Factors Related to Rape Reporting Behavior in Brazil: Examining the Role of Spatio-Temporal Factors

Abstract

The reporting of rape to police is an important component of this crime to have the criminal justice system involved and, potentially, punish offenders. However, for a number of reasons (fear of retribution, self-blame, etc.), most rapes are not reported to police. Most often, the research investigating this phenomenon considers incident and victim factors with little attention to the spatio-temporal factors of the rape. In this study, we consider incident, victim, and spatio-temporal factors relating to rape reporting in Campinas, Brazil. Our primary research question is whether or not the spatio-temporal factors play a significant role in the reporting of rape, over and above incident and victim factors. The subjects under study are women who were admitted to the Women’s Integrated Healthcare Center at the State University of Campinas, Brazil, and surveyed by a psychologist or a social worker. Rape reporting to police was measured using a dichotomous variable. Logistic regression was used to predict the probability of rape reporting based on incident, victim, and spatio-temporal factors. Although we find that incident and victim factors matter for rape reporting, spatio-temporal factors (rape/home location and whether the rape was in a private or public place) play an important role in rape reporting, similar to the literature that considers these factors. This result has significant implications for sexual violence education. Only when we know why women decide not to report a rape may we begin to work on strategies to overcome these hurdles.

Keywords

rape reporting police reporting spatio-temporal factors Brazil

Introduction

Latin American countries have some of the highest rates of violent crime in the world. Despite their adherence to the United Nations Development Programme (2013), many Latin American countries have high rates of robbery, murder, drug-related offenses, and rape. Rape is a historical and cultural problem that affects children, adolescents, and adults regardless of nationality, but the level of violence may vary according to nationality (Bott, Guedes, Goodwin, & Mendoza, 2012), social conditions (Nunes et al., 2011), and ethnicity (Wing & Merchan, 1993). Not surprisingly, a large proportion of victims do not report the rape due to the taboo associated with this type of crime. For instance, Vargas (1999) reported that the Brazilian Criminal Justice System has absolved rapists because young victims—younger than 14 years old—denied the case to help their fathers or stepfathers. Another study in Pernambuco, Brazil, showed that 21.6% of women between 15 and 49 years old reported that their first sexual intercourse was unwanted but not forced, while 4.3% were forced/raped (Bott et al., 2012).

According to the National System of Public Safety Information (SISNEP),¹ the Brazilian rate rape has had a 30% increase (from 2010 to 2014), but this may be a consequence of increased reporting by victims. In the Campinas Metropolitan Region (CMR), São Paulo state, the rape rate per 100,000 inhabitants was 18.7 in 2010 and it increased to 27.77 in 2012, but it had decreased to 23.23 in 2014.² One detail that can contribute to this high rate of rape is that Campinas is home to the largest open red-light district in Latin America (Helene, 2008). Red-light districts may represent highly attractive hunting fields for sex offenders (Beauregard, Rossmo, & Proulx, 2007). In addition, rapes in the CMR as a whole are characterized by indoor occurrences where the victim already knew the offender (Bedone & Faúndes, 2007). As such, spatio-temporal characteristics appear to play a role in rape reporting in a Brazilian context. However, there has been a lack of suitable data to study this problem in a Brazilian context (Bassani et al., 2009).

It is well-established that only a minority of rape victims report their victimization to police (Vargas, 1999). Consequently, the health care system is often the first contact for rape victims. This may be, in part, due to not only the low charge rates for rape offenders but also the level of trust in the police versus doctors: 44% and 66%, respectively, in Brazil (Verein, 2014). This creates a number of issues, not only for the administration of justice (i.e., deterrence effect of punishing acts of rape is absent) but more importantly for the victims (i.e., receiving the help needed to recover from the crime).

Factors Associated With Rape Reporting to Police

Numbers originating from different sources show that only a minority of rapes are reported to police (Cohn, Zinzow, Resnick, & Kilpatrick, 2013; Rennison, 2002). Some studies have estimated the reporting rate to be between 16% and 20% (Kilpatrick, Edmunds, & Seymour, 1992; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2006). This is highly problematic as one of the first conditions for the crime to be solved is that it must be reported to police (Bachman, 1998). Rape reporting to police has several implications. First, as suggested by deterrence theory, an unreported rape incident eliminates the possibility that the offender will eventually be arrested and convicted; moreover, it reduces the perceived likelihood that rape, in general, will be punished (Bachman, 1998). Second, it is important to better understand factors that could prevent the victim from reporting their rape victimization to improve the criminal justice system interventions, such as sensitivity of screening questions and referrals of women to specialized treatment (Cohn et al., 2013). Third, addressing the different reasons why victims are reluctant to report the rape incident could contribute to better educational strategies to facilitate access to post-assault services (Cohn et al., 2013). For instance, it was shown that victims who report the rape shortly after are more likely to receive medical examination: Resnick et al. (2000) found that victims who reported the rape to police were 5 times more likely to receive medical care (that most often includes mental health referrals) compared with those who did not. Thus, victims who report their victimization to the authorities present better psychological recovery compared with those who do not (Ruback & Thompson, 2001; Thompson et al., 2007).

