Do Environmental Cues to Discovery Influence the Likelihood to Rape?
Research on men's sexual exploitation of women has documented that men's psychology tracks cues associated with the ease of women's exploitability. In the current studies, we examined a different class of cues hypothesized to aid men's use of sexually exploitative strategies: env...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SAGE Publishing
2022-10-01
|
| Series: | Evolutionary Psychology |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049221141078 |
| _version_ | 1811205352947974144 |
|---|---|
| author | Rebecka K. Hahnel-Peeters Aaron T. Goetz Cari D. Goetz |
| author_facet | Rebecka K. Hahnel-Peeters Aaron T. Goetz Cari D. Goetz |
| author_sort | Rebecka K. Hahnel-Peeters |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Research on men's sexual exploitation of women has documented that men's psychology tracks cues associated with the ease of women's exploitability. In the current studies, we examined a different class of cues hypothesized to aid men's use of sexually exploitative strategies: environmental cues to the likelihood of discovery. We defined likelihood of discovery as the perceived probability of identification when engaging in exploitative behavior (e.g., presence of others). We test the hypothesis that men's likelihood to rape increases when their perception of the likelihood of discovery is low in three studies. In Study 1, we conducted a content analysis of individuals’ responses ( N = 1,881) when asked what one would do if they could stop time or be invisible. Besides the “other” category whereby there were no specific category for nominated behaviors, the most nominated category included sexually exploitative behavior—representing 15.3% of reported behaviors. Both Studies 2 ( N = 672) and 3 ( N = 614) were preregistered manipulations of likelihood of discovery surreptitiously testing men's rape likelihood to rape across varying levels of discovery. We found men, compared to women, reported a statistically higher likelihood to rape in both Studies 2 and 3: 48% compared to 39.7% and 19% compared to 6.8%, respectively. Across Studies 2 and 3, we found no statistical effect of the likelihood of discovery on participants’ likelihood to rape. We discuss how the presence of one's peers may provide social protection against the costs of using an exploitative sexual strategy if a perpetrator is caught. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T03:29:31Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-68f03fd5a6c644428c4305097d12b7af |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1474-7049 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T03:29:31Z |
| publishDate | 2022-10-01 |
| publisher | SAGE Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Evolutionary Psychology |
| spelling | doaj.art-68f03fd5a6c644428c4305097d12b7af2022-12-22T03:49:35ZengSAGE PublishingEvolutionary Psychology1474-70492022-10-012010.1177/14747049221141078Do Environmental Cues to Discovery Influence the Likelihood to Rape?Rebecka K. Hahnel-Peeters0Aaron T. Goetz1Cari D. Goetz2 Department of Psychology, , Austin, TX, USA Department of Psychology, , Fullerton, CA, USA Department of Psychology, , San Bernardino, CA, USAResearch on men's sexual exploitation of women has documented that men's psychology tracks cues associated with the ease of women's exploitability. In the current studies, we examined a different class of cues hypothesized to aid men's use of sexually exploitative strategies: environmental cues to the likelihood of discovery. We defined likelihood of discovery as the perceived probability of identification when engaging in exploitative behavior (e.g., presence of others). We test the hypothesis that men's likelihood to rape increases when their perception of the likelihood of discovery is low in three studies. In Study 1, we conducted a content analysis of individuals’ responses ( N = 1,881) when asked what one would do if they could stop time or be invisible. Besides the “other” category whereby there were no specific category for nominated behaviors, the most nominated category included sexually exploitative behavior—representing 15.3% of reported behaviors. Both Studies 2 ( N = 672) and 3 ( N = 614) were preregistered manipulations of likelihood of discovery surreptitiously testing men's rape likelihood to rape across varying levels of discovery. We found men, compared to women, reported a statistically higher likelihood to rape in both Studies 2 and 3: 48% compared to 39.7% and 19% compared to 6.8%, respectively. Across Studies 2 and 3, we found no statistical effect of the likelihood of discovery on participants’ likelihood to rape. We discuss how the presence of one's peers may provide social protection against the costs of using an exploitative sexual strategy if a perpetrator is caught.https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049221141078 |
| spellingShingle | Rebecka K. Hahnel-Peeters Aaron T. Goetz Cari D. Goetz Do Environmental Cues to Discovery Influence the Likelihood to Rape? Evolutionary Psychology |
| title | Do Environmental Cues to Discovery Influence the Likelihood to Rape? |
| title_full | Do Environmental Cues to Discovery Influence the Likelihood to Rape? |
| title_fullStr | Do Environmental Cues to Discovery Influence the Likelihood to Rape? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Do Environmental Cues to Discovery Influence the Likelihood to Rape? |
| title_short | Do Environmental Cues to Discovery Influence the Likelihood to Rape? |
| title_sort | do environmental cues to discovery influence the likelihood to rape |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1177/14747049221141078 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rebeckakhahnelpeeters doenvironmentalcuestodiscoveryinfluencethelikelihoodtorape AT aarontgoetz doenvironmentalcuestodiscoveryinfluencethelikelihoodtorape AT caridgoetz doenvironmentalcuestodiscoveryinfluencethelikelihoodtorape |