OBJECTIVE Colleges and universities are increasingly adopting affirmative consent standards of sexual assault, in which consent is defined as conscious and voluntary "yeses" given throughout a sexual interaction. We examined the impact of affirmative consent standards on perceptions of assault and consent. HYPOTHESES We hypothesized that in sexual assault scenarios involving physical force or verbal coercion, exposure to the consent standard would increase perceptions of assault and decrease perceptions of consent relative to not being exposed to the standard. We then explored whether dehumanization of the perpetrator or the victim mediates the association between assault type and sexual assault perceptions and how this relation changes on the basis of exposure to the affirmative consent standard. METHOD We exposed 909 participants (predominantly women: n = 574; predominantly White: n = 677; age: M = 28.61 years, SD = 11.10; students: n = 363, Mechanical Turk workers: n = 546) to an affirmative consent standard in a written policy, a video using a "cup-of-tea" metaphor to describe the consent standard, or no information on the standard. Participants rated perceptions of assault, consent, and dehumanization of a man and woman involved in a sexual interaction involving physical force, verbal coercion, or a consensual agreement. RESULTS Participants who saw the affirmative consent video were more likely to perceive physical assault as assault compared with participants in the no-exposure control condition. Participants who read the affirmative consent definition were no more or less likely to perceive physical assault as sexual assault compared with participants in the control condition. Participants exposed to the text definition perceived the consensual interaction as more assaultive than did participants in the video and control conditions. Perpetrator dehumanization also emerged as a mediator of the relation between assault type and assault perceptions. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that exposure to consent standards sometimes aids sexual assault decision-making but also leads to confusion, even in scenarios in which consent is normally discernable. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

肯定同意标准是否会增加性侵犯认知的准确性？这取决于您如何了解标准。

目标高校越来越多地采用性侵犯的肯定同意标准，其中同意被定义为在整个性互动过程中有意识和自愿的“是”。我们研究了肯定同意标准对攻击和同意的看法的影响。假设 我们假设在涉及体力或口头胁迫的性侵犯场景中，接触同意标准会增加对攻击的感知，并降低相对于未接触标准的同意感知。然后，我们探讨了施暴者或受害者的非人性化是否调解了攻击类型和性攻击感知之间的关联，以及这种关系如何在暴露于肯定同意标准的基础上发生变化。方法 我们让 909 名参与者（主要是女性：n = 574；主要是白人：n = 677；年龄：M = 28.61 岁，SD = 11.10；学生：n = 363，Mechanical Turk 工人：n = 546）接受肯定同意标准在书面政策中，一段视频使用“一杯茶”的比喻来描述同意标准，或者没有关于该标准的信息。参与者对涉及体力、言语胁迫或双方同意的性互动的男女进行攻击、同意和非人化的看法。结果 与非暴露控制条件下的参与者相比，观看肯定同意视频的参与者更有可能将身体攻击视为攻击。与控制条件下的参与者相比，阅读肯定同意定义的参与者不会或多或少地将身体攻击视为性侵犯。暴露于文本定义的参与者认为双方同意的互动比视频和控制条件下的参与者更具攻击性。肇事者非人化也成为攻击类型和攻击感知之间关系的中介。结论 这些结果表明，接触同意标准有时有助于性侵犯决策，但也会导致混乱，即使在通常可以辨别同意的情况下也是如此。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。暴露于文本定义的参与者认为双方同意的互动比视频和控制条件下的参与者更具攻击性。肇事者非人化也成为攻击类型和攻击感知之间关系的中介。结论 这些结果表明，接触同意标准有时有助于性侵犯决策，但也会导致混乱，即使在通常可以辨别同意的情况下也是如此。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。暴露于文本定义的参与者认为双方同意的互动比视频和控制条件下的参与者更具攻击性。肇事者非人化也成为攻击类型和攻击感知之间关系的中介。结论 这些结果表明，接触同意标准有时有助于性侵犯决策，但也会导致混乱，即使在通常可以辨别同意的情况下也是如此。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。结论 这些结果表明，接触同意标准有时有助于性侵犯决策，但也会导致混乱，即使在通常可以辨别同意的情况下也是如此。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。结论 这些结果表明，接触同意标准有时有助于性侵犯决策，但也会导致混乱，即使在通常可以辨别同意的情况下也是如此。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。