Whats-Consent-Full-A41

Recommendations

Info

1. Introduction > 1.1. Rationale for the Studyreports of harms arising from alcohol consumption. The link between drinking and non-consenting sex isespecially relevant in an Irish context, as, quite apart from the emergence of a hook up culture, alcohol useis a dominant feature of socialising among young adults. For instance, a comparative study of 21 countriesestablished that Irish university students exhibited one of the highest rate of drinking internationally (94%)(Dantzer et al., 2006). Dantzer et al. found no gender difference in the rate of non-drinking among Irish students,whereas in most countries rates of non-drinking are substantially higher among females than males.Ireland is one of several European countries with particularly high rates of alcohol consumption, along withDenmark, England, Scotland, Wales, and the Netherlands (Dantzer et al., 2006). All of these countries have highrates of binge drinking as well, a style of drinking that involves the consumption of large amounts of alcoholwithin a short period. There is by now little doubt that binge drinking is associated with considerably elevatedrisks of exposure to alcohol-related harms. These span the physical domain (e.g., injury, blackouts), psychologicalharms (e.g., lower quality of life, alcohol dependence), and social harms (e.g., higher rates of public disorderconvictions, lower academic performance) (Kypri et al., 2009). Following repeated exposure to harms amongpeer networks, negative events such as a memory blackout or interpersonal conflict may become normalised.It may be the case that these adverse outcomes become accepted as the cost of accommodating heavydrinking as an integral part of the university experience. The degree to which alcohol-related harms such asnon-consenting sex, rape, and sexual assault have been normalised is as yet unstudied in the Irish context.1.1. Rationale for the StudyRecently, qualitative researchers have begun to ‘unpack’ attitudes to alcohol and sexual violence (Hamed,2005; Coleman & Cater, 2005). However, there has been limited direct attention applied to understanding howattitudes to alcohol impact on perceptions of (a) an individual’s right not to give consent to a sexual activity, and(b) the responsibility of the other partner to respect those wishes. This study set out to add to our understandingof this intersection between attitudes to alcohol use and consent to sex.Recent research provided the exploratory framework for this study. Rather than asking study participants tospeak in global terms about consent and non-consent or potentially making them uncomfortable by requestingtheir personal experiences, we used hypothetical critical incidents that implicate consent and alcohol use.We derived these from previous research. For instance, Rinehart and Yeates (2011) suggest a classification ofcategories of sexual violence, based on unwanted sexual behaviour, sexual coercion, and rape. The classificationwas derived from the perceptions of women who had themselves experienced these acts. We also took intoaccount the contextual factors that influence how instances of sexual violence are labelled by others (Hamed,2005). These include the form of relationship the victim has with the perpetrator, whether force is used, theuse of threats and pleading, and the victim’s resistance behaviours. All appear to be taken into account bywomen themselves when making sense of what has happened to them and in choosing a label for the sexualviolence they have experienced. These recent characterisations of rape and sexual violence were used todevise hypothetical written scenarios. The underlying strategy was to use realistic scenarios to prompt writtenand verbal feedback from university students.Emerging from this rationale, the aims of the research were agreed as follows:1. Study the impact of attitudes to alcohol use on how college students make sense of and interpret nonconsentingsexual activity.2. Identify priorities and strategies for informing young adults about the rights and responsibilities concerningalcohol use and consent to sex.More specifically, the objectives are to:1. Prompt active consideration of consent among young adult participants using hypothetical, paper-basedcases.2. Add to the literature on harmful consequences of alcohol use by studying the intersection between beliefsabout consent to sex and alcohol use.6 Young People, Alcohol, and Sex: What’s <strong>Consent</strong> Got to Do With It?
