Gender Differences in Sexual Violence Perpetration Behaviors and Validity of Perpetration Reports: A Mixed-Method Study.

The current mixed-method study examined gender differences in sexual violence (SV) perpetration behaviors and the validity of perpetration reports made on the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Perpetration (SES-SFP). Fifty-four university students (31 women and 23 men) were asked to think out loud while privately completing an online version of the SES-SFP and to describe (typed response) behaviors that they reported having engaged in on the SES. Those who reported no such behavior were asked to describe any similar behaviors they may have engaged in. Integration of the quantitative responses on the SES and the qualitative descriptions of the events reported showed that men's SV perpetration was more frequent and severe than women's. The qualitative event descriptions further suggested that men's verbal coercion was often harsher in tone and that men more often than women used physical force (including in events only reported as verbal coercion on the SES). Unlike men, women often reported that their response to a refusal was not intended to pressure their partner or obtain the sexual activity. Two women also mistakenly reported experiences of their own victimization or compliance (giving in to unwanted sex) on SES perpetration items, which inflated women's SV perpetration rate. Findings suggest that quantitative measurement can miss important qualitative differences in women and men's behaviors and may underestimate men's and overestimate women's SV perpetration. Participants also sometimes misinterpreted or described confusion around the SES items, suggesting a need for updated language on this and other quantitative measures.

Self-Reports of Sexual Violence Outside of Survey Reference Periods: Implications for Measurement.

Accurate measurement of sexual violence (SV) victimization is important for informing research, policy, and service provision. Measures such as the Sexual Experiences Survey (SES) that use behaviorally specific language and a specified reference period (e.g., since age 14, over the past 12 months) are considered best practice and have substantially improved SV estimates given that so few incidents are reported to police. However, to date, we know little about whether estimates are affected by respondents' reporting of incidents that occurred outside of the specified reference period (i.e., reference period errors). The current study explored the extent, nature, and impact on incidence estimates of reference period errors in two large, diverse samples of post-secondary students. Secondary analysis was conducted of data gathered using a follow-up date question after the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Victimization. Between 8% and 68% of rape and attempted rape victims made reference period errors, with the highest proportion of errors occurring in the survey with the shortest reference period (1 month). These errors caused minor to moderate changes in time period-specific incidence estimates (i.e., excluding respondents with errors reduced estimates by up to 7%). Although including a date question does not guarantee that all time period-related errors will be identified, it can improve the accuracy of SV estimates, which is crucial for informing policy and prevention. Researchers measuring SV within specific reference periods should consider collecting dates of reported incidents as best practice.

Intimate Partner Sexual Violence Among Canadian University Students: Incidence, Context, and Perpetrators' Perceptions.

Men's sexual violence against women is pervasive and is commonly committed against young women by intimate partners. Limited research has examined occurrence rates of intimate partner sexual violence among university students separated by various tactics and sexual acts. Using surveys with convenience samples of 142 Canadian university women and 441 Canadian university men, we examined women's self-reported intimate partner sexual violence victimization and men's self-reported perpetration rates in their most recent heterosexual intimate relationship in the past year. We examined a detailed breakdown across different tactics (i.e., verbal coercion, intoxication, and threats of harm/physical force) and sexual acts (i.e., nonpenetrative sexual contact; oral, vaginal, and anal penetration). Thirty-three percent of women reported at least one victimization experience, and 16% of men reported at least one perpetration experience. The most common tactic reported was verbal coercion for both women's victimization and men's perpetration, and the most common sexual act reported was vaginal penetration for women's victimization and oral sex for men's perpetration. We also examined contextual features and perceptions of the effects of perpetrators' most memorable incidents. These most memorable incidents often occurred either in their own or their partner's home and involved alcohol consumption. Most men reported no significant effects of their sexual violence on their relationships and sometimes normalized their behavior. We briefly discuss the implications of our results for future research and interventions.

"He Didn't Necessarily Force Himself Upon Me, But . . . ": Women's Lived Experiences of Sexual Coercion in Intimate Relationships With Men.

This study examined women's subjective experiences with sexual coercion (SC), particularly less forceful forms, in intimate relationships. In-depth interviews with 12 university women highlighted that physical violence need not be present for SC to be harmful, as many experienced guilt, anger, sadness, and self-blame. The severity of SC and the context of women's relationships affected their interpretations, which in turn affected the effects of SC. Many women not only held negative interpretations of their partners' SC but also minimized and justified. Thus, the interviews were also critically analyzed for the possible influence of dominant discourses and gendered power relations.