Despite these different advantages of reporting rape to the authorities, the majority of rape victims do not report their victimization. There are different reasons as to why victims are reluctant to report the rape to police: Some victims have expressed the fear of being blamed by others for the rape (Kilpatrick et al., 1992), some were concerned about others knowing about the rape (such as family, friends, the public in general), or others knowing about getting HIV or another sexually transmitted disease from the rape (Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011). Some victims of rape have mentioned the fear of reprisal by the offender (Cohn et al., 2013), embarrassment about the incident (Thompson, Sitterle, Clay, & Kingree, 2007), and the perception that the victimization was not serious enough to report or were not sure whether a crime had occurred (Fisher, Daigle, Cullen, & Turner, 2003; Thompson et al., 2007). Some feared the stigma attached to rape prosecution or were concerned about not having the time to participate in a criminal prosecution (Amir, 1971). Finally, some victims mentioned that they thought that not enough evidence was present to report the crime or that they feared the criminal justice system (Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011).

Studies have also found differences in rape reporting to police between Western and non-Western countries. Baumer, Felson, and Messner (2003) suggested that due to the differences in legal systems, Western countries were more likely to pass anti-rape laws compared with non-Western countries, which could explain a greater awareness of Western women toward gender equality and legal rights and, thus, a greater tendency to report a sexual assault to police compared with non-Western women. Another potential hypothesis to explain this difference between Western and non-Western countries has been suggested in two studies conducted by Dussich (2001) and Yamawaki (2008) comparing Japanese with Western women. According to both authors, the difference in rape reporting behavior could be due to cultural differences in the conception of socially acceptable sexual behaviors, namely, that non-Western women tolerate a broader range of sexual behavior compared with Western women. According to Dussich (2001), Japanese women are more likely to rely on informal social support from their friends and family than on government. For Yamawaki (2008), the decision of Japanese women not to report rape to police could be motivated by the need to save victim’s face. In a study comparing rape reporting to police in Western and non-Western countries, Chon (2014) used the International Crime Victimization Survey and showed that male victims, urban residency, and the number of perpetrators were important factors for non-Western countries but not for Western countries. On the contrary, the victim’s prior relationship with the offender and the level of family income were important factors for Western countries but not for non-Western countries, suggesting the need to consider the social environment when examining factors influencing rape reporting behavior.

Victim- and Incident-Related Factors

Studies have also identified several factors that would increase the likelihood of a victim reporting their rape victimization. First, many studies have examined victim demographics. Being older, White, married, and having completed some high school have been related to a greater chance of police reporting (Amstadter, McCauley, Ruggiero, Resnick, & Kilpatrick, 2007; Kaukinen, 2002; Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011). However, Lizotte (1985) found that education was negatively related to the likelihood of rape reporting, as it was suggested they would either fear a loss of status or because they are aware of the low probability of obtaining a rape conviction.

Second, particular rape incident characteristics have been associated to a greater likelihood of reporting the rape victimization. Several studies have shown that when rapists are using strategies usually found in forcible rape, there is a greater chance of the victim reporting to police. For instance, when the offender is a stranger, threat and/or fear are used at the time of the crime, use of a weapon, degrading acts inflicted, and severe injuries are inflicted on the victim, victims are more likely to report the rape to authorities (Bachman, 1998; Cohn et al., 2013; Greenberg & Ruback, 1992; Rennison & Rand, 2002; Ullman & Filipas, 2001; Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011). It was hypothesized that victim injuries would increase reporting as victims show visible signs of the incident that is likely to help define the act as rape (Amir, 1971; Kaukinen & DeMaris, 2009; Lizotte, 1985). It was also suggested that the reason why these characteristics are usually leading to greater victim reporting is that they fit within the stereotypical definition of the rape script (Cohn et al., 2013; Littleton & Axsom, 2003; Littleton, Axsom, & Grills Taquechel, 2009; Osman & Davis, 1999; Williams, 1984). Also, Lizotte (1985) found that in the United States, the more property a rapist steals from the victim during the incident, the more likely the victim is to report the crime to police as it is thought that it makes a stronger case for conviction. However, studies have shown that the use of alcohol and/or drugs by the victim at the time of the assault was related to a lower likelihood of reporting (Fisher et al., 2003; Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011).

Spatio-Temporal Factors

Most studies examining the factors related to rape reporting to police have focused mainly on the victim and the crime characteristics. However, some studies have also included one particular factor often looked at by environmental criminologists: the location of the crime. Williams (1984) showed that women in the United States whose homes were broken into or were attacked in their cars were more likely to report the rape compared with women raped in a social situation such as on a date. In their cross-national research study, Greenberg and Ruback (1992) found that victims were more likely to report their victimization to police if the attack occurred outdoors. Bachman (1998) used the National Crime Victimization Survey in the United States to examine attacks that occurred in private versus public locations but did not find a significant difference. Using a different measure of location, Lizotte (1985) found that if the offender had the right to be present where the rape occurred, the victims were less likely to report the crime to the authorities. In cases of college women, Fisher et al. (2003) showed that rapes occurring on American university and college campuses are more likely to be reported compared with rapes that take place away from campus.

Although studies have examined a number of factors related to rape reporting, most studies have focused on victim demographics and some crime characteristics (Amstadter et al., 2007; Kaukinen, 2002; Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011). Aside from a few studies that have investigated the effect of the crime locations, most studies have neglected to account for the impact of spatio-temporal factors when considering the factors related to rape reporting (Bachman, 1998; Fisher et al., 2003; Greenberg & Ruback, 1992). Therefore, the aim of this study is to use a sample of rape victims from the Campinas region of Brazil to examine victim, crime, and environmental characteristics (e.g., indoor, outdoor, time of the rape, home city) that could be associated to a decision by the victim reporting the rape to the authorities.

Data and Method

According to the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2011), Campinas is the primary city within the CMR that has 20 municipalities and more than 2,500,000 habitants. Campinas has crime rates and a level of antisocial behavior that are above the national average (Melgaço, 2011). For example, rape rates per 100,000 are consistently, although modestly, greater than the national average (23.2 vs. 22.6, in 2014), whereas homicide, theft, and robbery are 28.3%, 42.1%, and 9.2% greater in Campinas relative to São Paulo State, 2014, respectively.³

The research data were collected from a special hospital for women called Women’s Integrated Healthcare Center (CAISM) at the State University of Campinas, Brazil. This public hospital has been treating women victims of sexual abuse of all ages since 1986, the year of its foundation, and follows the guidelines for victims of rape set by the Brazilian Ministry of Health. Usually, the sexual violence/abuse victims arrive at CAISM within 24 hr of the occurrence on their own or are forwarded by police and/or other health services (Bedone & Faúndes, 2007). The data provided contain information from reports to police, the victim’s profile, and the assault details.

The sexual violence/abuse data were collected in CAISM from a survey conducted by a psychologist or social worker for all sexual violence victims, January 2010 to December 2014—the psychologist of social worker received training for administrating this survey. Initially, the dataset had 677 victims, but 27 cases were eliminated because of the absence of information. On average, the CAISM treated 135.4 victims per year and 11.3 per month in these 5 years. The mean victim’s age in this study was 24.3 years old.

The dependent variable of the research refers to whether the victim reported the sexual assault to police (0 = not reported, 1 = reported). From these data, we considered 26 independent variables divided into three groups: victim profile, crime/event outcomes, and spatial/temporal factors—frequencies are available in Table 1. In the first group, three variables were used to describe the victim profile related to the assault: age,⁴ education, and whether or not the victim knew the offender. The second group was associated with crime/event outcomes and it included 12 variables: the strategies used by the offender such as physical strength; use of a gun,⁵ threat, and/or sharp weapon; whether the assault had more than one offender; variables representing whether or not the offender was drunk or the offender was using drugs were used to describe if the offender was perceived to be under the influence or not; in the context of police reporting, we included a variable stating whether or not the offender went to jail; and finally, variables representing sexual crime completion had occurred if the offender anally, orally, or vaginally penetrated the victim during the assault. The third and last group of variables was related to 11 spatial/temporal factors: Campinas was the city base for both variables representing home city and assault city; “on way to work” describes whether or not the sexual crime took place when the victim was traveling to or from work; four measures representing the environmental aspects of the locations where the sexual assaults happened are indoor private (e.g., house victim, house offender, motel), indoor public (e.g., school, commerce, work), outdoor private (e.g., party, backyard, work), and outdoor public (e.g., street, bus stop, leisure area); finally, four temporal factors are included in the current study that describe the hour of day during which the sexual assault occurred, representing morning (6:00 a.m.-11:59 a.m.), afternoon (12:00 p.m.-5:59 p.m.), evening (6:00 p.m.-11:59 p.m.), and night (12:00 a.m.-5:59 a.m.).

Table 1.

Percentages of Dependent and Independent Variables (N = 650).

Variables	Categories	%
Victim’s consent
Report to police	Yes = 1	65.85
Victim profile
Age	<16 years old = 1	28.00
Education	Illiterate/Elementary (0)	42.77
	High School (1)	45.08
	University (2)	12.15
Offender known	Known = 1	38.46
Crime/event outcomes
Physical strength	Yes = 1	10.62
With gun	Yes = 1	5.23
Threat	Yes = 1	2.31
Sharp weapon	Yes = 1	3.38
Multiple offenders	Yes = 1	14.62
Offender drunk	Yes = 1	25.23
Offender drugged	Yes = 1	20.92
Offender in jail	Yes = 1	5.85
Crime completion	Yes = 1	97.08
Anal	Yes = 1	9.38
Oral	Yes = 1	10.15
Vaginal	Yes = 1	25.08
Spatial/temporal factors
Home city	Campinas = 1	55.69
Assault city	Campinas = 1	60.31
On way to work	Yes = 1	11.23
Indoor private	Yes = 1	26.77
Indoor public	Yes = 1	22.15
Outdoor private	Yes = 1	12.92
Outdoor public	Yes = 1	41.54
Morning assault	Yes = 1	15.85
Afternoon assault	Yes = 1	22.92
Evening assault	Yes = 1	33.38
Night assault	Yes = 1	27.85

Due to the binary nature of our dependent variable, we estimate our statistical model using logistic regression—although a probit model could be used with these data, our logistic regression model has better goodness-of-fit based on the Akaike information criterion (AIC). All estimation was undertaken using R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (http://www.R-project.org).

Ten separate logistic regression models were run to verify the relationship between rape reported and not reported to police, plus four subsequent models investigating the importance of age. The first 10 models are divided both by groups related to sexual assault—victim profile, crime/event outcomes, and spatial/temporal factors—and by statistical model—full and reduced. In the groups of crime/event outcomes and spatial/temporal factors, we first ran a model only containing those variables pertaining to the group, and a second model with their own variables plus the variables of the other groups.

