[go: up one dir, main page]

IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jt0000/v8y2017i1p30-43.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Malevolent Side of Revenge Porn Proclivity: Dark Personality Traits and Sexist Ideology

Author

Listed:
  • Afroditi Pina

    (School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK)

  • James Holland

    (School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK)

  • Mark James

    (School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury, UK)

Abstract
This paper presents a novel study, exploring a form of technology facilitated sexual violence (TFSV) known as revenge porn. Despite its emerging prevalence, little is known about the characteristics of revenge porn perpetrators. In the current study, a revenge porn proclivity scale was devised to examine participants' behavioural propensity to engage in revenge porn. One hundred adults, aged 18-54, were recruited online from a community sample. The correlational relationship between revenge porn proclivity and the self-reported endorsement of the Dark Triad, sadism, and ambivalent sexism was examined. Additional proclivity subscales of revenge porn enjoyment and revenge porn approval were also created. The study's main findings revealed a positive correlation between a greater behavioural propensity to engage in revenge porn and higher levels of the Dark Triad and ambivalent sexism. Moreover, endorsement of psychopathy was found to be the only Dark Triad trait that independently predicted revenge porn proclivity. The results suggest that perpetrators of revenge porn may have distinct personality profiles. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Afroditi Pina & James Holland & Mark James, 2017. "The Malevolent Side of Revenge Porn Proclivity: Dark Personality Traits and Sexist Ideology," International Journal of Technoethics (IJT), IGI Global, vol. 8(1), pages 30-43, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:igg:jt0000:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:30-43
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/IJT.2017010103
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rodríguez-Rodríguez, Ignacio & Heras-González, Purificación, 2020. "How are universities using Information and Communication Technologies to face sexual harassment and how can they improve?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:igg:jt0000:v:8:y:2017:i:1:p:30-43. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.