What leads victims to resist? Factors that influence victim resistance in sexual assaults

Date05 August 2019
Published date05 August 2019
Pages122-137
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/JCP-05-2019-0014
AuthorSamantha Balemba,Eric Beauregard
Subject MatterHealth & social care
What leads victims to resist? Factors
that influence victim resistance in
sexual assaults
Samantha Balemba and Eric Beauregard
Abstract
Purpose Victim resistance has been shown to have an important impact on the outcome of sexual
assaults. Thus, the factors that affect a victims likelihood of various levels of resistance are relevant to
consider, given the possibly detrimental effect these actions can have on crime outcome. While not intended
to blame the victim in any way, it is important to examine the role the victim plays within a sexually coercive
interchange in order to completely understand the sex crime event and, thus, be able to inform potential
victims as to the patterns that increase resistanceand, potentially, overall violence. The paper aims to discuss
this issue.
Design/methodology/approach Sequential logistic regression analyses were conducted on a sample of
613 sex offenses (incorporating both adult and child victims) to examine the individual and combined effects
of offender lifestyle, disinhibitors, victim vulnerability, situational impediments and offender modus operandi
on victim resistance levels.
Findings Results suggest that indicators of offender mindset are significant, particularly the use of
pornography prior to the crime, and affect victim interpretation and response to the offenders actions during
the course of the assault. Other relevant factors include the victims age and the degree of violence present in
the offenders approach and subsequent offending strategies.
Originality/value This information would be helpful to incorporate into victim education programs so that
past and future potential victims can better understand the criminal event and the causes and effects of their
own actions within that event.
Keywords Modus operandi, Violence, Rape, Sexual assault, Criminal event, Victim resistance
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Violent offenders make decisions situationally and are affected by the context surrounding the
crime as well as by the behavior of those within the event most notably, the victim (Miethe and
Meier, 1994; Polaschek et al., 2001; Ward et al., 1995). While the offender has many important
decisions to make, including whether to commit the crime, as well as how to do so once the
crime has begun, the offender is not the only player within such an interchange the victim also
plays an important role.
One of the most important stages withina sexual assault is that which determineshow the victim
will react during thecrime, as this can potentially affect the progression of the assault and its final
outcome (Balembaand Beauregard, 2012; Balemba et al.,2012; Ullman, 1997, 1998; Ullmanand
Knight, 1991,1993, 1995). While this is notmeant to attribute blame to thevictim, it is simply a fact
that victim behavior can affect how a criminal altercation plays out.Therefore, to truly understand
the entire criminal event, not only must the offenders behavior be examined, but the patterns of
victim behaviormust be studied as well. The decisionto resist and thetype of resistance employed
are among the most influential actions a victim can have on the crime once it has begun
(these being the only real behaviors a victim can employ within the context of the assault).
Received 6 May 2019
Revised 15 June 2019
Accepted 20 June 2019
This work was supported by the
Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council.
Samantha Balemba is based at
the Department of Criminal
Justice, Montana State
University Northern, Havre,
Montana, USA.
Eric Beauregard is based at the
Department of Criminology,
Simon Fraser University,
Vancouver, Canada.
PAGE122
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY
j
VOL. 9 NO. 3 2019, pp. 122-137, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2009-3829 DOI 10.1108/JCP-05-2019-0014
Therefore, the current study examines the factors that lead to no resistance, passive resistance,
verbal resistanceor physical resistance by adult and childsexual assault victims. This serves as an
importantfirst step in elucidating the crime elementsthat differentiate varioustypes of sexual crimes
in terms of their progression and outcome.
Fattah (1995) suggested that victim and offender roles are dynamic to the point of becoming
revolving and interchangeable; that is, each player affects one another throughout the exchange
with a certain fluidity. Congruent with this line of reasoning, others have found that victim actions
during the commission of a sexual crime affect offender behavior, just as offender actions affect
the victims (Block, 1981; Luckenbill, 1977; Tedeschi and Felson, 1994). Thus, it is warranted to
examine factors that affect victim behavior, which may contribute to crime patterns and
progression. The current study focuses on victim, offender, situational and crime variables that
affect an adult or child victims likelihood to resist a sexual assault to varying degrees.
Victim resistance
The spectrum of possible reactions from the victim can range from forceful, physical resistance to
capitulation. The victims chosen response to a sexual assault is arguably the most important
action a victim can take within the criminal event. While this can be viewed as simply a type of
situational impediment to the offender (LaFree and Birkbeck, 1991), it is an important, distinct
dimension of the crime due to its theoretical difference as well as its temporal location within the
criminal event, necessarily occurring after the crime has begun and the offender has chosen his
attack strategy, but before its conclusion and eventual outcome (Balemba and Beauregard,
2012; Balemba et al., 2012).
The effect of victim resistance on consequent offender behavior and/or crime outcomes has been
studied a great deal in the literature (e.g. Balemba and Beauregard, 2012; Balemba et al., 2012;
Fisher et al., 2007; Marchbanks et al., 1990; Ullman, 1997, 1998; Ullman and Knight, 1991,
1993, 1995; Wong and Balemba, 2016a, b; Zoucha-Jensen and Coyne, 1993). However, far less
has been done to determine the factors that affect victim resistance, with some notable
exceptions (Clay-Warner, 2003; Gidycz et al., 2008; Leclerc et al., 2010; Macy et al., 2007;
Turchik et al., 2007).
Leclerc et al. (2010) examined the effect of offender modus operandi (MO) and victim
characteristics on victim resistance, although this study was limited to offenses against children.
The authors found the level of violence to be a significant factor, with offender threats and physical
force often increasing the likelihood of more forceful resistance by the child. As well, the younger
the victim, the more likely they would employ nonforceful resistance strategies, while older victims
were more likely to attempt physical resistance (Leclerc et al., 2010).
The study conducted by Gidycz et al. (2008) prospectively evaluated the predictors of victim
responses to a sexually abusive assailant. Prior to any assault, victims were asked how they
believe they would respond to an attacker. Interestingly, a victims belief that they would use
assertive resistance strategies (such as fighting back or running away) predicted assertive
resistance when victimization occurred. This idea was supported by Turchik et al. (2007), who
found similar relationships, but in terms of non-physical resistance strategies. That is, those who
intended to use verbal or nonforceful resistance techniques were more likely to do so.
Relatedly, and also through a prospective study, Turchik et al. (2007) determined the importance
of a victims level of self-confidence, noting that those with greater confidence were more likely to
respond verbally and physically to an assault. This is indirectly supported by research conducted
by Brecklin and Ullman (2005), who studied the effects of self-defense training on womens
responses to sexual attacks. Brecklin and Ullman (2005) found that women who had received
self-defense training were more likely to resist and were more successful in their resistance.
This could certainly be tied to self-confidence, as those with training would likely feel more
confident in their ability to fend off an attacker.
Within Gidycz et al. (2008), the level of offender aggression, particularly physical restraint by the
offender, also predicted the use of assertive resistance as well as nonforceful verbal resistance
tactics. Notably, previous sexual victimization was predictive of both nonforceful verbal resistance
VOL. 9 NO. 3 2019
j
JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY
j
PAGE123

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT