Posted at 10.15.2018
Irina Anderson explores the existing rape conception of both male and feminine rape and whether the respondent's gender impacts this understanding in a journal article called 'What is a typical rape? Ramifications of victims and participants gender in female and male understanding' which was published within the British Journal of Social Psychology. This short article also investigates the 'ethnic lag' theory of male rape. The results in this review demonstrate that, contrary to predictions made in the very beginning of the article, when asked to describe a typical rape, male and female, it was the stranger rape stereotype that was the prevailing way most used to describe this. It was also shown that rather than 'lagging' behind feminine rape based on the stranger-acquaintance dimension, male rape was conceptualized in terms of other factor, for example sexual orientation, that have been often deemed homophobic. I found this journal article interesting and accessible to learn. After reading the hypothesis proposed at the start of the article, I used to be intrigued to see that many of the predictions were in simple fact proved false at the end of the article, for example it was forecasted that when asked to spell it out a 'typical' rape members would express an acquaintance rape where as in earlier years the stranger rape stereotype was the way most detailed a 'typical' rape. However the results of the analysis show that in reality the stranger rape stereotype continues to be the predominant way people consider a 'typical' rape. This led me to question how much rape notion has actually modified in our population. I also found that both the goals and findings of the research were clear, correct and relevant; they were clearly organized and overall I found the article simple and easy to read. In addition the acknowledgment of the restriction to the research enhanced this article.
The article begins by giving a brief summary of previous studies and research which has been completed to investigate the same research topic. The ideas of acquaintance rape, where the victim is raped by someone known to them e. g. sweetheart, date, relative, good friend, and stranger rape stereotype, where the victim is raped by someone anonymous to them, are created and the ideas adjoining them are reviewed. For instance acquaintance rape is usually likely to happen indoors and the sufferer having put in time with the perpetrator before the rape. In contrast stranger rape is likely to happen outdoors, usually during the night where the victim is grabbed, overpowered and raped. Date rape s also briefly discussed and used to aid predictions that rape perceptions has modified considerably in the last few years credited to increased marketing coverage of this issue. The issue of male rape is then lifted and questions are raised such as are men raped in the same circumstances as women? It is described as more frequent trend than previously presumed. The ignorance and disbelief adjoining guy rape creates misconceptions and misconceptions in modern culture for example 'Most men who are raped are homosexuals'. This makes some analysts believe that male rape conception is 'lagging' behind that of feminine rape, that is current men rape perception is at the stage female rape understanding was at years ago in terms of the knowledge people have of computer. I believe the writer has succeeded in successfully bringing out the research subject matter and conveying the main aims of the study. The one possible fault I have for the launch is that the writer will not discuss why she feels the topic of research is important and why she made a decision to carry out the analysis. I believe this would enhance the article even more for the reader.
In the 'method' section of this information Anderson explains in detail how the review was completed. She represents how one hundred and nineteen undergraduate students were asked to participate; she also lists their gender and ethnicity. The individuals were asked to describe what they believe to be a 'typical' rape. Both male and female were included. The gender of the participant and the gender of the victim were the independent variables. Members were assigned randomly so that women could be designated to either a female rape or a male rape. Similarly men could be assigned to either feminine rape or guy rape. They were asked to add details that led to the incident, details of the incident itself and details following a rape. Characteristics of the victims and the perpetrator including emotions and thoughts were also asked for. Anderson then moves on to describe how these accounts of 'typical' rapes given by participants were examined. She details the coding manuals given to coders who must form the participant's content material into text message which abide by characteristics of the stranger rape stereotype and the ones which express an acquaintance rape. This is the main section of the article; any deficiencies would undermine the validity of the results. The sole deficiency I could find in this section was the actual fact that the individuals were college or university students; however the author recognizes this as a limitation at the conclusion of the article. Overall I came across this section of the article to provide a very extensive account of how the study was carried out. It addresses all aspects that are important to the seeks of the article.
