Rind et al.
Rind, Tromovitch and Bauserman are the authors of A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples. Psychologists Bruce Rind, Philip Tromovitch and Robert Bauserman conducted a
meta-analysis of child sexual abuse (CSA), published in 1998 in
the American Psychological
Association journal Psychological Bulletin.
It is not to be confused with Rind et al. (1997): A meta-analytic review of findings from national samples on psychological
correlates of child sexual abuse in Journal of Sex Research, 34, 237–255.
Rind et al.
Some of the more controversial conclusions were:
- CSA does not cause intense harm on a pervasive basis regardless of gender.
- An important reason why the assumed properties of CSA failed to withstand empirical scrutiny in the current review is that
the construct of CSA, as commonly conceptualized by researchers, is of questionable scientific validity.
The authors do not suggest that the construct CSA should be abandoned, but only that it should be used less indiscriminately
to achieve better scientific validity. They argue that its use is more scientifically valid when early sexual episodes are
unwanted and experienced negatively. The concept of consent is predictively valid i.e. it can be used empirically to predict the
degree of psychological damage based on whether the child describes the encounter as consensual or not.
Critics
The study was published in July 1998. In December 1998 it was critizised by the American organization National Association for Research and Therapy of
Homosexuality (NARTH) for its methodology and conclusions. Later it was
also attacked by a Catholic religious newspaper, the talk show host Dom Giordano, and radio host Dr. Laura
Schlessinger, known as Dr. Laura (who has a Ph.D. not
in psychology, but in physiology). Dr. Laura told the listeners that if scientific findings contradicted common sense, they are
probably wrong.
Soon everyone from Republican
politicians to the medical director of the American Psychiatric Association attacked Rind et al. and the APA for publishing it.
On June 9, 1999 Raymon Fowler, president of
APA, declared that there was going to be an independent review of Rind et al. The APA declared that "the sexual abuse of children
is wrong and harmful to its victims."
On June 12 the American House of Representatives condemned the study, and declared that child-adult sex could be nothing
but "abusive and destructive." The resolution was passed unanimously in the Senate.
On September 15, the American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), whom APA under political pressure had asked for an independent review of
the article, said:
- We see no reason to second guess the process of peer review used by the APA journal in its decision to publish the article
in question. While not without its imperfections, peer review is well established as a standard mechanism for maintaining the
flow of scientific information that scientists can refer to, critique or build on. After examining all the materials available to
the committee, we saw no clear evidence of improper application of methodology or other questionable practices on the part of the
article's authors.
- The Committee also wishes to express its grave concerns with the politicization of the debate over the article's methods
and findings. In reviewing the set of background materials available to us, we found it deeply disconcerting that so many of the
comments made by those in the political arena and in the media indicate a lack of understanding of the analysis presented by the
authors or misrepresented the article's findings. All citizens, especially those in a position of public trust, have a
responsibility to be accurate about the evidence that informs their public statements. We see little indication of that from the
most vocal on this matter, behavior that the Committee finds very distressing.
The whole affair was discussed a few years later in another APA journal, American Psychologist
(2002). Several researchers disagree with the way the APA dealt with the Rind et al. affair. Some, including two Psychological
Bulletin editors, call the letter from Ray Fowler on June 9, 1999 capitulation to political pressure.
See also
External links
-This article has been brought to you by BambooWeb and Wikipedia-
