Sexual Perpetration History Predicting Men's Empathy with a Rapist

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine empathy with a hypothetical rapist based on type of sexual perpetration experience (i.e., none, nonrape perpetrators, rapists who do not admit to “rape,” and rapists who admit to “rape”). Undergraduate men (n = 385) completed the Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale (Smith and Frieze 2003) and the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Perpetration (Koss et al. 2007), which first asks behavior-based questions, without using the word “rape,” to identify rapists and those with other sexual perpetration experience, and then asks if they “may have ever raped someone.” None of the respondents admitted to “rape,” but participants whose survey responses indicated prior behavior consistent with rape (rapists) reported greater empathy than those who indicated no behaviors consistent with any type of sexual perpetration (nonperpetrators). Respondents who indicated prior behavior consistent with sexual perpetration, but not rape (nonrape perpetrators) did not differ from either rapists or nonperpetrators. Committing rape may be associated with greater rape perpetrator empathy due to similarity in experience.

Introduction

Rape and sexual assault by men on college campuses are prevalent (McDermott et al. 2015; Osman 2011). Rape empathy is the ability to deeply understand the perspective, emotions, and reactions of a rape victim or perpetrator (Smith and Frieze 2003), and has been identified as an important factor in rape prevention, education, offender treatment, and judgments (Deitz et al. 1982; Foubert and Newberry 2006; Pithers 1999; Smith and Frieze 2003). In this literature, rape victim empathy has been examined and discussed more extensively than rape perpetrator empathy. However, the latter can have important implications in these areas as well.

Theory suggests that levels of empathy increase with those who share similar experiences (Krebs 1975). Among men, stronger desire to rape has been associated with greater empathy with a rapist (Deitz et al. 1982). Also, perpetrators of any type of sexual aggression have reported greater empathy with a rapist than nonperpetrators (Osman 2011). However, given the degree of similarity in experience, rapists may empathize with another rapist to a greater extent than other types of sexual perpetrators. Smith and Frieze (2003) predicted that men who have raped would empathize with a rapist more than men who have never raped, but their sample size of rapists was too small to test. Therefore, differences in rape perpetrator empathy based on rape or other sexual perpetration experience have not been studied.

Identifying sexual perpetrators in research is more successful when behavioral tactics are described (e.g., “put my penis into a woman's vagina without her consent”) rather than labeled (e.g., “rape”) (Koss et al. 2007), and past researchers have suggested that those who admit “rape” may differ from perpetrators who do not (Edwards et al. 2014). Thus, rapists who admit “rape” may identify and empathize with a rapist to an even greater extent than rapists who do not admit “rape.”

The purpose of this study was to examine empathy with a hypothetical rapist based on type of participant perpetration experience. It was predicted that rape perpetrator empathy would be greatest among rapists who admitted “rape,” followed by rapists who did not admit “rape,” nonrape perpetrators, and nonperpetrators.

Materials and Methods

Participants

Participants were 385 male undergraduates (mean age = 19.4, SD = 1.6; 45% freshman; 28% sophomores; 12% juniors; and 15% seniors). They volunteered as an option to receive extra credit. Participants reported ethnicity as European/European American (70%), African/African American (16%), Hispanic/Hispanic American (6%), Asian/Asian American (5%), and Biracial/Multiracial (3%).

Measures

To measure empathy with a rapist, participants completed Smith and Frieze's (2003) Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale (REMP); an 18-item Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The current Cronbach alpha was 0.87. Participants also completed the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Perpetration (SES-SFP) (Koss et al. 2007), which uses 35 behavior-based questions (without the word “rape”) to identify those with rape or other sexual perpetration experience (i.e., contact, attempted coercion, coercion, and attempted rape). To measure admitted rape, participants were then asked, “yes” or “no,” “Do you think you may have ever raped someone?”

Procedure

This study was approved by an institutional review board. After providing informed consent, participants anonymously completed surveys in a classroom setting, sitting at least every other seat apart for privacy. When finished, participants placed their surveys into an anonymous drop bag and received counseling option references.

Results

Participants who indicated no experience on the SES-SFP were categorized as nonperpetrators, those who indicated perpetration experience (but not rape) were categorized as nonrape perpetrators, and those who indicated rape experience were categorized as rapists. No rapists admitted “rape,” so we could not test this group. Those missing data (n = 34) were excluded.

