How belief in a just world and secondary victimization relate to victim–perpetrator disparities in reparation demands in cases of gender-based violence

This research investigates the psychological mechanisms underlying different responses to sexual violence against women, focusing on victim reparation and perpetrator exoneration. Drawing on just-world theory, we hypothesized that gender differences (female victims versus male perpetrators) in support for victim reparation would be reflected by the serial mediation of just-world beliefs (BJW) and secondary victimization. We tested this model with a sample of female survivors of domestic violence (n = 97) and male perpetrators of violence against women (n = 102). As predicted, male perpetrators showed significantly less support for restorative justice-based vctim compensation compared to female survivors. This effect was serially mediated by BJW and secondary victimization: Perpetrators reported more BJW, which predicted greater secondary victimization (i.e. victim-blaming, minimizing the victim's suffering, and avoiding the victim), which in turn predicted less support for victim compensation. Critically, we also found that perpetrators provided more compensation to other perpetrators than female victims, a difference that was mediated by BJW but not by secondary victimization. This finding demonstrates ingroup bias in perpetrator's compensation decisions, linked to BJW.