Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 24:569–587, 2015

Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 1092-6771 print/1545-083X online
DOI: 10.1080/10926771.2015.1029179

RESEARCH ON PERCEPTIONS OF RAPE

The Media’s Sexual Objectification of Women,

Rape Myth Acceptance, and Interpersonal
Violence

KAYLEE VANCE
Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA

MEGAN SUTTER and PAUL B. PERRIN

Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA

MARTIN HEESACKER
Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA

A new trend has emerged in print advertisements by which

women’s bodies are literally morphed into objects. This study begins
to explore this phenomenon by examining the effects of viewing
these types of advertisements on attitudes toward rape and vio-
lence, as well as rape likelihood. In addition, this study examined
the degree to which moral disengagement and dehumanization
influences rape likelihood through rape myth acceptance. Three
hundred eighty participants viewed 1 of 3 conditions—control, sex-
ual objectification of women, or women as objects—and then filled
out a number of questionnaires to assess their rape myth accep-
tance, acceptance of interpersonal violence, rape likelihood, and
moral disengagement. Results indicated that although viewing sex-
ually objectified women in advertising did not increase any of the
dependent variables for individuals in the experimental conditions
compared to the control condition, there was a main effect of sex
for several dependent measures, as well as a full mediation of moral
disengagement and rape likelihood by rape myth acceptance in

Received 21 April 2014; revised 23 November 2014; accepted 23 January 2015.

Address correspondence to Paul B. Perrin, Department of Psychology, Virginia
Commonwealth University, 808 West Franklin St., Room 201, P.O. Box 842018, Richmond,
VA 23284-2018. E-mail: pperrin@vcu.edu

569
570 K. Vance et al.

male participants. These findings suggest that education aimed at

correcting men’s endorsement of rape myths might be a key path-
way to decreasing rape likelihood. Despite these conclusions, this
study’s primary limitation was that it was conducted with collegiate
participants with an unequal gender distribution.

KEYWORDS advertisements, assault, gender, undergraduate

students

There is no doubt that sex sells. In Western culture, the advertising industry
has found great success in using the sexual exposure and objectification of
women as a vehicle for selling consumer products (Hennessy, 2000). Women
are depicted draped over cars, evocatively posing to sell bottles of perfume,
scantily clad to model clothing, and seductively biting into a chocolate bar.
Recently, a new trend in advertising has emerged in which women’s bodies
have become morphed literally into objects (Guthrie, 2007). These increasing
levels of objectification pose the question of what effect objectifying women
in advertising has on people’s real-life perceptions of women.

OBJECTIFYING ADVERTISEMENTS

An extensive body of research has documented the sexual objectification of

women, much of which was detailed in a comprehensive report on sexual
objectification by Fredrickson and Roberts (1997). These authors define sex-
ual objectification as the reduction of a woman to her body, body parts, or
sexual function, which are consequently viewed as instruments or as repre-
senting her entirely. The sexual objectification of women in the media is a
significant area of study because the average individual is exposed to approx-
imately 3,000 advertisements every day (Kilbourne, 1999). Stankiewicz and
Rosselli (2008) examined 1,988 advertisements in 58 U.S. magazines and
found that across all magazine categories (men’s, women’s, news and busi-
ness, entertainment, teen, and special interest), 50% of advertisements with
women portrayed them as sex objects. This number increased to 75% in
men’s magazines and 67% in women’s fashion magazines and adolescent
girls’ magazines. Similarly, this trend has increased within the last 40 years
in Vogue and Gentlemen’s Quarterly (Thompson, 2000), two of the leading
women’s fashion and men’s magazines in the United States today. Indeed,
the objectification of women in advertisements exists worldwide (Nelson &
Paek, 2005).
One way in which sexual objectification appears in the media is through
the male sexual gaze, which occurs when a man looks at a woman, usually
unreciprocated and unwanted, and often with the purpose of sexualizing
 Objectification 571

her (Kaschak, 1992). Often, the media portrays women in advertisements as

looking away from a man, which Goffman (1979) referred to as the anchored
drift. Media that portrays a woman as an object or separates her into parts
sends the message to its viewers that this sexual gaze is permissible and
even encouraged, and therefore, the objectification of the woman is as well
(Goffman, 1979).
Sexual objectification of women in print advertisements is also evi-
dent when a woman is portrayed evocatively posed and clothed in a
seductive manner, if clothed at all. In addition, sexually objectifying adver-
tisements tend to focus on the woman’s body or parts of her body,
excluding her face completely, producing an even greater emphasis on sex-
ual objectification (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). To further lend evidence
to sexual objectification theory, men are generally depicted in advertise-
ments with more facial detail and facial emphasis than women, whose bodies
are more the focus (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). A distinct way in which
advertisements can degrade women is when they are depicted as objects
(Kilbourne & Jhally, 2000). Kilbourne and Jhally (2000) argued that through
such images, women’s bodies lose value and become on par with trivial
objects such as a pair of scissors.
In terms of race and ethnicity, the objectification changes slightly, with
African American women portrayed as having the least facial prominence of
all demographic groups (Zuckerman & Kieffer, 1994) and more frequently
depicted as animals, as compared to other groups (Cowan, 1995; Leindholdt,
1983). Asian American women are more frequently depicted as exotic and
subservient, as compared to other groups (Root, 1995).

DEHUMANIZATION AND MORAL DISENGAGEMENT

People who view women as objects or as less than human are likely
to excuse treating them as less than human through emotional abuse,
physical violence, and rape (Ohbuchi, Ikeda, & Takeuchi, 1994; Zillman
& Bryant, 1984). Excusing one’s actions in this way is termed moral
disengagement, which occurs when an individual disengages his or her
moral self-sanctions from inhumane actions (Bandura, 2002a). Moral self-
sanctions begin to develop at an early age through normal socialization and
govern individuals’ actions, prohibiting people from acting against social
norms that would create feelings of self-condemnation (Bandura, 1999).
However, because individuals sometimes act against their self-sanctions,
they develop methods of reducing the shame incurred by these infringe-
ments. Bandura (2002a) discussed a variety of these methods, but the method
perhaps most pertinent to the objectification of women is dehumanization.
Dehumanization occurs when individuals attempt to ease the guilt and dis-
comfort of victimizing another person by lowering that individual to a state
572 K. Vance et al.

of subhumanity (Bandura, 2002a). Individuals might do this by attributing

animal-like qualities to their victim or perceiving their victim as a savage or
brute (McAlister, Bandura, & Owen, 2006).
This method of moral disengagement also mediates the link between
pornography and an increased tolerance of sexual aggression toward women
by dehumanizing them (Ohbuchi et al., 1994; Zillman & Bryant, 1984).
Pornography was defined by Longino (1980) as “sexually explicit material
that represents or describes degrading or abusive sexual behavior so as to
endorse and/or recommend the behavior as described” (p. 44). Indeed, some
advertisers push the boundary that separates sexually appealing advertise-
ments from pornography (Gould, 1994). As advertisements begin to mimic
the objectification of women found in pornography, they threaten to inten-
sify the association between viewing these images and accepting or acting
on sexual aggression, as the research shows with pornography (Ohbuchi
et al., 1994; Zillman & Bryant, 1984).

VIOLENCE AND OBJECTIFICATION

There are many potential consequences of viewing media depicting the

objectification of women. In a study by Lanis and Covell (1995), male partic-
ipants who viewed print advertisements sexually objectifying women scored
higher than controls on sex-role stereotypes and rape myth beliefs, and they
were more accepting of interpersonal violence. This is surprising because
sexual assault statistics show that one quarter of college women are victims
of rape or attempted rape (Brener, McMahon, Warren, & Douglas, 1999). The
identification of factors that influence the perpetuation of sexual assault is
essential to implementing prevention of this phenomenon.
Exposure to various media content that portrays the sexual
objectification of women is associated with normalization of violence toward
women. Lee, Hust, Zhang, and Zhang (2011) exposed individuals to either
sexually violent, physically violent, or nonviolent television clips, and found
that male participants perceived the most enjoyment in the sexually violent
clips compared to the other conditions. Social cognitive theory (Bandura,
2002b) posits that people can learn values vicariously through symbolic
environments, such as media content (Weaver, Graber, McCombs, & Eyal,
1981). When the objectification of women becomes commonplace, this
could increase the perception that sexual violence is justifiable (Berkowitz,
Burkhart, & Bourg, 1994). Ward and Friedman (2006) found individuals
who watched objectifying content in television sitcoms were more likely to
endorse women as objects compared to controls. Further, men who watched
movies in which women were objectified were more likely to believe that
the victim of sexual assault did not suffer (Milburn, Mather, & Conrad, 2000).
 Objectification 573

Sexual objectification of women and toleration of men’s use of force for

sexual conquest are generally seen as a result of a cultural climate of attitudes
and beliefs of rape acceptance (Berkowitz, 1992; Burt, 1980; Kanin, 1985).
Through these norms, women are viewed as more responsible for their own
victimization, for example, by wearing sexy clothing (Edmonds & Cahoon,
1986). Loh, Gidycz, Lobo, and Luthra (2005) found men’s adversarial beliefs
about relationships between men and women predicted sexual aggression,
and traditional gender roles were associated with sexual aggression. This
suggests that sexually aggressive men might view a role of men to be to
persuade women into engaging in sex.

PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF SEXUAL OBJECTIFICATION

Women might internalize objectification when society and culture socialize

them to believe that their bodies are no more than objects (Fredrickson
& Roberts, 1997), which can have myriad negative psychological conse-
quences. For instance, anxiety can result from the physical or sexual threat
often imposed on an objectified woman (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997).
Further, women experience body shame when they feel they fail to live
up to a false model of perfection and sexual beauty (Grabe, Hyde, &
Lindberg, 2007). Objectifying advertisements also affect women’s mood and
body satisfaction (Tiggemann & McGill, 2004), appearance anxiety, and body
shame (Monro & Huon, 2005), and even performance on gender-stereotyped
activities such as math and verbal questions (Davies, Spencer, Quinn, &
Gerhardstein, 2002).

THIS STUDY

The purpose of this study was to take the previous research a step further,
examining not only the effects of viewing sexually objectifying print adver-
tisements on men and women, but also the new and emerging trend in print
advertisements of morphing women’s bodies literally into objects. This study
examined the extent to which these conditions affected participants’ inferred
excusal of sexual aggression through the following constructs: acceptance
of interpersonal violence, rape myth acceptance, adversarial sexual belief
endorsement, rape likelihood, and moral disengagement. In addition,
this study also examined the degree to which moral disengagement and
dehumanization influence rape likelihood through rape myth acceptance.
To achieve this aim, the study used the cover story that the research
involved the study of drunk driving. Accordingly, this study contains three
hypotheses: (a) Males and females who are exposed to advertisements
that depict women as objects, whether explicitly or inferred, will be more
574 K. Vance et al.

likely than individuals in the control condition to excuse sexual aggression;

(b) these effects will be stronger for men than for women; and (c) the
relationship between moral disengagement and rape likelihood will be
mediated by rape myth acceptance.

METHOD
Participants
The researchers sent recruitment emails to instructors at a large southeastern
university who taught courses in sociology, psychology, and family, youth,
and community sciences. Some instructors offered their students extra credit
for completing the survey. Four hundred eighty-four undergraduate students
participated overall. Eighty-nine participants were excluded because they
responded to less than 90% of the study items. The university’s institutional
review board required that a debriefing process occur by which participants
were informed about the hypothesis for the experiment and its true objec-
tives (given the use of deception), as well as allowed to withdraw their data.
This resulted in the exclusion of an additional 15 participants because they
did not wish to have their data analyzed after learning the study’s true pur-
pose. Therefore, from among the 484 participants collected, 380 were valid
for analysis.
Most participants responded to every demographic question, provid-
ing the following sample profile: 88 males, 282 females, and 10 missing;
351 heterosexual, 12 homosexual, 6 bisexual, 2 identifying as “other,” and
9 were missing; 63 African Americans, 66 Hispanic or White, 5 Hispanic
Black, 31 Asian American/Pacific Islander, 178 White or Caucasian, 18 mul-
tiracial, 7 who marked “other,” and 12 missing. Participants were allowed
to choose more than one category for socioeconomic status, and they
were distributed as follows: 9 upper class, 119 upper middle class, three
upper middle to middle class, 179 middle class, 6 middle class or work-
ing class, 46 working class, 1 working class to lower class, 7 lower class,
and 10 missing. The following religious demographic sample profile also
emerged: 138 Christian Catholic; 109 Christian, Protestant, or nondenomi-
national; 2 Jehovah’s Witness; 19 Jewish; 3 Hindu, 4 Muslim, 4 Buddhist;
30 agnostic; 14 atheist; 44 who marked “other”; and 13 missing. The average
age for participants was 19.65 years (SD = 1.96, range = 17–34).

Materials and Measures

PRINT ADVERTISEMENTS

Advertisements were grouped into three categories: (a) control, (b) sexual
objectification of women, and (c) women as objects. Both experimental
 Objectification 575

groups (conditions b and c) contained five control advertisements and

five experimental advertisements. Control advertisements included neutral
advertisements for cars or alcohol that had no women depicted. Print
advertisements depicting the sexual objectification of women (condition b)
included advertisements that portrayed women in roles that were sexually
objectifying in which they are evocatively posed and clothed in a seduc-
tive manner. Print advertisements depicting women as objects (condition
c) included advertisements that portrayed women as morphed into objects,
such as a female figure represented as the shape of a beer bottle. In line with
the previous research on sexual objectification in print media, advertisements
for the sexual objectification condition were selected based on the pose or
presentation of the woman in a seductive manner. To differentiate the sec-
ond experimental condition, which goes beyond mere sexual objectification,
advertisements were selected if a part of a woman was portrayed as an
object. The control condition criteria were an advertisement for a car or alco-
hol product without a sexual image or a woman present. All advertisements
were either for alcohol or cars to maintain the cover story that the research
involved the study of drunk driving. All the women in the advertisements
were White so as not to confound the research variables with race.

DRUNK-DRIVING BEHAVIOR QUESTIONNAIRE

This scale was created for this study to help create a cover story and produce
a time lag between viewing the conditions and completing the questionnaires
(Mitchell & James, 2001). The drunk-driving questionnaire is not valid for
analysis and was not analyzed in this study.

ACCEPTANCE OF INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE

Burt’s (1980) Acceptance of Interpersonal Violence questionnaire measures

an individual’s acceptance of interpersonal violence and the perception that
force and coercion are reasonable ways to gain compliance in intimate and
sexual relationships. The questionnaire includes six items, and statements
such as “A man is never justified in hitting his wife” and “Sometimes the
only way a man can get a cold woman turned on is to use force.” Item
responses are given on a 7-point continuum, ranging from 1 (strongly agree)
to 7 (strongly disagree) (Burt, 1980). Scores range from 6 to 42, with higher
scores indicating more acceptance of interpersonal violence. Internal consis-
tency in the scale’s construction was Cronbach’s alpha = .59, and was .56 in
this sample. Concurrent validity has been shown through correlations with
self-esteem, sex-role stereotyping, and rape myth acceptance (Burt, 1980).
576 K. Vance et al.

RAPE MYTH ACCEPTANCE SCALE

Burt’s (1980) Rape Myth Acceptance Scale (RMAS) measures the degree to
which individuals endorse rape myths, which are “prejudicial, stereotyped,
or false beliefs about rape, rape victims, and rapists” (p. 217). The RMAS
includes 19 items, including statements such as, “In the majority of rapes, the
victim is promiscuous or has a bad reputation,” and “Any healthy woman can
successfully resist a rapist if she really wants to.” The scale has demonstrated
good internal consistency (α = .88; Burt, 1980). Participants who respond to
the first 11 items are rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly agree) to 7
(strongly disagree), which we label Subscale 1, and had an alpha of .78 in
this sample. The remaining eight questions (Subscale 2) are measured on a
5-point scale, which had an alpha of .57 in this sample. Although the original
article of the scale’s construction does not give information regarding scoring,
we separate the scale based on the different response scales for this study.
Concurrent validity has been shown through correlations with self-esteem,
sex-role stereotyping, adversarial sexual beliefs, and interpersonal violence
acceptance (Burt, 1980).

ADVERSARIAL SEXUAL BELIEFS SCALE

Burt’s (1980) Adversarial Sexual Beliefs Scale measures the degree to which
individuals endorse adversarial sexual beliefs, which “refer to the expectation
that sexual relationships are fundamentally exploitive, that each party to
them are manipulative, sly, cheating, opaque to the others’ understanding,
and not to be trusted” (p. 218). The scale encompasses nine items, such as,
“A woman will only respect a man who will lay down the law to her,” and
“Women are usually sweet until they’ve caught a man, but then they let their
true self show.” Item responses are recorded on a 7-point Likert-type scale
from 1 (strongly agree) to 7 (strongly disagree). Total scores range from 9 to
63, where higher scores indicate more adversarial sexual beliefs. The scale
has shown good internal consistency in the scale’s construction (α = .80), as
well as in this sample (α = .83). Concurrent validity has been shown through
correlations with self-esteem, sex-role stereotyping, interpersonal violence,
and rape myth acceptance (Burt, 1980).

RAPE LIKELIHOOD SCALE

The Rape Likelihood Scale (Briere & Malamuth, 1983) is a set of five items
measuring the likelihood to which individuals report they would engage
in the following actions: extramarital sex, group sex, bondage, forcing a
female or male to do something she or he didn’t really want to do, and
rape. The only items coded were the last two because the first three are
decoy items. The scale begins with the question, “If you could be assured
 Objectification 577

that no one would know and that you could in no way be punished for
engaging in the following acts, how likely, if at all, would you be to commit
such acts?” Participants respond to items on a 5-point scale regarding how
likely they would be to commit one of the acts. The two items are treated
as separate indexes of rape likelihood as the first taps into force and is
not specific of a sexual act, whereas the other item of rape is considered
more severe and directly assesses rape likelihood. Construct validity of the
RMAS has been demonstrated such that self-reported rape likelihood has
been associated with aggression toward women, both by self-report and
objectively (Malamuth, 1981).

BANDURA’S MORAL DISENGAGEMENT SCALE

Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, and Pastorelli’s (1996) Moral Disengagement
Scale (MDS) includes 32 items and ascertains which moral disengagement
methods (if any) an individual uses. Disengagement methods include moral
justification, euphemistic language, advantageous comparison, displacement
of responsibility, diffusion of responsibility, distorting consequences, attribu-
tion of blame, and dehumanization. Individuals responded to items such
as, “Some people deserve to be treated like animals” (dehumanization)
and “Kids cannot be blamed for using bad words when all their friends
do it” (displacement of responsibility) on a 3-point Likert-type scale on an
agree–disagree continuum (Bandura et al., 1996). Scores range from 0 to
96 with higher scores indicating more moral disengagement. The reliabil-
ity coefficient for this measure has been good (α = .82; Bandura et al.,
1996), and shows excellent internal consistency in this sample (α = .90).
Concurrent validity has been demonstrated through correlations between
moral disengagement and physical and verbal aggression, prosocial behavior,
and delinquency (Bandura et al., 1996).

VALIDITY CHECK

The research questionnaire included the following three validity check ques-
tions: How many of these advertisements, if any, have you seen before today?
Of the advertisements you’ve seen, how often, before today, have you seen
those advertisements? What did you think the purpose of this research study
was, and at what point did you decide on this purpose?

DEMOGRAPHICS QUESTIONNAIRE

The demographics questionnaire collected information on participant age,

sex, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and religious background.
578 K. Vance et al.

Procedure
Participants received a link to the online survey through their university
courses or through an email from their professors. The link sent participants
to the consent page, where participants were told that the survey would
examine the effects of viewing alcohol and car advertisements on drunk
driving and social behavior. When participants clicked the agreement, they
were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions (control, sexual
objectification, and women as objects). The control condition included
127 participants (36 male, 91 female), the sexual objectification condition
included 122 participants (26 male, 96 female), and the women as objects
condition included 121 participants (26 male, 95 female).
Participants then viewed 10 advertisements, answering after each one,
“To what degree does the advertisement increase or decrease your desire to
buy the featured product?” on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (greatly increase)
to 5 (greatly decrease). These questions were included on the advertisement
page to ensure that participants spent time viewing the advertisements.
The drunk-driving questionnaire followed the advertisements to support
the cover story as well as to produce a time lag between viewing the adver-
tisements and completing the questionnaires. Participants then filled out the
scales measuring rape myth acceptance, interpersonal violence, and moral
disengagement. The survey concluded with the validity check and demo-
graphics questionnaire. At the end of the survey, as part of the debriefing
form, participants learned the true purpose of the study and were able to
choose whether to have their data included after learning the study’s real
purpose.

RESULTS
Validity Checks
The three validity checks were coded as pass–fail and then correlated with
each of the scales measuring endorsement of sexual violence (Subscales
1 and 2 of the RMAS, the two rape likelihood questions, the two RMAS
percentage questions, the Attitude Toward Interpersonal Violence Scale, the
Adversarial Sexual Beliefs Scale, the Dehumanization subscale of the MDS,
and the MDS total score) to determine whether validity checks should be
included as covariates in the subsequent analyses, or if participants who
failed the third validity check (who prematurely determined the purpose of
the study) should be excluded from analyses.
For the validity checks, 114 participants stated that they had seen the
advertisements before the experiment (M = 2.48 number of times seeing the
advertisements, of those who had seen at least one; SD = 1.88). Fourteen
participants identified the purpose of the study. None of the correlations
between the validity checks and the scales measuring endorsement of
 Objectification 579

sexual violence were significant. Accordingly, none of the following analyses

control for validity check results, and all participants are included.

