DOI: 10.4119/ijcv-3776 IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Sexual Violence Victimization among Undergraduates at a Chilean University Laura Saldarriagai laura-ssr@hotmail.com Carolina Rochaii carocha@uc.cl Diego Castroii drcastro1@uc.cl Gloria Jiménez-Moyaii gjimenezm@uc.cl Héctor Carvachoii hectorcarvacho@gmail.com Gerd Bohneri gerd.bohner@uni-bielefeld.de i Department of Psychology, Bielefeld University, Germany ii Department of Psychology, Pontifica Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile Vol. 14(1)/2020 The IJCV provides a forum for scientific exchange and public dissemination of up-to-date scien - tific knowledge on conflict and violence. The IJCV is independent, peer reviewed, open access, and included in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) as well as other rele - vant databases (e.g., SCOPUS, EBSCO, ProQuest, DNB). The topics on which we concentrate—conflict and violence—have always been central to various disciplines. Consequently, the journal encompasses contributions from a wide range of disciplines, including criminology, economics, education, ethnology, his- tory, political science, psychology, social anthropology, sociology, the study of reli- gions, and urban studies. All articles are gathered in yearly volumes, identified by a DOI with article-wise pagi- nation. For more information please visit www.ijcv.or g Suggested Citation: APA: Saldarriaga, L., Rocha, C., Castro, D., Jiménez-Moya, G., Carvacho, H., & Bohner, G. (2020). Sexual violence victimization among undergraduates at a Chilean university. International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 14(1), 1-14. doi: 10.4119/ijcv-3776 Harvard: Saldarriaga, Laura, Rocha, Carolina, Castro, Diego, Jiménez-Moya, Gloria, Carvacho, Héctor, Bohner, Gerd. 2020. Sexual Violence Victimization among Under- graduates at a Chilean University. International Journal of Conflict and Violence 14(1): 1-14. doi: 10.4119/ijcv-3776 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution—NoDerivatives License. ISSN: 1864–1385 mailto:laura-ssr@hotmail.com http://www.ijcv.org/ mailto:gerd.bohner@uni-bielefeld.de mailto:hectorcarvacho@gmail.com mailto:gjimenezm@uc.cl mailto:drcastro1@uc.cl mailto:carocha@uc.cl IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 1 Sexual Violence Victimization among Undergraduates at a Chilean University Laura Saldarriagai Carolina Rochaii Diego Castroii Gloria Jiménez-Moyaii Héctor Carvachoii Gerd Bohneri i Department of Psychology, Bielefeld University, Germany ii Department of Psychology, Pontifica Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile As part of a campus-wide prevention program, the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (PUC) implemented a cross-sequential survey on sexual violence. In this article, we report data from the first wave (2018; N = 2,046) from three cohorts of undergraduates (Year 1, n = 792; Year 2, n = 601; Year 3, n = 653). We found an overall twelve-month prevalence for victimization experiences of 18.7 percent (4.3 percent by force or threat of force; 12.9 percent while unable to resist; 7.1 percent by verbal pressure; multiple responses allowed). Women (22.9 per - cent) were victimized more frequently than men (9.7 percent). Among women, victimization rates were highest for Year 1 students (25.7 percent), intermediate for Year 2 (22.3%), and lowest for Year 3 (19.8 percent). Only 10.9 percent of reported incidents happened in a university context. In most cases, perpetrators were male (88.9 per - cent) and known to the victim (72.1 percent); 24.4 percent were partners, 35.5 percent were friends. We present additional data on risk factors and attitudinal correlates. We also discuss our findings in relation to previous re - search suggesting higher prevalence rates at Chilean universities, considering differences in methodology and implications for future research. Keywords: Chile, prevention, rape, sexual violence, undergraduates Over the last decades, numerous scandals and debates have brought to light issues related to sexual violence, revealing a discouraging panorama.* In particular the #MeToo movement, launched in 2017 with a state- ment from US actress Alyssa Milano, has spurred one of the most important debates about sexual violence. Milano’s aim was to encourage women (and men) around the world to disclose their experiences with sexual violence, in order to communicate the mag- * This research was conducted by Laura Saldarriaga in par- tial fulfilment of the requirements of a PhD degree in psy- chology, which was supervised by Gerd Bohner. nitude of the problem (Khomami 2017). The move- ment’s repercussions were diverse, with consequences on many levels in different countries. In Sweden, for example, it prompted the introduction of new sexual assault legislation, under which engaging in sexual acts without clear affirmative consent (either verbal or non-verbal) constitutes a crime, even in the absence of evidence of physical coercion (BBC News 2018). In Chile, the #MeToo movement overlapped with the emergence of a strong feminist movement, whose ac- tions included large-scale strikes, occupations of pub- lic buildings, and protests against sexual harassment IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 2 and discrimination within the country’s universities (Bartlett 2018; Jiménez-Moya, Manzi, and Cheyre 2018; Sepúlveda-Garrido 2018). Despite persistent eco- nomic and social inequalities between men and wo- men in Chile, important changes are taking place. A growing interest in and commitment to scientific re- search on sexual violence is becoming apparent, which places Chile ahead of other Latin American countries in this regard. A systematic review of sexual violence research in Chile (Schuster and Krahé 2019) identified twenty- eight studies on the prevalence of sexual aggression victimization among women and men. The reported prevalence rates varied greatly across samples, which may be attributed to differences in definitions, meas- urement instruments, and time period assessed. Inter- estingly, however, even studies with similar defini- tions of sexual violence, with similar samples (univer- sity students between 18 and 30 years of age), and ad - dressing identical time periods yielded very different prevalence rates (Lehrer et al. 2007; Lehrer, Lehrer, and Koss 2013; Schuster et al. 2016). For example, Schuster and colleagues found much higher preval- ence rates of sexual violence victimization over a twelve-month period (33.4 percent for women, 41.5 percent for men) as well as since the age of 14 1 (51.9 percent for women, 48 percent for men), than the rates found by Lehrer and colleagues (17 percent over the last twelve months and 31 percent since the age of 14 among women; 20 percent since the age of 14 among men). One possible explanation for these discrepancies may lie in the number of items used to assess victim- ization (Bolen and Scannapieco 1999; Cook et al. 2011; de Graaf and De Haas 2018; Fisher 2009). Lehrer and colleagues (2007) used five comprehensive items as- sessing attempted rape, rape using three different co- ercive strategies (physical force, verbal pressure, tak- ing advantage of the victim being unable to resist), and unwanted sexual contact (such as touching or kissing). For example, one item read “Someone forced me to have sex using physical force”, with response options “yes” and “no.” By contrast, Schuster and col- leagues (2016) used thirty-six highly specific items 1 Fourteen years is the legal age of consent for heterosexual activities in Chile. that combined three coercive strategies (use or threat of force, verbal pressure, exploitation of an incapacit- ated state), three relationship constellations (partner, acquaintance, stranger), and four specific sexual acts (touching, attempted intercourse, completed inter- course, other). Specifically, after a lead-in that spe- cified the coercion strategy (“Has a man ever made you – or tried to make you – have sexual contact with him against your will by threatening to use force or by harming you?”), several items specified both the relationship constellation and the specific sexual act (“My current or former partner in a steady relation- ship … to engage in sexual touching”) with response options “never”, “once”, “twice”, and “three or more times.” We will return to the implications of this huge discrepancy in item number and specificity in the dis- cussion section. 