Search

Twenty-five survivors completed anonymous surveys about reporting sexual and gender-based misconduct to their public university's Title IX office, including case characteristics, perceptions of the reporting and response process (e.g., helpfulness, respect), and experiences of institutional betrayal and support. Measures and open-ended responses described varied misconduct incidents, reporting behaviors, case outcomes, process issues, and negative process consequences. Additionally, process perceptions correlated with institutional betrayal and support. Findings illuminate how survivors' Title IX process perceptions relate to experiencing harm or support from larger institutions, and offer insights into developing a Title IX process which maintains student rights and dignity regardless of outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following federal and state law, institutions of higher education (IHE) have implemented mandatory reporting (MR) policies, requiring some employees to report sexual violence they learn about to university officials regardless of victim/survivor consent (i.e., compelled disclosure). Proponents argue thatMR policies are beneficial (e.g., provide survivors with support), while critics argue that MR policies that limit survivor autonomy can be harmful. Given the tension between purported goals of MR policies and potential risks to survivors, the current work provided a comprehensive analysis of IHE MR policies in the United States. First, we reviewed laws shaping MR policies. Second, we analyzed MR policies from a nationally representative sample of Title IV eligible IHEs in the United States. Third, we discussed the findings in connection to extant research on MR policies, identifying key patterns and remaining gaps. Our analysis suggested that federal and state policymaking has increasingly expanded reporting mandates for IHE employees. The majority of IHEs designated all or nearly all employees as mandatory reporters, but there was more variability in the breadth of MR policies compared to the previous research. The content of MR policies mostly offered minimal instructions for employees (e.g., to whom to report) and rarely mandated trauma-informed responses (e.g., how to respond to disclosures). In light of empirical evidence, which finds that those who are most knowledgeable about survivors' needs and the process of reporting to the university (including survivors) are less supportive of MR policies, our findings further indicate that currentMRpolicies focus on compliance over victim/survivor support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Queer women are at high risk of college sexual victimization, but they face barriers to formal support services. As a result, informal support is critical. This study uses data from 40 open-ended interviews to explore family members' reactions to queer women's disclosures and examine whether their family is a reliable source of informal support. Findings indicate that family reactions are often more harmful than helpful. In comparison to research focused on heterosexual survivors, we find family reactions to be more extreme and disparaging of queer survivors' sexual identities. In fact, family members' negative reactions may pose barriers to accessing formal services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study examined two cognitive appraisals—labeling (identifying an unwanted sexual experience as sexual violence) and self-blame—as potential mechanisms between survivor alcohol use before sexual violence and three help-seeking barriers (minimization, negative treatment, and social-emotional barriers) among non-service-seeking sexual violence survivors. Participants were 141 undergraduate women who completed self-report measures. Three parallel mediation models were tested. Survivors who were drinking were more likely to label their victimization as sexual violence and, in turn, perceived fewer minimization and greater social-emotional barriers. Further, survivors who were drinking blamed themselves more and, in turn, perceived greater negative treatment and social-emotional barriers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In institutions of higher education, mandatory reporting policies require certain employees to report students' sexual assault disclosures to university officials, even if the student does not want to report. It is commonly assumed that these policies will benefit survivors, but there is a paucity of research to substantiate this assumption. The current study examined college sexual assault survivors' perceptions of mandatory reporting policies, including three specific policy approaches (Universal, Selective, Student‐Directed). Interviews were conducted with 40 college sexual assault survivors and thematic analysis was used to analyze these data. Results found that the mandatory reporting policy approaches that survivors prefer, which limit the number of mandatory reporters and offer more autonomy and flexibility, do not align with the policy approaches most frequently implemented within institutions of higher education (i.e., Universal). Survivors anticipated more harms resulting from mandatory reporting than benefits (e.g., pushing survivors into disclosures before they are ready, increasing stress and anxiety, discouraging help‐seeking from trusted sources of support on campus). Survivors lacked substantive knowledge of their university's mandatory reporting policy. Findings suggest that policy makers at institutional, state, and federal levels should consider survivors' perspectives when crafting such policies and institutions should increase educational efforts