Colombia - VACS Cognitive Lab Report

Attachment O: Colombia 2017 VACS Questionnaire Cognitive Interview Report

Building Appropriate Questions
on Violence for the Violence
Against Children Surveys (VACS)
in Four Regions of Colombia
SUMMARY REPORT

Khudejha Asghar, Amy Ritterbusch, Adriana Marquina, Sebastian Daniel
Leon Giraldo, Fabio Idrobo, Arturo Harker Roa, and Lindsay Stark
COLUMBIA GROUP FOR CHILDREN IN ADVERSITY, LLC | UNIVERSIDAD DE LOS ANDES
0

Acknowledgements
This study was funded by the Together for Girls (TfG) consortium, and completed in
consultation with TfG and CDC colleagues.
The authors would like to thank the 98 participants who lent us their time and insights; the
community leaders in Bogotá, Barranquilla, Juanchaco, and Quibdó, whose assistance was
critical to gaining perspectives from a diverse group of participants; and our colleagues at TfG
and CDC for their feedback in the conceptualization and review of this study.

1

Contents
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... 1
Abbreviations and Acronyms ......................................................................................................... 0
Conducting a Cognitive Lab: Summary of the Process .................................................................. 1
Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 2
Study sites ................................................................................................................................... 2
Sampling, eligibility, and participant recruitment ...................................................................... 3
Survey instruments...................................................................................................................... 3
Analysis....................................................................................................................................... 4
Results ............................................................................................................................................. 4
Question-by-question: findings and suggestions ........................................................................ 5
Demographics ......................................................................................................................... 5
Gender attitudes ...................................................................................................................... 6
Physical Discipline.................................................................................................................. 7
Immigration........................................................................................................................... 11
Community Violence ............................................................................................................ 12
Sexual Behavior .................................................................................................................... 13
Sexual Violence/Exploitation ............................................................................................... 15
Physical Violence Perpetration ............................................................................................. 16
Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence............................................................................. 18
Arms/Weapons ...................................................................................................................... 19
Cyberbullying ....................................................................................................................... 20
Considerations and Recommendations ......................................................................................... 23
Addressing fears related to disclosure ...................................................................................... 24
Institutional considerations, looking forward ........................................................................... 26
Inclusion of LGBTQ participants ............................................................................................. 29
Challenges in Sampling ........................................................................................................ 29
Protocol recommendations to promote respect for gender identity ...................................... 29
Spanish as a second language/Working with indigenous communities.................................... 31
Challenges in Sampling ........................................................................................................ 31
Challenges in obtaining consent and confidentiality ............................................................ 31
Safety .................................................................................................................................... 33
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 34
0

References ..................................................................................................................................... 35
Tables ............................................................................................................................................ 36
Table 2. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Demographic Questions ........................ 36
Table 3. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Gender Attitudes Questions .................. 37
Table 4. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Physical Discipline Questions ............... 41
Table 5. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Immigration Questions .......................... 53
Table 6. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Community Violence Questions ........... 58
Table 7. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Sexual Behavior Questions ................... 59
Table 8. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Sexual Violence/Exploitation Questions
................................................................................................................................................... 61
Table 9. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Physical Violence Perpetration Questions
................................................................................................................................................... 66
Table 10. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence
Questions................................................................................................................................... 71
Table 11. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Arms/Weapons Questions ................... 73
Appendix A. Codebook for Analysis ............................................................................................ 78
Appendix B. Resources on Violence against Children in Colombia ............................................ 84
Appendix C. Dynamics of a study in the National System of Studies and Population Health
Surveys .......................................................................................................................................... 85
Appendix D. Flowchart of study management and population surveys performed by the MSPS 86
Appendix E. Institutions: Subcommittee on Information Systems of Gender-Based Violence ... 87

1

Abbreviations and Acronyms
CDC
ICBF
LGBTQ
SIEDCO
TfG
VAC
VACS

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar (National Family Welfare Institute)
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer
Sistema de Información Estadístico Delincuencial, Contravencional y Operativo
Together for Girls
Violence Against Children
Violence Against Children Surveys

0

Conducting a Cognitive Lab: Summary of the Process
The Cognitive Lab was conducted with 98 youth ages 13-24 across four departments of
Colombia, over a period of three weeks. These four departments captured both urban and rural
populations, and included marginalized populations such as indigenous, LGBTQ, and AfroColombians. The study protocol followed the VACS protocol of sex-stratified sampling, when
possible, to reduce risk of harm to participants. The process of conducting the Cognitive Lab
demonstrated the importance of collaboration with community leaders in obtaining the trust of
respondents, especially when working with more marginalized populations. Communications
regarding the study also highlighted the somewhat delicate nature of maintaining contact and
communication with government representatives, in order to obtain support and permission
through official channels.
The Cognitive Lab revealed numerous areas of improvement for the VACS questions. Many
suggestions seek to clarify unclear references in the questions that may result in unintended
meanings. Notably, there were some questions that generated concerns from respondents about
confidentiality, interviewer perceptions of the respondent, and respondent distress. While
questions about violence would reasonably be expected to generate some level of distress, the
research revealed that questions about opinions may trigger distress among survivors of violence,
or be subject to social desirability bias among the populations interviewed. The Cognitive Lab
also presented some challenges, the most significant of which was the goal of obtaining rich
information on the questions of interest within the short data collection period. The interview
guide, which contained 64 primary questions and 2-4 probes per question, initially resulted in
interviews that took upwards of three hours to complete. To avoid compromising data quality
due to interviewer and participant fatigue, the interview guide was divided into two separate
tools. Each tool was tested with half of the population, resulting in a minimum of 12 respondents
per question for each age/sex strata, and in average interview length of about 1.5 hours.
Additionally, despite modifications to reduce the length of the interview, another significant
challenge to data collection was keeping younger participants engaged throughout the interview.
Youth ages 13-15, particularly males, frequently lost interest after 45-50 minutes; although youth
insisted that they wanted to complete the interview, their loss of interest was most visible
through provision of very short responses (‘yes’/’no’) to probing questions. Due to the length of
the VACS questionnaire, there is potential for youth to become disinterested if the interview
takes longer than one hour.
Working with marginalized populations also posed some barriers to completing the Cognitive
Lab that may have implications for the VACS survey. Indigenous participants had greater
difficulty understanding interview questions and terminology in Spanish, and their caregivers
frequently were not able to read the consent form. Completing interviews with LGBTQ
participants demonstrated that sex-stratified sampling ignores the potential for same-sex
partnerships and victimization. Including transgender individuals also revealed some ethical
dilemmas in respecting gender identity, while trying to maintain sex-stratified sampling. More
detailed information on working with these populations is included below.
Lastly, conducting the Cognitive Lab also illuminated some challenges in maintaining a flexible
interview schedule that could accommodate the needs of employed children and caregivers, due
1

to concerns about the safety of the research team. In both cities and rural areas, it was not
advised to travel in early morning or late evening hours; at the same time, caregivers frequently
left for work in the mornings and did not return until late evening.

Methodology
Study sites
The four proposed study sites, Bogotá, Barranquilla, Quibdó, and Juanchaco, were chosen in
consultation with database records of existing organizations working on issues of violence against
children, such as the ICBF, Sistema de Información Estadístico Delincuencial, Contravencional y
Operativo (SIEDCO), and Ministry of Social Protection. These four sites span four departments
(Valle, Chocó, Cundinamarca, & Atlántico), represent the geographic, cultural and ethnic diversity
of Colombia, and offer an opportunity to gauge how a national questionnaire may capture the
reality that forms of violence against children vary by region (McIlwaine & Moser 2001).
Bogota:
As the capital city, Bogotá provides a snapshot of an urban, networked area, where forms of
violence such as cyberbullying may be more prominent due to higher levels of internet access and
connectivity compared to more rural areas. According to a recent ICBF (Colombia’s National
Family Welfare Institute) report, Bogotá has the highest number of reported cases of child abuse
in Colombia. Bogota would provide an opportunity to ensure that survey tools properly document
forms of child abuse and fill gaps in national statistics.
Barranquilla:
Barranquilla, the capital of the Atlántico department, has a high incidence of multidimensional
poverty amongst children and adolescents. A previous mixed-method study found different forms
of violence exposure present in the city (García and Ritterbusch 2015).
Quidbo:
The city of Quibdo, on the Pacific coast, is home to a large indigenous population and receives
displaced people fleeing violence throughout the region. From an early age, indigenous girls in the
region are potential targets for violence by armed groups in the form of sexual violence, forced
sex work, or sex in exchange for “protection” (Springer, 2012).
Juancacho:
Juanchaco, a fishing and island community whose primary income sources are informal, houses a
primarily Afro-Colombian population, and has many similarities in terms of infrastructure and
access to services as other farming communities in rural Colombia. Youth in Juanchaco face an
intersectionality of vulnerabilities due to their socio-economic position, ethnic status, and access
to services. Additionally, children are especially vulnerable to exploitation in areas around the
coastal city Buenaventura, such as Juanchaco, as criminal entities have been known to use children
as look-outs, messengers, transporters of drugs and weapons, as well as for sexual favors and
prostitution.

2

Sampling, eligibility, and participant recruitment
A total of 98 participants age 13 – 24 were enrolled. Gender, language and age group informed
selection in each of the four study sites. Per site, 24 adolescents were recruited: 6 girls aged 1317, 6 girls aged 18-24, 6 boys aged 13-17, and 6 boys aged 18-24. In two sites, an extra male
participant was included.1
Researchers used maximum variation sampling for qualitative research (Glesne 2006, pg. 35),
stratifying target neighborhoods or communities by sex when possible. Maximum variation
sampling ensures recruitment of a diverse group of children in each study site. Sex stratification
guidelines, which have been used by VACS teams in other settings, were adapted for use in the
Colombian context as well. Sex stratification aims to reduce potential risks of harm associated
with participation, such as violence or other repercussions from perpetrators of violence.
Additionally, interviewing more than one person within the same household may present an
opportunity for perpetrators to learn or assume that victims living in the same household have
disclosed violence, which could lead to unintended harm such as further violence or other
repercussions for the victim. Thus, to reduce potential for unintended harm, researchers also
limited participation to one person per household. Researchers collaborated with local partners to
identify both in-school and out-of-school adolescents and young adults, and to include participants
from diverse socio-economic backgrounds in each site. In Bogotá and Barranquilla, where there
are active and public LGBTQ organizations, sensitive and discrete attempts were made to include
youth of different sexual orientations. In addition to collaboration with local partners, researchers
used door-to-door recruitment to select participants.
Prior to conducting interviews, researchers completed training on consent, cognitive interview
methodology, and confidentiality, and reviewed national laws and guidelines for the protection of
minors as per the National Institute of Family Welfare (ICBF) and other relevant governmental
agencies. At each site, participants identified through local partners were asked by research team
members to provide consent to participate. For youth under age 18, permission was first obtained
from primary caregivers, and then assent was obtained from youth. Researchers made attempts to
ensure that spaces used for interviews were confidential, including taking actions such as pausing
the interview or switching to general non-sensitive questions if local partners or other community
members entered the interview space.

Survey instruments
Researchers used a modified version of the ‘verbal probing’ cognitive interview technique to
conduct interviews. Cognitive interviewing is a technique for improving survey questions, and
asks the participant specific questions to gauge understanding of survey content. Verbal probing
is a type of cognitive interviewing that places the responsibility of obtaining information on the
interviewer, rather than the participant. Verbal probing interviews typically ask individuals to
There was one case in which the team felt that asking the participant’s biological sex may have been offensive.
Rather than cause unintended harm to the participant by not respecting his gender identity, the research team
recruited an additional participant who fulfilled the target age and sex for that site. Further details on respecting
gender identity are included in the Considerations and Recommendations section of the report. Additionally, in
another site, two team members in different locations interviewed an adolescent male of the same age range at the
same time. In order to obtain at least 6 interviews per age/sex strata per site, this additional participant’s interview
did not replace an interview in another site.
1

3

respond to the questions being tested, and also answer questions about how they understood the
questions themselves. However, given the sensitive nature of the questions and potential for
disclosure of violence to trigger procedures related to mandatory reporting laws, the research team
asked participants to respond to probes relating to each question, without answering the sensitive
questions, themselves. With this technique, the researchers used a combination of probes that are
pre-scripted to gauge comprehension, connotations of key terms, and whether developed answer
responses are appropriate to the question (Willis 1999).
Use of this technique in this context included development of probing questions to gauge
understanding, meaning, and applicability of quantitative questions developed by the funder, and
review of the Spanish translations provided by the funder. An initial round of translation revision
was completed by native Spanish speakers prior to field implementation, in collaboration with the
funder. Testing in the first site of demonstrated that completion of the cognitive interviews was
taking upwards of three hours, which presented challenges for retaining the engagement of
participants. The researchers and funder jointly determined that dividing the original interview
guide into two sections and testing each section with half of the population was the most feasible
solution to preserve both data quality and project timeline.

Analysis
Since the final VACS questionnaire will be quantitative, a primary goal of analysis is to identify
appropriate phrases and connotations for asking sensitive closed-ended questions on violence.
Analysis included documentation of commonly misunderstood questions; identification of key
terminology that is easily understandable by youth ages 13 – 24 of different genders, socioeconomic statuses, and ethnic groups across four departments; and compilation of considerations
and concerns for conducting the survey on a larger scale. After transcription and a first cycle of
descriptive coding in NVivo 11.0, analysis used a matrix-display approach to examine item
summaries and develop a coding scheme on problem types that is specific to the VACS instrument.
The item summaries were used to make recommendations about revision, retention, or removal of
individual items. This approach has precedent when using verbal probing techniques to gauge
interpretation of questions without soliciting responses on those items (Knafl et al. 2007). If
problems were identified by less than 10% of respondents, recommendations were made at the
research team’s discretion. The full codebook, which includes problem codes and definitions, is
available in Appendix A.

Results
Of 104 participants who were approached to participate in the study, four were ineligible, due to
lack of verbal Spanish language fluency (n = 3) and familial relationship to another participant
who had already completed the study (n = 1). Of the 100 eligible participants, 99 provided
consent, and 98 completed the study. The reason for non-completion by one participant was
illness.
Participants were divided fairly evenly across age and sex strata (Table 1). Additionally, nine
participants identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual across Bogotá and Barranquilla. Four of these

4

participants were under age 18, and five were age 18 – 24. Three participants age 18 – 24 were
transgender; the gender identity of two of these participants was male.
The educational and socio-economic status of participants was diverse across settings. Education
levels in Quibdó were fairly low, as a majority of the participants were recruited from informal
settlements located on the outskirts of the city. Four university students were interviewed in
Barranquilla (2 male, 2 female). In Bogotá, six male participants were recruited from a middleclass neighborhood, while other participants were recruited in partnership with a community
center that serves low-income youth. In Juanchaco, the sample included youth who were both in
school and out-of-school.
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics
N
(%)
Site
Barranquilla
25 (25.51)
Bogotá
24 (24.49)
Juanchaco
24 (24.49)
Quibdó
25 (25.51)
Gender: Female
Age 13-17
24
(50.0)
Age 18-24
24
(50.0)
Gender: Male
Age 13-17
25
(50.0)
Age 18-24
25
(50.0)
LGBTQ Status
Lesbian, gay, or
9
(9.2)
bisexual
Transgender
3
(3.1)

Question-by-question: findings and suggestions
Specific recommendations for individual questions tested during the study are included below.
The accompanying tables are included at the end of this report, starting on page 36.
Demographics
The transcripts revealed heterogeneity on perceptions of the temporary or more permanent nature
of the question on reasons for not attending school (F4.1 - What are the main reasons for you not
attending the school?). Responses provided by participants, as indicated in Table 2, demonstrated
that ‘no estar asistiendo la escuela’ could mean both missing school for a few days, and
dropping out of school completely. CDC representatives indicated that this question was meant
to capture school drop-out, rather than missing school on a more temporary basis. Thus, the
research team has recommended rephrasing to clarify that the question refers to dropping out of
school, changing the phrasing to “¿Cuales son las razones principales porque tu abandonaste los
estudios?” (“What are the main reasons that you abandoned [dropped out of] school?”).

