Abstract
Since the first edition of Current Controversies on Family Violence was published in 1993, mounting evidence has documented the nature and scope of date and acquaintance rape. Yet, critics continue to disparage empirical data that underscore this problem. When Koss, Gidycz, and Wisniewski (1987) published an epidemiological study of sexual assault on college campuses funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), their findings startled the scientific community and the nation. Results indicated that, since their fourteenth birthdays, 27 percent of college women recalled an incident that met the legal definition of rape, including attempts. In a 12-month period, 76 per 1,000 college women experienced one or more attempted or completed rapes. Of these, 8 of 10 involved someone the victim knew, and more than half (57 percent) involved a date. Initially, many did not believe that this level of assault could exist without coming to the attention of police, parents, or institutional authorities. Today, rape and sexual assault are acknowledged serious problems with consequences that require responses at local, state, and federal levels. But University of California social welfare professor Neil Gilbert (this volume) continues to question whether rape could possibly be as common as researchers suggest without being known to justice authorities. In this chapter we summarize Gilbert's criticism of the NIMH study and present new evidence that the scope of rape remains widespread.
View more >>