Sexual Risk Recognition Deficits: The Role of Prior Victimization and Emotion Dysregulation

Recent theoretical writings suggest that the ineffective regulation of negative emotional states may reduce the ability of women to detect and respond effectively to situational and interpersonal factors that increase risk for sexual assault. However, little empirical research has explored this hypothesis. In the present study, it was hypothesized that prior sexual victimization and negative mood state would each independently predict poor risk recognition and less effective defensive actions in response to an analogue sexual assault vignette. Further, these variables were expected to interact to produce particularly impaired risk responses. Finally, that the in vivo emotion regulation strategy of suppression and corresponding cognitive resource usage (operationalized as memory impairment for the vignette) were hypothesized to mediate these associations. Participants were 668 female undergraduate students who were randomly assigned to receive a negative or neutral film mood induction followed by an audiotaped dating interaction during which they were instructed to indicate when the man had “gone too far” and describe an adaptive response to the situation. Approximately 33.5% of the sample reported a single victimization and 10% reported revictimization. Hypotheses were largely unsupported as sexual victimization history, mood condition, and their interaction did not impact risk recognition or adaptive responding. However, in vivo emotional suppression and cognitive resource usage were shown to predict delayed risk recognition only. Findings suggest that contrary to hypotheses, negative mood (as induced here) may not relate to risk recognition and response impairments. However, it may be important for victimization prevention programs that focus on risk perception to address possible underlying issues with emotional suppression and limited cognitive resources to improve risk perception abilities. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

Is Everyone Rated Equal? An Examination of Factors Related to Sexual Risk in Ethnically Diverse Male Adolescents Who Have Sexually Offended

As the juvenile justice system has evolved, there has been a need for clinicians to make judgments about risk posed by adolescents who have committed sexual offenses. There are inherent difficulties in attempting to assess risk for violence among adolescents due to the developmental changes taking place and the absence of well-validated instruments to guide risk prediction judgments. With minority groups increasing in numbers in the U.S., it is likely that professionals will encounter minority individuals when conducting risk assessments. Overall questions regarding race/ethnicity have been neglected and there are few if any published research that explores risk factors with minority juvenile sex offenders. The present study examined whether differences exist between Caucasian and racial/ethnic minority adolescent sexual offenders on four risk assessment measures (J-SORRAT-II, J-SOAP-II, SAVRY, and ERASOR). The sample of 207 male adolescent sexual offenders was drawn from treatment facilities in a Midwestern state. Overall results indicated that minority adolescent sex offenders had fewer risk factors endorsed than Caucasian youth across all risk assessment tools. Exploration of interactions between race and factors such as: family status, exposure to family violence, and family history of criminality upon the assessment tools risk ratings yielded non-significant findings. Limitations, suggestions for future directions, and clinical implications are discussed.