Of 'normal sex' and 'real rape': Exploring the use of socio-sexual scripts in (mock) jury deliberation

Social and Legal Studies

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 291-312

  Ellison, Louise ^a   Munro, Vanessa E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Communication; Jury; Rape; Scripts; Sexuality

Indexed keywords

EID: 70349599160     PISSN: 09646639     EISSN: 14617390     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0964663909339083     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Abbey, A. and R. Harnish (1995) Perceptions of Sexual Intent: The Role of Gender, Alcohol Consumption and Rape Supportive Attitudes, Sex Roles 32: 297-313.
2. Abelson, R. (1976) Script Processing in Attitude Formation and Decision-making, pp. 33-46 in J. Carroll and J. Payne (eds) Cognition and Social Behaviour. Oxford: Erlbaum.
3. Amnesty International (2005) Sexual Assault Research: Summary Report. Available at http://www.amnesty.org.uk
4. Anderson, I., G. Beattie and C. Spencer (2001) Can Blaming Victims of Rape be Rational? Attribution Theory and Discourse Analytic Perspectives, Human Relations 54(4): 445-67.
5. Barber, R. (1974) Judge and Jury Attitude toward Rape, Australia and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 7: 157-72.
6. Bargh, J. (1996) Automaticity in Social Psychology, pp. 169-83 in E. Higgins and A. Kruglanski (eds) Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles. New York: Guilford.
7. Bonazzoli, M. (1998) Jury Selection and Bias: Debunking Invidious Stereotypes Through Science, Quinnipiac Law Review 18: 19-31.
8. Burt, M. (1994) Rape Myths and Acquaintance Rape, pp 26-40 in L. Parrot and L. Bechhofer (eds) Acquaintance Rape: The Hidden Crime. New York: Wiley.
9. Burt, M. and R. Albin (1981) Rape Myths, Rape Definitions, and Probability of Conviction, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 11: 212-30.
10. Byers, E. and P. Wilson (1985) The Accuracy of Women's Expectations Regarding Men's Responses to Refusals of Sexual Advances in Dating Situations, International Journal of Women's Studies 4: 376-87.
11. Calhoun, L., J. Selby, A. Cann and T. Keller (1978) The Effects of Victim Physical Attractiveness and Sex of Respondent on Social Reactions to Victims of Rape, British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 17(2): 191-2.
12. Cameron, B. and L. Murphy (2008) This Is Not an Invitation to Rape Me. Campaign Evaluation Research Report for Rape Crisis Scotland. Edinburgh: Progressive.
13. Cowan, G. (2000) Women's Hostility Towards Women and Rape and Sexual Harassment Myths, Violence Against Women 6(3): 238-46.
14. Crawford, M. (1995) Talking Difference: On Gender and Language. London: Sage.
15. Crome, S. and M. McCabe (2001) Adult Rape Scripting Within a Victimological Perspective, Aggression and Violent Behaviour 6: 395-413.
16. Deitz, S., M. Littman and B. Bentley (1984) 'Attribution of Responsibility for Rape: The Influence of Observer Empathy, Victim Resistance, and Victim Attractiveness', Sex Roles 10: 261-80.
17. Ehrlich, S. (2001) Representing Rape: Language and Sexual Consent. New York: Routledge.
18. Ellison, L. and V. Munro (2009a) Reacting to Rape: Exploring Mock Jurors' Assessments of Complainant Credibility, British Journal of Criminology 49(2): 202-19.
19. Ellison, L. and V. Munro (2009b) Turning Mirrors into Windows? Assessing the Impact of (Mock) Juror Education in Rape Trials, British Journal of Criminology 49(3): 363-83.
20. Ellison, L. and V. Munro (forthcoming a) Getting to (Not) Guilty: Examining Jurors' Deliberative Processes and Legal Understanding in a Mock Rape Trial, manuscript in progress.
21. Ellison, L. and V. Munro (forthcoming b) A Stranger in the Bushes, or An Elephant in the Room? Critical Reflections Upon Received Rape Myth Wisdom in the Context of a Mock Jury Study, manuscript in progress.
22. Ellsworth, P. (1993) Some Steps Between Attitudes and Verdicts, pp. 42-64 in R. Hastie (ed.) Inside the Juror: The Psychology of Juror Decision-making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Feild, H. (1978) Attitudes toward Rape: A Comparative Analysis of Police, Rapist, Crisis Counselors and Citizens, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36: 156-79.
24. Feild, H. and L. Bienen (1980) Jurors and Rape: A Study in Psychology and Law. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
25. Finch, E. and V. Munro (2005) Juror Stereotypes and Blame Attribution in Rape Cases Involving Intoxicants: Findings of a Pilot Study, British Journal of Criminology 45: 25-38.
