Contents lists available at ScienceDirectAggression and Vi.docx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Aggression and Violent Behavior
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aggviobeh
A metasynthesis of qualitative studies on girls' and women's
labeling of
sexual violence
Catherine Rousseaua,⁎, Manon Bergerona, Sandrine Riccib
a Sexology Department, Université du Québec à Montréal,
Montréal, Québec, Canada
b Sociology Department, Université de Québec à Montréal,
Montréal, Québec, Canada
A R T I C L E I N F O
Keywords:
Sexual violence
Labeling
Victims
Metasynthesis
Qualitative
A B S T R A C T
Many women do not label their unwanted sexual experiences as
rape or sexual violence, but rather use various
labels that suggest a different understanding of the events. This
metasynthesis provides new insights and em-

pirical evidence of how girls and women discuss their unwanted
sexual experiences, and identifies factors that
impede or promote such labeling. Qualitative data of 9 studies
were synthetized using Noblit and Hare's (1988)
framework. Results show that victims can frame sexual violence
within rape scripts that may lead to mini-
mization, normalization, self-blame or rationalization of the
event. Some participants hold an ambivalent dis-
course, which suggests that labeling is a fluctuating process.
Finally, seeking social support, or receiving edu-
cational information seem to facilitate the labeling of sexual
violence. The implications for intervention and
sexual violence prevention programs are discussed.
1. Introduction
Sexual violence is a social problem, mainly affecting girls and
women, that can lead to significant psychosocial consequences
(Rhew,
Stappenbeck, Bedard-Gilligan, Hughes, & Kaysen, 2017). In the
United
States, more than one-quarter of women experienced unwanted
sexual
contact in their lifetime, while one-third experienced some form
of non-
contact unwanted sexual experience in their lifetime (Basile,
Smith,
Breiding, Black, & Mahendra, 2014). The Centers for Disease
Control
and Prevention defines sexual violence as “a sexual act that is
com-
mitted or attempted by another person without freely given
consent of
the victim or against someone who is unable to consent or
refuse”
(Basile et al., 2014, p. 11). Sexual violence includes rape,

attempted
rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment, sexual coercion without
phy-
sical force and unwanted sexual contact (Basile et al., 2014).
This term
is inclusive of the various forms of sexual victimization that are
not
necessarily criminalized, especially since legal frameworks vary
from
one country to another. This definition allows for the
conception of
sexual violence on a continuum, as many feminist researchers
have
suggested, since the pioneering work of Kelly (1987) and
Hanmer
(1977).
While research confirms the high prevalence of sexual violence,
few
events of sexual violence are reported to the authorities.
According to
the Truman and Langton (2015), 34% of rape and sexual assault
crimes
are reported to authorities in the United States. One possible
explana-
tion for this under-reporting is that victims may not identify or
label the
event as a form of sexual violence. For several decades,
researchers
have been interested in victims' unacknowledged sexual
violence. Mary
Koss was one of the first to identify this phenomenon, which
she termed
“hidden rape,” and developed the Sexual Experiences Survey,
which is

an instrument capable of reflecting hidden cases of rape (Koss,
1985,
2011). Her study, based on the Sexual Experiences Survey,
shows that
43% of women who reported oral, anal, or vaginal non-
consensual in-
tercourse did not label their experience as rape (Koss, 1985).
More
recently, Wilson and Miller (2016) published a meta-analysis
sum-
marizing the results of their empirical work and presenting
estimates of
the prevalence of people who experienced rape, but did not
label their
experiences as such. Based on 28 studies, regrouping 5917
female rape
victims, the results show that an overall weighted mean
percentage of
60.4% of all victims do not understand their experience as rape.
In this metasynthesis, we analyze the social vocabulary present
in
victims' narratives (Hlavka, 2014; Kavanaugh, 2013). We
distinguish
between elements that justify or excuse sexual violence by
allowing
victims to interpret what happened to them (Scott & Lyman,
1968).
Because the labeling of sexual violence is embedded in culture,
it can
reflect rape myths or gendered stereotypes that make victims
feel guilty
and can take the blame off the perpetrator. For example, victims
can
minimize the severity of the experienced sexual violence. In
fact, a

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2020.101395
Received 12 August 2019; Received in revised form 1 March
2020; Accepted 8 March 2020
⁎ Corresponding author at: Université du Québec à Montréal,
Département de sexologie, CP 8888, succ. Centre-ville,
Montréal, Québec H3C 3P8, Canada.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (C. Rousseau),
[email protected] (M. Bergeron), [email protected] (S. Ricci).
Aggression and Violent Behavior 52 (2020) 101395
Available online 12 March 2020
1359-1789/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/13591789
https://www.elsevier.com/locate/aggviobeh
mailto:[email protected]
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.avb.2020.10
1395&domain=pdf
study reveals that women who have experienced rape are
usually
considered responsible for the event in the current social
context
(Peterson & Muehlenhard, 2004). Different factors can
influence the

labeling of sexual violence. Some factors, as named above,
appear to
prevent the identification of sexual violence, while others may
en-
courage it, such as verbally expressing non-consent (Cleere &
Lynn,
2013; Peterson & Muehlenhard, 2007).
Many factors contribute to a social context that would denigrate
and
blame women for experiences of sexual violence, such as rape
myths.
These social discourses are understood as culturally situated
and so-
cially learned ideologies that excuse rape. Various rape myths
have
been documented, for example: the belief that a husband cannot
rape
his wife, that women enjoy rape, that women have asked to be
raped
and that women are lying about having been raped (Edwards,
Turchik,
Dardis, Reynolds, & Gidycz, 2011). It is possible to believe that
these
rape myths are more closely interwoven with a narrow
conception of
what sexual violence is and that this conception is reiterated in
domi-
nant social discourses. Also, rape scripts may influence victims'
labeling
of unwanted sexual experiences (LeMaire, Oswald, & Russell,
2016).
They are defined as a social stereotype of what a “real” rape is
and how
victims and perpetrators of rape are viewed (Ryan, 2011). For
example,

a rape script usually implies a highly violent assault by a
stranger, in a
public space, with forced intercourse (Kahn, Mathie, & Torgler,
1994;
Littleton, Tabernik, Canales, & Backstrom, 2009). However,
most sexual
assaults are perpetrated by a known man, in a private place,
sometimes
with no physical force used (Cantor et al., 2015). In such
situations,
there would be an inconsistency between the sexual
victimization and
the rape script, which can lead to the non-labeling of the event
as sexual
violence.
This metasynthesis is informed by feminist theory. We postulate
that rape myths or rape scripts come from a patriarchal system
dis-
crediting women and girls' experience of sexual violence
(Brownmiller,
1975; Burt, 1980; Edwards et al., 2011; Gavey, 2005). By
adopting this
framework, we do not assume that girls and women should im-
mediately identify sexual violence after being victimized, but
we be-
lieve that greater recognition of what is sexual violence would
allow
many girls and women to avoid self-blame, minimization or
justifica-
tion of the violence that they experience. It would also foster
ac-
countability for perpetrators of sexual violence regarding their
beha-
viors. The way in which sexual violence is labeled is critical for
the

survivor's experience because it guides the perception of the
event and
its prevention. The social context, coming from patriarchal
tradition,
leads many women to take responsibility for the experienced
sexual
violence, which only accentuates the invisibility of this form of
gender-
based violence and, at the same time, dilutes the perpetrator's
respon-
sibility (Romito, 2006). This framework enables a more detailed
and
thorough understanding of the imbrication of labeling and
subscribing
to rape myths or scripts.
Studies on unacknowledged sexual violence mainly adopt
quanti-
tative methods because of the ethical and methodological
challenges
involved in interviewing people who have difficulties
identifying their
non-consensual sexual experiences as sexual violence
(Johnstone,
2016). Although these quantitative results can estimate the
prevalence
of the phenomenon, they do not give us much information on
how girls
and women qualify the unwanted sexual experience. They also
do not
reflect the complex reality of this phenomenon and its possible
varia-
tions over time (Johnstone, 2016). Recently however, there has
been an
increase in qualitative research on unacknowledged sexual
violence

that suggests new insights and useful in-depth information
about how
women label their experiences. Nevertheless, a synthesis of
qualitative
studies on the subject has not been published. This article aims
to offer
a more complete understanding of labeling in victims'
narratives. We
understand labeling both as women's acknowledgement of
unwanted
sexual experiences, and as the process whereby victims decide
whether
they label these experiences as sexual violence. Our
contribution is
based on a metasynthesis, which is a review of all qualitative
studies
published on the subject that fit certain inclusion criteria.
Qualitative
metasyntheses entail a systematic approach to the collection and
ana-
lysis of qualitative studies to allow the “enlarging of the
interpretive
possibilities of findings and constructing larger narratives of
general
theories” (Sandelowski, Docherty, & Emden, 1997, p. 369).
For this research, the objectives are: 1) to examine how girls
and
women perceive their unwanted sexual experience and 2) to
identify a
variety of factors that seem to impede the labeling of sexual
violence
and factors that seem to encourage it.
2. Method

