Public Opinion About #MeToo Victims and Offenders: A Nationwide Experiment

Abstract

During the #MeToo movement, many sexual assault survivors are discredited because of their delay in disclosure or failure to report to the police. The current study investigates which factors influence public opinion towards sexual assault victims and offenders by analyzing data from a national factorial survey. Results show disclosing the offense immediately to the public, reporting to the police, and having a witness are positively related to punitive attitudes towards the offender, via increased perceived credibility of the victim. The results highlight the importance of understanding extralegal factors in shaping stereotypic views about sexual assault in the #MeToo era.

Keywords

#MeToo movement stereotypes about sexual assault victims punitiveness towards sex offenders factorial survey

Introduction

In 2017, following serial accusations against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, #MeToo became a spreading hashtag on social media; tens of thousands of women revealed their sexual assault victimization experiences in the past and present (Rodino-Colocino, 2019). In 2018, at least 12 Republican and 13 Democratic politicians ended their campaigns for office or re-election amid sexual assault allegations (Godfrey et al., 2018). The vast number of allegations raised the public's awareness of the magnitude of the sexual assault problem (Graf, 2018). Legislators revisited and redefined rules regulating sexual harassment (Beitsch, 2018). Nobel Prize laureate Malala Yousafzai (2018) praised the movement as “a big achievement.” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (2018) commented that “now the law is on the side of women or men who encounter harassment, and that's a big thing.”

In response, some people started to question the credibility of the alleged #MeToo victims. Following Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's sexual assault accusation of the then Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump (2018a) tweeted “I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents. I ask that she bring those filings forward so that we can learn date, time, and place.” Similarly, in 2016 when the then Presidential candidate Donald Trump was accused of sexual misconduct himself, he claimed that the accusers were “phony”: they “suddenly after many, many years” came forward only to chase “free fame” (Trump, 2016).

Upon being discredited, the #MeToo victims may be viewed as perpetrators of false allegations rather than victims of sexual assault. According to President Trump (2018b), now is “a very scary time for young men in America,” because they “can be guilty of something” that they “may not be guilty of.” The president called Dr. Ford's allegation a “con game,” and asked the public to “pray for Brett Kavanaugh and his family” (Trump, 2018c). The #MeToo movement eventually led to a #HimToo backlash, in which concerned women shared their worry about male family members being falsely accused of sexual misconduct on social media (Garcia, 2018). In reality, fabricated sexual assault cases are rare (Saunders, 2012). Prior methodologically rigorous studies estimate the prevalence rate of false sexual assault reports within the range of 2%–8% (Lonsway et al., 2009).

How the public evaluates the credibility of sexual assault victims and their allegations is important for three reasons. First, public opinion may discourage victim reporting. Most sexual assault victims do not report to the police (Daly & Curtis-Fawley, 2006). Victims are more likely to report if they perceive themselves as the “real” victims by the society's stereotype (Kelly, 2001). If the victims are “ridiculed or disparaged, or worse” once they come forward, they will probably keep silent (Sunstein, 2019, p. 268). Second, the public's judgment may exacerbate victim blaming and cause more trauma. Sexual assault victims have extensive needs and may reach out to the community for help; if they experience disbelief and refusal, it may trigger secondary victimization, where the victims feel “powerlessness, shame, and guilt” (Campbell, 2013, p. 703). Third, fear of false sexual assault allegations may influence the decision making of police officers, prosecutors, and jurors (Frazier & Haney, 1996; Frohmann, 1991; Rumney, 2006).

There is limited knowledge about how the public perceives sexual assault allegations, especially in the current #MeToo era (Nodeland & Craig, 2021; Schwarz et al., 2020). In the current study, by analyzing results from a randomized experiment embedded in a national online survey, I present recent empirical evidence on public opinion about the #MeToo movement. Specifically, I investigate what extralegal factors predict the public's perceived credibility of alleged sexual assault victims and punitiveness towards alleged sexual assault offenders.

Witches in the #Metoo Age? The Gap Between Perceptions and Reality of False Sexual Assault Claims

The #MeToo movement has increased the public's awareness of sexual assault, including its definition, serious consequences, and the importance of reporting (Bhattacharyya, 2018). This social media campaign has also increased social support for sexual assault victims throughout the online community (Hosterman et al., 2018). Many survivors of sexual assault, who have kept silent for months, years, or even decades, choose to come forward to reveal their victimization experiences now, leading to a spike in sexual assault reports (White, 2018).

Responding to the recent waves of sexual assault allegations on social media, some celebrities have framed and dismissed the #MeToo movement as a “witch hunt.” Australian filmmaker Michael Haneke (2018) criticized the movement as a “witch hunt” in the film industry that that is “colored by a hatred of men” and “should be left in the Middle Ages.” Director Terry Gilliam (2020) said, “I’m tired, as a white male, of being blamed for everything that is wrong with the world.” According to the “witch hunt” theory, the #MeToo movement is blurring the line of normal “hitting on” women and sexual violence (Deneuve, 2018); men are becoming fearful that “old-fashioned” pursuing of women is now a violation of the law (Cavill, 2018). Others cast doubt on the motives of the sexual assault claims; for example, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov (2019) commented that the movement was “something of a fashion statement … in order to become celebrities.”

The public's sympathy towards sexual assault victims was soon accompanied by questions and doubts (Lanius, 2019). In the counter-#MeToo movement #HimToo, the public raises concerns about men's vulnerability to easily fabricated false sexual assault allegations (Boyle, 2019). It is important to note that the #HimToo movement was initiated by Republican supporters and political conservatives and flourished during the period when the then Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh was being questioned for sexual assault before confirmation (Boyle & Rathnayake, 2019). Although the #HimToo movement was short-lived and soon taken over by a new hashtag, #BelieveWomen (Boyle & Rathnayake, 2019), its possible impact on public opinion is far-reaching.

Recent polls show that the public holds mixed views about the #MeToo movement. A national phone survey conducted by Democracy Corps (2019) show that only 40% of the registered voters have a warm feeling about the #MeToo movement; others either feel cool (31%), don’t feel particularly warm or cold (12%), or don’t know about the movement or refuse to answer the question (17%). Similarly, a mixed-methods survey conducted by Associated Press-NORC (2019) using the probability-based AmeriSpeak panel shows that only 44% of the respondents view the #MeToo movement favorably. A recent Pew research study finds that more than half of U.S. adults think the increased focus on sexual assault has made it harder for men to know how to interact with women in the workplace (Graf, 2018). Responding to the politicians’, celebrities’, and public's questions and doubts, the #MeToo campaign founder Tarana Burke (2018) lamented that “victims are heard and then vilified.”

In reality, prior estimates of the prevalence of false sexual assault allegations are low. According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP, 2005, pp. 12–13), a false sexual assault allegation is determined when “the evidence established that no crime was committed or attempted … after a thorough investigation” (see also the Uniform Crime Reports Handbook). Based on this definition, McCahill et al. (1979) found that among the 709 sexual assault cases in Philadelphia analyzed by both the police and social workers from 1972 to 1975, only 3% of the cases were false. Lisak et al. (2010) analyzed 136 sexual assault cases reported to a major university for 10 years and found only 8 (5.9%) false reports where the victim deliberately fabricated a crime. Spohn et al. (2014) analyzed sexual assault cases reported to the Los Angeles Police Department in 2008 and found that the rate of fabricated false cases was 4.5%. Evidence in Canada, Australia, and Europe consistently echoes the findings in the United States, and shows that the prevalence of false rape allegations is between 2% and 8% (Clark & Lewis, 1977; Heenan & Murray, 2006; Kelly et al., 2005).

Why Now and Why Not to the Police? New “Bad Women” Stereotypes in the #Metoo Era

Given the disparity between the low prevalence of false assault allegations and the public's mixed views about the #MeToo movement, it is important to investigate what factors influence the public's attitudes towards the alleged sexual assault victim and offender. A major suspicion cast on the sexual assault victims, especially those that came forward in the #MeToo movement, is the delay in their sexual assault reports. Russian President Vladimir Putin (2018) commented that “certain people or certain organizations … are currently developing an entire process … raising problems that are 10, 20, or 30 years old … but the question still begs itself: why is this only being done now? Why not 10 years ago when some of these incidents supposedly took place?” Relatedly, another suspicion cast by political elites is that even if the victims can choose not to disclose the victimization experiences to the public, they should at least have filed a claim with the police or the court because that is how “any civilized country” should handle such claims (Putin, 2018).

Empirical studies show that delays in sexual assault reports for weeks, months, and even years are common (Lessing, 2005). The victimization experience may be intense and overwhelming (Peipert & Domagalski, 1994). Particularly for incidents involving nonstranger perpetrators, the victims may delay reporting sexual assault (Smith et al., 2000). The victims may also be concerned about retaliation from the perpetrators (Baumer et al., 2003), especially if their reports do not lead to an arrest or prosecution of the offender (Adefolalu, 2014). Even when victims choose to disclose their traumatic experiences, the disclosure is more likely to be an informal conversation between close friends, rather than a formal report to the police (Smith et al., 2000). The victims may be concerned about the confidentiality of their reports (Koss, 1996). Unsympathetic attitudes from the public, healthcare providers, and social workers may exacerbate their posttraumatic stress, harm their reputation, and disrupt their family relationships (Deitz et al., 2015; Lawson & Chaffin, 1992; Miller et al., 2011). The under-reporting of sexual assault is even more prevalent among adolescents and women with disabilities, who are likely to suffer from long-term negative consequences of both the victimization and nondisclosure of the experience (Adefolalu, 2014; Nannini, 2006).

Apparently, withholding victimization experiences is challenging for the “real” sexual assault survivors: the lack of immediate professional help may increase the risk of sexually transmitted diseases infection and mental illnesses, slowing the process of recovery (Merchant et al., 2004; Wathen & MacMillan, 2012). Repressed posttraumatic stress is related to increased likelihood of suicide attempts and abuse of alcohol and drugs (Ullman & Brecklin, 2002; Wu et al., 2003). Ironically, research shows that it is the “false” sexual assault victims that usually fabricate the victimization in a stereotypic way, such as an assault by a stranger with a weapon, and disclosing the claim in a timely manner, to make the story more trustworthy (Lonsway, 2010; Triggs et al., 2009).

Unfortunately, existing studies show that police officers tend to discredit delayed sexual assault reports (Kelly et al., 2005; Lea et al., 2003). The police may view delayed reporting as abnormal and as giving the alleged victim more time to fabricate the allegation (Jordan, 2004). In order to win credibility, the #MeToo victims have tried to provide witness testimony, such as in the case of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford (Gilmore, 2017). Or in the case of Harvey Weinstein, more than one victim came forward and collectively accused Weinstein of the crime (Zarkov & Davis, 2018).

Current Study

It is yet unknown if the public discriminates against sexual assault victims because of their delay in reporting and lack of cooperation with authorities, and if having witnesses and other victims of the same offender help increase the perceived credibility of sexual assault reports. Under-reporting of sexual assaults is pervasive, leading to long-term trauma for the victims (Strickland, 2001). A supporting public plays a key role in encouraging sexual assault discloures and condemning the offender, whereas a suspicious and discrediting public may discourage victim reporting and stigmatize sexual assault victims (Deitz et al., 2015; Miller et al., 2011). How the public views sexual assault victims, especially during a major social movement such as the #MeToo movement, is critical to shaping social norms about gender equality (Mendes et al., 2019). It is thus important to gauge public opinion about sexual assault in the #MeToo era. In the current study, I conduct a factorial survey using a national sample of U.S. adults, and examine if the public's evaluation of sexual assault reports is influenced by (1) reporting to the police; (2) disclosing immediately to the public; (3) having witnesses; and (4) having other victims of the same offender.