about mandatory reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sexual assault is a widespread problem on college campuses, and survivors rarely use campus supports. However, there is no established measure of service barriers for this population. This study develops and provides preliminary evidence for a measure of psychological service barriers. Data were collected from 100 college sexual assault survivors. Results provide evidence for three factors: social-emotional barriers, negative treatment barriers, and minimization barriers. Additional tests offer evidence for consistency and reliability in these factors over time and across campus supports. This work offers preliminary evidence for the psychometric properties of this measure and lays the groundwork for future validation research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Experiencing college sexual assault is detrimental for students' mental health. Counseling options exist in every type of college/university, but many survivors do not use these resources and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) survivors may have additional unmet mental healthcare needs. Using 40 qualitative interviews, we examined LGBTQ and (cis)straight survivors' actual and anticipated interactions with counseling in a counseling center and women's center. More survivors used the counseling center than the women's center. Students anticipated and experienced positive treatment from both centers, but believed the women's center would have more experience working with survivors. Ciswomen (straight and queer) and survivors with marginalized gender identities (e.g., trans, genderqueer) were most likely to anticipate and experience negative treatment. However, the women's center may be less accessible for cismen and gender minorities, as there were concerns that this resource may only be for cisgender women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. Department of Education (DoE) released new Title IX regulations in May 2020, including the requirement that postsecondary institutions conduct live hearings with direct cross‐examination for sexual misconduct reports. The 2,033‐page document included a summary of public comments and the DoE's discussion of those comments. We analyzed this publicly available document to answer two questions. (1) What are the primary concerns of the cross‐examination requirement for victims within the Department's summary of public comments? (2) How did the Department respond to these victim concerns? We conducted a content analysis, with a specific focus on the DoE's summary of survivor‐focused comments regarding cross‐examination and the DoE's discussion of and changes made in response to those comments. We identified four overarching survivor‐focused concerns and four categories of DoE responses. Our findings suggest that the DoE did not meaningfully address survivor‐focused concerns, but instead, selectively wielded "due process" as a shield to deflect critiques and legitimize the myth that sexual misconduct allegations inherently lack "credibility." The lack of protections for victims is a significant departure from legal norms in other settings. Our findings identify the importance of legislators working with survivor‐activists, practitioners, and researchers to ensure complainants receive adequate procedural protections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In many universities/colleges, employees are required to report students' sexual assault disclosures to university officials, even if the student does not want to make a report. These "mandatory reporting" policies have been shaped by federal mandates and guidelines, including Title IX. There is a notable lack of research on the implementation and effectiveness of these policies. The current study examined formal service providers' beliefs about university mandatory reporting policies and perceptions of three specific policy approaches (universal mandatory reporting, selective mandatory reporting, and student‐directed mandatory reporting). Focus groups were conducted with 12 service providers and these qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Participants had strong reservations about mandatory reporting policies, particularly universal approaches that designate all employees as reporters. Although they believed mandatory reporting may have been implemented with good intentions, they discussed how such policies may harm both survivors and employees. Lack of transparency and training in the implementation of mandatory reporting policies can create a climate of fear on campus, where neither survivors nor employees feel comfortable discussing sexual assault. Findings suggest the need for more empirically informed approaches to mandatory reporting of sexual assault in higher education and more comprehensive training for employees and students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Formal support providers can play a critical role in sexual assault survivors' well-being (e.g., providing resource referrals). In a university setting, resident assistants (RAs) are key support providers with a unique relationship to survivors based on their dual roles as help-provider and peer. We examined 305 RAs' responses to student sexual assault disclosure scenarios. Employing a critical discourse analysis, we identified four discourses used by RAs in their discussion of resources: controlling, gatekeeping, minimizing, and empowering. Due to power dynamics between RAs and residents, we conclude that empowering discourses would facilitate survivors' access to other resources (e.g., sexual assault center). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sexual assault is a pervasive problem on college campuses. Federal laws have shaped policies addressing sexual assault in higher education. Title IX guidance requires universities to designate "Responsible Employees," who are required to report all sexual assaults they learn about to the university (even if the survivor does not want to report). Resident assistants (RAs) are an important source of support for students and increasingly designated as Responsible Employees. University mandatory reporting policies have significant implications for reporters' and survivors' lives, but there is a lack of research on how Responsible Employees perceive this role. The current study examined Responsible Employee RA perceptions of mandatory reporting, the relationship between RAs' experience of college sexual assault and perceptions of mandatory reporting, and whether trust in university response to sexual assault mediates this relationship. Data from 305 Responsible Employee RAs were analyzed. RAs' perceptions of their reporting role were varied. For instance, RAs believed that mandatory reporting complicates their other responsibilities. College sexual assault survivors had less trust in university response to sexual assault, which, in turn, predicted more negative perceptions of mandatory reporting. Responsible Employees' perceptions of mandatory reporting offer valuable insight into the potential effectiveness and drawbacks of these policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented related to the study of sexual victimization that focus on the type of sexual violence experienced, the mental and physical consequences of sexual violence and discussed how the institutions respond to sexual trauma.

Sexual assault is a widespread problem on college campuses. In response, many institutions are developing policies mandating that certain employees report any student disclosure of sexual assault to university officials (and, in some cases, to police), with or without the survivor's consent. These policies, conceptualized here as compelled disclosure, have been prompted and shaped by federal law and guidance, including Title IX and The Clery Act. Proponents of compelled disclosure assert that it will increase reports--enabling universities to investigate and remedy more cases of sexual assault--and will benefit sexual assault survivors, university employees, and the institution. However, many questions remain unanswered. How broad (or narrowly tailored) are contemporary compelled disclosure mandates in higher education? Do any empirical data support assumptions about the benefits of these policies? Are there alternative approaches that should be considered, to provide rapid and appropriate responses to sexual violence while minimizing harm to students? The current article begins with an overview of federal law and guidance around compelled disclosure. Next, a content analysis of a stratified random sample of 150 university policies provides evidence that the great majority require most, if not all, employees to report student sexual assault disclosures. A review of the literature then suggests that these policies have been implemented despite limited evidence to support assumptions regarding their benefits and effectiveness. In fact, some findings suggest negative consequences for survivors, employees, and institutions. The article concludes with a call for survivor-centered reforms in institutional policies and practices surrounding sexual assault. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2005, the Department of Defense reformed military sexual assault (MSA) prevention and response efforts. However, research suggests that some Service members may not be informed of MSA resources. We examined how lacking such knowledge may undermine psychological well-being (i.e., symptoms of depression and posttraumatic stress) among MSA survivors as well as Service members who feel unsafe from MSA. The data were collected by the DoD in 2010 and sampled active duty Service women and men. Experiencing MSA, feeling unsafe from MSA, and lacking knowledge of MSA resources predicted greater psychiatric symptoms. Service members who felt unsafe from MSA reported greater psychiatric symptoms as a function of lacking knowledge of MSA resources. Findings suggest that education about sexual assault resources may be critical for the protection of mental health-among survivors and nonvictims alike. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our recent article "Compelled Disclosure of College Sexual Assault" examines college and university policies requiring most, if not all, employees to report student disclosures of sexual assault to university authorities, with or without student consent. We provided evidence that these mandatory reporting policies have become ubiquitous in American higher education, despite limited evidence of their safety or efficacy. Commenting on our article, Newins offers helpful advice for psychologists navigating the role of "responsible employee," such as seeking out information about their campus policy for reporting sexual assault disclosures and informing students of reporting mandates. The comment concludes with a call for researchers to investigate the many questions that remain unanswered about these policies. We agree with Newins's recommendations and, in this reply, encourage psychologists to push the envelope further. In addition to better understanding and managing reporting responsibilities, psychologists should advocate for policies that respect survivor autonomy, dignity, and right to self-determination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]