It doesn't seem like much, because it is short for a prospectus, but I specifically chose this topic because I would have an oppurtunity to add new information to the field. Read if you want. I need feedback, because I'm taking a chance on this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Literature Review
Early in 2006, the Duke Lacrosse rape case caught the attention of the media and the nation. Public opinion was quick to turn against the lacrosse team, but later evidence offered by the defense has cast doubt on the validity of the alleged victim’s accusations.

Feminists are very outspoken on the issue of false rape accusations, believing that most allegations the police deem false are nothing more than disbelief on the part of the authorities. Some feminist scholars go as far as to claim that rape in America is a socially normal and condoned behavior and is regulated rather than punished (Rozee & Koss, 2001). They refuse the existence of almost all false allegations and believe the very concept of is police harassment of victims (Kanin 1994). Rozee & Koss rail against the practice of subjecting accusers to polygraph tests, claiming it increases the possibility that rapes will go unreported. They also claim disbelief on the part of law enforcement officials intimidates real victims into false recantations, thereby incorrectly increasing the incidence of false accusations (2001).

This feminist ideology was most likely a backlash against the former sociological and psychological view of rape. Until relatively recently, judges and legal scholars held the opinion that false rape allegations were widespread. Freud helped advance this idea with his theory that women were naturally masochistic and had a subconscious desire for men to rape them (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997).

One argument states that the incidence of false allegations must be low, because rape is an underreported crime, although Bryden and Lengnick show that this argument is an illogical comparison. There is no rational connection between unreported rapes and false reports. They represent two entirely different sets of data. This argument also fails to present any statistics. It simply supposes that false allegation rates are low because unreported rapes are certainly greater than false reports. This line of reasoning is of no use (1997).

Another type of qualitative reasoning presumes that false allegations are rare because of the perceived disadvantages to the accusers. The accuser faces an intense and often disturbing investigation that may entail intrusive medical procedures. If the case goes to trial, the accuser may not only find her character on trial, but also face exposure and prosecution for perjury or falsely reporting a crime (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997).

However, this explanation fails to account for human behavior that is irrational (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997). Someone may file a false accusation as a form of revenge, to provide an alibi, or simply to garner attention and/or pity (Kanin 1994). Furthermore, in most cases where the alleged victim is a minor, rarely does the victim report the rape. Usually, a friend or family member makes the initial contact with the authorities. This does not assume that the victim is lying, rather if the victim is lying, they did not initially lie to the police. It is not a large stretch of the imagination to assume that some teenagers would lie about a rape to an extreme parental punishment. This is not as obvious or premeditated as filing a false police report firsthand (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997).

It seems views on the prevalence of false accusations vary in accordance to profession. For example, rape counselors are more likely to downplay the incidence of false allegations, where some police departments claim that false allegations of rape are common. This makes sense, as rape counselors would rarely work with a false accuser, while police would have the most experience with false incidences. Although, there is some strong evidence to suggest the police are improperly distrustful of rape allegations (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997).

The statistical evidence for the incidence of false rape allegations is confusing at best. Statistics vary from 2 - 42% and the research methodology is never the same. The FBI claims 8.4% of all reported rapes are unfounded accusations. This is significantly higher than the unfounded rates for other crimes. However, the FBI compounds their unfounded crime rates from police statistics. An unfounded crime is any crime the police did not believe occurred. This presents a problem, because some police districts are overly critical of rape accusations. Furthermore, police perceptions may vary widely as to witness credibility, circumstances, prostitution, or consensual sex (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997).

Rozee and Koss (2001) claim that the police are often the largest impediment to rape reports because of their innate disbelief of accusers. It is a distinct possibility that the FBI’s statistics are improperly skewed. Unfounded rape rates vary wildly from city to city based on prosecutorial and police protocol. Some districts report rapes as unfounded if police believe the accuser incredible, even if there is no evidence to doubt the accusation. The New York Rape Analysis Squad found that false rape allegations were about 2% did not differ statistically from the false allegation rates of other crimes (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997).

When third parties assess the credibility of accusers, the statistics vary again. Male police surgeons in the United Kingdom estimated that 31.4% of the rapes they had seen were false accusations. The female surgeons, however, put their estimate significantly lower, 23.2%. The amount of rape victims the surgeons had examined drastically altered their estimations. The surgeons who had seen the most cases estimated the false accusation incidence at 23.5%, while the surgeons who had examined the least amount of victims estimated 4% (Geis, Geis, & Wright, 1978). The year of this study is important, however, as the feminist movement did not begin to change the widespread belief that rape was mostly a falsely reported crime until the 1970’s (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997).

One interview study, asked social workers to interview alleged rape victims, at a Philadelphia hospital, and asses their credibility. The social workers gave high credibility ratings to all but 12.7% of the women they interviewed. Approximately 4% of the interviewees admitted their allegations were false during the interview (Bryden & Lengnick, 1997).

