Table 2

Comparisons of Effect Sizes in College and National Samples

Content References Tables

Vorige Start Volgende

[Page 719]

Sample

Prevalence of CSA

Point bi-serial (r)
corrected for base rates
a

U. S. college (as reported by Rind et al., 1998)

 

Female

27%

.11

 

Male

14%

.10

National: Laumann et al., 1995 (U.S.) b

 

Female

17%

.11

 

Male

12%

.11

López el al., 1995 (Spain) c

 

Combined

19%

.16

Boney-McCoy & Finkelhor, 1995 (U.S.) d

 

Female

15%

.22

 

Male

6%

.17

Note

Direct comparisons between effect sizes are problematic because the definition of child sexual abuse (CSA) and dependent measures differed considerably across studies.

a We corrected for base rates on the basis of data reported by Rind et al.; however, these adjustments should in practice be made at the level of individual study effect sizes. 

b The data from Laumann et al. came from a larger study of sexual activity and practices. Participants who reported being sexually touched prior to age 18 by an older person were asked to answer questions about sexual difficulties in the last year.

c For López et al., we combined the two outcome measures reported (only one of which was broken down by gender).

d Boney-McCoy and Finkelhor reported effects for posttraumatic stress disorder in U.S. youth (age 10-16) after controlling for demographic and parental factors.

 

Content References Tables

Vorige Start Volgende