1 Introduction Preventing Sexual Assault on College Campuses
It is no exaggeration to say that sexual assault is endemic to college campuses and, despite a long overdue recent uptick in visibility and public discourse, it is a scourge that remains unabated. Best estimates place the prevalence rate of sexual assault among women during their college years at one in five (e.g., Krebs, Lindquist, Warner, Fisher, & Martin, 2007), with nearly 5% of college males also reporting unwanted sexual contact through force or incapacitation (Cantor et al., 2015). Of those individuals who have experienced rape, approximately one-third currently meet diagnostic criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and approximately half met criteria for the disorder at some point in their lives following the trauma—to say nothing of significantly elevated rates of depression, anxiety, and substance use disorders that also occur at elevated rates following sexual assault (Zinzow et al., 2012).
The college years are often mischaracterized as an extended period of adolescence when one is protected from the hardships and stressors of the “real world.” This depiction is not easily reconciled with the realities of nearly a quarter of college students who experience an act of violence capable of yielding such long-term, deleterious consequences. Given the true scope and impact of sexual violence among college students, no hyperbole should be required to mobilize concerned students, faculty, and administrators to act. And yet, until quite recently, very little has been done to combat the problem. As will be reviewed in the chapters ahead, recent years have witnessed the development of a number of encouraging programmatic prevention efforts, and these advances are to be lauded as they are beginning to lay the foundation for effective solutions to end sexual violence on college campuses. To date, however, the sine qua non of effective sexual assault prevention—a demonstrable, replicable reduction in sexual assault prevalence stemming from a particular program—has yet to be convincingly demonstrated. Certainly, there are practical constraints and logistical barriers to developing, implementing, and evaluating programs that, on the one hand, need to be substantive, persuasive, and enduring—and, on the other hand, need to be efficiently delivered in a cost-effective manner to thousands of students on a particular campus each year. These very legitimate obstacles
understandably hinder the efforts of even the most ambitious, committed, and innovative prevention program developers, and they will be reviewed in detail in the ensuing chapters. Few would disagree, however, that the import of the problem is too significant and the cost of failure is too great to be daunted by these barriers, legitimate though they may be.
Accordingly, after a review of the magnitude, scope, and costs of sexual violence, this book critiques historical and emerging sexual violence prevention efforts—noting the considerable conceptual advances that have been made, while being candid about limitations characterizing the evidentiary base for even the most promising efforts to date. Concluding chapters advance suggestions for enhancing current programming efforts and, perhaps more importantly, offer methodological and practice suggestions for future sexual violence prevention efforts.
This book is not intended to advocate for a particular type of sexual assault prevention program or category of approaches. By design, we stop shy of making “best practice” recommendations for those hoping to begin administering the optimal prevention strategy in the very near future. Though it should be apparent from our review which emerging programs are most promising, we necessarily refrain from such advocacy for two important reasons. First, and most importantly, truly effective sexual assault prevention programming is very much in its infancy and, encouraging emerging trends aside, an objective view of the research simply does not allow for a particular approach to be advocated above all others at the present time. Second, in our view, a “best practice” moniker often serves as an unfortunate, if unintended, moratorium on intervention development efforts. Because of the fact that even the best programs to date have demonstrated a capacity to reduce rape-supportive beliefs and increase intentions to intervene on behalf of victims in the future despite not yet demonstrating actual reductions in sexual violence rates, it would be unwise to exalt any specific program at the expense of what we believe to be the only currently legitimate call to action based on a disimpassioned view of the data—and that is a call to innovate.
We offer some specific ideas in this regard which have been culled from effective attitude and behavior change strategies in diverse social justice and behavioral domains. These strategies, when combined with existing approaches, may prove to be wholly inert despite being effective for other problems and contexts. The specific approaches that fall or stand on their empirical merits in the years ahead, however, does not change the pressing mandate before us. Researchers, advocates, and campus stakeholders must approach the problem of sexual violence from a place of commitment and passion, innovation, and, importantly, shared methodological clarity. The proliferation of sexual violence prevention programs in recent years amply attests to growing commitment, passion, and innovation. Progress in coming years will be expedited considerably through candor about limitations in the evidentiary base and a commitment to methodologies and research plans
to overcome them. In that sense, then, although program content cannot be definitively advanced or advocated at present, methodological recommendations certainly can be, and this book aspires to do so. In the end, what we know depends greatly on how we come to know it, and a commitment to enhanced methodologies and evaluation strategies will be essential if we are to make appreciable reductions in the prevalence of sexual violence in the years ahead.
Legislative and Executive Actions Regarding Sexual Violence on College Campuses
Before reviewing the literature on sexual violence prevalence, impact, and prevention efforts, it is worth briefly introducing the central legislative and executive actions bearing on sexual assault reporting, education, and programming among institutions of higher learning. A comprehensive examination of relevant legislation is well beyond the scope of this book, but understanding current campus education and prevention efforts in context requires a brief discussion of the legislative acts that spawned them as well as more recent actions that continue to inform universities’ obligations and responses to sexual violence.