This metasynthesis aims to provide a comprehensive and
qualitative
overview of girls' and women's labeling of their experienced
sexual
violence.
2.1. Procedure and sample
A review of qualitative studies on victims' labeling of sexual
vio-
lence was done using SAGE journals online, PsycINFO, Taylor
and
Francis Online, Google Scholar and a review of found articles'
refer-
ences. We searched qualitative papers in April and May 2018,
using
keywords including: labeling, accounts, normalizing, sexual
violence,
unacknowledged rape, self-blame, qualitative, and mixed
methods.
The inclusion criteria for studies were (a) to have a qualitative
component as structured, semi- or unstructured interviews or
focus
groups, (b) to relate to the narrative of girls and women who
experi-
enced sexual violence, (c) to address the issue of
unacknowledged
sexual violence, (e) to have been carried out in Western
countries where
rape myths and rape script are similarly integrated and shared,
and (f)
to be written in English. Thus, studies published before 2000 or
that
only addressed the point of view of non-victims were excluded.

Nine studies were retained for this metasynthesis and 11 were
ex-
cluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. The
design of
all the selected studies was exclusively or partially qualitative
and
subscribed to different approaches to data analysis. One is a
phenom-
enological study, five are based on an inductive approach, two
have a
descriptive approach and one is outlined by the Listening Guide
methodology. Demographic and methodological characteristics
of se-
lected articles are shown in Table 1. All studies were conducted
in
United States, except for one in Canada and one in Australia.
Partici-
pants' ages ranged from 11 to 47 years old. Five studies focused
on
undergraduate students. All the studies exclusively involved
women
who were victimized by male perpetrators, most often someone
they
knew.
2.2. Analysis
All studies were transferred to NVivo 11 (QSR International Pty
Ltd.) for synthesis and management of the emerging themes.
The ap-
proach used for this metasynthesis was based on Noblit and
Hare's
framework (Noblit & Hare, 1988), which is divided into seven
phases.
First, researchers choose a phenomenon and must define it. In

our case,
we selected unacknowledged sexual violence and labeling in
girls and
women narratives. Second, researchers determine which
qualitative
studies are relevant to their initial interest. Nine studies met our
in-
clusion criteria. Third, researchers read the qualitative studies
several
times to identify keywords, themes or concepts. Fourth, they
evaluate
how these studies are related to each other by synthetizing
previous
keywords, themes or concepts. Fifth, researchers transpose the
studies
into one another. This phase enables comparison and maintains
the
central concepts of each label in their relation to other concepts.
An
open coding then leads to codes that are grouped to form
conceptual
categories. In line with Glaser and Strauss' (2009) axial coding,
we
compared conceptual categories to explore interactions between
studies
and to build conceptual categories that are mutually exclusive.
These
C. Rousseau, et al. Aggression and Violent Behavior 52 (2020)
101395
2
T

ab
le
1
St
u
d
ie
s
in
cl
u
d
ed
in
m
et
as
yn
th
es
is
.
#
A
u
th
or
s
Y
ea

r
R
es
ea
rc
h
d
es
ig
n
Sa
m
p
li
n
g
st
ra
te
gy
Q
u
al
it
at
iv
e
sa
m
p
le
A

p
p
ro
ac
h
to
d
at
a
an
al
ys
is
1
H
ar
n
ed
2
0
0
5
M
ix
ed
m
et
h
od

s:
O
p
en
-e
n
d
ed
qu
al
it
at
iv
e
it
em
s
St
ra
ti
fi
ed
ra
n
d
om
sa
m
p
li
n

g:
T
h
e
sa
m
p
le
w
as
n
ar
ro
w
ed
to
in
cl
u
d
e
on
ly
w
om
en
w
h
o
re

p
or
te
d
an
u
n
w
an
te
d
se
xu
al
ex
p
er
ie
n
ce
w
it
h
a
d
at
in
g
p
ar
tn
er

on
th
e
Se
xu
al
E
xp
er
ie
n
ce
s
Su
rv
ey
(S
E
S)
an
d
co
m
p
le
te
d
th

e
op
en
-e
n
d
ed
qu
al
it
at
iv
e
it
em
s
n
=
2
5
1
;
w
om
en
u
n
d
er
gr

ad
u
at
e
st
u
d
en
ts
in
U
n
it
ed
St
at
es
;
1
8
to
2
2
ye
ar
s
ol
d
;
9

7
%
u
n
m
ar
ri
ed
;
8
0
%
se
lf
-i
d
en
ti
fi
ed
as
W
h
it
e,
et
h
n
ic
al

ly
d
iv
er
se
;
9
6
%
h
et
er
os
ex
u
al
;
T
yp
e:
R
ap
e,
at
te
m
p
te
d
ra
p
e,

se
xu
al
co
er
ci
on
,
se
xu
al
co
n
ta
ct
P
h
en
om
en
ol
og
y
Fe
m

in
is
t
st
an
d
p
oi
n
t
ep
is
te
m
ol
og
ie
s
In
te
rp
re
ta
ti
ve
-d
es
cr
ip
ti
ve

ap
p
ro
ac
h
2
H
la
vk
a
2
0
1
4
Q
u
al
it
at
iv
e:
N
on
su
gg
es
ti
ve

,
la
rg
el
y
op
en
-e
n
d
ed
,
qu
es
ti
on
s
C
ri
te
ri
on
sa
m
p
li
n
g:
A
p

p
ra
is
ed
th
ei
r
ex
p
er
ie
n
ce
s
of
vi
ct
im
iz
at
io
n
as
a
cr
im
e
or
ab
u

si
ve
,
to
h
av
e
li
n
gu
is
ti
c,
co
gn
it
iv
e
an
d
so
ci
al
ab
il
it
y
to

co
n
ve
y
th
ei
r
m
ea
n
in
gs
of
vi
ol
en
ce
n
=
2
3
;
w
om
en
li
vi
n

g
in
an
u
rb
an
M
id
w
es
t
co
m
m
u
n
it
y,
in
U
n
it
ed
St
at
es
;
R
ac
ia
ll

y
d
iv
er
se
;
1
1
to
1
6
ye
ar
s
ol
d
;
T
yp
e:
Se
xu
al
as
sa
u
lt
/
ra
p

e
A
n
al
yt
ic
-i
n
d
u
ct
iv
e
m
et
h
od
an
d
an
al
yt
ic
br
ac
ke
ti
n
g
3

Jo
h
n
st
on
e
2
0
1
6
Q
u
al
it
at
iv
e:
Se
m
i-
st
ru
ct
u
re
d
in
te
rv
ie
w

s
C
ri
te
ri
on
sa
m
p
li
n
g:
P
ar
ti
ci
p
an
ts
w
er
e
re
qu
ir
ed
to
h
av

e
an
sw
er
ed
“n
o”
to
tw
o
qu
es
ti
on
s
(“
h
av
e
yo
u
ev
er
be
en
se

xu
al
ly
as
sa
u
lt
ed
/r
ap
e?
”)
an
d
“y
es
”
to
on
e
of
tw
o
ot
h
er
qu

es
ti
on
s
th
at
as
se
ss
ed
u
n
w
an
te
d
se
xu
al
in
te
rc
ou
rs
e
in
th
e
m

od
ifi
ed
ve
rs
io
n
of
SE
S.
n
=
1
0
;
w
om
en
u
n
d
er
gr
ad
u
at
e
st
u

d
en
ts
;
1
8
to
4
7
ye
ar
s
ol
d
;
H
et
er
os
ex
u
al
;
8
0
%
E
u
ro
p
ea

n
-C
an
ad
ia
n
,
et
h
n
ic
al
ly
d
iv
er
se
T
yp
e:
Se
xu
al
as
sa
u
lt
/r
ap

e
Fe
m
in
is
t
th
eo
ry
So
ci
al
co
n
st
ru
ct
io
n
is
t
th
eo
ry
Li
st
en
in
g
G

u
id
e
4
M
ad
is
on
&
M
in
ic
h
ie
ll
o
2
0
0
0
Q
u
al
it
at
iv
e:
In
te
rv

ie
w
s
of
ap
p
ro
xi
m
at
el
y
1
h
ea
ch
C
on
ve
n
ie
n
ce
sa
m
p
li
n
g:
St

u
d
en
t
re
gi
st
er
ed
n
u
rs
es
w
h
o
w
er
e
vo
lu
n
te
er
s
co
m
p
le
te
d

a
su
rv
ey
on
se
xu
al
h
ar
as
sm
en
t
n
=
1
6
;
re
gi
st
er
ed
n
u
rs
es
in

A
u
st
ra
li
a;
2
9
to
4
6
ye
ar
s
of
ag
e
T
yp
e:
se
xu
al
h
ar
as
sm
en

t
In
d
u
ct
iv
e
an
al
ys
is
5
P
et
er
so
n
&
M
u
eh
le
n
h
ar
d
2
0
1
1

M
ix
ed
m
et
h
od
s:
Se
m
i-
st
ru
ct
u
re
d
in
te
rv
ie
w
s
an
d
op
en
-e
n
d

ed
qu
al
it
at
iv
e
it
em
s
C
ri
te
ri
on
sa
m
p
li
n
g:
P
ar
ti
ci
p
an
ts
w
er

e
re
qu
ir
ed
to
h
av
e
h
ad
an
ex
p
er
ie
n
ce
th
at
qu
al
ifi
ed
as
ra
p
e
ac

co
rd
in
g
to
th
e
le
ga
l
d
efi
n
it
io
n
s
in
m
os
t
st
at
es
P
ro
ba
bi
li

ty
sa
m
p
li
n
g:
R
an
d
om
ly
se
le
ct
ed
an
d
in
vi
te
d
w
om
en
w
h
o
h
ad

an
sw
er
ed
“n
o”
to
bo
th
sc
re
en
in
g
qu
es
ti
on
s
n
=
7
7
;
co

ll
eg
e
w
om
en
fr
om
a
la
rg
e
M
id
w
es
te
rn
st
at
e
u
n
iv
er
si
ty
,
U
n
it

ed
St
at
es
;
1
8
to
3
0
ye
ar
s
ol
d
9
0
%
w
h
it
e,
et
h
n
ic
al
ly
d

iv
er
se
9
2
%
h
et
er
os
ex
u
al
;T
yp
e:
Se
xu
al
as
sa
u
lt
/r
ap
e
in
cl
u
d

in
g
on
ly
va
gi
n
al
p
en
et
ra
ti
on
In
d
u
ct
iv
e
an
al
ys
is
M
at
ch
-a

n
d
-m
ot
iv
at
io
n
m
od
el
6
W
ei
ss
2
0
0
9
Q
u
al
it
at
iv
e:
O
p
en

-e
n
d
ed
qu
al
it
at
iv
e
it
em
s
P
ro
ba
bi
li
ty
sa
m
p
li
n
g:
T
h
e
su
rv
ey

,
w
it
h
a
ra
n
d
om
se
le
ct
io
n
m
et
h
od
,
is
se
n
t
to
th
e
p
op
u

la
ti
on
n
=
9
4
4
;
fe
m
al
e
vi
ct
im
s;
1
2
ye
ar
s
ol
d
an
d
ol
d
er
(m

ed
ia
n
ag
e:
2
4
)
8
3
%
W
h
it
e,
1
4
%
B
la
ck
,
3
%
ot
h
er
ra

ce
s;
5
6
%
h
av
e
in
co
m
e
be
lo
w
2
5
,0
0
0
$
;
U
n
it
ed
St
at
es

;
T
yp
e:
ra
p
e,
at
te
m
p
te
d
ra
p
e,
u
n
w
an
te
d
se
xu
al
co
n
ta
ct

,
se
xu
al
co
er
ci
on
D
es
cr
ip
ti
ve
an
al
ys
is
7
W
ei
ss
2
0
1
0
Q
u
al

it
at
iv
e:
O
p
en
-e
n
d
ed
qu
al
it
at
iv
e
it
em
s
P
ro
ba
bi
li
ty
sa
m
p
li

n
g:
T
h
e
su
rv
ey
,
w
it
h
a
ra
n
d
om
se
le
ct
io
n
m
et
h
od
,
is
se
n
t

to
d
iff
er
en
t
u
n
it
s
of
th
e
p
op
u
la
ti
on
n
=
1
3
6
;
8
5
%
fe

m
al
e
vi
ct
im
s;
5
5
%
u
n
d
er
2
5
ye
ar
s
of
ag
e;
8
5
%
w
h
it
e,

1
4
%
bl
ac
k,
1
%
ot
h
er
ra
ce
s;
1
5
%
m
al
e
vi
ct
im
s;
U
n
it
ed

St
at
es
;
T
yp
e:
ra
p
e,
at
te
m
p
te
d
ra
p
e,
u
n
w
an
te
d
se
xu
al
co

n
ta
ct
,
se
xu
al
co
er
ci
on
In
d
u
ct
iv
e
or
gr
ou
n
d
ed
th
eo
ry
ap
p

ro
ac
h
8
W
ei
ss
2
0
1
1
Q
u
al
it
at
iv
e:
O
p
en
-e
n
d
ed
qu
al
it
at
iv

e
it
em
s
P
ro
ba
bi
li
ty
sa
m
p
li
n
g:
T
h
e
su
rv
ey
,
w
it
h
a
ra
n
d
om

se
le
ct
io
n
m
et
h
od
,
is
se
n
t
to
d
iff
er
en
t
u
n
it
s
of
th
e
p
op

u
la
ti
on
n
=
2
7
6
;
8
9
%
fe
m
al
e
vi
ct
im
s
1
1
%
m
al
e
vi
ct
im

s;
U
n
it
ed
St
at
es
;
T
yp
e:
ra
p
e,
at
te
m
p
te
d
ra
p
e,
u
n
w
an
te
d
se

xu
al
co
n
ta
ct
,
se
xu
al
co
er
ci
on
In
d
u
ct
iv
e
ap
p
ro
ac
h
9
D
ar
d

is
,
K
ra
ft
&
G
id
yc
z
2
0
1
7
M
ix
ed
m
et
h
od
s:
O
p
en
-e
n
d
ed

qu
al
it
at
iv
e
it
em
s
St
ra
ti
fi
ed
ra
n
d
om
sa
m
p
li
n
g:
T
h
e
sa
m
p
le

w
as
n
ar
ro
w
ed
to
in
cl
u
d
e
on
ly
w
om
en
w
h
o
re
p
or
te
d
an
u
n
w
an

te
d
se
xu
al
ex
p
er
ie
n
ce
w
it
h
a
d
at
in
g
p
ar
tn
er
on
th
e
Se
xu
al
E

xp
er
ie
n
ce
s
Su
rv
ey
(S
E
S)
an
d
co
m
p
le
te
d
th
e
op
en
-e
n
d
ed
qu

al
it
at
iv
e
it
em
s
n
=
1
2
3
;u
n
d
er
gr
ad
u
at
e
w
om
en
in
U
n
it

ed
St
at
es
;m
ea
n
ag
e:
1
9
.6
2
;
8
7
.8
%
C
au
ca
si
an
,
4
.9
%
B

la
ck
/A
fr
ic
an
A
m
er
ic
an
,
3
.3
%
A
si
an
,
4
.0
%
M
u
lt
ir
ac
ia
l/
O

th
er
,
3
.3
%
La
ti
n
o;
7
4
.0
%
h
et
er
os
ex
u
al
ex
p
er
ie
n
ce
s
on
ly
,

2
1
.1
%
m
os
tl
y
h
et
er
os
ex
u
al
ex
p
er
ie
n
ce
s,
3
.3
%
m
or
e
h
et
er

os
ex
u
al
th
an
h
om
os
ex
u
al
ex
p
er
ie
n
ce
s,
1
.6
%
eq
u
al
h
et
er
os

ex
u
al
an
d
h
om
os
ex
u
al
ex
p
er
ie
n
ce
s.
T
yp
e:
C
om
p
le
te
d
ra
p
e

D
es
cr
ip
ti
ve
an
al
ys
is
101395
3
categories must allow for a better understanding of the
phenomenon,
each of them taking into account the key concepts identified in
the
source studies (Paillé, 1994). Each category took into account
the key
concepts identified in the source studies. However, the
saturation of
each category might not be achieved because of the diverse
topics
covered in the corpus. Generally, researchers would then
synthesize
transpositions by producing an overview rather than simply
analyzing
them individually and extracting separate conceptual categories
(Coffey, 2006). Sixth, translations are compared to find

similarities and
differences. In this phase, conceptual categories are linked
together to
develop a storyline or theory, according to Glaser and Strauss'
(2009)
grounded theory. Nonetheless, this was not the goal of this
present
metasynthesis. Seventh, researchers adapt the synthesis to their
audi-
ence. Thus, this metasynthesis takes a written form and adopts a
lan-
guage that is adapted to academics and practitioners so that they
can
benefit from its results.
3. Results
The analysis of our corpus resulted in the creation of seven con-
ceptual categories, each containing several sub-categories (see
Table 2).
3.1. Self-blame occurring because of something done or not
done
In this first category, sexual violence is not identified as such
be-
cause participants feel they have failed to have their non-
consent re-
spected or to stop unwanted sexual behaviors. Some believe that
being
intoxicated has put them in a position deemed to be at risk,
which leads
them to consider that they are responsible for unwanted sexual
acts.
3.1.1. Feeling that sexual violence could have been stopped

Some participants felt like they failed to say they did not want
to
engage in sexual activity. Two women in Harned's (2005) study
said:
“[B]ecause [I] never told the person not to, even though [I]
didn't want them
to”; “I should have been more vocal” (p. 397). Another woman
stated that
she did not resist enough to prevent the event: “…a young man
who
respondent had met that night forced her into having sexual
inter-
course. She said ‘no’ many times, but he physically forced
himself on
her. He was much bigger than her. She was ashamed and felt she
was
partly to blame because she couldn't stop him” (Weiss, 2009, p.
827).
Weiss (2011) discussed that women can feel more self-blame
for the
event and be more reluctant to label it as rape when they
consider
themselves to have surrendered to sexual activity.
3.1.2. Holding oneself at least partially responsible for the
event
Another reason evoked is the victim's intoxication: “I was drunk
and
didn't put up a fight and gave in. Therefore, I feel I am partially
responsible
for what happened” (Participant in Harned, 2005, p. 396); “I
don't want to
label it rape because I feel it was my fault to be that

intoxicated” (ques-
tionnaire response from non-labeling participant in Peterson &
Muehlenhard, 2011, p. 563). For some participants, they
consider that
they did not communicate clearly enough: “I didn't really
communicate
that I didn't want it to happen. I just kind of tensed up and
didn't move.”
(Dardis, Kraft, & Gidycz, 2017, p. 13). Johnstone (2016) states
that the
impact of self-blame is weighed in the larger context of rape
culture
which holds the victim responsible for what happened, instead
of pla-
cing responsibility and accountability on the perpetrator.
3.2. Normalization of sexual violence
The minimization of sexual violence is frequent among the
partici-
pants of the various studies. The frequency of these acts of
violence –
such as sexual harassment, is sometimes reported as being daily,
to the
point that participants and even some friends see sexual
violence as
nothing serious or as not even worth disclosing.
3.2.1. “The event was no big deal”: reduction of severity
Some participants consider the event as something that is not
very
serious. For a participant in Hlavka's (2014) study, the event
deserved
to be forgotten since “not much happened”:

“I was going to the bathroom and he wouldn't let me go in. He
put his foot
in front of [the door], and he's a really strong person, so I didn't
really,
like, I couldn't open the door. And he said, ‘I'll let you in if you
give me a
kiss,’ and I said, ‘No.’ And I was going back to the classroom
and he
pinned me against the wall and tried to, like, lift up my shirt.
And, like,
touched me, and then I… I got up… I started to scream, and I
guess
someone heard, 'cause then, um, someone started coming. So he
got away
from me, I just went back in the classroom and forgot about it. I
just
didn't think it was really anything”.
(Hlavka, 2014, p. 346)
3.2.2. “It happens all the time”: everyday behaviors
3.2.2.1. Peer reactions can alter the inclination to recognize the
experience
Table 2
Categories, subcategories and data from studies that refer to
these categories.
Categories, subcategories and data from studies that refer to
these categories
Categories Subcategories Studies related
1. Self-blame occurring because of something done or not done
1.1 Feeling that sexual violence could have been stopped
1.2 Holding oneself at least partially responsible for the

event
1, 6, 7, 8, 9
1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
2. Normalization of sexual violence 2.1 “The event was no big
deal”: reduction of severity
2.2 “It happens all the time”: everyday behaviors
2.3 “He didn't mean it”: perpetrators held unaccountable
1, 2, 4, 7
1, 2, 3, 6
1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9
3. Rejection of the term “sexual violence” 3.1 Recognizing
oneself as a victim goes against a strong
self-image
3, 5, 8
4. Understanding sexual violence according to rape scripts 4.1
Lack of behaviors deemed problematic blurs the
labeling of sexual violence
4.2 Perpetrators do not fit the victim's image of a
perpetrator
4.3 Believing that consent may not be withdrawn
1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8
1, 3, 5, 9
1, 5, 8, 9
5. Ambivalence: avoiding labels or using alternative terms 5.1
Evading a label that refers to sexual violence
5.2 The use of alternative terms to describe their
experience

1, 3, 4
1, 3, 4, 5
6. Labeling of sexual violence through the perpetrator's violent
behavior, the consequences
suffered or the failure to comply with the consent
6.1 Physical violence and its repetition
6.2 Negative psychological impacts
6.3 Not having consented and not being able to say no
1, 3, 4, 9
1, 2, 3
1, 3, 4, 9
7. Seeking social support or having educational information 1,
4, 5
101395
4
as rape. A participant in Johnstone's (2016) study states that her
friend's reaction lead her to reconsider the event as something
normal
because her feelings were delegitimized: “So yeah, I told my
friend what
happened and then, I don't know, at first she started laughing
and I was, I
was like ‘this isn't funny,’ and she's like, ‘it's happened to me
so many times’”
(SchoolGirl [pseudonym], 20-year-old European-Canadian, p.
280).

3.2.2.2. Unwanted sexual experiences are commonplace and
expected
behaviors because they happen all the time. Sexual harassment
and
violence appear to be a part of women's daily lives. Thereby,
unwanted sexual experiences are normalized because of their
frequency. Patricia (age 13), in Hlavka's (2014) study, said:
“They
grab you, touch your butt and try to, like, touch you in the
front, and run
away, but it's okay, I mean… I never think it's a big thing
because they do it
to everyone” (p. 344). In addition, men are seen as natural
perpetrators
because they appear unable to control their sexual drive and
desires
(Phillips, 2000).
3.2.2.3. Sexual violence is seen as normal dating behavior
within
heterosexual relationships. Violence against women is a part of
a
continuum where the most extreme form is rape (Kelly, 1987).
Some
manifestations of violence tend to be normalized because they
are a
part of what is expected in a heterosexual relationship (Gavey,
2005).
Such social representation is largely informed by the
naturalization of
male desire, seen as uncontrollable: “He'd just rub his hand
across my
butt, and then one time I was sitting there and he—I was, like,
laying on the
couch watching TV—and he came home. He was kinda drunk,

then he, like,
literally just, like, laid on me. That's what he… well, guys
always try to get
up on you, like just normal” (participant in Hlavka, 2014, p.
347).
Although coercive experiences are unpleasant, some
participants did
not view them as more than an aggravation, characterized as
“annoying
male behavior” or “just an annoyance of a sexually energized
young man”
(participants in Harned, 2005, p. 404). One young woman
perceives the
event as a game with the boys, although she did not like it
(Weiss,
2009).
3.2.3. “He didn't mean it”: perpetrators held unaccountable
3.2.3.1. The event was accidental: denying their perpetrator's
intentions to
harm them. Some participants referred to the perpetrator's
intentions to
label their unwanted sexual experience. They maintain that their
partner's behavior was accidental: “I just don't think he
understood that
I didn't want him to keep on doing that and that it didn't feel
good”
(participant in Harned, 2005, p. 398). Another participant refers
to the
fact that the perpetrator was not aware of what he was doing
and
therefore that it was not sexual violence:
“While riding in the car with several friends, one of the male
occupants in
the car sexually assaulted the respondent. The offender was

grabbing and
fondling her, and would not stop when she asked him to. The
respondent
screamed and fought him off. The other passengers were
screaming at the
offender to stop. There was no actual rape but an attempt was
made. The
respondent decided not to report it because she was not sure the
offender
understood he was committing a crime.”
(Weiss, 2011, p. 453)
3.2.3.2. Blaming the effects of alcohol or drugs instead of the
perpetrator. An additional struggle that participants can face is
recognizing sexual violence when alcohol or drugs are involved.
The
difficulty in identifying the violent character of the unwanted
sexual
experience is exacerbated when the perpetrator is intoxicated
because it
is seen as a mistake, as the report made by this 18-year-old
participant
states: “At a friend's house, a drunk male made unwanted sexual
advances.
He apologized and said he didn't know what he was doing and it
wouldn't
happen again. Respondent did not report since she did not want
to get him in
trouble, and because he promised it wouldn't happen again”
(Weiss, 2009,
p. 823). In Dardis et al. (2017), nearly half of
miscommunication-
labeled victims blame the consumption of alcohol or substance:
“I don't

think he would have done it if he was sober.” (p. 13).
3.3. Rejection of the term “sexual violence”
Being a victim of sexual violence seems to be incompatible, for
some
participants, with being strong or perceiving oneself as such.
Thus, to
name having been victim of sexual violence negatively impacts
their
perception of themselves.
3.3.1. Recognizing oneself as a victim goes against a strong
self-image
Acknowledgement of having experienced sexual violence can
have
several implications, particularly in terms of one's identity. As
Peterson
and Muehlenhard (2011) state, not using the label “rape” can
allow
participants to maintain their self-image as proactive and
strong:
“[If it had been rape] I would probably have done something
about it. I
wouldn't have just let it go. I mean I don't think that's right… I
would have
told my parents right away and gone to the doctor to prove it. A
lot of girls
just let it go, and then 5 years later they say, ‘Well, how are you
going to
prove it?’ So, it wasn't rape, but if it was, I definitely would
have done
something about it.” (interview response of a non-labeling
participant,

Peterson & Muehlenhard, 2011, p. 565).
3.4. Understanding sexual violence according to rape scripts
Here, we deconstruct the rape script into three main themes.
First,
the idea of rape is often associated with physical abuse,
vaginal/anal
penetration, and injury. In the absence of these components,
many
participants do not use the term “sexual violence” to describe
what
happened. Furthermore, the rape script usually portrays an
unknown
and scary perpetrator. If the abuser is then a friend or partner –
which is
often statistically the case (Fisher, Cullen, & Turner, 2000), this
label
seems difficult to apply. Finally, consent is not usually a part of
the rape
script. When sexual consent was given at the beginning of
sexual in-
tercourse, some participants do not feel legitimized in
withdrawing it.
They do not identify the situation as sexual violence since they
gave
their consent at some point, even though they may not have
consented
to each component of the experience.
3.4.1. Lack of behaviors deemed problematic blurs the labeling
of sexual
violence
If some elements are absent from the victim's unwanted sexual
ex-

perience, it may not be labeled as sexual violence because it did
not fit
the rape script. This type of re-evaluation, as discussed by
Frohmann
and Mertz (1994), may lead victims to compare the event with
an ag-
gravated rape. This refers to the rape script as socially
designed: if the
event did not match this idea, it may not be labeled as rape.
3.4.1.1. Absence of physical violence or physical harm. The
absence of
physical violence committed by the perpetrator or the absence
of injury
to the victim may move the event away from the victim's rape
script.
The following narrative illustrates the difficulty in defining
what
happened: “Although she did not consent to sex with her ex-
boyfriend, she claims there was no violence and therefore does
not
see it as ‘rape exactly’” (In Weiss, 2009, p. 824). Other
participants in
Weiss (2011) and Peterson and Muehlenhard (2011) minimized
their
injuries by comparing their situation to extreme crime scenarios
with
worse outcomes. Grace (19-year-old, European-Canadian), a
participant
in Johnstone's (2016) study, said: “So… just, when I think of
rape I think
of maybe a weapon being used, like something more like
forceful than just
alcohol, or like drugs… kidnapping, like things like that. Like I
think of much
more scarier things than whatever happened to me” (p. 281).

3.4.1.2. Absence of penetration. Concordant with the rape
script's
presumption that rape implies a vaginal or anal penetration, its
absence blurs the identification of the violent nature of the
event. As
101395
5
Hlavka (2014) mentions: “Young women constructed classic
boundaries
between “real rapes” and everyday violence or “little rapes.””
(p. 346).
Terri (age 11) was interviewed because she told a friend she
was forced
to perform oral sex on a 17-year-old neighbor: “He forced me,
he, uh, he
grabbed me tighter, and he said if I didn't do it he was gonna
rape me”
(Participant in Hlavka, 2014, p. 346). About 5% of women of
Harned's
(2005) study did not consider the event as rape because there
was no
intercourse.
3.4.1.3. Absence of psychological wound. For some
participants, the
absence of psychological distress or trauma is an indicator that
the
event was not severe enough and therefore should not be
considered as

rape:
“I know it was kind of rape. I know in a general sense that is
kind of what
it is, but I have a really hard time coming to reality with that,
like I have a
hard time… cause I know people, most people who have been
raped, it's
been a lot more traumatic. So I can't really call it that because it
didn't,
like affect me that badly in the long run, I don't think. Like it's
obviously
really sucked at the time, but I'm ok now, like I don't have a
fear of men,
or … like, I don't have any long-standing problems from it…”
(Grace in Johnstone, 2016, p. 286)
3.4.2. Perpetrators do not fit the victim's image of a perpetrator
The perception of the perpetrator is often related to the image of
an
unknown person. However, in the selected studies, a man known
to the
victim committed much of the experienced sexual violence.
Acknowledging one's partner or friend as a rapist has
significant im-
plications for the victim, as presented by this participant: “I
liked the
person I was with. Although I sometimes felt pressured into
sexual inter-
course, we were friends and it wasn't a horrible situation”
(Participant in
Harned, 2005, p. 399). In some cases, the image of the man is
not
consistent with the stereotypic rapist image as cruel and rough:

“I don't
think that he was that bad of a guy that he would have just
totally taken
advantage of me. Because he really wasn't that bad of a guy,
just a mean,
vindictive person or anything. But … I mean, he should have
known to back
away. I wouldn't consider it like exactly rape” (interview
response by non-
labeling participant in Peterson & Muehlenhard, 2011, p. 562).
In some
cases, participants do not consider the perpetrator as a criminal:
“He is a
pig, but no rapist” (participant in Dardis et al., 2017, p. 17).
3.4.3. Believing that consent may not be withdrawn
When girls and women make sexual advances, they are less
likely to
acknowledge their legitimacy in wanting to stop sexual
intercourse.
This leads some to believe that they put themselves in a risky
situation
by agreeing to fondling with the man: “If I hadn't been ‘messing
around’
with him at all before, then I would consider it rape, probably,
but since I was
kind of into it in the beginning, then I just don't consider it
rape” (interview
response from non-labeling participant in Peterson &
Muehlenhard,
2011, p. 563). Fear of worsening the situation leads many
women not to
withdraw their consent: “I didn't want to make him mad by
saying no, so I
did what he wanted” (participant in Dardis et al., 2017, p. 18).