5

Gender attitudes
Interviews with youth illuminated opportunities to improve phrasing of key words in this section,
as the connotation of some phrases did not match the intended meaning. For question F38A (Do
you believe: Men, not women, should decide when to have sex), while many participants
provided responses indicating that they understood phrases such as ‘relaciones sexuales’ (sex),
there was less clarity on the connotation of ‘decidir cuando’ (decide when) as a phrase that
implied power. Additionally, there was limited understanding that the question was specifically
asking if only men should have the power to initiate or refuse sex. Our suggested wording
changes place more emphasis on men as decision-makers in the question. The English translation
of the suggestion in Table 3 is, ‘only the man should decide when to have sex’.
Additionally, for question F38B (Do you believe: If someone insults a boy or man, he should
defend his reputation with force if he needs to), both the words ‘reputation’ and ‘force’ were
either not understood or misinterpreted. The word ‘reputation’ was difficult for respondents in
Quibdó in particular to describe or define. The phrase ‘buen nombre’ (good name) was
understood more easily, and respondents’ examples of ‘mala nombre o reputación’ (bad name or
reputation) indicated perceptions related to both appearance and actions: “Sí, todo, su forma de
vestir, de hablar, todo, vulgarmente” (‘yes, everything, his form of dressing, of speaking,
everything, vulgarly’). Examples of a good reputation included working to support the family,
and being known as a respectful and kind person, which were more reflective of one’s treatment
of others than misogyny.
In this question, the concept of ‘force’ was frequently equated to effort or mental strength, rather
than physical violence. In the example listed in Table 3, the respondent relates force to self-belief
or confidence, rather than to a visual display of aggression. Respondents’ suggestions for
rewording the question included “agresión física” (physical aggression) or “pelea” (fight), to
clarify the use of physical force in the question.
For question F38D (Do you believe: Women who carry condoms have sex with a lot of men),
while the interviews demonstrated some heterogeneity in the meaning of ‘carrying condoms’,
less than 10% of respondents suggested rephrasing this question. The most common suggestion
was to replace “cargar” with “llevar” (both words meaning ‘carry’), though this suggestion was
infrequent (n = 3, 5.2% of respondents). Generally, “carrying condoms” was understood to mean
that a girl had condoms in her purse, or was taking them with her as she moved about outside of
the home. Respondents also believed that participants as young as thirteen would be familiar
with the word condom:
“Yo diría que sí, porque ya a los 13, uno ya debe estar en octavo y pues… en un caso a
mí me tocó a los 12 que me hablaron sobre eso.” (Mujer, 17 años)
“I would say yes, because already at 13, one should already be in eighth [grade] and
then… in my case, I turned 12 when they told me about it.” (Female, 17 years)
Since “cargar” was understood by the vast majority of the population, and respondents believed
that younger adolescents were aware of terminology such as condoms, we have not suggested
rephrasing this question.
6

The interviews revealed respondents’ apprehension about responding to questions on Actitudes
de Género, which were related to a fear that others would believe that their opinions would
imply certain behaviors that may not be socially accepted. For example, a female respondent
indicated that other youth may worry that their response to questions such as F38A would lead
the interviewer to infer that they were themselves participating in sexual intercourse:
“Pero hay gente que sí se preocupa, la gente pensará que tengo una vida sexual muy
activa, que tengo sexo 3 veces al día, o cosas así, cuando simplemente es una simple
pregunta de qué opinas.” (Mujer, 19 años)
“But there are people who would worry, ‘these people will think I have a very active sex
life, that I have sex three times a day’, or things like this, when it is just a simple question
about your opinion.”(Female, 19 years)
The example listed in Table 3 for question F38C (Do you believe: There are times when a
woman deserves to be beaten) also illustrates that these questions might be sensitive for
survivors of violence, who may fear that the perpetrator will somehow find out if they respond to
the question. Respondents’ fears that attitudes may be associated with behaviors illuminate the
possibility that these questions will capture respondents’ perceptions of socially desirable
answers, rather than their personal attitudes. These fears also suggest that hypotheses on linkages
between attitudes and behavior are not limited to communities of academics and practitioners
working to prevent or change norms around violence.
In order to improve validity for this section, we recommend reordering questions to include less
sensitive questions first. Since questions about sexual activity generated a greater level of
discomfort, the suggested structure is as follows:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.

F38B: Si alguien insulta a un niño o hombre, él debe defender su reputación o imagen
usando fuerza fisica si es necesario.
F38C: Hay situaciones en que una mujer debe ser golpeada.
F38A: Solamente el hombre debe decidir cuando tener relacciones sexuales
F38D: Las mujeres que cargan condones tienen relaciones sexuales con muchos
hombres
F38E: Una mujer debe aguantar la violencia para mantener a su familia

The Considerations and Recommendations section of this report (page 23) includes some
recommended strategies to reduce respondents’ fear of responding to questions about behavior
that may be more stigmatized or considered inappropriate for their age, and of potential harm.
Physical Discipline
Generally, respondents understood the content of physical discipline questions, and only a few
questions were found to have unclear references or missing options. Probing on the language
used for 18-24 year-olds in the description for question PD1 (When you were growing up, did a
parent or adult caregiver ever punish you when you misbehaved by), for example, highlighted
7

that the translation of the phrase “when you were growing up” was frequently interpreted as
experiences prior to adolescence. A male respondent provided an interpretation of the meaning
of “cuando eras niño”:
Entrevistador: ¿Qué significa para usted “cuando eras niño”? ¿A qué edad uno es niño?
Respondente (Hombre, 21 años): De unos 5, 4.
Entrevistador: ¿A qué edad uno deja de ser niño?
Respondente: Por ahí 15, 16, en la cultura más temprano.
Entrevistador: Si quisiéramos llamar a una persona de 17 años niño, ¿O cómo podríamos
llamarla?
Respondente: Joven.
Interviewer: What does ‘when you were a child’ mean to you? At what age is one a child?
Respondent (Male, 21 years): 4 or 5
Interviewer: At what age does one stop being a child?
Respondent: Around 15, 16, in the earliest culture
Interviewer: If we wanted to call a person who is 17 years old a child, or how could we say
it?
Respondent: A young person
This example also provided a suggestion for rephrasing the question to include adolescents.
Respondents more frequently recommended using “adolescencia” (“adolescence”) than “joven”
to capture all children under age 18. This recommendation has been incorporated into the
analysis for both questions PD1 and PD4 (Table 4).
Respondents indicated that references were also unclear for questions PD1b, PD1c, PD1d, and
PD1k; PD1c and PD1k (each questions asking about specific forms of discipline experienced)
each caused confusion to over 20% of respondents. For PD1c (giving you a reminder or warning
not to do it again), the word “advertencia” (“warning”) was interpreted as a threat by some
respondents, and as advice or an explanation by others. The example in Table 4 illustrates what
could be either a warning or a threat, depending on how the mother referenced in the quote
would punish or discipline her child. Since the question in English implies the meaning of
“warning” is closer to a reminder than a threat, the word “diciendote” (“telling you”), has been
added to the question.
For PD1k (Taking away food or drink), some respondents suggested that the word “bebida”,
which is the literal translation for “drink,” could be misunderstood as an alcoholic beverage. The
association between the word “bebida” and alcohol was pronounced in Quibdó, and respondents
at this site revealed that it was common for young people below the legal drinking age to obtain
and consume alcoholic beverages. Respondents in other sites also agreed that “bebida” could
mean alcohol, though as indicated in Table 4, some believed that the inclusion of “food” in the
question implied a non-alcoholic beverage. Since the understanding of “bebida” may depend on
8

patterns of local consumption of alcohol by youth, which may vary across departments and
neighborhoods in Colombia, including examples of non-alcoholic drinks may help avoid
confusion.
While there were some unclear references associated with questions PD1b and PD1d, these were
not significant enough to justify changes. For example, for PD1b, rather than misunderstanding
the meaning of the punishment itself, some respondents believed that “explaining why” a
behavior is bad should not be considered a punishment (Table 4). For PD1d, some respondents
thought the connotation of the word “sacudiéndote” (shaking you) related more to objects than
people, as is illustrated in Table 4. Generally, respondents who did not understand
“sacudiendote” understood “zarandeándote”, and vice versa. Similarly, PD1j was very well
understood, and the few cases in which participants had trouble understanding the question were
related to their definition of punishment.
Interviews also indicated that youth could also experience physical discipline or punishment
from actors whom were not included in the original formulation of the VACS questions.
Interviews in Quibdó revealed that in some communities in Colombia, it may be considered
acceptable for teachers or other adults to punish students, and that at times caregivers may give
permission for other adults in the community to punish their children for misbehaving. Further,
while children might primarily interact with a teacher in smaller schools, interviews in
Barranquilla and Bogotá illustrated that there were other adults who work in larger school
buildings that might punish children, such as the headmaster or other administrative staff. Since
the VACS questions may want to know specifically about parents/caregivers and about teachers,
it might not be necessary to modify questions PD1 and PD2. However, if the purpose of question
PD2, for example, is to capture abuse from all adults in schools, then rephrasing this question to
include other adults who work in the school would also allow for disclosure of abuse from adults
such as headmasters or other administrative staff.
In addition to the example in Table 4 for question PD1m (other type of discipline or
punishment), respondents in three of the four sites referenced a punishment that may be more
common in rural areas:
Entrevistador: Entonces en tu opinión, ¿Que es un castigo?
Respondente (Hombre, 24 años): Un castigo es como cuando lo arrodillan a uno, o cuando
vas a salir y te dicen que no puedes, eso para mi es un castigo.
Entrevistador: ¿Que eso de “arrodillan”?
Respondente: Cuando lo ponen de rodillas y con una silla en la mano, le colocan unos
granos de maíz, y lo hacen arrodillar ahí.
Interviewer: Then in your opinion, what is a punishment?
Respondent (Male, 24 years): A punishment is like when they kneel him, or when you go
to leave and they tell you that you can’t, this for me is a punishment.
Interviewer: That they ‘kneel’?
Respondent: When they put him on his knees and with a chair in his hand, they put some
9

grains of corn [on the floor], and they make him kneel there [on the grains].
Considering the length of the VACS tool and feedback that this section of the survey felt long
and repetitive, we have not made an official recommendation to include additional types of
punishments into the tool. Even so, interview teams working in rural areas of the country should
be aware that “arrodillan” may be used as shorthand for kneeling on grains or seeds if
participants are asked about other forms of punishment.
Interviews with adolescents and youth demonstrated that the translation of the answer options for
question PD2 misattributed gradations of frequency. In English, the options are commonly used
in several scales: rarely, sometimes, most of the time, all of the time. However, these phrases do
not have direct translations into Spanish, and the respondents indicated that the translation for
‘rarely’ (“unas veces”) implied greater frequency than the translation for ‘sometimes’ (“pocas
veces”). “Pocas veces”, for example, was operationalized as once or twice, whereas “unas veces”
was considered to be three to four times. To avoid confusion, we have recommended rephrasing
‘rarely’ to ‘almost never’ (“casi nunca”), which provides a clearer distinction from ‘sometimes.’
Due to mandatory reporting laws in Colombia, researchers could not formally test the sequence
of ‘ever’ versus ‘last 30 days’ for questions on physical discipline. For this section, respondents
were instead asked for their preference on discussing questions related to punishment at one time
point (ever) prior to moving to a different time point (last 30 days), in comparison to discussing
one punishment at a time, and including both time points per punishment before asking about the
following punishment. Interviewers gave brief demonstrations of each potential option. Almost
70% of the respondents asked preferred to discuss one punishment at a time, rather than
reviewing all of the punishments that had ever happened prior to asking about the last 30 days.
Thus, for each form of punishment covered in the physical discipline section, we recommend
asking both the ‘ever’ and ‘last 30 days’ before asking about the following punishment.
Additionally, there were some indications that certain types of punishments may be easier to
remember than others. For example, one respondent believed that being slapped was not an
experience that would be easy to forget, while others thought that it may be hard to estimate the
frequency of being given a warning to not do something again:
Entrevistadora: ¿Cuál es el que más se acuerda y cuál es que menos se va acordar?
Respondente (Mujer, 17 años): El que menos se va acordar es la advertencia.
Interviewer: Which is the most remembers and which is less to be remember?
Respondent (Female, 17 years): Warning is the least one you will remember
Respondents believed that the validity of reporting would be greater for more severe
punishments, and punishments which occurred less frequently.
For questions PUN1-PUN4 (questions focused on attitudes towards the acceptability and
necessity of physical punishment for a child’s misbehaviour, by caregiver and by teachers),
interviews revealed that translations for the words “acceptable” and “necessary” conflated the
meanings of the two words. The translation of “acceptable” indicated an obligation to do
10

something, which did not reflect the intended meaning in English. Similarly, the translation for
“necessary” implied acceptability rather than obligation. Thus, the phrasing of these questions
have been amended to more accurately reflect the intended meaning.
Importantly, the most common issue voiced by respondents on this set of questions is concern
about anonymity and participants’ willingness to disclose information about experiences of
domestic violence and coercion from parents, especially if abuse may be ongoing at the time of
the interview. Respondents indicated that their peers may be ashamed of their past or afraid of
future retaliation. Respondents also believed that it may cause their peers psychological distress
to disclose information about abuse from parents. Concerns about disclosure were most
frequently cited for questions PD1e, PD1d, and PD1g, which all ask about forms of physical
punishment from caregivers. Similarly, for PD2 (the frequency with which experiences of
discipline occured) respondents were concerned that disclosure of physical punishment from
professors could result in retaliation from teachers or parents.
Since questions related to more severe punishments were particularly sensitive, we recommend
reorganizing this section of the survey so that these questions are asked after questions about less
severe punishments. One means of reorganization is as follows: PD1, PD1b, PD1c, PD1h, PD1j,
PD1k, PD1l, PD1a, PD1e, PD1f, PD1i, PD1g, PD1d, PD1m. Suggestions for assuaging fears
related to disclosure are addressed in the Considerations and Recommendations section of this
report (page 23).
Immigration
There were some issues with question phrasing and answer options identified in the section on
immigration. Some of the phrasing in Spanish was thought to be ambiguous, especially in that
the phrasing could conflate the meanings of questions about relocation within the county to
relocation outside of the country. For example, in question F15A (Have you received money or
goods from abroad in the last three years?), while ‘exterior’ is the literal meaning of the word
‘abroad,’ it does not capture the intended meaning of the English word. In fact, many
respondents thought the question referred to the exterior of their state, community, town or
barrio; this could include a big city within Colombia such as Medellin. When probing for
alternative wording, even the phrase ‘from outside the country’ created problems of unclear
reference. In order to best convey the meaning of ‘abroad’ as something coming from outside the
country, we propose amending the question to ‘have you received money or goods from another
country…’. This eliminates the issues with unclear reference, as well as the need to list possible
‘other countries’ from which someone might receive goods.
Additionally, for the answer options in questions H17H and H28D (What were the main reasons
for you moving from your home? And What were the main reasons you left?), the word
“forzado” (forced) was, at times, viewed as having too strong of a connotation, as youth may
have left their homes to escape violence in the family, but not have felt that someone forced them
to do so. We have not removed this word from the answer options. However, this answer option
may be ambiguous to some respondents, and if the intention of the answer option is to capture
adolescents who left to escape violence but were not explicitly asked to leave, there may be a
need to further clarify the answer option or remove the word ‘forzado’ from answer option C.

11

Respondents also felt that this section lacked answer options that were not directly related to
violence. For questions H17H and H28D, which ask about the main reasons for leaving home or
living abroad, respectively, respondents felt strongly that options should be added to reflect the
many who left for reasons other than violence such as ‘greater (non-economic) opportunities’,
such as education. Since education often leads to better economic opportunities, we propose
expanding answer option B (economic/work reasons) to include education. Other examples for
leaving one’s home or moving abroad included “para tener más libertad” (to have more freedom)
than one would have in their parents’ household, as well as “echan de la casa” (kicked out by
parents), or “para conocer otra parte” (to become familiar with another part of the country).
Respondents also discussed the presence of problems in the family that are not related to
violence, which illuminates limitations of the answer option “forzado por la violencia al interior
de mi familia” (forced by violence in my family). To make this answer option more inclusive, we
have amended it slightly to include language recommended by participants, with the caveat that
‘forzado’ has not been removed (as indicated above): ‘forzado por la violencia o maltrato dentro
de mi familia (intrafamiliar)’.
While the Colombian experience provides many examples of forced displacement, in the context
of questions regarding immigration, respondents frequently regarded displacement within the
country as a form of violence in the community, rather than a reason meriting own separate
answer option. We recommend adding an answer option to reflect a desire for more autonomy
(option f: Para tener más libertad, o independencia, de los padres o la familia), and discussion
within the interview team to determine whether being kicked out of the house by parents for
reasons not related to violence (such as parents wanting children to find work or be independent
adults) should be considered ‘forzado por otras circunstancias’, or would be better classified as
‘por otras razones’.
Additionally, the answer option ‘family reunification’ refers to the process by which families are
reunited. The crude translation of this phrase was incomprehensible to respondents and required
more information. Upon further probing, ‘reencuentro familiar’ was determined to be both
understandable and consistent with the process being described. We recommend the answer
options for questions H17H and H28D to be changed to reflect the findings of the interviews.
Lastly, a relatively small number of respondents indicated barriers to disclosure for this section.
Reordering the questions in this section to discuss relocation within the country before relocation
outside of the country may help build rapport and reduce confusion about questions that ask
about living outside the country. The research team proposes changing the order of these
questions to: H17H, H17G, H17F, H28E, H28A, H28B, H28C, H28D. This is the order in which
questions are presented in Table 5.
Community Violence
Findings for questions F41A and F41.B (What are the main reasons for you not feeling safe at all
in your community/neighborhood? And To what extent do you think your neighbourhood/
community is affected by violence?) revealed a high level of comprehension among respondents,
but posed concerns about disclosure. For question F41A, many respondents were of the opinion
that some answer options were more likely to yield honest responses than others, leaving some to
suggest that while respondents would disclose that they did not feel safe, they would be elusive
12

regarding the exact reason. Respondents were wary of disclosing violence in the home due to
fears about interviewers reporting abuse to national social services organizations:
“Qué tal si cuando vengan a hacer la Encuesta Nacional, ofrecen esos servicios, no te van
a obligar, que oye, si tú me cuentas algo, te voy a reportar al Bienestar y tal cosa…”
(Mujer, 18 años)
“What if when you all come to do the National Survey, you all offer those services, they
won’t obligate you, listen, if you tell me something, I am going to report you to the
[ICBF] and something like that…” (Female, 18 years)
As the example in Table 6 suggests, this is especially pertinent for instances in which a
respondent personally experienced violence. This example also highlights that asking about
violence in the home triggers fears about disclosure. Since question F41.B also asks about the
presence of violence in the community, but asks for less details from the participant, this
question may be more likely to yield an honest response than question F41A. Thus, we
recommend including question F41.B in the VACS tool, rather than F41A.
Additionally, since scale answer options asking about a range from none/a little to a lot have
posed translation challenges in other sections (see section on Physical Discipline), we have
recommended changing the translation of the answer options to more clearly differentiate
between gradations such as “some”, “not too much”, and “not at all”. These changes are listed in
Table RR, under question F41.B.
Sexual Behavior
When asked, respondents overwhelmingly agreed that the questions regarding sexual behavior
were the most difficult. This is also reflected in the number respondents who felt that this
question would lead peers ages 13-24 to worry about disclosure due to concerns over
confidentiality, community pressures, or social appropriateness. Fifty-four percent of
respondents described some form of preocupacciones for question F409, compared to 43 percent
for question F410—these were both much higher than other questions examined through
cognitive interviewing, including the weapons/arms questions.
For question 409 (How would you describe the first time you had sex? Would you say that you
wanted to have sex, you did not want to have sex but it happened anyway, or were you forced to
have sex?), respondents were concerned about someone else finding out their response to the
question for fear that “la podrían castigar o algo” (“she would be punished or something”). As
with community violence, respondents believed that some would not answer this question
honestly especially if they had experienced sexual violence. Respondents insisted that
participants “no van a querer decir sus cosas intimas” (“do not want to talk about their intimate
things”), and if they had been the victim of sexual assault as their first sexual experience “le
daría más que todo pena o vergüenza de que le pasó eso” (“it would give more than anything
pain or shame that this happened”).
Regarding question F410 (The first time you had sex, were you verbally persuaded, pressured,
tricked, threatened, too drunk to say no, or physically forced?), the general consensus was “se
13

entiende. Pero hay muchas preguntas en la misma pregunta” (“I understand. But, there are a lot
of questions in the same question”). The options ‘verbally persuaded’ and ‘tricked’ were largely
viewed as the same, as they implied that one person had lied in some way, or coerced.
Respondents did not believe that these options were mutually exclusive in reality—their peers
could have experienced multiple forms of pressure or coercion during their first sexual
encounter.
In addition to feeling that there were too many options, the option “too drunk to say no” was said
to be vulgar:
“A mi me da pena decirlo, dicen unos que hacen corrompición, pichan como dicen los
hombres, se oye súper horrible, a mi no me gusta” (Mujer, 18 años)
“For me I am ashamed to say this, those who corrupt others would say it, [slang for
‘having sex’] how the boys say, it sounds super horrible, I don’t like it.” (Female, 18
years)
Additionally, respondents may not be honest about being too drunk to consent in particular, as
they may perceive negative judgment from interviewers:
“Demasiado incómoda, uno como mujer dice qué vergüenza, no la responderían y si la
responden, responden con mentiras” (Mujer, 18 años)
“Too uncomfortable, one as a women says “shame on you”, they won’t respond to you
and if they respond, they’ll respond with lies” (Female, 18 years)
However, rather than asserting that this option should not be asked, respondents offered
suggestions to soften the tone of this answer option:
“De bebidas alcohólicas o sustancias psicoactivas, yo diría que sería mejor, porque
demasiado borracha para decir no, eso de pronto lo hace ver como débil.” (Hombre, 21
años)
Of alcoholic drinks or psychoactive substances, I would say would be better, because too
drunk to say no, that suddenly makes you look like weak.” (Male, 21 years)
Since respondents had a hard time following the question due to all of the options included, we
recommend reducing the number of answer options and rephrasing the option on alcohol use. As
seen in Table 7, we suggest combining option 3 with option 1. We also recommend rephrasing
the option about being under the influence of alcohol: “tomaste bebidas alcohólicas o otras
sustancias, y no podías decir no” (“You had consumed alcoholic drinks or other substances, and
could not say no”). Lastly, we recommend making this question a ‘check all that apply’, to
capture the multiple forms of coercion that participants may have experienced during their first
sexual encounter.

14

To combat the high level of apprehension discussing the topic of sexual activity, we recommend
the continued use of the disclaimer preceding this section. We also recommend that data
collectors be adequate trained, and that data collectors and respondents be matched by sex, i.e.
female data collectors to interview girls and female young people. Additional strategies for
improving disclosure of sensitive questions are included in the Considerations and
Recommendations section (page 23).
Sexual Violence/Exploitation
Overall, analysis of questions related to sexual violence and exploitation confirmed their
appropriate use of language and understandability. Respondents overwhelmingly referred to
these questions as “ententible” (understandable). However, while the original question was
understandable, in practice the language seemed too formal, resulting in respondents feeling that
the questions were an interrogation rather than an interview. Since questions related to sexual
attitudes and behavior have elicited worries about disclosure throughout the VACS tool, we
recommend replacing formal language in question F501 with more informal language that is
easy to comprehend (Table 8).
Furthermore, changes to answer options respond to unclear references and incorporate
suggestions provided by respondents. Since “seguridad” (security) came up repeatedly as an
unprompted synonym for protection, we recommend using it in conjunction with protection in
the answer options for question F501. For question F502, respondents’ lexicons did not include
the words “proxeneta” or “chulo”, which were translations provided for “pimp.” While
“proxenenta” is the technical term for “pimp” in Spanish, there was near-universal agreement
that youth in Colombia would not have exposure to this word. “Chulo,” was equally
unidentifiable, and respondents informed researchers that this word could be confused with
“cholo,” a sometimes derogatory slur that refers to indigenous people in Colombia. Probing
elicited two words that would more accurately describe “pimp” for this population: “patron” and
“jefe” (boss).
Entrevistadora: ¿pero el proxeneta no?
Respondente (Mujer, 18 años): No creo, porque o sea yo sí sé que…. Y si yo tengo mi
patrón yo trabajo para X persona, y me acuesto y le tengo que dar el dinero, pero no sé,
no entendí, pero por lo menos no entendí cuando usted me dijo así.
Interviewer: But the pimp, no?
Respondent (Female, 18 years): I don’t think so, because or that is I do know that… if I
have my boss I work for X person, and I sleep with [someone] and I have to give him the
money, but I don’t know, I didn’t understand, but at least I didn’t understand when you
said it like so.
The pimp, or “patron/jefe”, was also presented as a missing answer option for question F503,
which asks who the respondent had sex with because that person provided things that are
important, helped with expenses or gave the respondent money. This indicated that young people
engaged in transactional sex may also be exchanging sex with their pimp. Furthermore, a few
respondents (~10%) believed that 'male/female stranger' and 'male/female I met on the internet'
both implied strangers. A small number of respondents suggested adding father to the list. While
15

we have not suggested changes to the table for options relating to strangers and people met via
the internet, there is potential to revise 'stranger' to ensure that it is distinct from 'stranger I met
on the internet', or to remove 'stranger I met on the internet' if the online aspect of this option is
not particularly important. We do recommend adding “patron/jefe” as an option to the list of
answers for question F503. In order to reduce confusion with answer option D (“empleador/
jefe”, or employer/boss), we have removed “jefe” from this option.
It is interesting to note that while these questions did elicit reservations about disclosure, there
were fewer concerns about discussing transactional sex in communities that relied on tourism as
a staple of their economy, such as the coastal towns of Juanchaco and Ladrilleros.
“Aquí vienen partes de allá de donde ustedes, partes lejas, parte… Y vienen aquí y
buscan… Y sí, buscan más que todo los negritos. Los buscan y les pagan, les pagan hasta,
digamos ‘quiero yo decir esa plata de estados unidos como es rara, son dólares… (Risas)
Y bueno, y sí, pasa.” (Mujer, 22 años)
“Here they come from parts from there where you are from, far away places… and they
come here and look… and they look for more than anything the dark ones. They look for
them and they pay them, they pay them even that money from the United States how
strange, the dollars… and well, and yes, it happens.” (Female, 22 years)
There was heterogeneity in respondents’ perception of willingness to disclose participation in
transactional sex. When asked if they would disclose this information to an interviewer, female
respondents believed that other female youth would disclose to a female interviewer. It is unclear
if males would likewise disclose to a male interviewer, but women and at least some men
claimed that tourists did not discriminate based on gender and men sleeping with men in
exchange for money did occur. As shown in the examples provided for question F504 in Table 8
(How old were you the first time you entered into a relationship because someone provided you
things that are important, helped you with expenses or gave you money?), some responses about
the conditions in which someone may disclose engagement in transactional sex demonstrated
both concerns about perceptions of the interviewer and beliefs that disclosure was linked to
“Madonna/whore” stereotypes. The example in Table 8 illustrates that adherence to stereotypical
beliefs may have led some respondents to think that young women who had chaste reputations in
the community would be less likely to disclose than young women who had reputations for
engaging in sexual behavior. Other responses indicated, as in other sections of the survey, that
perceptions of confidentiality of information disclosed during the interview would impact
disclosure. Suggestions for addressing disclosure of sensitive information is included in the
Considerations and Recommendations section on page 23.
Physical Violence Perpetration
There was only minor confusion on phrasing for questions on physical violence perpetration. For
question F200A, there were many examples of misunderstanding the use of the word ‘lanzado’,
with some understanding this as “…estoy jugando con esa botella, entonces por ejemplo, alguien
tirela hacia arriba” (“I am playing with a bottle and then for example someone throws it towards
above”) or playing with an object. The connotation of the word ‘lanzado’ did not readily match
the concept of throwing an object at someone. Prompts for synonyms that conveyed the intended
16

meaning of the question led us to a more appropriate word, ‘tirado’. This change has been
recommended in Table 9.
Concerns about disclosure were apparent for this section. Only a small number of respondents
believed that someone would answer question F200B (punching, kicking, whipping or beating a
current or previous boyfriend, romantic partner/husband) honestly. The conditions under which
someone might respond honestly was usually described as an individual who was openly
chauvinist:
“Porque hay hombres que son muy machistas, ellos dicen que todo, que ellos son los
mejores.” (Mujer, 17 años)
“Because there are men that are very chauvinistic, they say everything, that they are
better.” (Female, 17 years)
Interviews also revealed the belief that both male and female adolescents and youth would
respond in the affirmative to being perpetrators of physical violence against a partner if they felt
justified:
“Porque ellos justifican a veces muchos sus actos y pensarían a veces que dirían, se lo
merecía.” (Mujer, 17 años)
“Because they sometimes justify their actions a lot and would sometimes say, they [the
victim] deserved it.” (Female, 17 years)
As the severity of the physical violence increased, the level of perceived apprehension and fear
that would meet these questions was also amplified. While F200A and F200B were relatively
easy to answer, F200C and F200D were considered “ya son cosas más grandes...” (“those are
much greater things…”). Respondents mentioned vergüenza (shame), pena (embarrassment), and
fear of being reported to the police or their perpetration becoming public knowledge.
In questions F200.A and F426, the majority of respondents thought that it would be easier to
describe how many times a partner had been drinking (F426) than their own drinking habits
(F200.A). Other respondents conceded that participants might use drinking as a means of
justifying their previous answer to F200. Similarly, respondents felt that it would be easier to
answer question F201, regarding physical perpetration committed towards a non-intimate
partner, than F200, which asked about perpetration against an intimate partner.
These findings indicate the presence of social norms that disapprove of violence within
communities included in this study, and barriers to discussing intimate partner violence
specifically. In this context, in addition to non-disclosure due to shame or embarrassment,
respondents may provide answers that they believe to be socially desirable or to elicit positive
assessment of their character from interviewers. Suggestions on improving disclosure can be
found in the Considerations and Recommendations section of this report (page 23).

17

Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence
Questions tested in this section focused on the identity of perpetrators of intimate partner
violence against the respondent. Questions F104.1 and F104.2 were developed on the same
content, and tested with the intention of gauging which one might be more preferable. In
consultation with the CDC, the content for question F104.2 was changed to refer to gangs
(“pandillas”) and illegally armed groups (“grupo armado illegal”) prior to testing, since the terms
“homeboy” and “clicka” – developed for the Central American context – did not have relevance
in the Colombian context. However, interviews revealed distinctions between community
violence and involvement in an illegally armed group in Quibdó: community violence was
interpreted as violence between individuals that lived within the same neighborhood, and armed
groups were perceived as actors who were not part of respondents’ communities. In Juanchaco,
on the other hand, community violence encompassed both actions by armed groups, and disputes
between neighbors:
“O sea que de pronto hubo un atropello entre la sociedad y la comunidad, de pronto vio
reflejado en otra pareja, puede ser muchas cosas.” (Hombre, 18 años)
“Or it could be that there was an altercation between the society and the community, or
seen reflected in the other partner, it could be a lot of things.” (Male, 18 years)
There were also cases in which respondents included intimate partner violence as violence in the
community. In Quibdó, the family and the community were not always viewed as distinct
entities. Retaining language on the armed groups would help clarify that this question is not
asking about whether the perpetrator is only involved in intimate partner violence, or violence
within the family. Since the definition of community violence was broad and non-uniform across
settings, we recommend excluding question 104.1 and retaining question F104.2.
This section also revealed concerns about disclosure. In addition to concerns found in other
sections, such as negative repercussions to the respondent, the interviews demonstrated concerns
that participants may have about consequences for their partners (Table 10). Although there were
concerns about responding to questions on organized violence, respondents did not think that
these questions should be excluded from the survey:
Entrevistadora: ¿Entonces tú piensas que es peligroso hacer este tipo de preguntas en el
Chocó?
Respondente (Mujer, 17 años): No, porque es para el bien, el bienestar de las personas.
Interviewer: Then do you think that it is dangerous to ask these types of questions in
Chocó?
Respondent (Female, 17 years): No, because it is for the good, the well-being of the
people.
These findings illustrate that sensitive questions can be asked, but that researchers should ensure
a safe and confidential environment to facilitate disclosure. Recommendations for improving
disclosure of questions such as this are included in the Considerations and Recommendations
section of this report (page 23).

18

Questions F105 and F106 were easy to understand and did not elicit large worries about
disclosure. Respondents also affirmed that other youth would have sufficient information with
which to recall information about differences in age, which were central to these questions. Thus,
we do not recommend changes for F105 and F106.
Notably, the majority of responses regarding intimate-partner violence, prompted or unprompted,
assumed male aggression towards a female victim. These assumptions dictated how the
participant perceived the subject of the question or the assumed guilt of that person. A female
participant remarked, “él dice…yo le he pegado una cachetada a mi novia” (“he says [to himself]
… I have slapped my girlfriend”), and that he would be worried about responding. This assumed
directionality of violence may reflective of larger trends in victimization, but, as indicated during
interviews, may also pose issues for the perceptions of male youth in the applicability of these
questions to their own experiences. Thus, male participants’ disclosure of victimization of either
intimate-partner violence or sexual and gender based violence may be related to assumptions
made about their own potential victimization during the interview. Male youth might be more
likely to provide responses that reflect social desirability when discussing victimization:
Entrevistador: Y crees que un joven de tu edad estarían preocupados de lo que nosotros
pensamos de ellos cuando van a responder?
Respondente (Mujer, 20 años): Ahí sí se preocuparía más el hombre.
Interviewer: and do you think a young person your age would be worried about what we
think of them when they’re going to respond?
Respondent (Female, 20 years): Yes there the man would be more concerned.
For this and other reasons listed in the report, we recommend gender neutral wording whenever
possible.
Arms/Weapons
In terms of the broader context, laws in Colombia restrict civilian possession of firearms and
bladed weapons, especially in urban environments. Given this context, it is not surprising that
thematically, the primary issue with questions on arms and weapons is non-disclosure. Common
reasons for non-disclosure of weapons carrying included fear of judgment or negative
perceptions by the interviewer, fear that interviews may inform local authorities, and fear of
retaliation from violent organizations. Responses indicated that adolescents and youth may be
more likely to disclose general information about whether they had carried a weapon, but that
more detailed questions would cause greater discomfort. Information such as the frequency of
times a respondent carried or used arms within the last 30 days could be seen as too invasive.
Thus, we recommend rephrasing the questions to yes/no, rather than asking respondents to
provide the number of times they carried weapons.
In addition to verbal affirmations that youth may not be likely to disclose specifics of weapons
carrying, non-verbal cues observed by researchers in the field demonstrated respondents’
concerns about other community members overhearing the interview. These concerns were
palpable in Quibdó, an active conflict zone, where researchers were largely working in smaller,
tight-knit communities with non-standard housing structures. Working in small communities
19

frequently meant that other people from the community, while not able to overhear the interview,
could more easily learn which respondents had participated. Concerns about weapons questions
also arose in Barranquilla, where the research team was working in a neighborhood that was
identified by respondents as unsafe.
A small number of respondents also indicated that there might be some missing options for this
section. Although some respondents mentioned regionally-specific weapons could be included
for question F1210A, interviews demonstrated that the phrasing of this question was sufficiently
understandable and that respondents may include regionally-specific weapons in their responses
without being explicitly prompted to do so. Additionally, an ‘olla’, or place where people deal
drugs, was offered as an option to question F1210E. However, considering the concerns about
discussing details, and links between the drug trade and the armed conflict in Colombia, we
would not advise including options that ask a participant to disclose his or her involvement in the
drug trade, as this may be perceived to imply involvement in the armed conflict and pose a safety
threat to researchers. Following guidance from participants on concerns about providing details
about weapons or arms carrying, answer options for most questions in this section have been
rephrased to ask loosely about number of times, rather than the number of days (“nunca, una vez,
pocas veces, varias veces, o siempre”) (Table 11).
Cyberbullying
In addition to formally testing proposed questions to the VACS, researchers asked a series of
open-ended questions related to cyberbullying through social media. These questions provided
insight into topics ranging from motivations for engaging with social media, applications that
were frequently used to cause harm, and forms of harm that youth might experience while using
the internet. In some interviews, these open-ended questions also shed light onto respondents’
attitudes and opinions towards possible dangers regarding using social media.
The most frequently used applications were Facebook, Facebook Messenger (which is now a
separate texting/instant messaging app from Facebook), and Whatsapp. The complete list of
applications mentioned includes Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Skype, Google Chat, Hi5, Badoo,
SOMA, Grindr, and Line2. Gmail, Yahoo, and Hotmail were also mentioned. Additionally,
respondents mentioned websites such as Ask.com, where they could create profiles that allowed
other people to message them anonymously, and which posted questions and responses to their
Facebook profile. These applications and sites were frequently accessed through either mobile
phones or internet cafés. Even in poorly networked areas without consistent wireless service such
as parts of Quibdó, young people were aware of applications and traveled into the city center if
needed in order to use them.
The most cited reason for using these forms of social media was “para comunicarse” (“to
communicate”) or “para intercambiar información” (“to exchange information”). Respondents
described talking with friends, classmates and strangers using these tools. Other reasons included
2

For reference, Snapchat is a mobile app that allows people to send each other temporary photos and videos, and
has functions for live videochat. Instagram is a mobile application that allows users to share photos publicly or
privately. Line, like Whatsapp, is a mobile application for phone calls and text messages. SOMA is also a video call
and chat application. Badoo is a mobile application that allows users to chat with people who are in close physical
proximity. Grindr is a mobile dating application marketed specifically to members of the LGBTQ community.

20

to become or feel popular, complete or exchange information on homework, or to find new
musical artists. Information that was commonly exchanged included sharing pictures or images,
but in some cases also meant sharing phone numbers, addresses, and other personal information.
Among the indigenous community of Quibdó and the Afro-Colombian community of Juanchaco,
another popular reason for using social media was “para conseguir amigas, novias” (“to make
friends, girlfriends”). Further probing illustrates what participant describe as the use of these
applications “para no hablar siempre con los mismos sino para conocer otras personas” (“to not
only speak with the same [people], to know other people”). Meeting new people was a
commonly cited reason for using the internet, and reasons for doing so included a desire to meet
friends or romantic partners from other countries in the hopes of one day leaving Colombia.
Along with the term cyberbullying, or “bullying cibernético,” the phrases “matoneo” or
“matoneo virtual” are used to describe the practice of deliberately causing harm through social
media. Many perceived Facebook to facilitate bullying more frequently than Whatsapp.
Facebook was seen to be more public and accessible to a broader range of peers and strangers,
which facilitated public humiliation.
Entrevistadora: Como, ¿qué tipos de cosas le hacen?
Respondente (Mujer, 17 años): La hace quedar mal, digamos yo tengo un facebook y yo
te puedo hacer daño a ti, y empiezo a… ahora salió un cosito, un programa, para ponerte
digamos a ti y yo te desnudo toda.
Entrevistadora: ¿En serio?
Respondente: Sí.
Entrevistadora: Y eso lo haces público.
Respondente: Sí.
Entrevistadora: ¿Y cuáles son otros ejemplos de cuando alguien hace daño?
Respondente: Amenazando.
Entrevistadora: ¿Y esas cosas causan problemas psicológicos o otros daños a la gente?
Respondente: Sí, claro psicológicos.
Interviewer: Like, what types of things do they do?
Respondent (Female, 17 years): We say I have a Facebook and I can hurt you, and I start
to… now this little thing came out, a program, to put you—we say to you and—I can take
off all your clothes. [Note: referencing a mobile application that lets people put faces of
people they know onto naked bodies]
Interviewer: Seriously?
Respondent: Yes.
Interviewer: And you make this public.
Respondent: Yes.
21

Interviewer: And what are other other examples of how someone can harm [others]?
Respondent: Threatening.
Interviewer: And do these things cause psychological problems or other forms of harm?
Respondent: Yes, definitely psychological.
Cyberbullying seemed to be more limited on Whatsapp, partially due to the nature of the
application, in which someone must have your contact information in order to initiate contact.
However, interviews also revealed that Whatsapp chat groups are popular, and can put people in
contact with strangers on the application. Whatsapp users can join chat groups with loose
affiliations, such as fans of a particular sports team, or groups with peers from the same school.
These chat groups can be started by an individual person, and grow as those individuals receive
requests from members to add more people to the chat. From these sometimes-large chat groups,
it is possible for unwanted contact to be initiated or vice versa. Although Ask was not mentioned
as frequently as Facebook and Whatsapp, it was also perceived to have risks:
Respondente (mujer, 16 años): ‘Ask’ es una red social donde te hacen preguntas y tú
respondes. A veces tú sabes quién te está haciendo la pregunta, y hay veces que son
anónimos y te preguntan cosas. Es una red social bastante peligrosa.
Entrevistador: ¿Sí? ¿Y porque?
Respondente: Porque tú no sabes quién te está preguntando y porque te está preguntando.
Y hay veces que te hacen unas preguntas bastante personales como hay veces que las
hacen por joder.
Respondent (female, 16 years old): ‘Ask’ is a web site where they ask you questions and
you respond. At times you know who is asking the question and there are times that they
are anonymous and they ask you things. It is a very dangerous website.
Interviewer: Yes? And why?
Respondent: Because you don’t know who is asking you and why he/she is asking. And
there are times que they ask very personal questions like there are times that they do it to
[mess with you].
Respondents also believed that contact with strangers through the internet can facilitate violence
that occurs face-to-face. For example, interviews indicated that the practice of ‘catfishing,’
meaning when someone creates a fabricated profile in order to attract an individual under false
pretenses for nefarious purposes, may be widespread across platforms. One participant indicated
that she had been a victim of ‘catfishing’ before:
“A mí me han creado usuarios falsos. Entonces he procurado tener mis redes sociales
privadas en donde tenga que tener permiso para aceptar. Si, toca hacer mucho eso. Si te
contara que me salió un admirador, lindo el pelado, pero terminó siendo una mujer que le
gustaba. Y me di cuenta después porque las cosas no concordaban.” (Mujer, 24 años)

22

“To me they have created false users. So I have tried to have my social media [settings]
private where you have to have permission to accept. Yes. You have to do a lot of that. If I
told you I had a male admirer, nice haircut, but it turned out to be a girl that liked me.
And I found out later because there were a lot of things that didn’t add up.” (Female, 24
years)
This is especially true for members of the LGBT community, who describe being victims of false
profiles that ultimately lead to harassment through either social media or in-person, once a faceto-face meeting has been arranged. One young woman revealed that she has been subject to such
kind of harassment:
“Sí, a mí me han amenazado por Facebook, en correos estos como no deseados, como
spam, siempre que entro, veo, parece mentira, pero tú sabes que no te aparece, no te llega
el mensaje directamente sino que tú tienes que hundir como correo no deseado o spam
para verlos, y me ha pasado que un mes después se me da por entrar y entro: Maldita,
lesbiana, machorra, no sé qué.” (19 años)
“Yes, To me they have threatened me using Facebook, with unwanted emails, like spam,
overtime I go on, I see, it sounds like a lie, but you know it doesn’t appear to you, you
don’t get the message directly but you have to dive into your junk mail to see them, and it
has happened to me that one month ago I go on and I have: Damn, lesbian, butch, I do
not know what.” (19 years)
While ‘catfishing’ can occur on Facebook, respondents expressed fears of being targeted through
dating applications marketed towards the LGBTQ community, such as Grindr. For the
Colombian context, when discussing cyberbullying, it would be important to include applications
marketed towards minority groups such as LGBTQ youth, and harassment that young people
may face due to their identities (whether that is related to sexual orientation, racial/ethnic group,
religion, etc).

Considerations and Recommendations
In addition to specific phrasing changes that can improve understanding of many questions tested
from the VACS tool, the process of conducting this study illuminated considerations for
implementing the VACS questionnaire in the Colombian context. Apprehension about disclosure
was prevalent throughout the survey; thus, strategies to improve disclosure are needed.
Additionally, familiarity with the many institutions currently working on VAC in Colombia may
benefit the CDC. Further, inclusion of marginalized populations such as LGBTQ and indigenous
youth also demonstrated limitations of the VACS tool in addressing the experiences of these
populations. Lastly, safety of participants and researchers remains a paramount issue when
conducting a survey on violence in the Colombian context. Specific recommendations are made
with regard to these themes below.

23

Addressing fears related to disclosure
In addition to high levels of apprehension about questions on sexual behavior, sexual violence
victimization, and perpetration of violence, this study also found that participants had moderate
levels of distress about questions related to physical discipline, gender attitudes, community
violence, and arm/weapons carrying. Respondents’ anxieties about confidentiality, negative
perceptions from interviewers, negative repercussions or reporting of violence, and concerns
about repercussions to perpetrators may affect the veracity of responses to the survey. These
concerns should be prioritized during all stages of study design and implementation, as
willingness to disclose can have large impacts on prevalence rates obtained from a survey.
The findings of this study underscore the importance of obtaining an exemption from mandatory
reporting laws for violence against children, as the fear of retaliation from perpetrators such
intimate partners, caregivers, or teachers for disclosure was palpable among youth across all four
sites, and mandatory reporting laws may trigger processes that violate confidentiality. Sexual
behavior, sexual violence victimization, physical violence perpetration, and physical discipline
posed the greatest number of concerns to respondents about consequences for disclosure.
Additionally, respondents indicated that intimate partner violence may be more challenging for
their peers to discuss than non-partner violence, and that youth may be more comfortable
discussing victimization than perpetration.
However, even in a context where exemption from manadatory reporting is granted, it is likely
that participants may have concerns about revealing victimization and perpetration. The
following are strategies that may help encourage disclosure. As indicated by the results,
responses demonstrated a sophisticated awareness of perceptions of the interviewer, and the
presence of social norms that condemn violence. Respondents’ awareness of the interviewer as
an individual who may pass judgment on them poses a major challenge to validity of responses
obtained in the survey, and may be addressed by use of self-interview techniques, which may
improve accurate reporting of sensitive information and reduce the potential for social
desirability bias. Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview (ACASI) is an interview method that
completely removes the interviewer from the survey: participants read and/or listen to interview
questions on a phone, tablet, or laptop via headphones, and then select the responses themselves.
ACASI has been used with low-literacy populations and non-written languages, and participants
from more resource-poor settings have indicated that the technology is easy to use (Falb et al.
2017).
The principles behind ACASI can also be adapted to an in-person interview, especially for
interview teams that use tablets or mobile phones to collect data. Rather than putting the entire
survey on ACASI, for example, interviewers can give the tablet to respondents only for more
sensitive questions. Following suggestions listed in the results section to reorder questions, less
sensitive questions in some sections could be asked by the interviewer, and the respondent could
then answer more sensitive questions be him/herself on the tablet, before handing it back to the
interview to complete the following section. Since this study demonstrated that interview teams
are likely to find respondents with varying levels of literacy in the Colombian context, additional
adaptations could include asking interviewers to read more sensitive survey questions aloud from
a printed copy of the survey while participants select responses on the tablet, with cues such as
color-coded boxes that correspond to different answer options (see Falb et al. 2017 for visuals).
24

An additional option for checking the validity of the survey is to allow for anonymous reporting
after completion of the survey. The World Health Organization Multi-country Study on
Women’s Health and Domestic Violence against Women (2005) found that anonymous reporting
yielded higher reports of sexual abuse prior to age 15 years, confirming, as found in several other
studies as well, that “respondents often find it easier to disclose highly stigmatized behaviours
using anonymous formats” (WHO 2005, p.53). The WHO study used a two-stage process
whether interviewers asked women about experiences with early sexual abuse directly, and then,
at the end of the interview, asked women to answer these questions anonymously by marking a
paper card instead of responding verbally. The card can then be attached manually to the
interview or consent form, without the data collector reviewing the response at any point, thus
ensuring the anonymity of the response, and allowing for comparison of face-to-face and
anonymous reporting. Use of this methodology may result in more accurate reporting of sexual
behavior, sexual violence victimization, physical violence perpetration, and transactional sex in
particular.
In addition to strategies for addressing the problem of interviewer presence, the interview team
can reduce respondents’ fear of responding to questions about behavior that may be more
stigmatized or considered inappropriate for their age, and of potential harm. For example, a
written script at the start of the section on gender attitudes could:
1. Clarify that the questions are only about the opinion of the respondent, and there is no
correct or incorrect answer.
2. Inform the respondent that the questions are asked to all respondents, and that they
are not meant to imply that the respondent has participated in any activities
mentioned.
3. Remind the participant that the survey is confidential, and that no one in their
community will be able to learn their individual responses to any of the questions.
Interview teams can also create confidential and comfortable spaces. Some examples for doing
so include:
1. Selecting interview spaces that are private, with doors and windows that close
completely, which are not prone to interruption by others.
2. Ensuring that interviewers are not conducting interviews with respondents that they have
a personal relationship to (for example, a nephew/niece or other relative, or child of a
good friend).
3. Reminding participants about confidentiality, and their right to choose not to answer
questions.
4. Asking for clarification when necessary, rather than to satisfy curiosity.
5. Securely storing all paperwork related to the study.
6. Being mindful of the interviewer’s verbal and non-verbal language, and keeping neutral
facial expressions and tones throughout the interview.
7. Addressing the assumptions and perspectives of research teams on acceptability of
violence, and how those perspectives can influence interviewers’ tone and language
during interviews.
25

8. Recruiting qualified data collectors with good rapport-building structure, and developing
a system with layers of management to support these data collectors. One suggestion is to
use regional coordinators to oversee team leaders, who each oversee a small number of
data collectors.
9. Working with community leaders to help ID participants
Strategies for addressing other concerns related to disclosure, such as participant and researcher
safety are included below, on page 31.

Institutional considerations, looking forward
The government of Colombia has demonstrated interest in implementing the VACS. Dr. Alejandro
Gaviria Uribe, current minister of Health and Social Protection of the Republic of Colombia
(MSPS) formally requested a collaboration with the Center for Disease Control (CDC) its to
implement the Violence Against Children Survey (VACS) in Colombia. Citing the expected postconflict era, he stated the need to assess the magnitude of violence against children and adolescents
in order to increase the impact of the current policies aimed to prevent violence against children.
His request was sent under a 2011 Memorandum of Understanding between the CDC, and the
Ministry of Health and Social Protection (MSPS), as well as the 2014 Joint Plan Commission
Meeting agreement with participation of the MSPS, and the Colombian National Institute of Health
(INS). Subsequently, Dr. S. Hillis (CDC) & Dr. Ligiero of Together for Girls (TfG) informed Dr.
Gaviria that preliminary work for the cultural adaptation of a Spanish version of the VACS would
be done in a collaborative effort by TfG, CDC, The Columbia Group LLC (NYC, USA), and the
University of Los Andes (Bogota, Colombia).
In 2015 a division of the MSPS reviewed the items of the VACS. In this review, a list of the
population surveys that have been implemented in Colombia to collect statistics on the prevalence
of different forms of violence was included. Also included was a list of violence observatories and
national agencies that gather, analyze, and interpret violence related data (See Appendix B). They
will need to be taken into account when implementing the VACS. Two of the authors of this
report learned of this review at a preliminary meeting with representatives of the MSPS and the
Colombian Institute of Family Wellbeing (ICBF), in preparation for the Cognitive lab adaptation
of the VACS. Members of the MSPS’s Directorate of Epidemiology and Demography (DEyD)
group were also present, and expressed their interest in participating in the eventual validation of
the VACS. This is important to note because an initial step to pilot and implement the VACS will
have to be requested through the MSPS, and ICBF. It is equally important to point out that these
two institutions lead the child protection and health sectors services in Colombia, and work
together. For purposes of the survey, both institutions, in all likelihood, will coordinate the
implementation of the VACS as it moves forward.
Of greater interest, and in preparation for a national administration of the VACS, is the list of
institutions actors, policies, and institutional mechanisms that need to be taken into account. In
2013 the MSPS released their guide to implement health related population surveys and studies.
The guide contains the steps necessary to seek approval to conduct a health survey in Colombia.
Accordingly, the initial step for the implementation of the VACS will be to contact the MSPS in
order for them to identify an expert (thematic leader) in the area of violence against children. The
26

thematic leader will conduct the initial evaluation. In all likelihood the appointment this expert
will be done in consultation with the ICBF. At the time the thematic leader is identified the DEyDMSPS will appoint a technical leader (an epidemiologist) from the Knowledge Management and
Information Sources Group to configure the (first) group that will be present throughout all the
phases of the survey. The initial evaluation of the thematic and technical experts is then sent to
the Committee of Population Studies of the MSPS for final approval and implementation (see flow
diagram, Appendix C). Once the survey is conducted the results will be presented to the MSPS
group charged with the evaluation of the data, and for a final repository at the Integral System of
Information for Social Protection (SISPRO). Administratively and in order to provide continuity
for periodic evaluations the MSPS has an overarching committee, Committee for Health Studies,
to insure sustainability (Appendix D), in case several waves of a survey are proposed and
projected.
In light of the previous consideration, in our opinion, we have already identified the governmental
officials that need to be contacted and know the steps necessary to set into motion the process of
piloting and implementation of the VACS. Therefore an initial, and official request to move
forward with the VACS should go to the “Grupo de Gestión del Conocimiento y Fuentes de
Información -Dirección de Epidemiología y Demografía” of the MSPS. They have already offered
to work with the CDC on VACS implementation.
The two key institutions that should be specifically contacted, at the national level for the
implementation VACS are listed below:
Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social. MSPS
Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familia. ICBF
Additionally, at the time the fieldwork is conducted the MSPS’s “Secretarias de Salud,
Gobernaciones y Alcaldias” (state and local health secretaries) will have to be informed of the
work in their localities. The formal introduction of the VACS teams to the local health departemts
will have to be done in collaboration MSPS.
Further Institutional Considerations:
A newly (November, 2016) released guide by the MSPS lists (Appendix E) the governmental
agencies that are participating in the strengthening of the information gathering, monitoring,
observatories, and evaluation of gender violence data for the National Violence Observatory –
Gender Violence Line (ONV-LVG). These agencies’ mission is to foster the collection of
information to aid in the compliance of the laws that pertain to the prevention of sexual violence,
pornography and exploitation against children as specified by Colombia laws 1098 (2006); 1146
(2007); and 1336 (2009) among others. Foremost among the considerations of the guide, is that
it is the responsibility of the MSPS to promote the implementation of studies and surveys to
generate knowledge that complements the current available information.
It is our recommendation that in order to advance with the implementation of the VACS in
Colombia, and in the light of the guides to implement surveys that will lead to violence prevention
policies, all initial efforts to implement the VACS should be directed to the MSPS. This is not only
because of stated national policy, but also because of their formal working relations with other
governmental institutions under their newly created “Comisión Intersectorial de Salud Publica.”

27

This commission coordinates and follows all actions of the MSPS health plans as they affect the
different governmental sectors.
The list of institutions (Appendix E) that are part of the gender violence observatory will need to
be carefully examined for the implementation the VACS in order to work within the framework
of the newly created ONV-LVG directive. This should be done, specifically, in consultation with
the Director of Epidemiology and Demography (MSPS), the Director of the Promotion and
Prevention (MSPS) and the delegate of the High Commissioner for Peace to the MSPS. This last
officer is important inasmuch as the surveys will have to be administered in territories that are of
specific interest, but where conflict situations still remain. The CDC has already made contacts
with all three offices, which are looking forward to the VACS implementation.
Cautionary observations. Community acceptance of questionnaires with similar thematic content
to the VACS demonstrates potential barriers to VACS implementation. An annual national survey
administered to boys and girls in grades 7-11 by the DANE, the Survey of Behavior and Attitudes
about Sexuality – ECAS, was recently (September, 2016) halted due to concerns from parents and
educators on the subject matter of the survey questions. Two examples are reproduced below, in
Spanish and with English translation:
¿Conoces a alguna persona que haya recibido algo a cambio de tener relaciones sexuales;
por ejemplo, dinero, ropa, calificaciones u otros regalos?
Do you know someone who has received something in exchange for sex, such as money,
clothes, qualifications, or other gifts?)
¿Alguna vez te han tocado alguna parle de tu cuerpo de manera sexual, sin que tú lo
quisieras?
Has anyone ever touched any part of your body in a sexual manner, when you did not want
them to?
There are survey questions in the VACS that are the same or very similar. Therefore, in order to
avoid similar issues during implementation, we consider it prudent for the VACS team to discuss
ECAS implementation with officials from the DANE.
One last consideration is the implication of Chapter V of Law 1146. This law is issued to prevent
sexual violence, and provide integral attention to, boys, girls and adolescents victims of sexual
abuse. This chapter mandates that it is the duty of all citizens to denounce to the pertinent
authorities, within 24 hours, any evidence of sexual of minors.
As the piloting, and eventual implementation of the VACS takes place, an exemption to reporting
requirements under this law will be vital to completion of the survey and validity of the data.

28

Inclusion of LGBTQ participants
Challenges in Sampling
The research team attempted to use the sex stratification guidelines used by VACS teams in other
settings, which recommend that male participants are sampled from different neighborhoods or
communities within a city than female participants (CDC ND). By using sex stratification, VACS
teams seek to reduce potential risks of harm associated with participation, such as violence or other
repercussions from perpetrators of violence. Sex stratification assumes that violence is primarily
perpetrated by members of the male sex towards members of the female sex; however,
implementation of this sampling strategy with communities highlighted that this fundamental
assumption ignores the potential for same-sex violence.
To account for the flaw in this assumption, in Bogotá and Barranquilla, the research team took an
additional precaution by asking local partners to avoid enrolling both members of an ongoing
same-sex intimate partnership. The success of this strategy was dependent on the knowledge of
local partners within target communities that worked with LGBTQ youth, and has obvious
limitations: local partners’ knowledge of partnerships and relationships could be limited.
Additionally, this strategy likely misses same-sex acquaintance violence, as well as other violence
occurring outside of intimate partner relationships. Reliance on local partners for such information
is likely not a viable solution when conducting household sampling, since a random sample of
participants may not be as well-connected to community organizations or leaders as participants
who were purposively sampled for this study.
In addition to challenges in accounting for same-sex partnerships, conducting interviews with
transgender participants also exposed a tension between adhering to the sampling plan and
respecting gender identity. The VACS protocol in other countries has used biological sex when
conducting sex-segregated sampling, and pairs participants with an interviewer of the same
biological sex. For the cognitive interviews, the desired sample size was twelve male and twelve
female youth per site; an advance discussion with CDC partners determined that the research staff
should classify participants by their biological sex. However, not respecting the gender identity of
participants can itself be a form of violence (see Namaste 1996; Namaste 2000). The research
team attempted to both adhere to sampling protocols and respect gender identity by interviewing
transgender participants using a researcher of the same gender identity, and privately classifying
these participants by biological sex for the desired sample breakdown indicated in the methods
section. Logistically, this protocol conflicted with the sex segregation protocol, as there were
instances in which one or more biologically male participants were interviewed in the same
catchment area as biologically female participants, and vice versa. Recognizing that a very small
sample of the population is likely to be transgender, some recommendations for respecting gender
identity are included below.
Protocol recommendations to promote respect for gender identity
As argued by Namaste, “a perceived transgression of normative sex/gender relations motivates
much of the violence against sexual minorities, and … an assault on these ‘transgressive’ bodies
is fundamentally concerned with policing gender presentation through public and private space”
(Namaste 1996, 585; see also Namaste 2000). Namaste (1996) also highlights the danger of the
fusion of sexuality and gender in the examination of violence and suggests that “an attack is
29

justified not in reaction to one’s sexual identity, but to one’s gender presentation … women and
men who transgress acceptable limits of self-presentation, then, are among those most at risk for
assault” (Namaste 1996, 588). Given this conceptual context, which is particularly relevant in
Colombian society where the initial failure of the recent peace process can be largely attributed to
a counter-reaction to the LGBTQ rights movement and debates surrounding gender and sexuality
education in the public school system, it is extremely important to train the data collection team to
navigate the initial capture of demographic information with care and without assumptions based
on participants’ gender presentation (i.e., what gender identity, sex or sexual orientation
participants’ appear to adhere to). An attempt to capture the ‘LGBTQ’ community within a data
sample is particularly challenging due to the differences within this population. While for
transgender individuals it is necessary to consider their gender identity when categorizing an
individual as male or female, for lesbian, gay or bisexual individuals, the categorization depends
on the sexual orientation of the individual, while biological sex is a less problematic issue for
sampling practice. It is also important to note that the consideration of gender identity and sexual
orientation is not only of concern when categorizing participants as male or female for sampling
purposes. After establishing participants’ gender identity, it is important that an inclusive language
is employed throughout the interview, using appropriate pronouns (he/she/they [which is often
preferred by gender fluid or non-binary conforming participants]). The suggested protocol consists
of the following checklist that should be implemented as soon as the survey team establishes
contact with each participant (either by telephone or in-person): 1) Upon initial contact with
participants, the survey team should ask basic demographic questions and integrate the issue of
gender identity and sexual orientation in this process in order to ensure the use of inclusive
language throughout the interview/survey. We suggest formulating the gender identity
demographic question in the following terms: I would like to refer to you throughout the interview
using the pronouns that best define your identity. Should I use he, she, they or another term
throughout our conversation? We suggest formulating the sexual orientation demographic
question in the following terms: During our conversation, I will be ask you questions regarding
sexual relations and relationships with a boyfriend, girlfriend or other intimate partners. Should
I ask about a girlfriend, boyfriend, partner or how should I make reference to this person?
It is important to note that an in-depth training for the survey team regarding LGBTQ issues in
research design and institutional ethics protocols is necessary in order to ensure a research process
that respectfully navigates ambiguities in gender identity and sexual orientation. The training
should include a series of workshops designed to cover the following basic issues: 1) inclusive
interviewing techniques, including language use and strategies for establishing rapport [this
subsection of the workshop should also cover how to discuss issues of sexual violence, relationship
with partners and sexual relations in the context of LGBTQ adolescents and young people] , 2) the
basics of gender identity vs. sexual orientation vs. biological sex vs. gender assigned at birth, etc.,
3) conceptualizations of gender-based-violence that include LGBTQ considerations, 4) informed
consent processes with marginalized or minority research populations, 5) Latin America and
genderbashing contexts (homophobia, transphobia, machismo, gender inequality, the influence of
the Catholic Church and evangelical contexts), and 6) Strategies for creating a safe space and
respectful environment for LGBTQ respondents. Addressing nterviewer beliefs and assumptions
regarding LGBTQ populations, and encouraging respectful behavior, should be a central and
ongoing endeavor throughout trainings and data collection.

30

Lack of respect for the gender identity or sexual orientation of participants has implications for
data quality in that participants will not regard the interview/survey environment as a safe space
for expression and will not provide completely honest or contextualized answers, which is
particularly important for a study aiming to document different forms of violence against children.
Additionally, in the Latin American context of homophobia, transphobia, machismo and gender
inequality, the failure to capture violence against children committed in reaction to their gender
identity, sexual orientation or gender presentation/appearance will lead to a significant knowledge
gap that would otherwise provide important information for public policy design and
implementation surrounding gender-based-violence, which should not be conceived as only sexual
violence only against women and children. With the consideration of the above mentioned
challenges in both sampling and providing a safe and respectful research context, household
surveys may not be the best methodology to capture experiences of LGBTQ populations, and for
future research design, thoughtful and sensitive efforts are needed to capture violence against
LGBTQ children. Qualitative studies, conducted in collaboration with local LGBT groups and
using purposive sampling, may be able to capture some important aspects of how LGBT identity
and risks of different forms of violence operate in Colombia.

Spanish as a second language/Working with indigenous communities
Challenges in Sampling
The research team’s work with indigenous populations in Chocó revealed some challenges when
attempting to recruit only one person per household. Small communities of indigenous Colombians
live on the outskirts of Quibdó, in housing structures that both are not clearly delineated and often
lacked complete privacy. There was a lot of open movement between households, and young
people were frequently at the homes of relatives or friends. Additionally, as many participants had
the same last name, both household and family name were inadequate means to identify familial
relationships. Attempts to recruit by physical household structure led to multiple instances in
which potential participants were found to be ineligible either during or after completing the
consent process, because their sibling or spouse/intimate partner had already consented to
participation. In addition, although there were technically two different indigenous communities
living in the first neighborhood that researchers visited, the populations were not large enough to
enroll sufficient numbers of participants. Local partners provided much support in supplementing
sampling through contacts in other indigenous communities in the city. These issues, such as how
to define and delineated a household, are likely to be significant challenges in the implementation
of a household survey using random sampling, such as the VACS. Significant resources, in terms
of preparatory work using existing data sources (see Appendix B for examples), and possibly
mapping of communities in mapping communities, will be needed in order to create a sample
frame adequate to the study design used in the VACS in other countries.
Challenges in obtaining consent and confidentiality
Consent
In terms of consent, across the four study sites the research team faced multiple dilemmas that
typically arise within the informed consent process with historically marginalized or vulnerable
populations. The main dilemmas include difficulties in the effective communication and
participant understanding of the research activities, literacy, scheduling conflicts and the multiple
power dynamics in community leadership structures and between different social groups within
31

communities. While power dynamics and consent frequently pose challenges in research,
interview teams may be able to address these issues through careful attention to consent and
confidentiality throughout the research process.
Logistical considerations for consent
The working hours of some caregivers engaged in agriculture presented an obstacle for the consent
process. In order to obtain consent the research team would have to return several times after
inquiring about the caregivers’ work schedule and this created inefficiency in the data collection
process. Some caregivers left their homes for work as early as 5:00 a.m., and did not return until
late in the evening—as Quibdó was considered an active conflict zone at the time of data
collection, research staff could not travel to obtain consent during such hours due to safety
concerns. In terms of the research schedule and initiating the consent process, we also faced
challenges due to alcohol use among potential male participants in both indigenous and AfroColombian communities. During the weekend it was almost impossible to obtain consent from
male participants, as the majority were drinking heavily and thus unable to make an informed
decision about their participation. Creative strategies that may facilitate inclusion of families
whose caregivers have long working hours, such as training of small local teams with close
proximity to communities that may work in agrarian or related sectors, or explanation of consent
information via phone, will need to be balanced against ethical considerations.
Ethical considerations for consent
The literacy of caregivers across study sites and Spanish speaking ability in indigenous
communities was an obstacle for consent and should be a consideration for survey implementation.
In our first study site in an indigenous community in Quibdó, the research team had to spend
additional time explaining the content of the research process and consent form through on-site
translation provided by youth and community leaders. Within indigenous communities there are
also ethical implications of imposing Spanish as the primary means of communication, either while
consenting or during the cognitive interviews, as native languages represent a sense of cultural
pride and resistance to mainstream society. As we have found in other research contexts, the
consent process generates a trust building issue which can compromise data quality (Ritterbusch
2012). Additionally, while help with translation and participant recruitment was an asset in most
study sites, we caution against depending solely on community-leaders to run the logistics of the
consent process, as the level of influence some leaders have in their communities may lend to
coercive participation.
Viewing the consent process solely in instrumental terms, “undermines the potential for
researchers to engage participants communicatively in the process of shaping the conditions of
their participation to suit the contingencies of social context and self-understanding” (Butz 2008:
251). Instead of limiting the consent process to “the instrumental purposes of monitoring and
control attached to the noun consent,” we should design field practices that facilitate the
“communicative appreciation [and operationalization] of the adjectives voluntary and informed”
(Butz 2008, 251). The objective is to conceptualize and obtain consent using field practices that
are “more meaningful and consensual, more fully context-specific, and more commensurate with
a relational approach to research ethics that emphasises sensitivity to contingency” (Butz 2008,
250). We therefore propose creating more productive and in-depth spaces for the consent process
in order to facilitate the flow of human interaction and trust building in the research process, which
32

can enrich rather than inhibit communication between the data collection team and participants
(see also Ritterbusch 2012; Ritterbusch 2016).
Confidentiality
Doing research on violence is often fraught with issues surrounding confidentiality. Across the
four pilot sites, participants in general, and female and LGBTQ participants in particular, were
suspicious of the confidentiality clause in the consent form and most times deemed the statement
not enough to establish trust for a meaningful, honest conversation about different forms of
violence. After signing consent, some participants continued to question whether the information
they shared with the interviewer, specifically surrounding sexual violence, would remain
confidential before answering. Signing of the informed consent form, in the context of the VACS
in Colombia, should not be perceived as an indication that respondents trust the confidentiality of
the research process. This uncertainty indicates that there is something lacking in the consent and
assent process that generates a sense of safety and privacy for participants. Part of this is due to a
lack of private spaces for data collection as many times parents or caregivers do not allow their
children to conduct interviews in places where they cannot be supervised; however, the actual
research context and privacy can only go so far in contributing to participant comfort. Researchers
must undergo a rigorous training regarding how to generate research contexts that optimize
participant comfort through a collaborative and thorough consent process, through the use of
empathetic body language and conversation tone, and through the negotiation of interview location
with family members or other individuals that may inhibit participants’ freedom of expression.
Communication about confidentiality also needs to be continually reinforced in verbal and nonverbal ways throughout the research process. These research practices should be considered when
establishing data quality control mechanisms and when planning researcher training workshops.
Additionally, notions of household and community are deeply intertwined in Colombian culture,
both in urban and rural areas, and therefore permission to participate in research is often considered
a community decision. This complicates the traditional understanding of consent and
confidentiality at the individual level, which is especially relevant when research aims to
understand and eventually work against violence, which many times depends on communitydriven networks of protection and reporting.
Safety
The general negotiation and safeguarding of both participants and the data collection team should
occur during study-site specific preparation for fieldwork. Before initiating fieldwork in each
study site, it is necessary to assess the level of risk for both participants and researchers in terms
of the following issues: 1) transportation within study sites, 2) level of criminal activities within
study sites that can potential compromise researcher safety, 3) level of trust of the research team
within the research community and with community leaders (which necessarily contributes to the
safety of both participants and the research team), and 4) researcher experience navigating
complex field situations (this is of utmost importance when selecting the data collection team).
As discussed in Adams & Moore (2007), traditional human subjects protection protocols and
institutional ethics protocols generally overlook the issues of researcher safety. The authors discuss
the importance of conducting a participatory risk assessment and designating an “…emergency
contact person who knows: (a) who is in the research team, (b) the locations and/or addresses of
33

research sites, (c) what you will be doing and (d) when you are expected back and/or to make
contact” (Adams & Moore 2007: 47). In the four study sites, the research team was exposed to
different levels of risk in terms of physical safety, potential exposure to weapons, the presence of
armed groups, and safety risks in terms of taking transportation or walking in the evenings between
interview locations. Careful liaison with community leaders was critical to ensuring safety even
in urban, well-networked sites such Bogotá and Barranquilla. In the Colombian context and in
other Latin American country contexts, safety concerns should always be assessed per study site
and protocols should be developed with the input of local institutional actors, such as community
leaders, NGOs or trusted government entities. Thoughtful efforts should be made to identify local
formal and informal organizations working in different departments and sub-communities of larger
cities in advance of survey implementation.