To assess the prediction of the regression analyses, we applied a count-based pseudo-R² that treats any record with a predicted probability of .5 or greater as having a predicted outcome of 1 and any record with a predicted probability less than .5 as having a predicted outcome of 0. All the regression analyses showed a count-based pseudo-R² ranging from .65 to .67. As a measure of multicollinearity, we display the variance inflation factor (VIF) because it has a clear interpretation in terms of the effects of collinearity on the estimated variance of the ith regression coefficient.⁶ Most models had limited degrees of multicollinearity with VIFs around 1, indicating that multicollinearity is not a problem.

Results

Rape reporting to police had at least one statistically significant variable from each of the three variable groups related to sexual assault occurrence (Table 2). However, according to the AIC, the reduced models (Table 3) showed a relatively superior goodness-of-fit, with the inclusion of more statistically significant coefficients, or odds ratios (OR). For example, the full model of spatial/temporal factors (Model 4) did not have any statistically significant temporal variables, but the reduced model (Model 9) retained afternoon and night assault.

Table 2.

Full Models of Logistic Regression Predicting Sexual Abuse Victim’s Reports to Police (N = 650).

	Victim Profile	Crime/Event Outcomes		Spatial/Temporal Factors
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5
	OR (VIF)	OR (VIF)	OR (VIF)	OR (VIF)	OR (VIF)
Victim profile
Victims age	0.68 (1.01)*	—	0.64 (1.03)*	—	0.64 (1.5)*
Education	1.13 (1.01)	—	1.15 (1.03)	—	1.16 (2.1)
Offender known	1.27 (1.01)	—	1.34 (1.07)^†	—	1.27 (1.74)
Crime/event outcomes
Physical strength	—	1.21 (1.29)	1.26 (1.3)	—	1.17 (1.47)
With gun	—	1.43 (1.17)	1.73 (1.2)	—	1.69 (1.3)
Threat	—	0.55 (1.12)	0.6 (1.12)	—	0.51 (1.17)
Sharp weapon	—	0.89 (1.12)	0.86 (1.12)	—	0.92 (1.2)
Multiple offenders	—	0.86 (1.01)	0.94 (1.05)	—	0.96 (1.2)
Offender drunk	—	1.12 (1.2)	1.08 (1.21)	—	1.08 (1.62)
Offender drug	—	0.58 (1.21)*	0.57 (1.22)*	—	0.55 (1.6)*
Offender in jail	—	0.78 (1.03)	0.7 (1.04)	—	0.79 (1.14)
Crime completion	—	2.05 (1.08)	2.01 (1.08)	—	2.33 (1.15)
Anal	—	1.07 (1.44)	1.03 (1.44)	—	1.21 (1.57)
Oral	—	0.86 (1.54)	0.86 (1.55)	—	0.94 (1.76)
Vaginal	—	1.47 (1.72)	1.51 (1.74)	—	1.43 (2.26)
Spatial/temporal factors
Home city	—	—	—	0.64 (2.5)*	0.64 (2.56)*
Assault city	—	—	—	1.37 (2.44)^†	1.34 (2.5)^†
On way to work	—	—	—	1.15 (1.18)	1.15 (1.2)
Indoor private	—	—	—	2.9 (3.01)***	2.72 (3.1)**
Indoor public	—	—	—	1.75 (4.37)	1.46 (4.45)
Outdoor private	—	—	—	0.73 (2.52)	0.71 (2.56)
Outdoor public	—	—	—	2.24 (4.5)**	2.08 (4.7)*
Morning assault	—	—	—	0.78 (3.03)	0.82 (3.58)
Afternoon assault	—	—	—	1.21 (3.27)	1.18 (3.77)
Evening assault	—	—	—	0.85 (4.94)	0.87 (6.04)
Night assault	—	—	—	1.27 (3.53)	1.3 (4.5)
Constant	1.8***	1.93***	1.77**	—	—
Count R²	.658	.655	.662	.660	.675
AIC	835.087	845.822	842.006	827.296	834.046

Note. OR = odds ratio; VIF = variance inflation factor; AIC = Akaike information criterion.

†

p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 3.

Reduced Models of Logistic Regression Predicting Sexual Abuse Victim’s Reports to Police (N = 650).

	Victim Profile	Crime/Event Outcomes		Spatial/Temporal Factors
	Model 6	Model 7	Model 8	Model 9	Model 10
	OR	OR (VIF)	OR (VIF)	OR (VIF)	OR (VIF)
Victim profile
Victims age	0.68*	—	0.64 (1.01)*	—	0.64 (1.04)*
Crime/event outcomes
Offender drug	—	0.61 (1.01)*	0.6 (1.01)*	—	0.57 (1.04)**
Crime completion	—	—	—	—	2.86 (1.02)^†
Vaginal	—	1.44 (1.01)^†	1.47 (1.01)^†	—	1.59 (1.04)*
Spatial/temporal factors
Home city	—	—	—	0.65 (1.01)*	0.64 (1.03)*
Assault city	—	—	—	1.34 (1.01)^†	1.33 (1.01)^†
Indoor private	—	—	—	2.26 (1.3)***	2.41 (1.34)***
Outdoor public	—	—	—	1.72 (1.3)**	1.79 (1.32)**
Afternoon assault	—	—	—	1.42 (1.11)^†	—
Night assault	—	—	—	1.49 (1.13)^†	1.38 (1.05)†
Constant	2.16***	1.97***	2.23***	1.11	1.34
Count R²	.658	.658	.660	.649	.672
AIC	833.983	831.797	828.163	821.978	811.866

Note. OR = odds ratio; VIF = variance inflation factor; AIC = Akaike information criterion.

†

p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

As can be seen in Table 3 (Model 6), victims under the age of 16 years are less likely to report the crime to police (OR = 0.68, p = .03). Furthermore, in crime/event outcomes groups, victims also are less likely to report the sexual assault when the sex offender was drugged during the occurrence (Model 8: OR = 0.6, p = .01). However, these crimes are more likely to be reported when they had vaginal penetration (Model 10: OR = 1.59, p = .03). In Model 10 with all significant variables, the completion of the sexual crime increases the probability of reporting the assault to police by almost 3 times (OR = 2.89, p = .08).

The spatial factors proved to be important for the prediction of rape reporting to police. Victims living in Campinas are less likely to report the crime (Model 9: OR = 0.65, p = .01), but the sexual assaults that took place in Campinas were more likely to be reported (Model 9: OR = 1.34, p = .09). The most significant variable in the models is indoor private environments, with an OR suggesting that the sexual crimes occurring in these environments are more than 2 times more likely to be reported to police (Model 10: OR = 2.41, p = .00). In Model 10, the victims of sexual assault in outdoor public environments are more likely to report the crime as well (OR = 1.79, p = .01). Finally, the temporal factors of afternoon (Model 9: OR = 1.42, p = .10) and night (Model 9: OR = 1.49, p = .05) assault are more likely to be reported to police by the victims. However, in Model 10, only night sexual assault is significant.

Because of the statistical significance of the dichotomous age variable (under the age of 16 and 16 or older), an obvious question emerges: Are their differences in the factors relating to rape reporting to police for these two age groups that differentiate minors from adults? To investigate this question, we ran the full models, as well as obtaining their final form, separately for both age groups that are shown in Table 4. Of greatest interest here is the difference between the age groups with regard to indoor private and outdoor public effects. Both variables are statistically significant and positively related to rape reporting to police for both age groups, but the effects for those under 16 are of a much larger magnitude. This shows that these spatio-temporal factors matter for both age groups, as shown by the overall results in Tables 2 and 3, but they are more important for the younger victims.

Table 4.

Full and Final Models of Logistic Regression Predicting Reports to Police, by Age.

	16 and Over		Under 16
	Full Model	Final Model	Full Model	Final Model
Victim profile
Education	1.05		1.49	1.67*
Offender known	1.41		0.93
Crime/event outcomes
Physical strength	1.07		1.51
With gun	0.95		2.69	4.54*
Threat	0.33		0.70
Sharp weapon	0.57		4.85E+07
Multiple offenders	0.83		1.52
Offender drunk	1.02		1.52
Offender drug	0.57**	0.59**	0.35^†
Offender in jail	1.00		0.46
Crime completion	1.70		9.53E+07
Anal	1.33		0.89
Oral	1.07		0.93
Vaginal	1.35		1.68
Spatial/temporal factors
Home city	0.71		0.51^†
Assault city	1.39		1.31
On way to work	1.62		0.55
Indoor private	2.36**	1.80**	4.89**	4.66***
Indoor public	1.91		0.64
Outdoor private	0.57		2.10
Outdoor public	1.86^†	1.48^†	3.74**	3.00**
Morning assault	0.83		0.31	0.29*
Afternoon assault	1.44		0.37	0.38*
Evening assault	0.95		0.37	0.38*
Night assault	1.20		0.88

†

p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Discussion

This study examined which factors—victim, crime, and spatio-temporal factors—were useful to predict whether a victim of rape will report her victimization to the authorities in the region of Campinas, Brazil. Congruent with previous studies, our findings show that victim and crime characteristics are related to the decision of the victim to report the rape to police. However, the current study also shows that contrary to previous studies, several spatio-temporal factors could also explain the decision to report the rape.

Victim and Crime Characteristics

Similar to previous studies (e.g., Amstadter et al., 2007; Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011), our findings indicate that younger victims—those under the age of 16—are less likely to report the rape to the authorities. Although we do not know the exact rationale for such a finding, we may suggest two hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1: It is possible that younger victims are not aware of what constitutes a rape under the Law and may question themselves as to the seriousness of the act, preventing them from reporting the crime to police (see Fisher et al., 2003; Thompson et al., 2007).

Hypothesis 2: As suggested by Vargas (1999), some young victims may refuse to report the crime to the authorities to protect the offender who is close to them (i.e., a father or stepfather).

However, contrary to previous studies (e.g., Bachman, 1998; Greenberg & Ruback, 1992; Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011), no significant relationship was observed between the offender–victim relationship and the decision to report the rape (the relationship only approached statistical significance in Model 3 and was positive indicating an increase in rape reporting when the offender is known). These studies have shown that when the offender is a stranger, the victim is more likely to report the crime as this is a characteristic that fits well with the stereotypical definition of the rape script (see Littleton et al., 2009; Osman & Davis, 1999; Williams, 1984).

