An Examination of the Incidence of Sexual,
Physical, and Psychological Abuse and
Sexual Harassment on a College Campus
among Underrepresented Populations
LaVerne McQuiller Williams, JD, ABD, Associate Professor,
Rochester Institute of Technology
Judy Porter, PhD, Assistant Professor, Rochester Institute of
Technology
Prepared for Western Society of Criminology Conference
Honolulu, Hawaii February 5, 2010
Previous Research
Incident rates for dating violence and sexual harassment among college
students.
Physical violence = 20 percent to 50 percent (Cornelius et al. 2009;
Straus and Ramirez 2007; Straus 2004; Shook et al. 2000; White and
Koss 1991)
Psychological abuse = 70 percent to 88 percent (Cornelius et al.
2009; Nuefeld et al. 1999; White and Koss 1991)
Sexual Abuse = 12 percent to 25 percent (Gidycz et al. 2008;
Fisher et al., 2000; Rubenzahl and Corcoran 1998; Koss et al. 1987)
Sexual Harassment= 30 percent to 35 percent (Belknap and Erez
1995).
Previous Research

Few studies have addressed whether there are
differences in the incidence and/or nature of such
victimization experiences by race, ethnicity
(Straus and Ramirez 2007; Smith et al., 2005;
Rouse 1989), and/or sexual orientation (Duncan
1990).

Studies regarding victimization among students
with disabilities, particularly those who are Deaf
or Hard-of-Hearing, are especially scarce .
Data Collection



Survey instrument administered in Spring Quarter
2004 and Spring Quarter 2006
Simple random sample of Liberal Arts classes (open
to all majors); over-sampled NTID students (because
they do not take the same Liberal Arts classes)
Survey administered in classes; respondents were
required to sign a separate informed consent
Data Collection


2004 n=954, Response Rate = 97.2%
2006 n= 987, Response Rate = 98.3%
A total of 1,941 students filled out the surveys.
After removing cases with missing data, the final
sample size for this study is 1,881.
Measures
SEXUAL ABUSE (Sexual Experiences Survey,
Koss et al., 1987)




Verbal threats of sex against your will
Sexual touching against your will
Attempted sexual penetration (vaginal, anal, or
oral) against your will
Sexual penetration (vaginal, anal, or oral) against
your will
Measures
PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE (Conflicts Tactic
Scales, Straus and Gelles, 1986)



Insults/swearing
Put you down in front of friends/family
Threatened to hit/throw something at you
Measures
PHYSICAL ABUSE (CTS, Straus and Gelles, 1986)







Pushed, grabbed or shoved you
Slapped you
Kicked/bit you
Beat you up
Hit/tried to hit you with something
Choked you
Threatened you with a knife/gun
Measures
SEXUAL HARASSMENT (Belknap and Erez 1995)
 Unwelcome remarks of a sexual nature from students
 Unwelcome remarks of a sexual nature from
faculty/staff
 Unwelcome touching from students
 Unwelcome touching from faculty/staff
 Repeated pressures for dates/sex. activity from students
 Repeated pressures for dates/sex. activity from
faculty/staff
 Unwanted online messages of a sexual nature through
email, chat rooms, message boards, or discussion
forums
Results


Auditory status is significantly related to all four
types of victimization for both genders combined
but is more salient for males than for females.
Deaf/hard of hearing: 1.5 times more likely to be
a victim of sexual harassment, sexual assault,
psychological abuse, and physical abuse.
– Twice as likely to report sexual harassment
Deaf/Hard of Hearing Females


Females who identified as deaf or hard of
hearing were not significantly more likely
to report sexual harassment, sexual assault,
or psychological abuse.
Deaf or hard of hearing females were
nearly 2/3 more likely to report physical
abuse.
Deaf/Hard of Hearing Males

Deaf/hard of hearing males twice as likely to
report any type of victimization
– 2 ½ times as likely to report sexual
harassment
– More than twice as likely to report sexual
assault and psychological abuse
– Nearly 3 times as likely to report physical
abuse
– Auditory status for males appears to be an
important predictor of victimization
GLBO


Sexual orientation significant for all types
of victimization
Significant for psychological harassment
(nearly 2 times as likely), psychological
abuse (1 ½ times as likely), sexual assault
(3 ½ times as likely), and physical abuse
(1 ½ times as likely).
Female LBO




