Methods : How They Shape Views of Sexual Violence

This article distinguishes among the various research strategies available to the sexual aggression researcher and notes the limited domains of explanation inherent in each approach. Runkel and McGrath's (1972) circumplex typology is adapted as an organizing framework to clarify the relationships among the various research approaches. Examples of each type of research are given from the sexual aggression literature. Specific research strategies are examined in light of their ability to illuminate the possible and probable importance of a relationship between variables. Also discussed is the influential effect that a researcher's assumptions about the nature of sexual assault has on the choice of a research question and a research methodology to investigate that question. A multiple-strategies approach is recommended for the study of sexual assault. Article: The credibility of science is threatened when inappropriate characterizations of findings go unchallenged. (Wilcox, 1987, p. 942) Research methods have the potential for shaping one's view of reality. The resulting perceptions of reality, however, can become distorted when the purposes and limitations of various methodologies are ignored or misunderstood. This is a central issue in studies of sexual violence because of the tendency for consumers of research to make causal inferences based on correlational findings, to overlook the potential significance of higher order interactions not addressed in experimental manipulations, or to generalize beyond the data. Each approach for studying sexual aggression has its own strengths and limitations. Empirical analytic methods cannot help us know the phenomenological experience of a beautiful sunset, nor can we know the phenomenological experience of a rape survivor using traditional research paradigms. Conversely, subjective reports shed little light on the incidence and prevalence of sexual assault. There is, however, much that can be learned from both subjective methods and traditional scientific approaches when applied to the study of sexual aggression and victimization. Making best use of this knowledge hinges on an understanding of some basic but easily forgotten concepts about research methods. This article begins with a brief discussion of how assumptions about the nature of sexual assault can potentially influence the types of research questions asked. The following sections examine the relationships among research methods, their respective strengths and weaknesses, and their ability to address questions about the possibility and probability of relationships. Special emphasis is given to the types of inferences that can be drawn from these methods. The article concludes by emphasizing the need for a multiple-strategies approach for advancing knowledge about sexual violence. Assumptions About Sexual Assault and Choice of Research Questions Ideally, a thorough critique of research methods would begin with an examination of the underlying philosophy of science, and relatedly, the explicitly and implicitly held assumptions that guide the choice of research questions (Wittig, 1985). The assumptions that are made illuminate various facets of a domain of study, while obscuring others (Weiskopf, 1977). It is beyond the scope of this paper to undertake a thorough analysis of the assumptions underlying sexual assault research; however, one example can illustrate how assumptions set boundaries on that which is explored and explained. Early theories examined rape from a male point of view and assumed that sexual assaults were perpetrated by a few deviant men whose sex drives compelled them to perform aberrant acts. Rape was studied as an aspect of sexual deviancy, and consequently much of the early research focused on sexual aspects of rapists' personality and behavior. Early work also focused on victim characteristics that "precipitated" the assault (Amir, 1971). Feminist scholarship challenged the assumption that rape is largely an act of sexual deviancy, and instead insisted that sexual assault is better understood as an act of violence, supported by prevailing cultural attitudes that condone and normalize violence against women (Brownmiller, 1975). As feminist assumptions of sexual assault became adopted by sexual aggression researchers (see Donat & D'Emilio, this issue), a shift in research focus occurred. Cultural attitudes and rape myths (Burt, 1980), as well as dominance and power as motives for sexual assault (Ellis, 1989; Lisak & Roth, 1988; Malamuth, 1986; Palmer, 1988), became the focus of study. Similarly, the feminist assumption that sexual assault is a logical extension of cultural images of male sexuality and men's domination of women in a sexist society led to increased focus on "hidden" rape, i.e., sexually assaultive acts that do not come to the attention of the criminal justice system (Koss, 1988). Although the feminist assumptions concerning sexual aggression illuminated facets of sexual assault that had previously been ignored (i.e., patriarchal values, the role of power, and dominance motives), exclusive adherence to such assumptions can result in an incomplete understanding of sexual violence. Feminist assumptions, for example, generally deemphasize the potential contribution that biologically driven sexual motives may play in the commitment of sexual assault (cf. , Palmer, 1988), a perspective currently receiving attention in the sociobiological literature (Ellis, 1991; Thornhill & Thornhill, 1990—see Langley & O'Neal, 1991, for a critique). Additionally, feminist ideology does not readily acknowledge the contribution of men's own childhood sexual victimization to their future commitment of sexually assaultive acts against women (Amir, 1971; Groth, 1979). Sexual assault researchers are challenged to identify other assumptions underlying their work, to examine the implications of these assumptions, and to communicate these to their readers. Conceptualizing Research on Sexual Aggression The methods employed to test a question establish the domain of explanation (Garfinkel, 1981). For example, certain methods permit causal inferences; others do not. Some methodologies are geared toward identifying situational variables (e.g., antecedent and consequent stimuli) that may function to increase the likelihood that sexual aggression will occur, whereas others are concerned with the identification of stable structures or attributes (e.g., attitudes and personality characteristics) that covary with acts of sexual aggression. Methodologies that are designed to assess structural relations typically cannot be used to identify functional relations, and vice versa. Furthermore, methodologies that attempt to identify structural or functional relations do not adequately illuminate the phenomenology of sexual assault. Relationships Among Methods The structural analysis of research methods described below identifies distinguishing dimensions, and highlights each strategy's strengths and weaknesses. Three dimensions, described by Runkel and McGrath (1972), define eight basic research methods. A modified version of their typology is presented in Fig. 1. The circumplex figure displays the various research strategies, organized along axes that represent the following three dimensions: (a) controllability of research operations, which is maximized in laboratory experiments and experimental simulations; (b) manifest reality of behavior, which is maximized in field experiments and field studies; and (c) context independence of the data, which is