Methods

Data

To understand public attitudes towards sexual assault during the #MeToo movement, I conducted a randomized experiment in January 2019 using an online SurveyMonkey audience panel (N = 1,067). The SurveyMonkey audience panel is a type of web-based opt-in survey, which has been frequently used by criminologists to study public opinion about sexual assault (e.g., Dum et al., 2017, 2019; Socia et al., 2019a). Compared to nationally representative samples obtained using other methods such as the random digit dialing approach, online opt-in samples may produce data of the same or even higher quality, and are less likely to be influenced by social desirability bias (Chang & Krosnick, 2009; Weinberg et al., 2014).

Additionally, SurveyMonkey is a type of volunteer-based stratified web survey. It retains its own pool of users and subscribers (“audience”) of different demographic characteristics. From this pool, SurveyMonkey can select respondents based on researchers’ requests of sample composition. I requested the sample to reflect the representativeness of the U.S. adult population based on age (older vs. younger than 45 years) and sex (male vs. female). SurveyMonkey then emails the participants the online survey link; interested respondents take the survey for chances to donate to charity or to win sweepstakes for themselves. Research shows that compared to web surveys obtained using crowdsource platforms, respondents in volunteer-based online panels may devote more time to completing the survey questions (Baker et al., 2010).

The descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1. Of the 1,067 respondents who started the survey, 1,007 respondents (94.38%) completed the questions with no breakoff.¹ After dropping cases that were missing data on any of the variables used in the analyses, the analytic sample has 963 respondents.² In the analytic sample, 53.17% of the respondents are older than 45 years; 54% are female; 77.57% are White; 49.01% have a Bachelor's degree or higher; 26.37% are conservatives and 34.06% are liberals. The distribution of age and sex reflects that of the U.S. adult population: in the population, ∼51.62% of the adults are female and ∼53.84% of the adults are older than 45 years (U.S. Census, 2017). Based on the 2018 General Social Survey (GSS), there are fewer liberals (29.19%) and more conservatives (32.75%) in the population, though the percentage of moderates is similar (38.05% in the population vs. 39.56% in the sample).

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics (N = 963).

Variable	Mean	SD	Range
Dependent variables
Perceived credibility of victims	3.640	.916	1–5
Punitiveness towards offenders	6.669	3.579	1–13
Independent variables
Reporting to police	.479	—	0–1
Delay in reporting	.501	—	0–1
Witnesses	.504	—	0–1
Other victims	.516	—	0–1
Control variables
Prior victim	.526	—	0–1
Female	.540	—	0–1
White	.776	—	0–1
Hispanic	.090	—	0–1
Education	4.101	1.461	1–6
Political conservatism	2.884	1.059	1–5
Age	2.531	1.174	1–4

Abbreviations: SD = standard deviation.

Notes: Standard deviations are omitted for dummy variables.

Experimental Design

The study uses a 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 between-subject factorial survey design.³ There are four dichotomous factors and 16 different hypothetical vignettes in total. Each respondent is randomly exposed to one of the 16 hypothetical vignettes. The vignette is based on a hypothetical story of an intern being sexually assaulted by a famous TV host. The wording of the specific vignette and the manipulation of the four factors are presented in Table 2. The factors are the main independent variables.

Table 2.

Manipulation of Experimental Vignettes.

Vignette Text
	Lisa is a 25-year-old journalist. In response to the #MeToo movement, she told the media that when she was an intern she was sexually assaulted by a famous male TV host. According to her description, the TV host touched her breasts and kissed her face without her consent when they were in a makeup room. [Manipulation A] When the TV host tried to touch Lisa's other body parts, his coworker walked in and he stopped. [Manipulation B] [Manipulation C] [Manipulation D].
Manipulation A:
	A1) Another intern was in the room too and saw what happened
	A2) The content in the brackets is empty.
Manipulation B:
	B1) Lisa reported this offense to the police soon afterwards. The police at that time documented her report but did not take any further actions.
	B2) Lisa did not report the offense to the police
Manipulation C:
	C1) Lisa said she was aware of other victims who were assaulted by the same TV host.
	C2) Lisa said she did not know any other victims who were assaulted by the same TV host.
Manipulation D:
	D1) Lisa told this offense to the media soon afterwards. The media only picked up her story after the ‘Me Too’ movement became popular.
	D2) Lisa did not reveal the story to the public until the #MeToo movement became popular.

Dependent Variables

After reading the hypothetical scenario, respondents answered two questions measuring their perceived credibility of the alleged sexual assault victim and punitive attitudes towards the alleged perpetrator. It is important to test the respondents’ attitudes towards the perpetrator in addition to the victim as blameworthiness of the offender may indirectly reflect how much the respondents believe the victim's story (Socia et al., 2019b). Research consistently shows that Americans are punitive towards convicted sex offenders in general (Harris & Socia, 2016; Pickett et al., 2013; Rydberg et al., 2018). As such, punitiveness should increase as respondents’ trust in the victim increases, and the perceived credibility of the victim may mediate the relationship between the independent variables (factors) and punitive attitudes.

The question on perceived victim credibility is worded as “How much do you trust or doubt Lisa's story?” Answer categories range from “strongly doubt” (coded as 1) to “strongly trust” (coded as 5). In the sample, 2.39% of the respondents strongly trusted the alleged victim; 6.85% of the respondents trusted the victim; 31.57% of the respondents neither trusted nor doubted the victim; 42.78% of the respondents doubted the victim; 16.41% of the respondents strongly doubted the victim.

The question on punitiveness towards the offender is worded as “Which of the following do you think is the appropriate punishment for the TV host?” Answer categories include “no punishment at all,” three levels of fine ($1,000, $3,000, and $10,000), three levels of probation (1, 3, and 5 years), two levels of jail time (3 and 6 months), and four levels of prison time (1, 2, 5, and 10 years). In the sample, 16.93% of the respondents chose the punishment of “probation, 1 year,” followed by 11.63% of the respondents who chose “no punishment at all.”