1 Research Questions and Hypotheses The present study represents the first wave of data collection (April 2018) within a five-year cross-sequen- tial panel survey on sexual violence at Pontificia Uni- versidad Católica de Chile (PUC) in Santiago. It will establish a baseline for the evaluation of future inter- ventions (which are not the subject of the present contribution). For present purposes, the main research questions concerned (1) assessing sexual violence vic- timization experiences among PUC undergraduates in a differentiated yet economical form, and (2) examin- ing how these experiences correlate with other vari- ables that potentially represent risk factors for or con- sequences of victimization. Although many analyses were exploratory, we did have a-priori hypotheses re- garding some correlations, which are outlined below where applicable. Established risk factors for sexual violence victimiza- tion addressed in the survey include the age of onset of sexual activity, the number of previous sexual part- ners (Krahé 2009; Leenaars, Dane, and Marini 2008; Mandoki and Burkhart 1989), and short-term mating orientation, which includes a preference for uncom- mitted sexual encounters (Perilloux, Duntley, and Buss 2011). All of these variables affect the likelihood of getting into high-risk social situations and exposure to potential perpetrators. Thus we hypothesized victim- ization to be positively correlated with number of IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 3 partners and short-term mating orientation, and neg- atively correlated with age of onset. Also, based on the majority of prior prevalence studies, we hypothe- sized that female students would report higher vic- timization rates than male students. We also considered a number of possible conse- quences deriving from sexual violence victimization. Thus, we hypothesized that victimization would be re- lated to increased fear of being victimized, and would negatively impact life in general, academic life, and self-assessed health. Such consequences of victimiza- tion have been frequently described (for example, Krug et al. 2002). Additionally, we examined how attitudinal variables might affect the perception of victimization experi- ences. Previous research has shown effects of ambiva- lent sexism and sexual aggression myths on the per- ception of a victimization experience (LeMaire, Os- wald, and Russell 2016). Ambivalent sexism (Glick and Fiske 1996) encompasses both hostile attitudes toward women and benevolent attitudes toward women, which may subjectively appear positive but also rein- force gender inequality (“women are good mothers”) (Jost and Kay 2005). Sexual aggression myths, which are prejudiced beliefs about sexual violence victimiza- tion (Burt 1980; Lonsway and Fitzgerald 1994; Gerger et al. 2007), have a wide range of negative conse- quences for victims of sexual violence, as they deny, downplay, or justify sexually aggressive behavior (Bohner et al. 2009). Indeed, the endorsement of sex- ual aggression myths may reduce the likelihood that a victim identifies their own victimization experience as rape, and the same has been demonstrated in relation to benevolent sexism (LeMaire, Oswald, and Russell 2016). We therefore hypothesized that both sexist atti- tudes and the acceptance of sexual aggression myths would be related to a perception that the conse- quences of victimization experiences are less negative. Further, we assessed two related general inter-group attitude variables, namely right-wing authoritarianism (RWA, Altemeyer 1998) and social dominance orienta- tion (SDO, Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, and Malle 1994). These are positively related to a wide range of unfavorable attitudes toward members of disadvan- taged groups, including sexism and homophobia (Ku- gler, Jost, and Noorbaloochi 2014; Süssenbach and Bohner 2011). It therefore seemed plausible that both RWA and SDO would also be related to a perception that the consequences of victimization experiences are less negative, which we explored in the current study. 2 Method The survey was conducted in April 2018, approxi- mately six weeks into the Chilean academic year, which starts in March. It assessed victimization, per- petration, bystander experiences, and related issues, such as knowledge, risk factors, attitudes, and beliefs regarding sexual violence. All undergraduate students at the university were invited by e-mail to participate. They were fully informed about the purpose of the survey, accessed through the online platform Ques- tionPro. Students who completed the survey were en- tered in a raffle of 150 gift cards worth 30,000 Chilean pesos (about 40 euros). To preserve respondents’ anonymity, the e-mail addresses are kept separate and are not accessible to researchers analyzing the data. After completing the survey, respondents re- ceived a debriefing message that included information on support for victims and bystanders of sexual vio- lence. All procedures were approved by PUC’s rele- vant ethics committee. 2.1 Respondents 2,046 undergraduate students took part in the survey. 2 They were from three cohorts (Year 1 = 792, Year 2 = 601, Year 3 = 653), and were between the ages of 18 and 51 years (M = 19.87, SD = 2.24, 95 percent between 18 and 23) 67.3 percent identified as female, 32.2 per- cent as male, and 0.5 percent as non-binary. 87.2 per- cent identified as heterosexual, 4.5 percent as lesbian or gay, 5.7 percent as bisexual, and 2.5 percent re- ported other sexual orientations. 98.4 percent of the respondents had Chilean nationality and 78.2 percent were still living with their parents. 2 In 2018, the total number of undergraduates enrolled at PUC was 26,197 (53.4 percent female). Of these, 5,306 were in Year 1, 4,820 in Year 2, and 4,346 in Year 3. IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 4 2.2 Materials 2.2.1 Victimization Experiences To avoid overburdening respondents with a long list of items, we adapted the SAV-S (Krahé and Berger 2013), which was also used by Schuster and colleagues (2016), condensing the specific information from their thirty-six items into three main items, each address- ing one coercive strategy. We did not at this stage provide specific items for each combination of rela- tionship constellation and sexual act within each co- ercive strategy. Otherwise, we used the same Spanish wording as Schuster and colleagues (2016).3 Respon- dents who reported at least one victimization experi- ence in the three main items were asked to give addi- tional details.4 The English wording of the victimization measure read as follows (Spanish text available from the first author): Please tell us if, during the last twelve months, one or several person/s has/have had sexual contact with you or attempted to do so (for example kissing, touching, co- itus, oral sex) against your will or without your consent by … (i) … threatening to use force or hurting you (for ex- ample, causing you pain because you were held or threatened). (ii) … taking advantage of you being unable to resist (for example, after you had consumed a lot of alcohol or drugs). (iii) … verbally pressuring you (for example, threatening to end the relationship or questioning your sexual com- petence). For each item there were three response options: “never,” “once,” and “more than once.” Respondents who reported at least one relevant experience were then asked further questions relating to the (latest) incident; all others moved on to the items described in the next section. For victims, eighteen items were used to assess details including the number of perpe- trators (“one,” “two,” or “more than two”); perpetrator gender (“male” or “female”); whether the victim al- ready knew the perpetrator (“yes” or “no”); what rela- 3 The authors would like to thank Isabell Schuster for pro- viding access to her materials. 