Reporting childhood sexual abuse of boys to police: does perpetrator sex matter?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, the lifetime prevalence of the sexual abuse of boys is estimated at one in six (Dorais, 2009; Dube, Anda, Whitfield, Brown, Felitti, Dong, & Giles, 2005; Hopper, 2010; Briere & Elliot, 2003). Despite growing awareness of male victims of childhood sexual abuse, it is estimated that police reports are made in only 4.4% of cases (Priebe & Svedin, 2008). There continues to be little understanding as to why the reporting rate is so low. A sample of 155 male survivors of childhood sexual abuse was obtained through a community agency that provides support to this population. Data were gathered from participants’ intake forms on four variables that were expected to influence police reporting: 1) the survivors' age at the time of the first incident 2) the duration of the abuse; 3) the relationship between the survivor and the perpetrator; and 4) the sex of the perpetrator. It was predicted that the perpetrator's sex would be the most powerful predictor of a male's decision to report sexual abuse because of the ‘feminization of victimization’ phenomenon. This is the culturally based assumption that victims are female and perpetrators are male that leads male victims’ to question their own experiences and to a tendency by others to not take their victimization seriously. The findings revealed that perpetrator sex was not a significant predictor of police reporting. Only abuse duration was associated with whether a police report had been made. Other important findings were: 1) the mean age of this sample seeking support for childhood abuse was 50 years; 2) in almost 30% of cases, abuse began before the participant was six years old; 3) 49% of participants had been abused by family members; 4) 20% of participants had been abused by female perpetrators; and 5) in 75% of cases, a police report had not been made. Further research is needed to identify the factors influencing whether sexual abuse of boys is reported to police in order to enhance support services and police response.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".