26. Finch, E. and V. Munro (2006) Breaking Boundaries? Sexual Consent in the Jury Room, Legal Studies 26(3): 303-20.
27. Finch, E. and V. Munro (2007) The Demon Drink and the Demonised Woman: Socio-sexual Stereotypes and Responsibility Attribution in Rape Trials Involving Intoxicants, Social & Legal Studies 16(4): 591-614.
28. Finch, E. and V. Munro (2008) Lifting the Veil: The Use of Focus Groups and Trial Simulations in Legal Research, Journal of Law & Society 35: 30-51.
29. Finkel, N. (1995) Common Sense Justice: Jurors' Notions of the Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
30. Fischer, G. (1991) Cognitive Predictors of Not-guilty Verdicts in a Simulated Acquaintance Rape Trial, Psychological Reports 68: 1199-206.
31. Fischer, G. (1997) Gender Effects on Individual Verdicts and on Mock Jury Verdicts in a Simulated Acquaintance Rape Trial, Sex Roles 36(7): 491-501.
32. Foley, L. and Pigott, M. (2000) Belief in a Just World and Jury Decisions in a Civil Rape Trial, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 30: 935-51.
33. George, W., S. Gournic and M. McAfee (1988) Perceptions of Postdrinking Female Sexuality: Effects of Gender, Beverage Choice and Drink Payment, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 18: 1295-317.
34. Grubin, D. and J. Gunn (1990) The Imprisoned Rapist and Rape. London: The Institute of Psychiatry.
35. Hannon, R., D. Hall, T. Kuntz, S. Van Laar and J. Williams (1995) Dating Characteristics Leading to Wanted vs. Unwanted Sexual Behaviour, Sex Roles 33: 767-83.
36. Heilbrun, A. (1980) Presumed Motive in the Male and Female Perception of Rape, Criminal Justice and Behavior 7: 257-74.
37. Hepburn, J. (1980) The Objective Reality of Evidence and the Utility of Systematic Jury Selection, Law and Human Behaviour 4: 89-102.
38. Jacobson, M. and P. Popvich (1983) Victim Attractiveness and Perceptions of Responsibility in an Ambiguous Rape Case, Psychology of Women Quarterly 8: 100-4.
39. Kaplan, M. and L. Miller (1978) Reducing the Effects of Juror Bias, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36: 1443-55.
40. Kleinke, C. and C. Meyer (1990) Evaluation of Rape Victim by Men and Women with High and Low Belief in a Just World, Psychology of Women Quarterly 14: 343-53.
41. Kopper, B. (1996) 'Gender, Gender Identity, Rape Myth Acceptance, and Time of Initial Resistance on the Perception of Acquaintance Rape Blame and Avoidability', Sex Roles 34: 81-93.
42. Krahe, B., S. Bieneck and R. Scheinberger-Olwig (2007) The Role of Sexual Scripts in Sexual Aggression and Victimisation, Archives of Sexual Behaviour 36: 687-701.
43. Krulewitz, J. and J. Nash (1979) Effects of Rape Victim Resistance, Assault Outcome, and Sex of Observer on Attributions about Rape, Journal of Personality 47: 558-74.
44. Lees, S. (1996) Carnal Knowledge Rape on Trial. London: Hamish Hamilton.
45. Lenton, A. and A. Bryan (2005) An Affair to Remember: The Role of Sexual Scripts in Perceptions of Sexual Intent, Personal Relationships 12: 483-98.
46. Lerner, M. (1965) Evaluation of Performance as a Function of Performer's Reward and Attractiveness, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1: 355-60.
47. Lonsway, K. and L. Fitzgerald (1994) Rape Myths, Psychology of Women Quarterly 18: 220-32.
48. Luginbuhl, J. and C. Mullin (1976) Rape and Responsibility: How Much Is the Victim Blamed?, Sex Roles 7: 547-59.
49. Mills, C. and B. Granoff (1992) Date and Acquaintance Rape Among a Sample of College Students, Social Work: 504-9.
50. Monson, C., J. Langhinrichsen-Rohling and T. Binderup (2000) Does No'' Really Mean No After You Say Yes? Attributions About Date and Marital Rape, Journal of Interpersonal Violence 15: 1156-74.
51. Muehlenhard, C. and L. Hollabaugh (1988) Do Women Sometimes Say No When They Mean Yes? The Prevalence and Correlates of Women's Token Resistance to Sex, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54: 872-9.
52. Muehlenhard, C. and M. McCoy (1991) Double Standard/Double Bind: The Sexual Double Standard and Women's Communication About Sex, Psychology of Women Quarterly 15: 447-61.
53. Muehlenhard, C. and C. Rodgers (1998) Token Resistance to Sex: New Perspectives on Old Stereotypes, Psychology of Women Quarterly 22: 443-63.
54. Norris, J. and L. Cubbins (1992) Dating, Drinking and Rape: Effects of Victims' and Assailants' Alcohol Consumption on Judgments of their Behaviour and Traits, Psychology of Women Quarterly 16: 179-91.
