- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Point in case, this funnel plot I shared on the RQD2 Matrix room a while back:
Publication bias who?What are the labels for each axis? This graph doesn’t make sense without them.
Y-axis is sample size, X-axis is effect size.
I think that for this meta analysis they used Cohen’s d, though I don’t remember exactly.(It was actually Glass’ delta)When there’s no publication bias we expect studies to be somewhat evenly distributed to the left and right of the pooled estimate (red line), but we clearly see more low quality studies leaning to the bottom right. And it also almost looks like there’s a hard cut at 0, showing that researchers are clearly discouraged from publishing studies showing that people who had sexual contact with an adult as a kid had positive outcomes.
Did you create the plot yourself? The analysis I found by that title doesn’t seem to include it, still not surprising at all though that it’s a thing lol
Yeah I made it myself, I just used the numbers on depression from table 1.
neat :3
I know this is an old post but yeah…there aren’t really any large studies about adult-child sex that was felt to be wanted by the child. The closest one I think of is Theo Sandfort’s study which was very small. Pretty much all studies are about unwanted sex because studying the other is very academically risky. So when people are referring to negative effects of child-adult sex, they’re almost certainly going to cite a study about molestation, which most pro-c people DON’T want to legalize.