Hypothesis 1
For Hypotheses 1 and 2, the data were analyzed using a 3 × 2 factorial anal-
ysis of variance (ANOVA). The independent variables were condition (three
levels: control, sexual objectification of women, and women as objects) and
sex (male and female), and the dependent variable was each of the measures
tapping endorsement of sexual violence. Because there were 10 data points
missing for sex, the analytical sample size for the ANOVAs was 370.
The first hypothesis, that individuals who were exposed to advertise-
ments depicting women as objects, whether explicitly or inferred, would
be more likely than individuals in the control condition to excuse sexual
aggression, was not statistically supported for any dependent variable across
participants, all F(2, 364) < 1.73, p > .178. All η2 values were within the
small-sized range of .00 to .01. For means, standard deviations, and ranges
of dependent measures, as well as p values of effects, see Table 1.

Hypothesis 2
The second hypothesis, that Hypothesis 1 effects would be stronger for men
than for women, was not statistically supported because none of the inter-
action terms for condition by sex yielded statistically significant results, all
F(2, 364) < 2.12, p > .121. All η2 values for this analysis were within the
small-sized range of .00 to .01. However, there were significant main effects
for sex on excusing sexual aggression. For the two rape likelihood ques-
tions, males had significantly higher scores than females, F(1, 364) = 26.87,
p < .001, η2 = .07, and F(1, 364) = 6.89, p = .009, η2 = .02, respectively.
Males also had higher scores than females on the MDS, F(1, 364) = 26.48,

TABLE 1 Means and Standard Deviations of Dependent Measures by Condition

Total Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3

Dependent variable M SD M SD M SD M SD p value

Rape Likelihood 1 1.19 0.61 1.22 0.66 1.16 0.59 1.21 0.58 .672
Rape Likelihood 2 1.09 0.49 1.17 0.67 1.06 0.42 1.05 0.31 .719
MDS total 57.92 14.98 58.75 16.07 56.91 14.60 58.06 14.24 .527
ASB total 18.20 6.17 17.71 6.06 18.15 6.11 18.91 6.39 .143
RMA Subscale 1 19.11 6.03 18.95 5.81 18.99 6.35 19.39 5.95 .424
RMA Subscale 2 9.67 4.70 9.57 4.42 9.74 5.41 9.70 4.25 .243
AIV total 11.59 3.32 11.49 3.56 11.62 3.33 11.68 3.07 .346
Note. MDS = Moral Disengagement Scale; ASB = Adversarial Sex Beliefs; RMA = Rape Myth Acceptance;
AVI = Acceptance of Interpersonal Violence; Condition 1 = control; Condition 2 = sexual objectification;
Condition 3 = women as objects.
580 K. Vance et al.

TABLE 2 Means and Standard Deviations of Dependent Measures by Sex

Males Females

Dependent variable M SD M SD p value

Rape Likelihood 1 1.48 0.92 1.11 0.45 <.001

Rape Likelihood 2 1.22 0.73 1.06 0.40 .009
MDS total 65.16 17.64 55.62 13.39 <.001
ASB total 18.09 6.15 18.28 6.23 .985
RMA Subscale 1 22.31 6.83 18.10 5.38 <.001
RMA Subscale 2 11.55 4.99 9.07 4.33 <.001
AIV total 13.11 3.45 11.11 3.12 <.001
Note. MDS = Moral Disengagement Scale; ASB = Adversarial Sex Beliefs; RMA = Rape Myth Acceptance;
AVI = Acceptance of Interpersonal Violence.

p < .001, η2 = .07. In addition, males scored higher on average for accep-
tance of interpersonal violence compared to females, F(1, 364) = 27.64, p <
.001, η2 = .08. Finally, males scored higher than females for both rape myth
acceptance subscales, F(1, 364) = 37.96, p < .001, η2 = .07, and F(1, 354)
= 21.69, p < .001, η2 = .06, respectively. For means and standard deviations
of dependent measures in this analysis, as well as p values of effects, see
Table 2.

Hypothesis 3
Tests of mediation (Preacher & Hayes, 2004) were performed separately for
women and men to examine whether rape myth acceptance (RMAS Subscale
1) mediated the relationship between moral disengagement (MDS total)
and rape likelihood. Preacher and Hayes’s (2004) bootstrapping method for
mediation is a state-of-the-art method for conducting this type of analysis,
because it can be used with continuous, dichotomous, or multicategorical
independent variables. It can test both direct and indirect effects, includ-
ing bootstrapping and Monte Carlo confidence intervals for indirect effects.
Moreover, it automatically conducts a test of homogeneity of regression.
Bootstrapping increases power and can be used with smaller sample sizes
compared to Sobel’s test (Preacher & Hayes, 2004). The mediation was
evaluated using a bootstrapping resampling procedure in which 5,000 boot-
strapped samples from the data were drawn to estimate the mediation for
each resampled data set (Preacher & Hayes, 2004). The SPSS macro MEDIATE
was used to conduct analyses (Hayes & Preacher, 2014). Table 3 presents a
summary of the mediation analyses, which used 5,000 bootstrapping resam-
ples and 95% confidence intervals. A power analysis was conducted using
G∗ Power (Faul, Erdfelder, Buchner, & Lang, 2009) to determine the appro-
priate sample size for the mediation analysis. The program recommended a
 Objectification 581

