Abstract
The current study examines the role of group interaction in a women’s self-defense class. Study methods included individual interviews with women who had completed a college-based women-only self-defense course as well as supplemental observation of group behavior during a mock “attack” simulation class. The unique relationship that develops among women’s self-defense classmates seems to improve overall learning and performance due to the group collaboration and vicarious experiences. Results demonstrated that women’s self-defense courses offer participants a beneficial and supportive group atmosphere.
This study examines a college-based women-only self-defense course, Rape Aggression Defense (RAD), to gauge how the group environment of the course matters for women’s self-defense training. According to Koss, Gidycz, and Wisniewski (1987), one in four college women reported having experienced attempted or completed sexual assault since age 14. More recently, Fisher, Cullen, and Turner (2000) discovered that 2.8% of college women experience an attempted or completed rape during an academic year. Because the prevalence of rape is such a concern, self-defense classes are often offered on college campuses.
The main goal of women’s self-defense training is to strengthen women’s capacities to defend themselves against potential attacks. Self-defense training typically includes the teaching of both physical and verbal skills to use in response to a variety of threatening situations, with hands-on practice to facilitate skill development (Cummings, 1992). Encouraging women to fight back against an attacker is not just a matter of teaching techniques. Self-defense training should teach women that they have both the ability and the right to protect themselves to help women overcome traditional female socialization and embrace their will to fight (Guthrie, 1995; McCaughey, 1997, 1998). According to Hollander (2010), gender socialization “facilitates violence against women, both by encouraging assaultive behaviors in perpetrators and by creating fear, immobility, and self-blame in targets” (p. 461). Courses should also present a feminist understanding and the societal context of rape and other violence against women (Madden & Sokol, 1997). Self-defense training can provide an alternative view of women as independent, strong, and capable and may undermine violence against women and gender inequality. Females have reported that they saw women as more powerful and strong after completion of a self-defense course (Fraser & Russell, 2000; Hollander, 2004).
Research has shown that a victim’s use of physical resistance against a potential attack is related to rape avoidance (Ullman, 1997), implying that the strategies taught in women’s self-defense classes may decrease a woman’s risk of victimization (Brecklin, 2008). Evaluations have demonstrated that self-defense training participants increase their self-defense skills and perceive themselves as more physically competent after course completion (see Brecklin, 2008 for a review of women’s self-defense training evaluations). As self-defense course completion has also been linked to several positive outcomes (e.g., assertiveness, self-confidence, self-efficacy; Brecklin, 2008), the purpose of this study is to determine whether the group setting itself is relevant to these positive changes. The dynamics of group behavior in women’s self-defense courses may be just as important as the learning of the actual physical and verbal techniques.
Limited research has been conducted on the group processes of women’s self-defense training. The majority of relevant studies have analyzed Model Mugging (Fraser & Russell, 2000; Gaddis, 1990; Rowe, 1993; Shim, 1998), whereas the current study examines the Rape Aggression Defense (RAD) course. In both Model Mugging and RAD, women of all ages and abilities learn and repeatedly practice physical and verbal techniques and fight back full-force against padded “offenders” in realistic mock-assault scenarios. Both courses also present information to students on crime statistics and crime prevention/awareness strategies. Model Mugging, founded in 1971 by Matt Thomas, includes approximately 20 to 25 hr of training (http://modelmugging.org), whereas RAD, founded in 1989 by Lawrence Nadeau, is typically 9 to 12 hr in length (http://rad-systems.com). Another difference between Model Mugging and RAD is cost; Model Mugging typically costs $425 to $450 (http://modelmugging.org), whereas RAD averages about $25 (http://rad-systems.com). RAD also offers a free lifetime return and practice policy; former participants can take the class again for free anywhere RAD is offered worldwide.
