You are here:
Home 
Opinion The Radical Middle One-in-One-Thousand-Eight-Hundred-Seventy-Se...
Opinion The Radical Middle One-in-One-Thousand-Eight-Hundred-Seventy-Se...
RSS: The Mantra
|
"Extremism is so easy. You've got your position, and that's it. It doesn't take much thought. And when you go far enough to the right you meet the same idiots coming around from the left." — Clint Eastwood |
The Satire
|
The Links
|
Local Reading
National Reading Back Issues |
Official Muse
|
House Band
|
Latest Book
|
Social Media
|
The Dish
|
|
Monday, 28 February 2011 13:35
I’ve been wanting to get to this one for two weeks now, but a few other projects, and then that damned and damnable arbitrator’s decision, got in the way. Let’s not keep it waiting any longer.
Two Mondays ago, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review published a piece about the new state law that requires colleges and universities to provide sexual assault prevention programs on campus. While there is much to discuss (like PA Rep. Scott Conklin’s claim that some people believe when you go to a university, nothing bad can happen) and to deride (like Pitt freshman Dominique Benzio’s insistence that some people don’t even understand if they have been sexually assaulted or not) in the piece, I want to focus, clearly and simply, on the numbers it presents. And the contradictions it, and almost everyone else, ignores.You can not have an article on sexual assault in college, of course, without a solemn invocation of that infamous, oft-repeated, almost-as-oft-debunked One-in-Four statistic. The Trib does not disappoint:
The National Sexual Violence Research Center in Enola, northwest of Harrisburg, estimates 20 percent to 25 percent of women are victims of forced sex during their time in college.
But where the Trib, like everyone else who uncritically accepts this uncritical notion, does disappoint is in its failure to acknowledge that the numbers do not add up. And, in fact, that they do not even come close.
As a supplement to that same article, the Trib published a Campus Safety sidebar that provided a list of reported sexual assault offenses for eight local colleges over the past three years. All told, there were 65.
65. At 8 colleges. Among tens of thousands of female students. Over 3 years.
That’s a long way from 1-in-4. And thus a complete repudiation of the now-boilerplate statistic claimed in the article.
Those numbers, however, only represent reported assaults that occurred in student housing. Surely the numbers would be much higher, and much more alarming, once you counted sexual assaults that occurred elsewhere on campus and in the community at large. Surely that would get us much closer to the canonical 1-in-4 wisdom.
I decided to test that theory by examining the sexual assault statistics at Pittsburgh’s three largest residential universities: the University of Pittsburgh, Carnegie Mellon University, and Duquesne University.
Thanks to the Clery Act, all higher-ed institutions must publish and distribute an annual campus security report, complete with full crime statistics from the past three years. These documents are easily found online. You can check them yourself, and follow along with the numbers, here:
The University of Pittsburgh. Carnegie Mellon University. Duquesne University.
At the University of Pittsburgh, there are roughly 14,800 female students. If their chances of being sexually assaulted are 1-in-4, there should be about 3,700 sexual assaults each year. In 2009, the most recent year for which full statistics are available, Pitt students reported 4.
At Carnegie Mellon University, there are roughly 3,900 female students. If their chances of being sexually assaulted are 1-in-4, there should be about 975 sexual assaults each year. In 2009, CMU reported 6. (That figure was a three-year high.)
At Duquesne University, there are roughly 5,700 female students. If their chances of being sexually assaulted are 1-in-4, there should be about 1,425 sexual assaults each year. In 2009, Duquesne reported 3.
Just to be clear, and so those numbers stand out, here are the total number of reported sexual assaults for each of the three campuses in 2009, followed in parentheses by the numbers those universities should have suffered, according to the 1-in-4 figure:
PITT: 4 (3,700)
CMU: 6 (975)
DUQ: 3 (1,425)
Which means that, instead of 1-in-4, their chances of being sexually assaulted in 2009 were:
PITT: 1-in-3,700.
CMU: 1-in-650.
DUQ: 1-in-1,900.
There is, of course, a widely reported (if virtually unverifiable) statistic that says 90 percent of sexual assaults go unreported. The Trib piece took note:
90 percent or more of those victims do not report the assault.
If we grant that claim and adjust the numbers, then here are the total number of sexual assaults that occurred in 2009, followed in parentheses by the numbers those universities should have suffered, according to the 1-in-4 figure:
PITT: 40 (3,700)
CMU: 60 (975)
DUQ: 30 (1,425)
Which means that, even if we grant the 90%-are-unreported figure, women’s chances of being sexually assaulted while attending those universities in 2009 were not 1-in-4 but:
PITT: 1-in-370
CMU: 1-in-65
DUQ: 1-in-190
Even after adjusting for the possibility that 90% of sexual assaults on those university women went unreported, to get to 1-in-4, sexual assaults on those campuses in 2009 would have to be increased (and unreported) to the tune of:
PITT: 9,150%
CMU: 1,525%
DUQ: 4,650%
Is it possible that these numbers are just anomalies? That they represent a down year for sexual assaults on these local campuses, one that is not indicative of a typical year?
Not according to the crime statistics published for the past three years.
In 2009, Pitt reported 4, CMU 6, Duquesne 3. For the period 2007-2009, Pitt averaged 3.33 per year. CMU averaged 4 per year. Duquesne averaged 1.33 per year.
Which means that, in each case and on each campus, the three-year average was lower than the 2009 figure.
If we use those three-year averages, women’s chances of being sexually assaulted while attending those universities from 2007-2009 were not 1-in-4 but:
PIT: 1-in-4,444
CMU: 1-in-975
DUQ: 1-in-4,285
If you combine all of the crime statistics for Pitt, CMU, and Duquesne — again, the city’s three most populous urban campuses — and run an average for 2009 (which, as we’ve already seen, is above the most recent three-year average), here’s what you get:
# of Female Students: 24,400
# of Reported Sexual Assaults: 13
Chances of Being Sexually Assaulted: 1-in-1,877.
If you accept the claim that 90% of college sexual assaults are not reported, you get:
# of Female Students: 24,400
# of Reported Sexual Assaults: 130
Chances of Being Sexually Assaulted: 1-in-188.
To get to 1-in-4, you still need 47 times — not 47 more, but 47 times more — sexual assaults.
As I noted at the top of this post: the numbers in reality don’t come anywhere close to matching the numbers in the claims.
Is Pittsburgh just 47 (or, without a guess of an adjustment, 470) times safer than any other city, suburb, exurb, or small town in the country? Are Pitt, CMU, and Duquesne (plus all those other colleges on the Trib’s PDF) just terrific anomalies, just unexplained and uncharacteristic outliers in the data?
If so, and either way, there must be some city, some university, some collection of colleges somewhere for which the real, actual, federally mandated crime statistics — even bumped up to account for 90% of non-reports — work out to that 1-in-4 figure. Or at least come close. Right?
In fact, there ought to be a lot of them. Right?
Right?
If not, then the people who insist on advancing those dramatic claims while also ignoring these decidedly less dramatic realities would seem to have an awful lot of explaining to do.
Comments (5)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
...
written by Endgame, February 28, 2011 - 02:19 PM
written by Endgame, February 28, 2011 - 02:19 PM
Pretty solid, except for one part... You can't have over 100% of something. So when you're saying "PITT: 9,250%" What you actually mean is 99.8888...% under reporting. Just thought I would add in some extra math. what you do is take the actual reported figure (for pittsburgh that's 4) then divide that number by what the figure 'should' be which is 3,600. You end up with 0.001111... which you then multiply by 100 then subtract from 100%.
-
- -10
-
-
...
written by gorillagogo, February 28, 2011 - 08:56 PM
written by gorillagogo, February 28, 2011 - 08:56 PM
While we're on the topic of math Mr Hermann got wrong, let's discuss the fact that he's assuming 25% of all female students are sexually assaulted each year. I have no idea why he does this, given that he quoted an article saying 20-25% are assaulted during their time in college. Does he not read what he quotes, or does he just not understand what he quotes?
To arrive at a more accurate number, I assumed all students graduate in four years -- a big assumption, but one made for the sake of convenience. I used the formula (1 - (1 - x%)^4) = 25%, which comes out to x = 7%. This means 7% of the female student population would be sexually assaulted each year in order to arrive at the 25% figure for all female students at some point during a four year college career.
But wait -- the article Hermann cites says 20-25%. For some reason he assumes the higher number in his 'analysis'. If we plug the lower one into our formula we get 5.5% of female students being sexually assaulted in one year in order for 20% to be assaulted at some point in a 4 year college career. Using Pitt's student population, that gives us a range of 814 - 1036 students each year, not the 3700 students Hermann is throwing around.
Still, a range of 814 - 1036 is a long way off from Pitt's reported 4 incidents. I agree there's a monumental disparity here. What I don't understand is the assumption that any discrepancy between the reported number and the estimate must be due to overestimating the number of sexual assaults on college campuses. Let's think about this for a second -- Pitt has almost 15,000 female students and they expect people to believe that in this past year a mere four women had sex against their will? You could probably go to any given frat party on any given weekend and find four women in attendance who would wind up having sex against their will by the end of the night. To his credit, Chad Hermann acknowledges that over 90% of sexual assaults go unreported. He then calculates 40 sexual assaults as a more reasonable estimate for Pitt. Personally, 40 out of 15,000 still seems ridiculously low. Anyone who thinks that 40 is an accurate assessment of the number of female Pitt students having sex against their will at some point in a given year is either completely innumerate or has a retrograde definition of what constitutes sexual assault.
