@article{DworkinKraheZinzow2021,
  author    = {Dworkin, Emily R. and Krah{\´e}, Barbara and Zinzow, Heidi},
  title     = {The global prevalence of sexual assault},
  series = {Psychology of violence},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Psychology of violence},
  number    = {5},
  publisher = {American Psychological Association},
  address   = {Washington},
  issn      = {2152-0828},
  doi       = {10.1037/vio0000374},
  pages     = {497 -- 508},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Objective: We present a review of peer-reviewed English-language studies conducted outside the United States and Canada on the prevalence of sexual assault victimization in adolescence and adulthood published since 2010. Method: A systematic literature search yielded 32 articles reporting on 45 studies from 29 countries. Studies that only provided prevalence estimates for sexual assault in intimate relationships or did not present separate rates for men and women were excluded. All studies were coded by two coders, and a risk of bias score was calculated for each study. Both past-year and prevalence rates covering longer periods were extracted. Results: The largest number of studies came from Europe (n = 21), followed by Africa (n = 11), Asia, and Latin America (n = 6 each). One study came from the Middle East and no studies were found from Oceania. Across the 22 studies that reported past-year prevalence rates, figures ranged from 0\% to 59.2\% for women, 0.3\% to 55.5\% for men, and 1.5\% to 18.2\% for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) samples. The average risk of bias score was 5.7 out of 10. Studies varied widely in methodology. Conclusion: Despite regional variation, most studies indicate that sexual assault is widespread. More sustained, systematic, and coordinated research efforts are needed to gauge the scale of sexual assault in different parts of the world and to develop prevention measures.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{SchusterTomaszewskaMarchewkaetal.2020,
  author    = {Schuster, Isabell and Tomaszewska, Paulina and Marchewka, Juliette and Krah{\´e}, Barbara},
  title     = {Does question format matter in assessing the prevalence of sexual aggression?},
  series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {4},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-54663},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-546632},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {As research on sexual aggression has been growing, methodological issues in assessing prevalence rates have received increased attention. Building on work by Abbey and colleagues about effects of question format, participants in this study (1,253; 621 female; 632 male) were randomly assigned to one of two versions of the Sexual Aggression and Victimization Scale (SAV-S). In Version 1, the coercive tactic (use/threat of physical force, exploitation of the inability to resist, verbal pressure) was presented first, and sexual acts (sexual touch, attempted and completed sexual intercourse, other sexual acts) were presented as subsequent questions. In Version 2, sexual acts were presented first, and coercive tactics as subsequent questions. No version effects emerged for overall perpetration rates reported by men and women. The overall victimization rate across all items was significantly higher in the tactic-first than in the sexual-act-first conditions for women, but not for men. Classifying participants by their most severe experience of sexual victimization showed that fewer women were in the nonvictim category and more men were in the nonconsensual sexual contact category when the coercive tactic was presented first. Sexual experience background did not moderate the findings. The implications for the measurement of self-reported sexual aggression victimization and perpetration are discussed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MarchewkaTomaszewskaSchusteretal.2022,
  author    = {Marchewka, Juliette and Tomaszewska, Paulina and Schuster, Isabell and Krah{\´e}, Barbara},
  title     = {Unacknowledged and missed cases of sexual victimization},
  series = {Aggressive behavior : a multidisciplinary journal devoted to the experimental and observational analysis of conflict in humans and animals},
  volume    = {48},
  journal   = {Aggressive behavior : a multidisciplinary journal devoted to the experimental and observational analysis of conflict in humans and animals},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {Wiley-Liss},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0096-140X},
  doi       = {10.1002/ab.22043},
  pages     = {573 -- 582},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {From the beginning of systematic research on sexual victimization, it has been recognized that a substantial proportion of women report nonconsensual sexual experiences meeting the defining criteria of rape in response to behaviorally specific items, but do not acknowledge their experience as rape in response to broad questions about whether they have ever been raped. Recent studies suggest that rates of unacknowledged rape may be as high or even higher among men than among women. This study examined rates of unacknowledged female and male victims of rape and sexual assault by comparing responses to behaviorally specific items of the Sexual Aggression and Victimization Scale (SAV-S) with responses to broad questions using the labels of sexual assault and rape (SARA) in 593 participants (303 women) in Germany. As predicted, more women and men were classified as rape victims based on behaviorally specific items than on the basis of the broad rape item. The rates of unacknowledged rape were about 60\% for women and 75\% for men. The gender difference was not significant. Against our prediction, no significant differences in acknowledgement of sexual assault were found in relation to coercive strategy and victim-perpetrator relationship. Few cases of rape and sexual assault identified by the SARA items were missed by the behaviorally specific questions. The implications for establishing prevalence rates of rape and sexual assault and for comparing victims and nonvictims in terms of vulnerability factors and outcomes of sexual victimization are discussed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{SchusterTomaszewskaMarchewkaetal.2020,
  author    = {Schuster, Isabell and Tomaszewska, Paulina and Marchewka, Juliette and Krah{\´e}, Barbara},
  title     = {Does question format matter in assessing the prevalence of sexual aggression?},
  series = {The journal of sex research},
  volume    = {58},
  journal   = {The journal of sex research},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {0022-4499},
  doi       = {10.1080/00224499.2020.1777927},