Both Model Mugging and RAD require that course instructors be trained and certified. The primary instructors in Model Mugging are always female, serving as coaches and role models, whereas male instructors function as the padded attackers (http://modelmugging.org). The RAD course does not require female instructors; males are allowed (typically with a law enforcement background) to be primary instructors as well as padded attackers (http://rad-systems.com). Madden and Sokol (1997) argue that having male instructors present in courses adds to the realism, as women can practice against larger “attackers,” even if it is no longer a women-only environment. It is possible that given the differences in training length and instructor gender (although the RAD class examined in this study has male and female co-instructors), there is a better chance for group bonding and more emphasis on creating a supportive, empowering environment in Model Mugging. This article will explore whether the same group dynamics noted in past research of Model Mugging are present in RAD, and whether RAD and Model Mugging participants describe the role of the group similarly.
More than 900,000 women have taken RAD courses (http://www.rad-systems.com/), yet only a few formal evaluations have been conducted of the RAD program. These studies demonstrated that RAD participants experienced some positive changes, including increases in interpersonal self-efficacy, self-defense self-efficacy, and participatory behaviors (Cox, 1999; S. O. Michener, 1996; T. D. Michener, 1997). These evaluations have demonstrated some initial encouraging findings regarding the RAD course; however, more scholarly research is needed. The current study of RAD training is a necessary and important next step in women’s self-defense research.
In past studies of self-defense, the role of the group was typically a very tangential (and sometimes unexpected) part of the study, not a component of primary analysis. For example, Lidsker (1991), Rowe (1993), and Shim (1998) all used qualitative questionnaires in their studies to assess such factors as satisfaction with and changes due to the course, and the importance of the group in self-defense training emerged from subject responses to these questions. In the only past study to utilize individual interviews and report findings related to the group processes of self-defense training, Gaddis (1990) interviewed six Model Mugging participants to identify issues related to women’s empowerment; however, he did not directly ask the women about the role of the group.
Two studies have focused directly on the role of the group in women’s self-defense training (Fraser & Russell, 2000; Stevenson, 2006). Stevenson (2006) examined how a padded-attacker self-defense class (specific course was not named) is similar to a social work group through reliance on her personal experiences and observations from one class. Fraser and Russell (2000) analyzed the process elements of Model Mugging by interviewing 59 graduates. In Fraser and Russell’s study, 46 of the 59 women were interviewed in groups of 2 to 4, whereas this study is focused solely on individual interviews. Both individual and group interviews are useful for exploratory research. Individual interviews rely on participants to explain themselves and afford the opportunity to go into great detail (Morgan, 1996), while group interviews offer the advantage of having participants interact with each other and are closer to everyday conversation than individual interviews (King & Horrocks, 2010). However, this group interaction can have negative effects on the interview content; attitudes and responses of group members may be affected by the group discussion (Morgan, 1996). One or two participants may dominate the group interview, and others may fear repercussions if they state an unfavorable opinion (King & Horrocks, 2010). It is possible that group interviews about the group processes of self-defense training yield more positive findings, as women might not be willing to speak negatively about the group in front of other women. Another disadvantage of group interviews is that confidentiality between the participants regarding their responses cannot be promised, which is especially a concern with sensitive topics (King & Horrocks, 2010).
In addition to interviewing RAD participants, this study includes observation of a RAD class session. This combination of methodologies expands on prior research and leads to a richer view of group dynamics. It is possible that participants who self-select to be interviewed about their experiences in self-defense courses have had better experiences and enjoyed the group setting more than those who do not volunteer. Furthermore, participant memories might become more positive over time. Observation of the same self-defense program at the same university where interviews were conducted allows some control over the possibility that the interview responses may represent an overly positive view of the class. In essence, the observation portion of the study can be used to refute or validate interview responses. In summary, this study will expand on past research through the use of both individual interviews and observation to examine the role of the group in the RAD course.
According to Madden and Sokol (1997), self-defense courses should allow room for group discussion to help women cope with any emotional barriers to using the physical techniques. In an evaluation of IMPACT, a 20-hr padded-attacker course, Cermele (2004) referred to self-defense training as a “transformational learning experience” (p. 3) and explained that the group atmosphere is critical to this transformation for women. Similarly, based on her experiences and observation of a women’s self-defense course, Stevenson (2006) stated that “a self-defense class can be a powerful group experience” (p. 214) that “fosters a supportive peer relationship that can change women’s lives” (p. 196).