4 In addition to the instruments reported in this section, the survey contained questions on well-being, management of stress, empathy, self-esteem, recognition and attiitudes con- doning sexually aggressive behavior, consent, and bystander behavior. These issues are outside of the scope of the present article. Unless stated otherwise, response options of scales were from 1 = “totally disagree” to 5 = “totally agree.” tionship the perpetrator had to the victim (for exam- ple partner, friend, university member); the level of ac- quaintance (1 = “not close at all” to 5 = “very close”); whether the incident occurred within a university context (for example on campus, during a student party, during a class assignment or excursion, “yes” or “no”); whether the respondent had told anybody about the incident (“yes,” “no,” or “prefer not to say”); if not, why not (twelve possible reasons such as “I didn’t think it was something serious” could be select- ed; see Table 1); for those who told someone about the incident, how the support received was perceived (1 = “not satisfactory at all” to 5 = “very satisfactory”); whether victim or perpetrator had consumed drugs or alcohol (“me,” “the other person,” “both,” “nobody”); how serious the incident was for the respondent (1 = “not serious at all” to 5 = “very serious”); whether it had negative consequences on the respondent’s (aca- demic) life (1 = “not at all” to 5 = “very much”); whether the respondent had thought of leaving the university (“yes” or “no”); and whether the respondent had received psychological help related to the inci- dent (“yes” or “no”). 2.2.2 Knowledge about and Satisfaction with University Policies and Protocols To assess how well students were informed about and satisfied with PUC policies relating to sexual violence, ten items addressed respondents’ familiarity with specific action protocols and university contact points, whether they knew whom to contact accord- ing to the circumstances (for example if the perpetra- tor was a fellow student, if the incident happened on campus, if the perpetrator was a professor), and how satisfied they were with support offered by the uni- versity. Internal consistency of the policy satisfaction scale was very high (Cronbach’s α = .90). 2.2.3 Sexual Experience Three items addressing sexual experience were adapted from Schuster and colleagues (2016): “Have you ever had sexual intercourse?” (“yes,” “no,” “do not wish to answer”); “At which age did you have your first sexual intercourse?” (drop-down list with options starting at “under 14” and increasing in one-year steps); and “With how many persons have you had IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 5 sexual intercourse during the past 12 months?” (“none,” “one,” “two,” “three,” “four,” “5 to 10,” “11 to 20,” “21 to 100,” “more than 100”). 2.2.4 Fear of Victimization On the basis of work by Ferraro (1996) and Merrill (2014), we formulated three items to measure fear of victimization (for example “I fear that a fellow student might sexually assault me”), and three items to mea- sure avoidance behaviors related to this fear (for ex- ample, “How often have you done the following? … Take different paths or routes on campus to avoid be- ing sexually assaulted”; 1 = “never or almost never” to 5 = “always or almost always”). These six items were adapted to the PUC context by incorporating key ele- ments that had come up in pilot discussions with stu- dents. Internal consistency for this scale was good (α = .84). 2.2.5 Short-Term Mating Orientation To assess short-term mating orientation, we selected two items from a measure by Jackson and Kirkpatrick (2007): “I can easily imagine myself being comfortable and enjoying ‘casual’ sex with different partners” and “I could easily imagine myself enjoying one night of sex with someone I would never see again”. Internal consistency for this scale was good (α = .84). 2.2.6 Health To explore the possibility that victimization experi- ences might affect respondents’ health status, two items addressing self-assessed health were taken from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Health Related Quality of Life Measure (CDC HRQOL-14, 2000, cited in Khan et al. 2014): “How would you describe your physical health?” and “How would you describe your state of mind?” (1 = “poor” to 5 = “excellent”). Internal consistency for the health condition scale was modest (α = .59). 2.2.7 Ambivalent Sexism To assess ambivalent sexism, six items from the Span- ish Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Mladinic et al. 1998) were selected on the basis of their factor loadings in a Chilean sample (Jiménez-Moya, Manzi, and Cheyre 2018). Three items each represented hostile sexism (for example, “Women exaggerate problems at work”) and benevolent sexism (for example, “Women should be cherished and protected by men”). Internal consis- tency for this scale was acceptable (α = .78). 2.2.8 Sexual Aggression Myths On the basis of expert analysis, six items from the Ac- ceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression scale (Gerger et al. 2007; Spanish version by Megías et al. 2011), were selected and adapted for use with a Chilean sample (for example, “Many women tend to exaggerate the problem of male violence”). Internal consistency for this scale was good (α = .81). 2.2.9 Conservative Attitudes Two items from the SDO7 scale (Ho et al. 2012; for ex- ample, “Some groups of people are simply inferior to other groups”) and two items from the RWA scale (Funke 2005; for example, “What our country really needs instead of more ‘civil rights’ is a good stiff dose of law and order”) were translated and adapted on the basis of their adequacy for the Chilean context and their fit within the survey, as previous research had shown that they were strongly linked to hostile be- havior. Internal consistencies for these scales were ac- ceptable (α = .70 for SDO and α = .67 for RWA). 