Rigorous research on gender issues
Rigorous research on gender issues
[NB: Site not optimised for portrait view
Rigorous research on gender issues
Gander Research is coming in late 2023. We are pre-releasing a review of empirical studies on the prevalence of false sexual assault allegations.
Please click on the bottom buttons to comment or to join our mailing list.
Pre-launch research paper
Reviewing estimates of false rape claims
The sexual violence literature understates the prevalence rate
While there is little doubt that the majority of sexual assault allegations are genuine, historically estimates of the prevalence of false allegations have varied widely.
However, prominent sexual violence academics now agree that the prevalence rate is estimable within tight bounds and very low — with the “credible” estimates said to be “around 5%” or “between 2% and 10%” of reports being false.
These consensus estimates have been relied on in government publications and the media, and used to influence an increasing range of policies.
In this research paper, we identify several shortcomings in the empirical studies on which the consensus is based. The specialised police rules they follow to determine whether to classify a report as “false” exclude many false and potentially false reports. Some of the studies also suffer from incomplete or poor-quality data, limited interview response rates and mathematical errors.
The studies’ prevalence rates are better viewed as lower bound estimates, and we show that the actual prevalence rate could be materially higher.
Our findings have ramifications for how the sexual violence literature classifies false reports and how it describes and communicates prevalence rate estimates.
Click below to read our research paper…
Academic support for the paper
I appreciate the care and meticulous attention to detail shown in this manuscript. It makes a valuable contribution to the field, enhancing the credibility of research on false reporting with a methodical, transparent, and eyes-wide-open assessment of this most complex and challenging issue.
Dr Kim Lonsway
Director of Research
End Violence Against Women International
(Lead researcher for the 2009 US high-quality prevalence study on false sexual assault reports)
This is an important and overdue study. Given the paucity of research on false allegations of sexual offences, but also the valid concerns about giving disproportionate attention to them, this is just what is needed: a quantitative analysis which raises pertinent issues regarding estimations of prevalence, definitions, and methodologies, but without, it seems, taking any side or being polemical.
Dr Ros Burnett
Centre for Criminology
University of Oxford
(Editor of ‘Wrongful allegations of sexual and child abuse’, OUP 2016)
Gander Research is commencing soon. We are pre-releasing a review of key empirical studies on the prevalence of false sexual assault allegations.
Please click on the bottom buttons to comment or to join our mailing list.
Pre-launch research paper
Reviewing estimates of false rape claims
The sexual violence literature understates the prevalence rate
While there is little doubt that the majority of sexual assault allegations are genuine, historically estimates of the prevalence of false allegations have varied widely.
However, a consensus has emerged recently among prominent academics that the prevalence rate is estimable within tight bounds and very low — with the “credible” estimates said to be “around 5%” or “between 2% and 10%” of reports being false.
These consensus estimates have been relied on in government publications and the media, and used to influence an increasing range of policies.
In this research paper, we identify several shortcomings in the empirical studies on which the consensus is based. The specialised police rules they follow to determine whether to classify a report as “false” exclude many false and potentially false reports. Some of the studies also suffer from incomplete or poor-quality data, limited interview response rates and mathematical errors.
The studies’ prevalence rates are better viewed as lower bound estimates, and we show that the actual prevalence rate could be materially higher.
Our findings have ramifications for how the sexual violence literature classifies false reports and how it describes and communicates prevalence rate estimates.
Click below to read our research paper.