After women’s self-defense courses, participants have commented on the importance of the group environment for encouragement, emotional support, bonding, and sisterhood in semi-structured interviews (Gaddis, 1990), group interviews (Fraser & Russell, 2000), and qualitative questionnaires (Lidsker, 1991; Rowe, 1993; Shim, 1998). Several Model Mugging participants reported that the group process was therapeutic and provided support and a sense of belonging that they had never felt before (Fraser & Russell, 2000; Gaddis, 1990; Shim, 1998). Others cited emotional support and group bonding as unexpected benefits of the course and that they became more self-confident as a result of their intense class time with the other women (Rowe, 1993).
Rowe’s (1993) findings are important because self-efficacy theory maintains that “effective coping requires not only skills but self-beliefs of efficacy that ensure their effective use” (Ozer & Bandura, 1990, p. 473). This self-efficacy is gained primarily through performance accomplishments, but vicarious experience and verbal persuasion are also important (Bandura, 1977), and particularly relevant to group dynamics. In terms of verbal persuasion, the female participants need to be told that women can successfully fight back. Encouragement from fellow participants is important in self-defense courses where students practice their techniques in mock-assault situations (e.g., Model Mugging, RAD). According to McCaughey (1998), group support and praise are vital for overcoming traditional feminine hesitancy and physical incompetence, and “create an overall atmosphere in self-defense courses in which, paradoxical as it may seem, women get nurtured into aggressivity” (p. 284). During these mock-assault scenarios, the other students participate vicariously by observing and cheering the fighting participant on from the sidelines (McCaughey, 1998; Rowe, 1993), which can be beneficial for all of the participants. “Witnessing other women’s emotional and physical strength is also empowering and helps build a sisterhood” (Rowe, 1993, p. 184). Fraser and Russell (2000) also discussed the importance of the women sharing a common enemy (the mock attacker) and finding strength from banding together.
According to Gaddis (1990), women’s repeated successes in defeating the mock offender(s) throughout the class created a success momentum on both an individual and group level. The continuous exposure to women disabling the attackers instills in participants the idea that they too can be victorious and capable fighters, and heightens their self-defense self-efficacy expectations, particularly when they see how the other women’s abilities have improved over time (Henderson, 1997; Stevenson, 2006). This increase in self-efficacy is especially true in cases where the modeled behavior has clear outcomes (Bandura, 1977); typically, padded-attacker self-defense courses involve the clear outcome of disabling the “attacker(s)” (Stevenson, 2006). Hollander (2004) reported that as a result of watching other women exert the techniques, women achieved a renewed sense of personal self-protection in their own bodies rather than thinking of themselves as physically inferior to males. In addition, Model Mugging graduates felt that repeated demonstrations of self-defense skills by female instructors and the other students provided them with opportunities to vicariously learn skills, expanded the range of their own skills, and enhanced their self-confidence to defend themselves (Fraser & Russell, 2000).
In summary, prior studies have found support for the importance of the group environment for female participants of self-defense courses. This study examines whether the group dynamics of RAD are just as important, through an analysis of interviews and observations.
Method
Course Description
This study examines female participants in the RAD course. This specific RAD course is offered twice a year on the Midwestern campus where this study occurred. Although women affiliated with the university (students, staff, and faculty) are given the first opportunity to attend the class, enrollment is open to any female above the age of 17 and is free of charge. In addition, females under the age of 17 may take the class with parental consent. The course consists of four 3-hr classes co-taught by two RAD-certified law enforcement officers (one male and one female). During the final class, the students participate in various mock-attack scenarios, where they fight back against padded male “offenders” to demonstrate their learned skills and techniques.
Interviews
Qualitative data were obtained in the form of structured interviews regarding the motivations, perceptions, and experiences of female participants of the RAD program. Participants included women aged 18 and above, who completed the RAD course at a small Midwestern university between fall 2003 and spring 2007 and agreed to be interviewed. The director of the university’s Women’s Center sent emails to 71 past RAD students asking them to participate in the study. Four email addresses were no longer functional, reducing the potential sample size to 67. These emails included information about the study purpose and research methodology and emphasized the importance of the research project and their participation. With permission of the participants, the primary researcher was forwarded the names of those who expressed interest in participating in the study (along with their email addresses). These women were then contacted by the primary researcher.
