Contemporary Developments in Attitudes and Interactions with Victims of Crime

A special issue of Behavioral Sciences (ISSN 2076-328X). This special issue belongs to the section "Psychiatric, Emotional and Behavioral Disorders".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 29 November 2024 | Viewed by 1952

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Psychology, School of Education and Psychology, University of Bolton, Bolton BL3 5AB, UK
Interests: victim and witness interviews; sexual violence; victim blaming; jury decision making

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Social Science and Humanities, Loughborough University, Leicestershire LE11 3TU, UK
Interests: courtroom behavior and legal decision making; sexual violence and jury decision making

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Victims of crime are subjected to traumatic ordeals that can have long-lasting impacts on their health and wellbeing. These experiences will also create further difficulties for victims to give evidence and seek appropriate help. It is therefore imperative for professionals interacting with victims (e.g., police, healthcare professionals, support workers, jurors) to approach these interactions professionally and ethically. However, research continues to demonstrate that many professionals, as well as society in general, will approach cases unempathetically and problematically, drawing on cognitive biases or inaccurate pre-conceived beliefs. The impact of negative victim attitudes (e.g., victim blaming) are extremely problematic, they can cause re-traumatisation to victims, incite self-blame, and push many individuals away from wanting to report crimes or seek out support.

Research has come a long way in helping to identify and dispel problematic victim attitudes, as well as informing best practise for those working with crime victims (e.g., trauma-informed support). Despite this surge in empirical enquiry, the problem with negative victim attitudes persists. The following Special Issue calls for contemporary explorations into the treatment and perception of crime victims.

Dr. Dara Mojtahedi
Dr. Dominic Willmott
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Behavioral Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2200 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • victim
  • survivors
  • support
  • crime
  • trauma
  • victim attitudes

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

28 pages, 401 KiB  
Article
Are We Sure That He Knew That You Don’t Want to Have Sex?’: Discursive Constructions of the Suspect in Police Interviews with Rape Complainants
by Megan Hermolle, Alexandra Kent, Abigail J. Locke and Samantha J. Andrews
Behav. Sci. 2024, 14(9), 837; https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14090837 (registering DOI) - 18 Sep 2024
Abstract
Recent statistics reveal alarming flaws in the Criminal Justice System’s (CJS) handling of rape cases, undermining the pursuit of justice for complainants seeking legal redress. This paper takes a novel approach to explore police rape stereotype use in interviews with rape complainants, utilising [...] Read more.
Recent statistics reveal alarming flaws in the Criminal Justice System’s (CJS) handling of rape cases, undermining the pursuit of justice for complainants seeking legal redress. This paper takes a novel approach to explore police rape stereotype use in interviews with rape complainants, utilising critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis and discursive psychology to understand and critique the balance of power within an interview and how this might impact attrition and prosecution decisions. Ten police interviews with rape complainants were analysed with several suspect discursive constructions present throughout, including the interviewer constructing the suspect as misunderstanding, the complainant as miscommunicating non-consent, or agentless and passive talk. A significant and original finding was the way constructions interacted with the spectrum of stranger-to-partner rapes. In stranger rape cases, passive language often obscures the suspect and emphasises the complainant's behaviour. Acquaintance rapes frequently involved misunderstandings centred on visible distress and mixed signals. Partner rapes highlighted issues around consent and coercion, with officers often ignorant of coercive control and domestic abuse. These findings align with Operation Bluestone Soteria (OSB); thus, the recommendations align with those made by OSB’s Pillar One. Full article
23 pages, 749 KiB  
Article
Rape Myths and Verdict Systems: What Is Influencing Conviction Rates in Rape Trials in Scotland?
by Lee John Curley, Martin Lages, Pamela J. Sime and James Munro
Behav. Sci. 2024, 14(7), 619; https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14070619 - 21 Jul 2024
Viewed by 869
Abstract
The Scottish verdict system includes three verdicts: ‘guilty’, ‘not guilty’ and ‘not proven’. Politicians propose that the three-verdict system is partially to blame for the low conviction rate of rape, whereas research suggests that rape myths may be having a larger impact. To [...] Read more.
The Scottish verdict system includes three verdicts: ‘guilty’, ‘not guilty’ and ‘not proven’. Politicians propose that the three-verdict system is partially to blame for the low conviction rate of rape, whereas research suggests that rape myths may be having a larger impact. To test the effects of varying verdict systems (guilty, not guilty and not proven; guilty and not guilty; a series of proven and not proven verdicts) and rape myths on juror verdicts. A total of 180 participants answered questions regarding their acceptance of rape myths using the Acceptance of Modern Myth and Sexual Aggression (AMMSA) scale. They then watched a staged rape trial filmed in a real courtroom and reached a verdict. Participants also provided longer-form answers on which thematical analysis was conducted. The main findings are as follows: (1) The special verdict system leads to a higher conviction rate than the other systems when rape myth acceptance is controlled for. (2) The higher the rape myth acceptance, the more favourably the accused was perceived and the less favourably the complainer was perceived. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop