The Role of Male Sexual Arousal in Rape: Six Models

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology Copyright 199 l by the American Psychological Association r Inc. 

1991, Vol. 59, No. 5,621-630 0022-006X/91/$3.00 

The Role of Male Sexual Arousal in Rape: Six Models 

Howard E. Barbaree and William L. Marshall 

Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada 

This article examines men's sexual arousal to rape cues and its possible role in sexual assault. The 

article presents six different models that have been described in the literature to account for men's 

sexual arousal to descriptions of rape. The models are divided into two broad categories, response 

control models and stimulus control models, and are further divided into models postulating a 

"trait" that might distinguish rapists from other men and those postulating a "state" that might be 

present in men while they commit a sexual assault. A number of the models are supported by 

empirical data, and some of these data are reviewed. The article suggests that different models may 

be operating in different men when they commit sexual assault. These models are discussed in 

relation to the current literature on the classification and diagnosis of sexual offenders. 

Current research on the psychology of rape can be divided 

into two broad categories, depending on the nature of the work 

and the perspective of the researcher. On one hand, clinical 

research has tended to study known criminal groups, either 

incarcerated inmates (e.g., Groth, 1979) or outpatient men at- 

tending community-based treatment clinics (Abel, Becker, 

Blanchard, & Flanagan, 1981). Among the clinical studies, the 

intent has been to (a) derive an understanding of the motivation 

and background of rape from file reviews and interviews of the 

perpetrators (Abel, Becker, Cunningham-Rathner, Mittleman, 

& Rouleau, 1988), (b) develop typologies of offenders (Knight & 

Prentky, 1990), (c) develop assessment instruments that might 

predict recidivism or assess dangerousness (Abel, Mittleman, & 

Becker, 1985), and (d) develop effective treatments targeting rele- 

vant problem behaviors (Abel, Blanchard, & Becker, 1978). The 

clinical perspective has been dominated by a psychopathology 

approach to the offender, which attempts to specify the anoma- 

lous characteristics inherent to the offender that cause his sex- 

ual aggression (Abel, Baflow, Blanchard, & Guild, 1977). One 

example of the psychopathology model construes sexual ag- 

gression as a paraphilia (sexual sadism; Diagnostic and Statisti- 

cal Man ual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed., rev. [DSM-III-R; Amer- 

ican Psychiatric Association, 1987]), and clinical assessment of 

the offender has focused on the man's sexual deviance (Abel et 

al., 1988). 

On the other hand, social psychological research has focused 

on sexual aggression among men in the natural environment. 

These studies have usually depended heavily on surveys of uni- 

versity undergraduate women and men, partly because of the 

ease with which academic psychologists can access these sub- 

jects, but also because these subjects are sexually active, are 

verbally competent, and respond well to surveys in question- 

naire format. The research has attempted to (a) determine the 

prevalence of sexual aggression among university undergradu- 

ates (Koss & Dinero, 1988; Malamuth, 1981), (b) identify the 

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to How- 

ard E. Barbaree, Department of Psychology, Queen's University, King- 

ston, Ontario, Canada K7L 3N6. 

621 

psychological traits that characterize the sexual aggressors 

(Koss & Dinero, 1988; Malamuth, 1986, 1988), and (c) under- 

stand how social perceptions and social or interactional pro- 

cesses come to influence the occurrence of aggression (Craig, 

1990). The feminist perspective has been influential here, with 

theory and research concentrating on the assaultive and hostile 

aspects of rape (Brownmiller, 1975), the role of power in the 

psychology of the rapist (Darke, 1990), and the contribution of 

a male-dominated social structure (Herman, 1990; Russell, 

1975). 

Both perspectives recognize the basic duality of rape: Specifi- 

cally, they recognize that rape involves both aggressive and sex- 

ual elements. However, the perspectives differ in their descrip- 

tions of the interaction between these two components. 

The social psychology perspective, especially the feminist 

perspective, has rejected sexual motivation as an important ex- 

planatory concept by describing sexual arousal as a coinciden- 

tal by-product of the circumstance of rape (Brownmiller, 1975). 

In contrast, the clinical perspective of rape as a paraphiliac 

behavior or as an expression of a sexual preference has focused 

on sexual motivation (Freund, Scher, Recansky, Campbell, & 

Heasman, 1986) as an explanatory concept but has downplayed 

the role of aggression toward women as a component in rape. 

The present article takes the position that rape is best defined 

as an integration of both sexual and aggressive components and 

that our understanding of rape will be best advanced by an 

investigation of the way in which these two elements of rape 

interact. The current state of knowledge in the field does not 

make it clear how these two elements combine to produce the 

act of rape. 

Both approaches to rape have postulated and identified dis- 

positional factors that are apparently responsible for the aggres- 

sive acts of rapists. Craig (1990) has argued convincingly that 

men with particular dispositions toward sexual aggression seek 

out particular women for the perceived sexual possibilities they 

afford and then behave in ways that reduce the women's likeli- 

hood of resistance, decreasing the responsibility they feel for 

any coercion that is required. However, she goes on to argue 

that a more complete analysis of rape will include situational

622 HOWARD E. BARBAREE AND WILLIAM L. MARSHALL 

determinants (Craig, 1990). Recently, it has been suggested that 

rape is a heterogeneous phenomenon, with different instances 

of the behavior requiring different explanations. Knight and 

Prentky (1990) have presented a psychological typology of rap- 

ists, grounded in empirical investigation, that specifies differ- 

ent motives underlying the behavior in different subtypes of 

rapists. In addition, Malamuth has presented a predictive 

model of sexual assault that attributes the behavior to multiple 

predisposing characteristics (Malamuth, 1986, 1988). There- 

fore, rape is being seen less and less as a unitary phenomenon. 

Sexual arousal in the male perpetrator is an obvious and 

important component in most acts of rape. Studying sexual 

arousal in rape directly as it occurs in the natural environment 

is obviously out of the question, and most of what we know of 

sexual arousal in rape comes from interviews with rapists and 

their victims. Rapists are generally regarded as poor sources of 

information because they tend to lie or distort information 

regarding the offense (Scully & Marola, 1984). There have been 

several approaches to dealing with this dishonesty. For exam- 

ple, some investigators have encouraged honesty by making 

special arrangements to protect the confidentiality of informa- 

tion (Abel et al., 1988) or the rapist's anonymity (Koss & Dinero, 

1988). Other authors have written of their clinical impressions 

of rapists, and their descriptions of the motivation for rape have 

been invaluable in reaching our current understanding of rape 

(Groth, 1979). The social psychological approach has depended 

almost exclusively on self-report responses to survey question- 

naires as a research methodology. The clinical approach has 

depended heavily on self-report, in interview and in responses 

to questionnaires, but this approach has also utilized labora- 

tory assessments of sexual arousal and preferences as an impor- 

tant assessment measure and treatment target. 

