Based on a recent and extensive report from New York’s Attorney General, the state’s Governor, Andrew Cuomo, is now facing numerous credible claims of a pattern of sexual harassment, with his fellow Democrats, including the President, calling on him to step down. Some of the claims against him, including the one that initiated the inquiry last December, came to light years after the original events. As former Aide Lindsey Boylan notes, “There is a part of me that will never forgive myself for being a victim for so long.” “It was all so normalized,” she says, “that only now do I realize how insidious his abuse was.” These delayed claims are in line with the #MeToo phenomenon’s other recent claims of harassment or assault involving figures like Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, and Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The frequency and traction of these claims lends credibility to survey research showing that about six in ten American women have experienced sexual harassment. But they generally do not report it…at least not immediately.
For a long time in legal cases, the received wisdom was that if years have gone by then the person bringing the claim will have a credibility problem. But that may be shifting as many are gaining a broader awareness of the reasons why a victim might delay a report. Recently, one of the first studies was conducted to look at the effects of delayed reporting of sexual offenses against adults on mock juror decision-making. The research team (Fraser, Pica & Pozzulo, 2021) evaluated long-term delayed reporting (15 years, 25 years, or more) to see how that span affects jurors who are evaluating the credibility of the claim. Interestingly, they found that there were more guilty verdicts when there was a 25 year delay compared to a 15 year delay. “These results,” they conclude, “suggest that jurors in sexual offense cases may perceive longer delays in reporting as more believable than shorter delays.” In this post, I’ll look at why that might be the case.
A More Supportive Climate Is a Recent Development
The #MeToo hashtag caught fire only recently, in 2017. Before that (and still to this day, to some extent) those who have been the target of harassment or assault have been reluctant to come forward with their experiences, concerned that they will be doubted or attacked, or that their careers might end or otherwise be limited. The authors cite evidence that #MeToo is changing that and leading to an increased willingness to report harassment and assault in 30 countries including the United States. In that context, hearing today about a delayed report carries a different meaning. Potentially, the longer the delay, the more the abuse itself is pushed into a less supportive timeframe. Delaying the report becomes more understandable because, back when it happened, there was less support.
There Is a Difference Between Long-term and Short-term Delay
Someone who waits a few weeks to report maya scrutiny the is different than that faced by someone who waits years to report, and the advantage does not necessarily go to the more timely report. The current study’s authors refer to earlier research (Balogh et al., 2003) showing that an 18-month delay in reporting assault or harassment is less credible than an immediate report, with fewer guilty verdicts accompanying the delayed report. But the current research looking at a much longer timeframe reached the very different conclusion that a longer delay could actually be more credible. The implications are that, either things have changed substantially since 2003 (quite likely), or the implied reasons for waiting a short time to report are different than the implied reasons for waiting a long time.
Society Matters
The current study authors observe that what could be changing is the social context. That, after all, is the central power of the #MeToo hashtag. It revealed that so many women, and actually most women and many women you know, share this experience. That has an effect: Instead of being an outlier event that prompts scrutiny of the whistleblower, it is a normal event that prompts an accompanying #TimesUp attitude of demanding actual accountability and change. The visibility of the reporting also plays a role. The authors note, “An alternate explanation could be that mock-jurors are more likely to reach a guilty verdict when longer delays in reporting coincide with heightened publicity of similar cases.” In other words, the media reports have a demonstration effect, saying “You will be taken seriously” to other victims who might come forward. One other interesting finding is that the type of offense did not strongly influence guilt ratings. “One explanation,” the authors offer, “is that in the post #MeToo era, sexual harassment and assault may be viewed as more similar in severity.”
While the credibility of long-term delayed reports might be good news for some claims, it isn’t a great reason to delay reports. The researchers suggest that there might be a curvilinear relationship, with early or immediate claims being credible, but longer-term claims also invoking different kinds of responses, including potentially greater social understanding. In addition, while it isn’t tested in this study, it’s likely that jurors will pay close attention to the reason for the delay. So those bringing a late claim shouldn’t necessarily despair, but should explain. Increasingly, it seems that society may be ready to hear the explanation.
____________________
Balogh, D. W., Kite, M. E., Pickel, K. L., Canel, D., & Schroeder, J. (2003). The effects of delayed report and motive for reporting on perceptions of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 48(7), 337-348.
Fraser, B. M., Pica, E., & Pozzulo, J. D. (2021). The effect of delayed reporting on mock-juror decision-making in the era of #MeToo. Journal of interpersonal violence, 0886260521997464.
Image credit: 123rf.com, used under license
