Back to Top

 Skip navigation

Background Notes

Background Notes

CSO statistical publication, , 11am
National Helplines

If you are affected by any of the issues raised in this survey, help is available from the following national helplines or from local/regional helplines which you can find under Helplines below.

Survey overview

Following a request from Government, the CSO has conducted the Sexual Violence Survey (SVS), in order to measure the prevalence of sexual violence in Ireland. The survey involves collecting information from respondents on their experience of sexual violence, as well as looking at the relationship of the perpetrator to the person who experienced sexual violence, and whether persons disclosed their experience of sexual violence to anyone. The data collected will inform policy in several areas, including justice and equality, health and social service provision to those who experienced sexual violence, education and children. A pilot survey for the SVS was run in 2021 and the learnings from that pilot were incorporated into the survey design. 

The legal basis for the collection of the survey was the Statistics Act 1993, Section 24, which outlines that CSO can ask persons to provide information to it on a voluntary basis.

Sexual violence definition

Sexual violence is defined in this survey as a range of non-consensual experiences, from non-contact experiences to non-consensual sexual intercourse. The word “violence” as a term is sometimes associated with the use of force but it can also mean “having a marked or powerful effect” on someone, which includes actions or words that are intended to hurt people, as outlined in the Luxembourg Guidelines (a set of guidelines to harmonise terms on childhood sexual violence and abuse). Sexual violence is any sexual act which takes place without freely given consent or where someone forces or manipulates someone else into unwanted sexual activity. These experiences may range from a teenager making their friend watch a pornographic video on their phone, to someone being persuaded to undress or pose in a sexually suggestive way for photographs as a child, to a young woman being made to touch another person’s genitals without her consent or a man being threatened to have sex. This definition is based on national research, using the Scoping Group on Sexual Violence Data, and also on international research. The latter included the Istanbul convention, the methodological manual for the EU survey on gender-based violence against women and other forms of inter-personal violence (EU-GBV), the Luxembourg Guidelines and relevant research from the United Nations.

Ethics

In order for the data to be robust, explicit questions relating to sexual violence needed to be asked of some respondents. Conducting a survey dealing with highly sensitive issues involved designing a means of collecting data which addresses ethical considerations, as well as protecting the privacy of respondents and supporting survey staff in the field.

The Central Statistics Office (CSO) adheres to core values of Independence, Objectivity and Confidentiality as per the European Statistics Code of Practice. The underpinning legislation for the Office, the Statistics Act,1993, outlines the protection of confidential information (Section 21) which details the fact that information gathered will only be used for statistical purposes only, and that disclosure of information is prohibited by the Declaration of Secrecy which is signed by all staff and researchers. The Office operates in an ethical way overall but a survey on a sensitive issue like sexual violence introduces additional ethical responsibilities.

A CSO Social Statistics Ethics Advisory Group (SSEAG) was set up to provide advice to the CSO on the ethical aspects of the conduct of the surveys which may require such oversight and the SVS was the first survey they reviewed. The terms of reference and membership of this group can be seen on the CSO website.

As part of the initial stages of building expertise on the survey topic, international approaches to data collection on sexual violence were appraised by the CSO. Where there was little information on data collection specifically on sexual violence, related topics which could be deemed as sensitive were examined instead, for example, violence against women, domestic violence and gender-based violence.

A key reference used by many organisations (United Nations, Eurostat, academic papers) is the 2001 publication by the World Health Organisation (WHO) - Putting Women First: Ethical and Safety recommendations for Research on Violence against Women. This document was created as part of development work for the WHO Multi-country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence Against Women. It summarises ethical and safety concerns related to population-based surveys on domestic violence against women. The document itself states that “many of the principles identified are also applicable to other forms of quantitative and qualitative research on this issue”.

The principles are outlined here:

  • The safety of respondents and the research team is paramount, and should guide all project decisions.
  • Prevalence studies need to be methodologically sound and to build upon current research experience about how to minimize the under-reporting of abuse.
  • All research team members should be carefully selected and receive specialised training and ongoing support.
  • The study design must include a number of actions aimed at reducing any possible distress caused to the participants by the research.
  • Fieldworkers should be trained to refer women requesting assistance to available sources of support. Where few resources exist, it may be necessary for the study to create short-term support mechanisms.
  • Researchers and donors have an ethical obligation to help ensure that their findings are properly interpreted and used to advance policy and intervention development.
  • Violence questions should be incorporated into surveys designed for other purposes only when ethical and methodological requirements can be met.

These principles were also noted in a 2014 UN document on data collection as remaining widely accepted principles for such research.

Submissions which outlined the steps taken by the CSO to meet its ethical responsibilities when conducting the pilot and main survey of the Sexual Violence Survey were prepared and shared with the Group. It outlined how well-established international principles for the conduct of sensitive surveys such as a sexual violence survey had been applied by CSO to ensure the ethical conduct of the survey.

The CSO SSEAG reviewed the submissions and offered advice on the methodology proposed. This advice was considered by the Office, accepted and incorporated where feasible into the survey design.

Questionnaire design

The SVS was a newly designed questionnaire which used the 2002 Sexual Abuse and Violence in Ireland (SAVI) report and the European Gender-based Violence (EU-GBV) survey, as well as other international surveys, as reference points when designing the questions.

Due to the novel nature of the survey, significant testing was conducted on the concepts and questions which is outlined in Figure 9.1. Further detail on the work completed as part of questionnaire design is available in Appendix I. 

Figure 9.1 Overview of the ways in which stages of the Sexual Violence Survey (SVS) were tested. The image description is linked below the image.

[Figure 9.1 Image Description]

Overall, the SVS questionnaire can be broken down into these sections:

  • Demographic details.
  • Sexual harassment/Stalking.
  • Adult experiences.
    • Intimate partner sexual violence.
    • Non-intimate partner sexual violence.
  • Childhood experiences.
    • Non-contact sexual violence.
    • Contact sexual violence.
  • Disclosure of experiences.
  • Attitudes (will be asked only of those who do not disclose experiences of harassment, stalking or sexual violence).
  • Respondent module.

