Sexual Violence Among Postsecondary Students: No Evidence that a Low Response Rate Biases Victimization or Perpetration Rates in a Well-Designed Climate Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy and representativeness of common census-sampled campus climate surveys given the potential for misestimating sexual violence (SV) rates on campuses due to low response rates and self-selection bias in research (mixed findings in previous research).Method We compared SV rates obtained from a census-sampled campus climate survey with a lottery draw (a common method for collecting campus SV data) with those obtained from a gender-stratified random sample survey with individual incentives.Results We found no evidence that census-sampled campus climate surveys misestimate SV: our low response rate census-sampled survey produced very similar rates to our high response rate random sample survey.Discussion and Conclusion Our research suggests that less costly and labor-intensive census-sampled surveys, when well-designed, produce sufficiently accurate and representative SV estimates on campuses despite their lower response rates.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".