55. Ong, A. and C. Ward (1999) The Effects of Sex and Power Schemas, Attitudes Towards Women, and Victim Resistance on Rape Attributions, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 29: 362-76.
56. Osman, S. and C. Davis (1997) Predicting Men's Perceptions of Date Rape Using the Heuristic-systematic Model, Journal of Sex Education and Therapy 22: 25-32.
57. Richardson, D. and J. Campbell (1982) Alcohol and Rape: The Effect of Alcohol on Attributions of Blame for Rape, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 8(3): 468-76.
58. Richardson, D. and G. Hammock (1991) Alcohol and Acquaintance Rape, pp. 83-95 in A. Parrot and L. Bechhofer (eds) Acquaintance Rape: The Hidden Crime. New York: Wiley.
59. Schank, R. and R. Abelson (1977) Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
60. Schuller, R. and A. Stewart (2000) Police Responses to Sexual Assault Complaints: The Role of Perpetrator/Complainant Intoxication, Law and Human Behavior 24: 535-51.
61. Schult, D. and L. Schneider (1991) The Role of Sexual Provocativeness, Rape History, and Observer Gender in Perceptions of Blame in Sexual Assault, Journal of Interpersonal Violence 6: 94-101.
62. Sealy, A. and W. Cornish (1973) Jurors and Their Verdicts, Modern Law Review 36: 496-508.
63. Shaver, K. (1970) Defensive Attribution: Effects of Severity and Relevance on the Responsibility Assigned for an Accident, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 14: 101-13.
64. Shotland, R. and L. Goodstein (1983) Just Because She Doesn't Want to Doesn't Mean It's Rape: An Experimentally Based Causal Model of the Perception of Rape in a Dating Situation, Social Psychology Quarterly 46: 220-32.
65. Shotland, R. and L. Goodstein (1992) Sexual Precedence Reduces the Perceived Legitimacy of Sexual Refusal: An Examination of Attributions Concerning Date Rape and Consensual Sex, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 18: 756-64.
66. Simon, R. (1968) The Jury and the Defence of Insanity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
67. Simon, W. and J. Gagnon (1984) Sexual Scripts, Society 22: 52-60.
68. Simon, W. and J. Gagnon (1986) Sexual Scripts: Permanence and Change, Archives of Sexual Behaviour 15: 97-120.
69. Simon, W. and J. Gagnon (1987) A Sexual Scripts Approach, pp. 363-83 in J. Greer and T. O'Donohue (eds) Theories of Human Sexuality. New York: Plenum.
70. Spellman, B. and A. Kincannon (2001) The Relation Between Counterfactual (But For) and Causal Reasoning: Experimental Findings and Implications for Jurors' Decisions, Law and Contemporary Problems 64: 214-64.
71. Stormo, K., A. Lang and Q. Stritzke (1997) Attributions About Acquaintance Rape: The Role of Alcohol and Individual Differences, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27(4): 279-305.
72. Taylor, N. (2007) 'Juror Attitudes and Biases in Sexual Assault Cases', Trends & Issues in Crime & Criminal Justice Paper 344. Canberra: AIC.
73. Taylor, N. and J. Joudo (2005) The Impact of Pre-recorded Video and Closed Circuit Television Testimony by Adult Sexual Assault Complainants on Jury Decision-making: An Experimental Study, Australian Institute of Criminology Research & Public Policy Series (No. 68). Canberra: AIC.
74. Taylor, N. and J. Mouzos (2006) Community Attitudes to Violence Against Women Survey 206: Full Technical Report. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
75. Temkin, J. and B. Krahe (2008) Sexual Assault and the Justice Gap: A Question of Attitude. Oxford: Hart.
76. Tetreault, P. (1989) Rape Myth Acceptance: A Case for Providing Educational Expert Testimony in Rape Jury Trials, Behavioural Sciences and the Law 7: 243-57.
77. Ugwuebu, D. (1979) Racial and Evidential Factors in Juror Attribution of Legal Responsibility, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 15: 133-46.
78. Visher, C. (1987) Juror Decision Making: The Importance of Evidence, Law and Human Behavior 11: 1-17.
79. Wall, A. and R. Schuller (2000) Sexual Assault and Defendant/Victim Intoxication: Jurors' Perceptions of Guilt, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 30(2): 253-74.
80. Ward, C. (1995) Attitudes Towards Rape: Feminist and Social Psychological Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
81. Wyer, R., G. Bodenhausen and T. Gorman (1985) Cognitive Mediators of Reactions to Rape, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48: 324-38.
82. Yescavage, K. (1999) Teaching Women a Lesson: Sexually Aggressive and Sexually Non-aggressive Men's Perceptions of Acquaintance and Date Rape, Violence Against Women 5: 796-812.