Control Variables

The survey measures respondents’ age (1 = 18–29, 2 = 30–44, 3 = 45–60, 4 = >60), education level (1 = less than high school diploma, 2 = high school diploma or equivalent, 3 = some college but no degree, 4 = Associate's degree, 5 = Bachelor's degree, 6 = graduate degree), and political conservatism (1 = very liberal, 2 = liberal, 3 = moderate, 4 = conservative, 5 = very conservative). Female and Hispanic were coded as binary variables (1 = female, 0 = male; 1 = Hispanic, 0 = non-Hispanic). I also controlled for respondents’ prior victimization experiences (1 = have been a victim of crime; 0 = have not been a victim of crime).

Analytic Strategy

The analyses proceed in four steps. First, I use ordinary regression squares (OLS) to predict the respondents’ perceived credibility of the alleged sexual assault victim using the factors. Second, I use OLS regression models to predict respondents’ punitive attitudes towards the alleged sex offenders using the factors.⁴ Third, I use mediation tests to analyze if perceived credibility of the victim mediates the relationship between the factors and punitive attitudes towards the offender.

Results

Predicting Perceived Credibility of the Alleged Sexual Assault Victim

The analyses start with regression models predicting respondents’ perceived credibility of the alleged sexual assault victims using the factors. As shown in Model 1 of Table 3, if the victim reported the crime to the police, disclosed the victimization experience to the public immediately after it happened, or had a witness, respondents perceived the victim as more credible (b = .213, p < .001; b = .273, p < .001; b = .258, p < .001, respectively). Model 2 includes the control variables. The findings remain unchanged. Moreover, respondents who are more politically conservative tended to doubt the alleged sexual assault victim (b = −.321, p < .001). Female respondents tended to trust the victim (b = .265, p < .001). Respondents’ education level is positively related to trust in the victim (b = .039, p = .043).⁵

Table 3.

OLS Regression Models of Perceived Credibility by Factors and Control Variables (N = 963).

Variable	Model 1			Model 2
Variable	b	RobustSE	β	b	RobustSE	β
Factors
Reported to the police	.213***	.057	.116	.206***	.052	.112
Disclosed the offense immediately	.273***	.058	.149	.259***	.052	.141
Had witnesses	.258***	.057	.141	.244***	.052	.133
There were other victims	−.053	.058	−.029	−.053	.052	−.029
Controls
Prior victimization	—	—	—	.025	.055	.013
Female	—	—	—	.265***	.052	.144
White	—	—	—	.073	.067	.033
Hispanic	—	—	—	.182	.097	.057
Education	—	—	—	.039*	.019	.062
Political conservatism	—	—	—	−.321***	.027	−.371
Age	—	—	—	.009	.024	.012
R ²	.058			.235

Abbreviations: b = unstandardized regression coefficient; SE = standard error; β = standardized regression coefficient.

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 (two-tailed).

Predicting Punitiveness Towards the Alleged Sex Offender

Next, I use regression models to predict respondents’ punitive attitudes towards the alleged sex offender. Model 1 of Table 4 presents the relationship between punitiveness and the factors. Results show that immediate disclosure of the victimization experience to the public increases respondents’ punitiveness (b = .628, p = .006). The results remain largely unchanged when control variables are included (Model 2). Moreover, politically conservative respondents tend to be less punitive (b = −.339., p = .003).⁶ Female respondents tend to be more punitive (b = .576, p = .012). Age is negatively associated with punitiveness (b = −.387, p < .001); the result is consistent with previous research that shows older people are less likely to support the death penalty (Unnever & Cullen, 2010) and are less punitive towards juvenile offenders (Pickett & Chiricos, 2012).⁷

Table 4.

OLS Regression Models of Punitiveness Towards Offenders by Factors and Control Variables (N = 963).

Variable	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3
Variable	b	RobustSE	β	b	RobustSE	β	b	RobustSE	β
Factors
Reported to the police	.378	.229	.053	.409	.226	.057	.120	.215	.017
Disclosed the offense immediately	.628**	.230	.088	.625**	.226	.087	.262	.218	.037
Had witnesses	.349	.230	.049	.325	.226	.045	−.017	.218	−.002
There were other victims	.113	.230	.016	.139	.226	.019	.213	.214	.030
Controls
Prior victimization	—	—	—	−.188	.235	−.026	−.223	.222	−.031
Female	—	—	—	.576*	.228	.080	.205	.219	.029
White	—	—	—	.458	.298	.053	.356	.289	.041
Hispanic	—	—	—	.089	.443	.007	−.166	.439	−.013
Education	—	—	—	−.084	.081	−.034	−.139	.077	−.057
Political conservatism	—	—	—	−.339**	.115	−.100	.111	.119	.033
Age	—	—	—	−.387***	.105	−.127	−.400***	.100	−.131
Perceived Credibility of Victims	—	—	—	—	—	—	1.402***	.134	.359
R ²	.013	.051	.150

Abbreviations: b = unstandardized regression coefficient; SE = standard error; β = standardized regression coefficient.

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 (two-tailed).

Mediation Analysis

I then test if perceived credibility of the victim can explain punitiveness towards the offender. Model 3 of Table 4 shows that when respondents perceive the victim as more credible, they are also more punitive towards the offender (b = 1.402, p < .001). As the coefficients of the factors become statistically nonsignificant when perceived credibility is included in the model, it is possible that perceived credibility is a mediator in the relationship between the factors and punitiveness. I tested this mediation effect formally using bias-corrected bootstrap confidence intervals (k = 5,000; Preacher & Hayes, 2004). The results confirm that the indirect effect of perceived credibility is statistically significant in the relationship between reporting to police, immediate disclosure, having a witness, and punitive attitudes (b = .288, 95% bootstrapped CI = [.139, .451]; b = .363, 95% bootstrapped CI = [.207, .540]; b = .342, 95% bootstrapped CI = [.189, .507], respectively).

Discussion

The #MeToo movement has exposed millions of sexual assault victimizations around the world. How the public evaluates these reports may influence how the movement proceeds, how the offenders are condemned, and how the victims feel. In the current study, I evaluate the new stereotypes about sexual assault victims and the blameworthiness of sex offenders in the #MeToo era by analyzing results from a national factorial survey. Below I discuss the findings, policy implications, future directions, and limitations of the study.