3. Results 3.1 Prevalence Rates Overall, 18.7 percent of respondents reported at least one experience of nonconsensual sexual contact over the previous twelve months (4.3 percent by force or threat of force; 12.9 percent while unable to resist; 7.1 percent by verbal pressure; multiple answers were possible). Responses for the three coercive strategies were positively intercorrelated (rs ranging from .20 to .30; Cronbach’s alpha = .46). Women (22.9 percent) were victimized more frequently than men (9.7 per- cent). Taking sexual orientation into account, victim- ization was lowest for heterosexual men (8.2 percent), followed by homosexual women (15.2 percent) and homosexual men (17.0 percent). Among the group of males, the highest victimization rate was reported by bisexuals (19.2 percent). Heterosexual (22.6 percent) and bisexual women (30.6 percent) reported the high- est rates of victimization. IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 6 Among women, victimization rates were highest for Year 1 students (25.7 percent), intermediate for Year 2 (22.3 percent), and lowest for Year 3 (19.8 percent). This is a significant linear decrease from Y1 to Y3, χ2(1, N = 1367) = 4.71, p = .03. Among the men, no comparable trend emerged. In most cases, the perpetrators were male (88.9 per- cent) and known to the victim (72.1 percent); 24.4 per- cent were partners, and 35.5 percent were friends. In 57.1 percent of cases, both parties had consumed alco- hol, in 6.4 percent only the victim, and in 6.9 percent only the perpetrator. In 12.3 percent of the cases both parties had consumed other drugs, in 2.9 percent only the victim, and in 13.7 percent only the perpetrator. Alcohol or drugs were almost always involved when the victim was unable to resist (93.9 percent) but less frequently when the perpetrator used (threat of) force (51.2 percent) or verbal pressure (46.7 percent). When intoxication was involved (vs. not involved), the victim was less likely to know the perpetrator (66.7 percent vs. 89.0 percent). Only 10.8 percent of the reported cases occurred in a university context. Of interest, in- toxication was involved more frequently in university contexts (97.5 percent) than in other contexts (71.7 percent). At least 18.1 percent of reported perpetrators were university members,5 of whom 92 percent were fellow undergraduates. 3.2 Consequences of Victimization Although more than half of the victims (53.1 percent) rated the incident as at least “somewhat” severe, many did not perceive major negative consequences (see also Figure 1). A majority reported that the inci- dent had little or no impact on their personal life (57.7 percent) or on their academic life (81.2 percent) (Points 1 and 2 on a scale from 1 = “not at all” to 5 = “very much”). 16.2 percent of the victims reported having received psychological help and 19 percent had thought about leaving the university. 58.8 percent of the victims reported having told someone about the incident. In a majority of cases, they talked about the incident with friends (51.2 percent) and/or fellow students (31.4 percent), and the support received was 5 The item format with exclusive response options did not allow us to distinguish if perpetrators reported as friends, family members, etc. might also have been university mem- bers. rated as “rather satisfactory” in most cases. Very few victims had reported the incident to the police (2.4 percent) or to the university (2.9 percent), and those who had done so rated the support received as rather unsatisfactory. Figure 2 shows in detail whom victims told about the incident, and the associated level of satisfaction with the support received. The most common reasons for not reporting the in- cident were “I didn’t think it was something serious” (51.6 percent), “I didn’t know with whom or how I could talk about what happened” (39.8 percent), and “I couldn’t decide if it was appropriate or not” (39.1 percent). All reasons and their respective percentages are listed in Table 1. An exploratory analysis showed that respondents who had talked about the incident reported more severe consequences (M = 2.29) than did respondents who had not talked about it (M = 2.01), t(315.82) = 2.85, p = .005. Further, respondents who had experienced sexual violence (M = 2.80) were less satisfied with PUC policies on sexual violence than those who had not (M = 3.01), t(535.93) = -4.18, p < .001. We will return to these findings in the discus- sion. 3.2 Correlation and Regression Analyses on Risk Factors and Consequences In bivariate correlation analyses (see Table 2), the number of sex partners, short-term mating orienta- tion, age of onset of sexual activity, and the fact of be- ing sexually active were identified as significant corre- lates of sexual violence victimization, supporting our hypotheses regarding risk factors. Furthermore, as hy- pothesized, self-assessed health was negatively corre- lated, and reported fear of victimization was posi- tively correlated with victimization experiences. Atti- tudinal factors, such as sexist attitudes, acceptance of sexual aggression myths, and conservative attitudes, were all negatively correlated with victimization. As can be seen in Table 2, although significant, all of these correlations were small in magnitude. IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 7 Figure 1: Consequences of victimization by type of coercion Note: Percentage of victims by type of coercion who (i) rated the incident as at least “somewhat” severe (Points 3 to 5 on a scale from 1 = “not severe” to 5 = “very severe”), (ii) said the incident affected their personal lives at least “somewhat” (Points 3 to 5 on a scale from 1 = “not at all” to 5 = “very much”), (iii) said the incident negatively affected their academic lives at least “somewhat” (Points 3 to 5 on a scale from 1 = “not at all” to 5 = “very much ”), (iv) had thought of leaving the university (“yes” in a yes/no answer format), (v) or received psychological help (“yes” in a yes/no answer format). Type of coercion did not significantly affect the reporting of consequences. Figure 2: Communication of the incident and satisfaction with support Note: Percentage of victims who are not satisfied (darker bars) and at least somewhat satisfied (lighter bars) with the sup - port offered. The number of victims telling the incident to each specific target is shown in parentheses. For example, 195 victims told friends about the incident, and over 80 percent of these found the support given at least “somewhat” satisfac - tory (Points 3 to 5 on a scale from 1 = “not at all satisfactory” to 5 = “very satisfactory”). IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 8 Table 1: Reasons for not reporting sexual violence victimization Reason Percentage of vic- tims reporting this reason for not telling anybody I didn’t think it was something serious 51.6% I didn’t know with whom or how I could talk about what happened 39.8% I couldn’t decide if it was appropriate or not 39.1% I have/had an intimate or close relationship with the person responsible 38.3% The person responsible was somebody I liked/like 35.9% I felt that I provoked what happened to me 33.6% I am/was worried about what other people would think if I reported 32.8% I didn’t/don’t think that the perpetrator/s would suffer any kind of consequences 21.1% What happened to me was something common and accepted among my acquaintances 19.5% I didn’t/don’t think that I would receive the support I needed 15.6% I didn’t/don’t think that other people would believe me 11.7% The person responsible was in a powerful position and could have retaliated afterwards 3.9% Note: The reasons offered were based on previous research (Vanselow 2009; Woodzicka and LaFrance 2001). Table 2: Correlates of victimization Correlation with victimization Potential risk factors Number of sex partners .202** Short-term mating orientation .119** Being sexually active .063** Age of onset of sexual activity -.059* Potential consequences Health status -.119* Fear of victimization .225** Attitude variables Ambivalent sexist attitudes -.112** Acceptance of modern myths about sexual aggression -.096** Right-wing authoritarianism -.077** Social dominance orientation -.058** Note: ** p < .01 (2-tailed); * p < .05 (2-tailed). IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 9 We also conducted a multiple regression analysis with victimization as the dependent variable and the following predictors: respondent gender and age, number of sex partners, short-term mating orienta- tion, and age of onset of sexual activity (the main risk factors), as well as