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 requires any institution of higher learning that receives financial assistance from the federal government to provide education and prevention efforts to address sexual assault on their campuses and to respond promptly and effectively when it is reported. As outlined by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights in a 2011 policy statement, schools must take immediate steps to address any gender-based discrimination, sexual harassment, or sexual violence. If an incident of sexual violence, harassment, or discrimination creates a hostile environment for any student, the institution must act to eliminate it, provide support and remedy for those harmed, and act immediately to prevent its recurrence. Every school is required to have a Title IX coordinator who is responsible for handling complaints and coordinating institutional response to the complaint. In addition to investigating the allegations and determining if the preponderance of evidence supports the likelihood that an act of discrimination or harassment of violence has occurred, the Title IX office is typically charged with providing support and referral information for affected individuals. Schools must implement reasonable changes to a complainant’s residence, class or extracurricular activities, and campus employment in order to ensure that he or she can continue to pursue an education free from ongoing sexual violence, harassment, or discrimination. These accommodations and supports are to be provided immediately as opposed to being deferred until a legal verdict has been reached or an internal investigation has been completed. They should not unduly burden the complainant, and schools are required to prevent retaliation directed toward the individual making a complaint. In order to do so, “no contact”
orders are routine, and they require that the accused individual may not initiate contact with the complainant, nor may he or she do so via a third party. Finally, if accommodations are needed to support affected individuals in their pursuit of an education, the institution should provide them at no cost to the student. Stated differently, victims should not incur additional expenses in order to recover from acts of sexual violence or to prevent ongoing difficulties stemming from an assault.
The Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (i.e., the “Clery Act,” 1990) is a federal statue requiring all colleges and universities that participate in federal financial aid programs to keep and disclose information about campus crime, including sexual assault. Compliance is monitored by the US Department of Education, which can impose civil monetary penalties against institutions for infractions and can suspend institutions from participating in federal student financial aid programs. Expanded in 2013 via the Campus SaVE Act, it broadens coverage to domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking, and it also requires that universities develop and disseminate prevention policies and programs. Certainly, these legislative acts are crucial in establishing a formal responsibility and set of obligations that institutions of higher learning are required to heed in an effort to protect students from sexual violence. Importantly, these pieces of legislation are more than toothless, aspirational standards, as institutions in violation can incur significant financial penalties and, ultimately, loss of federal funding. As such, there is ample motivation to comply with their provisions and mandates. Nevertheless, they offer precious little guidance as to what should be included in awareness and prevention programs, how they should be structured and disseminated, and how they might be evaluated. It should come as no surprise then, that the modal “program” on most college campuses is a single-session (i.e., “oneshot”) informational overview that lasts approximately one hour (e.g., DeGue et al., 2014). The legislative mandate to provide unspecified education and programming has been met with the perhaps predictable institutional response to such mandates—a very brief overview of the most basic information about sexual violence, typically delivered en masse to a captive audience. This, in turn, has resulted in a most predictable outcome—i.e., no clearly evident or demonstrable reduction in sexual violence rates whatsoever since such legislation has been enacted. Again, this is not to say that promising approaches have not been developed—only that they are not the norm nationwide, and, further, that they have not been rigorously evaluated with respect to reductions in actual rates of sexual violence. Given the complexity of sexual violence, its origins in long-standing societal assumptions and misperceptions about gendered sexual behavior, global misconceptions about causes and consequences of sexual assault, and the unique characteristics of college campuses that are associated with sexual violence (e.g., binge drinking and incapacitation, a prevailing “hookup” culture, and
developmentally emergent sexual exploration), it would be very surprising indeed if an hour-long informational program could possibly be expected to stem the tide of sexual violence.
Because the prevalence of sexual violence on college campuses has not appreciably diminished despite well-intentioned and important legislation designed—in part—to do so, President Barack Obama signed a presidential memorandum on January 22, 2014, which formally established the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. The Task Force—still in the formative stages of its work—established a new website NotAlone.gov—to support sexual assault survivors and to provide clarity to colleges and universities about their specific obligations in preventing and responding to sexual violence. In April of 2014, the Task Force issued a set of action steps and recommendations as follows. First, schools were provided with a tool kit to develop and conduct campus climate surveys. Because the great majority of sexual assaults are not reported to campus or law enforcement personnel, formal crime statistics grossly underestimate the scope of the problem. In order to appreciate fully the local frequency and impacts of sexual violence, institution-specific data that do not rely on campus crime reports are needed. Second, the Task Force wisely recommended engaging the broader campus community—including men—to combat sexual violence. For too long, prevention efforts have been directed toward potential victims and potential perpetrators, which, by definition, excludes the majority of the campus. By recognizing that, although most males are not perpetrators, all males can be allies and potentially intervene when someone is at risk, this recommendation can mobilize more individuals to act and to take personal responsibility for promoting campus safety. Third, recommendations were advanced for responding effectively and appropriately when a student is sexually assaulted. In brief, these recommendations include provisions for confidential reporting as well as clarity about who on campus can maintain a victim’s confidentiality in order to give the survivor more control over the reporting experience, a checklist for developing a comprehensive sexual misconduct policy, trauma-informed training for school officials, development and dissemination of school investigatory and disciplinary systems, and a call to increase optimal partnerships with the community. Fourth, the Task Force recommends and attempts—via the NotAlone.gov website—to provide greater transparency and information for victims in layperson-friendly language so that victims can better understand their rights and their institution’s obligations and responsibilities. It is, of course, much too early to know whether this renewed emphasis on sexual violence prevention and the corresponding efforts to increase transparency and access to information will improve outcomes, but it is encouraging that there is heightened executive-level recognition of the problem and a concentrated effort to bring greater visibility and recognition to campus sexual violence.
