (16–37), which was not unusual due to the study setting; similar age groups have been reported in other studies within university settings in Nigeria (Kabir 2005; Kullima et al. 2014; Ogunwale and Oshiname 2015).

Unlike studies with similar focus in like settings our study differed from previous studies in surveying the views of respondents rather than reporting prevalence estimates among those who experienced sexual violence (Audu et al. 2009; Kullima et al. 2014).

Our focus was to answer questions we formulated as our research aims. The first was What is the view of college students toward individuals who experienced violence in the hypothesized six social situations?

Our study showed that some barriers still exists in the social acceptance of individuals who experienced sexual violence by college students along some of the social situations of our study. A major area of negative social distancing were in situations that required closer, intimate relationships with individuals who experienced sexual violence such as being members of their families or dating such individuals. Similar findings had also been reported in earlier studies among therapists and university students toward female victims and offenders in the United States (Shechory and Idisis 2006).

The reluctance among college students may be associated with multifaceted reasons that border on public stigma. Stigmatization of these individuals has often been reported in several studies (Awosusi and Ogundana 2015; Denno 1992; Muoghalu 2012; Odu et al. 2014). It is interesting to find that the feeling of shame may not only lie with such individuals as most studies report (Kullima et al. 2014; Ladebo 2004) but may also be expressed by youths who are related to them.

Further, our findings seem to suggest that quite a number of college students (68.7%) would prefer not to date or consider marriage to individuals who experienced sexual violence. Those who would not prefer to date were more than twice the number of those who would prefer to date such individuals (2.19:1).

Dating and pairing up for potential marriage is quite common among students within university walls due to the high level of socialization, desire for companionship, natural youthfulness, and fun (Knox and Wilson 1981; Ogunwale and Oshiname 2017). These negative distancing views can potentially distance individuals who experienced sexual violence from meaningful social interactions and can be socially ostracizing within the university community.

More often individuals who experienced sexual violence are often blamed for such experiences (Bieneck and Krahé 2011). Not surprisingly more than half of our respondents were in the affirmative in responding to blaming individuals who experienced sexual violence. This finding replicates numerous findings in previous studies (Bieneck and Krahé 2011; Fawole and Agboola 2015; McCaul et al. 1990; Muoghalu 2012). Although our study did not explore factors related to social distancing, reasons for the persistence of such attitude lie in the deeply entrenched cultural rape myths and stereotypic conception in patriarchal societies (Herek 2000; McCaul et al. 1990). As reported in earlier studies rape myths and beliefs have been shown to underlie social distancing (Shechory and Idisis 2006). It has also been postulated that blame also results from the lack of empathy for individuals with such experiences (Bell et al. 1994). In Nigeria, rape and sexual molestation and victimization are strongly condemned but deeply entrenched are cultural myths and stereotyping of victims (Ogunyemi 2000). These societal perceptions tend to pass from generation to generation. Among university students, prior studies have shown that they also share societal view as to seeing sexual violence especially completed rape as a crime (Elegbeleye 2006). Despite these perceptions of criminality, they still maintain a degree of negative social distancing of individuals who experienced sexual violence as our finding suggests.

Social myths revolving around individuals who experienced sexual violence have also been found to be common among young people in Nigeria (Ajuwon et al. 2005). These social myths may be a major factor in negative social distancing and stigmatization of individuals who experienced sexual violence. Myths such as the unnegotiable right of men to satisfy sexual urges from their girlfriends by any means, possible that girls who refuse sexual friendships are seen as arrogant, and women usually invite such incidences due to the pattern of dressing or misbehavior (Ajuwon 2005). Another factor may be the degree to which participants feel a sense of identity or similarity with such individuals may affect their perception as findings showed in studies among junior college students in a U.S. survey (Bell et al. 1994).

Our second question was to assess the views across socio-demographic parameters.

As we found out, significant differences were observed in the perception across age groups and marital status. Those who were younger (16–26) were more in number in feeling ashamed of a family member who experienced sexual violence while those in the older age group (27–37) were more unwilling to date individuals who experienced sexual violence (Table 3).

We could not project any reason for these differences as we could not find studies with similar results. The trend is also seen along marital lines, as those who were never married were more likely to have conversations with individuals and more likely to maintain relationships with individuals who experienced sexual violence and to date individuals who experienced sexual violence. These differences may be due to the fact that the older age group were more likely to be involved or have been involved in marital relationships and not disposed to any other intimate association. However, extensive wide scale studies will be needed to determine how significant these differences are and eliciting factors behind the findings.

