Attributions of Blame in Stranger and Acquaintance Rape: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: Victim blame, particularly in cases of acquaintance rape, presents an obstacle to criminal justice. Past research indicates that acquaintance rape results in more blame than stranger rape. However, there are inconsistencies in these findings (e.g., whether there is a linear relationship between victim blame and relationship closeness), partly due to methodological variation. Objectives: To examine the effect of victim–perpetrator relationship on victim blame, how this effect is impacted by rape myth acceptance (RMA) and ambivalent sexism (AS), and to establish what the methodological quality is of studies. Synthesis method: Studies were synthesized through a multilevel meta-analysis using the Metafor package in R (version 2.4-0), synthesizing findings from 47 individual studies. Studies compared victim blame between stranger and acquaintance rape, in isolation or in conjunction with RMA and AS, and were identified through a database search. Results: The review found higher levels of blame in acquaintance as compared to stranger rape, with a medium effect size. This effect was not moderated by RMA. AS was not included as a moderator in the meta-analysis, but the review indicated that benevolent sexism may be a particularly relevant variable. Implications: Future research should examine the relationship between AS and victim blame. The current review contributes to the evidence base on victim blame in rape cases by suggesting that methodological limitations can account for some of the past mixed findings in this area, particularly in a lack of consistency in vignette details. It is recommended that future sexual assault research uses rigorous methodology and increases transparency of research processes.