The Impact of Rape Myths in the Criminal Justice System
The Impact of Rape Myths in the
Criminal Justice System
David Carrier
Research implication
proposal for:
[CJ 590] Research Methods
December 2020
---------------------
INTRODUCTION
One of the most common forms
of non-consensual forced sex, date rape, has been a consistent problem on
college campuses. A substantial argument for why it occurs is society’s
generalizing desensitization of sex and male dominance. These two elements are
made to be interchangeable and are most prevalent in social settings as well as
the court room. Investigation into how often date rape occurs and why it occurs
in certain years of individuals lives reveals that there are serious problems
with both how date rape is viewed and how it is, or how it is not, handled by
the criminal justice system.
This
is an incredibly important area of discovery in research science due to the
lack of focus on the topic of date rape. A significant reason, it being reliant
on an individual’s response of their past experiences. These experiences are
very sensitive and can incur distress and anxiety in those asked to participate
in the study. This will be one of the biggest challenges in this research, for
it is crucial that questions, asked to people who may be victims of date rape,
are both appropriate and accurate. The research will start out with a
literature review analyzing other studies that have covered the impacts of
norms and biases in public opinion, verdicts, trial proceedings, and legislative
components (laws relating to rape). The findings from the research will
highlight any impacts of socialized views on the frequency of date rape as well
as the criminal justice system’s lacking the ability to effectively and
efficiently prosecute the offender. Next, how this topic will be covered in
this research study, involving the ways in which information will be attained
and how it will be sampled. Finally, this research will undergo a
self-evaluation into ethical considerations, especially due to the seriousness
of the topic. This research proposal was created to raise awareness about the succession
of rape myths in current culture and how this plays a part in date rape and the
insufficiency of the criminal justice system henceforth.
---------------------
LITERATURE
REVIEW
It
must first be understood that there are a variety of elements to a date rape
that must be considered to represent a sensible research question. The first in
this argument is that of biases, knowing where they exist, what kinds of biases
are present in our day-to-day lives, and how that factors into date rape. The
second, understanding the legislative aspect of rape and how it may or may not
correlate with biases stemming from public opinion.
Biases
There
are many potential biases existing within rape culture that can affect the
outcome of a rape trial. Myths, media, and public opinion are all important
elements in determining whether an incident will be classified as a rape. While
biases are not supposed to be considered when standing as a juror or judge,
there are subconscious biases, stereotypes that individuals form outside their
own conscious awareness (Moule, 2007), that are not only thought of but also
utilized in the trial. Therefore, sexual assaults and rapes, especially if the
offender and victim know each other, are cases with the highest acquittal rates
(Taylor, 2007). Biases exist not only in the court but have an influence on the
case from the very start of the investigation. The way in which an officer of
the law or school institution responds to the rape will create a domino effect
that will determine how the case will proceed. Analyzing previous research and
filling in the gaps or correcting the misconceptions may help to clarify the
center of this research proposal asking why date rape is less prosecuted than
it statistically/legally should be in the criminal justice system.
Myths. Rape myths are one of the most
dangerous elements to a rape case, being founded solely off social attitudes
and generally false beliefs about rape that serve to deny and justify male
sexual aggression against women. There has been much research into rape myths
and the value they hold within a trial, but the data consistently lacks
adequate theoretical precision. However, this type of research cannot be
overstated due to its immense potential for the understanding of sexual assault.
A study by Jacqueline Gray (2006) resulted in rape myth biases or guidance’s
influencing verdicts in a rape scenario in which the attribution of blame to
the man and woman depicted could be perceived as being ambiguous. Gray’s
research remains consistent with other research in saying that rape myths may
have a substantial effect on the reporting and prosecuting of rapes. However,
the biggest limitation in Gray’s research was that it was taken by a population
of students at a single university. By narrowing down her research to one
university, this limited her ability to gain a wide variety of inputs. While
this may not always be negative, it could have a substantial effect on the
results if there is a generalization of normal, socially accepted views at the
institution. This could include the university emphasizing a certain religion
or political mindset. The results of this study could henceforth be different
if it emphasized opposite religious or political mindset. To truly understand
rape myths as they prevail, there needs to be a wider range of participants
from multiple universities, as well as individuals who may not be in college
but are still considered a part of the younger generation that experiences such
high amounts of sexual assaults.