Conclusion
This study identified numerous areas where validity of the VACS in Colombia can be improved.
Across most sections of the survey, use of less formal language improved understanding of
question content. Inteviews also highlighted the importance of confidential reporting of violence,
and barriers that mandatory reporting may pose in obtaining valid data. Beyond fear of
repercussions, this study also revealed the extent of respondents’ awareness of the interviewer as
an individual with his or her own perceptions and judgment. Adaptation of self-interview
techniques may improve rates of report for sensitive subjects, such as sexual behavior and
victimization.
Additionally, the process of conducting the study also revealed challenges in working with
marginalized populations. Following the sex-stratification process by which interview teams may
attempt to conduct the VACS in the future exposed heterosexist assumptions of sex stratification
that might exclude participation from LGBTQ participants. There were logistical and ethical
challenges in obtaining consent in indigenous communities, where portions of the community
may not have full fluency in Spanish, and local community structures may centralize power over
consent for the community.
Lastly, while we did not formally test quantitative questions on cyberbullying, qualitative
interviews demonstrated an array of behaviors across social media platforms, and engagement
with social media even in poorly networked areas. Interviews demonstrated a need to further
examine the behavior of youth on the internet: specifically, the widespread practice of meeting
strangers online, as this may put youth at risk of harm either online or in person. Respondents
also indicated that interactions online could lead to face-to-face violence victimization. The
exploratory information gathered through this study can be used to inform development of
quantitative questions, which should be tested further before use in a national survey.

34

References
Adams, M. and G. Moore. 2007. Participatory action research and researcher safety. In
Participatory action research approaches and methods: Connecting people, participation
and place, eds. Kindon, S., R. Pain, and M. Kesby, 41-48. New York: Routledge.
CDC, No date. Towards a Set of Ethical Guidelines: Conducting National Surveys on Sexual
Violence Against Children Around the World. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention.
Falb K, Tanner S, Asghar K, Souidi S, Mierzwa S, Assazenew A, et al. 2017. Implementation of
Audio-Computer Assisted Self-Interview (ACASI) among adolescent girls in
humanitarian settings: feasibility, acceptability, and lessons learned. Conflict and Health
10(1):32.
Namaste, Viviane. 1996. Genderbashing: sexuality, gender, and the regulation of public space.
Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 14(2) 221 240.
Namaste, Viviane. 2000. Invisible Lives. The University of Chicago Press.
Ritterbusch, A. 2012. Bridging Guidelines and Practice: Toward a Grounded Care Ethics in
Youth Participatory Action Research. The Professional Geographer 64(1): 16 - 24.
Springer, N. 2012. Como corderos entre lobos. Del uso y reclutamiento de niñas, niños y
adolescentes en el marco del conflicto armado y la criminalidad en Colombia.
WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence against women: summary
report of initial results on prevalence, health outcomes and women’s responses. Geneva,
World Health Organization, 2005.

35

Tables
Table 2. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Demographic Questions
Question
No.

Question in
English

Question in
Spanish

F4.1

What are the
main reasons
for you not
attending the
school?

Cuales son las
razones
principales para
no estar
asistiendo a la
escuela?
-Violencia en el
vecindario
-Violencia en la
escuela
-Yo / Mi familia
no tiene dinero
para pagar por
mi estudio
-Tengo que
trabajar
-No me gusta
estudiar
-No sabe / No
responde

Choose all
reasons that
apply

Number of
participants
asked
89

Most common
issues

Example
(Spanish)

Translation of
example
(English)

Suggested change
to question
wording in
Spanish

Suggested
change to
answer options
in Spanish

Unclear reference
(N=27, 30%),
Preoccupations
(N=25, 28%)

Entrevistador:
¿Qué significa
‘no ir a la
escuela’? ¿No van
nunca o faltan
unos días?

Q: what does 'did
not go to school'
mean? Does it
mean they never
went, or missed a
few days?

none

201001: Hay unos
que faltan algunos
días por el
trabajo, pero hay
otros que dicen
que se cansan,
que están
aburridos del
colegio y se van.
Y ya suspenden el
estudio.

A: There are
some who miss
some days
because of work,
but others who
say that they are
tired, or bored of
school and they
leave. And they
already suspend
their studies.

If intention is to
capture reasons
for dropout:
¿Cuales son las
razones
principales
porque tu
abandonaste los
estudios?

36

Table 3. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Gender Attitudes Questions
Question
No.

Question in
English

Question in
Spanish

Number of
participants
asked

Most common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of
example (English)

Suggested
change to
question
wording in
Spanish

Suggested
change to
answer
options in
Spanish

F38A

Do you
believe: (Read
categories
below)

Usted cree
que: (Leer las
opciones)

54

Preoccupations
(N=17, 31%),
Unclear
reference
(N=14, 26%)

Entrevistadora: Súper. Entonces
para que esta pregunta sea más
apropiada en términos culturales y
por edad ¿Cómo la reformularías?
Es una afirmación pero en la
encuesta como tal cuando lo
diseñamos, la joven o el joven va a
responder, sí, no o no respondió, si
están de acuerdo con la afirmación
y eso tiene la intención de indagar
sobre el machismo, sobre qué
tanto poder tienen las mujeres…

Q: To make this
question more
culturally and ageappropriate, how
should we rephrase
it? It is an affirmation
but in the survey, a
young person is going
to respond 'yes, no, or
no response' to the
affirmation, and this
[question] intends to
inquire about
chauvinism, about
how much power
women have...

Crees que: (Leer
las opciones)

none

A) Men, not
women,
should decide
when to have
sex

Los hombres
y no las
mujeres,
deben decidir
cuando tener
relaciones
sexuales

101012: Aquí no deberían ser ni
los hombres ni las mujeres, todos
ambos por igual, porque yo soy así
todo por igual, puede ser hombre o
puede ser mujer, ni ellos son más
ni nosotras menos, entonces la
pregunta no sería “Los hombres y
no las mujeres” sino “Ni los
hombres, ni las mujeres” cada
quién decide a qué hora va a tener
su primera actividad sexual

37

A: Here it shouldn't
be 'neither men nor
women', both are
equal, because I think
all are equal, it could
be the man or the
woman, men aren't
more and us [women]
aren't less, thus the
question shouldn't be
'the men and not the
women', but 'neither
the men, nor the
women' everyone
who decides at
whichever time to
have their first sexual
activity

Solamente el
hombre debe
decidir cuando
tener relacciones
sexuales
*Additional
change
recommended:
revise order of
questions in this
section so that
F38A is not
asked first

F38B

Do you
believe: (Read
categories
below)
B) If someone
insults a boy
or man, he
should defend
his reputation
with force if
he needs to

F38C

Do you
believe: (Read
categories
below)
C) There are
times when a
woman
deserves to be
beaten

Usted cree
que: (Leer las
opciones)

55

Si alguien
insulta a un
niño o
hombre, el
debe defender
su reputación
con fuerza si
es necesario.

Usted cree
que: (Leer las
opciones)
Hay
situaciones en
que una mujer
merece ser
golpeada.

Unclear
reference
(N=20, 36%),
Preoccupations
(N=20, 36%)

Unclear Reference:

Unclear Reference:

Entrevistador: ¿Qué entiende por
“usando la fuerza”? ¿Qué es usar
la fuerza para defender la
reputación?

Q: What does 'using
force' mean? What is
it to use force to
defend one's
reputation?

201022: Uno puede usar la fuerza
mental, la fuerza de nosotros de
agresividad, como uno se cree que
tiene fuerza puede coger a otro y
no

59

Unclear
reference
(N=20, 34%),
Preoccupations
(N=14, 24%)

Preoccupations:
Entrevistadora: ¿Crees que una
joven podría estar preocupada por
contestar esa pregunta de manera
honesta?
101012: Depende, porque si la
muchacha asume el maltrato físico
por su pareja, por su novio, le
sería difícil porque le daría miedo
a responder porque cree que eso lo
van a contar o algo, dependiendo
las circunstancias
Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: ¿No lo entiendes?
¿Qué entiendes por merece?
101011: ¿Merecer? Yo entiendo
que merecer cuando a uno le dan
un consejo
Entrevistadora: ¿Entiendes mejor
la palabra debe? "Hay situaciones
en las que una mujer debe ser
golpeada." No tienes que estar de
acuerdo pero ¿Entiendes la frase?
101011: Un poquito

38

A: One can use
mental strength, our
force of
aggressiveness, like
someone believes that
they have the
strength, they can
'catch' [grab]
someone or not
Preoccupations:
Q: Do you think a
young woman might
be worried about
answering that
question honestly?
A: It depends,
because if the girl
assumes physical
abuse by her partner,
her boyfriend, it
would be difficult
because she would be
afraid to respond
because she believes
that you will tell the
boyfriend or
something, depending
on the circumstances
Unclear Reference:
Q: Do you get it?
What do you
understand by deserve
it?

Crees que: (Leer
las opciones)

none

Si alguien
insulta a un niño
o hombre, él
debe defender su
reputación o
imagen usando
fuerza fisica si
es necesario.

Crees que: (Leer
las opciones)
Hay situaciones
en que una
mujer debe ser
golpeada.

none

F38D

Do you
believe: (Read
categories
below)
D) Women
who carry
condoms have
sex with a lot
of men

Usted cree
que: (Leer las
opciones)
Las mujeres
que cargan
condones
tienen
relaciones
sexuales con
muchos
hombres

58

Preoccupations
(N=17, 29%),
Unclear
reference
(N=11, 19%)

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistador: ¿Qué es cargar
condones?
101024: Cargar condones es como
algo, algo… cómo le digo, es
cargar algo en la vida para que las
enfermedades no le…
Preoccupations:
Sí, básicamente por el estigma
social que tienen de las mujeres
que cargan muchos condones, el
machismo saldría a relucir ahí
porque diría de que sí, una persona
machista diría directamente que sí,
sin temor a la presión social,
porque socialmente está mal visto
que una mujer cargue muchos
condones

39

A: Deserve it? I
understand that
deserve is when
someone gives you an
advice
Q: Do you understand
the word ‘debe’?
"There are situations
in which a woman
must be beaten." You
do not have to agree,
but do you understand
the phrase?
A: A little bit
Unclear Reference:
A: What does it mean
carry condoms?
A: Carry condoms is
like something,
something ... how can
I tell you, is to carry
something in life so
that diseases do not...
Preoccupations:
Yes, basically
because of the social
stigma they have
about women who
carry many condoms.
Machismo would
come out there
because I would say
that yes, a macho
person would say
directly yes, without
fear of social
pressure, because
socially it is frowned
upon a woman carries
many condoms

*While most
respondents
understood the
word "carry" in
the same
manner, some
confusion arose
as to how many
condoms were
implied by
"carrying
condoms." Thus,
the only changes
are grammatical.
Crees que: (Leer
las opciones)
Las mujeres que
cargan condones
tienen relaciones
sexuales con
muchos hombres

none

F38E

Do you
believe: (Read
categories
below)
E) A woman
should
tolerate
violence to
keep her
family
together

Usted cree
que: (Leer las
opciones)
Una mujer
debe tolerar la
violencia para
mantener a su
familia unida

58

Unclear
reference
(N=19, 33%),
Limited
applicability
(N=17, 29%)

Unclear Reference:

Unclear Reference:

Entrevistadora: Pero ¿Qué
significa mantener a la familia
unida?
201026: Mantener, digamos,
mantener algo, un digamos un
conjunto, unas unidades, digamos
mantener digamos puede ser tú
mantienes una familia con un
presupuesto para que esa familia
no se vaya

Q: But what does it
mean to keep the
family together?
A: Keep, let's say,
keep something, let's
say a set, some units,
let's say that you can
keep a family if you
have a budget so that
family does not leave

Limited Applicability:

Limited
Applicability:

Entrevistador:¿Usted cree que si
hacemos esta pregunta a una
persona de 13 años, las personas
van a entenderlo fácil?
101026: No creo
Entrevistador: ¿Por qué no?
101026: Porque como,
habitualmente por los lados de acá
no les enseñan ese tipo de valores,
los padres se alejan mucho de los
hijos

40

Q: Do you think that
if we ask this question
to a person of 13
years old, people will
understand it easy?
A: I do not think so
Q: Why not?
A: Because, usually
around these parts
they don't teach us
these kind of values,
parents distance
themselves a lot from
children

Crees que: (Leer
las opciones)
Una mujer debe
aguantar la
violencia para
mantener a su
familia junta

none

Table 4. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Physical Discipline Questions
Question
No.

Question in English

Question in Spanish

Number of
participants
asked

Most common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of
example
(English)

Suggested
change to
question
wording in
Spanish

Suggested
change to
answer
options in
Spanish

PD1

Age 13-17: Has a parent or
adult caregiver ever
punished you when you
misbehaved by:

Edades 13-17:
Alguna vez, cuando
te hayas portado mal,
tu padre, madre o el
adulto que te haya
criado te ha castigado
así: Edades 18-24
Cuando eras niño,
alguna vez, cuando
te portaste mal tu
padre, madre o el
adulto que lo haya
criado te castigo así:

82

Unclear
reference
(N=6, 7%)

Unclear Reference:

Unclear
Reference:

For
participants
age 18-24:
En tu niñez y
adolescencia,
alguna vez,
cuando te
portaste mal,
tu padre,
madre o el
adulto que lo
haya criado te
castigó así:

none

Gritándote

54

*Lack of
clarity of
question was
minimal, thus,
no changes
suggested.

none

Ages 18-24: When you
were growing up, did a
parent or adult caregiver
ever punish you when you
misbehaved by:

PD1a

Shouting/yelling/screaming
at you

Preoccupations
(N=8, 15%)

O sea para mí uno deja
de ser niño ya, para mí
que uno se va de la
casa a los 18 años, hay
personas que no se van
de la casa a los 18
años, ya desde que
usted sea ciudadano
usted se manda, desde
que no sea ciudadano
no

Preoccupations:
Entrevistador: ¿Les
daría pena? ¿Por qué?
201023: Sí, porque tal
vez se sentirían como
si tal vez decir que le
gritaron es como si le
hubieran pegado o
“porqué esa persona te
gritó si no es familia
tuya o no tiene nada
que ver contigo”
pienso que por eso les
daría pena

41

For me, People
stops being a
child now, for
me, once leaves
the house at 18,
there are people
who do not leave
the house at 18,
since you
become a citizen
you can do
whatever you
want, if you are
Non-citizen you
don´t
Preoccupations:
Q: Would they
feel shame?
Why?
A: Yes, because
maybe they
would feel
ashamed, maybe
saying that they
yelled at him is
as if they had hit
him or "why that
person yelled at
you if it is not
your family or
has nothing to
do with you" I

think that would
give them shame

PD1b

Explaining why the
behavior is wrong

Explicándote porqué
el comportamiento es
malo

53

Unclear
reference
(N=7, 13%)

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: El
siguiente, explicándote
porqué el
comportamiento es
malo ¿Qué significa
esto para ti?
101012: La palabra
explicándote no iría
ahí
Entrevistadora: ¿No
se entiende?
101012: Explica
porqué el
comportamiento es
malo, explicándote no,
ya es algo como más
allá

PD1c

Giving you a reminder or
warning not to do it again

Dándote una
advertencia de no
volver a hacerlo

52

Unclear
reference
(N=11, 21%)

42

Unclear reference:
Entrevistadora: Y me
puedes dar un ejemplo
de cuando un padre,
madre o un adulto que
te haya criado te dio
una advertencia.
301014: Un ejemplo,
pues una vez llegué
tarde a mi casa y mi
mamá me dijo que si
lo vuelvo a hacer me
iba a castigar.

Unclear
Reference:
Q: The next one,
explaining why
the behavior is
wrong. What
does this mean
for you?
A: The word
“explaining”
would not go
there
Interviewer: It's
not understood?
101012: Explain
why the
behavior is
wrong,
explaining no, it
is already
something like
beyond
Unclear
Reference:
Q: And can you
give me an
example of when
a father, mother
or adult that
takes care of you
gave you a
warning?
A: An example,
well one time I
arrived home

*Lack of
clarity of
question was
minimal, thus,
no changes
suggested.

none

Dándote una
advertencia, o
diciendote,que
no debes
volver a
hacerlo

none

late and my
mother told me
that if I do it
again she would
punish me.
PD1d

Shaking you

Sacudiéndote o
sarandiándote

51

Preoccupations
(N=16, 31%),
Unclear
reference
(N=6, 12%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistadora: ¿Tú
te preocupas por lo
que pensamos
nosotros? ¿O los
adultos?
101004: Me
preocuparía lo que
están pensando los
adultos de la
comunidad

Q: Would you
worry about
what we think?
Or the adults?
A: I would
worry about
what the adults
in the
community are
thinking

Unclear Reference:

Unclear
Reference:

Entrevistadora: Ok.
Otro ejemplo, tal
“sacudiéndote o
zarandeándote”.
301002: No se
entiende.
Entrevistadora: ¿No
se entiende ninguna de
los dos?
301002: Sacudiéndote
es como sacudir de acá
algo, echar o limpiar.

PD1e

Hitting you on your bottom
with their bare hand

Dándote una
nalgada/Golpeándote
en tu cola con su
mano

52

Preoccupations
(N=10, 19%)

43

Preoccupations:

Q: Okay.
Another
example, such as
"shaking you or
shaking you."
A: It is not
understood.
Q: Don’t you
understand?
A: Shaking you
is like shaking
something from
here, throwing
or cleaning.
Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: ¿Usted
cree que alguien se
preocuparía de lo que
los demás piensen en
el momento de
respondernos si alguna

Q: Do you think
someone would
worry about
what other
people can think
when they

*Lack of
clarity of
question was
minimal.
Participants
understood at
least one, if
not both, of
the words used
for 'shaking',
thus, only
changes
suggested are
to correct
spelling in
Spanish:

none

Sacudiéndote
o
zarandeándote

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, no
changed
suggested.

none

vez lo castigaron así o
no?
201023: Pienso que
algunos sí
Entrevistador: ¿Por
qué?
201023: Porque pues
acá las personas no les
gusta decir me
pegaron, me
maltrataron, todo el
mundo quiere que su
infancia haya sido
perfecta, como sin
golpes, entonces le
daría pena responder,
me pegaron algún día

PD1f

Hitting or slapping you in
the face or head

Dándote una
cachetada o
golpeándote en la
cara o la cabeza

48

Unclear
reference
(N=4, 8%)

44

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistador: Ok,
siguiente forma de
castigo, dándote una
cachetada, o
golpeándote en la cara
o la cabeza ¿Sería fácil
o difícil contestar a
esto? Si le
preguntamos si alguna
vez su padre o madre
le ha dado una
cachetada
101024: Yo creo que
no porque recordar
eso, lo sucedido, como
esa pregunta…

respond if they
were ever
punished like
this or not?
A: I think some
do
Q: Why?
A: Because
people here do
not like to say
that someone hit
them, they
mistreated me,
everyone wants
a perfect
childhood,
without hits.
Then they could
feel shame if
they respond that
someone hit
them.
Unclear
Reference:
Interviewer: Ok,
the following
form of
punishment,
slapping on the
cheek, or hitting
in the face or
head. Would it
be difficult to
respond to this?
If we asked if
your father or
mother had ever
slapped your
cheek.
101024: I don't
believe so
because to
remember that,

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, no
changed
suggested.

none

what happened,
like that
question...

PD1g

Hitting you with an object
(e.g., belt, paddle, stick,
broom)

Golpeándote con un
objeto tal como un
cinturón, un cable,
un palo o escoba

60

Missing
options (N=25,
32%),
Preoccupations
(N=11, 18%)

Missing Options:
Entrevistadora: Otro
ejemplo, golpeándote
con un objeto tal como
un cinturón, un cable,
un palo, una escoba
¿Agregarías algo a la
lista?
101012: El rejo de
vaca

Preoccupations:
Pues porque algunas
personas han tenido
infancias muy duras
algunos padres no han
sido buenos con ellos,
no han tenido padre,
todas las personas que
han estado los han
maltratado quizá
porque no han sido
muy obedientes,
entonces muchas
personas al recordar
eso se ponen tristes y
no quieren hablar… O
les da miedo.

45

Missing
Options:
Q: Another
example, hitting
you with an
object such as a
belt, a cable, a
stick, a broom.
Would you add
something to the
list?
A: [a strip of
leather, such as a
belt]
Preoccupations:
Because some
people have had
very hard
childhoods,
some parents
have not been
good with them,
they have not
had a father, all
the people who
have been
mistreated
maybe because
they have not
been very
obedient, then
when many
people
remember that
they become sad
and they do not

Golpeándote
con un objeto
tal como un
cinturón, un
cable, un palo
o escoba, o
cualquier otro
objeto

none

want to talk ...
Or they're just
scared.

PD1h

PD1i

Making you sit by yourself
for a few minutes to think
about what you had done

Haciéndote quedar
sentado solo por unos
minutos para pensar
en lo que había hecho

57

Pulling your hair or
pulled/pinched your ear

Halándote el pelo o
la oreja

54

Preoccupations
(N=4, 7%)

Preoccupations
(N=5, 9%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistador:
¿Piensas que los
jóvenes se acuerden de
eso y nos van a contar?
301005: Mucha gente
se acuerda, pero no te
lo pueden contar...
Entrevistador: ¿Por
qué?
301005: Porque les da
como pena… Les
puede dar
resentimiento al
acordarse de cosas…
Yo por lo menos te
estoy contando porque
ajá, ya uno de pronto...

Q: Do you think
the young people
will remember
that and tell us?
A: Many people
remember, but
they cannot tell
you ...
Q: Why?
A: Because it
gives them
shame ... It can
give them
resentment when
remembering
things ... At least
I'm telling you
why aha, and
one soon...
Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:
Creo que va a ser
difícil porque
igualmente vienen en
el mismo tipo de
violencia, sus padres
contra ellos, pueden
pensar que es algo que
no deberían contar,
porque es algo que va
en contra del contexto
socialmente aceptado
del castigo hacia ellos,
pienso yo

46

I think it's going
to be difficult
because they
also come in the
same kind of
violence, their
parents against
them, they may
think it's
something they
should not tell
because it goes
against the
socially accepted
context of

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, no
changed
suggested.

none

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, no
changed
suggested.

none

punishment
towards them, I
think

PD1j

PD1k

Taking away something
you liked or wanted to do

Taking away food or drink

Quitándote algo que
te gustaba o quería
hacer

Quitándote la comida
o bebida

57

57

Unclear
reference
(N=3, 5%)

Unclear
reference
(N=13, 23%)

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistador:
Bueno, ¿está bien
quitándole algo que te
gustaba o quería hacer,
como castigo de que se
portó mal? ¿Está bien
esa pregunta?
401016: Para mí no.
Entrevistador: No
está bien hecha; vamos
hablar un poco, piensa
en eso, ¿porque no está
bien hecha?
401016: Porque
quitándole algo que le
guste a uno u otras
personas o le está
quitando por decir.
(…)

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: ¿Qué
entiendes por bebida?
101012: El jugo
Entrevistadora: ¿No
se entiende como
alcohol?
101012: No,
dependiendo las
bebidas también, pero
más bebida sí es como

47

Unclear
Reference:
Q: Well, is it
okay to take
anything you
liked or wanted
to do, as a
punishment for
misbehaving? Is
that a good
question?
A: Not for me.
Q: It's not well
made; Let's talk
a little, think
about it, why is
not it well done?
A: Because
taking
something that
one or other
people likes or is
taking away for
saying. (...)
Unclear
Reference:
Q: What do you
understand by
drink?
A: Juice
Q: Is not it
understood as
alcohol?
A: No,
depending on the
drinks too, but

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, no
changed
suggested.

none

Quitándote la
comida o una
bebida tal
como un jugo,
agua o leche.

none

pa’ alcohol, como
colocan comida uno
entendería bebida
como jugo, la pregunta
está mal formulada

PD1l

Ignoring you for several
hours

Ignorándote por
varias horas

62

Rephrasing
(N=13, 21%)

Rephrasing:
Entrevistadora: ¿No
querer? ¿Para ti qué
significa “ignorar”?
101013: Como no
querer hablar,
dándome la espalda.

PD1m

PD2

Other [specify]

[If YES]: Was this
something that happened:

Otra [especificar]

[SI es que si]
¿cuántas veces lo ha
castigado un padre o
guardián adulto
cuando se ha portado
mal ¿Diría que
nunca, una vez, pocas
veces o muchas
veces?

17

98

Missing
options (N=7,
41%)

Unclear
reference
(N=18, 18%)

48

Missing Options:
Entrevistador: ¿Otro?
201018: Encerrarlo en
el cuarto

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora:
¿Cuál es el que más se
acuerda y cuál es que
menos se va acordar?
401013: El que menos
se va acordar es la
advertencia.

more drink is
like alcohol, as
they put food
one would
understand drink
as juice, the
question is badly
formulated
Rephrasing:
Q: Do not want?
For you what
does ignore
mean?
A: Like not want
to talk, giving
you their back.
Missing
Options:
Q: Another?
A: Lock him in
the room

Unclear
Reference:
Q: Which is the
most remembers
and which is less
to be remember?
A: Warning is
the least one you
will remember

No poniéndote
atención por
varias horas

none

*'Arodillar'
was mentioned
in multiple
settings as an
additional
form of
punishment.
Interviewers
should be
aware of this
concept in
case it is
provided as
another form
of punishment.
[SI es que si]
¿cuántas veces
lo has
castigado un
padre o adulto
cuando te has
portado mal
¿Dirías casi
nunca, pocas
veces, muchas
veces, o todas
las veces?

none

1=Casi
nunca
2=Pocas
veces
3=Muchas
veces
4=Todas
las veces

PD4

Ages 13-17:
Has a teacher ever
punished you when you
misbehaved by:
Ages 18-24:
When you were growing
up, did a teacher ever
punish you when you
misbehaved by:

PUN1

Do you believe that it is
acceptable for a parent to
physically punish a child
when he or she misbehaves
(i.e. slap, push, show,
punch, kick, whip, beat)?

Edades 13-17:
Alguna vez, cuando
te haz portado mal,
un profesor o
profesora te ha
castigado así:
Edades 18-24:
Cuando eras niño,
alguna vez, cuando te
habías portado mal,
un profesor o
profesora te castigó
así:

92

¿Cree usted que es
aceptable que los
padres le den
puñetazos, patadas o
golpes a un niño
cuando él o ella se
porta mal?

69

Preoccupations
(N=34, 37%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistadora: Un
joven de 13 a 17
¿Crees que tendrían
miedo? ¿Sería
diferente?
101012: Sí porque le
daría miedo que digan
que es cobarde

Q: A young man
from 13 to 17.
Do you think
they would be
afraid? It would
be different?
A: Yes, because
he would be
afraid that
someone else
would say that
he is a coward
Q: Who? The
companions?
A: Yes, he
would be afraid
that someone
else would say
that he is a
coward
Unclear
Reference:

Entrevistadora:
¿Quiénes? ¿Los
compañeros?
101012: Sí, le daría
miedo que digan que
es cobarde

Unclear
reference
(N=15, 22%),
Limited
applicability
(N=10, 14%),
Missing
options (N=10,
14%)

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: ¿pero
qué es la palabra, qué
quiere decir?
301006: Aceptar, eso
la palabra es aceptar,
es diciendo, a mí me
gusta que mi papá me
golpeé, eso es aceptar,
que usted acepte a su
papá, como diciendo,
en el Facebook te
mandan una solicitud y
no te gusta usted la
rechaza, verdad, pero
si te gusta pone
aceptar.
Limited
Applicability:

49

Q: But what is
the word, what
does it mean?
A: To accept,
that the word is
to accept, is
saying, to me
that I like that
my father hit me,
this is to accept,
that you accept
that your father,
like saying, on
Facebook they
send you a
solicitation
[friend request]
and you don't
want to refuse,

For
participants
age 18-24:
En tu niñez y
adolescencia,
alguna vez,
cuando te
habías portado
mal, un
profesor o
profesora te
castigó así:

none

¿Crees que es
pasable o
aceptable que
los padres le
den puñetazos,
patadas o
golpes a un
niño cuando él
o ella se porta
mal?

none

Entrevistador: ¿Usted
cree que si le hacemos
esta pregunta a un niño
de 13 o 14 años, la
entendería bien?
201022: No
Entrevistador: ¿Por
qué no?
201022: Porque digo
yo que no tienen la
capacidad para
responder una serie de
pregunta, ellos pueden
responder pero como
por salir del paso, no
están tan maduros
como para ese tipo de
preguntas
Missing Options:
Pues puede castigarlo
de la siguiente manera,
no dejarlo salir, no
darle plata, tenerlo en
su casa sin darle
permiso para salir ni
nada

PUN2

Do you believe that it is
necessary for a parent to
physically punish a child
when he or she misbehaves
(i.e. slap, push, show,
punch, kick, whip, beat)?

¿Cree usted que los
padres tienen que dar
puñetazos, patadas o
golpes a un niño
cuando él o ella se
porta mal?

68

Unclear
reference
(N=20, 29%)

50

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: Cuál
es la diferencia entre
las dos palabras?
401012: ‘Tienen que’
es como si de pronto.
En cambio el
‘aceptable’ es
‘tienen’... No puede
ser ‘de pronto’ si no
‘tienen’...

right, but if you
like it you put
"accept".
Limited
Applicability:
Q: Do you
believe that if
we ask this
question to a 1314 year-old
child, he will
understand it
well?
A: No
Q: Why not?
A: I say because
they don't have
the capacity to
respond to a
series of
questions, they
can respond but
like to get it [the
question] out of
the way, they are
not mature
enough for these
types of
questions.
Unclear
Reference:

Q: What is the
difference
between these
two words?
A: ‘Tienen que’
is like maybe.
But ‘Aceptable’
is like “have
to”… It cannot

¿Crees que es
necesario que
los padres le
den puñetazos,
patadas o
golpes a un
niño cuando él
o ella se porta
mal?

none

be ‘Maybe’ it
has to be ‘have
to’

PUN3

Do you believe that it is
acceptable for a teacher to
physically punish a child
when he or she misbehaves
(i.e. slap, push, show,
punch, kick, whip, beat)?

¿Cree usted que es
aceptable que los
profesores le den
puñetazos, patadas o
golpes a un niño
cuando él o ella se
porta mal?

34

Unclear
reference
(N=10, 29%),
Preoccupations
(N=4, 12%)

Unclear Reference:
Aceptable es aceptar
los errores que
cometió. Que o sea,
aceptable acá es que
tiene que aceptar las
cosas que hizo.
Preoccupations:
Entrevistador:
¿Puedes pensar en
alguna razón por la
cual una persona de tu
edad se preocuparía
por dar una respuesta
honesta?
301003: Pues digamos
que sería, empezando
por el miedo, que si
alguien, aparte de
nosotros dos, nos
pueda escuchar, sería
el temor a que otra
persona se enterara
luego de esto.

51

Unclear
Reference:
Acceptable is to
accept the
mistakes you
made. I mean,
acceptable here
is that you have
to accept the
things you did.
Preoccupations:
Q: Can you
think in any
reason why a
person of your
age would be
concerned about
giving an honest
answer?
A: Well let's say
it would be,
beginning with
fear, that if
someone, apart
from the two of
us, could hear
us, it would be
the fear that
someone else
would find out
after this.

¿Crees que es
pasable o
aceptable que
los profesores
le den
puñetazos,
patadas o
golpes a un
niño cuando él
o ella se porta
mal?

none

PUN4

Do you believe that it is
necessary for a teacher to
physically punish a child
when he or she misbehaves
(i.e. slap, push, show,
punch, kick, whip, beat)?

¿Cree usted que los
profesores tienen que
dar puñetazos, patear
o golpear a un niño
cuando él o ella se
porta mal?

29

Unclear
reference
(N=11, 38%)

52

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistador: ¿Qué
diferencia hay entre
“tienen que” y “es
aceptable”?
401024: Es aceptable
o sea ya está decidido,
y tiene es como que
dejen hacer eso

Unclear
Reference:
Interviewer:
What is the
difference
between "have
to" and "is
acceptable"?
401024:
acceptable it's
something
already decided,
and have to it's
like they let it do
that

¿Crees que es
necesario que
los profesores
le den
puñetazos,
patadas o
golpes a un
niño cuando él
o ella se porta
mal?

none

Table 5. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Immigration Questions
Question
No.

Question in
English

Question in
Spanish

Number of
participants
asked

Most common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of
example (English)

Suggested
change to
question
wording in
Spanish

Suggested
change to
answer options
in Spanish

F15A

Have you
received
money or
goods from
abroad in the
last three
years?

Ha usted
recibido
dinero o
artículos
desde el
exterior en los
últimos 3
años?
Si __
No __
NS/ NR
Cuales son las
razones
principales
para irse de su
casa a vivir a
otro lugar?
(selecciones
todas las que
corresponden)

76

Unclear
reference
(N=16, 21%)

Unclear Reference:

Unclear Reference:

none

Entrevistadora: ‘Exterior es
algo fuera de barranquilla o de
Colombia?
301018: Sí afuera de
Barranquilla, o afuera de mi
casa, afuera de Colombia...

Q: 'Exterior is
something out of
Barranquilla or
Colombia?
A: Yes outside of
Barranquilla, or
outside my house,
outside Colombia ...

Has recibido
dinero o
artículos de
otro pais en los
últimos 3 años?
Si __
No __
NS/ NR

Missing
options (N=19,
39%),
Unclear
reference
(N=14, 29%)

Missing Options:

Missing Options:

*Only change
is grammatical

201001: A veces lo que yo veo
acá en mi entorno, los padres
siempre ‘lárguese porque no
estas haciendo nada, tienes que
buscar trabajo, tienes que
mantenerte, ya estás grande’,
entonces más que todo ellos se
van mentalizando, verdad yo
tengo que salir a trabajar, tengo
que superarme.
Entrevistador: ¿Cómo
llamarías a esta razón?
201001: Acá le dicen que los
‘echan de la casa’

A: Sometimes what I
see in my
environment, parents
will be 'get out of
here why are you
doing nothing, you
have to find work,
you have to take care
of yourself, you're
grown,' then more
than anything they
are thinking, right, I
have to get out to
work, I need to
better myself.
Q: What would you
call this ‘reason’?
A: Here they call it
that they ‘throw you
out of the house’

a. Reencuentro
familiar
b. Económica/
trabajo/educación
c. Forzado por la
violencia o
maltrato dentro
de mi familia
(intrafamiliar)
d. Forzado por la
violencia en mi
comunidad
(como amenazas)
e. Forzado por
otras
circunstancias
f. Para tener más
libertad, o
independencia,
de los padres o la
familia
g. Por otras
razones

H17H

What were
the main
reasons for
you moving
from your
home?
Choose all
reasons that
apply

49

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora; ¿Qué entiende
usted por reunificación
familiar?
201018: Es cuando uno se va de
la casa y deja a los papás y los
hermanos, por la mujer y los
hijos

53

Unclear Reference:
Q: What do you

Cuáles fueron
las razones
principales para
irse de tu casa a
vivir a otro
lugar?
(selecciones
todas las que
corresponden)

H17G

H17F

Have you
ever moved
to another
state, region
or
municipality
in your
country?

Have you
tried to live
in the US in
the past 3
years?

Alguna vez ha
tenido que irse
a vivir a otro
departamento,
región o
municipio de
su país?