The flow of the questionnaire is summarised in Figure 9.2. The questionnaire itself can be found on the Methods page on the CSO website.

Figure 9.2 Overview of the Sexual Violence Survey (SVS) Instrument. The image description for this diagram is linked below the image

[Figure 9.2 Image Description]

Survey coverage

The SVS was collected directly from private individuals, aged 18 and over who were resident in Ireland.

Frame and sample design

The sample was selected from the Irish Population Estimates from Administrative Data Source (IPEADS) person-based sampling frame. IPEADS uses pseudonymised administrative data from public sector bodies to produce estimates of the population in Ireland and includes breakdowns by several variables including sex, age, nationality, marital status and economic status. IPEADS is created using 17 different data flow sources, such as the Central Record System (CRS), the Local Property Tax (LPT), etc., and consists of 5.2 million person records. This was updated with information from Census to quality check and ensure the most up to date view of those resident in Ireland as of the 1 January 2022.

Due to this person-based frame, a simple random sample stratified by local authority area was generated. A sample of 12,665 was chosen.

Reference period

The survey to collect the information for this publication began in May 2022 and ran it until December 2022. 

The questionnaire asked questions about lifetime experiences of unwanted or non-consensual sexual activity. It also asked questions about sexual harassment for the reference period of twelve months prior to the interview taking place.

Data collection

The data for the survey was collected between May and December 2022. To ensure our ethical responsibilities to respondents who may have been in an ongoing abusive relationship, the survey was known as the ‘Safety of the Person’ survey during the data collection phase. Ethical considerations also led to the decision to have a graduated and less explicit introduction to the survey. After this initial introduction, before the respondent began the main part of the survey, they were informed clearly about the nature of the survey and their consent was sought before they could proceed through to the survey questionnaire. To ensure that a wide range of respondents could engage with the survey, a range of data collection modes was used: secure web-form, face-to-face with a confidential element for the sensitive questions, and a paper form. The vast majority of respondents replied via the secure web-form.

The initial contact with the selected respondent was led by the Field Administration Unit (FAU) in the CSO. Letters of invitation were addressed directly to the selected respondent. Within the letter was the survey link and the authentication code to access the online survey. Up to two reminders were issued to the selected respondent if there was no response. If no response had been received, then the case was forwarded to the field data collection team (25 interviewers and 3 co-ordinators).

The field data collection followed the standard model for data collection in the Office. If any respondent contacted the Office directly instead, relevant information was passed where necessary to the interviewer as per normal procedures. The field data collection team were provided with training and interview material in advance and were comfortable with using the required technology.

Training for this included:

  • An overview of SVS.
  • The survey aims/procedures.
  • Recruitment of household training.
  • Confidentiality/disclosure training.
  • COVID-19 working procedures.
  • Mindfulness/wellbeing.

At the first visit, interviewers encouraged respondents to go online to complete the survey. If a respondent requested the survey link or authentication code, then the Office reissued the survey invite letter to the respondent.

If the respondent did not complete the survey online, the interviewer revisited the respondent and offered a tablet-based interview with the respondent completing the entire survey on the interviewer tablet. If the respondent was not able to complete the survey on the tablet but wished to contribute to the survey, a paper form was offered as an alternative. 

The process is summarised in Figure 9.3.

Figure 9.3 Overview of Sexual Violence Survey (SVS) data collection process. This diagram illustrations the data collection process. Please contact us for full detail of the contents of this image.

Self-completion and SVS

To encourage and assist respondents that have experienced sexual violence to disclose often difficult and painful experiences in a survey setting, the mode of data collection is important. Research shows that if under-reporting of instances of sexual violence is not managed then it will lead to biased results. Tourangeau and Yan (2007) state that the biases introduced through under-reporting of instances of sexual violence will far exceed all other forms of survey and sampling errors.

According to van Wijk et al. (2015), disclosure of sexual violence shows more susceptibility to mode effects than disclosures of physical violence. Similarly, Tourangeau and Yan (2007) advise that studies going back nearly 50 years suggest that respondents are more willing to report sensitive information when the answers are self-administered than when they are administered by an interviewer.

In order to ensure data quality and respondent safety, the SVS survey was completed without the assistance of an interviewer. It created an environment of privacy for the respondent to answer honestly and without any potential perceived judgement. This approach is preserved for all mode choices offered to the respondent. Ways in which underreporting through the survey and respondent distress were managed is listed in Appendix II and III.

Response rate

The number of responses for the SVS was 4,575 responses. This represents a 36% response rate based on the 12,665 individuals who were in the original sample This compares very favourably with similar surveys conducted internationally (see section below). As with all surveys, there is the potential for bias in the survey responses (where different cohorts of the population have a different propensity to respond to the survey). With the SVS there are two particular areas where non-response bias could be introduced into the survey:

  1. A risk of under-reporting of sexual violence prevalence - for those who have direct or indirect experience of harassment or sexual violence, feelings of shame, fear, emotional distress may be evoked, and so some potential respondents may not engage with the survey. This is a well noted feature of trying to determine sexual violence prevalence levels.
  2. A risk of over-reporting of sexual violence prevalence – some selected potential respondents may not have experienced sexual violence and so may think that the ‘survey isn’t for them’.