Relatedly, many factors associated to the typical rape script discussed by Williams (1984) were included in the current study: use of force, use of a weapon (gun or sharp object), use of threat, penetration (vaginal and anal), and completion of the rape. Surprisingly, only two crime characteristics were found to be significantly related to rape reporting. Victims who have suffered vaginal penetration and where the offender was successful completing the crime (approaching significance) were more likely to report the crime to police. These two statistically significant characteristics are consistent with the typical rape script hypothesis suggested by Williams (1984) or what Sudnow (1965) has referred to as a “normal crime.” When penetration occurred and the rape is completed, this leaves little doubt as to the seriousness of the offense (e.g., Fisher et al., 2003). Moreover, the penetration and, potentially, ejaculation of the offender (if not using a contraceptive device) make the rape more “visible.” The victim is likely to feel more confident to seek help, be willing to undertake a forensic examination that could determine the rape, and be more confident that an eventual prosecution could lead to a conviction of the offender. Another possibility is that both penetration and ejaculation are two necessary conditions for pregnancy. Thus, it may be that victims who have been penetrated and the offender has ejaculated fear to become pregnant, that naturally pushes them to seek help, whether this is through the health care or criminal justice systems. It is possible that the reason why most variables associated to the typical rape script were not significant is due to the low frequencies—close to 10% or less—of these particular behaviors in our sample.

When victims perceived that the offender was under the influence of drugs, they were less likely to report the crime to authorities. One possible explanation for this relationship is that in these cases, the victim knew that the offender used drugs because she was there with him or even used drugs with the offender. Prior studies have found that the use of alcohol and/or drugs by the victim at the time of the assault was related to a lower likelihood of reporting (Fisher et al., 2003; Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2011). Another possibility is that some victims will falsely believe that because the offender was intoxicated, he could not know what he was doing and will “excuse” the offender’s behavior or blame themselves and decide not to report the crime (Williams, 1984). This is in line with some of the rape myths or even cognitive distortions held by some rapists.

Spatio-Temporal Characteristics

As mentioned previously, only a few studies have examined the role of one particular spatio-temporal factor on victim reporting behavior that is the crime location. Similar to previous studies, our findings reveal that rapes occurring in an indoor private location, such as the victim residence, are more than 2 times more likely to be reported to police. Similarly, Williams (1984) showed that women whose homes were broken into were more likely to report the rape compared with women raped in a social situation such as on a date. However, it is also important to consider situations where the victims are younger. Offenders who target children prefer to offend inside, most likely in their own residence when no one else is present (Leclerc, Beauregard, & Proulx, 2008). As these rapes may occur repetitively or on a regular basis, it is likely that the rapes get noticed and are reported by the victims or someone close to the victim (e.g., a parent or caregiver).

Similarly, our findings indicate that rapes committed in outdoor public places are more likely to be reported to police. This is consistent with Greenberg and Ruback (1992) who found that victims were more likely to report their victimization if the attack occurred outdoors. One possible reason for such a finding is related to the level of violence involved in outdoor attacks. As shown by Balemba and Beauregard (2013), strategies to commit rape vary dramatically depending on the spatio-temporal factors. For instance, their study showed that offenders were more likely to use violence when the rape was taking place in an outside public location. Therefore, outdoor rapes are associated with more violence that, in turn, increases victim reporting due to the visible signs of the rape and the fact that it fits the classic rape script (Williams, 1984). This is similar for rapes that occur during daytime. Once again, Balemba and Beauregard (2013) showed that daytime attacks usually required more violence on the offender’s part. This could explain why victims who are raped during daytime are more likely to report the crime. However, it is also possible that rapes committed during the day make it easier for the victim to recognize her offender that would constitute one more incentive to report the crime to the authorities.

When looking at the city specifically, our findings show that victims living in Campinas are less likely to report the crime to police. As mentioned previously, it may be hypothesized that victims living in Campinas are well aware of the higher crime rate of the region compared with the national average (Melo, Matias, & Andresen, 2015) and do not have confidence that reporting the crime to authorities would lead to the conviction or even the prosecution of the offender.

Conclusion

Factors related to the victims’ decision to report or not the crime to the authorities are important to examine to better understand the crime of rape. Currently, studies show that only a minority of rape victims report their victimization to police, suggesting most rapists go undetected. Beyond the consequences for the criminal justice system, it is important to focus on the consequences for the victims. When not reporting the rape, victims do not get access to mental health services that may lead to additional difficulties to recover from the attack (Cohn et al., 2013; Resnick et al., 2000) and impose other indirect costs on society.

The present study found that in addition to victim and crime characteristics, it is important to consider different spatio-temporal factors. A better understanding of the context or the situation in which the crime takes place may help to better address the reluctance of potential victims to report their victimization to police. More specifically, as suggested by Cohn et al. (2013), this new knowledge may be used to improve educational strategies about rape reporting. Only by knowing why victims decide not to report the rape may we address these hurdles and start working on different strategies to overcome victims’ reluctance to rape reporting. We believe that looking at where the crime is committed is a promising avenue to further our understanding of this phenomenon.

Although the findings add to the existing literature, this study is not without its limitations. One of the obvious limitations of the current study is its small sample size. It is possible that the small number of observations included in the study may have prevented some relationships from emerging as statistically significant. Moreover, as highlighted previously, some variables specific to the classic rape script presented a very low frequency (around 10%) that could have skewed some of the findings. Another limitation is that we only know if the rape was reported to police when the victims were admitted to the hospital; however, it is possible that the rape was reported at a later date given that health care staff are required to advise the victims to report the crime to police, or a child protection agent in the case of children. Moreover, our sample consists of female victims who reported their rape to a health care center; consequently, we do not have information on victims who did not seek some form of health services or male victims. Also, the study took place in one specific region of Brazil—Campinas—suggesting that the findings may not be generalizable to other regions of this country or to North America. However, it is interesting to point out that despite the many differences between countries from North America and South America, a study showed that in both the United States and Venezuela, it is the seriousness of the crime that will explain why people report the crime to police, not the public’s attitude toward police (Birbeck, Gabaldon, & LaFree, 1993).

