Further information on the advisors and research involved in ONS' study into Controlling Co-oercive Behaviour (CCB)

FOI Ref: ​FOI/2021/3052

You asked

1. With regards to the following FOI response, https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/advisorsandresearchinvolvedinonsmeasuresofccb, the reply hasn't stated what the source of the expectations was. E.g. were they invented by the evaluation panel or sourced from the Myhill 2015 study (or some other source but it seems no other reference is used). Please could this be clarified?
2. Would you also please provide the Myhill paper so that the public can understand the technical basis for the expectations upon which the survey is being assessed?
3. Would you please confirm that there is no other technical source for the 'expectations' other than the single Myhill paper of 2015 (no international research etc?)
4. What measures have been undertaken to consider the impact of Mr Myhill's presence on the ONS Domestic Abuse Statistics Steering Group, which is evaluating the CSEW survey, considering his is the only technical paper against which the CSEW survey is being assessed.
5. Would you please detail the expectations: e.g. what was the expected prevalence rate per gender per category? What were the expected impacts per gender per category?
6. Please see Appendix Table 8 of the 'Developing a measure for controlling or coercive behaviour' release. Would you please provide an explanation as to why the total of the figures are in excess of 100% and the reason for the female total to be consistently above 300% whilst the male total is consistently less than 200%?

We said

Thank you for your request. Please see the following answers to your queries.

Question 1, 3 & 4

The hypotheses and research questions were evaluated following the trial based on agreed input from the range of experts on the DASSG. The hypotheses and research questions presented in the article were developed based on advice given by the expert members of the Domestic Abuse Statistics Steering Group (DASSG). We cannot provide a list of technical papers that each member of the discussion group based their advice off.

Question 2

The Myhill (2015) paper referenced was used in the research for this publication. Unfortunately, this paper is only accessible for those who are part of a research organisation or alternatively, members of the public can pay a fee to access the paper. The research paper requested is considered exempt under Section 21(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), as this is reasonably accessible via another route. This exemption applies even if that route would incur a charge for the information. Please see the following link, where you may purchase a copy of this paper: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1077801214568032.

Question 5

As outlined in the paper, the expectations were on direction of change, not of specific point estimates that we were expecting. There was no prior expectation of the conclusion of the split-sample trial.

Question 6

In reference to Appendix Table 8 of the 'Developing a measure for controlling or coercive behaviour' release, it is the columns of data that sum to 100% rather than the rows. So for example, the 25.9% figure in the first sub-table relating to fear that violence would be used, should be interpreted as: of those who were very much impacted, 25.9% were men (and 74.1% were women) and not that of men, 25.9% were very much impacted.

If you have any crime-related queries in the future, please email crimestatistics@ons.gov.uk and we will endeavour to help.