References
Cantor, D., Fisher, B., Chibnall, S., Townsend, R., Lee, H., Bruce, C., & Thomas, G. (2015). Report on the AAU campus climate survey on sexual assault and sexual misconduct. Rockville, MD: Association of American Universities.
DeGue, S., Valle, L. A., Holt, M. K., Massetti, G. M., Matjasko, J. L., & Tharp, A. T. (2014). A systematic review of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence perpetration. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19, 346–362. doi:10.1016/ j.avb.2014.05.004
Krebs, C. P., Lindquist, C. H., Warner, T. D., Fisher, B. S., & Martin, S. L. (2007). The campus sexual assault (CSA) study. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Zinzow, H. M., Resnick, H. S., McCauley, J. L., Amstadter, A. B., Ruggiero, K. J., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2012). Prevalence and risk of psychiatric disorders as a function of variant rape histories: Results from a national survey of women. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 47(6), 893–902. doi:10.1007/ s00127–011–0397–1
2 Prevalence and Institutional and Economic Costs of Campus Sexual Assault
Sexual victimization is a significant public-health concern in the United States, and in recent years, it has gained substantial attention in the media. While estimates vary depending on the methodology employed, findings from national investigations indicate that the rate of sexual victimization is high, particularly among college-aged women (Black et al., 2011; Cantor et al., 2015; Fisher, Cullen, & Turner, 2000; Krebs et al., 2007; Sinozich & Langton, 2014). The present chapter provides an introduction to the problem and significance of sexual assault. Estimates of the prevalence of sexual assault among males and females within the general and college population in the United States are reported. Additionally, information regarding the characteristics of sexual victimization and issues with victim reporting behavior are described. Then, the institutional and economic impacts of sexual assault on college campuses are presented and discussed.
Prevalence of Sexual Assault
A number of national and regional studies have been conducted in an effort to quantify the prevalence and impact of sexual victimization among general and college populations. In 2010, with support from the Department of Justice and Department of Defense, the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) National Center for Injury Prevention and Control conducted the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) to assess the prevalence, characteristics, and consequences of sexual violence (Black et al., 2011). The NISVS was part of an ongoing, nationally representative random digit dial telephone survey that collected information about sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence among English or Spanishspeaking women and men aged 18 or older in the United States. Rape was defined as any completed or attempted unwanted vaginal, oral, or anal penetration through the use of physical force or threats to physically harm the victim. The definition included instances when the victim was drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent. Findings from the NISVS indicated that a startling 1 in 5 women (18.3%) and 1 in 71 men (1.4%)
report having been raped at some time in their lives, including completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, or alcohol/drug facilitated completed penetration. Additionally, an estimated 13% of women and 6% of men have experienced sexual coercion (i.e., unwanted sexual penetration after being pressured in a nonphysical way), and 27.2% of women and 11.7% of men have experienced unwanted sexual contact (i.e., sexual experiences involving tough but not sexual penetration, such as being kissed in a sexual way, or having sexual body parts fondled or grabbed) in their lifetime. In view of that, rates of sexual victimization within the general population are disturbingly high.
With respect to age, the majority of female rape victims (79.6%) reported being raped prior to their twenty-fifth birthday, with 42.2% of participants indicating that they had experienced a rape prior to age 18 (Black et al., 2011). Accordingly, individuals appear to be at the highest risk for sexual victimization at a time when they may be beginning or pursuing their college education. An unfortunately common consequence of sexual violence is the revictimization of victims. Within Black and colleagues’ (2011) sample, 35.2% of female victims who reported a completed rape prior to their eighteenth birthday also experienced a completed rape as an adult. For male victims, prevalence rates for most age categories were too small to calculate a reliable estimate, but over a quarter of those who had been sexually victimized (27.8%) reported experiencing a completed rape at age ten or younger. Findings further revealed that sexual victimization has no racial or ethnic boundaries, impacting a high percentage of women regardless of ethnic minority status. Black et al. (2011) reported that approximately one in five black (22%) and white (18.8%) non-Hispanic women in the United States have experienced rape at some time in their lives. Comparable lifetime prevalence rates were reported for women who identified as Hispanic (one in seven; 14.6%), American Indian or Alaska Native (one in five; 26.9%), and multiracial (one in three; 33.5%). For men, lifetime estimates were 1 in 59 (1.7%) among those identifying as white non-Hispanic, 1 in 5 (26.2%) among Hispanic, and 1 in 3 (31.6%) for those identifying as multiracial. Recently, the US Department of Justice (Sinozich & Langton, 2014) published a report comparing rates of sexual assault victimization among college-aged females during 1995–2013 drawn from the National Crime Victim Survey (NCVS). The survey was administered to persons age 12 or older from a nationally representative sample of households in the United States. The survey was presented to participants as a study about crime, which included threatened, attempted, and completed rape against males and females, but excluded unwanted sexual contact because of verbal or emotional coercion. Data were collected during in-person and telephone interviews using a two-phased approach, including a screening phase for rape and sexual assault, followed by an incident form that assessed details about the incident (e.g., type of injury, use of weapon, offender characteristics, and reporting behavior).
Findings revealed prevalence rates of rape and sexual assault for females between the age of 18 and 24 at 7.6 per 1,000 for nonstudents and 6.1 per 1,000 for students (Sinozich & Langton, 2014). Although rates appear to be higher among female nonstudents, after accounting for the rates of completed rapes, which were 3.1 per 1,000 for nonstudents and 2.0 per 1,000 for students, there were no differences between the groups regarding attempted rape or other forms of sexual assault. When compared to females in other age brackets, the rates were consistently higher for college-aged women (i.e., 18–24 years). Evidence suggests that, within this sample, college-aged female students are at the greatest risk for victimization, with female nonstudents experiencing higher rates of rape than their college-enrolled counterparts. In their report, Sinozich and Langton (2014) also described the rate of rape and sexual victimization among college-aged males. While estimates were lower among males as compared to females regardless of student status, the rate among student males was higher than that documented for nonstudent males (1.4 per 1,000 for students vs. 0.3 per 1,000 among nonstudents).
Investigations among college-only populations suggest comparably high prevalence rates of sexual victimization on college campuses. For example, the National College Women Sexual Victimization (NCWSV) study conducted by the Department of Justice recruited a randomly selected, national sample of women (N = 4,446) attending colleges or universities with at least 1,000 students (Fisher et al., 2000). Sexual victimization was assessed for a seven-month reference period (i.e., the start of school in the fall of 1996 through the middle of spring semester 1997) in two phases via a telephone survey. The initial phase included behaviorally specific screening questions to assess exposure to different forms of sexual victimization. In phase two, participants who indicated positive responses during phase one were asked to provide information about the type of victimization (e.g., type of penetration experienced, type of unwanted sexual contact, and means of coercion used by the perpetrator) and details of the incident (e.g., relationship to perpetrator or location of victimization). The NCWSV survey also consisted of questions about the respondents’ demographic characteristics, including lifestyles or routine activities, living arrangements, and prior history of sexual victimization.
Results from the NCWSV indicated that 2.8% of the sample (n = 123) had experienced either a completed (n = 74; 1.7%) or attempted rape (n = 49; 1.1%) within the seven-month reference period (Fisher et al., 2000). Interpretation of these findings suggest that an astounding 20–25% of female undergraduates will experience attempted or completed rape at some point during their college careers. Additionally, within their sample, Fisher and colleagues (2000) found comparably high rates of attempted sexual coercion (n = 60; 1.3%), completed sexual contact with force or threat of force (n = 85; 1.9%), completed sexual contact without force (n = 80; 1.8%), attempted sexual contact with force or threat of force (n = 89, 2.0%), and
attempted sexual contact without force. Taken together, these rates of sexual victimization illustrate that sexual violence is a critical issue on college campuses.
Similar rates of sexual victimization among college populations have been reported elsewhere. The Campus Sexual Assault study (CSA) conducted by the National Institute of Justice, collected data in the winter of 2006 using a web-based survey from a random sample of undergraduate female (n = 5,446) and male (n = 1,375) students aged 18–25 at two large public universities in the South and Midwest (Krebs, Lindquist, Warner, Fisher, & Martin, 2007). Within their sample, frequencies of attempted or completed sexual assault prior to or since entering college were 28.5%, with 16% of the total sample of women experiencing an assault experience before entering college and 19% reporting sexual victimization since entering college. Reported rates among male college students were considerably lower, with 3.9% reporting an attempted or completed assault prior to entering college and 6.1% indicating they had experienced a completed or attempted assault after entering college. Specifically, in terms of the nature of reported rapes, 11.1% of females and 3.7% of males reported experiencing an incapacitated completed rape, with the majority involving the use of alcohol and/or drugs (7.7% of females and 2.7% of males). In short, a summary of these findings suggest that sexual victimization was highest among females, with slightly more females having experienced sexual assault after entering college. Further, most instances of completed rape involved were facilitated by the use of substances.
Most recently, the Association of American Universities (AAU) collaborated with a research firm and a team of university researchers and administers to conduct a campus climate survey at 27 different institutes of higher learning during the spring semester of 2015 (Cantor et al., 2015). The research team developed the campus climate survey and based it on the instrument created by the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. The survey was administered to a total sample of undergraduate and graduate students equaling 779,170, although only 150,072 or 19.3% of the larger sample responded. Overall, 11.2% of students (18.1% of females and 4.2% of males) reported experiencing nonconsensual penetration or sexual touching (i.e., kissing, touching someone’s breast, chest, crotch, groin or buttocks, grabbing, groping, or rubbing against the other in a sexual way) by force or incapacitation since enrolling at their university.
