Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.658305
Title: An exploratory model of MPR offence progression : the role of self-regulation and male peer support in duo rape offences
Author: Lambine, Mackenzie Erica
ISNI:       0000 0004 5352 852X
Awarding Body: Middlesex University
Current Institution: Middlesex University
Date of Award: 2015
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
Multiple perpetrator rape (MPR) has been the focus of relatively little empirical scrutiny, and the difficulty faced by the legal system in securing convictions (Horvath & Kelly, 2009). The primary aim of this thesis is to provide a meaningful exploration of interpersonal dynamics at work in MPR offences with a particular focus on those offences committed by two perpetrators (duos), the most commonly occurring type of MPR (DaSilva, Woodhams, & Harkins, 2012; Lambine, 2012). Better understanding has been sought here through the development of an exploratory offence progression model that attempts to synthesize two empirically supported offending theories: self-regulation and male peer support. Mixed methodological techniques were adopted, beginning with a quantitative study of police recorded MPR cases comparing duo, trio, and 4+ offending groups. This was followed by a qualitative study, focusing upon the possible role of male peer support in propagating atmospheres, dialogue, and behaviours conducive to misogyny and woman abuse, in a sample of sportsmen. Finally, incarcerated duo rapists were interviewed to gain perspective on the possibility of male peer support influencing their offending behaviours. Findings from thematic analyses of the qualitative studies suggest that interactions of certain all-male groups can result in an atmosphere of normalised misogyny that is an important contributor to individual acceptance of woman abuse, and in some cases, MPR in duo offending groups. The proposed model found some empirical support from study findings, and was elucidated and further refined in light of findings from each study, which are further elaborated in the context of reflexivity, limitations, and directions for the future.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.658305  DOI: Not available
Share: