I Do, But I Don’t Consent: Mock Juror Marital Status and Intimate Partner Rape Perceptions

• In Event: Lightning Talk: Key Issues in Power-Based Violence

Abstract

Intimate partner rape (IPR)—nonconsensual sexual intercourse between domestic partners—affects 1 in 3 women but is highly under-prosecuted. One reason is that IPR is often not seen as “real” rape due to the existing relationship between victim and perpetrator. Additionally, some believe that in heterosexual marriages, wives are obligated to have sex with their husbands. This experiment examined how mock jurors' marital status affects perceptions of IPR. Online community participants (N=214) read a mock IPR trial summary involving a female victim and male perpetrator, then provided a verdict, their verdict reasoning, and ratings of the victim and defendant (e.g., credibility). Based on self-reported marital status, we coded participants as married or nonmarried. A significant mediation emerged: married participants rendered fewer guilty verdicts because they perceived the defendant as less typical than did nonmarried participants. Married participants also rated the victim more negatively (lower credibility, less sympathy), the defendant more positively (higher credibility, lower blame, less anger), and viewed both the victim and scenario as significantly less typical. These findings highlight how juror characteristics—such as marital status—can influence legal decision-making and reveal biases that may perpetuate misconceptions of IPR, a topic that remains underexplored in the literature.

Authors

• Kristina Lambert, Bridgewater State University

• Nesa Wasarhaley, Bridgewater State University