Society/Culture Child sexual abuse study - participants needed please

[Donners]

One of the reasons why I'm doing this research is in the hope that we can show evidence that will support the argument for scrapping juries in CSA cases and having them replaced by specialised judges who are well informed on CSA myths and are more free of prejudice than a jury would be.

That's actually an outcome which I would support.

There has been increasing specialisation in sex offences in recent years from courts, judges, solicitors and barristers (both prosecution and defence).

There are certainly myths and misconceptions about child sex abuse (some, sadly, promoted by practitioners) and the cost of experts in every trial to counter those for the jury is quite prohibitive, and is rarely done - potentially at the cost of justice.

Another reason changing from juries to judges in this area would be the sheer complexity of the law - charges for child sex offences are so complex that they would be very difficult for many jurors to follow.


However, I am somewhat unsettled by the idea of this sort of research being conducted with the express goal of supporting a particular argument.

 

[Max zero]

One of the reasons why I'm doing this research is in the hope that we can show evidence that will support the argument for scrapping juries in CSA cases and having them replaced by specialised judges who are well informed on CSA myths and are more free of prejudice than a jury would be.

How will you accomplish this?

Are you hoping to find a wide range of views? Widespread bias? Irrational conclusions?

While I do agree with the idea of Judges replacing Jurors in these kinds of trials the results you could find in this study could well be applied to Juries as a whole.

 

[Donners]

It's worth noting that the right to trial by jury for indictable offences is a Constitutional right, so it would take either a referendum or some trickery (making them no longer indictable offences) to change it, unless I am misremembering my admin law.

 

[andreabennet]

However, I am somewhat unsettled by the idea of this sort of research being conducted with the express goal of supporting a particular argument.

It's not the sole purpose of my research, i guess you could call that practical application side of it. There is also a need to understand and quantify what the public perceptions/misconceptions/attitudes etc are and understand where they come from, what drives people to hold these perceptions.

How will you accomplish this?

Are you hoping to find a wide range of views? Widespread bias? Irrational conclusions?

While I do agree with the idea of Judges replacing Jurors in these kinds of trials the results you could find in this study could well be applied to Juries as a whole.

I can't say what we are expecting to find while the study is still open as I don't want to affect the way people will answer. I'm happy to come back and explain once the study is closed if anyone is interested. I am interested in seeing whether this form of data collection will find results that are similar to previous research. i don't really know what to expect but previous studies have shown that a large proportion of the community hold a lot of CSA misconceptions about the age where a child should be able to consent to sex, what a typical victim's behaviour should be like, the type of evidence that is usually presented in these cases etc. Theoretically, it would be interesting to see how my studie's results will compare to others' results.

With regards to judges replacing jurors as a whole, I would argue that CSA or SA is unique in that in majority of the cases there is no physical evidence and these crimes are unique in that the court accepts hearsay as evidence. So, no I wouldn't say that other crimes should have judges replace jurors. I hope that makes sense.

 

[Donners]

I'd certainly be interested to see the results, though I have some idea of how they would look already based on previous experiences.

 

[andreabennet]

I'd certainly be interested to see the results, though I have some idea of how they would look already based on previous experiences.

If you would like to read the results, PM with your email address and I will send them to you once the data has been analysed.

 

[skilts]

Regardless of bickering about motives and methodologies, it is of interest that BF was used in the survey. It's surprising it doesn't happen more often. I've always thought BF provided an accurate cross-section of Australians. Not that I'm trying to encourage more of this.

 

[andreabennet]

I have had to re-open the study to get even number of men and women for my survey. I need three more men to fill in my survey so if there are any men reading this that would be willing to fill in the survey, please consider it. Thank you!!!

 

[kfc1]

Sexual abuse is a crime with one of the lowest conviction rates. The crime is usually reported months and even years after it occurs and it becomes a case of the child's word against the adult's.

I just did the survey and this is what I struggled with.

In the presented evidence, there's nothing but one person's word against the other. In that case I could hardly say that James was guilty, although I did lean towards that side based on the balance of probabilities.

 

[skilts]

Having done the survey, I recommend that others read it. Unfortunately, to do so, will require that you participate. When you get to the end of the survey, you'll find out why I think that psychologists are the scum of the earth. Look for the part where you are given an option to say that, "it's society's fault".

Inadvertent involvement in this despicable process, its hidden presumptions and agenda, have made me feel unclean. The woman who devised it, and her supervisor, are vile dissemblers, upon whom I wouldn't piss if they were on fire. They have disgraced the notion of empirical academic research and taken advantage of the good graces of BigFooty.