To arrive at a more accurate number, I assumed all students graduate in four years -- a big assumption, but one made for the sake of convenience. I used the formula (1 - (1 - x%)^4) = 25%, which comes out to x = 7%. This means 7% of the female student population would be sexually assaulted each year in order to arrive at the 25% figure for all female students at some point during a four year college career.
But wait -- the article Hermann cites says 20-25%. For some reason he assumes the higher number in his 'analysis'. If we plug the lower one into our formula we get 5.5% of female students being sexually assaulted in one year in order for 20% to be assaulted at some point in a 4 year college career. Using Pitt's student population, that gives us a range of 814 - 1036 students each year, not the 3700 students Hermann is throwing around.
Still, a range of 814 - 1036 is a long way off from Pitt's reported 4 incidents. I agree there's a monumental disparity here. What I don't understand is the assumption that any discrepancy between the reported number and the estimate must be due to overestimating the number of sexual assaults on college campuses. Let's think about this for a second -- Pitt has almost 15,000 female students and they expect people to believe that in this past year a mere four women had sex against their will? You could probably go to any given frat party on any given weekend and find four women in attendance who would wind up having sex against their will by the end of the night. To his credit, Chad Hermann acknowledges that over 90% of sexual assaults go unreported. He then calculates 40 sexual assaults as a more reasonable estimate for Pitt. Personally, 40 out of 15,000 still seems ridiculously low. Anyone who thinks that 40 is an accurate assessment of the number of female Pitt students having sex against their will at some point in a given year is either completely innumerate or has a retrograde definition of what constitutes sexual assault.
-
- -30
-
-
...
written by Pellegri, February 28, 2011 - 09:55 PM
written by Pellegri, February 28, 2011 - 09:55 PM
Or rather than taking apart the math in detail and missing the point in an ecstasy of your own savantry, gorillagogo, you can take it for what it is--what we like to call "napkin math" among people who do math for a living--and examine the conclusions it's trending toward. Namely: The statistics don't match the assertions being made in the media.
So we're just to assume that seven percent of the female student body is getting raped every year because that's what "feels" correct based on our own college experiences? Really? Rather than looking at the reported values for sexual assaults on college campuses and extrapolating from there?
Fantastic. This is a completely credible method of doing science and I wish you the very best; you clearly are someone who is absolutely justified in criticizing someone's math.
Anyone who thinks that 40 is an accurate assessment of the number of female Pitt students having sex against their will at some point in a given year is either completely innumerate or has a retrograde definition of what constitutes sexual assault.
So we're just to assume that seven percent of the female student body is getting raped every year because that's what "feels" correct based on our own college experiences? Really? Rather than looking at the reported values for sexual assaults on college campuses and extrapolating from there?
Fantastic. This is a completely credible method of doing science and I wish you the very best; you clearly are someone who is absolutely justified in criticizing someone's math.
-
- +36
-
-
...
written by gorillagogo, March 01, 2011 - 07:48 PM
written by gorillagogo, March 01, 2011 - 07:48 PM
Pellegri
Right, I missed the point, despite the fact that I clearly addressed it. What part of my statement "I agree there's a monumental disparity here" doesn't address your comment "The statistics don't match the assertions being made in the media"? What exactly did I miss?
So we're just to assume that seven percent of the female student body is getting raped every year because that's what "feels" correct based on our own college experiences? Really? Rather than looking at the reported values for sexual assaults on college campuses and extrapolating from there?
No, and yes. No we're not supposed to assume 7 percent is accurate. I apologize if I gave that impression in my previous comment, but I'm not saying that number is accurate. I'm saying that if the one in four statistic is true, then 7 percent is a rough estimate of how many women would be assaulted in a given year. As for the one in four statistic itself, I have no idea whether that's accurate. Given that it's widely reported, my initial reaction is to assume there must be some validity to it. I could be persuaded otherwise, but I'm not going to just dismiss it out of hand like Chad Hermann seems to want to do. He seems to think there's absolutely no way that 'one in four' is remotely accurate. Why else would he deride it as "oft-repeated, almost-as-oft-debunked"? Frankly, that implies a long standing resentment.
Regarding your second point, yes, I absolutely believe we should disregard reported figures if those numbers don't jibe with what "feels" right. This isn't some sort of rigorously controlled scientific experiment that resulted in a counterintuitive discovery. This is one guy on the internet with a clearly stated agenda of "debunking" a widely reported statistic about sexual assault. His proof amounts to uncritically accepting that, out of almost 15,000 female Pitt students, in a given year a grand total of four women were raped. He thinks that's accurate. I think his uncritical acceptance of that fact is Exhibit A in the case that we shouldn't take anything he has to say on the subject seriously.