The results show that the respondents hold stereotypic views about trustworthy sexual assault victims in the #MeToo movement. If the victim has reported the offense to the police, disclosed the offense to the public immediately after it happened, or has a corroborating witness, respondents perceive the victim to be more credible. Since the 1970s, researchers have been discussing the stereotypes of sexual assault victims, which tend to involve “slutty” females who “ask for it”; people might be unsympathetic to such victims as they think they “deserve” the misfortune (McMahon, 2010; Payne et al., 1999). The public tends to believe in a "real rape" template, where the victim is assaulted by a stranger and is injured or threatened by force (Larcombe, 2011). In the #MeToo era, as a vast number of women come forward to reveal various sexual assault experiences, it may seem like progress that the public is less interested in verifying if the victim fits the rape template and the victims are less likely to be troubled by a slut label. However, if the public now doubts the credibility of sexual assault victims because they choose not to report to law enforcement, delay in coming forward, or do not have a witness, it is still difficult for victims to receive full support from the community and the criminal justice system, as many victims are reluctant to disclose the offense to anyone shortly after it happens (Smith et al., 2000).

The results further show that stereotypic views about sexual assault victims’ credibility play an important role in shaping public punitiveness towards the offender. Immediate disclosure of the victimization experience increases punitiveness towards the offender. Perceived credibility of the victim indirectly increases punitiveness through reporting to police, disclosing immediately to the public, and having a witness. Punitive attitudes may eventually turn into criminal justice policies (Enns, 2016), influencing how law enforcement and prosecution handle sexual assault cases and how the victims are treated in the criminal justice system. The results of the present study provide support for a recent scholarly argument that “#MeToo has ushered in a new cultural awareness of the complexities of sexual assault cases, and in turn, punitive responses to such cases” (Socia et al., 2019b, p. 3).

Public opinion about sexual assault and the #MeToo movement has important policy implications. Months of delay in victim reporting may lead to unfavorable court rulings against sexual assault victims (Tippett, 2018). According to the Supreme Court, a delayed sexual assault disclosure “is merely an unfortunate event in history which has no present legal consequences” (United Air Lines v. Evans, 1977). Before the #MeToo movement, a number of prior legal rulings have decided that months of delay in reporting sexual assault should be considered unreasonable (e.g., Casiano v. AT&T Corp, 2000; Thornton v. Fed Express Corp., 2008; Walton v. Johnson & Johnson, 2003 ). However, in a more recent ruling, years of delay (from 2009 to 2013) in reporting were not considered unreasonable; the judge in this case wrote: “A mere failure to report one's harassment is not per se unreasonable. Moreover, the passage of time is just one factor in the analysis” (Minarsky v. Susquehanna County, 2018). Given the potential impact of public opinion on the criminal justice system (Pickett, 2019), it is possible that the unfolding #MeToo movement and changing public opinion about sexual assault will bring more revolutionary changes to sexual assault legislation.

Moreover, policymakers should explore how to use social media to change people's biases and stereotypes and achieve gender equality. Prior research shows that exposure to social media is related to the public's perceptions of crime, especially among young adults (Intravia et al., 2017). In addition to the #MeToo hashtag, social media movements such as #HowIWillChange may engage men and boys in an effort to collectively reduce sexual violence and dismantle the rape culture (PettyJohn et al., 2019). Healthcare providers and social workers may use social media to disseminate health information and help sexual assault victims (Bravo et al., 2019).

For future researchers who would like to continue to examine the #MeToo movement and public attitudes towards sexual assault, this study points to several interesting future directions. First, future research should explore how to change existing stereotypes that sexual assault victims who delay reporting or do not immediately disclose the offense are less credible. Possible solutions include providing the public with more accurate information about why victims may withhold victimization experiences and not cooperate with authorities immediately after victimization. Prior research has shown that exposure to accurate information may change public opinion about crime and criminal justice (Bohm & Vogel, 2004; Indermaur et al., 2012; Roberts et al., 2012). Future research should test the effect of information treatment on changing public opinion about sexual assault victims. Second, it is possible that public opinion about sexual assault evolves over time (see, e.g., Pickett, 2019). Future research should monitor how public attitudes change as the movement comes to an end and examine over-time variations in collective attitudes longitudinally. Third, researchers should conduct qualitative interviews with #MeToo victims and provide more cultural contexts for understanding the experiences of victims.

The current study has several limitations. First, the vignette used in the experiment focuses on the story of a hypothetical female victim and male offender. The discussion of sexual assault in this study does not cover homosexual relationships or the situation where the offender is female and the victim is male. Future research should explore public opinion about male victims and sexual assault in homosexual relationships when more data are available. Second, although the study uses a high-quality online opt-in panel, it is not a nationally representative sample. Thus, the external validity of the results should be interpreted with caution. Third, the current study is based on a cross-sectional survey. As social conditions are dynamically changing--e.g., new sexual assault allegations have been made against Democratic leaders after the current survey was completed (North, 2020)--researchers should constantly monitor public opinion under different circumstances and re-examine the research questions using longitudinal data.

Despite the limitations, this study is an important first step to understand the public opinion context of sexual assault reporting, victim blaming, and legal consequences of sex offenders. For victimology and gender researchers, results from the study can help develop new measures to evaluate prejudice against sexual assault victims. For society at large, this study can raise awareness of the difficulties faced by sexual assault victims and suggest alternative ways other than the criminal justice system to help the victims. More research using qualitative and longitudinal methods is still needed to fully understand public opinion about sexual assault in the #MeToo era.

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) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Luzi Shi

Notes

Author Biography

Luzi Shi is an assistant professor in the Department of Criminal Justice at Bridgewater State University. Her research interests include public opinion about crime and criminal justice, media, gender, victimology, and inequality.

References

Adefolalu

A. O.

(2014). Fear of the perpetrator: A major reason why sexual assault victims delayed presenting at hospital. Tropical Medicine & International Health, 19(3), 342-347. https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.12249

American Association for Public Opinion Research (2016). Standard definitions. Retrieved from www.aapor.org

Anderson

A. L.

Lytle

Schwadel

(2017). Age, period, and cohort effects on death penalty attitudes in the United States, 1974–2014. Criminology, 55(4), 833-868. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12160

Associated Press-NORC (2019). Associated Press-NORC Survey. Retrieved from Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. Cornell University.