Studies of sexual arousal among rapists and nonrapists in the 

laboratory using analog assessment techniques have been used 

to study the role of sexual arousal in rape, and the current 

article will focus on the results of these studies. Most of the 

studies have been done in the following way. Male subjects are 

recruited, either from among incarcerated or convicted rapists 

or from a community sample of men serving as a comparison 

group. The community sample is usually designated as a non- 

rapist sample, although a minority of these men will have quite 

likely engaged in some kind of sexually aggressive behavior 

(Koss & Dinero, 1988). In a laboratory setting, their erectile 

response is monitored, usually by circumferential strain gauge 

plethysmography, while they are presented with verbal descrip- 

tions of consenting sexual activity between adults and of rape in 

which a male forces intercourse on an adult woman. 

The present article reviews the literature concerned with sex- 

ual arousal to rape cues and describes six different models, each 

specifying a different relationship between the aggressive 

aspects of rape and the perpetrator's sexual response. We do not 

argue for the supremacy of any particular model. In fact, differ- 

ent models may be helpful in understanding the role of sexual 

arousal in different rapes or in the rapes of different rapists. 

The models are being presented in two categories. First, there 

are those that focus on the nature of the responses involved, and 

these are referred to as response control models. Second, there 

are those that focus on the way in which stimuli associated with 

rape behavior evoke sexual arousal. We refer to these as stimu- 

lus control models. There are four of these presented. Most of 

the models that are presented here are "trait" models in the 

sense that they postulate an organization of behavior in the 

perpetrators of rape that distinguishes them from normal men. 

One of the models is a "state" model in the sense that it postu- 

lates the potential for a transitory state that has the potential for 

increasing the risk of rape in normal men. 

The models will be presented in order of increasing complex- 

ity. Parsimony demands that we favor the less complex models, 

and it may be that some findings currently understood within 

the framework of a more complex model will eventually be fully 

explained by using a more straightforward model. 

A number of published articles have discussed the method- 

ological issues relating to penile plethysmography and its use as 

an assessment of sexual offenders (Barbaree, 1990; Earls & Mar- 

shall, 1983). These articles have rightly pointed to the factors 

that may contribute to error variance in these measures, such as 

construction of the stimuli and the ability of subjects to sup- 

press arousal or to "fake" responses. We will not attend to these 

issues, but rather focus on the conceptual and theoretical issues 

pertaining to the measurement of rape arousal. Often, method- 

ological and conceptual issues will seem to be synonymous. For 

example, men may have the ability to suppress their arousal to 

avoid the detection of a deviant sexual interest by the assessor, 

and the problem of faking has been addressed as an important 

methodological issue (Quinsey & Chaplin, 1988). On the other 

hand, the first model presented here highlights men's ability to 

suppress as a conceptual issue, by postulating important differ- 

ences among men in the ability to suppress and by postulating a 

relationship between this ability and the propensity to commit 

sexual aggression (Hall, 1989). Because of limited space, we will 

not be able to discuss the methodological issues in detail. 

Ability to Suppress Arousal 

Response Control Models 

The first model presented is one of the more recently de- 

scribed in the literature. Hall (1989) suggested this very simple 

model after presenting data collected from a large sample of 

incarcerated sexual offenders. Hall (1989) presented these of- 

fenders with verbal descriptions of consenting sexual interac- 

tions, rape, and nonsexual assault while monitoring their erec- 

tile responses in the laboratory. At the end of the session, he 

presented the stimulus that had evoked the greatest arousal in 

the session again to each subject, with instructions to inhibit 

their arousal as best they could. He then divided his subjects 

into those who were able to inhibit their arousal and those who 

were not. Those subjects who were not able to inhibit had 

shown greater arousal to stimuli depicting sexual assault in the 

session before being given instructions to inhibit. In an earlier 

study, Abel, Blanchard, and Barlow (1981) found that some 

rapists actually showed increases in arousal to rape cues after 

they had been instructed to suppress arousal. 

This model suggests that an explanation of sexual arousal to 

rape cues in the laboratory might reduce to the ability the sub- 

ject shows in consciously suppressing his sexual arousal. Even 

though most of the subjects in the Hall (1989) study, all of whom 

were offenders, were able to suppress their arousal, this model

might go on to postulate that sexually aggressive men differ 

from nonaggressive men in that their ability to suppress sexual 

arousal is less than normal. This hypothesis has not been tested 

to any extent, but Wydra, Marshall, Earls, and Barbaree (1983) 

compared rapists and nonrapists in their ability to suppress 

arousal and found no differences. 

At the very least, because of the advantages of parsimony and 

the simplicity of Hall's model, the "ability to suppress" model 

will force the rest of us who opt for more complex stimulus 

control models to examine and eliminate the possibility that 

our results are not due to this straightforward ability to sup- 

press. 

Response Compatibifity 

Blader and Marshall (1989) argue directly against the sexual 

preference hypothesis that posits that rapists "prefer" noncon- 

senting sexual activity. They argue that there is no evidence for 

sexual arousal to force and violence as an antecedent response 

to rape, as the view of rape as a paraphilia would have us be- 

lieve, because the cues ofnonconsent and violence cannot stim- 

ulate a man to rape when they are produced by the very behav- 

ior that is in question. Furthermore, Blader and Marshall re- 

view the research literature and conclude that rapists are not 

distinguished from nonrapists by their erectile responses to 

sexual violence in the laboratory. 

Blader and Marshall (1989) point to the fact that when a man 

rapes, his sexual arousal accompanies his assaultive behavior. 

Therefore, what distinguishes rapists from nonrapists is an abil- 

ity to perform the responses of hostile aggression and sexual 

arousal at the same time. These authors argue that, in the nor- 

mal man, the two responses are mutually inhibitory: When the 

aggressive response has been emitted it precludes sexual 

arousal, and when sexually aroused, a man is incapable of an 

aggressive response. According to these authors, "response com- 

patibility" of aggressive and sexual behaviors is the psychologi- 

cal hallmark of the rapist. This model is presented as a diagram 

in Figure 1. 

Blader and Marshall (1989) referred to an unpublished man- 

uscript (Blader, Marshall, & Barbaree, 1988) that described an 

experimental paradigm designed to study response compatibil- 

ity. The paradigm involved a combination of penile plethys- 

mography methodology to study the stimulus control of sexual 

arousal with analog laboratory procedures that have been used 

to study aggressive responses. Subjects who were being moni- 

tored for erectile responses to various sexual stimuli were made 

to believe that they were also delivering a noxious stimulus to 

another subject (actually a female confederate of the experi- 

menter). When subjects were required to present a noxious stim- 

ulus to a woman, sexual arousal was greatly reduced. However, 

when subjects were provoked to anger by the woman in a nega- 

tive evaluation manipulation, subject's sexual arousal was 

maintained while the subject presented noxious stimuli to the 

confederate. In this circumstance, the aggressive responding 

did not inhibit the sexual response, and the two responses were 

therefore seen to be compatible. 

