This commentary responds to claims that research by Cheryl Thomas ‘shows’ no problem with rape myths in English and Welsh juries. We critique the claim on the basis of ambiguous survey design, a false distinction between ‘real’ jurors and other research participants, the conflation of attitudes in relation to abstract versus applied rape myths, and misleading interpretation of the data. Ultimately, we call for a balanced appraisal of individual studies by contextualising them against the wider literature.
- Social Sciences and Humanities
- Criminology, Sociology and Social Policy
Published inJournal of Gender-Based Violence
VersionAM (Accepted Manuscript)
Rights holder© Centre for Gender and Violence Research University of Bristol
Publisher statementThis is a post-peer-review, pre-copy edited version of an article published in Journal of Gender-Based Violence. The definitive publisher-authenticated version Daly, E., Smith, O., Bows, H., Brown, J., Chalmers, J., Cowan, S., Horvath, M., Leverick, F., Lovett, J., Munro, V., & Willmott, D. (2023). Myths about myths? A commentary on Thomas (2020) and the question of jury rape myth acceptance, Journal of Gender-Based Violence, 7(1), 189-200 is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021X16371459419254.
DepositorDr Olivia Smith. Deposit date: 2 September 2021