Twice as likely to report sexual assault and
psychological abuse and 1 ½ times as likely to
report physical abuse.
Females who are also deaf/HH only significant
for physical abuse
Living on campus doubled the likelihood of
sexual harassment
Living alone was twice as likely to report sexual
assault
– 70% more likely to report psychological abuse
Male GBO




7 times more likely to report sexual assault
2 ½ times more likely to report sexual
harassment
Living on campus decreased the odds of
psychological abuse
Living alone increased the likelihood of
sexual assault
Housing


Living on campus – increased risk for
sexual harassment and sexual assault
but decreased risk for psychological abuse
Living alone doubled the risk of sexual
assault
In sum

Deaf/HH – while females were not
significantly different for all outcomes
except reporting physical abuse, males were
significantly more to report sexual
harassment, sexual assault, psychological
abuse, and physical abuse
– Auditory status for males appears to be
an important predictor of victimization
GLBO


Sexual orientation was significant for
all types of victimization
Male GBO were 7 times more likely to
report sexual assault
Future Research and
Limitations

Results provide data/information on
relatively unexamined populations and
suggest that these students are often
victimized at higher rates than those in the
majority population.
Future Research and
Limitations

Limitations
1) Data were obtained by self report.
2) Data for physical abuse does not
account for extent of injuries.
3) Findings may not generalize beyond
particular sample.
Bibliography
Belknap, T and E. Erez. 1995. the Victimization of Women on College Campuses: Courtship
Violence, Date Rape and Sexual Harassment. In B.S Fisher and J.J. Sloan. Campus
Crime: Legal, Social and Policy Perspectives, pp. 156-178. Springfield, IL: Charles C.
Thomas.
Cornelius, T.L., Sullivan, K.T., Wyngarden, N. and J.C. Milliken. 2009. Participation in
prevention Program for dating Violence: Beliefs About Relationship Violence and
Intention to Participate. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 24(6):1057-1078.
Duncan D.F. 1990. Prevalence of Sexual Assault Victimization Among Heterosexual and
Gay/Lesbian University Students. Psychological Reports 66: 65-66
Koss, M.P., and Gidycz, C.A. 1985. Sexual experiences survey: Reliability and validity.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 53: 422-423.
Straus, M.A., and Gelles, R.J. 1986. Societal changes and change in family violence from
1975-1985 as revealed by two national surveys. Journal of Marriage and Family 48:
465-479.
Fisher, B.S., F.T. Cullen and M.G. Turner. 2000. The Sexual Victimization of College
Women. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
Gidycz, C.A, Orchowski, L.M., King, and C.R. Rich. 2008. Sexual Victimization and
Health-Risk Behaviors: A Prospective Analysis of College Women. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence 23 (6):744-763.
Bibliography
Koss, M.P., C.A. Gidycz, and N. Wisniewski. 1987. The Scope of Rape: Incidence and
Prevalence of Sexual Aggression and Victimization in a National Sample of Higher
Education Students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 55:162-170.
Nuefeld, J., McNamara, J.R., and M. Ertl. 1999. Incidence and Prevalence of Dating
Partner Abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 14:125-137.
Rouse, L.P. 1988. Abuse in Dating Relationships: A Comparison of Blacks, Whites, and
Hispanics. Journal of College Student Development 29:312-319.
Smith, B.A., S. Thompson, J. Tomaka, and A.C. Buchanan. 2005. Development of the
Intimate Partner Violence Attitude Scales (IPVAS) with a Predominately Mexican
American College Sample. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 27: 442-454.
Shook, N.J., Gerrity, D.A., Jurrich, J., and A.E. Segrist. 2000. Courtship Violence Among
College Students: A Comparison of Verbally and Physically Abusive Couples.
Journal of Family Violence 15:1-22.
Straus, M.A. 2004. Prevalence of Violence Against Dating Partners by Male and Female
University Students Worldwide. Violence Against Women 10: 790-811.
Straus, M.A. and I.L. Ramirez. 2007. Gender Symmetry in Prevalence, Severity and
Chronicity of Physical Aggression Among Dating partners by University Students in
Mexico and USA.
White, J. and M. Koss. 1991. Courtship Violence: Incidence in a National Sample of
Higher Education Students. Violence and Victims 6:247-256.