Something to chew over|
The reporting of the study, either in the article you linked or the further article linked therein, is pretty insufficient to be able to judge whether the claims made by the articles are founded by the study. There's repeated reference to the rape myth, but there's little evidence that acceptance of the rape myth was directly tested in the study. At best it seems it was studied by proxy - measuring acceptance of whether subjects agreed with statements like "places herself knowingly in a situation to provoke the sexual attention of men". I don't think a battery of such statement measurements would be irrelevant, but without knowing the details of the study, it's also impossible to tell whether the inference drawn here is sound at all. And if the articles are accurate, it sounds like the study may have reached conclusions not totally supported by the tests. It's probably more likely that the articles are mischaracterising or exaggerating the conclusions of the study, though.
Social science is murky, murky stuff, yo.
Very true. I'd love to read the study itself. However, I'm more inclined to believe that the author at least *thinks* she's tested the point, as the second article is on Stanford's own site.