Methodological Issues in the Use of Survey Data for Measuring and Characterizing Violence Against Women

Abstract

There are numerous methodological pitfalls in the use of survey data to study violence against women. This article reviews some of the major problems, including definitional problems, operationalization of concepts, recall bias, underreporting, question order, external validity, and the sex and ethnicity of interviewers. Recommendations for improving methodology are made, and some of the latest developments in the field are reviewed. It is argued that research ethics are particularly difficult and important in this field of study, not only for the potential emotional trauma to the respondents, but also for the potential for actual revictimization.

Prevalence estimate of intimate partner violence in Jordan

“…This difference in prevalence was expected given that estimates tend to increase in response to broader definitions of violence [12,19,20]. …”

“…This need must be weighed against the benefits of standardization and comparability. A standardized estimate, however, does not necessarily translate into a valid measurement of the prevalence of intimate partner violence unless it captures the most commonly occurring violent experiences [12].…”

Researching domestic violence and abuse in healthcare settings: Challenges and issues

“…While a clear definition of DVA is central for researchers in terms of study design, it is crucial that collaborating healthcare practitioners and study participants themselves are able to identify with and recognise the terminology used (Schwartz, 2000). The researcher also has to be very self-aware of their own thoughts, feeling and views to ensure that these do not impact the design and conduct of the study.…”

The Effects of Survey Question Wording on Rape Estimates

“…First, studies abound that further elaborate on the discussion of the effects that different research designs, operationalizations of rape, and wording of survey questions have on rape estimates. Each study provides plausible methodological explanations that are critical for better understanding why such widely diverging rape estimates exist (see Bachman, 2000;Cantor & Lynch, 2005;Hamby & Koss, 2003;Lynch, 1996aLynch, , 1996bJaquier et al, 2006;Schwartz, 2000). Second, substantial revisions in both the NCS and the Sexual Experiences Survey have occurred.…”