Asking about specific behaviors rather than abuse yields truthful data

Evidence

The insight embedded in Straus’s approach — that you had to ask about specific behaviors, not about categories like “abuse” that subjects would deny — was methodologically foundational. It was the same insight that drove Felitti’s questionnaire design for the ACE Study: don’t ask “were you abused?” Ask “were you hit?” Ask “did an adult in your household do this specific thing to you?” The behavioral specificity was what made the data real. — , The Rod and the Child, 9768

Categorization

• XREF: Directly bridges to the Felitti/ACE portions of this same book series, naming the shared methodological insight. — connects to: Machines could learn human values by observing behavior instead of being programmed — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1086; Observing a creature’s behavior can prompt deeper inquiries. — Joanna Stern, I Am Not a Robot- My Year Using AI to…, 930; Drone targeting decisions rest on probabilistic inference from behavior rather than observed facts. — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 482 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Machines could learn human values by observing behavior instead of being programmed #corroborates (0.55) — Brian Christian, The Alignment Problem, 1086
• Drug courier profiles describe behaviors frequently shown by completely innocent people #expands (0.50) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 862
• Drone targeting decisions rest on probabilistic inference from behavior rather than observed facts. #corroborates (0.45) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 482
• Observing a creature’s behavior can prompt deeper inquiries. #corroborates (0.40) — Joanna Stern, I Am Not a Robot- My Year Using AI to…, 930
• Mass media research persists in behaviorism despite knowing media are not behavioral inputs #corroborates (0.40)