A total of 34 women were interviewed; descriptive characteristics of the women at the time of the interviews are present in Table 1. Based on 67 potential respondents, the response rate was 50.7%. Twenty-nine women were interviewed in person by the primary researcher between April and June 2007. Five interviews were conducted by email; these women had moved away from the area but were still interested in participating in the study. Four of the subjects had taken the RAD class more than once. Prior to study participation, each subject was required to sign a consent form and asked to answer a brief list of questions regarding their specific demographics. The women were assured that their responses would be kept confidential and that they could withdraw from the study at any time. The in-person interviews took place in a small, private office within the university’s Women’s Center. Interviews ranged in length from approximately 10 to 35 min. All subjects consented to having their interviews tape-recorded; the interviews were then transcribed.
Characteristics of Subjects.
All of the interviews included a standard set of questions about the women’s experiences in the RAD program. The analyses of statements related to the group dynamics of women’s self-defense training were primarily made in response to these interview questions: “Why did you enroll in RAD?” “What attracted you most to the course?” “What was your favorite thing about the course?” and “Did watching the other women in the class hitting the padded aggressor affect you in any way? How?” The face-to-face interviews allowed for more flexibility than the interviews over email. During these in-person semi-structured interviews, additional questions were at times asked based on the content of each interviewee’s responses. For example, after several participants specifically stated that the group environment is what attracted them most to the course, a question about the group dynamics of the course was added to the interview protocol (“What did you think of the group dynamic of the class?”). This grounded theory approach revealed the need for a new focus on group processes in the RAD course, and 15 of the 34 subjects were directly asked for their thoughts on the group dynamic of the class.
The interviews were conducted and analyzed using a grounded theory approach to discern themes within the data (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The primary researcher and research assistant individually read and thematically analyzed each interview. This inductive approach allowed the researchers to mine the data and discover common responses between the interviewees. The two researchers then discussed the themes each developed to come up with a consensus on the primary patterns. Interviews were then analyzed systematically by both researchers to determine which responses fit the recurring themes. Typically, there was consensus on the coding schemes; disagreement was resolved by discussion to reach consensus.
Observation
To supplement the interview data, the final night of the spring 2008 RAD class (of 18 women) was observed. The researchers collected data through natural non-participant observation of the final 3-hr class, which included the mock-attack scenarios by the padded aggressors, as well as the RAD participants as a group watching the video of themselves during the simulations. The padded aggressors are a group of three men who are dressed in uniform and stage several scenarios to “attack” each participant. Then, the participant attempts to fend off her attacker(s) with the techniques she learned in the class. This observation was part of a larger longitudinal study examining psychological and behavioral changes of female RAD participants. The primary researcher and research assistant distributed pre-test surveys at the beginning of the first RAD class and then post-test surveys at the end of the last night of class over a series of five different classes. We typically entered the class on the final night of class just after completion of the mock-attack scenarios in time to observe the group watching the simulations on video; however, for this class, we observed the entirety of the final night. Descriptive characteristics of the women in the observed class are presented in Table 1.
Results
Based on interview response analysis, two main themes related to group interactions were discovered across interviews: the importance of group collaboration and significance of vicarious experiences. Some quotes have been edited to improve readability.
Interviews
Group collaboration
The manner in which group members interact has been implicated in successful group education. Fraser and Russell (2000) reported that groups whose members experience closeness and bonding tend to perform better, have more confidence in themselves, and are more dedicated to the group as a whole. During the interview process, several factors relating to group collaboration were revealed that fostered the women’s learning experience. Participants reported a common realization of potential threats and bonding with their classmates in a fun, comfortable, and supportive course atmosphere.
Realization of potential threats
Female self-defense participants typically come together with the common goal of learning to defend themselves against violence. As a European American/White 24-year-old said, “It was good that women came together just to protect themselves and learn how.” In addition, some women had similar fears and past experiences that led to their enrollment. Regarding her fellow participants’ perceived threat of victimization, a European American/White 26-year-old expressed that “They all seemed to recognize that this could happen.” Similarly, a European American/White 20-year-old explained,
The people who taught it . . . gave so many real-life examples, and there were people in the class who had had past experience at things that violently had happened to them. And, it just brought a broader perspective that something can eventually happen to me.
Clearly, the participants were united in their goal of learning self-defense techniques as a result of awareness about their potential to experience victimization.
Bonding
Although some women took the class with their roommates and/or friends, the participants were mostly unfamiliar with one another at the beginning of the class. However, the women commonly reported establishing a kinship among classmates over the duration of the course. For instance, a European American/White 25-year-old explained, “. . . when you were there together doing this, you really did kind of feel that community . . . it was nice to be able to bond for a little bit with people.” Likewise, a European American/White 22-year-old stated,
. . . we all ended up being acquaintances at the very least, we were talking to each other . . . about things and about our lives . . . we were almost like a little group . . . almost like a little family for that period of time.
When a European American/White 72-year-old was asked what she liked most about the class, she responded,
Two things, getting my voice back, and then the companionship during the class as we moved through the weeks . . . and we got to know each other more intimately than one would just on campus, but it was like a sisterhood at the end. Even now today, when I see some of those people that are walking on campus, there’s a special connection.
Obviously, the group members became more familiar with each other as the classes progressed. As a result of increased familiarity, bonding occurred and enhanced the overall learning environment for the individuals within the group.
Fun
Although women’s self-defense classes are designed to teach women the skills needed to fend off potential attackers and minimize victimization, participants revealed that they were able to have fun while developing their self-protection skills. According to a European American/White 33-year-old, “we had a lot of fun together . . . we joked with each other . . ..” A European American/White 20-year-old stated that one should “. . . take this class seriously, but at the same time, we had fun . . . we just goofed around sometimes . . .” A European American/White 43-year-old further explained, “. . . so I think how comforting and fun and relaxing the atmosphere was might’ve been a little bit surprising . . ..” Despite the serious nature of the class, participants still had fun during the course, a testament to the collaborative nature of the group environment.
Comfortable atmosphere
The women spoke about the importance of the class’s non-threatening and comfortable atmosphere. This is exemplified by a European American/White 24-year-old who “liked the fact that all of us could get together. It was a non-threatening environment because it was only women.” A European American/White 22-year-old explained why it was important to her that the course included only female participants:
It made it much more free feeling, like if I did have a question, I could ask it and I guess the idea behind that was also so that . . . men wouldn’t know what our plan of defense was, and I think that was also, and in some way, reassuring, that I know something that maybe they can’t, if they did try to attack me, that they wouldn’t know what I was going to do. So, I felt more, even more confident. So, I think it was nice to have all women.
Another participant (European American/White 43-year-old) expressed appreciation for the course’s environment, saying, “It wasn’t scary or threatening . . . it’s not that your adrenaline didn’t go up, but it’s just that it was a very comfortable atmosphere.” Women-only self-defense classes seem to offer participants a safe place to learn defense skills, while putting women at ease.
Supportive of each other
Interview responses indicated that participants were supportive of one another in a women’s self-defense class by reassuring each other, comparing techniques, and sharing in each other’s successes. The interviewees recognized this support for one another by reporting that they were communicative within the group and encouraging of one another. A European American/White 52-year-old stated,
We did talk . . . we would take breaks between different sessions and get things set up, so we could . . . talk about oh that, I was really scared with that, or I hadn’t thought about that, and . . . how did you hold your hand, or how did you do that? I don’t think I’m doing that right . . ..
A European American/White 23-year-old responded that “. . . my class, I think was awesome. Everyone got along really well and we were really encouraging to each other.” Another respondent (European American/White 50-year-old) revealed specifically that the instructors were supportive as well by stating, “. . . they encouraged us, and they [the instructors] encouraged us to encourage each other . . ..” Overall, a high level of support was viewed among classmates.
Significance of Vicarious Experiences
Key components of many women’s self-defense courses revolve around watching the other participants practice and effectively execute the self-defense techniques. The simulations, where each participant is “attacked” by offender(s) and has to fight back until the offender is disabled, are particularly important in terms of increasing women’s self-efficacy and confidence in their own abilities to fight back. During these “attack” scenarios in the final RAD session, the other students typically watch from the sidelines (after completing the scenario themselves). After the scenarios have been completed, the participants sit together to watch all of the video-recorded scenarios. As a result of these vicarious experiences, interviewees reported feeling proud of the other women’s accomplishments and empowered by the other participants, in addition to viewing the age diversity of the class as vital to their increased self-efficacy.
Proud of other women
As a result of watching the other women successfully fight back in the “attack” scenarios, interviewees commonly remarked on how proud they felt of their classmates. A European American/White 20-year-old explained how she felt after watching the other women defend themselves in the “attack” scenarios:
And, for the ones after me, I was really happy that we had all passed and we all knew what to do now.. . . And one of my other friends . . . she is very quiet and giggly. And, I was really proud of her, watching her. She was loud, and she did it really well.
In addition, a European American/White 34-year-old described her own emotional response:
Being with those women and just listening to them during classes and things like that as they shared things, some not so profound, and others pretty intense, and just watching their confidence, and watching them do those things, it was pretty emotional. And, I know that I got choked up at a couple of points watching other people because I was so proud of them, and proud of myself too, just proud of the accomplishment, the sense of accomplishment, and confidence, I think. It was just a major confidence booster.
During the scenarios, the women often cheered for each other, as this European American/White 22-year-old said, “I was sort of cheering them on, knowing all these different women found a way to gain this strong self and confidence.” Participants commonly felt proud of the other women due to their successful defensive actions and techniques, and the mock “attack” scenarios served as a locus where the women could root for each other.
Empowered by other women
Female participants often mentioned that seeing their classmates’ skills and accomplishments during the course increased their confidence in their own abilities. A European American/White 50-year-old said, about witnessing the other women’s techniques, “That was helpful . . . seeing somebody else do the punches, and be like, I can do that.” According to an Asian/Pacific Islander 19-year-old, her favorite thing about the class “was really just being there with the other girls and seeing that, oh, she can do this and that’s actually kind of cool.” In addition, a European American/White 72-year-old explained how important it was for her to see the other participants change over the duration of the course:
I was just feeling so empowered in myself . . . and a couple of the girls who had been so shy and unable to speak at the beginning of the class, they were not even able to follow directions of what we were told to do. For instance, our most important weapon being our voice, and they were hardly able to speak, and it was just so empowering to watch them at a later time too.
Observing other women practice the moves and successfully fight back during the simulations seemed critical for encouraging participants that they too could successfully defend themselves.
Impact of age diversity
Several interviewees mentioned that diversity in terms of participant age was appreciated and important for the class dynamics. For example, a European American/White 52-year-old explained how the diverse group increased her own confidence:
I was very assured the first night, when the lady who was getting ready to retire was there, and I’m thinking, okay, I can do this then. If she can do it, I can do it. So, that was good, and it was good to have a range of people from students to the community.
Furthermore, a Hispanic 20-year-old described being paired up with an older woman as her favorite part of the course:
Applying what we learned, like they’d teach us a move and then we had to pair up with someone. And the only reason it’s my favorite is because I’d always end up with this like 75-year-old woman.. . . This woman had more guts than I ever will . . . I didn’t want to hit her too hard, and she was like, “No, be harder.” She made the class for me because she had this life experience with her . . . and so she really took the class seriously and the fact that she was so serious about it made me almost take the class a little more seriously. Because although it is fun, it is something I need to remember. And, hopefully it’ll never happen to me, but in the case that it does, then I should be prepared.
The impact of diversity was particularly significant in terms of viewing the older women who were able to successfully fight back against the “attacks.” This was demonstrated by a European American/White 25-year-old’s thoughts on how watching the other women during the scenarios made her feel:
I thought that they all did really good, we had some really old ladies in our class and a couple people who weren’t really sure that they could do it. And, in the end, they did really well. I was really happy they did it.
The above quotes suggest that a diverse class in terms of age builds up the younger participants’ confidence in their own strength and abilities and encourages them to use that new-found power.