In terms of student demographics, frequency of incidents involving penetration by force or incapacitation were highest among students identifying as transgender, genderqueer, nonconforming, questioning, or not listed (TGQN; 12.4% for undergraduates), followed by undergraduate females (10.8%) and TGQN graduate/professional students (8.3%; Cantor et al., 2015). Among undergraduate students, rates of sexual contact by physical force or incapacitation during the current year were highest among freshmen (10.5% overall; 16.9% of females and 3.5% of males) and appeared
to decline by year in school, with the lowest rates being reported among seniors (7.2% overall; 11.1% of females and 3.0% of males) These findings suggest that the risk of assault appears to decline as students progress through their college careers.
With respect to the nature of rape incidents, Cantor and colleagues (2015) reported that frequencies of nonconsensual sexual contact involving force or incapacitation ranged from 13% to 30% across the 27 participating universities. However within their sample, results indicated that about as many individuals who reported penetration by physical force (5.7%), reported penetration by incapacitation (5.4%), suggesting that both types of assault are common. Further, results revealed that among undergraduates, private universities had a higher incidence rate (25.3%) when compared to public universities (22.8%), while the reverse was true for graduate/ professional students.
In sum, although estimates of sexual victimization vary depending on the methods employed in each investigation, sexual assault appears to be an unfortunately common occurrence both in campus and larger community contexts. Projected frequencies of rape and sexual assault appear to be highest among females, particularly among those within the college-aged range (Black et al., 2011; Sinozich & Langton, 2014). With respect to college populations, female undergraduates and those identifying as TGQN appear to report the greatest levels of victimization (Cantor et al., 2015; Fisher et al., 2000). Further, some evidence suggests that sexual victimization occurs at a somewhat comparable rate at private and public institutes of higher learning, although slightly higher rates were observed at private universities (Cantor et al., 2015). The high prevalence of sexual assault on college campuses suggests a critical need for further research into and education on preventative measures, particularly among groups of women just entering university.
Characteristics of Sexual Assault
Many of the investigations that examined the frequency of sexual assault also yielded important information regarding the particular features of sexual victimization. Contrary to popular layperson beliefs, findings from the majority of studies indicate that most instances of sexual assault do not occur at the hands of unknown assailants. Rather, most survivors report having previously known their perpetrators (Black et al., 2011; Fisher et al., 2000; Sinozich & Langton, 2014). For instance, results from the NISVS (Black et al., 2011) revealed that the majority of female rape survivors reported being raped by an intimate partner (51.1%), or acquaintance (40.8%), with 12.5% reporting being raped by a family member. Among male respondents, 52.4% reported being raped by an acquaintance. Additionally, the majority of male (86.6%) and female (71.2%) survivors reported that their assault involved one perpetrator. Lastly, most males and females indicated that males perpetrated their assaults.
Prevalence and Costs
Consistent findings have also been documented among college samples, revealing that most survivors reported having known their perpetrators. For example, in the NCVS, Sinozich and Langton (2014) reported that 80% of college-aged female survivors of rape and sexual assault, regardless of whether they were a nonstudent or student, knew their offenders. In contrast to general population findings reported by Black et al. (2011), student victims were less likely to experience victimization by an intimate partner (34% for nonstudents vs. 24% for students) and were more likely to have been victimized by a friend or acquaintance (50% for students vs. 37% for nonstudents). Overall, among nonstudents and students, strangers perpetrated roughly one in five instances of sexual victimization. Additionally, results from the NCVS revealed that the majority of sexual assaults occurred at either the victims’ homes or the homes of other people they knew (70%), indicating that the majority of incidents occur in familiar settings.
Similar findings were reported in the CSA (Krebs et al., 2007), revealing that only a small proportion of victims reported being assaulted by a stranger (23.3% among victims of forced sexual assault and 11.5% among victims of incapacitated sexual assault). Accordingly, forced assault was more likely to involve an unknown assailant, while the majority of incapacitated sexual assaults were more likely to be perpetuated by a friend (35.4%) or acquaintance of the victim (33.9%) or a classmate (27.1%). Further, more than a quarter (27.5%) of incapacitated sexual assault victims were victimized by a member of a fraternity and most victims reported that they were at a party (58.3%) off campus (60.6%) and were either in their own (21.2%) or another person’s living quarters (49.4%). Consistent findings were also demonstrated in the NCWSV (Fisher et al., 2000), which estimated that nine in ten perpetrators of completed and uncompleted rape among college women were known to the victim. The majority of completed or uncompleted rapes took place in off-campus residences. Additional analyses confirmed that women were at an increased risk of victimization if they were unmarried, frequently consumed alcohol enough to get drunk, had a prior history of victimization, and if they lived on campus.
Overall, these findings show a large majority of incidents of sexual victimization occur at the hands of a known perpetrator, such as a friend, and often take place in residential settings. Accordingly, contrary to common misperceptions of sexual assault, victimization typically occurs at the hands of trusted individuals, such as boyfriends, ex-boyfriends, classmates, acquaintances, or coworkers and in contexts that may be mistakenly considered to be safe. Further, some evidence suggests that assaults perpetrated by known offenders may be more likely to involve the use of drugs or alcohol, indicating that substance use may play an important role in the occurrence of sexual assault. Understanding the common characteristics of sexual assault affords valuable information regarding the contexts in which sexual victimization is most likely to occur. Such information is critical for effective prevention and risk-reduction efforts. Indeed, early sexual assault prevention
programs and efforts were often geared toward comparatively rare variants of sexual assault (e.g., issuing rape whistles to fend of “stranger-in-thebushes” types of assaults). In order to most effectively reduce rates of sexual violence, it is critical to understand what sexual assault actually looks like on college campuses and to develop interventions accordingly.