Non-response management

The following mitigated the risks around non-response:

  • Questionnaire - the Questionnaire Design section of this Background notes outlines in more detail the questionnaire used for the survey and how it was constructed to ensure a better quality response from selected respondents. In short, following extensive research with a range of experts, a questionnaire was used which gives the respondent every opportunity to quickly respond on their particular experience of sexual violence (whether they experienced it or not). The primary mode used (web-based form) also better facilitates a response, allowing, as it does, a flexible space for respondents to engage with the survey.
  • Use of neutral title – to better ensure engagement from respondents, the neutral title “Safety of the Person” was used during the data collection phase. This ensures a graduated introduction to the survey for respondents, better ensuring that respondents will begin the survey and then finish it.
  • Well trained staff – extensive training was provided to CSO staff on the survey and data collection techniques.
  • Data collection - letters personally addressed to respondents is an important feature of this survey. By making this direct contact we engage quickly with the respondent (rather than relying on a more indirect introduction). Proactive management of the data collection effort was done, to ensure a broadly based response across all sections of the sample selected for the survey.
  • Weighting and calibration – in common with other surveys, the sample results for SVS have been weighted and calibrated back to the population levels, to ensure estimates from the survey are aligned back to the population totals.
    • The Labour Force Survey (LFS) Q3 2022 population estimates (the most recently available estimates at the time of analysis) were used to benchmark the dataset across key characteristics for calibration. The individual weights were inflated to match overall population totals and then calibrated using CALMAR calibration adjustment program. Calibration ensures that benchmarked respondent totals matched the LFS Q3 2022 benchmark totals for a number of key characteristics, including sex, age and education level.
    • Benchmarking calibration has been used to adjust to key population totals to match current population distributions with respondent distributions.

Consideration of non-response bias adjustment

In conjunction with CSO Methodology Division, two additional methods of non-response adjustment were considered:

  1. Non-response survey – here a sample of respondents and non-respondents would be directly contacted by CSO. In such a survey, the selected persons would be asked a subset of the sexual violence prevalence questions with certain demographic variables also asked. The data from such a survey would have the potential to provide information on the propensity to respond by different demographic characteristics, which in turn could provide an adjustment factor for a non-response bias adjustment.

    There are practical considerations for such a survey – for example, would someone who previously didn’t respond to the survey now engage in a non-response survey, but fundamentally, for ethical considerations, such a non-response survey is not possible. It would involve direct recontact with respondents and non-respondents. Persons who didn’t respond to the main survey may not have responded for valid safety considerations (for example they may be in an ongoing abusive relationship), and those who did respond may have done so in a very confidential manner within their household (with any recontact of that respondent potentially causing a safety issue also). With the ethical consideration of ‘do no harm’ determining our approach to survey operations, it is not possible to conduct such a non-response survey.

  2. Use of auxiliary variables on the population frame to facilitate a non-response adjustment model - here the population frame used for the sample selection would be expanded to include other available demographic variables on respondents. These additional variables then would be used to determine the likelihood of response or non-response by certain demographic variables.

    This methodology is not possible to implement. To provide added reassurance to respondents around the confidentiality of their data, personal identifiers on the frame used for sample selection and post-out were irrevocably removed from CSO databases once survey contact was made with the respondent and their data received by CSO. This breaking of the link between population frame and sample for sound ethical considerations means that the auxiliary demographic variables cannot be attached to the sample.

    The general international experience for surveys of this nature is that non-response bias adjustment is not done, given the substantive ethical issues involved in such an exercise.

International experiences

The following table highlights the respective response rates for similar type surveys conducted internationally. Differences in survey modes, questions asked, and target populations can have a marked impact on response rates and so caution should be exercised in examining this table. International comparison of sexual violence response rates and prevalence levels is difficult, but this table provides an indication of the response rate for the SVS as compared to international surveys of a similar type.

Country Survey Title Mode Response Rate
The Netherlands Feeling Safe and Being Safe Web based 28%
Austria Quality of Life and Security in Austria Face to face with self-completion/ Web based 28-42%
Slovenia National Safety Survey Web based / Face to face/ Telephone 49%
Canada Survey of Safety in Public and Private Spaces Telephone/ Web based 43%
USA The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey Telephone 8%

The EU survey on gender-based violence against women and other forms of inter-personal violence (EU-GBV) which is being conducted in 18 EU countries currently, has developed a comprehensive methodological manual for those countries conducting the survey. While it does not advise a specific non-response adjustment approach, it encourages countries to get the highest response rate possible with advice on how to build this into the preparatory stages of the survey development process, e.g. advance letters, neutral name, experienced interviewers, good training delivered, active monitoring during data collection and address any drops in response rate when they happen, etc. CSO have implemented this advice in the survey management for this survey and the weighting and calibration done for the survey estimates are adjusted for non-response as far as possible and aligned to the population totals.

Further processing

Once the data was back in the CSO it was checked. After the data collection phase was complete, the data was aggregated together. Occupation text strings were re-coded to the proper category while further validation checks were done.

Derivation of results

To provide national population results, the survey results were weighted to represent the entire population of persons aged 18 years and over. The survey results were weighted to agree with population estimates broken down by age group, sex and region and were also calibrated to highest level of education achieved totals.

Individual weights were calculated for all responses in the initial weighting scheme. This eliminated the bias introduced by discrepancies caused by non-response, particularly critical when the non-responding households are different from the responding ones in respect to some survey variables as this may create substantial bias in the estimates.

To obtain the final weights for the results, after the previous steps were carried out, the distribution of households by sex and age and highest level of education achieved was calibrated to the population of households in Quarter 4 2022. The CALMAR2-macro, developed by INSEE, was used for this purpose.

Confidence interval

Prevalence estimates by selected demographic characteristics were calculated along with 95% confidence intervals and the estimated total number of the adult population in Ireland who experienced this type of experience. See Tables 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 and 9.4.

Table 9.1 Prevalence of those who experienced sexual violence in their lifetime with associated confidence intervals, 2022

Table 9.2 Prevalence of those who experienced sexual violence as an adult with associated confidence intervals, 2022

Table 9.3 Prevalence of those who experienced sexual violence as a child with associated confidence intervals, 2022

Table 9.4 Prevalence of those, who experienced non-consensual sexual intercourse with associated confidence intervals, 2022

Reliability of estimates presented

Estimates for number of persons where there are less than 30 persons in a cell are too small to be considered reliable. These estimates are presented with an asterisk (*) in the relevant tables.

Where there are 30-49 persons in a cell, estimates are considered to have a wider margin of error and should be treated with caution. These cells are presented with parentheses [ ].

In the case of rates, these limits apply to the denominator used in generating the rate.

All data from surveys are subject to sampling and other survey errors, which are relatively greater in respect of smaller values.

Note on tables

The sum of row or column percentages in the tables in this report may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Definitions

Sexual Violence

Sexual violence is defined in this survey as a range of non-consensual experiences, from non-contact experiences to non-consensual sexual intercourse. Sexual violence is any sexual act which takes place without freely given consent or where someone forces or manipulates someone else into unwanted sexual activity. This definition is based on national research, using the Scoping Group on Sexual Violence Data, and also on international research. The latter included the Istanbul convention, the methodological manual for the EU survey on gender-based violence against women and other forms of inter-personal violence (EU-GBV), the Luxembourg Guidelines and relevant research from the United Nations.

In order to capture the breadth of it, a series of variables have been constructed which cover the spectrum of sexual violence. It is summarised in Figure 9.4.

Figure 9.4 Components of Sexual Violence. Image Description is linked below the image

[Figure 9.4 Image Description]

As an adult, as a child, in their lifetime categories

As an adult

Experiences as an adult are those which were unwanted, non-consensual sexual experiences that happened since the respondent was 17 years old.

It includes experiences with a partner or ex-partner. "Partner" means a person that you are/were married to, living with, a boyfriend/girlfriend or someone you are/were regularly dating.

It also includes experiences with someone other than a partner or ex-partner, i.e. a non-partner.

It excludes experiences that took place before the respondent was 17 years old.

As an adult only

Experiences as an adult only are those which were unwanted, non-consensual sexual experiences which only happened since the respondent was 17 years old with either a partner and/or non-partner. This cohort did not experience sexual violence as a child.

As a child

Experiences as a child refers to those which were unwanted, sexual experiences that happened before the respondent was 17 years old i.e., respondents were asked to think back to when they were younger, from earliest childhood until before their 17th birthday.

It includes unwanted sexual experiences; both non-contact (experiences not involving physical contact or attempted physical contact) and contact experiences (experiences involving physical contact or attempted physical contact).

It excludes any sexual experiences that the respondent was comfortable with, for example, with a boyfriend or girlfriend who was a similar age at the time.

These are not described as non-consensual as these individuals were under the age of consent.

As a child only

Experiences as a child only refers to those which were unwanted, sexual experiences that only happened before the respondent was 17 years old. This cohort did not experience sexual violence as an adult.

Both as an adult and as a child

Experience of sexual violence both as an adult and as a child refers to those who experienced sexual violence as a child and as an adult.

In their lifetime

Experience of sexual violence in their lifetime refers to those who experienced sexual violence at any point in their lifetime, whether as an adult or as a child or both as an adult and as a child.

Figure 9.5 This set of venn diagrams illustrate the lifetime categories outlined in the previous text

 

Types of sexual violence

Sexual violence as an adult is composed of unwanted non-consensual experiences which happened after the respondent turned 17. The components of this are:

  • Non-consensual sexual intercourse

    Sexual intercourse includes vaginal sex, anal sex, oral sex and/or penetration with an object or finger. The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened since they were 17 when answering the questions. The questions used to capture this were:

    • ...has a partner (current or ex) ever coerced, threatened or forced you in order to make you have sexual intercourse without your consent?
    • ...has a partner (current or ex) ever had sexual intercourse with you when you could not give consent, or stop what was happening because you were asleep, passed out or under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs?
    • ...has anyone, other than a partner or ex-partner, ever coerced, threatened or forced you in order to make you have sexual intercourse?
    • ...has anyone, other than a partner or ex-partner, ever had sexual intercourse with you when you have been unable to provide consent, or stop what was happening because you were asleep, passed out or under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs?
  • Non-consensual attempted sexual intercourse

    Sexual intercourse includes vaginal sex, anal sex, oral sex and/or penetration with an object or finger. The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened since they were 17 when answering the questions. The questions used to capture this were:

    • ...has a partner (current or ex) ever attempted to have sexual intercourse with you without your consent, but the intercourse did not happen?
    • ...has anyone, other than a partner or ex-partner, ever attempted to have sexual intercourse with you without your consent but the intercourse did not happen?
  • Non-consensual sexual touching

    The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened since they were 17 when answering the questions. The questions used to capture this were:

    • ...has a partner (current or ex) ever touched your breasts and/or genitals (penis/vagina) without your consent?
    • ...has a partner (current or ex) ever coerced, forced or made you touch their breasts and/or genitals (penis/vagina) without your consent?
    • ...has anyone, other than a partner or ex-partner, ever touched your breasts and/or genitals (penis/vagina) without your consent?
    • ...has anyone, other than a partner or ex-partner, ever coerced, forced or made you touch their breasts and/or genitals (penis/vagina) without your consent?
  • Non-consensual other sexual contact

    The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened since they were 17 when answering the questions. the questions used to capture this were:

    • ...has a partner (current or ex) ever had any other sexual contact with you when you could not give consent, or stop what was happening because you were asleep, passed out or under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs?
    • ...has a partner (current or ex) ever attempted to have any other sexual contact with you without your consent?
    • ...has anyone, other than a partner or ex-partner, ever had other sexual contact with you when you have been unable to provide consent, or stop what was happening because you were asleep, passed out or under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs?
    • ...has anyone, other than a partner or ex-partner, ever attempted to have any other sexual contact with you without your consent?

Further details on experiences of sexual violence as an adult (for example, duration of experience, location of experience, age when this began, etc.) will be included in a future publication.

Sexual violence as a child is composed of unwanted experiences which happened before the respondent turned 17 and are broken down by non-contact and contact experiences.