Auspurg

Hinz

(2014). Factorial survey experiments (Vol. 175). Sage Publications.

Baker

Blumberg

S. J.

Brick

J. M.

Couper

M. P.

Courtright

Dennis

J. M.

Dillman

Frankel

M. R.

Garland

Grovers

R. M.

Kennedy

Krosnick

Lavrakas

P. J.

(2010). Research synthesis: AAPOR report on online panels. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(4), 711-781. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq048

Baumer

E. P.

Felson

R. B.

Messner

S. F.

(2003). Changes in police notification for rape, 1973–2000. Criminology, 41(3), 841-870. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2003.tb01006.x

Beitsch

(2018). #Metoo has changed our culture. Now it’s changing our laws. Pew Research Center.

Bhattacharyya

(2018). #Metoo movement: An awareness campaign. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 3(4), 1-12. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3175260

10.

Bohm

R. M.

Vogel

B. L.

(2004). More than ten years after: The long-term stability of informed death penalty opinions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32(4), 307-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2004.04.003

11.

Boyle

(2019). #Metoo, Weinstein, and feminism. Palgrave Macmillan.

12.

Boyle

Rathnayake

(2019). #HimToo and the networking of misogyny in the age of #MeToo. Feminist Media Studies, 20(8), 1259–1277. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2019.1661868

13.

Bravo

R. G.

Bravo

M. G.

Lygidakis

Vogele

(2019). Social media as an opportunity for public health interventions: The #MeToo movement as an exemplar. Journal of the International Society for Telemedicine and Ehealth, 7(e5), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.29086/JISfTeH.7.e5

14.

Burke

(November 29). MeToo founder Tarana Burke: Campaign now “unrecognizable”. Retrieved from bbc.com.

15.

Campbell

(2013). The psychological impact of rape victims’ experiences with the legal, medical, and mental health systems. In Sisti

D. A.

Caplan

A. L.

Rimon-Greenspan

(Eds.), Applied ethics in mental health care: An interdisciplinary reader (pp. 149-178). Boston Review. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262019682.003.0011

16.

Casiano v. AT&T Corp, 213 F.3d 278, 280-81, 287 (5th Cir. 2000).

17.

Cavill

(2018, July 12). “Superman” actor fears MeToo witch hunt, gets instant MeToo Backlash [interview transcript]. Retrieved from dailywire.com.

18.

Chang

Krosnick

J. A.

(2009). National surveys via RDD telephone interviewing versus the internet: Comparing sample representativeness and response quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(4), 641-678. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp075

19.

Clark

L. M.

Lewis

D. J.

(1977). Rape: The price of coercive sexuality. Women's Press.

20.

Collins

L. M.

(2018). Optimization of behavioral, biobehavioral, and biomedical interventions: The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST). Springer.

21.

Cullen

F. T.

Clark

G. A.

Cullen

J. B.

Mathers

R. A.

(1985). Attribution, salience, and attitudes toward criminal sanctioning. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 12(3), 305-331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854885012003003

22.

Daly

Curtis-Fawley

(2006). Restorative justice for victims of sexual assault. In Heimer

Kruttschnitt

(Eds.), Gender and crime: Patterns of victimization and offending (pp. 230-265) New York: NYU Press.

23.

Deitz

M. F.

Williams

S. L.

Rife

S. C.

Cantrell

(2015). Examining cultural, social, and self-related aspects of stigma in relation to sexual assault and trauma symptoms. Violence Against Women, 21(5), 598-615. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801215573330

24.

Democracy Corps. (2019). Democracy corps poll. Retrieved from Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. From Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

25.

Deneuve

(January 9, 2018). Catherine Deneuve: #MeToo movement is a “witch hunt” that has “punished” men [letter transcript]. Retrieved from abcnews.go.com.

26.

Dum

C. P.

Socia

K. M.

Long

B. L.

Yarrison

(2019). Would god forgive? Public attitudes toward sex offenders in places of worship. Sexual Abuse, 32(5), 567-590. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063219839498

27.

Dum

C. P.

Socia

K. M.

Rydberg

(2017). Public support for emergency shelter housing interventions concerning stigmatized populations: Results from a factorial survey. Criminology & Public Policy, 16(3), 835-877. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12311

28.

Enns

P. K.

(2016). Incarceration nation. Cambridge University Press.

29.

Frazier

P. A.

Haney

(1996). Sexual assault cases in the legal system: Police, prosecutor, and victim perspectives. Law and Human Behavior, 20(6), 607-628. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01499234

30.

Frohmann

(1991). Discrediting victims’ allegations of sexual assault: Prosecutorial accounts of case rejections. Social Problems, 38(2), 213-226. https://doi.org/10.2307/800530

31.

Garcia

S. E.

(2018). A mom’s #HimToo twee ignites a viral meme, and her embarrassed son clarifies. Retrieved from nytimes.com.

32.

General Social Survey (2018). Think of self as liberal or conservative. Retrieved from gssdataexplorer.norc.org

33.

Gilliam

(January 5, 2020). Director Terry Gilliam sparks outrage after calling #MeToo movement a “witch hunt” [interview transcript]. Retrieved from newsweek.com

34.

Gilmore

(2017, December). He said/she said: Truth-telling and# MeToo. Journal of Culture & the Arts,FORUM: University of Edinburgh Postgraduate, No. 25, 1–5.

35.

Ginsburg

R. B.

(2018, January 22). Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg praised the #MeToo movement, and shared her own experience of sexual harassment. (J. Lynch). Retrieved from businessinsider.com.

36.

Godfrey

Felton

Hosking

(2018). The 25 candidates for 2018 sunk by #MeToo allegations. Retrieved from www.theantlantic.com

37.

Graf

(2018). Sexual harassment at work in the era of #MeToo. Pew Research Center.

38.