sexism, sexual aggression myths, RWA, and SDO (the attitudinal variables). This analy- sis yielded an overall R2 of .073, p < .001; in the same analysis, respondent gender (β = .15, p < .001), number of sex partners (β = .18, p < .001), and short-term mat- ing orientation (β = .06, p = .030) remained significant individual predictors, all other p > .30. Further significant negative correlations were found between the perceived consequences of victimization on the one hand, and ambivalent sexism, acceptance of sexual aggression myths, and conservative attitudes on the other (see Table 3). This means that, as hypoth- esized, respondents endorsing those attitudes were less likely to perceive experiences of sexual violence as having a severe impact on victims’ lives. Again, al- though significant, all correlations were small. A mul- tiple regression analysis that included all of the pre- dictors listed in Table 3 as well as respondent gender and age yielded an overall R2 of .121, p < .001; in the same analysis, respondent gender (β = .23, p < .001) and age (β = .14, p = .005) were significant individual predictors, but none of the attitudinal variables (all p > .08). 4 Discussion The purpose of the survey was to assess rates of prevalence of sexual violence victimization among un- dergraduates at Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile (PUC) and to identify correlates in terms of risk factors and personal consequences. We were also in- terested in attitudinal correlates that had been previ- ously identified as noteworthy with regard to sexual violence victimization and the perception of its conse- quences. Our analyses will support the planning of preventive measures at PUC. In general, the findings of our survey are compatible with previous research. Regarding prevalence, the re- sults resemble those obtained among students in Chile using shorter instruments (Lehrer et al. 2007), but differ considerably from the rates obtained by Schuster and colleagues (2016). As stated in the intro- duction, Schuster and colleagues used a much longer questionnaire, which could explain the very high rates of victimization reported in their study. Studies that have analyzed victimization rates in re- lation to questionnaire length usually report a positive correlation between the two variables (Bolen and Scannapieco 1999; de Graaf and De Haas 2018; Fisher 2009). It has been argued that instruments with multi- ple behaviorally specific items, such as the SAV-S, which yield the highest prevalence rates, are also the most valid (Cook et al. 2011). This may be true to the extent that such instruments are better at cueing spe- cific memories of incidents that a respondent may otherwise not have recalled or not labeled as sexual violence. However, we should also consider the possi- bility that a long, multi-item instrument may increase the reporting of false positives, as the content may subtly provide normative information about its topic (Schwarz 2007). Thus, a respondent going through thirty-six items that repeatedly ask if they have been sexually assaulted (combining three coercive strate- gies, three victim/perpetrator constellations, and four Table 3: Correlates of the consequences of victimization Correlation with perceived consequencesa Ambivalent sexist attitudes -.165** Acceptance of modern myths about sexual aggression -.167** RWA -.171** SDO -.189** Note: a Perceived severity of the incident, negative consequences on personal life, and negative consequences on academic life averaged into one scale (Cronbach’s α = .81). ** p < .01 (2-tailed). IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 10 sexual acts) may get the impression that it is norma- tively expected to have had such experiences – why else would such similar questions be asked over and over again? This could conceivably lead a respondent to tick a positive response option once or twice to comply with the perceived norm. Given that the true answer to each specific item is more likely to be “no” than “yes,” even random errors in responding (inad- vertently ticking the wrong response category) would systematically increase the number of false positives. In light of these considerations, we kept the number of items asking about whether the respondent had been victimized to three, but otherwise used the wording of the SAV-S. Nonetheless, the question of optimal questionnaire length and specificity needs further research. Our data also revealed important differences to the results of Schuster and colleagues (2016) regarding gender differences in victimization. Whereas they sur- prisingly found higher twelve-month prevalence rates for men (41.5 percent) than women (33.4 percent), in our study more than twice as many women (22.9 per- cent) than men (9.7 percent) reported victimization. Our finding is in line with previous studies also re- porting higher prevalence rates among females in stu- dent samples (Cantor et al. 2015). This highlights the gendered nature of sexual violence, which is widely recognized. The World Health Organization (2013) de- scribes sexual violence as a major public health prob- lem that violates the rights of women, limits their par- ticipation in society, and damages their health and well-being. Nevertheless, male college students also report relatively high rates of victimization (Cantor et al. 2015). This could also be observed in our findings. The most commonly reported coercive strategy was taking advantage of the victim being unable to resist, often facilitated by the use of alcohol or drugs. The use of these substances has been outlined as an im- portant risk factor (Abbey et al. 2004; Krahé and Berger, 2013), and this was also observed in our data: In most of the victimization cases reported, alcohol (and drugs to a lesser degree) was used by both victim and perpetrator. The role of intoxication was particu- larly pronounced for assaults in a university setting, those perpetrated by strangers, and those where the perpetrator(s) took advantage of the victim’s inability to resist. This points to the possibility that such inci- dents happened at parties or student gatherings, which are also the scenarios where sexual advances (especially from men toward women) are encouraged. As we hypothesized, significant correlations with health status (negative) and fear of victimization (pos- itive) point to consequences of victimization. These re- sults are in line with extensive literature (see Krug et al. 2002 for a review). Correlation and regression analyses also supported our hypotheses regarding risk factors for sexual victimization. Specifically, we identi- fied the number of sexual partners, the age of onset of sexual activity, being sexually active, and a short-term mating orientation as predictors of victimization. All these factors are associated with frequent sexual in- teractions, which increase the probability of encoun- tering a sexually coercive person and thus the risk of being victimized (see also Perilloux, Duntley, and Buss 2011). It should be noted, however, that in our data only respondent gender, number of sexual partners, and short-term mating orientation remained signifi- cant individual predictors when the other variables and age were controlled for in a multiple regression analysis. Certain groups were identified as being more vul- nerable than others. Specifically people with a sexual interest in men (heterosexual and bisexual women, bi- sexual and homosexual men) appear to be at higher risk than those with no such interest (homosexual women and heterosexual men). This suggests that prejudiced expectations and gender stereotypes might encourage coercive behaviors among men, and that men are more likely to misinterpret, disregard, or