It is too early to tell how productive this model will be in 

generating research ideas or how helpful it will be in terms of 

our understanding of sexual aggression. The results of the re- 

SPECIAL SECTION: MALE SEXUAL AROUSAL IN RAPE 623 

S 

Aggression I Arousal 

j (') 

S 

Normal - Responses Incompatible 

Aggression Arousal 

j (0) 

Pathological - Responses Compatible 

Figure 1. The response compatibility model. 

search paradigm may be just as well accommodated by the 

stimulus disinhibition model described below. Upon some re- 

flection, we have come to believe the argument at the heart of 

the response compatibility model may be tautological. When a 

man rapes, by definition, he is committing an aggressive and a 

sexual act at the same time. The co-occurrence, and therefore 

the compatibility of these two responses, is the defining feature 

of rape behavior. Therefore, when response compatibility is 

used as an explanatory concept for rape, the argument these 

authors present reduces to the circular statement "a man rapes 

because he rapes:' Nevertheless, the response compatibility 

model and the experimental paradigm described above may 

ultimately lead to useful assessment methodologies and re- 

search findings. 

Stimulus Control Models 

For the purposes of this exposition, the following definitions, 

presented in advance, will assist in the clear articulation of the 

models presented. A sexual stimulus is one that has the effect of 

evoking sexual arousal in the average or typical male. It usually 

involves the description of sexual activity or the description of 

the physical attributes of a woman in various forms of undress. 

A rape stimulus is that part of the verbal description of rape 

that describes elements of force, violence, victim harm, pain, 

humiliation, or fear. Excitation is a process whereby a stimulus 

evokes or increases sexual arousal, and inhibition is a process 

whereby a stimulus reduces or limits the strength of sexual 

arousal to a sexual stimulus (Barbaree, 1990).


The concept of stimulus control has been applied to re- 

sponses that are acquired through a process of classical condi- 

tioning and to responses that have been learned through instru- 

mental learning. Sexual arousal responses may be learned 

through either process (Laws & Marshall, 1990). The following 

discussion is not specific as to the conditioning or learning 

origins of the responses. Therefore, our description of the pro- 

cess of stimulus control will use terms applicable to classical 

conditioning, which characterize the response as being elicited, 

whereas some authors may interpret the response as being an 

instrumental response. A complete discussion of this issue is 

beyond the scope of the present paper. 

Sexual Preference." Cues of Force and Violence as 

Excitatory Cues 

The view of rape as a paraphiliac behavior defines a model of 

rape in which the subject's arousal is evoked or increased by 

cues of force, nonconsent, humiliation, and so forth. According 

to the sexual preference hypothesis, rapist paraphiliacs engage 

in rape behavior because the cues associated with the act are 

maximally arousing and because the act is therefore optimally 

rewarding or satisfying. This view of rape regards the behavior 

as analogous to other paraphilias, such as pedophilia or fe- 

tishism. 

The model of rape arousal as a paraphiliac behavior is pre- 

sented in Figure 2. 

Abel et al. (1977) recorded the sexual arousal of rapists and a 

group ofnonrapist sexual deviates during 2-min verbal descrip- 

tions of mutually consenting sex and rape. The rapists were 

more aroused by descriptions of forced sex than were the 

nonrapists. However, the rapists did not show a sexual prefer- 

ence for rape. As a group, the rapists were equally aroused by 

rape and consenting cues, whereas nonrapists were consider- 

ably less aroused by rape than they were by the consenting 

sexual descriptions. Soon after, these findings were supported 

by reports by Barbaree, Marshall, and Lanthier (1979) and 

Quinsey and Chaplin (1982, 1984). 

However, later, in strong support of the sexual preference 

hypothesis, Quinsey, Chaplin, and Upfold (1984) reported that 

rapists showed stronger arousal to rape cues than did nonof- 

fenders and stronger arousal to rape cues than to consenting 

cues (Quinsey, personal communication, January, 1988). Simi- 

larly, Earls and Proulx (1986) reported findings from a study of 

francophone rapists, using translations of the Abel, Blanchard, 

Becker, and Djenderedjian (1978b) verbal descriptions of rape, 

consenting sex, and assault. 

However, Baxter, Barbaree, and Marshall (1986) reported re- 

sults from 60 rapists and 41 nonrapists indicating that both 

groups showed significantly less arousal to rape than to mutu- 

ally consenting cues. Similarly, Murphy, Krisak, Stalgaitis, and 

Anderson (1984) and Langevin et al. (1985) failed to find signifi- 

cant differences between rapists and nonrapists in their re- 

sponses to sexual violence. 

The discrepant findings in this literature are confusing, and 

at this time the discrepancies are unexplained. Blader and Mar- 

shall (1989) have suggested that the discrepancies might be due 

to differences among studies in the demographic characteris- 

Stimulus 

Sexual Stimulus 

Rape Stimulus 

Normal 

Arousal 

n0 

Stimulus: Arousal: 



+ 

or 

0 

• ~ + 

Pathological 

As in Sadism-Paraphilia 

Figure 2. The sexual preference model. 

tics of the subject samples, with the more deviant samples hav- 

ing a psychiatric history leading to more deviant arousal on 

testing. Barbaree (1990) has suggested that studies have used 

widely different methods for the construction of rape stimuli 

and that these methodological differences may have led to the 

discrepant findings. Further research is required to assess 

whether, and to what extent, rapists as a group show excitation 

of sexual arousal to rape cues. 

The use of the penile plethysmograph in forensic assessments 

of accused rapists follows directly from this model. In these 

assessments, arousal to deviant sexual cues is often taken to be 

an indication of a sexual interest in the deviance, or a sexual 

preference. It is beyond the scope of this article to discuss the 

uses and misuses of sexual preference data in forensic assess- 

ments. However, plethysmographic assessments often result in 

the inference of a sexual preference, when such an inference is 

an oversimplification. Recognition of other models of rape 

arousal, as presented here, may discourage such oversimplifica- 

tion.

Inhibition Model: Cues of Force and Violence as Inhibitory 

Barbaree et al. (1979) interpreted their findings using an in- 

hibitory model of rape arousal. They viewed the sexual stimu- 

lus as a compound stimulus. The compound stimulus included 

the descriptions of sexual interactions and physical aspects of 

the woman in the vignette, and these sexual cues had the effect 

of increasing arousal. However, during the rape descriptions, 

rape cues including descriptions ofnonconsent, force, violence, 

and suffering of the victim were seen to serve, especially in 

nonrapists, as inhibitory stimuli, reducing the arousal that 

would otherwise occur to the sexual cues. In a trait model of 

rape arousal, these authors posited that the rapists may not have 

the same strength of inhibition to the rape stimuli, and hence, 

this trait may be a defining characteristic distinguishing rapists 

from nonrapists. The inhibition model of rape arousal is pre- 

sented in Figure 3. 

