Some methodological problems in estimating incidence and prevalence in child sexual abuse research

The prevalence of child sexual abuse in community and student samples: A meta-analysis

“…This finding is contrary to the reports of other authors who have placed great importance on the definition of sexual abuse as a determining factor in the variability of prevalence rates (Goldman & Padayachi, 2000;Gorey & Leslie, 1997;Wynkoop et al, 1995). However, it should be borne in mind that the fact that one of the two definitions (broad) includes behaviour that is characteristic of the other (narrow) could account for this.…”

“…The mode of data collection (interview versus self-administered questionnaires) has also been regarded as a variable to take into account when establishing the prevalence rate of sexual abuse (Goldman & Padayachi, 2000), although the results of the present meta-analysis suggest it does not have a significant effect.…”

“…Another issue addressed in the literature has been the reporting of lower prevalence rates in studies where the sample consisted of college students, although there seem to be no clear trends in this regard (Goldman & Padayachi, 2000). Some studies have provided evidence in support of this idea (Baker & Duncan, 1985;Kercher & McShane, 1984;Mullen, Romans-Clarkson, Walton, & Herbison, 1988), while others have failed to confirm that the prevalence of sexual abuse is lower in this group of subjects (Rind et al, 1998).…”

“…These studies are based on the retrospective recall of participants, which may be subject to errors such as the distorted perception of what happened, the reinterpretation of the experience of abuse with the passage of time, complete amnesia due to denial and dissociation from what occurred, or even the conscious desire not to respond sincerely to the questionnaire items (Briere, 1992;Goldman & Padayachi, 2000;McMillen & Zuravin, 1998;Prescott et al, 2000).…”

“…It should be noted that this method of study inevitably underestimates the extent of the problem, and by no means does an incidence rate establish the real occurrence of child sexual abuse (Leventhal, 1998). Factors such as the secrecy which surrounds the abusive situation, the shame felt by the victim when speaking about what has happened, the criminal penalties to which the abuser may be subject, and the young age of victims combined with their dependence upon adults mean that very few victims come forward at the time of abuse, it therefore being highly probable that official statistics underestimate the true extent of the problem (Finkelhor, 1994;Goldman & Padayachi, 2000;Widom & Morris,1997).…”