Everyone who's ever taken a survey design/research methods class knows that how you word the questions and administer them has a profound impact on responses. It's the only way to explain large differences in responses between the NCVS and NISVS data.Mist, I'm asking you because I'm busy in work and can only read blurbs, instead of being obtuse and letting go of little one liners, why don't you just explain what you meant. Reading over the methodology now. I'm still seeing a very broad, and open ended question.
Incidents involving forced or unwanted sexual acts are
often difficult to talk about. (Other than any incidents
already mentioned), have you been forced or coerced
to engage in unwanted sexual activity by (a) someone
you didn't know before, (b) a casual acquaintance? OR
(c) someone you know well?
I mean, I guess someone who could not consider oral sex a sexual act. But really? That sounds like crap. Need to read the questionnaire to find the other classification questions.
I absolutely think the 1 in 5 data is garbage too, but you'd have to be pants on head retarded to think these numbers are representative of the true scope of the problem either.