Public
biases and individual opinion. Rape myths play heavily into creating
socially accepted biases and opinions towards rape and acquaintance rape. When
it comes to a court case, jurors have most of the power in deciding an
offender’s future. However, these jurors, who are supposed to be impartial, could
be filled with jargon brought forth by the defense, as one might point out
specific details to remind the jurors of their partial, biased beliefs. Setting
aside potential flaws in the trial due to gender, race, religion, and
ethnicity, the level in which jurors are exposed to the defenses attempt to
connect with the jurors doubts about the victim’s encounter will play into the
success of the defense. A research study by Thacker (2017) tested whether the
social aspect of a juror’s life swayed the juror to make a partial decision. These
results extended the proof from rape myths that the social context of rape and
date rapes themselves are brought into consideration (when they should not be)
when deciding a verdict. In the study, rape scenarios were judged to be less
serious than rape by a stranger, and rape was judged less serious when the
victim's sexual history was described as either limited or extensive than when
this information was not given (Thacker, 2017). What the researcher did not
provide was the extent of the relationship and socialization between the person
who reads the case (formulates an opinion) and the juror who does not read the
case (receives only the opinion of peer). Different relationships may have
different impacts on opinions, or it may not. Analyzing any differences in
opinions formed off stronger or weaker relationships may help to clarify
whether socialization truly does affect the opinion of jurors when they enter
the courtroom.
Law
Understanding how the legal fissures
in the criminal justice system allow for offenders to be judged not guilty is
the other component to researching why rape cases do not as frequently result
in the prosecution of an offender. Research into the laws around rape cases are
equally as important as looking at the social biases and opinions that also may
sway a verdict. There has been a significant lack of reflection on laws surrounding
rape, as well as any legislation that could be made to invigorate the
prosecutions chances of winning a case. Many of the laws regarding rape and
date rape cases are outdated. A policy referral should be drafted to reform and
create new laws that are in ordinance with contemporary societal views. Baker
and Oberman (2020) examined the relevance of rape shield legislation, in
contrast to social biases of rape, and attempts to evaluate the impact of such
legal reforms. He concluded that attempts to progressively implement rape
shield have thus far failed and that research evaluating its impact has been
relatively misguided (Baker; Oberman, 2020). Due to his research being very
case specific, it is hard to say that this is what happens in other cases as well.
However, this research proposal attempts to use both specific cases and general
oversight to compile evidence that attempts to implement rape shield laws truly
do fail throughout the criminal justice system, a substantial element to the
lack of prosecution in rape cases.
Rape
Shield and the Sixth Amendment. The sixth amendment guarantees the rights
of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without
unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and
the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and
evidence against you. However, in rape cases, rape shield laws limit the
ability to introduce evidence or cross-examine rape complainants about their
past sexual behavior. This contradiction is what gives way for the defense to
often utilize the Sixth Amendment as a loophole to expose the victim’s past
sexual history, something that can be incredibly condemning to the
prosecution’s argument. Tanford and Bocchino (1980) that analyzed the legality
involving rape shield laws and the sixth amendment. They concluded that most
cases in which the defense cites the sixth amendment will get a not guilty
verdict, and the efforts of legislators to pass rape shield reform has
consistently failed, making date rape and rape cases brought against an
individual(s) unlikely to be successful. Tanford and Bocchino failed to cite
whether these two elements were related, leaving their research open for
review. A more recent study by Gray (2018) reverberated Tanford and Bocchino’s
conclusions with a smaller sample size, providing more insight on the effects
of the sixth amendment on juror verdicts. Nonetheless, more research should be
done to understand whether passing new rape shield laws will negate the
prosecution from using the Sixth Amendment in a potentially damaging way. If the Sixth
Amendment is negated by new rape shield laws, this could also affect the
defense from using any prior criminal record (especially involving sexual
assault) that the offender may have.