All of the studies cited above either rely on third party assessments of rape allegations or, like the FBI’s data, skew dramatically with police conceptions and procedures. Kanin (1994) focused on the accusers instead.

The investigation took place in an unnamed, Midwestern town with a population of 70,000. There was a lack of serious crime in the area, and thus the police were free to pursue all rape allegations. Departmental policy stated that officers could not make assessments on rape allegation. Police had to investigate every accusation regardless of how unconvincing the accuser. They also had to subject all accusers and suspects to polygraph tests. Most importantly, the police could not label any rape accusation false unless the accuser recanted. If the accuser did admit to falsifying a statement, the District Attorneys prosecuted them. The law enforcement officials informed the accusers of the prosecutorial policy before they could make any retractions (Kanin 1994).

The findings showed that over a nine-year period, 45 out of 109 (41%) rape allegations were false. One year showed a 70% incidence of false allegations. The year with the lowest incidence was 27%. The most frequent reasons for leveling a false rape charge were gaining an alibi, seeking attention, and revenge. One woman started a fight when inebriated and then claimed the man she fought with had assaulted and raped her. In another case, A sixteen-year-old female had consensual sex, and when confronted by her friends and parents, claimed rape. Another sixteen-year-old accused her boyfriend of raping her when she caught him dating another girl (Kanin, 1994).

Although Meadows (2004) cites Kanin’s findings in his argument to loosen rape shield laws, others are not so sure. Although the reasoning of Rozee and Koss (2001) does not apply to this study, as the police investigated all rape allegations and could not utilize personal judgments to dissuade accusers from filing reports, Bryden and Lengnick point out that the incident rate in Kanin’s study could be flawed for that same reason. The police spend time on rape cases that otherwise they might dismiss immediately. The wildest stories, though later recanted, would become false incidences. In other areas, the police might dissuade accusers from filing those reports (1997).

There is a possibility of false recantations, specifically because the police subject the accusers to polygraph tests. Most accusers recant their statements or simply refuse to cooperate in the face of investigations, even if the claims are true (Rozee & Koss, 2001). However, it would seem extremely unlikely for a true victim to recant the accusation and open herself to perjury or falsification charges (Kanin, 1994). One important note, the study does not address false rape allegations that resulted in conviction and later acquittal (Bryden and Lengnick).

Although there is wide statistical variation attributed to the incidence of false rape allegations, there is still a need for law enforcement officials to recognize the traits of a false accusation. Some studies have shown that police do not differ significantly from the general population when asked to detect a false story. Some law enforcement training, like the Reid Technique, which uses subtle physical cues to detect deception, actually decreases the risk of properly identifying deception (Marshall & Allison, 2006).

Since false accusers usually do not understand the psychological trauma that comes from rape, their stories often differ in key ways. Often, in a false allegation, the accuser will attempt to mitigate the embarrassment of the situation by exaggerating the violence of the act, claiming they resisted, or creating scenarios in which resistance was impossible. In real rape incidents, the victim experiences extreme fear and it overcomes the ability to resist (Marshall & Alison 2006).

In Kanin’s study, the false rape allegations only included descriptions of vaginal intercourse. Other forced sex acts, such as anal or oral sex, or forced entry of a foreign object took place in roughly 25% of the actual rape cases (1994). Marshall and Alison found, similarly, that real victims reported fellatio and cunnilingus significantly more often (2006). False accusers also focus on the violence the supposed rapist perpetuated, whereas actual rapists often exhibit a large degree of pseudo-intimate behavior. Pseudo-intimate behavior includes variables such as complimenting the victim, the rapist revealing his identity, kissing, and inquisitive language. The violence that false accusers report more often than real victims includes torn clothing, demeaning language, and physical abuse. Finally, real victims are much morel likely to report the use of a weapon (Marshall & Alison, 2006).


“The only conclusion that safely can be drawn from these studies is that false rape complaints may be much more common than most recent rape scholars have supposed (Bryden and Lengnick, 1997, pg. 1214).” Regardless, the variation in the studies cited is enough to warrant more research into the area. It is important to see if Kanin’s findings replicate to other demographics (Bryden and Lengnick, 1997).

The Bryden and Lengnick report, heavily cited in this review, was nearly 2,000 pages long. They spent only six pages discussing quantitative studies of false rape allegations and they give most of that space to discussing Kanin’s study because of the severe lack of academic writing on the subject. They write, “In contemporary rape scholarship, the topic of false rape reports is normally discussed, if at all, only in passing. Such discussions usually assume that an accusation of rape is simply an assertion of historical fact (1997, pg 1203).” They admit there had been almost no academic research on the incidence of false rape allegations. The most current study cited (Marshall & Alison, 2006) still cites Kanin as the main reference for incidence, although Kanin’s study is over a decade old.

I would say that that was very good, Precision. You are a fantastic writer, and I think you have a bright future ahead.