Reporting of Sexual Assault
A significant challenge in attempting to provide accurate estimates of sexual assault within the general and college populations is that only a minority of survivors actually report their assault experience. The Department of Justice’s NCVS report among college-aged women revealed that female students were less likely than female nonstudents to report rape and sexual assault victimizations to the police (20% vs. 33%, respectively; Sinozich & Langton, 2014). Their findings further revealed that student victims were more likely than their nonstudent counterparts to state that they believed their victimization experience was not important enough to report (12% vs. 5%, respectively). Among both groups who did not report to police, about a quarter of respondents indicated that they believed the incident was a personal matter (26% of students and 23% of nonstudents), and one in five (20% of each group) stated a fear of reprisal. Reporting of sexual victimization to authorities appears to be an unfortunately low occurrence for reasons that often stem from survivors beliefs about the seriousness of the assault and the nature of the criminal justice process.
Similarly, findings from the NCWSV also suggest that few incidents of sexual victimization among college women are reported to formal support sources (Fisher et al., 2000; Fisher, Daigle, Cullen, & Turner, 2003). While approximately 88% of college women in the NCWSV reported having disclosed experiences of sexual victimization to their peers, only 1% disclosed to a counseling service, 4% to a campus authority, and only 2.1% to a police agency (Fisher et al., 2003). Respondents who reported experiencing completed rape provided a range of reasons for not reporting their assault experience. The most frequently cited reason was that they did not believe their assault experience was serious enough (70.5%). Other common reasons cited included not wanting their families (38.9%) or other people (40.3%) to know, being unsure whether the crime or harm was intended (42.3%), and believing there was a lack of proof that the incident happened (36.9%). With respect to reporting to law enforcement, 30.2% of participants thought the police would not think the assault was serious enough, 20.1% believed police would not want to be bothered, and 17.4% feared hostility from police.
In the CSA, Krebs et al. (2007) reported that only 40% of forced and 25% of incapacitated victims indicated that they considered their assault to be rape. In terms of reporting behavior, the majority of forced (68.9%) and incapacitated (63.7%) sexual assault victims indicated that they disclosed
the incident to someone close (i.e., family or friends). Few victims reported their assault to the police or campus security (12.9% of forced and 2.1% of incapacitated). Slightly higher estimates were reported in the AAU’s campus climate survey (Cantor et al., 2015). In their sample, reporting rates for physically forced penetration were 25.5% and incapacitated penetration rates were 13.3%, still suggesting that a comparatively small minority of survivors report incidents of sexual aggression to authorities. Consistent with prior findings, 58.6% of students who experienced penetration with physical force indicated that the primary reason they did not report to authorities was because they did not consider the event to be serious enough, followed by 35.9% who indicated that they felt too embarrassed and ashamed, as well as feeling that it would be too emotionally difficult, and 29% reported that they did not think anything would be done about it. Yet, similar to results by Fisher et al. (2003), the majority of respondents indicated that they did tell somebody, most often a friend (78.2% for penetration by force and 76.1% for penetration by incapacitation).
Reluctance to report sexual assault to authorities or to disclose to formal support sources is not uncommon. Orchowski and Gidycz (2010) collected data as part of a larger study examining the effectiveness of a sexual assault prevention program implemented among undergraduate women (N = 374) living in a first-year residence hall. Data were collected at baseline and at four-month and seven-month follow-up periods. Results revealed that 35.8% of their sample reported an unwanted sexual experience at or after age 14, with 8.1% reporting an experience of completed rape. Among women with a history of sexual victimization, approximately three-quarters of participants reported that they had discussed the experience with another individual, with the majority disclosing to a female peer (86%), followed by a male peer (36%), sibling or other family member (17%), father (17%), or mother (5%). Interestingly, only 8% of women reported disclosing their victimization experience to a formal support source. Not surprisingly, research suggests that survivors are more likely to come forward and report their assaults if presented with reporting contexts perceived as more approachable, trustworthy, and supportive. Hence efforts to improve laypersons’ awareness of how to respond and support victims after an assault may be an important piece of successful prevention.
Taken together, evidence suggests that most sexual assault victims do disclose their assault experience to another individual, with the most common recipient being close members of their support network such as family and friends. However, few victims report incidents of assault to law enforcement or campus authorities. Low rates of such reporting have historically led to university and government officials underestimating the frequency of sexual assault on their own campuses. More importantly, low reporting rates have adversely impacted victims’ ability to seek justice, medical and/or mental health-care services, and support from friends, family, and university personnel. It can be a difficult decision for women to decide whether or
not to disclose their sexual assault to formal (e.g., law enforcement, campus officials, medical personnel) or informal (e.g., friends, family) support sources. Unfortunately, the evidence that few victims perceive their experience of sexual victimization as assault and/or as serious in nature appears to be further complicating issues related to reporting given that this underrecognition of sexual assault likely also contributes to low incidences of reporting. Further, even if victims justifiably and accurately perceive successful prosecution of perpetrators to be unlikely, there are numerous structural supports (e.g., mental health services, academic accommodations, housingrelated considerations) that victims may not be able to benefit from—and may not even be aware of—when they do not report assaults to appropriate university personnel.
Institutional Impact
Sexual assault on college campuses has received significant attention and has resulted in a number of federal statutes that impact college campuses. Currently, two federal laws address sexual violence on college campuses, the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The Clery Act requires all public and private institutes of higher learning that participate in federal student financial assistance programs to track crimes in and around their campuses and to report that data to their campus community and to the Department of Education (McCallion & Feder, 2014). Title IX is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on sex within all educational programs or activities that receive federal funding (McCallion & Feder, 2014). Under Title IX, sexual harassment, which includes sexual victimization, is considered a form of unlawful sex discrimination. In addition to these legal statutes, in 2013 federal law authorized the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (VAWA), which compelled universities to expand campus crime reporting statistics imposed by the Cleary Act to include incidents of domestic and dating violence and stalking. VAWA also requires higher education institutions to adopt revised standards for investigation and conduct of student discipline proceedings in response to instances of victimization. Further, these federally mandated standards now require institutions to provide written notification of accommodations available to victims regardless of whether the victim chooses to report and to provide comprehensive educational prevention and awareness for incoming students and new employees on sexual assault, rape, acquaintance rape, domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking (McCallion & Feder, 2014). In response to these statutes, colleges have made efforts to increase awareness and implement prevention efforts to reduce rates of sexual victimization. However, while legislative efforts have been made to address the problem of sexual assault on college campuses, it is clear that more work still needs to done. In the AAU’s campus climate survey (Cantor et al., 2015)
respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they perceived sexual victimization as a problem on their campus, their perceptions of the likelihood of being victimized, and their expectations regarding the response from the university if they were to report sexual assault or misconduct. Roughly one-fifth of all students (20.2%) viewed sexual assault or misconduct as very or extremely problematic at their university. Five percent indicated that it was very or extremely likely that they would experience sexual assault on campus or at a university-affiliated event off campus. Students identifying as TGQN (43.6%) and undergraduates females (27.1%) endorsed these items pertaining to campus problems and risk to a greater extent than male undergraduates (16.1%). Given the rates of victimization, it is surprising that more students do not view sexual victimization as a significant problem on their campus and only a small minority perceive themselves as at risk of sexual assault. It is possible that students may feel safe at their own universities and perceive that such occurrences are more likely to occur elsewhere. Alternatively, these findings could indicate that students may tend to minimize or have a lack of awareness of the problem of sexual assault among college populations. As will be reviewed later in this book, it is not uncommon for individuals to underestimate personal risk and/or to erroneously blame victims for assaults, as doing so can afford perceptions of predictability, control, and safety. Though such perceptions are not always accurate, they serve an emotionally palliative function.
Cantor et al.’s (2015) campus climate survey also revealed several noteworthy findings in regard to students’ perceptions about how well institutions are handling sexual assault misconduct reports. More than half of students (63.3%) reported that they believed a report of sexual victimization would be taken seriously by campus officials, with female students (57.1%–57.3%) expressing less confidence than their male counterparts (69.9%–70%). When asked if they believed campus officials would protect the safety of individuals making the report, a lower percentage of students expressed favorable views (56.5% overall), with undergraduate students expressing the lowest level of confidence (51.3%). Additionally, when asked to rate their confidence in campus officials’ likelihood of conducting a fair investigation, only 49.2% of all respondents (45.7% of female undergraduates and 53.2% of their male peers) believed this was very or extremely likely to occur, and only 44.6% expressed strong beliefs that the campus officials would be likely to take action against the offender (37.4% of female and 54.2% of male undergraduates). While these estimates indicate that a majority of students hold favorable views toward their university’s response to sexual assault, they also suggest a large percentage of students may feel less assured of their university’s justice process in this regard.
Over the past 20 years, important steps have been taken nationally in legislative efforts aimed at reducing the problem of sexual assaults on college campuses. Specifically, lawmakers have laid the groundwork to: a) provide more accurate records and estimates of sexual assault via mandated
reporting of incidents, b) improve the reporting process for victims while also ensuring that reports of assault are duly investigated and perpetrators are appropriately punished, and c) increase awareness of and education pertaining to acts of sexual and interpersonal violence. Universities nationwide are now in the process of implementing these standards which will, hopefully, through awareness and prevention efforts, reduce the incidence of interpersonal victimization among students. However, questions still remain regarding the efficacy of these programs. Despite the high prevalence of sexual assault on college campuses, findings from the AAU’s campus climate survey suggest that most students do not view sexual assault as a problem on their campus, a fact that speaks to the disconnect between perception and reality regarding sexual assault among this group. Interestingly, a sizable proportion continue to express a high degree of concern and these groups may ultimately serve as the critical mass necessary to heighten awareness of sexual assault nationally. Further, while the majority of students believe a reported assault would be handled seriously, there is still room to improve students’ confidence in their university’s ability to successfully investigate and respond to reports. Ideally, future programs aimed at improving awareness and response to sexual victimization will reflect a significantly greater proportion of affirmative responses to questions concerning confidence and optimism in college and university handling of these types of incidents.