Haneke

(Feb 12, 2018). Michael Haneke: #MeToo has led a witch hunt “coloured by a hatred of men’ [interview transcript]. Retrieved from theguardian.com

39.

Harris

A. J.

Socia

K. M.

(2016). What’s in a name? Evaluating the effects of the “sex offender” label on public opinions and beliefs. Sexual Abuse, 28(7), 660-678. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063214564391

40.

Heenan

Murray

(2006). Study of reported rapes in Victoria, 2000–2003. Office of Women’s Policy. Department for Victorian Communities, Melbourne.

41.

Hogan

M. J.

Chiricos

Gertz

(2005). Economic insecurity, blame, and punitive attitudes. Justice Quarterly, 22(3), 392-412. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418820500219144

42.

Hosterman

A. R.

Johnson

N. R.

Stouffer

Herring

(2018). Twitter, social support messages, and the# MeToo movement. Journal of Social Media in Society, 7(2), 69-91.

43.

IACP (2005). Investigating sexual assaults: Concepts and issues paper.

44.

Indermaur

Roberts

Spiranovic

Mackenzie

Gelb

(2012). A matter of judgement: The effect of information and deliberation on public attitudes to punishment. Punishment & Society, 14(2), 147-165. https://doi.org/10.1177/1462474511434430

45.

Intravia

Wolff

K. T.

Paez

Gibbs

B. R.

(2017). Investigating the relationship between social media consumption and fear of crime: A partial analysis of mostly young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 158-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.047

46.

Jordan

(2004). Beyond belief? Police, rape and women’s credibility. Criminal Justice, 4(1), 29-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466802504042222

47.

Kelly

(2001). Routes to (in) justice: A research review on the reporting, investigation and prosecution of rape cases. Retrieved from justiceinspectorates.gov.uk.

48.

Kelly

Lovett

Regan

(2005). A gap or chasm? Attrition in reported rape cases (Home Office Research Study 293) Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate, London.

49.

Kleck

Jackson

D. B.

(2016). Does crime cause punitiveness? Crime & Delinquency, 63(12), 1572-1599. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128716638503

50.

Koss

M. P.

(1996). The measurement of rape victimization in crime surveys. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23(1), 55-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854896023001005

51.

Lanius

(2019). Torment porn or feminist Witch hunt: Apprehensions about the# MeToo movement on/r/AskReddit. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 43(4), 415-436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859919865250

52.

Larcombe

(2011). Falling rape conviction rates: (some) feminist aims and measures for rape law. Feminist Legal Studies, 19(1), 27-45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-011-9169-2

53.

Lawson

Chaffin

(1992). False negatives in sexual abuse disclosure interviews: Incidence and influence of caretaker's belief in abuse in cases of accidental abuse discovery by diagnosis of STD. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 7(4), 532-542. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626092007004008

54.

Lea

S. J.

Lanvers

Shaw

(2003). Attrition in rape cases. Developing a profile and identifying relevant factors. British Journal of Criminology, 43(3), 583-599. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/43.3.583

55.

Lessing

J. E.

(2005). Primary care provider interventions for the delayed disclosure of adolescent sexual assault. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 19(1), 17-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0891-5245(04)00181-6

56.

(2013). Little's test of missing completely at random. The Stata Journal, 13(4), 795-809. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X1301300407

57.

Lisak

Gardinier

Nicksa

S. C.

Cote

A. M.

(2010). False allegations of sexual assault: An analysis of ten years of reported cases. Violence Against Women, 16(12), 1318-1334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801210387747

58.

Lonsway

K. A.

(2010). Trying to move the elephant in the living room: Responding to the challenge of false rape reports. Violence Against Women, 16(12), 1356-1371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801210387750

59.

Lonsway

K. A.

Archambault

Lisak

(2009). False reports: Moving beyond the issue to successfully investigate and prosecute non-stranger sexual assault. . Prosecutor, Journal of the National District Attorneys Association, 43(1), 10-22.

60.

McCahill

T. W.

Meyer

L. C.

Fischman

A. M.

(1979). The aftermath of rape. Lexington Books.

61.

McMahon

(2010). Rape myth beliefs and bystander attitudes among incoming college students. Journal of American College Health, 59(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2010.483715

62.

Mendes

Ringrose

Keller

(2019). Digital feminist activism: Girls and women fight back against rape culture. Oxford University Press.

63.

Merchant

R. C.

Keshavarz

Low

(2004). HIV post-exposure prophylaxis provided at an urban pediatric emergency department to female adolescents after sexual assault. Emergency Medicine Journal, 21(4), 449-451. https://doi.org/10.1136/emj.2002.002824

64.

Miller

A. K.

Canales

E. J.

Amacker

A. M.

Backstrom

T. L.

Gidycz

C. A.

(2011). Stigma-threat motivated nondisclosure of sexual assault and sexual revictimization: A prospective analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35(1), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684310384104

65.

Minarsky v. Susquehanna County, No. 17-2646 (3d Cir., 2018).

66.

Nannini

(2006). Sexual assault patterns among women with and without disabilities seeking survivor services. Women's Health Issues, 16(6), 372-379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2006.10.001

67.

Nodeland

Craig

(2021). Perceptions of legal and extralegal punishments for sexual harassment in the “MeToo“ era. Deviant Behavior, 42(7), 850-861.

68.

North

(2020). A sexual assault allegation against Joe Biden has ignited a firestorm controversy. Retrieved from www.vox.com

69.

Payne

D. L.

Lonsway

K. A.

Fitzgerald

L. F.

(1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the Illinois rape myth acceptance scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 33(1), 27-68. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1998.2238

70.

Peipert

J. F.

Domagalski

L. R.

(1994). Epidemiology of adolescent sexual assault. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 84(5), 867-871.

71.

Peskov

(July 26, 2019). Russia’s Version of #MeToo has struggled to take off-until now [interview transcript]. Retrieved from time.com.

72.

PettyJohn

M. E.

Muzzey

F. K.

Maas

M. K.

McCauley

H. L.

(2019). # HowIWillChange: Engaging men and boys in the # MeToo movement. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 20(4), 612-622. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000186

73.