Future studies need to further investigate the role of place in the decision to report the rape to police. For instance, it would be interesting to look at detailed locations (e.g., bars, shopping center, workplace, etc.) to see their effect on the victim’s decision to report the crime to police. Moreover, it is likely that these factors do not operate in a vacuum and that different interactions exist between these factors. It would be important to use an analytical strategy that could explore these potential interaction effects between the factors under study. Because of the ethnic diversity in Brazil, understanding the role, if any, of the ethnicity of the victim or the ethnic composition of the place in which the crime occurred would be of interest to both academics and health care practitioners. The public health care system itself would also benefit from direct research investigating how it can help sexual violence victims for reporting to police and recovery after the crime. And finally, more research needs to be undertaken that considers a variety of spatio-temporal factors in an effort to replicate these results within and outside of Brazil.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The lead author gratefully acknowledges support from the following Brazilian sources: Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES)—grant reference 99999.014576/2013-09—and National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq)—grant reference 140310/2013-4.

Notes

Author Biographies

Silas Nogueira de Melo is a PhD candidate in the Department of Geography at the University of Campinas. His research interests involve the geography of crime in Brazilian cities, violence in Brazil, violence prevention, and the application of spatial statistical methods to understanding crime. His recent research has appeared in Applied Geography.

Eric Beauregard, PhD, is a professor in the School of Criminology and director of the Centre for Research on Sexual Violence at Simon Fraser University. His research interests include psychological and geographic profiling, criminal event analysis, rational choice approach to crime, environmental criminology, situational approaches to crime, prediction, decision making, scripts, and sex offenders. He has published over 100 refereed journal articles, books, and contributions to edited volumes. His research has recently appeared in Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, Violence and Victims, Journal of Criminal Justice, Criminal Justice and Behavior, and Journal of Interpersonal Violence.

Martin A. Andresen, PhD, is a professor in the School of Criminology and associate director of the Institute for Canadian Urban Research Studies at Simon Fraser University. His research interests include spatial crime analysis, crime and place, geography of crime, environmental criminology, applied spatial statistics and geographical information analysis. He has published over 100 refereed journal articles, books, and contributions to edited volumes. His research has recently appeared in Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Journal of Criminal Justice, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Homicide Studies, and Applied Geography.

References

Amir

(1971). Patterns in forcible rape. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Amstadter

A. B.

McCauley

J. L.

Ruggiero

K. J.

Resnick

H. S.

Kilpatrick

D. G.

(2007). Service utilization and help seeking in a national sample of female rape victims. Psychiatric Services, 59, 1450-1457.

Bachman

(1998). The factors related to rape reporting behavior and arrest. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25, 8-29.

Balemba

Beauregard

(2013). Where and when? Examining spatiotemporal aspects of sexual assault events. Journal of Sexual Aggression: An International, Interdisciplinary Forum for Research, Theory and Practice, 19, 171-190.

Bassani

D. G.

Palazzo

L. S.

Béria

J. U.

Gigante

L. P.

Figueiredo

A. C.

Aerts

D. R.

Raymann

B. C.

(2009). Child sexual abuse in southern Brazil and associated factors: A population-based study. BMC Public Health, 9, Article 133.

Baumer

E. P.

Felson

R. B.

Messner

S. F.

(2003). Changes in police notification for rape. Criminology, 41, 841-872.

Beauregard

Rossmo

D. K.

Proulx

(2007). A descriptive model of the hunting process of serial sex offenders: A rational choice perspective. Journal of Family Violence, 22, 449-463.

Bedone

A. J.

Faúndes

(2007). Atendimento integral às mulheres vítimas de violência sexual: Centro de Assistência Integral à Saúde da Mulher, Universidade Estadual de Campinas [Comprehensive healthcare for women victims of sexual violence: Care Center for Women’s Health, State University of Campinas]. Cad Saúde Pública, 23, 465-469.

Birbeck

Gabaldon

L. G.

LaFree

(1993). The decision to call the police: A comparative study of the United States and Venezuela. International Criminal Justice Review, 3, 25-43.

10.

Bott

Guedes

Goodwin

Mendoza

J. A.

(2012). Violence Against Women in Latin America and the Caribbean: A comparative analysis of population-based data from 12 countries. Washington, DC: Pan American Health Organization.

11.

Chon

D. S.

(2014). Police reporting by sexual assault victims in Western and in non-Western countries. Journal of Family Violence, 29, 859-868.

12.

Cohn

A. M.

Zinzow

H. M.

Resnick

H. S.

Kilpatrick

D. G.

(2013). Correlates of reasons for not reporting rape to police: Results from a national telephone household probability sample of women with forcible or drug-or-alcohol facilitated/incapacitated rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28, 455-473.

13.

Dussich

J. P. J.

(2001). Decisions not to report sexual assaults: Comparative study among women living in Japan who are Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and English-speaking. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45, 278-301.

14.