3.5. Ambivalence: avoiding labels or using alternative terms
This category refers to narratives suggesting ambivalence.
Participants do not know how to name the event, sometimes
because it
does not seem to fit their idea of what sexual violence is, and
therefore
must not be sexual violence per se. For others, as previously
stated, the
term “sexual violence” holds too much negative connotation and
par-
ticipants will prefer using other words that appear less strong or
may be
less connotated. This may act both as a result of being unwilling
or
unable to characterize their experience as sexual violence or
rape, and
as a way to minimize the event's impact and the likelihood of it
being
understood as sexual violence or rape as they reappraise the
situation in
the future.
3.5.1. Evading a label that refers to sexual violence
Madison and Minichiello's (2000) study reveals that evasive
stra-
tegies are used in participants' narratives when describing the
event.
For example, a participant avoided labeling what happened
altogether.
Some participants were unsure how to label the event: “I'm not
quite sure
what to call what happened”; “I don't really think it has a term”;
“I don't

know how I would define this situation” (participants in
Harned, 2005, p.
405).
3.5.2. The use of alternative terms to describe their experience
Some participants used synonyms to describe their experience.
These labels do often have a softer connotation: “[I] see it more
as
emotional and psychological abuse and manipulation rather than
sexual
abuse” (participant in Harned, 2005, p. 405). Also, some
participants
avoid using the label “rape,” judged negatively, too strong, and
upset-
ting: “[It was] not rape, but [it was] unwanted, forced sex…
[R]ape is a
strong word, but I definitely did not want sex” (questionnaire
response
from non-labeling participant in Peterson & Muehlenhard, 2011,
p.
564). The label “rape,” in these cases, is judged inappropriate
for their
experience and participants consciously refuse to use it.
3.6. Labeling of sexual violence through the perpetrator's
violent behavior,
the consequences suffered or the failure to comply with the
consent
Some participants engage in a labeling process when they
clearly
identify the perpetrator's problematic behaviors. Alternatively,
some
recognize sexual violence due to the experienced consequences.
Lastly,

some participants label the situation as sexual violence because
their
consent was not respected.
3.6.1. Physical violence and its repetition
Coherent with rape scripts, some participants labeled the event
as
sexual violence because physical violence was involved:
“[B]ecause he
used his physical strength to make me do something that I didn't
want to do”
(participant in Harned, 2005, p. 389); “He held down my arms
and
choked me so I would cooperate” (participant in Dardis et al.,
2017, p.
15). Injuries resulting from the event also facilitate the labeling
of
sexual assault: “[L]ooking at my bruises made me realize that
there had to
be some force involved and that [I] was not just letting him do
it. There were
bruises everywhere” (participant in Harned, 2005, p. 392). The
repetition
of violent events perpetrated by the same man is also a clue, for
some
participants, that something was wrong: “At first it… appeared
to be
accidental, but it wasn't accidental, because after a series of the
same sort of
gestures you kind of get the picture that… it was premeditated”
(participant
in Madison & Minichiello, 2000, p. 408).
3.6.2. Negative psychological impacts
Participants can feel negative emotions following an unwanted

sexual experience, such as anxiety, fear, anger, and
disengagement. In
some cases, these harmful psychological impacts lead to the
labeling of
sexual assault. Negative impacts can also affect sexual health
and
sexuality in general: “[T]hat experience took away the meaning
that sex
used to have for me. [N]ow, [I] don't feel it means as much, if
anything, at
all” (participant in Harned, 2005, p. 390). For Sarah (18,
European-
Canadian), loss of control was a factor of distress: “Well it's,
uhh… I don't
know, it's like, I think it's the whole thing about, like, it's…
your own body,
and it's like… not having… not having your say in what's going
on”
(Johnstone, 2016, p. 282).
3.6.3. Not having consented and not being able to say no
Issues of consent explain, for almost all labelers of Harned's
(2005)
study, why they consider the event as sexual violence. Some of
them
suggest the absence of consent as a determinant component: “I
was not
consenting to what occurred. I was not asked before penetration
occurred if I
wanted penetration to occur” (participant in Harned, 2005, p.
387); “I
said no and tried to leave. Despite this he continued”
(participant in Dardis

101395
6
et al., 2017). For others, the inability to give consent because of
in-
toxication confirms the sexual violence: “I'd have to classify it
as rape
because… if I was not conscious, you're not consenting”
(participant in
Johnstone, 2016, p. 283). Finally, some participants clearly
state that
they did not want sexual activity: “[B]ecause [I] clearly said no
and told
him to stop, and he continued with his actions and raped me”
(participant
in Harned, 2005, p. 388).
3.7. Seeking social support or having educational information
External elements may also lead participants to redefine their
ex-
periences. In Harned's (2005) study, seeking social support
triggered
participants to label their victimization as sexual assault: “[I]
felt it was
my fault, for drinking and flirting and leaving the party, but a
close male
friend of mine convinced me that it was sexual assault” (p.
390). Receiving
a warning from a colleague made a participant realize what was
going
on: “Someone had said to me, ‘Don't get near that guy, he's a

sleaze bag,’ you
know? ‘He's sleazy,’ or ‘he's strange,’ […]” (participant in
Madison &
Minichiello, 2000, p. 407). Also, being exposed to educational
in-
formation facilitates the labeling of the event: “I read an article
on sexual
assault or harassment, and the situation I had been in was listed
as a form of
it” (participant in Harned, 2005, p. 392).
The in-depth analysis of this corpus allowed us to expose a
variety of
factors that lead a victim to label or to refuse to label her
experience as
sexual violence. These factors predominantly include self-
blame, nor-
malization, rejection of the term “sexual violence”, adherence
to rape
scripts, ambivalence, characteristics of the experience deemed
proble-
matic, and social support or educational information.
4. Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine how girls and women
perceive their unwanted sexual experience and to identify a
variety of
factors that seem to impede or promote the labeling of the
event.
Results allowed the identification of three main representations
in
participants' narratives: most would not label the event as
sexual vio-
lence (categories 1 to 4), others would be ambivalent about it
(category

5), and some would explicitly label the event as sexual violence
(cate-
gories 6 and 7). All participants had experienced a situation that
was
concordant with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention's
(2014) definition of sexual violence, which includes sexual
harassment,
sexual assault, attempted rape, rape, sexual coercion without
force,
sexual contact and unwanted sexual advances.
The first group of categories (categories 1 to 4) portrays the
com-
plexity of the labeling process as greatly influenced by the
social con-
text in which these events occur. Analysis confirmed that
adherence to
rape scripts and rape myths impact the victims' propensity to
label and
understand the event as sexual violence. Thus, not only does
this ad-
herence deny the presence of sexual violence, but it also leads
to types
of labeling that trivialize the violent nature of the interaction
(Kavanaugh, 2013). This finding raises concerns since it
suggests a
tolerance towards of forms of violence that can be modulated by
minimization, normalization, and rationalization of the
perpetrator's
behavior, who is very often a man known to the victim.
Comprehension
of these labels is illuminated when understood in conjuncture
with
heterosexual relationships (Rich, 1981). In the context of
patriarchy,

sexual assault in heterosexual sex is not represented as a
distinctive act
of violence, but rather as the end of a continuum of sexual
activities
between men and women (Gavey, 2005). Social representations
often
present the male sexual drive as uncontrollable, prompting
many men
and women to adhere to this idea of sexual violence as normal,
banal, or
commonplace experiences. In this traditional sexual script, a
man's role
is to initiate sexual activity, while a woman's responsibility is
to refuse
his sexual advances if she is not willing (Wiederman, 2005).
However,
the masculine script further suggests persistence despite
protests or
vocal non-consent (Harned, 2005; Littleton, Rhatigan, &
Axsom, 2007).
As a result, it is not surprising to find that many events of
unwanted
sexual experience are not represented as sexual assault or rape
by vic-
tims or by perpetrators. This representation of unlabeled sexual
vio-
lence or rape as natural or expected is the most common
discourse in
this study. Rape attribution research has shown that many
unwanted
sexual events are not defined as sexual violence, particularly if
they
contain elements that fit the traditional heteronormative sexual
script –
within the context of intimate relationships, when there is low

physical
force used by the perpetrator (Boyle & McKinzie, 2015; Cleere
& Lynn,
2013; Littleton et al., 2007) or victim's low use of verbal or
physical
resistance (Harned, 2005; Littleton, Axsom, Breitkopf, &
Berenson,
2006).
The second type of representations (category 5), suggests that
la-
beling may be a process, as depicted by showing the
ambivalence in
narratives. Results show that participants are questioning the
event by
using terms that seems less threatening than “rape.” These
participants
mainly reported recent experiences of victimization. This is
concordant
with studies that found that victims who do not label sexual
violence as
such were more likely to relate a recent assault (Boyle &
McKinzie,
2015; Cleere & Lynn, 2013; Littleton et al., 2006), which
suggest that
time may influence labeling process. As reported by Harned
(2005),
labeling seems to be a gradual process that is influenced by
different
factors: seeking social support, thinking about it, personal
growth, so-
bering up (when the sexual violence occurred while she was in-
toxicated), negative impact suffered, educational information
and re-
peat offender (when the perpetrator has multiple victims).
However,