  • Unwanted non-contact sexual violence experiences include being shown pornographic material, being asked to pose in a sexually suggestive manner for photographs, having someone expose themselves or someone masturbating in front of a child. The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened during their childhood before they were 17 when answering the questions. The questions used to determine this are as follows:

    • ...did anyone ever ask, persuade or make you look at pornographic material, for example, pictures, magazines, videos or online content?
    • ...did anyone ever ask, persuade, make or pay you to undress or pose in a sexually suggestive way for photographs or videos?
    • ...did anyone ever expose themselves physically to you in a way that made you feel uncomfortable?
    • ...did anyone ever masturbate in front of you?
  • Unwanted contact sexual violence experiences include a child being touched in a sexual way or being made to touch another person in a sexual way, experienced sexual intercourse or attempted sexual intercourse, and any other unwanted non-specified sexual contact.

    The components of this are:

    • Unwanted sexual intercourse 

      Sexual intercourse includes vaginal sex, anal sex, oral sex and/or penetration with an object or finger. The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened during their childhood before they were 17 when answering the question. The question used to capture this was:

      • ...did anyone ever persuade, make or force you to have sexual intercourse?
    • Unwanted attempted sexual intercourse 

      Sexual intercourse includes vaginal sex, anal sex, oral sex and/or penetration with an object or finger. The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened during their childhood before they were 17 when answering the question. The question used to capture this was:

      • ... did anyone ever attempt to make you have sexual intercourse, but intercourse did not take place?
    • Unwanted sexual touching 

      The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened during their childhood before they were 17 when answering the questions. The questions used to capture this were:

      • ...did anyone ever touch your body in a sexual way?
      • ...did anyone ever ask, persuade or make you touch someone else's body in a sexual way?
    • Unwanted other sexual contact 

      The respondent was asked to think about unwanted experiences that may have happened during their childhood before they were 17 when answering the question. The question used to capture this was:

      • ... did anyone ever attempt to have any other unwanted sexual contact with you?

Further details on experiences of sexual violence as a child (for example, duration of experience, location of experience, age when this began, the reason why it stopped, etc.) will be included in a future publication.

Perpetrator of sexual violence 

The perpetrator is the person that carried out the particular sexual violence experience on the respondent. Personally identifiable information on the perpetrator was not sought in the survey. If there were multiple experiences of sexual violence shared in the survey, the person was asked to share details on the experience that affected the person the most. Respondents who shared that the sexual violence experience involved more than one person were not asked the perpetrator question.

For those who disclosed sexual violence experiences as an adult in the survey with someone other than a partner or ex-partner, this was the question used to capture this:

At the time, was the person that did this to you...

Please select one of the following

  1. A family member/relative
  2. A neighbour
  3. A friend/acquaintance
  4. A person in authority, for example, a boss, a doctor
  5. A stranger
  6. Other

For those who disclosed sexual violence experiences as a child in the survey (for both non-contact and contact experiences) this was the question used to capture this:

At the time, was the person that did this to you...

Please select one of the following

  1. A boyfriend/girlfriend/ex-boyfriend/ex-girlfriend
  2. A family member/relative
  3. A neighbour
  4. A friend/acquaintance
  5. A person in authority, for example, a babysitter, teacher, doctor, coach, priest
  6. A stranger
  7. Other

Further details on the perpetrator in experiences of sexual violence as a child (for example, age of perpetrator, sex of perpetrator, etc.) will be included in a future publication.

Disclosure

Disclosure is when the person told one person or many persons or an organisation/group about their experience of sexual violence. It is asked of:

  • those who experienced sexual violence as an adult (partner or non-partner sexual violence)
  • those who experienced sexual violence as a child (non-contact or contact sexual violence)

If there were multiple experiences of sexual violence shared in the survey, the person was asked to share details on the experience that affected the person the most.

Further details on disclosure (for example, who was told, how long it took to disclose, reasons for disclosure, etc.) will be included in a future publication.

Harassment 

Harassment is defined by unwanted behaviours that a person may have experienced in their daily life, which made the person feel offended, humiliated or intimidated. This was limited to the last 12 months.

These behaviours include:

  • crude or sexually explicit remarks made that the person found offensive, humiliating or intimidating while they were online (including social media, dating apps, discussion boards) or in any other situation e.g. in person, by text, phone call.
  • private sexual images or videos shared without permission. This included when the person was made aware of historic images being shared without their permission if they were shared within the last 12 months.
  • someone exposing themselves physically in a way that made the person feel uncomfortable.
  • being exposed to sexually explicit pictures or photos that made the person feel offended, humiliated or intimidated.
  • experiencing physical contact, for example, touching, hugging or being in close proximity that made the person feel offended, humiliated or intimidated.
  • inappropriate sexual advances that made the person feel offended, humiliated or intimidated.
  • any other sexually inappropriate behaviour that made the person feel offended, humiliated or intimidated.

Please note that as the survey ran from May to December 2022 that the 12-month period spans May 2021 to December 2022 depending on when the respondent completed the survey. This period did include varying levels of COVID-19 restrictions.

Further details on harassment (for example, what type of harassment experience, who did it, who was told, etc.) will be included in a future publication.

Classifications

Age

Respondents were asked their age directly. The survey was only asked of persons aged 18 or over. Age groups were classified as follows:

  • 18-24 years old
  • 25-34 years old
  • 35-44 years old
  • 45-54 years old
  • 55-64 years old
  • 65 years and over

Tables where the age classification are grouped together, for example, 55 and over, are provided in order to provide reliable estimates for that category.

Publication plan

The Sexual Violence Survey will be published as a series of publications over the course of several weeks. While the final titles for the publications are to be agreed, the publications will concentrate on the following areas:

  • Main Results, 19 April 2023 

    This will include information, by sex and age, on overall prevalence level for lifetime adulthood and childhood experiences of sexual violence, by type of sexual violence experience (contact, non-contact, etc.), as well as the overlap between child and adult sexual violence experiences. it will also include data on the relationship with the perpetrator and whether the person disclosed their experience of sexual violence to anyone (by adult and child experience).

