Understanding and Preventing Image-Based Sexual Abuse

How science can help build digital sexual safety.

Updated February 8, 2026 | Reviewed by Ekua Hagan

Today, digital life is real life. So when intimate images are created or shared without consent, the harm is embodied, multifaceted, and often enduring (McGlynn et al., 2020). Survivors of image-based sexual abuse (IBSA) describe a form of violence that can continue indefinitely because the material can reappear, be redistributed, or be weaponized in new settings. Survivors have reported that even leaving jobs or changing addresses does not necessarily help them escape the abuse. Below are four insights and action steps from psychology that clarify why IBSA spreads, and what actually helps to prevent it.

4 Insights From Psychology

The internet is real life, and the harms are social as well as psychological.

Survivors often describe the most lasting damage as social exclusion: being treated as “contaminated,” avoided at work or school, or quietly pushed out of communities. That aligns with what we know about stigma and ostracism; social rejection reliably predicts distress and negatively affects self-esteem (Gerber & Wheeler, 2009). A growing evidence base also links nonconsensual sharing of intimate images with depression , anxiety , suicidal ideation, PTSD , and economic challenges (Bates, 2017; Powell et al., 2024; Spiker et al., 2025). This means responses that focus only on takedowns miss the opportunity to address social reintegration and protect survivors from secondary victimization.

Victim-blaming is a coping strategy that fuels the abuse.

Why do communities sometimes respond to victims by saying, “Why did you take the photo?” or “You should’ve known better”? Classic psychology offers a grim answer: People are motivated to believe the world is fair (just-world beliefs) and that bad outcomes happen for a reason (Lerner, 1980). One quick way to protect that belief is to mentally distance oneself from victims (i.e., “That wouldn’t happen to me”), which often shows up as blame and moral judgment. In IBSA specifically, victim-blaming is common, and it correlates with attitudes that minimize harm and protect perpetrators (Flynn et al., 2023).

Perpetration is often about power, entitlement, and disengaged empathy.

One persistent myth is that IBSA perpetration is primarily driven by libido. But perpetrators don’t need coercion or hacking to see consensual sexual content online. IBSA's defining feature is non-consent, and psychology has strong tools for explaining that. Research (e.g., Henry & Beard, 2024; Pina et al., 2021; Karasavva et al., 2023) finds links between IBSA perpetration and:

This means prevention has to target attitudes and cognitive justifications.

Deepfakes make one truth impossible to ignore: “Don’t send nudes” was never the solution.

Sexualized deepfake abuse clarifies the core logic of IBSA: A perpetrator can fabricate sexualized images even when someone never created or shared any intimate content. That reality undercuts the idea that “good victims” are safe and “careless victims” are responsible. It also exposes a broader “sliding scale” of consent violations that society is increasingly treating as entertainment.

Replace “self-protection” messaging with consent messaging. Teach adolescents and young adults that creating, sharing, or threatening to share intimate material without consent is abuse. For example, when adults only tell girls, “Don’t send photos,” they unintentionally teach that boys are expected to violate trust. A healthier norm to communicate is that trust is expected, consent is mandatory, and violations have consequences.
Start digital consent education early, and make it concrete. Effective programs don’t rely on vague “Be respectful” slogans. They teach skills like perspective-taking , empathy for consequences, recognizing coercion, and interrupting peer reinforcement. Ground this in moral disengagement science: When people learn to spot justifications (“No one gets hurt,” “It’s a joke”), they’re less likely to adopt them.
Design institutions to prevent secondary victimization. Schools, universities, and workplaces should have clear, fast protocols that prioritize safety planning, nonjudgmental reporting, confidentiality, and targeted sanctions for harassment. Evidence shows that victim-blaming attitudes exacerbate harm. Institutions can reduce that by training staff and standardizing supportive responses (Flynn et al., 2023).
Push platforms toward “speed + friction.” Survivors need rapid removal pathways, but prevention also benefits from friction: prompts that ask about consent before upload, tighter detection of known nonconsensual content, and meaningful penalties for distribution. The goal is to reduce the “It must be okay if the platform allows it” moral shortcut (Flynn et al., 2025).

Image-based sexual abuse persists not because technology is “too fast,” but because the same old psychological drivers, such as sexism, victim-blame, and moral disengagement, find new tools. The hopeful part is that these drivers are measurable, predictable, and changeable. When communities treat IBSA as sexual violence , center perpetrator accountability, and build pro-consent norms that include boys and men as capable moral agents, we move from reaction to prevention.

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3 (3), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3

Bates, S. (2017). Revenge porn and mental health: A qualitative analysis of the mental health effects of revenge porn on female survivors. Feminist Criminology, 12 (1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085116654565

Flynn, A., Cama, E., Powell, A., & Scott, A. J. (2023). Victim-blaming and image-based sexual abuse. Journal of Criminology, 56 (1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076221135327

Flynn, A., Powell, A., Eaton, A. A., & Scott, A. (2025). Sexualised Deepfake Abuse: Perpetrator and Victim Perspectives on the Motivations and Forms of Non-Consensually Created and Shared Sexualized Deepfake Imagery. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08862605251368834

Gerber, J., & Wheeler, L. (2009). On Being Rejected: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Research on Rejection. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 4 (5), 468–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01158.x

Henry, N., & Beard, G. (2024). Image-Based Sexual Abuse Perpetration: A Scoping Review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse , 25 (5), 3981-3998. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380241266137

Karasavva, V., Swanek, J., Smodis, A., & Forth, A. (2023). From myth to reality: sexual image abuse myth acceptance, the Dark Tetrad, and non-consensual intimate image dissemination proclivity. Journal of Sexual Aggression , 29 (1), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2022.2032430

Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion . Springer.

McGlynn, C., Johnson, K., Rackley, E., Henry, N., Gavey, N., Flynn, A., & Powell, A. (2020). ‘It’s Torture for the Soul’: The Harms of Image-Based Sexual Abuse. Social & Legal Studies , 30 (4), 541-562. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663920947791

Mindbridge Podcast Episode 11: Image-based sexual abuse. (2026). https://mindbridgecenter.substack.com/podcast

Pina, A., Bell, A., Griffin, K., & Vasquez, E. (2021). Image-Based Sexual Abuse proclivity and victim blaming: The role of dark personality traits and moral disengagement. Oñati Socio-Legal Series , 11 (5), 1179–1197. https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1213

Powell, A., Scott, A. J., Flynn, A., & McCook, S. (2024). A multi-country study of image-based sexual abuse: Extent, relational nature and correlates of victimisation experiences. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 30 (1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2022.2119292

Spiker, R., Eaton, A. A., & Saunders, J. F. (2025). Victimization by Nonconsensual Distribution of Intimate Images Is Related to Lower Holistic Well-Being in a Diverse Sample of U.S. Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Violence and victims , 40 (4), 630–660. https://doi.org/10.1891/VV-2023-0146

Share this post Facebook Bluesky Linkedin Email

There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.

By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy

Mindbridge is the nation’s premier non-profit using brain and behavioral science to empower human rights defenders.

Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.

This article is part of the Bringwise Psychology Journal — daily insights on human behavior, mental health, and personal growth.