Assessing sexual aggression: Addressing the gap between rape victimization and perpetration prevalence rates

Obtaining consistent and accurate rates of women's sexual assault experiences and men's history of sexual aggression has proved difficult and rates vary tremendously throughout the literature [Koss, M.P. (1993a). Detecting the scope of rape: A review of prevalence research methods. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8 (2), 198–222].It has been suggested that methodological factors influence the detection of women's sexual assault experiences and contribute to the rate disparities [Fisher, B. S., Cullen, F. T. & Turner, M. G. (2000). The sexual victimization of college women (NCJ 182369). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Institute of Justice.; Hamby, S. L. & Koss, M. (2003). Shades of gray: A quantitative study of terms used in the measurement of sexual victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 243–255.; Koss, M.P. (1993a). Detecting the scope of rape: A review of prevalence research methods. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8 (2), 198–222].Survey methods are commonly used in the assessment of women's experience with sexual assault victimization. Men's history of sexually aggressive behaviors is typically examined using parallel versions of the survey instruments used with women.While much is known about variables affecting the reliability, validity, and utility of these assessment methods when applied to women, less is known about the influence of these factors in the assessment of men's self-reported aggression. This paper discusses current sexual victimization and perpetration incidence and prevalence rates.An overview of the major sources of these data, as well as a review of the methodological factors known to influence levels of rape detection inwomen is presented. An examination of how these issuesmay be relevant in themeasurement ofmale sexual aggression is discussed with suggestions for future research. © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.