Observations
Characteristics noted during the non-participant observation of the classes support several of the themes that emerged during analysis of participant interview responses. Prior to the start of the first class and while completing their pre-test surveys and demographic information, each individual kept to herself, socializing little within the group, with the exception of the women who enrolled with a friend. In contrast, during the fourth and final class, the women were all interacting with each other, demonstrating the bonding discovered in the interviews. During the mock-attack simulations, the women actively cheered each other on and shouted out encouraging words to boost the other participants’ confidence levels, providing evidence for the theme of a supportive environment. Interestingly, there did not seem to be the common barriers often seen between people from different backgrounds. The women all seemed to be comfortable with each other. Women of all ages, races, and academic levels were able to have fun together while also being accepting and supportive of each other. This was evidenced in the interviews through quotes related to the impact of age diversity, and it is possible that other forms of diversity are also important for self-defense group processes and development of self-efficacy.
Group bonding and support were particularly apparent during the viewing of the recorded “attack” scenarios at the end of the final class. While watching the tapes of the women during the “attack” simulations, some participants expressed dissatisfaction with their performance, and the other women would offer words of reassurance and support. In addition, a more cohesive group was seen in the final class; while watching the tapes, the women had relaxed their limits of personal space and boundaries and were all sitting on the floor very close to each other. During this portion of the course, the atmosphere was also very celebratory in nature, consistent with the theme of fun revealed in the interviews. The women seemed enthusiastic about having completed the simulations and eager to applaud each other’s victories, which confirms the thematic analyses related to being proud of and empowered by the other participants.
Discussion
The role of the group in women’s self-defense training was examined through the combination of interviews and non-participant observation. Based on interviewee responses, it appears that the dynamics of the group setting itself played an important part in not only enhancing the women’s ability to learn and successfully execute the self-defense techniques but also in building up their self-confidence and empowering them. This empowerment may be necessary to help the women overcome any hesitation to use physical resistance that results from traditional gender socialization. According to Hollander (2010), “self-defense transforms the way it feels to inhabit a female body. It changes what it means to be a woman” (p. 469).
Two main themes related to group processes were discovered in the interviews with RAD participants: group collaboration and significance of vicarious experiences. A close and collaborative relationship developed over a short time period between the female participants of the RAD program. Similarly, Fraser and Russell (2000) discovered in their study that the intensity of Model Mugging’s course structure led to rapid group bonding. Although RAD is about 10 hr shorter in length than Model Mugging, a cohesive group clearly still developed. As observed in the RAD course, the women’s interactions with each other changed dramatically over a 4-week period, culminating in a cohesive and supportive group during the last class session. There seems to be similar group processes that occur in both Model Mugging and RAD.
Interview responses highlighted how fun the RAD class environment was, which likely further enhanced group collaboration and bonding. Respondents mentioned that the comfortable atmosphere was also important to them. The class environment offered a non-threatening place to both share their feelings about common potential threats of victimization and learn new defensive skills. Past research has shown that female self-defense participants tend to share common victimization experiences and fears (Gaddis, 1990; Shim, 1998). Another pattern evidenced by the responses and behaviors of both the interviewed and observed participants was how encouraging the women were of each other, consistent with past research on Model Mugging (Fraser & Russell, 2000; Gaddis, 1990; Rowe, 1993; Shim, 1998). This group support helps nurture the women into aggressivity (McCaughey, 1998). Fraser and Russell (2000) referred to success as a collective experience in women’s self-defense, and the respondents in this study clearly demonstrated this collectivity by cheering each other on and valuing their classmates’ successful maneuvers.