A second important indication of inhibitory differences be- 

tween these two groups of men had to do with the increased 

discrimination between consenting and rape arousal over ses- 

sions. A number of studies have reported that nonrapists show 


Sexual Stimulus + 

R ape Sti mu 1 us ,-- - 

Normal -Inhibition 



Rape Stimulus r---t"- 0 

PathologicaI-Disinhibition 

Figure 3. The inhibition model is presented in the upper panel, and 

the disinhibition model is presented in the lower panel. 


greater strength of inhibition in a second session than in the 

first session. No such effect was found with the rapists (Bar- 

baree et al., 1979; Baxter et al., 1986). 

Subjects' emotional responses to the rape descriptions may 

result in this inhibition. The subject may become fearful or 

anxious in response to the descriptions of a violent and crimi- 

nal act, or he may respond with an emotional reaction to the 

description of harm and upset displayed by the victim. Similar 

emotional responses may be evoked as a result of empathy for 

the victim. These emotional responses could inhibit sexual 

arousal through activation of the sympathetic nervous system, 

which is known to decrease the erectile response. Malamuth 

and Check (1980, 1983) have provided indirect support for this 

idea by showing that when the victim is described as being in 

greater pain and distress, which might be expected to evoke an 

even stronger emotional response in the subject, sexual arousal 

to the rape descriptions was reduced. 

Also, subjects may be responding to experimenter demands. 

Subjects recognize that arousal to the rape descriptions would 

be socially inappropriate. Generally, subjects in psychological 

research have behaved in such a way as to appear socially ap- 

propriate or normal, and they may perceive a purpose to the 

experiment and want to appear as cooperative subjects (Ro- 

senthal & Rubin, 1978). Accordingly, they may deliberately sup- 

press arousal to the rape descriptions while attempting to en- 

hance arousal to the consenting scenes. As mentioned above, 

nonrapists show a more pronounced discrimination between 

mutually consenting cues and rape cues in a second assessment 

session both because of enhanced arousal to consenting cues 

and because of reduced arousal to rape cues (Barbaree et al., 

1979; Barbaree, Marshall, Yates, & Lightfoot, 1983; Baxter et 

al., 1986). Perhaps practice allows nonrapists to become more 

proficient in making themselves appear more socially appro- 

priate. 

Inhibition of sexual arousal to rape cues can be viewed as a 

prosocial act. The more concern the subject has for the imag- 

ined victim, the more positive his attitudes toward women, and 

the more sensitive he is to her pain and suffering, the stronger 

will be the emotional component that produces the inhibition. 

Also, the more sensitive the subject is to societal restrictions 

concerning inappropriate sexual behavior, the more likely he 

will be to expend the effort required to reduce his arousal to 

rape in the laboratory. 

Numerous authors have postulated a continuum of individ- 

ual differences in responses thought to be important in rape in 

the general population of men. For example, Abel et al. (1977) 

computed a rape index (rape arousal/consenting arousal) and 

showed that the mean index was higher among rapists than 

among nonrapists and that this index has been found to be 

correlated with the rapist's number of previous victims and the 

likelihood of victim injury (Abel, Blanchard, & Becker, 1978). 

Presumably, the index quantifies the tendency in the individual 

to inhibit sexual arousal to cues of nonconsent and force. We 

(Barbaree et al., 1979) have postulated that, in the general popu- 

lation of men, individuals differ in the strength of their inhibi- 

tion to rape cues. Similarly, Malamuth and an associate (Mala- 

muth, 198 la, 1983, 1986; Malamuth & Check, 1983) have sug- 

gested that a continuum exists of the "likelihood of raping" 

among the general male population. Furthermore, according to


Malamuth, sexual arousal to rape cues is only part of an inte- 

grated set of behaviors and cognitions that characterize the 

rapist. Men who admit a potential for raping also have more 

callous attitudes toward rape and are more likely to believe in 

rape myths than are men who deny such a potential (Malamuth, 

1981b; Malamuth, Haber, & Feshbach, 1980; Malamuth & 

Check, 1980). Additionally, men who respond with relatively 

strong erectile responses to rape cues, and who also express 

attitudes accepting of sexual violence toward women, are more 

likely to aggress against women when given the opportunity in 

the laboratory (Malamuth, 1983). 

Disinhibition of Arousal to Rape Stimuli 

The disinhibition model of rape arousal is a state model that 

describes how an emotional or cognitive state may increase the 

rape arousal of men who would otherwise show strong inhibi- 

tion of rape arousal. If strength of inhibition of arousal by the 

rape cues is a defining difference between rapists and nonrap- 

ists, then nonrapists may be at risk for committing a sexually 

aggressive act should their inhibitory process be disrupted. If 

the effect of rape cues in decreasing arousal were to be suddenly 

removed, then arousal to the sexual cues during the rape de- 

scriptions would occur unabated. 

When a stimulus loses its inhibitory power abruptly because 

of some disruptive event, the process is known as disinhibition, 

and this concept has been applied to processes associated with 

the sexual response (Malamuth, Heim, & Feshbach, 1980; 

Yates, Barbaree, & Marshall, 1984). Circumstantial variables 

and events surrounding a sexual assault might influence its oc- 

currence through the disruption of stimulus inhibition. The 

following review describes laboratory experiments in which the 

disinhibition of rape arousal has been studied. First, we will 

describe the manipulations that decrease prosocial tendencies. 

The manipulations that have served to disinhibit arousal to 

violent cues have some or all of the following features in com- 

mon. First, they decrease the subject's motivation to behave in a 

prosocial way or to appear to behave in a prosocial way. Second, 

they create or increase anger or hostility in the subject toward 

the female victim. 

Permissive instructions. Barbaree and Murphy (1991) tested 

nonrapists over two sessions, presenting verbal descriptions of 

both consenting sexual activity and rape. One half of the sub- 

jects were initially told that arousal to the rape episode was 

normal, that the subject should not worry about it, and that 

such arousal to cues of force, violence, and nonconsent indi- 

cated nothing about his proclivity to enact such behavior. Given 

these permissive instructions, subjects showed disinhibited 

arousal to the rape stimuli in that they showed reduced discrimi- 

nation between rape and consenting cues. 