I decided to do some more investigating. Here's a study by the US Dept of Justice looking into acquaintance rape on college campuses. This paragraph seems relevant:
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e03021472.pdf
That's just one of a half dozen different sources I discovered on teh google in less than fifteen minutes. All of them referenced studies that confirmed or had some variation on the one in four college women figure, yet for some reason Chad Hermann decided to completely ignore google when researching this post. If Chad Hermann was interested in an honest discussion about this subject he might have come across some of these sources.
Right, I missed the point, despite the fact that I clearly addressed it. What part of my statement "I agree there's a monumental disparity here" doesn't address your comment "The statistics don't match the assertions being made in the media"? What exactly did I miss?
So we're just to assume that seven percent of the female student body is getting raped every year because that's what "feels" correct based on our own college experiences? Really? Rather than looking at the reported values for sexual assaults on college campuses and extrapolating from there?
No, and yes. No we're not supposed to assume 7 percent is accurate. I apologize if I gave that impression in my previous comment, but I'm not saying that number is accurate. I'm saying that if the one in four statistic is true, then 7 percent is a rough estimate of how many women would be assaulted in a given year. As for the one in four statistic itself, I have no idea whether that's accurate. Given that it's widely reported, my initial reaction is to assume there must be some validity to it. I could be persuaded otherwise, but I'm not going to just dismiss it out of hand like Chad Hermann seems to want to do. He seems to think there's absolutely no way that 'one in four' is remotely accurate. Why else would he deride it as "oft-repeated, almost-as-oft-debunked"? Frankly, that implies a long standing resentment.
Regarding your second point, yes, I absolutely believe we should disregard reported figures if those numbers don't jibe with what "feels" right. This isn't some sort of rigorously controlled scientific experiment that resulted in a counterintuitive discovery. This is one guy on the internet with a clearly stated agenda of "debunking" a widely reported statistic about sexual assault. His proof amounts to uncritically accepting that, out of almost 15,000 female Pitt students, in a given year a grand total of four women were raped. He thinks that's accurate. I think his uncritical acceptance of that fact is Exhibit A in the case that we shouldn't take anything he has to say on the subject seriously.
I decided to do some more investigating. Here's a study by the US Dept of Justice looking into acquaintance rape on college campuses. This paragraph seems relevant:
The most recent large-scale study, including students at both two- and four-year colleges, found 35 rapes per 1,000 female students over seven months (rape was defined as "unwanted completed penetration by force or threat of force"). Based on this study, a college with 10,000 women students could experience 350 rapes a year. This conflicts with official college data. In 1999, reported forcible and nonforcible sexual offenses totaled 2,469 incidents for all U.S. college campuses combined, underscoring the low levels of rape reporting.
http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e03021472.pdf
That's just one of a half dozen different sources I discovered on teh google in less than fifteen minutes. All of them referenced studies that confirmed or had some variation on the one in four college women figure, yet for some reason Chad Hermann decided to completely ignore google when researching this post. If Chad Hermann was interested in an honest discussion about this subject he might have come across some of these sources.
-
- -8
-
-
...
written by Clarence, March 03, 2011 - 01:46 AM
written by Clarence, March 03, 2011 - 01:46 AM
gorillagogo:
There was a whole series of posts done on sexual assaults on campus by this very blogger over the last year or so. Here's a few links:
http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/radicalmiddle/archive/2009/12/10/the-myth-that-will-not-die.aspx
http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/radicalmiddle/archive/2009/12/14/the-myth-that-will-not-die-pt-ii.aspx
Another interesting post:
http://www.feministcritics.org/blog/2008/02/28/whats-her-point/
I also direct you to the comments sections of this blog and the feminist critics blog. By the way, despite the name, two of the bloggers at feminist critics self identify as feminists and they sometimes critique MRA and anti feminist studies as well.
Lastly: http://falserapesociety.blogsp...anard.html
You may wish to look at the list of changes in the laws and in policies and tell me if you still believe that 99.99 plus of rapes are not reported.
There was a whole series of posts done on sexual assaults on campus by this very blogger over the last year or so. Here's a few links:
http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/radicalmiddle/archive/2009/12/10/the-myth-that-will-not-die.aspx
http://community.post-gazette.com/blogs/radicalmiddle/archive/2009/12/14/the-myth-that-will-not-die-pt-ii.aspx
Another interesting post:
http://www.feministcritics.org/blog/2008/02/28/whats-her-point/
I also direct you to the comments sections of this blog and the feminist critics blog. By the way, despite the name, two of the bloggers at feminist critics self identify as feminists and they sometimes critique MRA and anti feminist studies as well.
Lastly: http://falserapesociety.blogsp...anard.html
You may wish to look at the list of changes in the laws and in policies and tell me if you still believe that 99.99 plus of rapes are not reported.
-
- +12
-
-
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|