Pickett

J. T.

(2019). Public opinion and criminal justice policy: Theory and research. Annual Review of Criminology, 2, 405-428. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-011518-024826

74.

Pickett

J. T.

Baker

. (2014). The pragmatic American: Empirical reality or methodological artifact?. Criminology, 52(2), 195-222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12035

75.

Pickett

J. T.

Chiricos

(2012). Controlling other people’s children: Racialized views of delinquency and Whites’ punitive attitudes toward juvenile offenders. Criminology, 50(3), 673-710. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2012.00280.x

76.

Pickett

J. T.

Mancini

Mears

D. P.

(2013). Vulnerable victims, monstrous offenders, and unmanageable risk: Explaining public opinion on the social control of sex crime. Criminology, 51(3), 729-759. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12018

77.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, &Computers, 36(4), 717-731. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206553

78.

Putin

(2018, June 7). Putin suggests #MeToo movement is a media conspiracy [interview transcript]. Retrieved from theguardian.com.

79.

Roberts

Hough

Jackson

Gerber

M. M.

(2012). Public opinion towards the lay magistracy and the sentencing council guidelines: The effects of information on attitudes. British Journal of Criminology, 52(6), 1072-1091. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azs024

80.

Rodino-Colocino

(2019). Me too, #MeToo: Countering cruelty with empathy. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 1(15), 96-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2018.1435083

81.

Rumney

P. N.

(2006). False allegations of rape. Cambridge Law Journal, 65(1), 128-158. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008197306007069

82.

Rydberg

Dum

C. P.

Socia

K. M.

(2018). Nobody gives a#% &!: A factorial survey examining the effect of criminological evidence on opposition to sex offender residence restrictions. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 14, 541-550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-018-9335-5

83.

Saunders

C. L.

(2012). The truth, the half-truth, and nothing like the truth: Reconceptualizing false allegations of rape. British Journal of Criminology, 52(6), 1152-1171. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azs036

84.

Schwarz

Baum

M. A.

Cohen

D. K.

(2020). (Sex) crime and punishment in the #MeToo era: How the public views rape. Political Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-020-09610-9

85.

Smith

D. W.

Letourneau

E. J.

Saunders

B. E.

Kilpatrick

D. G.

Resnick

H. S.

Best

C. L.

(2000). Delay in disclosure of childhood rape: Results from a national survey. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(2), 273-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0145-2134(99)00130-1

86.

Socia

K. M.

Dum

C. P.

Rydberg

(2019a). Turning a blind eye: Public support of emergency housing policies for sex offenders. Sexual Abuse, 31(1), 25-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063217720925

87.

Socia

K. M.

Rydberg

Dum

C. P.

(2019b). Punitive attitudes toward individuals convicted of sex offenses: A vignette study. Justice Quarterly, 38(6), 1262-1289. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2019.1683218.

88.

Spohn

White

Tellis

(2014). Unfounding sexual assault: Examining the decision to unfound and identifying false reports. Law & Society Review, 48(1), 161-192. https://doi.org/10.1111/lasr.12060

89.

Strickland

J. L.

(2001). Adolescent acute sexual assault: Contrasting with adult experiences. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 97(Suppl 1), S6.

90.

Sunstein

C. R.

(2019). # MeToo as a revolutionary cascade. University of Chicago Legal Forum, Vol. 2019, Article 9.

91.

Thornton v. Fed Express Corp., 530 F.3d 451, 457 (6th Cir. 2008).

92.

Tippett

E. C.

(2018). The legal implications of the MeToo movement. Minnesota Law Review, 103, 229–302.

93.

Triggs

Mossman

Jordan

Kingi

(2009). Responding to sexual violence: Attrition in the New Zealand criminal justice system . Ministry of Women’s Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications

94.

Trump

(2016, October 15). Donald Trump denies allegations of sexual assault from multiple women [television transcript]. Retrieved from cnn.com

95.

Trump

(2018a, September 21). Donald Trump’s personal tweet. Retrieved from tweet.com

96.

Trump

(2018b, October 2). Scary time for young men in America [video]. Retrieved from cnn.com

97.

Trump

(2018c, September 25). Donald Trump’s personal tweet. Retrieved from tweet.com

98.

Ullman

Brecklin

(2002). Sexual assault history and suicidal behavior in a national sample of women. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 32(2), 117-130. https://doi.org/10.1521/suli.32.2.117.24398

99.

United Air Lines v. Evans, 431 U.S. 553, 558 (1977).

100.

Unnever

J. D.

Cullen

F. T.

(2010). The social sources of Americans’ punitiveness: A test of three competing models. Criminology, 48(1), 99-129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2010.00181.x

101.

U.S. Census. (2017). Age and sex composition in the United States: 2017. Retrieved from www.census.gov

102.

Walton v. Johnson & Johnson Svcs., Inc., 347 F.3d 1272, 1277, 1290-91 (11th Cir., 2003).

103.

Wathen

C. N.

MacMillan

H. L.

(2012). Health care’s response to women exposed to partner violence: Moving beyond universal screening. Journal of the American Medical Association, 308(7), 712-713. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.9913

104.

Weinberg

J. D.

Freese

McElhattan

(2014). Comparing data characteristics and results of an online factorial survey between population-based and a crowdsource-recruited sample. Sociological Science, 1, 292-310. https://doi.org/10.15195/v1.a19

105.

White

(2018). Title VII and the #MeToo movement. Emory Law Journal Online, 68, 1014-1033.

106.

Berenson

A. B.

Weimann

C. M.

(2003). A profile of adolescent females with a history of sexual assault in Texas: Familial environment, risk behaviors, and health status. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, 16(4), 207-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1083-3188(03)00123-2

107.

Yousafzai

(2018). Nobel peace prize laureate praises Me Too. Retrieved from sbs.com.au

108.

Zarkov

Davis

(2018). Ambiguities and dilemmas around #Metoo: #For how long and # whereto? European Journal of Women’s Studies, 25(1), 3-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506817749436