Economic Impact of Sexual Assault
It is difficult to estimate accurately the economic costs associated with rape and sexual assault; however, current evidence suggests that the financial impact is high. Although research in this area is limited, the majority of figures have attempted to account for costs associated with the victim (e.g., medical and mental health services), loss of productivity, and legal and law enforcement services. A 1996 National Institute of Justice research report (Miller, Cohen, & Wiersema, 1996) estimated the total societal costs associated with rape in the United States at $127 billion. Their estimates revealed the costs associated with each rape or attempted rape incident at approximately $87,000, which accounted for tangible monetary losses, including loss of productivity for victims at work, home, and school ($2,200), medical care ($500), mental health care ($2,200), police/fire services ($37), social/ victim services ($27), and property loss/damage ($100), as well as intangible losses, such as fear, pain, suffering, and lost quality of life, at a cost of $81,400 per incident. Although the cost of tangible losses may appear low ($5,100 per incident), the authors note that estimates are based only on those who are willing to report victimization and the use of services, such as medical or mental health care, which is unfortunately low. Stated differently, to the extent that we as a society provide better support to sexual assault survivors by rendering services more readily available and encouraging survivors to avail themselves of such services, the economic impact
of sexual aggression will increase considerably. Although $127 billion is an enormous economic burden, costs are—if anything—suppressed by low reporting and service utilization.
In a recent study of the monetary costs of violent and homicidal crimes, including rape, DeLisi and colleagues (2010) estimated the total cost of rape at $151,423 per offense. Data were collected during 2003 from a sample of convicted and incarcerated homicide offenders from eight states (i.e., Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas). In their breakdown of costs, DeLisi et al. (2010) estimated that each rape offense amounted to $138,310 in victim costs, $8,503 in justice costs, and $4,610 in loss of offender productivity. These figures do not include additional estimates for willingness to pay that account for public concern about crime and willingness to assist in crime prevention, which project an additional $297,109 per rape incident.
In sum, most recent estimates suggest that the approximate cost per victim of each rape incident falls anywhere between $81,000 and $138,000 (DeLisi et al., 2010; Miller et al., 1996). These costs can have far-reaching repercussions for the victims, especially since those at highest risk are young women with presumably limited finances. It is important to note that existing research on the estimated economic impact of sexual assault is limited for a number of reasons. First, these estimates do not include costs associated with other forms of victimization, such as sexual harassment, domestic and dating violence, and stalking, which are also frequent on college campuses and co-occur with sexual assault. Also, as noted, estimates do not account for losses incurred by victims who do not report incidents of sexual assault, which likely leads to an underestimation of the actual impact of sexual assault. Further, the measurable sum for “tangible loss” accounts for only a small percentage of the total estimated cost for a victim of rape. “Tangible loss” fails to consider the very real socioeconomic impact of sexual assault over the course of one’s life, which undoubtedly affects, to a degree, the broader well-being of victims. Despite the aforementioned limitations, the reported costs are striking and attest to the far-reaching implications of sexual assault that transcend the psychological impact of these events.
References
Black, M. C., Basile, K. C., Breiding, M. J., Smith, S. G., Walters, M. L., Merrick, M. T., . . . Stevens, M. R. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 summary report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cantor, D., Fisher, B., Chibnall, S., Townsend, R., Lee, H., Bruce, C., & Thomas, G. (2015). Report on the AAU campus climate survey on sexual assault and sexual misconduct. Rockville, MD: Association of American Universities. DeLisi, M., Kosloski, A., Sween, M., Hachmeister, E., Moore, M., & Drury, A. (2010). Murder by numbers: Monetary costs imposed by a sample of homicide
Prevalence and Costs 19
offenders. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 21, 501–513. doi:10.1080/14789940903564388
Fisher, B. S., Cullen, F. T., & Turner, M. G. (2000). The sexual victimization of college women. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Fisher, B. S., Daigle, L., Cullen, F., & Turner, M. (2003). Reporting sexual victimization to the police and others: Results from a national-level study of college women. Criminal Justice and Behaviors, 30, 6–38. doi:10.1177/0093854802239161
Krebs, C. P., Lindquist, C. H., Warner, T. D., Fisher, B. S., & Martin, S. L. (2007). The campus sexual assault (CSA) study. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
Langton, L., & Sinozich, S. (2014). Rape and sexual assault among college-aged females, 1995–2013 (Report No. NCJ 248471). Retrieved from http://www.bjs. gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf
McCallion, G., & Feder, J. (2014). Sexual violence at institutions of higher education (Report number: R43764). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from www.hsdl.org/?view&did=759198
Miller, T. R., Cohen, M. A., & Wiersema, B. (1996). Victim costs and consequences: A new look. National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/ pdffiles/victcost.pdf