TABLE 3 Mediation of Moral Disengagement and Rape Likelihood by Rape Myth Acceptance

Boot-
strapping Overall
B SE t (SE) LLCI ULCI model R 2 F (df )

Males 0.18 5.43

(2, 85)∗∗∗
MD−RMA (a) 0.15 0.04 3.98∗∗∗
RMA−RL (b) 0.04 0.01 3.59∗∗∗
MD−RL (c) 0.01 0.00 2.33∗
MD−RMA−RL (c’) 0.00 0.00 .87 0.00 .0012 .0175
(0.00)
Females 0.11 18.02
(2, 279)∗∗∗
MD−RMA (a) 0.13 0.02 5.54∗∗∗
RMA−RL (b) 0.01 0.00 2.67∗∗
MD−RL (c) 0.01 0.00 5.32∗∗∗
MD−RMA−RL (c’) 0.01 0.00 4.27∗∗∗ 0.00 −.0004 .0048
(0.00)
Note. LLCI = lower limit confidence interval; ULCI = upper limit confidence interval; MD = moral
disengagement; RMA = rape myth acceptance; RL = rape likelihood.
∗
p < .05. ∗∗ p < .01. ∗∗∗ p < .001.

minimum of N = 77 to obtain a medium-sized effect at α = .05 and power

(1 – β) = .80.
For men in this analysis, the paths from moral disengagement to rape
myth acceptance and rape likelihood, and the path from rape myth accep-
tance to rape likelihood were all significant (all ps < .022). The indirect
effect of moral disengagement on rape likelihood through rape myth accep-
tance was also significant. After accounting for the significant indirect effect
of moral disengagement on rape likelihood through rape myth acceptance,
the direct effect of moral disengagement on rape likelihood was no longer
significant, suggesting that rape myth acceptance mediated the link between
moral disengagement and rape likelihood. Additionally, the 95% confidence
interval for the point estimate of the indirect effect did not contain zero. The
variance accounted for in rape likelihood without rape myth acceptance was
5.94%, whereas when the effect of rape myth acceptance was included, the
variance accounted for was 18.31%.
For women in this analysis, the paths from moral disengagement to
rape myth acceptance and rape likelihood, and the path from rape myth
acceptance to rape likelihood were all significant (all ps < .008). After
accounting for the significant mediation effect of moral disengagement on
rape likelihood through rape myth acceptance, the direct effect of moral
disengagement on rape likelihood was still significant, suggesting that rape
myth acceptance partially mediated the link between moral disengagement
and rape likelihood. However, the 95% confidence interval for the point esti-
mate of the indirect effect included zero. Thus, the results of these analyses
582 K. Vance et al.

revealed that rape myth acceptance did not mediate the relationship between
moral disengagement and rape likelihood for women. As a result of these
findings, Hypothesis 3 was supported for men, but not for women.

DISCUSSION

In this study, viewing print advertisements that sexually objectify women and
morph their bodies into objects did not increase women’s and men’s rape
myth acceptance, acceptance of interpersonal violence, rape likelihood, or
moral disengagement. However, for men, but not women, rape myth accep-
tance fully mediated the relationship between moral disengagement and rape
likelihood. Additionally, there were main effects of sex for most dependent
measures such that men scored significantly higher than women on rape
myth acceptance, acceptance of interpersonal violence, rape likelihood, and
moral disengagement.
The lack of statistically significant experimental effects in this study
stands in contrast to research by Lanis and Covell (1995), which found
that, in comparison to women and to a control group, male participants
who were exposed to sexually objectifying advertisements scored higher
on sex-role stereotypes and rape myth beliefs and were more accepting of
interpersonal violence. Moreover, the findings reported here contradict find-
ings regarding television and movie content, in which watching content that
objectifies women versus controls, participants were more likely to endorse
women as objects (Ward & Friedman, 2006) and were more likely to state
the victim of sexual assault did not suffer (Milburn et al., 2000). The findings
from this study are also contrary to findings from studies that examined the
effects of pornography on dehumanizing women and endorsing rape and
interpersonal violence myths (Ohbuchi et al., 1994; Zillman & Bryant, 1984).
The lack of significant effects of condition could be the result of a num-
ber of factors. The questions on drunk driving, drinking, and sexual behavior
might have led participants to believe that the study was examining their
morality, which could, in turn, have increased their desire to appear highly
moral and resulted in their answering the questions untruthfully. In fact, 22%
of participants stated in the validity check that they believed the experiment
was looking at college students’ morality. There could have also been an
emergence of morality and ethics awareness on college campuses since and
in response to Lanis and Covell’s (1995) study, with campaigns encouraging
a drug-free, morally sound social and sexual life. The salience of the morality
issue on campus, coupled with the focus on drunk driving, drinking, and sex-
ual behavior could have combined to affect participants’ response patterns.
Another possible reason for the lack of statistical significance of the
conditions and sex interaction effects might be participants having been
oversaturated with sexually objectified images of women at a level higher
 Objectification 583

than that occurring in the mid- to late 1990s, when Lanis and Covell col-
lected their data. College campuses are full of advertisements for clubs,
alcohol, bar promotions, and the like, which prominently feature images
of sexualized women. Likewise, the Internet is now in nearly universal use
among college students, and it is a plentiful source of images of sexualized
women. This oversaturation could minimize or eliminate the priming effect
of the conditions in this experiment.