Fisher

B. S.

Daigle

L. E.

Cullen

F. T.

Turner

M. G.

(2003). Acknowledging sexual victimization as rape: Results from a national-level study. Justice Quarterly, 20, 535-574.

15.

Greenberg

M. A.

Ruback

R. B.

(1992). After the crime: Victim decision making. New York, NY: Plenum.

16.

Helene

(2008). Corpo e Cidade: uma pequena etnografia da prostituição em Campinas (SP) [Body and City: A small ethnography of prostitution in Campinas (SP)]. Os Urbanitas-Revista de Antropologia Urbana, 5, Article 7.

17.

Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. (2011). Cidades. Retrieved from http://cod.ibge.gov.br/493

18.

Kaukinen

(2002). The help-seeking decisions of violent crime victims. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 432-456.

19.

Kaukinen

DeMaris

(2009). Sexual assault and current mental health: The role of help-seeking and police response. Violence Against Women, 15, 1331-1357.

20.

Kennedy

(1992). A guide to econometrics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

21.

Kilpatrick

D. G.

Edmunds

C. N.

Seymour

A. K.

(1992). Rape in America: A report to the nation. Washington, DC: National Victim Center.

22.

Leclerc

Beauregard

Proulx

(2008). Modus operandi and situational aspects in adolescent sexual offenses against children: A further examination. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52, 46-61.

23.

Littleton

H. L.

Axsom

(2003). Rape and seduction scripts of university students: Implications for rape attributions and unacknowledged rape. Sex Roles, 49, 465-475.

24.

Littleton

H. L.

Axsom

Grills Taquechel

(2009). Sexual assault and victims’ acknowledgement status and revictimization risk. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 33, 34-42.

25.

Lizotte

A. J.

(1985). The uniqueness of rape: Reporting assaultive violence to the police. Crime & Delinquency, 31, 169-190.

26.

Melgaço

(2011). The injustices of urban securitization in the Brazilian city of Campinas. Spatial Justice, 4, 1-19.

27.

Melo

S. N.

Matias

L. F.

Andresen

M. A.

(2015). Crime concentrations and similarities in spatial crime patterns in a Brazilian context. Applied Geography, 62, 314-324.

28.

Nunes

M. A. A.

Camey

Ferri

C. P.

Manzolli

Manenti

C. N.

Schmidt

M. I.

(2011). Violence during pregnancy and newborn outcomes: A cohort study in a disadvantaged population in Brazil. The European Journal of Public Health, 21, 92-97.

29.

O’Brien

R. M.

(2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity, 41, 673-690.

30.

Osman

S. L.

Davis

C. M.

(1999). Predicting perceptions of date rape based on individual beliefs and female alcohol consumption. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 701-709.

31.

Rennison

C. M.

(2002). Rape and sexual assault: Reporting to police and medical attention, 1992-2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.

32.

Rennison

C. M.

Rand

M. R.

(2002). Criminal victimization, 2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

33.

Resnick

H. S.

Holmes

M. M.

Kilpatrick

D. G.

Clum

Acierno

Best

C. L.

Saunders

B. E.

(2000). Predictors of post-rape medical care in a national sample of women. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19, 214-219.

34.

Rogerson

P. A.

(2001). Statistical methods for geography. London, England: Sage.

35.

Ruback

R. B.

Thompson

M. P.

(2001). Social and psychological consequences of violent victimization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

36.

Sudnow

(1965). Normal crimes: Sociological features of the penal code in a public defender’s office. Social Problems, 12, 254-276.

37.

Thompson

Sitterle

Clay

Kingree

(2007). Reasons for not reporting victimizations to the police: Do they vary for physical and sexual incidents? Journal of American College Health, 55, 277-282.

38.

Tjaden

Thoennes

(2006). Extent, nature, and consequences of rape victimization: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

39.

Ullman

S. E.

Filipas

H. H.

(2001). Correlates of formal and informal support seeking in sexual assault victims. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 1028-1047.

40.

United Nations Development Programme. (2013). Citizen security with a human face: Evidence and proposals for Latin America (Regional Human Development Report 2013-2014). Retrieved from http://www.undp.org/content/dam/rblac/docs/Research%20and%20Publications/IDH/IDH-AL-ExecutiveSummary.pdf

41.

Vargas

J. D.

(1999). Familiares ou desconhecidos? A relação entre os protagonistas do estupro no fluxo do Sistema de Justiça Criminal [Family or strangers? The relationship between the rape’s actors in the flow of the Criminal Justice System]. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, 14, 63-82.

42.

Verein

GfK.

(2014). Trust in professionals, 2014. Nuremberg, Germany: GfK Verein.

43.

Williams

L. S.

(1984). The classic rape: When do victims report? Social Problems, 31, 459-467.

44.

Wing

A. K.

Merchan

(1993). Rape, ethnicity, and culture: Spirit injury from Bosnia to Black America. Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 25, 1-48.

45.

Wolitzky-Taylor

K. B.

Resnick

H. S.

McCauley

J. L.

Amstadter

A. B.

Kilpatrick

D. G.

Ruggiero

K. J.

(2011). Is reporting of rape on the rise? A comparison of women with reported versus unreported rape experiences in the National Women’s Study-Replication. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 807-832.

46.

Yamawaki

(2008). The roles of independent self-construal and concerns for face on advising rape victims to report police in Japanese and U.S. college students. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 478-492.