ig- nore cues regarding (non)consent in sexual interac- tions. According to Reed, Gupta, and Silverman (2014), regardless of the victim’s gender, male-perpe- trated sexual violence appears to be linked to gender norms that promote male dominance and control (for a multi-country study supporting this, see Fulu et al. 2013). Previous research has also shown a link be- tween acceptance of sexual aggression myths, tradi- tional gender roles, and hypermasculinity on the one hand, and sexual violence perpetration on the other hand (for a review, see Greathouse et al. 2015). One possible protective factor that emerged is the fact of being at university. The significant drop in IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 11 women’s reported victimization from Year 1 (where most of the reported experiences would have hap- pened before entering university) to Year 3 suggests that the university might be a safer environment than where students came from. But other factors could also explain the reported decrease in victimization. The change could reflect maturation and growth, rather than merely the fact of being at the university. Another consideration inconsistent with the idea of the university being a protective environment is that some activities commonly taking place in university contexts (such as parties, student gatherings) are also known as settings where sexual violence is more likely. In any case, it is inadvisable to draw definite conclusions from a trend based only on the first wave of a panel survey. Future waves, and the possibility of analyzing longitudinal data, should bring greater clar- ity. Negative correlations were observed between am- bivalent sexist attitudes, acceptance of modern myths about sexual aggression, RWA, and SDO on the one hand, and victimization experiences on the other. It is possible that victimization experiences change attitu- dinal dispositions toward sexual violence and may also decrease unfavorable group-related attitudes. The fact of being directly confronted with sexual violence, which is very often counter-stereotypical (for example the perpetrator is not a stranger and the coercive strategy is not physical force), reduces rape-related stereotypes (see Bohner 1998). Conversely, students who have never experienced sexual violence may be more likely to enjoy the “illusion of invulnerability” that comes with high levels of rape myth acceptance and, to a lesser extent, conservative attitudes (Bohner, Siebler, and Raaijmakers 1999; Bohner et al. 1993). This highlights the importance of communicating vic- timization experiences, in order to give people a sense of how widespread sexual violence really is and what it actually looks like. However, further research is needed to replicate the correlations discussed here, given that their magnitude was small and regression analysis showed that they may be explained by inter- correlations with other variables such as sexual expe- rience, gender, or age. The attitudinal variables were also negatively corre- lated with perceived consequences of victimization, where they jointly (but not individually) predicted a small proportion of variance. Victims who scored higher on sexist attitudes, acceptance of sexual ag- gression myths, RWA, and SDO reported that they perceived the consequences of victimization as less se- vere. The endorsement of such attitudes appears to normalize coercive behaviors, reducing the willingness to acknowledge their severity (Papendick and Bohner 2017). This complements results by LeMaire and col- leagues (2016), who found that endorsement of benev- olent sexism and sexual aggression myths reduces the likelihood that a person will label their victimization experience as rape. Our results point to the possibility that this link between attitudes and labeling a victim- ization experience as rape might be mediated by a vic- tim’s perception of the consequences associated with that experience as less severe. Nonetheless, further re- search is needed to explore the underlying causal process. Our results highlight the relevance of identifying factors that may lead victims to underestimate the personal consequences of sexual violence, which seems to occur frequently. Although most victims of sexual violence in our sample reported that the inci- dent did not have much impact on their personal life, we also found that sexual violence experiences were associated with judgments of poorer health and an in- creased fear of victimization. We suspect that atti- tudes that legitimate sexual violence and, more gener- ally, conservative attitudes may prevent respondents from consciously linking their experiences of sexual violence with negative consequences, even though these consequences exist. Furthermore, the perceived consequences of the in- cident seem to have an effect on the willingness of the victim to talk about it, as respondents who perceived milder consequences were less likely to talk about the incident to others. Indeed, the most common reason for not reporting a victimization experience was thinking that it was not something serious. Most victims preferred to talk about the incident with friends or family, rather than reporting it to uni- versity or public authorities. It should be of special in - terest for PUC that out of the minority (2.9 percent) who reported a victimization experience to the univer- sity, more than two-thirds were dissatisfied with the IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 12 support received. One reason for this high level of dis- satisfaction could be that university policies were in their first year of implementation when the data were collected, and may have been limited in their effec- tiveness. Additionally, during data collection, the local feminist movement, in which many female students were participating, was asserting that Chilean univer- sities’ efforts to address sexual violence within their institutions were inadequate. This perception may have been especially salient to victims who had had direct experience of the existing institutional support. However, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions from the satisfaction data, as our data also show that the less severe assault cases were shared mostly with friends, whereas only the more severe cases were re- ported to authorities, and talking to friends may gen- erally be a more gratifying experience than talking to strangers. Further data on this issue should be gath- ered in future waves of the panel survey; also, in- depth interviews with service users may provide a clearer picture of future needs. 4.1 Strengths and Limitations One major strength of the current study is that it was possible to invite all undergraduates at PUC to partic- ipate, and a substantial proportion did so (more than 14 percent of students in Years 1 to 3). As the first analysis in a five-year cross-sequential study, it marks the starting point of the largest assessment of sexual violence ever conducted in the Chilean university con- text. We note that female students appear to be over-rep- resented in the sample. The same may be true for peo- ple who have been victimized: the topic of the survey may have attracted students who felt a need to report their own experience. Another obvious limitation at the current stage is that only cross-sectional, correla- tional data are available, which means that any causal interpretations must be treated with caution. Also, considerations of research economy demanded that many constructs be assessed with very short versions of existing instruments, which means that reliability may have been compromised. On the other hand, the adequate participation rate suggests that the survey instrument was not too large. 