Social Norms: Are Sexually Aggressive Men More Likely to Misperceive Other Men’s Sexual Desires and Behavior?

ABSTRACT

Separate lines of research show that men overestimate the extent of male peers’ sexual activity, and independently, that sexually aggressive men believe that other men approve of coercive behavior. This study examined the intersection of these lines of inquiry, testing whether the degree of male participants’ misperception of other men’s sexual behavior differs as a function of perpetrator status. In a national sample, we presented heterosexually active men (n = 497) with sexual scenarios varying in sexual acts, partner types, and circumstances. Results showed that participants significantly overestimated the typicality of all types of sexual situations for other men. Participants also misjudged the desirability of scenarios consistent with a traditional masculinity sexual script to other men; these scenarios reflected an adversarial perspective on relationships and an impersonal approach to sexuality – a known risk factor for sexual aggression. Further, sexually aggressive men overestimated the desirability of these traditional masculinity scenarios to a greater extent than non-aggressive peers. Findings suggest that interventions that provide accurate knowledge about social norms, or “typical” sexual desires and behaviors among other men, may reduce pressure to live up to perceived but perhaps inaccurate masculine ideals, as well as reduce social norm-related risks for sexually aggressive behavior.

KEYWORDS:

• Sexual assault
• sexual behavior
• social norms
• men

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by Grant R01 HD056952 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development to Diane M. Morrison (the Guys’ Turn study). We also acknowledge the software and data storage resources provided by the University of Washington’s Center for Studies in Demography and Ecology under National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Grant R24 HD42828.

Disclosure of Interest

Authors Casey, Masters & Beadnell declare that they have no conflicts to report.

Ethical Standards and Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (University of Washington) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all participants for being included in the study.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [R01 HD056952, R24 HD42828]