PUSHING ITNTUP FOR ITCONSENTON A MISSIONILLING? BLACKOUTNOITNOLSIT YESALCOHOL MESSYUT YES WASTED DRUNKONODBLACKOUTPUSHING ITSIGNAL GREY AREAYESG?DRUNKMESSYNOMESSYYESNOMISSIONDRUNKNODRUNKPUSHING ITCONSENTON AMISSIONUP FOR IT2. MethodologyYESALCOHOL MESSYWASTED DRUNKSIGNALMESSYYESDRUNKALCOHOLYESWASTEDPUSHING ITALCOHOLMESSYGREY AREAWASTEDMESSY2.1. Research DesignWILLING?NOSIGNALPUSHING ITON A MISSIONUP FOR ITYESCONSENTYESPUSHING ITWILLING?WILLING?UP FOR ITPUSHING ITCONSENTUP FOR ITCONSENTON A MISSIONYES WILLING? BLACKOUTNOPUSHING ITNOSIGNALYESYESALCOHOLALCOHOL MESSYYES WASTED DRUNKNONOWASTEDBLACKOUTPUSHING ITSIGNAL GREY AREANOUP FOR ITCONSENTYESNOBLACKOUTBLACKOUTDRUNKMESSYMESSYYESNOON A MISSIONDRUNKNODRUNKPUSHING ITCONSENTWILLING?A mixed-methods qualitative research design was used to carry out the study. Two forms of qualitative datawere collected in response to hypothetical scenarios that featured non-consenting sexual activity and alcoholuse. Focus groups were used to elicit interactional data indicative of views held within peer networks. An onlinesurvey was employed, using open-ended questions to elicit complementary individual-level data. The mainemphasis of the research analysis was on the focus group component of the design. The online survey wasused to help triangulate and explore the potential broader applicability of the focus group findings.ON AMISSIONUP FOR ITNOYESALCOHOLMESSYMESSYGREY AREAGREY AREADRUNKYESWASTEDMESSYNOSIGNALPUSHING ITYES2.2. Sampling and RecruitmentA total of 187 young adults took part in the study. Four focus groups were held with female students (n=24).Four females took part in Focus Group 1 (F1), six in F2, six in F3, and 8 in F4. Three focus groups took placewith males (n=20), comprising six in focus group 1 (M1), nine in M2, and five in M3. An online survey wascompleted by 143 students.All the students were recruited from one Irish university. The focus groups were gender-specific to promote opendiscussion within groups. Focus group participants were recruited via an email invitation sent to all students.The first students to respond were invited to take part in a focus group. The online survey respondents wererecruited via two methods. The first of these was a research participation exercise for undergraduate studentsstudying psychology, who take part in a certain number of psychology studies and experiments for academiccredit. The second source of online survey participants was via an email invitation to a wider group of studentsoutside the psychology student pool.Of the 143 respondents who completed the online survey, 103 were female and 40 were male. Nearly half(n=71) were first year students, 39 were second year students, 12 were third year students, and 15 were in thefourth year (or later) of an undergraduate programme. Six were postgraduate students. Most were aged under21 (n=105), 22 were aged 21-22 years, and 16 were 23 years or older. The focus group participants had anolder age profile. Half were postgraduate students, and consistent with this, 23 of the focus group participantswere aged 23 years of age or older, 13 were aged 21-22 years of age, and 8 were under 21. The difference inage profile between the focus group and online survey samples is partly attributable to the time of year whendata were collected. Focus group data were collected first, following final exams, when undergraduate studentswere less likely to be available to take part. The online survey was conducted during an academic semesterand included an undergraduate pool of psychology students. Data from the online survey and focus groupswere compared during the analysis to identify notable differences in the expression of attitudes. There was littleevidence of systematic divergence in the views expressed by the two samples.2.3. Procedure2.3.1. Development of MaterialsA set of written scenarios was devised that drew on previous research studies of sexual violence (Harmed, 2005;Rinehart & Yeates, 2011). See Appendix 1 for a copy of the study materials. The scenarios were adapted for afocus group topic guide. The hypothetical paper-based cases were devised to represent critical incidents whereconsent plays an important role, either due to a victim of sexual violence not giving active consent or where s/he is forced to engage in a sexual activity for which consent is actively refused. Each scenario was presentedResearch Report : January 28th 20147
Page 2 and 3: DRUNKMESSYYESUP FOR ITNOALCOHOLNOWA
Page 4 and 5: AcknowledgementsWe wish to acknowle
Page 6 and 7: ?YESNOYESON A MISSIONBLACKOUTPUSHIN
Page 10 and 11: 2. Methodology > 2.3. Procedureas a
Page 12 and 13: 2. Methodology > 2.4. Data Analysis
Page 14 and 15: 3. Findings > 3.1. The Context for
Page 20 and 21: 3. Findings > 3.2. Scenario 1. Fred
Page 29 and 30: 3. Findings > 3.3. Scenario 2. Dan
Page 39 and 40: 3. Findings > 3.4. Scenario 3. Jim
Page 49 and 50: 3. Findings > 3.5. Scenario 4. Mich
Page 59 and 60:
3. Findings > 3.5. Scenario 4. Mich
Page 61 and 62:
• How will Michelle react after t
Page 63 and 64:
NTILLING?ITLSYESODG?ITDRUNKMESSYNOU
Page 65 and 66:
4. Discussion > 4.1. Sex without Co
Page 67 and 68:
4. Discussion > 4.2. Alcohol and Co
Page 69 and 70:
4. Discussion > 4.3. Gender Stereot
Page 71 and 72:
4. Discussion > 4.5. Study Conclusi
Page 73 and 74:
References >MacNeela, P., Clinton,
Page 76 and 77:
Appendix 1 > Study MaterialsTopic 3
Page 78 and 79:
Appendix 1 > Study MaterialsTopic 5
Page 80 and 81:
Appendix 1 > Study MaterialsOnline
Page 82 and 83:
Notes80 Young People, Alcohol, and
Page 84:
4 Prospect HillGalwayT: 091 563676E
show all

Whats-Consent-Full-A41

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?