The only reason I participated was that I am an alumnus of that university. The standards at that institution have certainly slipped since I attended, but not in the Psychology Department. They're as low as they ever were.

The thing I really fear out of this, is that this tart will get her Doctorate of Philosophy - a license to wreak more havoc, and a calculated insult to the very grounding of philosophy.

 

[cancat]

Against my better judgement I completed the questionaire.

I see no science here.

 

[kfc1]

Having done the survey, I recommend that others read it. Unfortunately, to do so, will require that you participate. When you get to the end of the survey, you'll find out why I think that psychologists are the scum of the earth. Look for the part where you are given an option to say that, "it's society's fault".

Inadvertent involvement in this despicable process, its hidden presumptions and agenda, have made me feel unclean. The woman who devised it, and her supervisor, are vile dissemblers, upon whom I wouldn't piss if they were on fire. They have disgraced the notion of empirical academic research and taken advantage of the good graces of BigFooty.

The only reason I participated was that I am an alumnus of that university. The standards at that institution have certainly slipped since I attended, but not in the Psychology Department. They're as low as they ever were.

The thing I really fear out of this, is that this tart will get her Doctorate of Philosophy - a license to wreak more havoc, and a calculated insult to the very grounding of philosophy.

You do realise the point of the research is to collect data to understand society's attitudes towards child sex abuse? Some parts of society do have an attitude that it is 'society's fault' - do you think Andrea should have ignored that?

 

[Chief]

Against my better judgement I completed the questionaire.

I see no science here.

Can you explain further? What are you comparing it to in your direct experience as a scientist?

 

[Chief]

Look for the part where you are given an option to say that, "it's society's fault".

Are you railing against the existence of an attitude some people hold rather than the existence of the question?

What is the exact wording of that part? Do you feel it is leading? Do you feel that it is not responsible to let people give this response, even though they may actually hold that opinion?

 

[skilts]

Are you railing against the existence of an attitude some people hold rather than the existence of the question?

What is the exact wording of that part? Do you feel it is leading? Do you feel that it is not responsible to let people give this response, even though they may actually hold that opinion?

To be able to give you the exact wording would involve doing the bloody thing again. The way in which the question is framed gives no opportunity to reply in a way other than the one that is obviously preferred by the questioner. The methodology is fraudulent and the questions are loaded.

What really pisses me off is the (to me) transparent manner used to manipulate people, along with a colossal arrogance in thinking that those people won't see through her duplicity.

If you are attempting to justify having allowed this survey to be posted, I'd suggest you desist. These people are not your friends.

 

[skilts]

You do realise the point of the research is to collect data to understand society's attitudes towards child sex abuse? Some parts of society do have an attitude that it is 'society's fault' - do you think Andrea should have ignored that?

I think she should have been more careful to avoid showing her preconceived prejudices in the questions she framed. We should all be happy that she's not attempting a doctorate in surgery.

 

[Chief]

If you are attempting to justify having allowed this survey to be posted, I'd suggest you desist. These people are not your friends.

You've made claims, and I asked you to give us more information. Nothing more.

You seem to have your own bias against this field of study. You seem to have some sort of issue with the people at this university.

 

[powerful girl]

Slightly off topic, but some interesting food for thought in the 2009 National Association for the Prevention of Abuse and Neglect survey of over 20,000 Australians below: Interesting to think about how you might respond.

When confronted by clear-cut cases of child abuse, less than half of the people surveyed would definitely take formal action to protect the child.

Respondents were presented with three hypothetical situations and asked what they would do in each. Each scenario depicts a clear-cut case of child abuse:
• Physical abuse scenario: “Your neighbour’s 7 year old child often has bruises. You hear a lot of yelling and screaming coming from the house. You see the child with a new black eye”.

• Neglect scenario: “When walking past a house in your neighbourhood you often notice 3 children in their front yard. They are skinny and always look dirty. One of the children, who is about 10 years old regularly asks you for money for food.”
•
• Sexual abuse scenario: “A twelve year old child, who is a member of your extended family, tells you that an adult relative has been touching him/her on the genitals.”

For each scenario, respondents were asked to nominate what they ‘definitelywould do’, ‘probably would do’, ‘might or might not do’, ‘probably wouldn’t do’
and ‘definitely wouldn’t do’ each action.

The a results show that even though most respondents considered child abuse to be a serious issue, if they were confronted with a clear-cut case of child
abuse or neglect, less than 50% would take definite action to protect the child, by ringing a child protection authority or the police. And even in the sexual abuse scenario, only 34% of respondents would definitely call the police.

