| Sumario: | To investigate slut shaming (condemnation aimed at presumably sexually active females) as a form of bullying, we asked 142 U.S. college students acting as disciplinary committee members to decide a case involving two female high school students. We manipulated the victim's self-presentation (sexually available, control) and the level of harm she suffered (mild anxiety, PTSD). Although evaluators typically make more pro-victim judgments when the level of harm is higher rather than lower, we expected participants to ignore harm when the victim self-presented as sexually available. As predicted, participants in the control condition made higher probability of guilt estimates and harsher sentence recommendations when the victim experienced PTSD versus mild anxiety. In contrast, harm level did not influence participants' judgments in the sexually available condition. Additional analyses demonstrated that participants attributed relatively more responsibility to the sexually available than to the control victim, and the effect of the victim's self-presentation on guilt estimates was mediated by attributions about the cause of the harm. The results correspond with previous findings that evaluators blame bullying victims whom they believe made themselves targets. We suggest that school districts revise their policies as necessary to avoid encouraging slut shaming and that evaluators receive training to help them apply the legal definition of bullying to specific situations.
|
|---|