---------------------
RESEARCH
METHODS
A
combined quantitative and qualitative research design will be used to explore
whether an intervention may influence an outcome, if there are common
experiences among individuals, a shared culture, and individual stories. Research
will be conducted using three methods: survey, secondary data analysis, and
interviews. The survey research and secondary data analysis will follow a
quantitative approach, while the interviews will follow a more qualitative
design. The reason for the mixed method research is that these three methods
will provide an abundance of data to potentially answer questions as the study
continues. An overreaching population is needed to sample from for quantitative
measures, while the qualitative details from interviews will provide both
support and reasoning behind the numbers.
For
the quantitative design, a survey will be sent out to young, around “college-age”,
individuals across various parts of the United States. The survey will consist
of close-ended questions in multiple different formats with the intent to
provide data about whether individuals think cultural biases such as rape
myths, stereotyped and false beliefs about sexual assaults, exist in society
and if it affects their judgement towards rape cases. Questions about the age
and gender of the respondents will provide important information in measuring
potential differences of opinions (male/female, older/younger). The survey will
also measure the extent of exposure the respondent has had to the topic and
whether this has an impact on their decision, a question that will have to be
carefully thought out to avoid reluctance. Secondary data analysis will be the
second research method used and will provide statistics to compare previous
findings with the ones in this study’s survey. Sources of this analysis will
come mostly from non-public reports by the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National
Network (R.A.I.N.N.), police departments, and college/university administration
officials. This research method will be very cost/time efficient and will only
look for reports that are pre-established to be valid. To prevent any
limitations to secondary data analysis, out-of-date reports will not be used.
Only the most recent reports will be analyzed; if the most recent report is
more than ten years old, another report will be sought out.
For
the quantitative design, interviews will be conducted to ask more open-ended
questions to see how individuals respond towards cultural biases that they may
or may not see present in their day-to-day lives. This information will come
from case examples that will ask underlying questions and provide a more
detailed response. Hypothetical scenarios will not be used to prevent
fabrication in the research, rather multiple rape cases that have happened will
be chosen to acquire the feelings or potential judgement of the person being
interviewed. Each case will be categorized under certain rape myths to help
measure the data more accurately.
Though
the theory of this proposal contains many moving parts, there are specific
variables that need to be looked at to determine a causal relationship between
juror bias and the final verdict. The sources of information that will be used
will help collect the data, and sampling will thin it down to the most
important and conclusive results. A limitation of this concept is the volumous
information that will be possessed, but the solution is an understanding of
what information helps determine juror bias and what information is excess.
Specifically, the information will look for elements of bias seen in
individuals as proposed in the literature review earlier. A simplified example
measurement that can help make this causal relationship could be whether or not
an individual believes a defendant’s sexual history should be taken into
consideration for the present case. If no, the determination is that the
individual would judge solely based on the information provided from the
present trial. However, if the individual answers yes, it is fair to assume
they will acquire pre-existing notions about the defendant that will affect
their view of the defendant on the present trial. To summarize this example, a
defendants past sexual history is an independent variable that can affect the
verdict, the dependent variable.
---------------------
SAMPLING
METHODS
The
survey will be sent out via email to young, “college-age”, individuals across
multiple states and backgrounds. This will avoid an abundance of similar
responses due to a lack of geographical variety. Opinions differ in different
areas, as noted in the literature review, which is why it is important to
survey as much area throughout the United States as possible. It will also
provide a large population to sample from, making the sample more
heterogeneous. Once the deadline for sending in a completed survey has passed,
simple random sampling will be the technique used to obtain a sample. This
technique will be done by assigning each element (survey) a number, then
choosing a select number of elements to be included in the sample through
random number generation (random sampling). The limitation to using simple
random sampling is that the research will be unable to compare any potential
findings from a correlation between rape myths and trial proceedings in urban
and rural areas due to the sample’s randomness. However, an overproduction of
samples in one geographical location might make certain answers more similar,
hence bring bias into the research and corrupting later results.
