Are College Students' Attitudes Related to Their Application of Sanctions for Campus Sexual Assault Cases?

With growing attention to adjudication of campus sexual assault cases, more is known regarding students' views of sexual assault, but little the literature focuses on how students perceive "justice" in terms of assigning sanctions or guilt/responsibility for such cases. The present study focused on understanding whether college students' preformed attitudes and beliefs were associated with the severity of sanctions they applied across a range of sexual assault cases as well as their assignments of guilt and responsibility to the parties involved. To determine students' attitudes and beliefs mediating effects on sanction choices, five scales (i.e., rape myth acceptance, downplaying the severity of rape, sexism, just world beliefs, and right-wing authoritarianism) were adapted and used for this project. College students (n = 846) responded to one of four versions of a randomly distributed survey each containing eight vignettes varied to represent levels of 14 factors employed because of their relevance to campus sexual assault cases. Across all versions, sexism was associated with increased responsibility given to the victim. In addition, stronger endorsement of both downplaying significance of rape and rape myth acceptance scales were associated with giving a milder sanction to the perpetrator and increased responsibility and guilt assigned to the victim. Just world beliefs and right-wing authoritarianism associations were inconsistent across the four versions, suggesting these beliefs were situation-specific. Preformed attitudes that are more directly related to the context of sexual assault influenced the designation of sanctions applied to perpetrators and perceptions of guilt and responsibility. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for research and prevention programming.

Identifying Invalid Responders in a Campus Climate Survey: Types, Impact on Data, and Best Indicators.

Self-report surveys that are online, lengthy, and contain sensitive material greatly increase the probability of invalid responding (IR) on the instrument. Most research to inform our identification of invalid responders have not been able to test their methodologies where all these conditions are present. This study systematically adopted 10 IR indicators based on direct, archival, and statistic strategies to identify IR providing answers on a lengthy survey collecting campus climate/violence information that college students (N = 6,995) accessed online. Exploratory factor analysis indicated two internal factors (i.e., careless and extreme responding) underlying these IR indicators. Latent class analysis identified 4.8% of the sample as being invalid responders. Compared with honest responders, invalid responders were significantly more likely to report forms of victimization and a greater negative impact from physical abuse or sexual assault. Of importance, mean scores on victimization scales were significantly higher for invalid responders, illustrating the potential for IR data to skew prevalence rates. IR indicators differentially identified honest and invalid responders. The findings of this study contribute to the systematic investigation of IR with college students completing online and lengthy surveys that address sensitive material.

A Campus Climate/Violence Survey's Psychometrics and Findings.

Data from a campus climate/violence survey (CCS) include psychometric information for survey items/scales plus findings from a large state university to promote its usefulness for assessment of interpersonal violence/harassment. This CCS can thus be evaluated for its measurement and documented findings, allowing for benchmarking purposes. An innovative measurement strategy is introduced to comprehensively capture incidence of victimization types through streamlined questioning. Tables provide detailed data for 6,995 undergraduate and graduate/professional students over a 1-year period. Adding to published literature on existing CCSs, this article provides the range of information needed for universities to determine the potential usefulness of a CCS.

Do Guns in the Home Predict Gender and Relationship Attitudes? An Exploratory Study.

This study explores the potential relationship of guns in students' homes with attitudes indicative of tolerance of violence, negative attitudes toward women and their roles, and attitudes suggestive of myths regarding sexual assault. Seniors in Kentucky high schools whose families possessed guns (N=1749) produced higher scores on scales measuring these variables as well as on scales of relationship dependency and religious involvement than seniors whose families did not own guns (N=912). Students whose families owned more than 10 guns tended to score highest on these measures compared with students whose families owned no or a few guns. Because of lower effect sizes, these significant associations require further investigation.