Mediational Findings
Rape myth acceptance fully mediated the significant relationship between
moral disengagement and rape likelihood for men but not for women.
In other words, for men only, the relationship between moral disengagement
and self-reported rape likelihood required participants to accept some or
all of the rape myths assessed in Burt’s (1980) scale. One way to think
about this effect is that male participants needed to justify higher rape
likelihood by espousing a set of beliefs that shifts the blame for rape onto
the victim and away from the perpetrator. Therefore, moral disengagement
justified the aggression, and rape myth insulated the aspiring perpetrator
from blame. This insulation from blame is evidently very important; without
it, moral disengagement was unrelated to self-reported likelihood of men
committing rape. This finding illuminates a possible pathway by which moral
disengagement leads to rape likelihood and as a result has implications
for interventions to decrease the likelihood of rape on college campuses.
Educational interventions aimed at correcting men’s false beliefs about rape
could help break the pathway by which moral disengagement leads to rape
likelihood.
There has been little research into how men’s moral disengagement
leads to acts of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse toward women.
However, there have been discussions on the proclivity of men to believe
rape myths and how this proclivity might increase sexual violence toward
women. Brownmiller (1975) defined rape myths as “the distorted proverbs
that govern female sexuality . . . that most men hold” (p. 312). The attitudes
of men might have changed since 1975, and thus Brownmiller’s definition
should be examined in light of modern, current society. Indeed this study
found what Lonsway and Fitzgerald (1994) asserted, that rape myths “serve
to deny and justify male sexual aggression against women” (p. 134).
Although rape myths don’t fit neatly into any of Bandura’s moral
disengagement subscales, they make sense under the subscales of
dehumanization and attribution of blame, in which case, rape myth accep-
tance could be viewed as a type of moral disengagement. However, it can
also be hypothesized that accepting rape myths serves as critical step in
transforming moral disengagement into sexual violence, and is therefore a
584 K. Vance et al.

component in the process of morally disengaging from reported likelihood

of rape, not a type of moral disengagement.

Limitations and Future Directions

There were several limitations to this study. The sample, because it was taken
mostly from introductory sociology and psychology classes, was heavily
comprised of a select group of female participants. However, there were
enough men to perform the analyses, so a smaller number of men than
women in the study likely cannot account for the failure to support the
hypotheses. The fact that all participants were college students, however,
is a larger concern. Most universities, including the university sampled,
have active awareness initiatives regarding rape. In addition, collegiate sam-
ples tend to be wealthier, healthier, younger, better educated, and more
predominantly White than other samples. Additionally, all measures were
self-report and responses are subject to biases associated with this method
of measurement.
There is also concern that the way the advertisements were shown
was ineffective at priming objectification of women. As mentioned earlier,
perhaps the saturation of sexually objectifying advertisements in college
students’ lives caused the experimental primes to be ineffective. Also, the
study’s focus on drinking, drinking and driving, and sex might have made
issues of morality and ethics highly salient to the participants and thus could
have created an unanticipated bias in participants, a bias to protect their
self-images as moral and ethical people. Future research in the area of sex-
ual objectification in the media might need to use different primes in a
context that is unlikely to trigger participants’ focus on their morals and
ethics. Additionally, future studies should assess the level of salience of sex-
ual objectification of women in each condition to test the potency of sexual
objectification in controls versus sexual objectification of women and women
portrayed as objects in advertisements.
Future research should explore the effect of subtypes of moral
disengagement, especially dehumanization and attribution of blame on rape
likelihood, perhaps in the context of other types of advertisements sexually
objectifying women. The subscales could provide important insight regard-
ing more specifically how perpetrators morally disengage from violent and
sexual actions and whether advertisements play a role in the process. As doc-
umented in previous research, advertisements have the potential to influence
the endorsement of rape myths, which as shown in this study, play a sig-
nificant role in a man reporting his likelihood to rape a woman. It might
be important to implement rape awareness education programs through
advertisements conveying public service announcements to inform the pub-
lic about the realities of rape, thus dispelling rape myths in an attempt to
reduce rape and sexual violence.
 Objectification 585

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Kaylee Vance is now a family therapist at Vince Carter Sanctuary in Bunnell,

Florida, USA.

REFERENCES

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities.

Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 193–209.
Bandura, A. (2002a). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency.
Journal of Moral Education, 31, 101–119.
Bandura, A. (2002b). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In J. Bryant
& D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed.,
pp. 121–154). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of
moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 71, 364–374.
Berkowitz, A. (1992). College men as perpetrators of acquaintance rape and sexual
assault: A review of recent research. Journal of American College Health, 40,
175–181.
Berkowitz, A. D., Burkhart, B. R., & Bourg, S. E. (1994). Research on college men
and rape. New Directions for Student Services, 65, 3–19.
Brener, N. D., McMahon, P. M., Warren, C. W., & Douglas, K. A. (1999). Forced
sexual intercourse and associated health-risk behaviors among female college
students in the United States. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
67, 252–259.
Briere, J., & Malamuth, N. (1983). Self-reported likelihood of sexually aggres-
sive behavior: Attitudinal versus sexual explanations. Journal of Research in
Personality, 17, 315–323.
Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Rape, women, and men. New York, NY:
Simon & Schuster.
Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 38, 217–230.
Cowan, G. (1995). Black and white (and blue): Ethnicity and pornography. In
H. Landrine (Ed.), Bringing cultural diversity to feminist psychology: Theory,
research, practice (pp. 379–411). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., Quinn, D. M., & Gerhardstein, R. (2002). Consuming
images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain
women academically and professionally. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 28, 1615–1628.
Edmonds, E. M., & Cahoon, D. D. (1986). Attitudes concerning crimes related
to clothing worn by female victims. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 24,
444–446.
586 K. Vance et al.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009) Statistical power analy-
ses using G∗ Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior
Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160.
Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understand-
ing women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 21, 173–206.
Goffman, E. (1979). Gender advertisements. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Gould, S. J. (1994). Sexuality and ethics in advertising: A research agenda and policy
guideline perspective. Journal of Advertising, 73(8), 73–80.
Grabe, S., Hyde, J. S., & Lindberg, S. M. (2007). Body objectification and depres-
sion in adolescents: The role of gender, shame, and rumination. Psychology of
Women Quarterly, 31, 164–175.
Guthrie, S. (2007). Bottles are men, glasses are women. Material Religion, 3(1),
14–33.
Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicat-
egorical independent variable. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical
Psychology, 67, 451–470. doi:10.1111/bmsp.12028
Hennessy, R. (2000). Profit and pleasure: Sexual identities in late capitalism. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Kanin, E. J. (1985). Date rapists: Differential sexual socialization and relative
deprivation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 14, 219–231.
Kaschak, E. (1992). Engendered lives: A new psychology of women’s experience. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Kilbourne, J. (1999). Can’t buy my love: How advertising changes the way we think
and feel. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Kilbourne, J. (Producer) & Jhally, S. (Director). (2000). Killing us softly 3 [Motion
picture]. Northampton, MA: Media Education Foundation.
Lanis, K., & Covell, K. (1995). Images of women in advertisements: Effects on
attitudes related to sexual aggression. Sex Roles, 32, 639–649.
Lee, M. J., Hust, S., Zhang, L., & Zhang, Y. (2011). Effects of violence against women
in popular crime dramas on viewers’ attitudes related to sexual violence. Mass
Communication and Society, 14, 25–33. doi:10.1080/15205430903531440
Leindholdt, D. (1983, March 15). Where pornography meets fascism. WIN Magazine,
18–22.
Loh, C., Gidycz, C. A., Lobo, T. R., & Luthra, R. (2005). A prospec-
tive analysis of sexual assault perpetuation: Risk factors related to per-
petrator characteristics. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 1325–1348.
doi:10.1177/0886260505278528
Longino, H. (1980). What is pornography. In L. Lederer (Ed.), Take back the night
(p. 44). New York, NY: Morrow.
Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1994). Rape myths: In review. Psychology of
Women Quarterly, 18, 133–164.
Malamuth, N. M. (1981). Rape proclivity among males. Journal of Social Issues, 37,
138–157.
McAlister, A. L., Bandura, A., & Owen, S. V. (2006). Mechanisms of moral
disengagement in support of military force: The impact of Sept. 11. Journal
of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 141–165.
 Objectification 587

Milburn, M. A., Mather, R., & Conrad, S. D. (2000). The effects of viewing R rated
movie scenes that objectify women on perceptions of date rape. Sex Roles, 43,
645–664.
Mitchell, T. R., & James, L. R. (2001). Building better theory: Time and the spec-
ification of when things happen. The Academy of Management Review, 26,
530–547.
Monro, F., & Huon, G. (2005). Media-portrayed idealized images, body shame, and
appearance anxiety. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 38, 85–90.
Nelson, M. R., & Paek, H. (2005). Cross-cultural differences in sexual advertising
content in a transnational women’s magazine. Sex Roles, 53, 371–383.
Ohbuchi, K., Ikeda, T., & Takeuchi, G. (1994). Effects of violent pornography upon
viewers’ rape myth beliefs: A study of Japanese males. Psychology, Crime, and
the Law, 1, 71–81.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect
effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, &
Computers, 36, 717–731.
Root, M. P. P. (1995). The psychology of Asian-American women. In H. Landrine
(Ed.), Bringing cultural diversity to feminist psychology: Theory, research, and
practice (pp. 265–302). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Stankiewicz, J. M., & Rosselli, F. (2008). Women as sex objects and victims in print
advertisements. Sex Roles, 58, 579–589.
Thompson, M. J. (2000). Gender in magazine advertising: Skin sells best. Clothing
and Textiles Research Journal, 18, 178–181.
Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the effect of
magazine advertisements on women’s mood and body dissatisfaction. Journal
of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 23–44.
Ward, M. L., & Friedman, K. (2006). Using TV as a guide: Associations between
television viewing and adolescents’ sexual attitudes and behavior. Journal of
Research on Adolescence, 16, 133–156.
Weaver, D. H., Graber, D. A., McCombs, M. E., & Eyal, C. H. (1981). Media agenda
setting in a presidential election: Issues, images and interest. New York, NY:
Praeger.
Zillman, D., & Bryant, J. (1984). Effects of massive exposure to pornography. In N.
M. Malamuth & E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and sexual aggression (pp.
115–138). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Zuckerman, M., & Kieffer, S. C. (1994). Race differences in face-ism: Does facial
prominence imply dominance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
66, 86–92.
Copyright of Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma is the property of Taylor &
Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a
listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.