4.2 Open Questions and Outlook As discussed above, one tricky issue that merits fur- ther attention is the optimal length and specificity of the victimization part of the survey. This issue needs to be addressed in order to explain the diverging find- ings for Chilean prevalence rates (especially between the present study and Schuster et al. 2016). New theo- rizing and specific methodological studies will be needed to tackle the question of potential under- and over-reporting. References Abbey, Antonia, Tina Zawacki, Philip O. Buck, A. Monique Clinton, and Pam McAuslan. 2004. Sexual Assault and Al- cohol Consumption: What Do We Know About Their Re- lationship and What Types of Research Are Still Needed? Aggression and Violent Behavior 9 (3): 271–303. doi:10.1016/S1359-1789(03)00011-9 Altemeyer, Bob. 1998. The Other “Authoritarian Personal- ity.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 30:47–92. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2 Bartlett, John. 2018. Chile’s #MeToo Moment: Students Protest Against Sexual Harassment. Guardian (Interna- tional Edition), July 9. https://www.theguardian.com/ world/2018/jul/09/chile-metoo-sexual-harassment-uni- versities BBC News. 2018. Sweden Approves New Law Recognising Sex Without Consent as Rape. BBC News, May 18. www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44230786 Bohner, Gerd. 1998. Vergewaltigungsmythen: Sozialpsycholo- gische Untersuchungen über täterentlastende und opfer- feindliche Überzeugungen im Bereich sexueller Gewalt. Landau, Germany: Verlag Empirische Pädagogik. Bohner, Gerd, Friederike Eyssel, Afroditi Pina, Frank Siebler, and Tendayi Viki. 2009. Rape Myth Acceptance: Cognit- ive, Affective, and Behavioural Effects of Beliefs that Blame the Victim and Exonerate the Perpetrator. In Rape: Challenging Contemporary Thinking, ed. Miranda Hor- vath and Jennifer Brown, 17–45. Cullompton, UK: Willan. Bohner, Gerd, Frank Siebler, and Yvonne Raaijmakers. 1999. Salience of Rape Affects Self-esteem: Individual Versus Collective Self-aspects. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 2 (2): 191–99. doi:10.1177/1368430299022006 Bohner, Gerd, Christina Weisbrod, Paula Raymond, Alexan- dra Barzvi, and Norbert Schwarz. 1993. Salience of Rape Affects Self-esteem: The Moderating Role of Gender and Rape Myth Acceptance. European Journal of Social Psy- chology 23 (6): 561–79. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420230603 Bolen, Rebecca, and Maria Scannapieco. 1999. Prevalence of Child Sexual Abuse: A Corrective Metanalysis. Social Ser- vice Review 73 (3): 281–313. doi:10.1086/514425 Burt, Martha R. 1980. Cultural Myths and Supports for Rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38 (2): 217–30. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.38.2.217 Cantor, David, Bonnie Fisher, Susan Chibnall, Reanne Towsend, Hyunshik Lee, Carol Bruce, and Gail Thomas. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44230786 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/09/chile-metoo-sexual-harassment-universities https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/09/chile-metoo-sexual-harassment-universities https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/09/chile-metoo-sexual-harassment-universities IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 13 2015. Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sex- ual Assault and Sexual Misconduct. Rockville, MD: Westat. https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Key- Issues/Campus-Safety/AAU-Campus-Climate-Survey-FI- NAL-10-20-17.pdf Cook, Sarah L., Christine A. Gidycz, Mary P. Koss, and Megan Murphy. 2011. Emerging Issues in the Measure- ment of Rape Victimization. Violence Against Women 17 (2): 201–18. doi:10.1177/1077801210397741 de Graaf, Hanneke, and Stans De Haas. 2018. The Effect of Behavioural Specificity of Survey Items on Survey Re- spondents’ Disclosure of Sexual Victimisation. Journal of Gender-Based Violence 2 (2): 351–71. doi:10.1332/239868018X15263881729733 Ferraro, Kenneth. 1996. Women’s Fear of Victimization: Shadow of Sexual Assault? Social Forces 75 (2): 667–90. doi:10.1093/sf/75.2.667 Fisher, Bonnie. 2009. The Effects of Survey Question Word- ing on Rape Estimates: Evidence from a Quasi-Experi- mental Design. Violence Against Women 15 (2): 133–47. doi:10.1177/1077801208329391 Fulu, Emma, Rachel Jewkes, Tim Roselli, and Claudia Gar- cia-Moreno. 2013. Prevalence of and Factors Associated with Male Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the UN Multi-country Cross-sectional Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific. Lancet Global Health 1 (4): 187–207. doi:10.1016/S2214- 109X(13)70074-3 Funke, Friedrich. 2005. The Dimensionality of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism: Lessons from the Dilemma between Theory and Measurement. Political Psychology 26 (2): 195–218. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00415.x Gerger, Heike, Hanna Kley, Gerd Bohner, and Frank Siebler. 2007. The Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Ag- gression Scale: Development and Validation in German and English. Aggressive Behavior 33 (5): 422–40. doi:10.1002/ab.20195 Glick, Peter, and Susan Fiske. 1996. The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sex- ism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (3): 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491 Greathouse, Sarah M., Jessica Saunders, Miriam Matthews, Kirsten M. Keller, and Laura L. Miller. 2015. A Review of the Literature on Sexual Assault Perpetrator Characteristics and Behaviors. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/ research_reports/RR1000/RR1082/RAND_RR1082.pdf Ho, Arnold K., Jim Sidanius, Felicia Pratto, Shana Levin, Lotte Thomsen, Nour Kteily, and Jennifer Sheehy-Skeffin- gton. 2012. Social Dominance Orientation: Revisiting the Structure and Function of a Variable Predicting Social and Political Attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 38 (5): 583–606. doi:10.1177/0146167211432765 Jackson, Jenée J., and Lee A. Kirkpatrick. 2007. The Structure and Measurement of Human Mating Strategies: Toward a Multidimensional Model of Sociosexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior 28 (6): 382–91. doi:10.1016/j.evol- humbehav.2007.04.005 Jiménez-Moya, Gloria, Jorge Manzi, and Manuel Cheyre. 2018. Encarar o callar: ¿Cómo se percibe a las mujeres que confrontan discriminación? Santiago de Chile: MIDE. Re- search Report. https://www.mideuc.cl/wp-content/up- loads/2018/MidEvidencias-N16.pdf Jost, John T., and Aaron C. Kay. 2005. Exposure to Benevo- lent Sexism and Complementary Gender Stereotypes: Consequences for Specific and Diffuse Forms of System Justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88 (3): 498–509. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498 Khan, Sammyh S., Nick Hopkins, Shruti Tewari, Narayanan Srinivasan, Stephen D. Reicher, and Gozde Ozakinci. 2014. Efficacy and Well-Being in Rural North India: The Role of Social Identification with a Large-Scale Commu- nity Identity. European Journal of Social Psychology 44 (7): 787–98. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2060 Khomami, Nadia. 2017. #MeToo: How a Hashtag Became a Rallying Cry Against Sexual Harassment. Guardian (In- ternational Edition), October 20. https://www.the- guardian.com/world/2017/oct/20/women-worldwide-use- hashtag-metoo-against-sexual-harassment Krahé, Barbara. 2009. Sexuelle Aggression und Opfererfah- rung unter Jugendlichen und jungen Erwachsenen. Psy- chologische Rundschau 60 (3): 173–83. doi:10.1026/0033- 3042.60.3.173 Krahé, Barbara, and Anja Berger. 