Table 4.
Meta-Analytic Results of Within-Group Sexual Threat–Related Bias Among Control Participants (k = 12 Outcomes).
| Study | n | g | 95% CI | p | FV | RP | VS | G | Age | P | Pub |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bush (1999) | 60 | .00 | [−0.51, 0.51] | 1.00 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 20.78 | 2 | 1 |
| Cassiday et al. (1992) | 12 | .00 | [−1.21, 1.21] | 1.00 | NA | NA | NA | 9 | 34.33 | 1 | 2 |
| Foa et al. (1991) | 16 | .00 | [−1.03, 1.03] | 1.00 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 28.69 | 1 | 2 |
| Freeman and Beck (2000) | 20 | .59 | [0.13, 1.05] | .01 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 14.60 | 1 | 2 |
| Garcia (2006) | 21 | .01 | [−0.40, 0.42] | .97 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 19.00 | 1 | 1 |
| Klewchuk et al. (2007) | 18 | .40 | [−0.06, 0.35] | .09 | NA | NA | NA | 9 | 40.8 | 1 | 2 |
| Lambourn-Kavcic (1998) | 13 | .11 | [−0.40, 0.62] | .67 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 29.00 | 1 | 1 |
| Martinson et al. (2013) | 35 | .25 | [−0.08, 0.58] | .13 | NA | NA | NA | 9 | 19.20 | 1 | 2 |
| McNally et al. (2000) | 12 | .01 | [−0.52, 0.53] | .98 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 36.5 | 1 | 2 |
| Patriquin et al. (2012) | 29 | .33 | [−0.04, 0.69] | .08 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 18.84 | 1 | 2 |
| Sawhney (2002) | 21 | .40 | [0.01, 0.87] | .05 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 35.29 | 1 | 1 |
| Waller and Ruddock (1995) | 26 | .02 | [−0.05, 0.87] | .92 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 24.20 | 1 | 2 |
Note. n = number of participants in subsample; g = Hedge’s g (effect size); CI = confidence interval; p = p value; FV = age first victimized; RP = relationship to perpetrator; VS = victimization severity; G = gender of sample; Age = mean age of sample; P = paradigm; Pub = publication type; NA = nonapplicable. Dashes indicate that moderator variable could not be computed.