Replication of meta-analytic examination of child sexual abuse by Rind et al.
Research conducted during the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s consistently reported widely accepted negative outcomes associated with child sexual abuse. In 1998, Rind, Tromovitch, and Bauserman conducted a meta-analysis challenging the four most often reported correlates of child sexual abuse. The present study attempted to reexamine the four main objectives of the Rind et al. (1998) study, correcting for methodological and statistical problems identified by Dallam et al. (2001) and Ondersma et al. (2001).
The current meta-analysis supported the findings by Rind et al. (1998) in that child sexual abuse was found to account for 1% of the variance in later psychological outcomes, whereas family environment accounted for 5.9% of the variance. In addition, the current meta-analysis supported the finding that there was a gender difference in the experience of the child sexual abuse, such that females reported more negative immediate effects, current feelings, and self-reported effects. The implications of these findings, problems with replicating the Rind et al. (1998) meta-analysis, and future directions are discussed. [...]
The results of the meta-analysis yielded five main findings:
- - individuals with a history of sexual abuse were slightly less well adjusted than control groups;
- - family environment explained more variance in outcomes than child sexual abuse;
- - negative effects are not typically intense or pervasive;
- - the relationship between child sexual abuse and maladjustment was stronger for females than for males; and
- - outcomes for males who were in the consenting group (i.e., consented to a sexual interaction) for child sexual abuse were no different from those in control groups.
Based on their findings, which did not support the generally accepted views regarding outcomes of child sexual abuse, Rind et al. suggested that researchers should utilize a more neutral term for child sexual abuse under certain circumstances. The authors suggested the term "adult-child sex," which they consider to be value neutral, to describe sexual encounters between children and adults that are not necessarily abusive. However, if the sexual encounter is forced or coerced and results in a negative reaction, then the term "child sexual abuse" could still be used (Rind et al., 1998). [...]
Some individuals may argue that Rind et al.'s (1998) analysis and this re-examination provide support for those who question or deny that child sexual abuse can sometimes be associated with severe psychological harm. The authors of the current research would hesitate to support such a general statement. Instead, our results, and the results of the Rind et al. meta-analysis, can be interpreted as providing a hopeful and positive message to therapists, parents, and children. Child sexual abuse does not necessarily lead to long-term harm. The finding that there is a possibility of a positive prognosis for future adjustment in child sexual abuse victims can play an integral part in therapy.
source: Article 'Child sexual abuse - A replication of the meta-analytic examination of child sexual abuse by Rind, Tromovitch, and Bauserman (1998)' by Heather Ulrich, Randolph Mickey & Shawn Acheson; www.ipce.info/library_3/files/rbt_replica/frame.htm; The Scientific review of Mental Health Practice 4-2, pp 37-51, Fall/winter 2005-2006