In my judgment the results portion of this article is great. The studies are clearly organized for the reader. Headings help separate the finding into different areas for example 'assessment hypothesis 1 and occurrence of category use within feminine rape'. These headings also help list the ends up with terms of the original research question and predictions given at the beginning of the article. Desks are also used which demonstrate different types of categories of description employed by participants and the number of female and male who used these categories. Immediate quotations are also placed to provide the reader understanding in to the types of information participants gave that i found very interesting e. g. : due to the physical difficulty of guy rape the perpetrator would typically be bigger and more robust than the sufferer'. The author acknowledges the results do not match the predictions made at the start and points out the possible reasons for this by stating perhaps researcher's presumption that societies rape perception has evolved is actually false as well as perhaps our perceptions never have progressed around it was thought. The ethnical 'lag' theory of male rape was only partly supported by the studies. Although female rape was explained more in conditions of acquaintance rape than male rape, the other facet of the theory, that male rape would be identified in conditions of stranger rape stereotype more than feminine rape, had not been supported. In fact many 'other' factors played a component in the description of male rape such as penetration, the rapist's strength and power within the victim and the victim's shame and humiliation. Thus demonstrating that female and male rapes are conceptualized along different continuums. The results overall focus on the importance of periodically evaluating rape understanding and the consequences of gender.
The talk section addresses the primary findings of this article and any new information gained which can be added onto prior information discovered in previous research. Anderson discusses the reason why behind the individuals which described an average rape in conditions of the stranger rape stereotype. It really is here blame attributions are reviewed. Anderson notes this can be a opportunity that participant didn't write more about acquaintance rape as they assumed the victim would therefore be more blameworthy. This is strengthened by the actual fact that ladies, when describing a lady rape, used the stranger rape theory more than men and similarly men, when explaining a male rape, used the stranger rape stereotype more than women. This perhaps demonstrates that when writing about a victim of their own gender they preferred the stranger rape stereotype as they presumed it could steer the blame away from the sufferer.
In my thoughts and opinions this article consists of all the key components of a good journal article. Right from the start the author points out clearly the key arguments and main points of the written text. She also includes relevant background information and makes concrete predictions. The technique and results of the analysis are clearly organized and are easy to follow. Another aspect protected in the written text is the acknowledgment of its limits. Worthwhile journal article is aware of the constraints of the studies and in this specific article they are obvious. How male rape is talked about is quite interesting as it not really a subject many articles discuss. The thought of the 'lag' theory was also remarkable, that the problem of male rape notion in culture today was that of feminine rape years ago. Also the actual fact that males themselves described male rape in a homophobic and mocking tone intrigued me. For instance, 'one of the two bufties edge on the lone man'. One of the very few limitations in this text is that all the individuals were students from one university, a human population which may be more aware of rape than the overall population. It is noted a analysis of the perceptions of rape presented by authorities, medical employees and juries may enhance findings in the foreseeable future. Another fault I've with this article is that I really believe the author is going into more detail on why she thinks this research is important and just why she decided to conduct this research. Furthermore, while reading the studies of the research it struck me that another reason nearly all participants opt for situation which adheres to the stranger rape stereotype is they could feel under stress to provide certain answer or they could make an effort to please the research workers by giving the answer they imagine the experts desire.
In conclusion, I came across this information to be detailed, relevant and interesting. All main ideas are plainly mentioned and concrete predictions are produced from the beginning. The results look at the consequences of gender in rape conceptualization and the importance of analyzing male rape alongside woman rape to get further insight in to the dissimilarities in gender conception. A broader way to obtain participants is acknowledged as a future improvement that could be made to studies such as these. The results section of the paper is, to me, the most impressive section. The studies are reviewed in a concise manner, taking particular notice of the reason why the results contradict the predictions made in the beginning. Overall I think this is an outstanding example of a mental journal article, it adheres to all or any the guidelines which makes a journal article impressive and overall I found it hard to fault