more studies need to be done on this specific process since this
inter-
pretation remains speculative in nature.
The third group of categories (categories 6 and 7) applies to
parti-
cipants that do label the event as sexual violence. Results show
that
some elements promote the labeling of sexual violence: non-
respect of
consent, severity of consequences, perpetrator' social behavior
and
educational information or social support. These elements also
seem to
be linked to rape scripts. As suggested by some researchers,
women that
report emotional distress following sexual violence are more
likely to
label the event as such because it fits the “real rape scenario,”
which
states that a high level of physical violence and psychological
distress
must have been experienced either during or after the event
(Boyle &
McKinzie, 2015; Littleton et al., 2006). However, a
considerable pro-
portion of the participants rely on their lack of consent to label
the
event, more than they rely on the perpetrators' behaviors in and
of it-
self. It is consistent with the many prevention programs in the
United
States and Canada that promote communication of sexual
consent.
Bedera and Nordmeyer (2015) have identified the different
prevention

tips that are addressed to college students, most common sexual
vio-
lence prevention tip being to “communicate sexual limits.”
Although it
seems to help some women in labeling their experience as
sexual vio-
lence, the fact that these interventions place the emphasis on
commu-
nication (and, more specifically, on a victim's role in that
commu-
nication) leads some of them to blame themselves by implying
that they
were not clear enough in their rejection of sex, and therefore are
re-
sponsible for being a victim of sexual violence.
4.1. Limitations and future research
This metasynthesis has limitations. First, the data analysis did
not
result in the achievement of theoretical saturation, since there is
a
dearth of documentation regarding certain categories. Unlike a
typical
qualitative research process based on research interviews, this
sec-
ondary analysis prevented a direct conversation with the
participants
themselves to look for missing elements in our analysis. Rather,
it is
better understood as an exploratory study of the phenomenon.
Second, the internal diversity of the participants in this research
was
limited to the characteristics of selected studies' samples.
Although

there was a great diversity of age between the participants, little
racial
diversity was observed. Thus, the stakes of social class,
racialization, or
101395
7
other forms of marginalization are not represented. Populations
from
diverse economic and racial backgrounds should be further
studied to
document a broader and less ethnocentric comprehension of the
phe-
nomenon.
Future research should validate, qualify and adapt labeling cate-
gories with other under-represented groups, such as people of
sexual
and gender diversity, and cultural, religious, ethnic or racial
diversity.
It would also be necessary to explore labeling regarding other
forms of
sexual violence such as online sexual violence.
4.2. Practice implications
These results have implications for research, and for
intervention
and prevention. In research studies, the methodological oper-
ationalization of sexual violence appears to be a feminist issue.
It is

important to study the labeling of sexual violence in
sociologically
operational terms in an effort to make it visible, allowing
women to
identify the violent nature of the situation experienced. In order
to
obtain the most comprehensive portrait of sexual violence, it is
critical
to adopt a vocabulary that echoes women's experiences, while
identi-
fying the indicators that reveal or obscure the presence of
violence.
In intervention and prevention, professionals working with
sexual
violence victims must tackle rape myths and deconstruct rape
scripts
that may be present in victims' narratives. Such strategy may
allow the
victims to avoid feelings of shame or guilt, and thus better
process the
events that they have experienced. It is important to embrace
the fact
that some people label sexual violence, while others do not. As
Johnstone (2016) states, the process of labeling an assault can
come
with ambivalence. This ambivalence should be addressed to
support
each victim in concordance with how she conceptualizes the
event.
Most importantly, we must aim for a better recognition of the
dif-
ferent manifestations of sexual violence among various groups.
By
adopting an inclusive definition of the varied types of sexual

victimi-
zation, intervention programs will be able to address myths
more
broadly. These programs should also address more insidious and
covert
forms of sexual violence, such as inappropriate sexual
comments or
sexual jokes, so as to be in line with an approach that places
sexual
violence on a continuum. Prevention programs must deconstruct
rape
myths and different gender stereotypes that negatively affect
hetero-
sexual relationships, from childhood to adulthood, for both
hetero-
sexual individuals and those from sexual and gender diverse
commu-
nities. Intervention programs should criticize the traditional
gender
socialization of women to enable them to overcome emotional
barriers
that promote always being nice (physically or emotionally) to
others
and to defer to men's desires. Finally, prevention programs,
such as the
Enhanced Assess Acknowledge Act Education program (Senn et
al.,
2013), should focus on women's knowledge of sexual violence
to con-
trast it with positive and healthy sexualities and intimate
relationships.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Mylène Fernet for her helpful comments on
an

earlier draft of the manuscript, Carl Rodrigue for the guidelines
needed
to conduct a metasynthesis.
Funding information
This research was assisted by fellowships from the Fonds de
Recherche du Québec - Société et Culture (FRQSC).
References
Basile, K. C., Smith, S. G., Breiding, M. J., Black, M. C., &
Mahendra, R. R. (2014). Sexual
violence surveillance: Uniform definitions and recommended
data elements, version
2.0. Retrieved from
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv_surveillance_
definitionsl-2009-a.pdf.
Bedera, N., & Nordmeyer, K. (2015). “Never go out alone”: An
analysis of college rape
prevention tips. Sexuality & Culture, 19, 533–542.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-
015-9274-5.
Boyle, K. M., & McKinzie, A. E. (2015). Resolving negative
affect and restoring meaning:
Responses to deflection produced by unwanted sexual
experiences. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 78(2), 151–172.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272514564073.
Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will: Men, women and
rape. États-UnisSimon &
Schuster.

Burt, M. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal
of Personality and Social
Psychology, 38, 217–230.
Cantor, D., Fisher, B., Chibnall, S., Townsend, R., Lee, H.,
Bruce, C., & Thomas, G. (2015).
Report on the AAU campus climate survey on sexual assault and
sexual misconduct.
Retrieved from Maryland:
https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/%40%20Files/
Climate%20Survey/AAU_Campus_Climate_Survey_12_14_15.p
df.
Cleere, C., & Lynn, S. J. (2013). Acknowledged versus
unacknowledged sexual assault
among college women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
28(12), 2593–2611. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0886260513479033.
Coffey, J. S. (2006). Parenting a child with chronic illness: A
metasynthesis. Pediatric
Nursing, 31(1), 51–59.
Dardis, C. M., Kraft, K. M., & Gidycz, C. A. (2017).
“Miscommunication” and under-
graduate women’s conceptualizations of sexual assault: A
qualitative analysis. Journal
of Interpersonal Violence, 1–29.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517726412.
Edwards, K. M., Turchik, J. A., Dardis, C. M., Reynolds, N., &
Gidycz, C. A. (2011). Rape
myths: History, individual and institutional-level presence, and
implications for
change. Sex Roles, 65, 761–773.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9943-2.

Fisher, B. S., Cullen, F. T., & Turner, M. G. (2000). The sexual
victimization of college
women. Retrieved from Washington:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.
pdf.
Frohmann, L., & Mertz, E. (1994). Legal reform and social
construction: Violence, gender,
and the law. Law & Social Inquiry, 19, 829–851.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-
4469.1994.tb00941.x.
Gavey, N. (2005). Can a woman be raped and not know it? Just
sex: The cultural scaffolding of
rape. New York, NY: Routledge.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2009). The discovery of
grounded theory: Strategies for
qualitative research. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
Hanmer, J. (1977). Violence et contrôle social des femmes.
Nouvelles Questions féministes,
2, 68–88.
Harned, M. S. (2005). Understanding women’s labeling of
unwanted sexual experiences
with dating partners. Violence Against Women, 11(3), 374–413.
https://doi.org/10.
1177/1077801204272240.
Hlavka, H. R. (2014). Normalizing sexual violence: Young
women account for harassment
and abuse. Gender & Society, 28(3), 337–358.
https://doi.org/10.1177/
0891243214526468.

Johnstone, D. J. (2016). A listening guide analysis of women’s
experiences of un-
acknowledged rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(2),
275–289. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0361684315624460.
Kahn, A. S., Mathie, V. A., & Torgler, S. (1994). Rape scripts
and rape acknowledgment.
Psychological of Women Quarterly, 18, 53–66.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.
1994.tb00296.x.
Kavanaugh, P. R. (2013). The continuum of sexual violence:
Women’s accounts of victi-
mization in urban nightlife. Feminist Criminology, 8(1), 20–39.
https://doi.org/10.
1177/1557085112442979.
Kelly, L. (1987). The continuum of sexual violence. In J.
Hanmer, & M. Maynard (Eds.).
Women, violence, and social control (pp. 46–60). Atlantic
Highlands, N.J: Humanities
Press International.
Koss, M. P. (1985). The hidden rape victim: Personality,
attitudinal, and situational
characteristics. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 193–212.
j.1471-6402.1985.tb00872.x.
Koss, M. P. (2011). Hidden, unacknowledged, acquaintance, and
date rape: Looking back,
look forward. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 348–354.
0361684311403856.