Alcohol intoxication. Offenders often claim that their sexual 

assault was committed while they were severely intoxicated. It is 

estimated that up to 50% of rapists are intoxicated at the time of 

their offense (Christie, Marshall, & Lanthier, 1979; Gebhard, 

Gagnon, Pomeroy, & Christenson, 1965). The implication has 

been that alcohol intoxication causes sexual assault or facili- 

tates processes that cause sexual assault. However, the effects of 

alcohol intoxication on rape arousal are complex. Early studies 

in this area suggested that many of the alcohol effects were due 

to the subject's expectations rather than to direct pharmacologi- 

cal action. For example, Briddell et ai. (1978) used an experi- 

mental design known as the balanced placebo design, in which 

subjects were divided into two equal groups, with one group 

being told that they would receive an alcoholic beverage and the 

other group being told that they would receive a nonalcoholic 

beverage. Each group was further subdivided, with one sub- 

group actually receiving alcohol and the other receiving a nonal- 

coholic beverage. After subjects had ingested their beverages, 

Briddell et al. presented both consenting and rape cues to men 

while monitoring erectile responses. Subjects who thought they 

had consumed alcohol showed greater arousal to rape cues than 

did men who thought they had drunk no alcohol. Actual drink 

content did not influence sexual arousal to rape cues. 

We (Barbaree et al., 1983) used the balanced placebo design 

in a study much like that of Briddell et al. (1978). After being 

tested in a baseline session, subjects returned to the laboratory 

and were administered their expectancy instructions and a 

beverage. The amount of alcohol consumed was calculated to 

increase their blood alcohol level to 0.07% during arousal as- 

sessment, a larger dose than used by Briddell et al. After drink- 

ing their beverages, subjects were again presented with rape and 

consenting cues while their arousal was monitored. We found 

effects of alcohol intoxication, but they were not straightfor- 

ward. Subjects who were intoxicated failed to show the increase 

in discrimination between consenting and rape cues that we 

have previously seen in nonoffenders and that we saw in this 

study in the men who had not drunk alcohol. In this respect, the 

intoxicated nonoffenders were behaving like rapists we have 

tested. 

Anger toward a female. Yates et al. (l 984) monitored sexual 

arousal to verbal descriptions of rape and consenting sex. Sub- 

jects were told that the purpose of the study was to examine the 

effects of physical exercise on sexual arousal. Subjects in the 

"exercise-only" group were asked to pedal on a bicycle ergome- 

ter as fast as they could for one minute, after which they were 

tested in the sexual arousal laboratory. Subjects in the "an- 

gered" condition were also asked to pedal the bicycle ergome- 

ter. However, just before they commenced pedaling, a woman 

dressed in a laboratory coat (actually a confederate of the exper- 

imenter) entered the room and asked to borrow a piece of 

equipment. The woman was told to wait until the experimenter 

finished with the subject. At the end of the minute, the subject 

was told how "far" he had pedaled. In response to hearing this, 

the female confederate made a disparaging remark directed 

toward the subject concerning his performance. This same prov- 

ocation had been shown in an earlier pilot study to increase 

aggression in men toward a woman in the laboratory. The sub- 

ject was then immediately tested in the arousal laboratory. The 

exercise-only group showed the usual strong inhibition of 

arousal to the rape cues. However, the angered group showed 

equally strong responding to rape cues as to consenting cues, 

indicating a complete lack of stimulus inhibition. 

Victim blame. The way in which the victim is portrayed in 

the rape vignette and her described response to the sexual as- 

sault can have an important influence on the subject's level of 

arousal in response to the stimulus. Malamuth and Check 

(1980) compared penile responses between two groups of men. 

One group listened to a portrayal of rape in which the victim

abhored her assault, and the other group listened to a portrayal 

in which the victim became sexually aroused. Men presented 

with a sexually aroused victim became more aroused to the 

rape stimulus. 

Sundberg, Barbaree, and Marshall (in press) examined the 

role of victim blame in disinhibiting arousal to rape cues in 

three separate studies. In a pilot study, rape vignettes were rated 

by 384 university undergraduates, both male and female, on the 

extent to which the victim was responsible or blameworthy in 

the assault. The vignettes varied in the clothing worn by the 

victim and her location when first observed by the rapist. Vic- 

tims wore either revealing or conservative dress and were lo- 

cated either in a deserted park or in a library These variables 

were combined factorially to construct four separate vignettes. 

When the victim wore revealing dress while walking in a de- 

serted park, both male and female raters judged her to be signif- 

icantly more blameworthy than when the victim wore conserva- 

tive dress or wore a revealing dress in a library 

In a subsequent laboratory experiment, erectile responses 

were monitored in response to rape vignettes in which victim 

blame was manipulated by varying the victim's dress and loca- 

tion. For those subjects who listened to the rape of the victim 

judged earlier to be more blameworthy, the discrimination be- 

tween rape and consenting cues was markedly reduced, indi- 

cating a reduced strength of stimulus inhibition. 

Excusability of the rapist's behavior. Barbaree and Seto 

(1991) presented depictions of mutually consenting sex and 

date rape to male university undergraduates. These investiga- 

tors varied the information in the taped descriptions in the 

preamble to the actual sexual assault with the intention of ma- 

nipulating the subject's perception of the perpetrator's responsi- 

bility for the assault. In one set of descriptions, the rapist was 

described either as having one or two drinks or as being intoxi- 

cated after heavy drinking. In another set of descriptions, the 

rapist and the victim were described either as being on a first 

date or as having a long-standing sexual relationship. In a pilot 

study, the rapists who were described as intoxicated and who 

were said to have had a long-term sexual relationship with the 

victim were rated as being less to blame for committing a sexual 

assault. In a subsequent laboratory test, when the rape cues 

were preceded by information that excused the rapist by virtue 

of intoxication or his sexual relationship with the victim, sexual 

arousal was disinhibited. 

Exposure to pornography. It is commonly argued that when 

men are exposed to pornography, their risk of committing sex- 

ual offenses may increase. For example, Malamuth and Check 

(1981) exposed a group of undergraduate students to a violent, 

sexually explicit movie and a second group to a control, feature- 

length film. Results indicate that exposure to the sexually vio- 

lent film increased male student's acceptance of interpersonal 

violence. Similarly, Malamuth and Check (1985) exposed under- 

graduates to a verbal description of an aggressive sexual inter- 

action in which the female victim was described as becoming 

sexually aroused. In subsequent measures of attitudes toward 

rape, these male students were more likely to endorse the rape 

myth that views women as enjoying rape encounters. Further- 

more, Malamuth (1981a) has shown that men who have been 

exposed to a rape version of a slide-audio show generate more 

violent sexual fantasies than do men exposed to a mutually 


consenting slide-audio show. Finally, Sommers and Check 

(1987) have found that sexually aggressive partners of battered 

women were more likely to be consumers of pornography than 

was a matched comparison group. 

