“…Second, some aspects of our methodology may have facilitated greater disclosure of CSA in male survivors (almost 20% as compared to approximately 8% in a recent meta-analytic study ;Stoltenborgh, Van IJzendoorn, Euser, & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 2011). For example, the use of an anonymous Internet-based survey (Bagley & Genuis, 1991), a broader definition of CSA, and a neutral inquiry that did not specifically label reported sexual experiences as CSA or the participants as victims may have helped to identify more men as CSA survivors. If some male survivors had been excluded from the group of CSA survivors and placed in the control group, this could have contributed to artificial evidence of a gender difference.…”