 

[andreabennet]

I just did the survey and this is what I struggled with.

In the presented evidence, there's nothing but one person's word against the other. In that case I could hardly say that James was guilty, although I did lean towards that side based on the balance of probabilities.

unfortunately this typical of sexual abuse cases, it's one person's word against the other's.

Skilts, I'm really lost as to why this survey has upset you and what you think I'm trying to do. Why would I want to trick you or anyone? Can you please be more specific with what you think the issue is? are you saying that people would not be willing to blame society for child sexual abuse (eg include people blaming the media for the sexualisation of children through advertisements etc)?

 

[cancat]

Can you explain further? What are you comparing it to in your direct experience as a scientist?

I hold a relevent degree but yes you are quite right; only people with direct experience as scientists should comment on science. Caroline Wilson should also stop commenting on football and Bob Brown should stop commenting on climate change.

However, if I were a scientist I might point out that

- (despite best attempts) the sample population being used may not be representative of the target population

- personality tests are a very crude method of capturing the complexity of human beings. They cannot predict how we will act in particular roles or situations. They cannot predict how we will change over time.

- the simple scenario presented is not representative of the complex scenario being modelled

- the answers given about the simple scenario are not predictive of decisions and actions that people might make in a real situation

- the results will necessarily need to be correlated against entirely subjective criteria such as 'misconceptions about the age where a child should be able to consent to sex, what a typical victim's behaviour should be like'. These are not facts about the world, they are subjective viewpoints about what is a misconception and what is not. All research is open to unconscious subjective bias but this study is consciously building it in.

 

[andreabennet]

Thanks for your input cancat. I just wanted to clarify that BF is not the only forum where I have posted this study, I'm trying to reach as many people as I can so this survey has been dispersed on : parenting forums, various sporting forums, special interest forums like gaming, fishing, chess, camping, kiting, wedding planning etc. these studies are usually given to university students or handed out in shopping centres (which I would presume be biased to those who are unemployed?), I'm trying to capture a wider audience.
I agree, the scenario used here is very short but I have to keep in brief or people will not participate. It's something that is kept in mind when the results are interpreted, we caution the reader against making generalisations etc. I'm also writing an entire chapter on this issue in my thesis to acknowledge it.
Also, there is no personality test here, I'm not interested in personality at all, I do however want to make sure that people who answer in a socially desirable manner (the extreme ends only which so far, I have only had one or two) are considered carefully before being included in the data analysis, I hope that makes sense.

I'm not trying to trick anyone at all.

 

[skilts]

You've made claims, and I asked you to give us more information. Nothing more.

You seem to have your own bias against this field of study. You seem to have some sort of issue with the people at this university.

If you'd bothered to read the questionaire, you wouldn't find it necessary to ask to which segment I was referring.

I'm biased against this so-called "field of study" because its underlying assumptions are baseless, its practitioners are deluded about the value of its pursuit, and worst of all, they seek credibility by pretending to conduct their experiments in a, 'scientific' fashion. That they think this to be a worthwhile goal is indicative of their fantastic agenda. Why would any so-called discipline lower itself to such depths of depravity?

I have no issue with the university per se, but its Psychology Department is notoriously unreliable and ridiculously shallow. In their favour though, it must be said, that the same could be said about any other wastes of oxygen, in similar departments, at other institutions.

If you are unable to discern the flaws in the in this survey's methodology and the putrid agenda underlying it, maybe you should return to something simple like physics? I'd give them credit for having pulled the wool over your eyes, but that would be faint praise.

 

[skilts]

unfortunately this typical of sexual abuse cases, it's one person's word against the other's.

Skilts, I'm really lost as to why this survey has upset you and what you think I'm trying to do. Why would I want to trick you or anyone? Can you please be more specific with what you think the issue is? are you saying that people would not be willing to blame society for child sexual abuse (eg include people blaming the media for the sexualisation of children through advertisements etc)?

Print the whole survey on this thread and I'll be able to explain it to you. After all, those who haven't read it are at a severe disadvantage without access to what you wrote, as am I.

 

[dugrene]

Regardless of bickering about motives and methodologies, it is of interest that BF was used in the survey. It's surprising it doesn't happen more often. I've always thought BF provided an accurate cross-section of Australians. Not that I'm trying to encourage more of this.

Bf represents a cross section no doubt. How accurate is debatable.

Nevertheless I'll do the survey sometime.

The things surveys should be able to prove is
(i) Not to have a preset objective.
(ii) Do not encourage people with their own agenda.


One thing is certain the question often is more important than the answer.