Why Sexual Assault Survivors Do Not Report to Universities: A Feminist Analysis
Abstract
The present study analyzed responses from 220 female survivors of sexual assault at a U.S. college campus. Guided by feminist thought, we used thematic analysis to analyze survivors' reasons for not reporting their sexual assault to university officials. Drawing on participants' own words, the most common reasons for not reporting included “It was not a big enough deal,” “I didn't know who to report to or that I could report,” “It wasn't related to the university,” “I was afraid,” “Because I was drunk,” “Too ashamed to report,” “I didn't want to get him in trouble,” and “Felt as if I would be blamed for putting myself in the situation.” We conducted a series of binary logistic regressions to determine which demographic and experiential variables were associated with the thematic reason(s) for not reporting. In the spirit of feminist praxis, we offer implications for universities to remove barriers for reporting sexual violence.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Two studies required additional information to assess their risk of nonresponse bias.
“Two studies required additional information to assess their risk of nonresponse bias (Pijlman et al., 2023; Spencer et al., 2017).”
From Silenced Survivors: A Systematic Review of the Barriers to Reporting, Investigating, Prosecuting, and Sentencing of Adult Female Rape and Sexual Assault (2024) · cites this paper as Spencer et al., 2017
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414 · see citing works
A solution to the problem of separation in logistic regression
Heinze, G., & Schemper, M. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1047 · Cited by 2,711 · see citing works
Gender: An Intersectionality Perspective
Shields, S. A. (2008) · Sex Roles · doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8 · Cited by 1,509 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Wieberneit, M., Thal, S., Clare, J., Notebaert, L., & Tubex, H. (2024) · Trauma, Violence, & Abuse · doi:10.1177/15248380241261404 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Sexual Assault Case Attrition: The Voices of Survivors
Murphy-Oikonen, J., Chambers, L., Miller, A., & McQueen, K. (2022) · Sage Open · doi:10.1177/21582440221144612 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
- Authors
- Spencer, C., Mallory, A., Toews, M., Stith, S., & Wood, L.
- Affiliations
- Kansas State University (US)
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- Corresponding author
- Spencer, Chelsea
- Venue
- Family Relations
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-02
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 166-179
- ISSN
- 0197-6664 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3729
- OpenAlex
- W2616071017
- Cited by
- 121
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 12.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Family Relations (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Military, Security, and Education Studies
- Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
- Keywords
- sexual assault, university students, underreporting, barriers to reporting, women survivors, campus sexual violence, shame, fear, feminist politics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
