"Preliminary data suggest rates of male military sexual trauma may be higher than previously reported": Retraction of Sheppard et al. (2015).

Abstract

Reports the retraction of "Preliminary data suggest rates of male military sexual trauma may be higher than previously reported" by Sean C. Sheppard, Edward J. Hickling, Mitch Earleywine, Tim Hoyt, Amanda R. Russo, Matthew R. Donati and Kevin E. Kip (Psychological Services, 2015[Nov], Vol 12[4], 344-347). The following article from the November 2015 issue is being retracted. The retraction is at the request of the authors. The data analysis was flawed due to the method used to test for statistical significance which was not consistent with modern methods. This compromised the study findings. Thus, the conclusions about statistical significance drawn in the paper were not consistent with the data. The statistical testing error that occurred was unintentional and acknowledged by the authors when pointed out by external scholars. All authors of the article joined in the request for the retraction. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2015-49326-002.) Stigma associated with disclosing military sexual trauma (MST) makes estimating an accurate base rate difficult. Anonymous assessment may help alleviate stigma. Although anonymous research has found higher rates of male MST, no study has evaluated whether providing anonymity sufficiently mitigates the impact of stigma on accurate reporting. This study used the unmatched count technique (UCT), a form of randomized response techniques, to gain information about the accuracy of base rate estimates of male MST derived via anonymous assessment of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)/Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) combat veterans. A cross-sectional convenience sample of 180 OEF/OIF male combat veterans, recruited via online websites for military populations, provided data about history of MST via traditional anonymous self-report and the UCT. The UCT revealed a rate of male MST more than 15 times higher than the rate derived via traditional anonymous assessment (1.1% vs. 17.2%). These data suggest that anonymity does not adequately mitigate the impact of stigma on disclosure of male MST. Results, though preliminary, suggest that published rates of male MST may substantially underestimate the true rate of this problem. The UCT has significant potential to improve base rate estimation of sensitive behaviors in the military.