LeMaire, K. L., Oswald, D. L., & Russell, B. L. (2016).
Labeling sexual victimization ex-
periences: The role of sexism, rape myth acceptance, and
tolerance for sexual har-
assment. Violence and Victims, 31(2), 332–346.
https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.
VV-D-13-00148.
Littleton, H. L., Axsom, D., Breitkopf, C. R., & Berenson, A.
(2006). Rape acknowledgment
and postassault experiences: How acknowledgment status
relates to disclosure,
coping, worldview, and reactions received from others.
Violence and Victims, 21(6),
https://doi.org/10.1891/vv-v21i6a006.
Littleton, H. L., Rhatigan, D. L., & Axsom, D. (2007).
Unacknowledged rape: How much
do we know about the hidden rape victim? Journal of
Aggression, Maltreatment &
Trauma, 14(4), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1300/J146v14n04_04.
Littleton, H. L., Tabernik, H., Canales, E. J., & Backstrom, T.
(2009). Risky situation or
harmless fun? A qualitative examination of college women’s
bad hook-up and rape
scripts. Sex Roles, 60(11–12), 793–804.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-
9586-8.
Madison, J., & Minichiello, V. (2000). Recognizing and
labeling sex-based and sexual
harassment in the health care workplace. Journal of Nursing
Scholarship, 32(4),
405–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2000.00405.x.

Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography:
Synthesizing qualitative studies.
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Paillé, P. (1994). L’analyse par théorisation ancrée. Critiques
féministes et savoirs. Vol. 23,
147–181. https://doi.org/10.7202/1002253ar.
Peterson, Z. D., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (2004). Was it rape? The
function of women’s rape
myth acceptance and definitions of sex in labeling their own
experiences. Sex Roles,
51(3/4), 129–144.
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SERS.0000037758.95376.00.
101395
8
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv_surveillance_de
finitionsl-2009-a.pdf
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv_surveillance_de
finitionsl-2009-a.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-015-9274-5
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-015-9274-5
https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272514564073
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S1359-1789(19)30233-2/rf0020
https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/%40%20Files/Climate%
20Survey/AAU_Campus_Climate_Survey_12_14_15.pdf
https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/%40%20Files/Climate%
20Survey/AAU_Campus_Climate_Survey_12_14_15.pdf

https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513479033
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260513479033
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517726412
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9943-2
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4469.1994.tb00941.x
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801204272240
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801204272240
https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243214526468
https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243214526468
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315624460
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315624460
https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085112442979
https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085112442979
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684311403856
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684311403856
https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-13-00148
https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-13-00148
https://doi.org/10.1891/vv-v21i6a006

https://doi.org/10.1300/J146v14n04_04
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9586-8
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9586-8
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2000.00405.x
https://doi.org/10.7202/1002253ar
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SERS.0000037758.95376.00
Peterson, Z. D., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (2007). Conceptualizing
the “wantedness” of wo-
men’s consensual and nonconsensual sexual experiences:
Implications for how
women label their experiences with rape. Journal of Sex
Research, 44(1), 72–88.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490709336794.
Peterson, Z. D., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (2011). A match-and-
motivation model of how
women label their nonconsensual sexual experiences.
Psychology of Women Quarterly,
35, 558–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684311410210.
Phillips, L. M. (2000). Flirting with danger: Young women’s
reflections on sexuality and
domination. New York: New York University Press.
Rhew, I. C., Stappenbeck, C. A., Bedard-Gilligan, M., Hughes,
T., & Kaysen, D. (2017).
Effects of sexual assault on alcohol use and consequences
among young adult sexual
minority women. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 85(5), 424–433.
https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000202.

Rich, A. (1981). La contrainte à l'hétérosexualité et l'existence
lesbienne. Nouvelles
Questions féministes, 1, 15–43.
Romito, P. (2006). Un silence de mortes. La violence masculine
occultée. Paris, France:
Nouvelles questions féministes.
Ryan, K. M. (2011). The relationship between rape myths and
sexual scripts: The social
construction of rape. Sex Roles, 65, 774–782.
Sandelowski, M., Docherty, S., & Emden, C. (1997). Focus on
qualitative methods.
Qualitative metasynthesis: Issues and tehcniques. Research in
Nursing & Health, 20,
365–371. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-
240X(199708)20:4<365::AID-
NUR9>3.0.CO;2-E.
Scott, M. B., & Lyman, S. M. (1968). Accounts. American
Sociological Review, 33(1), 46–62.
Senn, C. Y., Eliasziw, M., Barata, P. C., Thurston, W. E.,
Newby-Clark, I. R., Radtke, H. L.,
... team, a. S. s (2013). Sexual assault resistance education for
university women:
Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (SARE trial).
BMC Women’s Health,
13(25), https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-13-25 (13 p.).
Truman, J. L., & Langton, L. (2015). Criminal Victimization,
2014. Retrieved from U.S.
Department of Justice:
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv14.pdf.

Weiss, K. G. (2009). Boys will be boys and other gendered
accounts: An exploration of
victim excuses and justifications for unwanted sexual contact
and coercion. Violence
Against Women, 15(7), 810–834.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801209333611.
Weiss, K. G. (2011). Neutralizing sexual victimization: A
typology of victims’ non-re-
porting accounts. Theoretical Criminology, 15(4), 445–467.
1362480610391527.
Wiederman, M. W. (2005). The gendered nature of sexual
scripts. Family Journal, 13(4),
496–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480705278729.
Wilson, L. C., & Miller, K. E. (2016). Meta-analysis of the
prevalence of unacknowledged
rape. Violence & Abuse, 17(2), 149–159.
1524838015576391.
101395
9
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490709336794
https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684311410210
https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000202

https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-
240X(199708)20:4<365::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-E
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-
240X(199708)20:4<365::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-E
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-13-25
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv14.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801209333611
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480610391527
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480610391527
https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480705278729
https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838015576391
https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838015576391A metasynthesis of
qualitative studies on girls' and women's labeling of sexual
violenceIntroductionMethodProcedure and
sampleAnalysisResultsSelf-blame occurring because of
something done or not doneFeeling that sexual violence could
have been stoppedHolding oneself at least partially responsible
for the eventNormalization of sexual violence“The event was no
big deal”: reduction of severity“It happens all the time”:
everyday behaviorsPeer reactions can alter the inclination to
recognize the experience as rapeUnwanted sexual experiences
are commonplace and expected behaviors because they happen
all the timeSexual violence is seen as normal dating behavior
within heterosexual relationships“He didn't mean it”:
perpetrators held unaccountableThe event was accidental:
denying their perpetrator's intentions to harm themBlaming the
effects of alcohol or drugs instead of the perpetratorRejection of
the term “sexual violence”Recognizing oneself as a victim goes
against a strong self-imageUnderstanding sexual violence
according to rape scriptsLack of behaviors deemed problematic
blurs the labeling of sexual violenceAbsence of physical

violence or physical harmAbsence of penetrationAbsence of
psychological woundPerpetrators do not fit the victim's image
of a perpetratorBelieving that consent may not be
withdrawnAmbivalence: avoiding labels or using alternative
termsEvading a label that refers to sexual violenceThe use of
alternative terms to describe their experienceLabeling of sexual
violence through the perpetrator's violent behavior, the
consequences suffered or the failure to comply with the
consentPhysical violence and its repetitionNegative
psychological impactsNot having consented and not being able
to say noSeeking social support or having educational
informationDiscussionLimitations and future researchPractice
implicationsAcknowledgementsmk:H1_40Funding
informationmk:H1_42References

Contents lists available at ScienceDirectAggression and Vi.docx

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Contents lists available at ScienceDirectAggression and Vi.docx

Similaire à Contents lists available at ScienceDirectAggression and Vi.docx (10)

Plus de bobbywlane695641

Plus de bobbywlane695641 (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Contents lists available at ScienceDirectAggression and Vi.docx