  pages     = {502 -- 511},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {As research on sexual aggression has been growing, methodological issues in assessing prevalence rates have received increased attention. Building on work by Abbey and colleagues about effects of question format, participants in this study (1,253; 621 female; 632 male) were randomly assigned to one of two versions of the Sexual Aggression and Victimization Scale (SAV-S). In Version 1, the coercive tactic (use/threat of physical force, exploitation of the inability to resist, verbal pressure) was presented first, and sexual acts (sexual touch, attempted and completed sexual intercourse, other sexual acts) were presented as subsequent questions. In Version 2, sexual acts were presented first, and coercive tactics as subsequent questions. No version effects emerged for overall perpetration rates reported by men and women. The overall victimization rate across all items was significantly higher in the tactic-first than in the sexual-act-first conditions for women, but not for men. Classifying participants by their most severe experience of sexual victimization showed that fewer women were in the nonvictim category and more men were in the nonconsensual sexual contact category when the coercive tactic was presented first. Sexual experience background did not moderate the findings. The implications for the measurement of self-reported sexual aggression victimization and perpetration are discussed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{WinzerKraheGuest2019,
  author    = {Winzer, Lylla and Krah{\´e}, Barbara and Guest, Philip Michael},
  title     = {The Scale of Sexual Aggression in Southeast Asia: A Review},
  series = {Trauma, violence \& abuse},
  volume    = {20},
  journal   = {Trauma, violence \& abuse},
  number    = {5},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {Thousand Oaks},
  issn      = {1524-8380},
  doi       = {10.1177/1524838017725312},
  pages     = {595 -- 612},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Southeast Asia is one of the most dynamic regions in the world. It is experiencing rapid socioeconomic change that may influence the level of sexual aggression, but data on the scale of sexual aggression in the region remain sparse. The aim of the present article was to systematically review the findings of studies available in English on the prevalence of self-reported sexual aggression and victimization among women and men above the age of 12 years in the 11 countries of Southeast Asia (Brunei, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam). Based on four scientific databases, the search engine Google, Opengrey database, and reference checking, 49 studies were found on sexual victimization. Of those, 32 included only women. Self-reported perpetration was assessed by only three studies and included all-male samples. Prevalence rates varied widely across studies but showed that sexual victimization was widespread among different social groups, irrespective of sex and sexual orientation. Methodological heterogeneity, lack of representativeness of samples, imbalance of information available by country, missing information within studies, and cultural differences hampered the comparability between and within countries. There is a need for operationalizations that specifically address sexual aggression occurring after the age of consent, based on detailed behavioral descriptions of unwanted sexual experiences and allied to a qualitative approach with cultural sensitivity. Data on sexual aggression in conflict settings and in human trafficking are also limited. Recommendations for future research are presented in the discussion.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{BieneckKrahe2017,
  author    = {Bieneck, Steffen and Krah{\´e}, Barbara},
  title     = {Blaming the victim and exonerating the perpetrator in cases of rape and robbery: is there a double standard?},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-402907},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Research in legal decision making has demonstrated the tendency to blame the victim and exonerate the perpetrator of sexual assault. This study examined the hypothesis of a special leniency bias in rape cases by comparing them to cases of robbery. N = 288 participants received descriptions of rape and robbery of a female victim by a male perpetrator and made ratings of victim and perpetrator blame. Case scenarios varied with respect to the prior relationship (strangers, acquaintances, ex-partners) and coercive strategy (force vs. exploiting victim intoxication). More blame was attributed to the victim and less blame was attributed to the perpetrator for rape than for robbery. Information about a prior relationship between victim and perpetrator increased ratings of victim blame and decreased perceptions of perpetrator blame in the rape cases, but not in the robbery cases. The findings support the notion of a special leniency bias in sexual assault cases.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BieneckKrahe2011,
  author    = {Bieneck, Steffen and Krah{\´e}, Barbara},
  title     = {Blaming the victim and exonerating the perpetrator in cases of rape and robbery is there a double standard?},
  series = {Journal of interpersonal violence : concerned with the study and treatment of victims and perpetrators of physical and sexual violence},
  volume    = {26},
  journal   = {Journal of interpersonal violence : concerned with the study and treatment of victims and perpetrators of physical and sexual violence},
  number    = {9},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {Thousand Oaks},
  issn      = {0886-2605},
  doi       = {10.1177/0886260510372945},
  pages     = {1785 -- 1797},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Research in legal decision making has demonstrated the tendency to blame the victim and exonerate the perpetrator of sexual assault. This study examined the hypothesis of a special leniency bias in rape cases by comparing them to cases of robbery. N = 288 participants received descriptions of rape and robbery of a female victim by a male perpetrator and made ratings of victim and perpetrator blame. Case scenarios varied with respect to the prior relationship (strangers, acquaintances, ex-partners) and coercive strategy (force vs. exploiting victim intoxication). More blame was attributed to the victim and less blame was attributed to the perpetrator for rape than for robbery. Information about a prior relationship between victim and perpetrator increased ratings of victim blame and decreased perceptions of perpetrator blame in the rape cases, but not in the robbery cases. The findings support the notion of a special leniency bias in sexual assault cases.},
  language  = {en}
}