A Response to Commentary on Faust, Bridges, and Ahern's (2009) “Methods for the Identification of Sexually Abused Children”

Abstract

Our series of three chapters (Faust, Bridges, & Ahern, 2009a, 2009b; Bridges, Faust, & Ahern, 2009) on the methodology of identifying sexually abused children elicited a number of comments, both supportive and critical. The criticisms appear related to three primary issues or apparent misconceptions of our work, perhaps due in part to incomplete exposition or ambiguity in presented material: our use of hypotheticals, our argument against “double-dipping,” and our use of Bayesian analyses. We address each of these criticisms here in the hope of clarifying any misunderstandings and contributing in a constructive way to progress in this critical arena.

Keywords:

• abuse
• assessment
• decision making

Additional information

Notes on contributors

David C. Ahern

David C. Ahern, PhD, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.

Ana J. Bridges

Ana J. Bridges, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR.

David Faust

David Faust, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, and Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI.