Display options
Share it on

J Math Psychol. 2010;54(1):137-149. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2008.10.001.

Perceived association between diagnostic and non-diagnostic cues of women's sexual interest: General Recognition Theory predictors of risk for sexual coercion.

Journal of mathematical psychology

Coreen Farris, Richard J Viken, Teresa A Treat

Affiliations

  1. Carnegie Mellon University, United States.

PMID: 20607097 PMCID: PMC2895926 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmp.2008.10.001

Abstract

Young men's errors in sexual perception have been linked to sexual coercion. The current investigation sought to explicate the perceptual and decisional sources of these social perception errors, as well as their link to risk for sexual violence. General Recognition Theory (GRT; [Ashby, F. G., & Townsend, J. T. (1986). Varieties of perceptual independence. Psychological Review, 93, 154-179]) was used to estimate participants' ability to discriminate between affective cues and clothing style cues and to measure illusory correlations between men's perception of women's clothing style and sexual interest. High-risk men were less sensitive to the distinction between women's friendly and sexual interest cues relative to other men. In addition, they were more likely to perceive an illusory correlation between women's diagnostic sexual interest cues (e.g., facial affect) and non-diagnostic cues (e.g., provocative clothing), which increases the probability that high-risk men will misperceive friendly women as intending to communicate sexual interest. The results provide information about the degree of risk conferred by individual differences in perceptual processing of women's interest cues, and also illustrate how translational scientists might adapt GRT to examine research questions about individual differences in social perception.

References

  1. J Stud Alcohol. 2000 Sep;61(5):688-97 - PubMed
  2. J Abnorm Psychol. 1995 May;104(2):312-26 - PubMed
  3. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004 Oct;72(5):747-56 - PubMed
  4. Psychol Rev. 1986 Apr;93(2):154-79 - PubMed
  5. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1991 Jun;120(2):150-72 - PubMed
  6. Annu Rev Psychol. 1999;50:215-41 - PubMed
  7. Psychol Assess. 2001 Dec;13(4):549-65 - PubMed
  8. Clin Psychol Rev. 2008 Jan;28(1):48-66 - PubMed
  9. Int J Eat Disord. 2005 Jul;38(1):65-72 - PubMed
  10. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1987 Apr;55(2):162-70 - PubMed
  11. Psychol Sci. 2005 Dec;16(12):973-8 - PubMed
  12. Psychol Assess. 2002 Sep;14(3):239-52 - PubMed
  13. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1980 Feb;38(2):217-30 - PubMed
  14. Psychol Sci. 2008 Apr;19(4):348-54 - PubMed
  15. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1988;528:133-47 - PubMed
  16. Psychol Sci. 2006 Oct;17(10):869-75 - PubMed
  17. Psychol Assess. 2002 Sep;14(3):253-62 - PubMed
  18. Psychometrika. 1967 Mar;32(1):25-33 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support