Marshall, Seidman, and Barbaree (1991) presented male uni- 

versity students with short videotaped sequences depicting ei- 

ther explicit or nonexplicit mutually consenting sex, explicit or 

nonexplicit rape, or a nonsexual scene. Explicit scenes depicted 

actors with full frontal nudity and a focus on the genitals during 

intercourse, and the presentation was in color with an audible 

sound track. Nonexplicit scenes did not depict nudity, nor any 

display of genitalia, and the presentations were in black and 

white with no audible sound track. The nonsexual scene in- 

volved an aviation theme. Then, subjects were presented with 

audiotaped vignettes of mutually consenting sex and rape, 

while erectile responses were monitored. Subjects who had 

been preexposed to rape scenes showed reduced discrimination 

between rape and mutually consenting stimuli, compared with 

subjects who had been preexposed to consenting or neutral 

stimuli. Therefore, this study provides empirical evidence that 

previous exposure to rape themes disinhibits men's arousal to 

rape cues. 

The disinhibition model may be most applicable to acquain- 

tance or date rapes, which are perpetrated by men who may not 

have other psychological characteristics of rapists, but who fail 

to respond appropriately to indications of nonconsent by their 

partner. Because the date rape may be the most numerous of all 

rapes (Koss & Dinero, 1988), the disinhibition model may ap- 

ply to the greatest number of rapes. 

Emotional State Augmentation 

According to this model, nonsexual emotional states modu- 

late the strength of a sexual response. For example, when a man 

has strong positive feelings of love or affection for a woman, his 

emotional state may serve to increase the strength of sexual 

arousal he experiences in response to sexual interactions with 

her. Similarly, when a man has strong negative feelings of hate or 

hostility toward a woman, or women in general, his emotional 

state may serve to increase the strength of sexual arousal he 

achieves during a rape or sexually assaultive behavior. Figure 4 

presents this model in pictorial form. 

Barbaree (1990) describes an experiment conducted on an 

individual case that illustrates the model. The experiment stud- 

ied a rapist who, on earlier plethysmographic assessment, was 

found to have strong arousal to descriptions of rape and weak 

arousal to consenting cues. In the experiment, the rapist was 

monitored for erectile responses, and he was presented with 

numerous trials in which he was presented with descriptions of 

rape. In each trial, he was asked to imagine that the woman in 

the rape descriptions was a woman he had known previously 

Three women from his past were chosen for these imagined 

rapes, one for whom he held a strong affection, one for whom he 

held a long-standing animosity, and one for whom his feelings 

were ambivalent. His pattern of response to the imagined rapes 

indicated that when he imagined raping a woman toward 

whom he was hostile, his arousal to the rape cues was the stron- 

gest. When he imagined raping the woman for whom he held 

affection, his rape arousal was attenuated. Therefore, there is a


Stimulus: Emotional 

State 






N 

E 

R 

L 

v 

E 

H 

E 

t 

Arousal 

(+) 

_ (0) 

or 

(-) 

(+)(+3 

_ (-)(-) 

Rape Stimulus .~_ (+) 

Figure4. The emotional state augmentation process is illustrated. (In 

the upper panel, no augmentation is present. In the middle panel, the 

arousal to sexual cues is augmented by positive emotional responses 

toward the partner. In the lower panel, the arousal to rape cues is 

augmented by negative emotional responses toward the partner.) 

possibility that rape arousal is modulated by the emotional 

state of the subject, or by the nature of the emotional response 

he directs toward the imagined victim of the rape. 

Discussion 

Abel et al. (1977) presented data and an interpretation of data 

that encouraged a sexual preference explanation of sexual as- 

sault and a sexual preference view of rape arousal among rap- 

ists. Following from this article and view, numerous authors 

have espoused the sexual preference hypothesis as it pertains to 

rape and violent sexual assault (e.g., Quinsey et al., 1984). This 

view would argue that proclivity to rape would be proportional 

to the strength of sexual arousal to rape cues. However, several 

research articles have reported comparisons of sexual arousal 

to rape cues between rapists and nonrapists in which the differ- 

ences between these groups are either nonsignificant in a statis- 

tical sense (Murphy et al., 1984) or unimportant in a clinical 

sense (Baxter et al., 1986). 

Commentary in the literature on these discrepant findings 

seems, on the whole, to be predicated on the notion that what is 

true for one rapist must be true for all others. For example, 

when the sexual preference hypothesis has been posited and 

supported by research findings, it has been discussed as if it 

pertains to all, or at least most, sexual aggressors (Abel et al., 

1977; Quinsey, Chaplin, & Upfold, 1984). When findings have 

been explained in terms of a lack ofdisinhibition among rapists 

(Barbaree et al., 1979), the explanation has been applied to all 

rapists. When authors have been critical of the notion that rape 

cues have excitatory control over rapists' arousal (Blader & 

Marshall, 1989), the criticism has seemed to apply to the use of 

the model for all rapists. 

The application of a single model of arousal to rapists belies 

the data each research group has presented. Examination of 

individual case data will show a heterogeneity of pattern of 

response. Even so, a single pattern of response is often pre- 

sented as being typical of the rapist. For example, even if 

groups of rapists, on average, show patterns of response that are 

not different from nonrapists (i.e., that rape cues act to inhibit 

responding), it is clear that at least some individual rapists show 

patterns of response indicating that rape cues have excitatory 

properties for them (Abel, Blanchard, Baflow, & Mavissaka- 

lian, 1975; Barbaree, 1990), or they show a preferential rape 

pattern (Freund et al., 1986). 

Even in studies of sexual preferences among child molesters, 

where the group studies indicate large differences between 

child molesters and normal subjects and where child molesters 

as a group show clear evidence of a sexual preference for chil- 

dren (Freund, 1981; Marshall, Barbaree, & Christophe, 1986; 

Quinsey, Steinman, Bergersen, & Holmes, 1975), the pattern of 

responding has been shown to be extremely heterogenous, with 

no less than five different patterns of response identified (Bar- 

baree & Marshall, 1989). 

Knight, Rosenberg, and Schneider (1985) have pointed to the 

extreme heterogeneity among sexual offenders measuring dif- 

ferences along many different dimensions, including sexual 

arousal. They go on to argue for the necessity of constructing 

typologies to describe the heterogeneity that has been ob- 

served. Knight and Prentky (1990) have presented a typology of 

rapists that contains no fewer than nine separate subtypes, and 

the typology has been shown to be reliable and to have empiri- 

cal validity. The possibility exists, and begs investigation, as to 

the relation between patterns of response to rape cues and classi- 

fication in the various rapist subtypes. For example, we might 

predict that the sadistic rapists would show evidence of rape 

cues being excitatory, in comparison with the nonsadistic sub- 

type rapists, who may show no such evidence. Perhaps the 

model of disinhibition of rape arousal would account for the 

sequence of events leading up to the opportunistic rapist's as- 

saults. For the subtypes of rapists whose motivation involves 

anger and hostility, we might predict that anger would disinhi- 

bit arousal to the rape cues in the vindictive rapists, and it may 

serve to enhance or accelerate arousal in the pervasively angry 

subtypes.

References 

Abel, G. G,, Barlow, D. H., Blanchard, E. B., & Guild, D. (1977). The 

components of rapists' sexual arousal. Archives of General Psychia- 

try 34, 895-903. 

Abel, G. G., Becker, J. V., Blanchard, E. B., & Flanagan, B. (1981). The 

behavioral assessment of rapists. In J. Hays, T. Roberts, & K. Solway 

(Eds.), Violence and the violent individual. Holliswood, NY: Spectrum 

Publications. 

Abel, G. G., Becker, J. V., Cunningham-Rathner, J., Mittleman, M., & 

Rouleau, J. (1988). Multiple paraphilic diagnoses among sex of- 

fenders. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 

16, 153-168. 

Abel, G. G., Blanchard, E. B., & Barlow, D. H. (1981). Measurement of 

sexual arousal in several paraphilias: The effects of stimulus modal- 

ity, instructional set, and stimulus contents on the objective. Be- 

haviour Research and Therapy 19, 25-33. 

Abel, G. G., Blanchard, E. B., Barlow, D. H., & Mavissakalian, M. 

(I 975). Identifying specific erotic cues in sexual deviations by audio- 

taped descriptions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 8, 247- 

260. 

Abel, G. G., Blanchard, E. B., & Becker, J. V. (1978). An integrated 

treatment program for rapists. In R. T. Rada (Ed.), Clinical aspects of 

the rapist. New York: Grune & Stratton. 

Abel, G. G., Blanchard, E. B., Becker, J. V., & Djenderedjian, A. (1978). 

Differentiating sexual aggressives with penile measures. Criminal 

Justice and Behavior, 5, 315-332. 

Abel, G. G., Mittleman, M. S., & Becker, J. V. (1985). Sex offenders: 

Results of assessment and recommendations for treatment. In M. H. 

Ben-Aron, S. J. Hucker, & C. D. Webster (Eds.), Clinical criminology: 

The assessment and treatment of criminal behavior (pp. 207-220). 

Toronto: M & M Graphics. 

American Psychiatric Association. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical 

manual of mental disorders (3rd ed., rev.). Washington, DC: Author. 

Barbaree, H. E. (1990). Stimulus control of sexual arousal: Its role in 

sexual assault. In W L. Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree 

(Eds.), Handbook of sexual assault: Issues, theories, and treatment of 

the offender (pp. 115-142). New York: Plenum Press. 

Barbaree, H. E., & Marshall, W L. (1989). Erectile responses among 

heterosexual child molesters, father-daughter incest offenders, and 

matched non-offenders: Five distinct age preference profiles. Cana- 

dian Journal of Behavioural Science, 21, 70-82. 

Barbaree, H. E., Marshall, W. L., & Lanthier, R. D. (1979). Deviant 

sexual arousal in rapists. Behaviour Research and Therapy 17, 215- 

222. 

Barbaree, H. E., Marshall, W L., Yates, E., & Lightfoot, L. O. (1983). 

Alcohol intoxication and deviant sexual arousal in male social 

drinkers. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 21, 365-373. 

Barbaree, H. E., & Murphy, R. A. J. (1991). The effect of permissive 

instructions on sexual arousal to rape cues in university undergraduate 

men. Manuscript submitted for publication. 

Barbaree, H. E., & Seto, M. (1991). Perce&ed responsibility of rapist and 

disinhibition of sexual arousal to rape cues in university undergraduate 

men. Manuscript submitted for publication. 

Baxter, D. J., Barbaree, H. E., & Marshall, W L (1986). Sexual re- 

sponses to consenting and forced sex in a large sample of rapists and 

nonrapists. Behaviour Research and Therapy 24, 513-520. 

Blader, J. C., & Marshall, W. L. (1989). Is assessment of sexual arousal 

in rapists worthwhile? A critique of current methods and the develop- 

ment of a response compatibility approach. Clinical Psychology Re- 

view, 9, 569-587. 

Blader, J. C., Marshall, W L., & Barbaree, H. E. (1988). The inhibitory 

effect of coercion on sexual arousal in men and disinhibition by provo- 

cation. Manuscript submitted for publication. 

Briddell, D. W, Rimm, D. C., Caddy, G. R., Krawitz, G., Sholis, D., & 


Wunderlin, R. J. (1978). Effects of alcohol and cognitive set on sexual 

arousal to deviant stimuli. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 87, 418- 

430. 

Brownmiller, S. (1975). Against our will." Men, women, and rape. New 

York: Simon & Schuster. 

Christie, M. M., Marshall, W. L., & Lanthier, R. D. (1979). A descriptive 

study of incarcerated rapists and pedophiles (report to the Solicitor 

General of Canada). Available from William L. Marshall, Queen's 

University, Kingston, Canada K7L 3N6. 

Craig, M. (1990). Coercive sexuality in dating relationships: A situa- 

tional model. Clinical Psychology Review, 10, 395-423. 

Darke, J. L. (1990). Sexual aggression: Achieving power through hu- 

miliation. In W L. Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree (Eds.), 

Handbook of sexual assault: Issues, theories and treatment of the of- 

fender (pp. 55-72). New York: Plenum Press. 

Earls, C. M., & Marshall, W L. (1983). The current state of technology 

in the laboratory assessment of sexual arousal patterns. In J. G. Geer 

& I. R. Stuart (Eds.), Sexualaggression: Current perspectives on treat- 

ment (pp. 336-362). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. 

Earls, C. M., & Proulx, J. (1986). The differentiation of francophone 

rapists and nonrapists using penile circumferential measures. Crimi- 

nal Justice and Behavior, 13, 419-429. 

Freund, K. (1981). Assessment of pedophilia. In M. Cook & K. Ho- 

wells (Eds.), Adult sexual interest in children (pp. 139-179). London: 

Academic Press. 

Freund, K., Scher, H., Racansky, I. G., Campbell, K., & Heasman, G. 

(1986). Males disposed to commit rape. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 

15, 23-35. 

Gebhard, E, Gagnon, J., Pomeroy, W., & Christenson, C. (1965). Sex 

offenders. New York: Harper & Row. 

Groth, A. N. (1979). Men who rape: The psychology of the offender. New 

York: Plenum Press. 

Hall, G. C. N. (1989). Sexual arousal and arousability in a sexual of- 

fender population. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 98, 145-149. 

Herman, J. L. (1990). Sex offenders: A feminist perspective. In W L. 

Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree (Eds.), Handbook of sexual 

assault: Issues, theories, and treatment of the offender (pp. 177-193). 

New York: Plenum Press. 

Knight, R. A., & Prentky, R. A. (1990). Classifying sexual offenders: 

The development and corroboration of taxonomic models. In W. L. 

Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree (Eds.), Handbook of sexual 

assault: Issues, theories, and treatment of the offender (pp. 23-52). 

New York: Plenum Press. 

Knight, R. A., Rosenberg, R., & Schneider, B. A. (1985). Classification 

of sexual offenders: Perspectives, methods, and validation. In A. W 

Burgess (Ed.), Rape and sexual assault (pp. 222-293). New York: 

Garland. 

Koss, M. P., & Dinero, T, E. (1988). Predictors of sexual aggression 

among a national sample of male college students. In R. A. Prentky 

& V. L. Quinsey (Eds.), Human sexual aggression: Current perspec- 

tives (pp. 133-147). New York: New York Academy of Sciences. 

Langevin, R., Ben-Aron, M. H., Couthard, R., Heasman, R., Purins, 

J. E., Handy, L. C., Hucker, S. J., Russon, A. R., Day, D., Roper, V., 

Bain, J., Wortzman, G., & Webster, C. D. (1985). Sexual aggression: 

Constructing a predictive equation. A controlled pilot study. In R. 

Langevin (Ed.), Erotic preference, gender identity and aggression in 

men: New research studies. Hillsdale, N J: Erlbaum. 

Laws, D. R., & Marshall, W L. (1990). A conditioning theory of the 

etiology and maintenance o fdeviant sexual preference and behavior. 

In W L. Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree (Eds.), Handbookof 

sexual assault: Issues, theories, and treatment of the offender (pp. 

209-229). New York: Plenum Press. 

Malamuth, N. M. (1981a). Rape fantasies as a function of exposure to 

violent sexual stimuli. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 10, 33-47.


Malamuth, N. M. (198 lb). Rape proclivity among males. Journal of 

Social Issues, 37, 138-156. 

Malamuth, N. M. (1983). Factors associated with rape as predictors of 

laboratory aggression against women. Journal of Personality and So- 

cial Psychology, 45, 432-442. 

Malamuth, N. M. (1986). Predictors of naturalistic sexual aggression. 

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 953-962. 

Malamuth, N. M. (1988). A multidimensional approach to sexual ag- 

gression: Combining measures of past behavior and present likeli- 

hood. In R. A. Prentky & V. L. Quinsey (Eds.), Human sexualaggres- 

sion: Current perspectives (pp. 123-132). New York: New York Acad- 

emy of Sciences. 

Malamuth, N. M., & Check, J. V. P. (1980). Penile tumescence and 

perceptual responses to rape as a function of victim's perceived reac- 

tions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 528-547. 

Malamuth, N. M., & Check, J. V. P. (1981). The effects of mass media 

exposure on acceptance of violence against women: A field experi- 

ment. Journal of Research in Personality, 15, 436-446. 

Malamuth, N. M., & Check, J. V. P. (1983). Sexual arousal to rape 

depictions: Individual differences. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 

92, 55-67. 

Malamuth, N. M., & Check, J. V. P. (1985). The effects of aggressive 

pornography on beliefs in rape myths: Individual differences. Jour- 

nal of Research in Personality, 19, 299-320. 

Malamuth, N. M., Haber, S., & Feshbach, S. (1980). Testing hypotheses 

regarding rape: Exposure to sexual violence, sex differences, and the 

"normality" of rapists. Journal of Research in Personality, 14, 121- 

137, 

Malamuth, N. M., Heim, M., & Feshbach, S, (1980). Sexual responsive- 

ness of college students to rape depictions: Inhibitory and disinhibi- 

tory effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 399- 

408. 

Marshall, W L., Barbaree, H. E., & Christophe, D. (1986). Sexual of- 

fenders against female children: Sexual preferences for age of vic- 

tims and type of behavior. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 

18, 424-439. 

Marshall, W L., Seidman, B. T., & Barbaree, H. E. (1991). The effects of 

prior exposure to rape stimuli on patterns of erectile responding to 

consenting and forced sex in normal males. Manuscript submitted for 

publication. 

Murphy, W D., Krisak, J., Stalgaitis, S., & Anderson, K. (1984). The use 

of penile tumescence measures with incarcerated rapists: Further 

validity issues. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 13, 545-554. 

Quinsey, V. L., & Chaplin, T. C. (1982). Penile responses to nonsexual 

violence among rapists. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 9, 372-381. 

Quinsey, V. L., & Chaplin, T. C. (1984). Stimulus control of rapists' and 

non-sex offenders' sexual arousal. Behavioral Assessment, 6, 169- 

176. 

Quinsey, V. L., & Chaplin, T. C. (1988). Preventing faking in phallo- 

metric assessments of sexual preference. In R. A. Prentky & V. L. 

Quinsey (Eds.), Human sexual aggression: Current perspectives. New 

York: New York Academy of Sciences. 

Quinsey, v. L., Chaplin, T. C., & Upfold, D. (1984). Sexual arousal to 

nonsexual violence and sadomasochistic themes among rapists and 

non-sex-offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 52, 

651-657. 

Quinsey, v. L., Steinman, C. M., Bergersen, S. G., & Holmes, T. E 

(1975). Penile circumference, skin conductance, and ranking re- 

sponses of child molesters and "normals" to sexual and nonsexual 

visual stimuli. Behavior Therapy, 6, 213-219. 

Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1978). Interpersonal expectancy effects: 

The first 345 studies. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 377-415. 

Russell, D. E. H. (1975). The politics of rape. The victim's perspective. 

New York: Stein & Day. 

Scully, D., & Marolla, J. (1984). Convicted rapists' vocabulary of mo- 

tive: Excuses and justifications. Social Problems, 31, 530-544. 

Sommers, E. K., & Check, J. V. P. (1987). An empirical investigation of 

the role of pornography in the verbal and physical abuse of women. 

Violence and Victims, 2, 189-209. 

Sundberg, S. L., Barbaree, H. E., & Marshall, W L. (in press). Victim 

blame and the disinhibition of sexual arousal to rape. Violence and 

Victims. 

Wydra, A., Marshall, W L., Earls, C. M., & Barbaree, H. E. (1983). 

Identification of cues and control of sexual arousal by rapists. Be- 

haviour Research and Therapy, 21, 469-476. 

Yates, E., Barbaree, H. E., & Marshall, W L. (1984). Anger and deviant 

sexual arousal. Behavior Therapy, 15, 287-294. 

Received January 29, 1991 

Revision received April 23, 1991 

Accepted April 25, 1991 •

The Role of Male Sexual Arousal in Rape: Six Models

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?