• ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hello, you seem to be referencing an often misquoted statistic. TL:DR; The 40% number is wrong and plain old bad science. In attempt to recreate the numbers, by the same researchers, they received a rate of 24%, but only while considering acts like shouting as violence. Further researchers found rates of 7%, 7.8%, 10%, and 13% with stricter definitions and better research methodology.

    The 40% claim is intentionally misleading and unequivocally inaccurate. Numerous studies over the years report domestic violence rates in police families as low as 7%, with the highest at 40% defining violence to include shouting or a loss of temper. The referenced study where the 40% claim originates is Neidig, P.H…, Russell, H.E. & Seng, A.F. (1992). Interspousal aggression in law enforcement families: A preliminary investigation. It states:

    Survey results revealed that approximately 40% of the participating officers reported marital conflicts involving physical aggression in the previous year.

    There are a number of flaws with the aforementioned study:

    The study includes as ‘violent incidents’ a one time push, shove, shout, loss of temper, or an incidents where a spouse acted out in anger. These do not meet the legal standard for domestic violence. This same study reports that the victims reported a 10% rate of physical domestic violence from their partner. The statement doesn’t indicate who the aggressor is; the officer or the spouse. The study is a survey and not an empirical scientific study. The “domestic violence” acts are not confirmed as actually being violent. The study occurred nearly 30 years ago. This study shows minority and female officers were more likely to commit the DV, and white males were least likely. Additional reference from a Congressional hearing on the study: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951003089863c

    An additional study conducted by the same researcher, which reported rates of 24%, suffer from additional flaws:

    The study is a survey and not an empirical scientific study. The study was not a random sample, and was isolated to high ranking officers at a police conference. This study also occurred nearly 30 years ago.

    More current research, including a larger empirical study with thousands of responses from 2009 notes, ‘Over 87 percent of officers reported never having engaged in physical domestic violence in their lifetime.’ Blumenstein, Lindsey, Domestic violence within law enforcement families: The link between traditional police subculture and domestic violence among police (2009). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/1862

    Yet another study “indicated that 10 percent of respondents (148 candidates) admitted to having ever slapped, punched, or otherwise injured a spouse or romantic partner, with 7.2 percent (110 candidates) stating that this had happened once, and 2.1 percent (33 candidates) indicating that this had happened two or three times. Repeated abuse (four or more occurrences) was reported by only five respondents (0.3 percent).” A.H. Ryan JR, Department of Defense, Polygraph Institute “The Prevalence of Domestic Violence in Police Families.” http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/virtual_disk_library/index.cgi/4951188/FID707/Root/New/030PG297.PDF

    Another: In a 1999 study, 7% of Baltimore City police officers admitted to ‘getting physical’ (pushing, shoving, grabbing and/or hitting) with a partner. A 2000 study of seven law enforcement agencies in the Southeast and Midwest United States found 10% of officers reporting that they had slapped, punched, or otherwise injured their partners. L. Goodmark, 2016, BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW “Hands up at Home: Militarized Masculinity and Police Officers Who Commit Intimate Partner Abuse “. https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2519&context=fac_pubs

    • kungen@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      TL;DR: only ~10% of police are confirmed assailants of domestic abuse!

      • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Now go look up the incidence of domestic violence in the general population, and see if you still feel so smug in saying that, lol.

    • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I’m gonna be that person right now, but i really don’t care if it’s a misleading or misquoted stat. If they get to throw around 13/50 or that trans suicide number without any care to the actual reasons I’m gonna throw around 40% self report to domestic abuse. Just like you can’t stop them, you can’t stop me. It’d be different if I had a platform of some kind, but I don’t. If someone finds out misrepresented something oh well, they’ll fine the correct info eventually and by that point they may have been swayed to our side by doing further digging. Go ahead and down vote internet numbers mean nothing to me.

      BTW did you know that 40% of cops abuse their spouse?

      • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        i really don’t care if it’s a misleading or misquoted stat.

        I’m frankly not surprised. Decent, honest people do, though, hence my effort to reveal that it is, in fact, a bogus stat, so that said people will know to disregard both it, and those like you, who continue to spread it in the name of their narrative despite knowing it’s bogus.

        People who care more about maintaining and propagating their biases/prejudices than about being honest and truthful, are abhorrent scum, and don’t belong in civilized society.

        • Alkali@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          The main problem though is this falls into the paradox of tolerance. Essentially, one group has been found to manipulate stats. However, the focus is on the other group’s manipulation rather than accuracy across the board. This ends up working as a form of oppression through bias enforcement of the social contract. Not saying you are going that, just pointing out a possible bases for the other person’s comments.

          • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            The main problem though is this falls into the paradox of tolerance.

            lmao, no it fucking doesn’t. If you want to make an assertion, any assertion, and back it up with evidence, that evidence should be, well, not bullshit.

            That’s all there is to it.

            And if your assertion is actually correct, but X amount of attention is taken away from it because you’re spreading bullshit in support of it, that’s your own damn fault. If you’re right, you don’t have to lie to prove it.

      • kaffiene@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Lying to support your position is how people lose trust in arguments. I’m used to seeing this kind of BS from the RW but it’s disappointing to see it from the left. We need to be better than this or discussion becomes completely useless

        • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          There are few things more frustrating, politics-wise, than seeing someone who you presumably fundamentally agree with on issue X, fuck everything up by exaggerating or fabricating evidence.

          It’s better to get called out by someone who isn’t interested in doing anything but correcting them. Could easily be fuel to completely reject the premise if it was someone else.

        • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          If people were convinced by facts and logic we wouldn’t have had trump as president and the ADF wouldn’t have any power in Germany. Snappy soundbites are necessary. Why do you think you heard 13/50 everywhere? Because it’s easy to remember and it sounds good. Same thing with 41%. You’ll be hard pressed to find someone that’s willing to do a whole bunch of reading to understand why ACAB unless they are already predisposed to believe you. 40% is a potential gateway in, and when they are along that path and see all the problems with cops, it won’t really matter when they find out that the 40% wasn’t true.

          So go ahead, be disappointed, go ahead downvote, or whatever. But if you think winning only involves playing fair and honest you have another thing coming and it’s very far right from what you want.

          • kaffiene@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I don’t think that all people are convinced by facts. I do think that eventually those who CAN be swayed are swayed by honesty.