2013. Men and Women as Perpetrators and Victims of Sexual Aggression in Hetero- sexual and Same‐Sex Encounters: A Study of First‐Year College Students in Germany. Aggressive Behavior 39 (5): 391–404. doi:10.1002/ab.21482 Krug, Etienne G., Linda L. Dahlberg, James A. Mercy, An- thony B. Zwi, and Rafael Lozano. 2002. World Report on Violence and Health. Geneva: World Health Organization. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/ 2002/9241545615_eng.pdf Kugler, Matthew, John Jost, and Sharareh Noorbaloochi. 2014. Another Look at Moral Foundations Theory: Do Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation Ex- plain Liberal-Conservative Differences in “Moral” Intu- itions? Social Justice Research 27 (4): 413–31. doi:10.1007/ s11211-014-0223-5 Leenaars, Lindsey S., Andrew V. Dane, and Zopito A. Marini. 2008. Evolutionary Perspective on Indirect Victimization in Adolescence: The Role of Attractiveness, Dating and Sexual Behavior. Aggressive Behavior 34 (4): 404–15. doi:10.1002/ab.20252. Lehrer, Jocelyn A., Evelyn Lehrer, and Mary Koss. 2013. Un- wanted Sexual Experiences in Young Men: Evidence from a Survey of University Students in Chile. Archives of Sex- ual Behavior 42 (2): 213–23. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-0004-x Lehrer, Jocelyn A., Vivian L. Lehrer, Evelyn L. Lehrer, and Pamela B. Oyarzún. 2007. Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Sexual Victimization in College Women in Chile. In- ternational Family Planning Perspectives 33 (4): 168–75. doi:10.1363/ifpp.33.168.07. LeMaire, Kelly. L., Debra Oswald, and Brenda Russell. 2016. Labeling Sexual Victimization Experiences: The Role of Sexism, Rape Myth Acceptance, and Tolerance for Sexual Harassment. Violence and Victims 31 (2): 332–46. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-13-00148 Lonsway, Kimberly A., and Louise F. Fitzgerald. 1994. Rape Myths: In Review. Psychology of Women Quarterly 18 (2): 133–64. doi:1 0.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb00448.x http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2002/9241545615_eng.pdf http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2002/9241545615_eng.pdf https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/20/women-worldwide-use-hashtag-metoo-against-sexual-harassment https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/20/women-worldwide-use-hashtag-metoo-against-sexual-harassment https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/20/women-worldwide-use-hashtag-metoo-against-sexual-harassment https://www.mideuc.cl/wp-content/uploads/2018/MidEvidencias-N16.pdf https://www.mideuc.cl/wp-content/uploads/2018/MidEvidencias-N16.pdf https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1000/RR1082/RAND_RR1082.pdf https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1000/RR1082/RAND_RR1082.pdf https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Key-Issues/Campus-Safety/AAU-Campus-Climate-Survey-FINAL-10-20-17.pdf https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Key-Issues/Campus-Safety/AAU-Campus-Climate-Survey-FINAL-10-20-17.pdf https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Key-Issues/Campus-Safety/AAU-Campus-Climate-Survey-FINAL-10-20-17.pdf IJCV: Vol. 14(1)/2020 Saldarriaga, Rocha, Castro, Jiménez-Moya, Carvacho, Bohner : Sexual Violence Victimization 14 Mandoki, Catalina A., and Barry R. Burkhart. 1989. Sexual Victimization: Is There a Vicious Cycle? Violence and Vic- tims 4 (3): 179–90. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.4.3.179 Megías, Jesús L., Mónica Romero-Sánchez, Mercedes Durán, Miguel Moya, and Gerd Bohner. 2011. Spanish Validation of the Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Ag- gression Scale (AMMSA). Spanish Journal of Psychology 14 (2): 912–25. doi:10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n2.37 Merrill, Monica. 2014. Defensive Behaviors on College Cam- puses: The Role of Fear, Perceived Risk, Perceived Motiva- tion and Past Exposure to Sexual Victimization. Ph.D. diss., University of Akron, OH. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!et- d.send_file?accession=akron1404217382&disposition=at- tachment Mladinic, Antonio, José L. Saiz, Marcela Díaz, Antonio Orte- ga. and Paola Oyarce. 1998. Sexismo Ambivalente en Estudiantes Universitarios Chilenos: Teoría, Medición y Diferencias de Género. Revista de Psicología Social y Personalidad 14 (1): 1–14. Papendick, Michael, and Gerd Bohner. 2017. Passive Victim – Strong Survivor? Perceived Meaning of Labels Applied to Women Who Were Raped. Plos One 12 (5): e177550. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177550 Perilloux, Carin, Joshua D. Duntley, and David M. Buss. 2011. Susceptibility to Sexual Victimization and Women’s Mating Strategies. Personality and Individual Differences 51 (6): 783–86. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.032 Pratto, Felicia, Jim Sidanius, Lisa M. Stallworth, and Bertram F. Malle. 1994. Social Dominance Orientation: A Personality Variable Predicting Social and Political Atti- tudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67 (4): 741–63. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741 Reed, Elizabeth, Jhumka Gupta, and Jay G. Silverman. 2014. Understanding Sexual Violence Perpetration [letter to the editor]. JAMA Pediatrics 168 (6): 581–82. doi:10.1001/ jamapediatrics.2013.5408 Schuster, Isabell, Barbara Krahé, Paola Ilabaca Baeza, and José A. Muñoz-Reyes. 2016. Sexual Aggression Victimiza- tion and Perpetration among Male and Female College Students in Chile. Frontiers in Psychology 7:1–12 doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01354 Schuster, Isabell, and Barbara Krahé. 2019. Prevalence of Sexual Aggression Victimization and Perpetration in Chile: A Systematic Review. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse 20 (2): 229–44. doi:10.1177/1524838017697307 Schwarz, Norbert. 2007. Cognitive Aspects of Survey Methodology. Applied Cognitive Psychology 21 (2): 277– 87. doi:10.1002/acp.1340 Sepúlveda-Garrido, Paulina. 2018. #MeToo, un año después. La Tercera (Chile), September 23. https://www.latercera.com/tendencias/noticia/metoo- ano-despues/327541/ Süssenbach, Philipp, and Gerd Bohner. 2011. Acceptance of Sexual Aggression Myths in a Representative Sample of German Residents. Aggressive Behavior 37 (4): 374–85. doi:10.1002/ab.20390 Vanselow, Nina. 2009. Of Beauties, Beaus and Beasts: Study- ing Women’s and Men’s Actual and Imagined Experiences of Sexual and Gender Harassment. Ph.D. diss., Bielefeld University. Woodzicka, Julie A., and Marianne LaFrance. 2001. Real Ver- sus Imagined Gender Harassment. Journal of Social Issues 57 (1): 15–30. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00199 World Health Organization. 2013. Global and Regional Esti- mates of Violence against Women: Prevalence and Health Effects of Intimate Partner Violence and Non-partner Sex- ual Violence. Geneva, WHO Press. https://apps.who.int/ iris/bitstream/handle/10665/85239/9789241564625_en- g.pdf https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/85239/9789241564625_eng.pdf https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/85239/9789241564625_eng.pdf https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/85239/9789241564625_eng.pdf https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/85239/9789241564625_eng.pdf https://www.latercera.com/tendencias/noticia/metoo-ano-despues/327541/ https://www.latercera.com/tendencias/noticia/metoo-ano-despues/327541/ https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=akron1404217382&disposition=attachment https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=akron1404217382&disposition=attachment https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=akron1404217382&disposition=attachment