Référence bibliographique 
Brousseau, Mélanie, Bergeron, Sophie, Hébert, Martine et McDuff, Pierre. 2010. «Sexual Coercion Victimization and Perpetration in Heterosexual Couples: A Dyadic Investigation ». Archives of Sexual Behavior, vol. 40, p. 363-372.
«The purpose of the present research was to address the above limitations by examining and comparing the reported rates of victimization and perpetration of sexual coercion, and its degree of reciprocity from the perspective of both partners in current romantic relationships.» (p. 365)
«It was hypothesized that there would be a divergence between partners of a given couple in their reports of sexually coercive behaviors. […] It was also expected that the majority of coercive couples would include both members as perpetrators and victims, highlighting the potentially reciprocal nature of SC [sexual coercion], similar to results found in studies of intimate partner violence (O’Leary, Slep, Avery-Leaf, & Cascardi, 2008; Próspero, 2008). Moreover, it was predicted that participants would report more coercion within previous relationships as opposed to within their current one.» (p. 365)
L’étude se base sur un échantillon de 222 couples hétérosexuels.
Type de traitement des données :
«[T]he findings of the current study have important theoretical implications. Firstly, the finding that participants reported less frequent and severe sexual coercion within their current relationships than in terminated relationships lends support to the cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957). Minimization or reinterpretation of SC as coaxing or seductive behaviors may help victims cope with otherwise negative situations. […] Moreover, participants may be more tolerant of milder SC and interpret it as ‘‘normal’’ and reportable, whereas cognitive dissonance and social desirability may prevent them from reporting severe SC. Likewise, the low rates of agreement on the occurrence of SC suggest that neither member of a couple can truly objectively report or recall SC in their relationship, but rather presents their interpretation of it according to their beliefs, sexual scripts, and need for low cognitive dissonance. Furthermore, results indicated that the majority of couples were not reciprocally sexually coercive. […] Indeed, women are still at greater risk of being victims of SC in their relationships and they may retaliate or attempt to defend themselves using psychological or physical aggression rather than reciprocate sexual coercion.» (p. 371)