  • Experiences of Sexual Violence in Adulthood, 09 May 2023

    This will include information on partner and non-partner experiences as well as the frequency of experiences, who was involved, the duration of the experience and if non-partner experiences, the location of the sexual violence experience. It also will present on the detailed socio-demographic sexual violence experience (sexual violence by education, sexual orientation, nationality, etc.)

  • Experiences of Sexual Violence in Childhood (end May/June 2023) 

    This will include information on contact and non-contact experiences, as well as the frequency of experiences, who was involved, the duration and location of the experience and the respondent’s view on the reason why it stopped. It also will present on the detailed socio-demographic sexual violence experience (sexual violence by education, sexual orientation, nationality, etc.)

  • Disclosure of Sexual Violence Experiences (no later than end June 2023) 

    This will include information broken down by adult and childhood experiences as well as who was told, how long it took to do so, the reasons why the person disclosed or not, whether the person disclosed to the gardai and/or if they used any services e.g. medical, counselling, etc.

  • Sexual Harassment and Stalking (no later than end July 2023) 

    This will include information on sexual harassment and stalking events that occurred in the last 12 months. It will look at the type of harassment experienced, the frequency of the experience, who did it, and whether it was disclosed.

  • Attitudes to sexual violence (no later than end July 2023) 

    This will include information based on responses from those who did not disclose any experiences of sexual harassment or sexual violence in the survey. It will contain information on the opinion of the respondents who were not victims of sexual violence on several so-called ‘rape myths’ surrounding sexual violence and the perception of the frequency of sexual violence in the community.

Comparability of the Sexual Violence Survey results with other surveys

The following should be considered when attempting to compare the results of this survey with the results of other countries/other surveys:

  • Differences in the definitions of variables over time and country - some sexual violence variables may be established on a definition based on the current country specific legal interpretation of criminal acts, while others may take a broader sense of the issue.
  • How the survey is framed may lead to a different prevalence level - for example, if it is collected as part of a crime survey, the respondents may not disclose some sexual violence experiences due to minimisation of the experience as a coping mechanism (the respondent may not categorise them as crimes). The CSO Sexual Violence Survey is a stand-alone survey.
  • How the data is collected can have an impact on the prevalence levels – the more confidential the data collection setting the more likely it is that a truer prevalence level will be achieved. How countries collect this information differs.

Attitudes to sexual violence

The public perception of the prevalence of sexual violence by those who have not experienced sexual violence was examined in this survey. The results showed high levels of societal awareness in Ireland around sexual violence. Almost nine in 10 women and about seven in 10 men reported that sexual violence against women is “common”. Fewer people reported that sexual violence against men is “common” – about five in 10 women and three in 10 men. Younger people were more likely to say that sexual violence against women or men is “common”. See Table 9.1.

Further details on the attitudes to sexual violence will be available in the last publication, available no later than the end of July.

Table 9.5 Public perception of experience of sexual violence by sex, 2022

Helplines

If you are affected by any of the issues raised in this publication, help is available at from the following organisations.

National helplines

  • National Sexual Violence Helpline (for men and women) - 1800 778 888 or rapecrisishelp.ie
  • National Domestic Violence Helpline (for women) - 1800 341 900
  • Male Advice Line (for men experiencing domestic abuse) - 1800 816 588

Local/Regional helplines

County Service Helpline Office Website
Carlow Carlow & South Leinster Rape Crisis Centre 1800 727 737 (059) 913 3344 www.carlowrapecrisis.ie
Cavan Sligo Rape Crisis Centre 1800 750 780 (071) 91 71188 www.srcc.ie
Clare Rape Crisis Midwest 1800 311 511 (065) 686 4665 www.rapecrisis.ie
Cork Sexual Violence Centre Cork 1800 496 496 (021) 450 5577 www.sexualviolence.ie
Donegal Donegal Sexual Abuse and Rape Crisis Centre 1800 44 88 44 (074) 912 8211 www.donegalrapecrisis.ie
Dublin Dublin Rape Crisis Centre 1800 77 88 88 (01) 661 4911 www.drcc.ie
Galway Galway Rape Crisis Centre 1800 355 355 (091) 564 800 www.galwayrcc.org
Kerry Kerry Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre 1800 633 333 (066) 712 3122 www.krsac.com
Kildare Carlow & South Leinster Rape Crisis Centre 1800 727 737 (059) 913 3344 www.carlowrapecrisis.ie
Kilkenny KASA/Kilkenny Rape Crisis Centre 1800 478 478 (056) 775 1555 www.kasa.ie
Laois Tullamore Sexual Abuse & Rape Crisis Counselling Service 1800 32 32 32 (057) 932 2500 www.tullamorerapecrisis.ie
Leitrim Sligo Rape Crisis Centre 1800 750 780 (071) 91 71188 www.srcc.ie
Limerick Rape Crisis Midwest 1800 311 511 (061) 311 511 www.rapecrisis.ie
Longford Athlone Midlands Rape Crisis Centre 1800 306 600 (090) 64 73862 www.amrcc.ie
Louth Rape Crisis and Sexual Abuse Centre (North East) 1800 21 21 22 (042) 933 9491 www.rcne.ie
Mayo Mayo Rape Crisis Centre 1800 234 900   www.mrcc.ie
Meath Dublin Rape Crisis Centre 1800 77 88 88 (01) 661 4911 www.drcc.ie
Monaghan Rape Crisis and Sexual Abuse Centre (North East) 1800 21 21 22 (042) 933 9491 www.rcne.ie
Offaly Tullamore Sexual Abuse & Rape Crisis Counselling Service 1800 32 32 32 (057) 932 2500 www.tullamorerapecrisis.ie
Roscommon Athlone Midlands Rape Crisis Centre 1800 306 600 (090) 64 73862 www.amrcc.ie
Sligo Sligo Rape Crisis Centre 1800 750 780 (071) 91 71189 www.srcc.ie
Tipperary Tipperary Rape Crisis and Counselling Centre 1800 340 340 (052) 6127676 www.trcc.ie
Waterford Waterford Rape & Sexual Abuse Centre 1800 296 296 (051) 873362 www.waterfordsac.ie
Westmeath Athlone Midlands Rape Crisis Centre 1800 306 600 (090) 64 73862 www.amrcc.ie
Wexford Wexford Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Services 1800 33 00 33 (053) 9122722 www.wexfordrapecrisis.com
Wicklow Dublin Rape Crisis Centre 1800 77 88 88 (01) 661 4911 www.drcc.ie

Appendix I - Questionnaire development overview

The outline of work conducted in defining the variables and testing the questionnaire is summarised in Figure 9.6 below.Figure 9.6

[Figure 9.6 Image Description]

Identifying data needs was addressed through using the data list provided as part of the Scoping Group Report on Sexual Violence data. Data experts and policy experts were identified and consulted on the definition of the data points provided, discussed prioritisation and core needs for policy/service development.

Following this a variable list was created and shared with the SVS Liaison Group and Steering Group where feedback, where appropriate, was incorporated.

Questions were designed to capture these variables using various reference points for crafting the questions, for example, Eurostat Gender Based Violence Survey, The Sexual Assault and Violence in Ireland report (SAVI), Scottish Crime and Justice Survey, Crime Survey of England and Wales, model UN questionnaire, etc.

A process of testing these questions was designed using best practice techniques. The two main methods were cognitive testing and focus groups. In summary:

  • Cognitive testing looked at testing:
    • the questions.
    • understanding of phrasing. 

Due to the sensitivity of the topic, the questions were split into sensitive and non-sensitive questions. The non-sensitive set of questions were asked of the volunteers from within the Office and the sensitive set of questions were posed to service providers volunteers who would be more familiar with the language and be better equipped to handle the potential distress caused by these sensitive questions. In all, there were ten interviews conducted.

  • Focus group testing looked at testing:
    • the concepts.
    • types of categories.

Due to the sensitivity of the topic, we have chosen to use service providers rather than volunteers from the Office for the discussion to facilitate the voice of victims through this format rather than a one-on-one format in the cognitive test. In all, two focus groups were conducted.

Once conducted a report was drawn up and learnings were incorporated into the questionnaire.

Evaluating the whole draft questionnaire was conducted both before the pilot was run (April to June 2021) and the pilot itself was a test of the questionnaire. An overview is provided below:

  • Pre-pilot:
    • External - Clinical psychologists and an expert in language and speech therapy were asked to look at the impact of the questionnaire and the phrasing used for potential victims and non-victims. Their observations were incorporated where possible into the questionnaire.
    • Internal – Experts in methodology and question design were identified within the CSO office. They were asked to go through the questionnaire with specific scenarios and report any pertinent observations.
    • Timing tests and questionnaire flow tests were completed on the questionnaire after it was converted into an electronic instrument.
  • Pilot:
    • A large-scale pilot was held in Q2 2021. Overall, the pilot validated the use of the questionnaire.

A concurrent focus group was held with those who experienced sexual violence during the pilot to get qualitative feedback. It identified some areas for additional work to be completed for the questionnaire, such as including ways to signal progression through the questionnaire and improving the format of some questions (particularly the disability and consent questions).

Appendix II - Minimising under-reporting in the SVS

The collection of data on sexual violence involved the use of sensitive questions. Sensitive questions are identified by Tourange and Lee as those which display some of the following characteristics:

  • Intrusive in nature.
  • Include a potential threat of disclosure – when answering a question may result in harm, for example, admitting to drug use or a crime.
  • Introduce social desirability – when a question is answered in a socially acceptable fashion rather than with the truth.

The impact of this is higher non-response rates, both in terms of unit and item non-response. Unit non-response occurs when a respondent refuses to participate in the survey; item non-response occurs when respondents do not answer particular questions in the survey.

This can lead to a biased measurement and is a particular issue for sexual violence measurement. The reasons for this apparent bias in the measurement of the prevalence of sexual violence in surveys are varied. Notwithstanding media reports of specific or alleged crimes involving sexual violence, the topic itself is generally not part of everyday conversation. It may provoke feelings of unease, nervousness and awkwardness in those who are not used to speaking openly about the topic or using that specific language. For those who have direct or indirect experience of harassment or sexual violence, feelings of shame, fear, emotional distress may be evoked. This can lead to either an unwillingness to participate or disclose any instances of sexual violence.

This fear in disclosing may also be exacerbated when there is:

  • A lack of trust in the statistical process.
  • If the survey respondent feels unsafe or insecure in the environment when the survey is being conducted.

Interestingly, the presence of an interviewer itself could have a positive or negative effect on disclosure rates. When the interviewer is well trained, experienced in the topic and the language used, they can be a key figure in ensuring the respondent is supported appropriately when disclosing painful experiences in an interview setting. However, the converse is true, when an interviewer, by asking the question to a respondent, can induce social desirability where the respondent gives an answer that would be more socially acceptable than the truth.

To limit under-reporting these were the aspects highlighted when designing the survey:

  • The choice of mode: The CSO Methodology Unit was tasked with producing a report examining the literature on mode options for a survey on sexual violence. They looked at the experience of other National Statistical Institutes as well as approaches used in academic papers. Their report showed that the mode can have a large impact on underreporting when surveying sensitive topics. They recommended a face-to-face survey with self-completion for the sensitive questions (for example, on an interviewer’s tablet). A web-based survey was noted as an alternative, but the potential risks around higher non-response rates were noted as an issue to manage.
    • The online mode for the SVS allowed the respondent to select the setting and timing that ensure that they can remain private when entering the answers. A self-completion mode like this also reduced the tendency for social desirability, an issue for surveys such as these. The use of self-completion where an interviewer provided the tablet upon which the survey can be completed also maintained this sense of privacy.
    • There was a risk that there could be a proportion of people who were unable to access or able to use computers to complete the survey. This was observed during the pilot. In order to support those who wished to access the survey but did not have the technical ability, a paper form was provided to these respondents. Like the online mode, it allowed the respondent to choose when and where they wanted to complete the survey.
  • The choice of survey organisation: The CSO is widely seen as an independent body with high levels of public trust.
  • Clarity for complex concepts: In order to encourage respondents to identify their personal experiences as being relevant for the survey, the concepts were broken down to constituent parts in as much as possible. For example, sexual violence for those over 17 was broken down by partner and non-partner experiences. Research has shown that respondents were less likely to disclose experiences with their partner in prevalence surveys. This may be due to recall issues or minimisation of the experiences. Hence, providing more a separate section on the sexual violence experience with a partner may prompt the respondent to recall these experiences.
  • Best practice in questionnaire design was employed when designing the questions:
    • The survey was designed to reduce any element of potential victim blaming language or phrasing. There were no direct questions on alcohol/drugs consumption which could be misconstrued.
    • The questions were sensitively phrased, and this was tested through focus group and cognitive testing with volunteers.
    • The topics in the survey flow were graded from less sensitive to more sensitive though the survey, for example, demographic to harassment to adult experience to child experiences.
    • The questions relating to experiences were also graded by level of contact, for example, questions on being touched without consent move to touching another without your consent and then move to penetration. 
    • The questions did not use terminology which could be misunderstood or is emotive, for example, anal sex is used rather than homosexual sex, sexual intercourse rather than rape. 
    • Significant testing of the questions/concepts completed prior to going in the field with relevant groups, for example, those who experienced sexual violence.
    • The language and phrasing used in the questionnaire was assessed by a speech and language expert to ensure it was as understandable as possible to aid those with lower literacy abilities.

Appendix III - Managing respondent distress

The topic of sexual violence is an emotive and sensitive one. Collecting clear and objective data on this topic is challenging due to the personal reaction to the topic and the difficulty in terms of categorising of experiences. For a survey on lifetime prevalence, recalling previous experiences can be deeply affecting. In addition, the nature of these experiences and the differing personal interpretations of consent may mean that people are not consciously aware that they are have had these types of experiences.

The design of the survey meant that the sensitive questions were solely completed through self-completion and facilitated by several modes for the respondent to complete. While this limited a dynamic assessment of respondent distress throughout the survey, there were many advantages to this, for example, removing an interviewer from the interview in the case of the online and paper modes, giving a respondent control as to when and where they want to complete the survey. These can, in themselves, reduce distress.

An overview of the ways in which managing respondent distress was addressed for the SVS is given below:

  • Questionnaire design stage
    • Significant work done in the early stages of the SVS project to reduce the data points identified in the Scoping Group report to a more reasonable and realistic set of data needs.
    • The questions were tested prior to piloting using those with experience of sexual violence and service providers.
    • The language and phrasing used was reviewed by clinical psychologists and a speech and language therapist prior to piloting.
    • Filtering through the survey ensured that people are not asked questions which were inappropriate, for example, questions requesting details of experiences were not asked to those who did not disclose relevant experiences.
    • Questions were designed to be quickly answered using yes/no answer categories where possible.
    • The attitude section was not asked of those who disclose any experiences of harassment, stalking, adult or childhood sexual violence due to the risk that it could have been distressing to finish the survey on this section after disclosing sensitive experiences.
    • The questionnaire went through an extensive pilot in 2021 with a sample size of almost 4,000. Findings from this pilot were incorporated into the main survey questionnaire.
  • Survey invite stage
    • Through the survey invite process, the survey was be referred to in a general sense (however important features such as the potentially distressing nature of questions, and ways to manage privacy were shared in the introductory material for the respondent).
  • At door
    • When the interviewer introduced the survey to the selected respondent, the use of the generic name for the survey aimed to reduce embarrassment, awkwardness or anger. This led to potentially better data quality as the respondent would not be perhaps primed to dismiss their involvement in the survey if they felt they have had no experiences of sexual violence.
  • During the survey
    • The introduction to the survey was clear that the topic of the survey is sexual violence. This introduction gave the rationale why it was not introduced as such prior to that point. The web survey introduction gave key advice – complete when respondent was on their own without being overseen, the survey could be ended at any time, there was no compulsion to answer every question.
    • The face-to-face interaction could be rescheduled before beginning the survey interview, to a date and time that suits the respondent, ensuring the respondent was in control. The interviewer was trained to encourage respondents to go online to complete the survey and to facilitate this where possible. Where this was not possible, the interviewer began by establishing that they were willing to conduct the survey then. The tablet was handed over to the respondent so that they are not asked the sensitive questions directly. The interviewer was trained to remove themselves while the respondent completed the survey themselves. However, the interviewer was trained to provide details of support services in a non-judgemental fashion. If the respondent did not want to complete the survey on the tablet but were willing to complete the survey, then the interviewer was trained to offer a paper-based survey to these respondents. 
    • The paper-based survey allowed the respondent to engage at a time and place that suited them. In addition, this survey instrument was shortened to the key prevalence questions. This was done to reduce the respondent burden, by removing the filtering and detailed questions and hence to reduce the respondent’s distress. Also contact details for support services were available at the beginning and the end of the survey form.
    • Information on support services was provided at the beginning and end of the survey. In addition, a localised list of services grouped by county was provided where the respondent could select a region from a drop-down list at the end of the survey and see a list of relevant services in that area.
    • The non-judgemental language used reduced the possibility of inadvertent victim blaming. This was evident in the description given for intimate partner relationships.
    • The sections in the survey and questions within those sections were graded from less sensitive experiences to more sensitive experiences.
  • After the survey
    • Information in support services was provided in relevant areas of the website, for example, the respondent facing pages, the “Taking part in a survey?” section of the website, the information page on the development of the survey. The “Taking part in a survey?” section was available while the survey was in the field. The information on the development of the survey remained available after the survey closes so support information would be available if a respondent wished to access it afterwards.
    • Any queries on the survey and its methodology, from respondents who had completed the survey and looking for further details, were directed to staff who worked on the project, and they had received training on how to direct someone to the services which can support them if required.