Another pattern of responses related to group dynamics emerged as a result of the mock-attack scenarios during the final RAD class. Interviewees spoke of being proud of the other women and their accomplishments during the simulations, and this was validated by observations of the participants cheering each other on during the scenarios. An additional theme discovered across interviews was that the participants felt empowered by and more confident due to their classmates’ abilities and skills at fighting off the “attackers.” These findings confirm that the vicarious experience of watching the other women successfully fight back against the “attackers” can play an important role in increasing participants’ self-efficacy. Evaluations have shown that participants in programs with mock-attack simulations have stronger self-defense skills (Henderson, 1997) and moderately higher self-defense self-efficacy (T. D. Michener, 1997) than participants in programs without these simulations, which may be due in part to participant empowerment resulting from these vicarious experiences. In addition, this study demonstrated the importance of a diverse class in terms of age for increasing women’s confidence in their self-defense abilities, which is a new finding in this area of research. According to Bandura (1977), diversified modeling can be helpful to the development of self-efficacy. If people of varying ages can successfully perform the moves, this leads other participants to have a rational basis for increasing their own self-efficacy.
There were several limitations of the current study that need to be mentioned. Only 34 interviews with female RAD participants were conducted, but given the demographics of the sample and comments from interviewees on the diversity of their classmates, it is likely representative of women who take the RAD course at this university. The majority of quotes offered here are from European American/White women; therefore, future research would benefit from analysis of more diverse classes. Another limitation is that interviewee responses may only generalize to the specific RAD course at this Midwestern university. Although all RAD courses include similar content and teach the same self-defense techniques, findings of this study may merely be relevant to this particular set of classes and instructors. Instructors bring their own experiences and beliefs to each course; thus, the interpretation and teaching of course material is subjective to each instructor. This specific RAD course is co-taught by law enforcement officers (one male and one female), which may lead to a different climate than a course with a different set of instructors.
It is also possible that those participants who agreed to be interviewed were the most positive toward the RAD course. However, because the supplemental observation confirmed many of the themes discovered in the interviews, there is less concern about these demand effects. In addition, interviewees were asked about their least favorite thing about the RAD class. Eleven respondents (32%) did not have a least favorite thing to report. The most common least favorite thing reported was the actual fighting (in the simulations), which was reported by five women (15%), although three of these women specifically stated that they knew it was necessary for the course. Other common responses included the first class with paperwork and lecture (12%), dislike of specific techniques (9%), and being shy and nervous in front of the class (9%). For example, a European American/White 24-year-old said,
I was probably a little nervous because I’m a grad student and most of the girls were freshmen undergrad. So, it was just kind of like, oh, should I really be here, at first. But, I got over that quickly.
Only one woman (a European American/White 25-year-old) directly referenced group processes as her least favorite thing. She wanted more discussion during the course, specifically
to interact more, to ask these women, you know, what are you scared of? What are, you know, why are you really here? . . . More honest interaction, you know, kind of down to earth. I think that would’ve been good.
This quote demonstrates that additional group interaction might be desired and even more beneficial for participants.
Based on grounded theory principles, a question on group dynamics was added to the interview protocol partway through the interviews once a trend in responses related to the group environment was discovered. Therefore, not all interview participants were specifically asked about group dynamics. The researchers analyzed the interviews for common patterns and themes; however, there was some overlap in the developed categories based on interviewee responses. Finally, sexual and physical assault survivors in particular may benefit from the supportive group environment of self-defense courses, as it can help to facilitate survivors’ healing process (e.g., Peretz, 1991; Shim, 1998). Prior victimization was not directly asked about in this study’s interviews, which is something that should be examined in future research.
The interviews and observations of RAD participants provided insights into their experiences and the role of the course group environment. Both the interview responses and researcher observations demonstrated that self-defense classes offer women a positive and collaborative atmosphere that enhances their learning and performance of self-defense skills. However, future research should analyze whether and how the group dynamics of self-defense training are different from other all-women groups. In addition, as suggested by Shim (1998), future research should analyze measurements of group cohesiveness, attachment to the group, and friendships maintained after training completion. It seems that the group dynamics of women’s self-defense training are critical for helping participants feel comfortable in the class, build confidence, and successfully learn the self-defense techniques. Based on this study, more women should enroll in group-based women’s self-defense courses, as they offer supportive group interactions and promising benefits.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
We are indebted to Mike Stuart, Amanda Parris, and Lynn Otterson for providing us with access to interview, survey, and observation of the female participants of several Rape Aggression Defense (RAD) classes.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors received financial support from the College of Public Affairs and Administration Executive Committee at University of Illinois, Springfield for the research of this article.