"I Think You Covered the Three Levels of Drugs and Consent": Qualitatively Testing Different Operationalizations of an Alcohol and Other Drugs-Involved Sexual Violence.

Substance-involved rape is increasing among college students, particularly women (Koss et al., 2022). Addressing rape requires first measuring it accurately in surveys to understand its true scope and nature. We used cognitive interviews with 40 young adults to qualitatively test the construct validity of an alcohol- and other drugs (AOD)-involved rape item in the Sexual Experiences Survey by asking participants to comment on different operationalizations of this construct. Our findings revealed that different phrasings elicited different interpretations of the items by participants. Specifically, the results indicated that (1) respondents viewed the different operationalizations as a sequence of events with varying severity; (2) some participants focused on the intentionality and responsibility of the perpetrator as opposed to opportunistic perpetration; and (3) study participants consistently chose one of the operationalizations as describing "being roofied" (being drugged without consent). Participants also contributed additional scenarios not described in the questionnaire and shared their interpretations of the items. The results underscore the importance of refining survey language to properly measure AOD-involved rape and allow us to understand how to tailor appropriate questions for best comprehension. The findings indicate the benefit in including several items about AOD-involved rape in questionnaires such as the Sexual Experiences Survey, with each item addressing different scenarios of victim intoxication. The results could also have important implications for sexual violence prevention programs, which should discuss consent, intentions, and responsibility specifically in the context of AOD consumption.

Predicting College Women's Self-esteem Based on Verbal Coercion Experience and Verbal Tactic Items on the Revised Sexual Experiences Survey.

Verbal coercion experience is common among college women and has sometimes been associated with lower self-esteem. The current study examined self-esteem based on the two verbal coercion items included in the latest version of the most popular measure of sexual victimization experience, the Sexual Experiences Survey-Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV; Koss et al., 2007). One item includes verbal tactics categorized as "threat" and the other item includes verbal tactics categorized as "criticism." Undergraduate women (n = 479) completed the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale and the SES-SFV. Results showed that women who experienced criticism reported lower self-esteem than those who did not experience criticism. However, threat experience was not significantly related to women's self-esteem. Findings support Koss et al.'s suggestion that criticism tactics are more negative than threat tactics, and imply that self-esteem may be negatively associated with some sexually coercive verbal tactics but not associated with others. Future researchers should pay careful attention to operational definitions of verbal coercion.

Lifetime Acts of Violence Assessment (LAVA) predictors of laboratory aggression.

While self-report data warrants interpretive caution in applied settings, these indices serve an important role in exploratory research. The Lifetime Assessment of Violent Acts (LAVA) inventory is a brief, reliable, face-valid questionnaire for estimating the frequency, triggers, and consequences (including injuries to others) of prior acts of aggression. The LAVA also identifies the situational contexts in which prior violence was triggered and provides a basis for risk classifications based on past reactive, intimate partner, alcohol-related, and/or weapon-related violence. Scores on the LAVA indices have been linked to a range of developmental and maladjustment indicators. Associations were found between lab-provoked (Taylor Aggression Paradigm) responding and both dimensional and risk classification scores in this sample (N = 92) of college men. Participants "competed" with a fictional opponent using electric shock as a retaliatory measure for perceived provocation. The total LAVA dimensional score predicted mean shock intensity ( d = .87), baseline responding ( d = 0.90), and past sexual aggression ( d = 1.01). Shock intensities in response to high provocation were predicted ( M d = 0.57) by all but one LAVA index. Participants who reported inflicting one or more injuries on another showed more intense escalations of aggression ( d = 0.46) in response to provocation than normative counterparts. Prior injuries to another ( RR = 2.71), reactive acts of aggression ( RR = 3.73), or intimate-partner violence ( RR = 4.19) elevated the risk of one or more prior acts of self-reported sexual aggression. The limitations and potential value of self-report data were discussed in regard to aggression research.