An observation from our study is that there were no significant differences in social distancing across gender. Our study does show that among our respondents views on social distancing toward individuals with sexual experience across gender were similar. Female respondents were almost equally likely as their male counterparts to show social distancing toward individuals who experienced sexual violence, However, some slight differences in the varied responses across each category were noticed, women had more negatives for those who felt ashamed for family members who were raped, were less likely to date people with a history of sexual violence than men, and had higher percentages of persons who will not share a room with men. The small sample size may have limited the significant differences between gender, but a pattern is noticed from our results that men were more likely to date victims than women and generally women had higher negative distancing in many categories than their male counterparts, unlike findings from numerous studies that showed more empathetic views among women (Alarape and Lawal 2011; Audu et al. 2009; Koss et al. 1987; World Health Organization 2013). Our study did not explore attitudes explicitly, our study showed that distancing behavior may be more negative in women despite the widespread findings of empathetic views. We do note that these seeming differences in findings may be due to circumstantial and methodological factors such as the nature of the study population, study design, local factors, and our particular study focus on social distancing. In consideration, our findings raise issues as to gender perception of social distancing and conceptualization of sexual violence across differing cultures and environments. A more widespread community study will help to explore significant findings in distancing and attitude.

Nevertheless, it is gratifying to note that majority (82.2%) reported their willingness to maintain friendships with such individuals and are willing to share habitation with them. The implication of this finding shows that there is a potential degree of gathering peer support for individuals who experienced sexual violence that can be harnessed in building supportive frameworks and education to reduce negative effects of social distancing or stigmatization among college students as reported by some authors (Banyard et al. 2007). This is imperative because negative social distancing such as feelings of shame over family members who experienced sexual violence can be a major barrier to public reporting of sexual violence by college students as observed by some authors (Sadler et al. 2000). Efforts at public education should be encouraged to help reduce social distancing among students.

Our study has limitations; the responses of our participants were not based on actual knowledge of victims. Moreover, the cross-sectional nature of the study limits causal inference. Further, the sample size and the selection of only two institutions cannot be taken as an adequate representation of the views of all college students in Nigeria, extensive multicenter study will be needed. There is also need for future research to focus on knowledge of victims and identifying reasons for major differences in distancing among age groups and marital status.

Conclusion

Negative distancing exists among college students in Nigeria. College students expressed greater social distancing toward individuals who experienced sexual violence in intimate and family relationships. This may likely be due to rape myths within the socio-cultural contexts and the public view of such individuals. We recommend a need for peer support programs to be established in colleges to help reduce social distancing.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the administrators and students of the Yaba College of Technology and University of Nigeria, Nsuka (Lagos Annex).

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

References

Adeleke

, Olowookere

, Hassan

, et al. (2012). Sexual assault against women at Osogbo, South western Nigeria. Niger J Clin Pract. 15, 190–193.

Adewuya

, Makanjuola

. (2008). Social distance towards people with mental illness in southwestern Nigeria. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 42, 389–395.

Adewuya

, Oguntade

. (2007). Doctors' attitude towards people with mental illness in Western Nigeria. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 42, 931–936.

Ajuwon

. (2005). Attitudes, norms and experiences of sexual coercion among young people in Ibadan, Nigeria. In Sex Without Consent: Young People in Developing Countries. Shireen

, Jejeebhoy

, eds. (Zed Books, London and New York, NY), pp. 96–104.

Ajuwon

, Oladapo Olley

, Akintola

, Akin-Jimoh

. (2004). Sexual coercion in young persons: Exploring the experiences of rape victims in Ibadan. Nigeria. Health Educ., 104, 8–17.

Alarape

, Lawal

. (2011). Attitudes toward rape among Nigerian young adults: The role of gender, parental family structure and religiosity. Gender Behav. 9, 3886–3896.

Alemika

. (2013). Criminal Victimization, Policing and Governance in Nigeria. (CLEEN Foundation Monographe, CLEEN Foundation, Lagos, Nigeria.)

Anette

, Gilbert

, Per-Olof

. (2011). The impact of socio-demographic and religious factors: And religious factors upon sexual behavior among Ugandan University. Plos One. 6, 1–12.

Ani

, Ola

, Coker

. (2011). School children's stigmatising attitude towards peers with epilepsy in Nigeria. Vulnerable Child Youth Stud. 6, 330–338.

10.

Audu

, Geidam

, Jarma

. (2009). Child labor and sexual assault among girls in Maiduguri, Nigeria. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 104, 64–67.

11.

Awosusi

, Ogundana

. (2015). Culture of silence and wave of sexual violence. AASCIT J Educ. 1, 31–37.

12.

Bachman

. (1993). Predicting the reporting of rape victimizations have rape reforms made a difference?. Crim Justice Behav. 20, 254–270.

13.

Banyard

, Moynihan

, Plante

. (2007). Sexual violence prevention through bystander education: An experimental evaluation. J Community Psychol. 35, 463–481.

14.

Bell

, Kuriloff

, Lottes

. (1994). Understanding attributions of blame in stranger rape and date rape situations: An examination of gender, race, identification, and students' social perceptions of rape victims. J Appl Soc Psychol. 24, 1719–1734.

15.

Bieneck

, Krahé

. (2011). Blaming the victim and exonerating the perpetrator in cases of rape and robbery: Is there a double standard?. J Interpers Violence. 26, 1785–1797.

16.

Burt

. (1998). Rape myths. Confronting rape and sexual assault. In Confronting Rape and Sexual Assault. Clay-Warner

, ed. (Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD), pp. 129–144.

17.

Denno

. (1992). Perspectives on disclosing rape victims' names. Fordham Law Rev., 65, 1113.

18.

Elegbeleye

. (2006). Is rape in the eye or in the mind of the offender? A survey of rape perception among Nigerian university stakeholders. Educ Res Rev., 1, 40–51.

19.

Fawole

, Agboola

. (2015). Parental influence and Dating Violence among Students at Nigerian Universities. Violence Crime Fam Patterns Causes Consequences. 177–187.

20.

Foshee

, Bauman

, Ennett

, et al. (2004). Assessing the long-term effects of the Safe Dates program and a booster in preventing and reducing adolescent dating violence victimization and perpetratio. Am J Public Health. 94, 610–624.

21.

Foubert

, Newberry

, Tatum

. (2007). Behavior differences seven months later: Effects of a rape prevention program. J Stud Aff Res Pract. 44, 1125–1146.

22.

Herek

. (2000). The psychology of sexual prejudice. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 9, 19–22.

23.

Hill

, Silva

. (2005). Drawing the Line: Sexual Harassment on Campus. (American Association of University Women Educational Foundation, WA.)

24.

Kabir

. (2005). Sexual behaviour among students in tertiary institutions in Kano, northern Nigeria. J Community Med Prim Health Care. 16, 17–22.

25.

Kennedy

. (2005). Violence in emergency departments: Under-reported, unconstrained, and unconscionable. Med J Aust. 183, 362–365.

26.

Knox

, Wilson

. (1981). Dating behaviors of university students. Family Relations. 32, 255–258.

27.

Koss

, Gidycz

, Wisniewski

. (1987). The scope of rape: Incidence and prevalence of sexual aggression and victimization in a national sample of higher education students. J Consult Clin Psychol., 55, 162.

28.

Kullima

, Kawuwa

, Audu

, et al. (2014). Sexual assault against female Nigerian students. Afr J Reprod Health. 14, 189–193.

29.

Ladebo

. (2004). Sexual harassment in academia in Nigeria: How real?. Afr Soc Rev. 7, 117–130.

30.

McCaul

, Veltum

, Boyechko

, Crawford

. (1990). Understanding attributions of victim blame for rape: Sex, violence, and foreseeability. J Appl Soc Psychol., 20, 20.

31.

Muoghalu

. (2012). Rape and women's sexual health in Nigeria: The stark realities of being female in a patriarchal world. Afr Anthropologist. 19, 33–41.

32.

Odu

. Falana

, Olotu

. (2014). Prevalence of violent sexual assault on South West Nigeria girls. ESJ. 10, 471–481.

33.

Ogunwale

., Oshiname

. (2017). A Qualitative Exploration of Date Rape Survivors Physical and Psycho-Social Experiences in a Nigerian University. J Interpers Violence, 32, 227–248.

34.

Ogunyemi

. (2000). Knowledge and perception of child sexual abuse in urban Nigeria: Some evidence from a community-based project. Afr J Reprod Health. 4, 44–52.

35.

Reza

, Breiding

, Gulaid

, et al. (2009). Sexual violence and its health consequences for female children in Swaziland: A cluster survey study. Lancet. 373, 1966–1972.

36.

Sadler

, Booth

, Nielson

, Doebbeling

. (2000). Health-related consequences of physical and sexual violence: Women in the military. Obstet Gynecol. 96, 473–480.

37.

Shechory

, Idisis

. (2006). Rape myths and social distance toward sex offenders and victims among therapists and students. Sex Roles. 54, 651–658.

38.

Watts

, Zimmerman

. (2002). Violence against women: Global scope and magnitude. Lancet. 359, 1232–1237.

39.

Westphal

, Khanna

. (2003). Keeping directors in line: Social distancing as a control mechanism in the corporate elite. Adm Sci Q. 48, 361–398.

40.

White House Council on Women and Girls. (2014). Rape and assault: A renewed call to action. Retrieved January 21, 2017, from www.whitehouse.gov/sexualassault_renewed-call-action.

41.

World Health Organization. (2002). World report on violence and health. (World Health Organization, Geneva.)

42.

World Health Organization. (2005). WHO multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence against women. (World Health Organization, Geneva.)

43.

World Health Organization. (2013). Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. (World Health Organization, Geneva.)

44.

World Health Organization. (2014). Global status report on violence prevention. (World Health Organization, Geneva.)