Secondary
data analysis will provide statistics to compare previous findings with the
ones in this study’s survey. Sources of this analysis can include non-public
reports by the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network (R.A.I.N.N.), police departments,
and college/university administration officials. This statistical analysis
production will attempt to be similar to that of the quantitative analysis
produced by the survey. For example, if R.A.I.N.N.’s statistics show that X
number in Y number of people do not report date rape, that can be arguably
confirmed as a fact in this study if there is a similar ratio present in the
analysis of the survey. Data sampled from these organizations will have to be
centered around the questions from the survey and the hypothesis of this study
to stay within a relevant range of data collection, creating a purposive
sampling environment in this aspect. The organizations that this data will be
sampled from will be randomly assigned, with the specific data-mining being the
secondary filter for the large amount of organizations that will be included in
the collection.
Interviews
conducted will be reviewed extensively, as key words, phrases, and answers will
be noted to determine if there is a pattern in multiple participants. At the
end of the survey, participants will be asked if they would like to participate
in an interview. There will not be a sample from the group of interviews,
rather the interviews will be the product of a sample. Out of the survey
participants who wish to be included in the interviews, a second (much smaller)
random sampling will occur to determine the participants selected for an
interview. The limitation to this selection is present in the inability of the
research to formally reach out to participants, instead providing a gateway in
the survey question. This limitation may also be self-corrective, if the
generalization is that individuals who are more willing to participate further
might give more accurate details and accounts of date rape and the criminal
justice system.
---------------------
ETHICAL
CONSIDERATIONS
Ethical
standards in research studies are very important to the sanctity of proposed
research and its formalized institutions. Being aware of the standards and
regulations is important to maintaining and producing ethical research. While
there are many different types of standards, the focus on a select few will be
important to implement into this research proposal to make sure the research is
of minimal risk to the participants. The biggest element to understand about
this research is the psychological and legal risk. Rape is a very serious and
traumatizing event that can severely affect a person’s life either short term
or forever. First, every participant of the study will be explained to what the
research method is about, so they know before they are being asked and are
answering questions. Making sure that people are comfortable with being asked
certain questions is the key step to beginning ethical considerations.
Additionally, anyone who becomes uncomfortable with the questions could give
false answers, which is why it is important to stress the weight of the
questions before asking them. A partially detailed abstract will be created and
reviewed by a psychological professional to make sure individuals who are
participating in the study know what the study is about.
Possibly
the most important aspect of ethical considerations in this research is the
need to keep participant information and participation details private. To make
sure that a.) participants are comfortable participating in the study and b.)
no private information is being released to the public, a confidentiality
report (also known as a Non-Disclosure Agreement, NDA) will be given to each
individual as optional. If the participant wants to sign a confidentiality
report, henceforth legally binding the receiving party from releasing the
information given by the participant in the study, they may. If the participant
does not want to sign a confidentiality report, they must sign a waiver that
declares they did not want to sign the confidentiality report. The participants
will be assured that their information is confidential and will not be released
in the findings of the study. The waiver will help prevent a future situation
such as the study being held accountable for potentially releasing information
of participants who did not want to sign the confidentiality report.
Finally,
the questions will be respectful and appropriate to avoid poor wording that
could both turn participants away or affect their psychological state. Getting
the questions reviewed and corrected by a psychology counsellor could be
beneficial to creating an ethical survey. A bad question, for example: “Do you
believe that a boyfriend can rape his girlfriend if they are in a
relationship?” The more correct way to ask this question is, “Do you believe it
is possible for an individual in a committed relationship to be sexually
assaulted by the other?” In the new question, we are completely excluding
gender and specifically stating that there is a dating relationship between two
individuals. By following these guidelines, the research should produce vast
amounts of data that occurred with little to no risk to the participants.
---------------------
LIMITATIONS, OTHER INFORMATION
A
rape contains a significant number of elements to it, including the need for
reporting or reason for it being unreported, the trial and prosecution, and the
social myths that surround these factors. Because not all the data in this
research can be understood through one lens, I will aggregate the data into
different key concepts that address the elements of my research. An indicator
of my question will include, if the crime was reported, whether the offender
was prosecuted based on a sample of select cases in which rape myths are
present or not present. The dimension in which rape myths are present may
indicate the offender not being prosecuted for the rape, while the other
dimension wherein no rape myths are present may indicate that the offender will
be prosecuted for their actions. This is where my research methods will come
into play, as they will distinguish between the dimensions and help direct the
results towards the general indicators. If the result does not end at the
indicator it may show something different from previous criminological
research, providing a gateway to a new question about whatever dimension the
indicator was mistaken for. The three research methods that will be used to
help conceptualize the data and help measure certain elements of the research may
not be able to be fully structured in numbers. For example, the survey will
give a consensus of a support or dismay for social myths regarding either rape
in general or rape as it pertains to a specific case. When discussing
reliability, the data will have to be looked at through the lens of inter-rater
reliability to understand if the indicators of a previous stated
element/dimension is correct. If the data is not in consensus, that may
indicate potential branching research questions about the interchangeability of
rape, rape myths, and trial proceedings that can be looked at in another study.
---------------------
CONCLUSION
Understanding
how rape myths, through opinions and beliefs, affect trial proceedings in rape
cases across U.S. college campuses is important to the integrity of the
criminal justice system and its educational counterpart. The individuals that
operate the criminal justice system experience these biases when they attend
college themselves. By giving offenders light sentences or none at all, it
makes the impacts on the continuation of such culture more substantial. Data
showing a lack of correlation between a high count of rape incident’s and low
reporting should be taken into consideration when understanding how the culture
of sex dominates both public opinion and judicial review. This research, in its
literature review, survey, and secondary analysis, seeks to provide new proof
that rape myths can make rape and acquaintance rape appear less serious to both
young individuals and members of the criminal justice system.
---------------------
References
Baker, K.;
Oberman, M. (2020). Consent, Rape, and the Criminal Law. The Oxford Handbook
of Feminism and Law in the United States (2021). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Gray,
J.M. (2006). Rape myth beliefs and prejudiced instructions: Effects on
decisions of guilt in a case of date rape.
Legal and Criminological Psychology, 11(1),
75-80.
Gray, J.M. (2018).
Rape Myths in the Criminal Justice System. Women and the Criminal Justice
System, doi: 10.1007/9783319767741
Lynch, K.R.;
Jewell, J.A.; Wasarhaley, N.E. (2017). Great Sexpectations: The Impact of
Participant Gender, Defendant Desirability, and Date Cost on Attributions of a
Date Rape Victim and Defendant. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(17-18).
Moule,
J. (2009). Understanding Unconscious Bias and Unintentional Racism. Phi
Delta Kappan, 90(5), 320–326. doi: 10.1177/003172170909000504
Reynolds, A.
(2017). The effects of rape myth acceptance and gender role beliefs on perceptions
of date rape. Manchester Metropolitan University’s Research Repository.
Liverpool John Moores University.
Tanford,
J.A.; Bocchino, A.J. (1980). Rape Victim Shield laws and the Sixth Amendment. Articles by Maurer Faculty, 128(544),
544-602.
Taylor,
N. (2007). Juror Attitudes and Biases in Sexual Assault Cases. Trends & Issues in crime and criminal
justice. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Thacker, L.K.
(2017). Rape Culture, Victim Blaming, and the Role of Media in the Criminal
Justice System. Kentucky Journal of Undergraduate Scholarship, 1(1).
Comments
Post a Comment