Vorige Start Omhoog Volgende

1998: The Meta-Analysis 

A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples; Rind, B., Tromovitch, Ph. & Bauserman, R.,  in: Psychological Bulletin 1998, Vol 124, No 1, pp 22-53.
< http://www.ipce.info/library_3/rbt/metaana.htm  >

“Many lay persons and professionals believe that child sexual abuse (CSA) causes intense harm, regardless of gender, pervasively in the general population. The authors examined this belief by reviewing 59 studies based on college samples. Meta-analyses revealed that students with CSA were, on average, slightly less well adjusted than controls. However, this poorer adjustment could not be attributed to CSA because family environment (FE) was consistently confounded with CSA, FE explained considerably more adjustment variance than CSA, and CSA-adjustment relations generally became nonsignificant when studies controlled for FE. Self-reported reactions to and effects from CSA indicated that negative effects were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women. The college data were completely consistent with data from national samples. Basic beliefs about CSA in the general population were not supported.”

The authors choose for college samples, because the already mentioned similarity with data from national samples, and because there are far more data about college samples, so the statistical validity could be high. 

The authors chose college samples, because of the already mentioned similarity with data from national samples, and because there are far more data about college samples, so the statistical validity could be high. 

The researchers investigated if there was harm. There was harm, but only in a few cases, but surely not always and pervasive. The effect size was, statistically speaking, low: 1% for girls, 0.5% for boys, 0.81% on average. For consensual experiences: 0.6% for girls, 0% for boys. Note, that this is the percentage of the effect size, not the percentage of girls or boys. The effect size for family environment was ten times higher: 8.41%. Pervasive harm was reported by 0% of the boys and 4% of the girls. 4% for girls is 4% too much, but it is certainly not 100% for both. There appeared to be a significant difference in reactions to consensual and forced experiences. The boys' reactions were, rounded off, one-third positive, one-third neutral, and one-third negative. The girls' reactions were, rounded off, two-third negative, one-sixth neutral and one-sixth positive. 

The authors conclude that the term "sexual abuse" does not match every childhood sexual experience. Since there is not always harm, so there is not always abuse. They advise to use more neutral terms. This advice is not received with thanks, as will become clear.

  Vorige Start Omhoog Volgende