A one-way ANOVA revealed a main effect, F (2, 348) = 4.02, p = 0.019, partial n² = 0.023. Rapists reported greater empathy than nonperpetrators, p = 0.014, partial n² = 0.022. Nonrape perpetrators did not significantly differ from rapists, p = 0.326, partial n² = 0.008, or nonperpetrators, p = 0.067, partial n² = 0.011 (Table 1).

Table 1.

Means, Standard Deviations, and Comparisons of Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale Scores

	M	SD	n
Nonperpetrators	2.4_a	0.66	234
Nonrape perpetrators	2.5_ab	0.66	79
Rapists (nonadmitted)	2.7_b	0.79	38
Admitted rapists	—	—	0

Means that do not share subscripts differ at the p = 0.014 level. Scores on the REMP were summed and divided by 18, so final scores can range from 1 to 5. Higher scores indicate greater empathy with a rapist.

REMP, Rape-Perpetrator Empathy Scale; SD, standard deviation.

Discussion

Rapists had greater empathy with a hypothetical rapist than nonperpetrators. However, nonrape perpetrators did not differ from either of these groups. Results suggest that committing rape may most clearly increase identification with another rapist, perhaps because of their degree of similarity in experience. Given the various behaviors included in the nonrape perpetration group, more research is needed before drawing conclusions regarding how other perpetration experiences may impact empathy.

Zero participants in this sample admitted “rape,” including the rapists. This limitation has implications for identifying rapists in future samples, especially given the federal initiative to more accurately assess sexual assault prevalence rates on college campuses (White House Task Force 2014), and suggests that measures utilizing behaviorally descriptive questions, without the term “rape,” may best detect perpetrators.

To test whether those who admit “rape” differ from those who do not, it may be fruitful to consider alternative labels (e.g., “sexual assault” and “perpetration”), consider that respondents may more readily admit to future “rape” intentions than to past criminal behavior (Edwards et al. 2014), or examine populations in which rapists may be more likely to admit “rape” (e.g., prison). Furthermore, future research in these populations, investigating female perpetration, and alternative study designs may address other limitations in this study, including the lesser number of perpetrators than nonperpetrators, undergraduate male sample, potential assumption by participants that the REMP's hypothetical rapist was male, and correlational nature of the data.

Conclusions

In addition to promoting empathy with a victim, it could be beneficial to address factors (e.g., rape experience) that may lead individuals to empathize with a rapist, as these two types of empathy are not mutually exclusive (Osman 2011; Smith and Frieze 2003). For example, empathy with a rapist may be a point of consideration in developing educational prevention or treatment programs, or in jury selection. Thus, continuing research to understand factors associated with rape perpetrator empathy may expand our knowledge and utilization of empathy to educate, prevent, enforce justice, and rehabilitate.

Footnotes

Author Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

References

Deitz

, Blackwell

, Daley

, Bentley

. (1982). Measurement of empathy toward rape victims and rapists. J Pers Soc Psychol, 42, 372–384.

Edwards

, Bradshaw

, Hinsz

. (2014). Denying rape but endorsing forceful intercourse: Exploring differences among responders. Violence Gender, 1, 188–193.

Foubert

, Newberry

. (2006). Effects of two versions of an empathy-based rape prevention program on fraternity men's survivor empathy, attitudes, and behavioral intent to commit rape or sexual assault. J Coll Student Dev, 47, 133–148.

Koss

, Abbey

, Campbell

, et al. (2007). Revising the SES: A collaborative process to improve assessment of sexual aggression and victimization. Psychol Women Quart, 31, 357–370.

Krebs

. (1975). Empathy and altruism. J Pers Soc Psychol, 32, 1134–1146.

McDermott

, Kilmartin

, McKelvey

, Kridel

. (2015). College male sexual assault of women and the psychology of men: Past, present, and future directions for research. Psychol Men Masculin, 16, 355–366.

Osman

. (2011). Predicting rape empathy based on victim, perpetrator, and participant gender, and history of sexual aggression. Sex Roles, 64, 506–515.

Pithers

. (1999). Empathy: Definition, enhancement, and relevance to the treatment of sexual abusers. J Interpers Violence, 14, 257–284.

Smith

, Frieze

. (2003). Examining rape empathy from the perspective of the victim and the assailant. J Appl Soc Psychol, 33, 476–498.

10.

White House Task Force (2014, June 18). Not Alone: The First Report of the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. Retrieved on February 9, 2017, from www.justice.gov/ovw/page/file/905942/download