Ha tratado de
irse a vivir a
los Estados
Unidos en los
últimos 3
años?

48

Preoccupations
(N=5, 10%)

Preoccupations:
Entrevistador: ¿Hay una razón
por la cual un joven sentiría
pena de contar que se fue a otro
lugar?
201001: Algunas personas sí,
bueno en Buenaventura se ve
más que todo la gente se viene a
vivir de allá porque tienen
problemas con narcotraficantes,
se vienen para acá pero les da
pena contar lo que pasó y sólo
dicen que se vienen acá a vivir
pero en realidad las razones son
otras más graves.

43

Missing
options (N=9,
21%),
Unclear
reference
(N=5, 12%)

understand by
‘family
reunification’?
A: It’s when
someone leaves the
home and leaves
their parents and
siblings, to be with
the women and
children
Preoccupations:

Unclear Reference:

Q: Is there a reason
why a young man
would feel shame for
telling us that he
went somewhere
else?
A: Some people,
well in
Buenaventura it is
seen more than all
the people come to
live here because
they have problems
with drug dealers,
they come here but
they are ashamed to
tell what happened
and they only say
that they come here
to live but In fact the
reasons are other
more serious.
Unclear Reference:

Entrevistadora: ¿Qué significa
tratado de irte?
101001: Por gusto que ellos se
van

Q: What does “try to
leave” mean?
A: For the pleasure
they are leaving

54

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, no only
suggested
changes are
grammatical.

none

Alguna vez has
tenido que irse
a vivir a otro
departamento,
región o
municipio de tu
país?

Has intentado
irte a vivir a los
Estados Unidos
en los últimos 3
años?

none

H28E

H28A

H28B

Do you have
any plans of
going to live
in the U.S. in
the next
three years?

Have you
ever lived
abroad?

Where have
you lived?

Tiene planes
de irse a vivir
a los Estados
Unidos en los
próximos 3
años?

Ha vivido
fuera del país?

Donde ha
vivido?

38

51

40

Preoccupations
(N=5, 13%)

Unclear
reference
(N=8, 16%)

Unclear
reference
(N=5, 13%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistadora: Y qué tal:
“teniendo planes de irse a vivir
a los Estados Unidos en los
próximos 3 años”. ¿Es igual, no
tendrían confianza?
301007: Ajá, para poder decirle
a alguien, depende que si uno
tenga confianza a la persona y
que la conozco para contarle lo
que él tiene pensado hacer.

Q: And what about:
"having plans to
move to the United
States in the next 3
years." Is it the
same, would not
they have
confidence?
A: Aha, to be able to
tell someone, it
depends if the person
has confidence with
you, and know him
to tell him what he
intends to do.
Unclear Reference:

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: Y es difícil
visitar a, ejemplo. Que
diferencia hay entre que yo
diga, yo voy a vivir en Bogotá,
a decir, yo voy a visitar Bogotá.
Hay diferencia?
101018: No. No hay diferencia.

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: Entonces si yo
me voy a vivir a Venezuela por
un ratito, ¿viví en Venezuela o
visité a Venezuela?
160810_101-013: Pues yo
digo… que si estoy regresando,
digo que de visita.

55

Q: And it is difficult
to visit, for example.
What is the
difference between,
I'm going to live in
Bogota, and, I'm
going to visit
Bogota? Is there a
difference?
A: No. There is no
difference.
Unclear Reference:
Q: So if I'm going to
live in Venezuela for
a little while, did I
live in Venezuela or
visit Venezuela?
A: Well I say ... that
if I am coming back,
I say visit.

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, only
suggested
changes are
grammatical.

none

Tienes planes
de irte a vivir a
los Estados
Unidos en los
próximos 3
años?

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, only
suggested
changes are
grammatical.

none

Has vivido
fuera del país?

*Instances of
lack of clarity
of meaning
were minimal;
thus, thus, only
suggested
changes are
grammatical.
Donde has
vivido?

none

H28C

H28D

How old
were you
when you
first began
living
abroad?

What were
the main
reasons you
left?

Qué edad
tenía cuando
se fue a vivir
fuera del país
por primera
vez?

Cuales fueron
las razones
principales
para irse fuera
del país?
(selecciones
todas las que
corresponden)

46

49

Limited
applicability
(N=3, 7%)

Preoccupations
(N=13, 27%),
Unclear
reference
(N=12, 24%),
Missing
options (N=10,
20%)

Limited Applicability:
Entrevistador: ¿Cree que sea
fácil recordarlo?
201025: Sí, ah no pues esa edad
es como muy niños

Limited
Applicability:
Q: Do you think it's
easy to remember?
A: Yes, ah no,
because that age is
like very children

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistadora: ¿Y por qué es
un poco más difícil?
301011: Por el miedo, pensar
que… no, si yo digo algo de
pronto esta persona va y le
cuenta a otra persona y me
puedo meter en un lío.

Q: And why is it a
little bit more
difficult?
A: For fear, to think
that ... no, if I say
something maybe
this person goes and
tells another person
and I can get into a
mess.

Unclear Reference:
Porque me parece complejo,
porque reunificación familiar,
puede sonar, no solo a eso, sino
puede sonar a otras cosas
Missing Options:
Razones políticas de exilio, el
exilio, obviamente todos se
puede ir por violencia en la
comunidad, pero hay otros que
se van por el exilio, también por
migraciones, puede ser

56

Unclear Reference:
Because it seems
complex, because
family reunification,
it may sound, not
only that, but it may
sound to other things
Missing Options:
Political reasons for
exile, exile,

*Since less
than 10% of
respondents felt
that the
question was
inappropriate
for young
children, the
only suggested
changes are
grammatical.
Qué edad
tenías cuando
te fuiste a vivir
fuera del país
por primera
vez?
*Only
suggested
change is
grammatical.
Cuáles fueron
las razones
principales para
irte fuera del
país?

none

a. Reencuentro
familiar
b. Económica/
trabajo/educación
c. Forzado por la
violencia o
maltrato adentro
de mi familia
(intrafamiliar)
d. Forzado por la
violencia en mi
comunidad
(como amenazas)
e. Forzado por
otras
circunstancias
f. Para tener más
libertad, o
independencia,
de los padres o la
familia
g. Por otras
razones

obviously everyone
can leave for
violence in the
community, but
there are others who
go through exile,
also by migrations,
maybe..

57

Table 6. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Community Violence Questions
Question
No.

Question in
English

Question in
Spanish

Number of
participants
asked

Most common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of
example (English)

Suggested change to
question wording in
Spanish

Suggested
change to
answer
options in
Spanish

F41A

What are the main
reasons for you not
feeling safe at all in
your
community/neighb
orhood? .

1. Cuáles son las
razones
principales para
no sentirse del
todo seguro en su
comunidad/vecin
dario?
- Miedo/Temor
por la Violencia
en la comunidad
(amenazas,
extorciones)
- Miedo/Temor
por la Violencia
en la casa
- Miedo/Temor
de la Policía o el
Ejercito en las
calles
-NS / NR
2. Que tanto cree
que su
comunidad/vecin
dario está
afectado por la
violencia?
Diría usted que
mucho, un poco,
no mucho, o no
está afectado?
a. Mucho
b. Un poco
c. No mucho
d. No está
afectado
e. NS/NR

44

Preoccupations
(N=11, 25%),
Unclear
reference
(N=6, 14%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

none

Tal vez, sí, o sea no
te van a decir, por
qué no te sientes
seguro, porque mi
papá es maltratador
por ejemplo o
porque mi papá es
alcohólico, no te lo
van a decir así.

Maybe yeah, I mean
they will not tell you,
because you do not
you feel safe, because
my dad is abusive for
example or because
my dad is an
alcoholic, they will
not tell you that.

*Suggestion is to
remove this question
and keep question
F41.B

Unclear Reference:

Unclear Reference:

Sentirse seguro es
como, yo estoy
seguro que voy a
lograr eso, de estar
seguro

Feeling safe is like,
I'm sure I'll achieve
that, to be sure

Unclear Reference:

Unclear Reference:

Entrevistadora:
Qué quiere decir
“afectada”?
101030: Enfermar.

Q: What does
"affected" mean?
A: Sick.

*Less instance of
unclear reference and
worry compared to
F41A. Suggest using
question F41.B rather
than F41A. Changes
suggested to improve
grammar.

a. Muy
afectada
b.
Afectada
c. Un
poco
afectada
d. No está
afectada
e.
NS/NR

F41.B

To what extent do
you think your
neighbourhood/co
mmunity is
affected by
violence? Would
you say a lot,
some, not too much
or not at all?

43

Unclear
reference
(N=5, 12%)

Que tanto crees que tu
comunidad/vecindario
está afectado por la
violencia?
Dirías que 'muy
afectada', 'afectada', 'un
poco afectada', o 'no
está afectada'?

58

Table 7. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Sexual Behavior Questions
Questio
n No.

Question in
English

Question in
Spanish

Number of
participant
s asked

Most common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of example
(English)

Suggested
change to
question
wording in
Spanish

Suggested
change to
answer options
in Spanish

F409

How would
you describe
the first time
you had
sex? Would
you say that
you wanted
to have sex,
you did not
want to have
sex but it
happened
anyway, or
were you
forced to
have sex?

¿La primera
vez que tuvo
relaciones
sexuales fue
porque lo
deseaba, no
lo deseaba
pero ocurrió
de todos
modos o
alguien la
forzó a
hacerlo?

65

Preoccupations
(N=35, 54%),
Unclear
reference
(N=24, 37%),
Limited
applicability
(N=7, 11%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

none

Entrevistador: De pronto las
personas que nos contesten
¿No les daría pena responder?
201022: Pues de pronto esta
parte si le daría pena, de pronto
su dignidad, de pronto le da
pena, porque piensa que
ustedes vayan a disociar con
otras personas, “Esa muchacha
que va allá fue en cierta edad la
cogieron y la forzaron”, de
pronto eso es lo que a ella la
obliga a no decir la verdad,
evaden la respuesta

Q: Maybe, people won’t
answer this question; do
you think they would feel
ashamed?
A: Maybe, people can be
ashamed in this part of
the survey, maybe his
dignity, because people
can think that you are
going to share the
information with other
people. "That girl over
there had sex at a certain
age, they took her and
forced her", maybe that is
why she is forced to not
tell the truth, and evade
the answer

¿La primera vez
que tuviste
relaciones
sexuales fue
porque lo
deseabas, no lo
deseabas pero
ocurrió de todos
modos, o fuiste
forzado/a a
hacerlo?

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistador: ¿Qué significa
para una persona tener
relaciones sexuales?
101022: Sexuales, ahí si no me
entiendo

Limited Applicability:
No estoy de acuerdo porque si
usted lo mandan a hacer
encuestas, cómo van a meter
unas preguntas de esas así,
tienen que saber que algunas
personas, no todas las personas
se lo van a responder, esas

59

Unclear Reference:
Q: What does it mean for
a person to have sexual
relations?
A: Sexual, I do not
understand
Limited Applicability:
I do not agree because if
someone send you to do
surveys, how they are
going to put some

cosas de sexualidad, todas las
personas no se la van a
responder

F410

The first
time you
had sex,
were you
verbally
persuaded,
pressured,
tricked,
threatened,
too drunk to
say no, or
physically
forced?

¿La primera
vez que tuvo
relaciones
sexuales fue
convencido
verbalmente,
fue
físicamente
forzada,
estaba
demasiado
borracha
para decir
no o fue
presionada,
amenazada o
engañada?

63

Preoccupations
(N=27, 43%),
Unclear
reference
(N=23, 37%)

Preoccupations:

questions of those like
this, they have to know
that some people, not all
people are going to
respond, those things of
sexuality, all people will
not respond
Preoccupations:

Entrevistadora: ¿Por qué no?
160810_101-013: Porque ya
ella diría que se están metiendo
en su vida privada, porque es
muy vergonzoso decirlo.

Q: Why not?
A: Because she would
say that you are getting
into her private life,
because it is very
embarrassing to say it.

Unclear Reference:

Unclear Reference:

Entrevistadora: ¿Qué
significa para usted
convencido?
101022: Convencido es que
estaba diciendo una mentira

Q: What does
“convencido” mean to
you?
A: Convencido is that he
was telling a lie

60

La primera vez
que tuviste
relaciones
sexuales fuiste
convencido
verbalmente o
engañada, fuiste
físicamente
forzada, tomaste
bebidas
alcohólicas o
otras sustancias
y no podías
decir no, fuiste
presionada, o
fuiste
amenazada?
(Selecciones
todos los que
correspondan)

1=Fuiste
convencido
verbalmente o
engañada
2=Fuiste
físicamente
forzada
3=Tomaste
bebidas
alcohólicas o
otras sustancias
y no podías
decir no
4=Fuiste
presionada
5=Fuiste
amenazada
6=Ninguna/Sol
amente occurió
99=No
responde

Table 8. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Sexual Violence/Exploitation Questions
Question
No.

Question in
English

Question in
Spanish

Number of
participants
asked

Most common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of
example (English)

Suggested change to
question wording in
Spanish

Suggested change to
answer options in
Spanish

F500

Have you
ever
entered into
a sexual
relationship
with
anyone in
order to get
things that
are
important
to you, for
help with
your
expenses,
or for
money?

¿Ha tenido
usted
relaciones
sexuales con
alguien
porque le
haya dado
cosas que son
importantes
para usted, le
ayuda pagar
por algunas
cosas o le dio
dinero?

87

Preoccupations
(N=38, 44%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

none

What did
they
provide
you with?
(Circle all
mentioned)

Qué clase de
cosas le han
dado a usted?
(Seleccione
todos los que
correspondan)

55

Entrevistador:
¿Usted cree que las
personas a las que les
preguntemos esto se
preocuparían por lo
que pensemos cuando
nos respondan?
201018: Sí
Entrevistador: ¿Por
qué cree que sí?
201018: Porque hay
personas que si lo
hacen por dinero,
digamos una mujer,
uno diría que es una
puta, una prepago, ya
entre un hombre sería
un poco más breve
Preoccupations:

Q: Do you think
that the people we
ask this would
worry about what
we think when
they respond?
A: Yes
Q: Why do you
think so?
A: Because there
are people that do
it for money, let´s
say a woman,
people would say
that she is a
whore, a prepaid.
With men would
be easier.
Preoccupations:
Let´s say, if the
answer is money,
she would be
worry about the
judgement
because she is
just selling
herself.

*Instances of lack of
clarity of meaning were
minimal; thus, only
suggested changes are
grammatical.

F501

Preoccupations
(N=15, 27%),
Missing
options (N=11,
20%),
Unclear
reference
(N=10, 18%)

Digamos, si la
respuesta de ella es el
dinero, le daría como
cosa que la empiecen
a juzgar, de que sólo
se está vendiendo.
Missing Options:

Missing Options:
Cirugías, también hay
muchas que cambian
pro cirugías plásticas,
son pocas las
opciones pero si son,
muchas hacen eso.

61

Surgeries, there
are also many
girls that change
for plastic
surgeries. There

¿Has tenido relaciones
sexuales con alguien
porque te haya dado
cosas que son
importantes para usted,
te ayuda pagar por
algunas cosas o te dió
dinero?

Qué cosas te dieron?
(Selecciones todos los
que correspondan)

A=Dinero
B=Alimentos
C=Buenas
calificaciones/notas
D=Matricula escolar
E=Empleo
F=Regalos/favores
G=Transporte
H=Refugio/renta
I=Protección/seguridad
X=Otro (especifique)
Z=No sabe/no responde

Yo creo que ya
Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: ¿La
palabra chulo se
entiende?
101001: Sí
Entrevistadora:
¿Qué significa?
101001: Si un
hombre me da plata a
mí, o mi marido me
da plata, yo lo
compro comidita pal
niño, pa’ la mamá y
con el que sobra yo
compra mi ropita, mi
shampoo o mi loción

F502

When they
gave you
money,
who did
you give it
to?(Circle
all
mentioned)

Cuando le
dieron dinero,
¿a quién se lo
dio?
(Seleccione
todos los que
correspondan)

45

Unclear
reference
(N=16, 36%),
Word
comprehension
(N=13, 29%),
Preoccupations
(N=10, 22%)

are few options
but if they are,
many do that. I
think that´s all.
Unclear
Reference:

Entrevistadora: Qué
entiendes por
proxeneta?
401019: Digamos yo
vivo con Santiago, y
un amigo me dice ay
yo quiero una amiga
pa’ salir y yo se la
llevo, pues yo soy
proxeneta porque yo
se la estoy
presentando a él

Q: Is the word
“chulo”
understood?
A: Yes
Q: What does it
mean?
A: If a man gives
me money, or my
husband gives me
money, I buy
food for the kid,
for mom and with
the surplus I buy
my clothes, my
shampoo or my
lotion
Unclear
Reference:
Q: What does
Pimp means to
you?
A: Let's say I live
with Santiago,
and a friend tells
me and I want a
friend to go out
and I take her, I'm
a pimp because
I'm presenting her
to him

Word
Comprehension:

Word
Comprehension:

Entrevistadora: Que
entiende usted por

Q: What does
Pimp means to

Unclear Reference:

62

*Only change is
grammatical.
Cuando te dieron
dinero, ¿a quién te lo
diste?
(Selecciones todos los
que correspondan)

A. Lo guardaste para ti
mismo
B. Se lo diste a la
familia
C. Se lo diste al
novio/pareja
D. Se lo diste al patron
o jefe
X. Otro (especifique)
Z. No sabe/no responde

F503

Who was
the person
who you
had sex
with
because
they
provided
you things
that are
important,
helped you
with
expenses or
gave you
money?
(Circle all
mentioned)

¿Quién fue la
persona con la
cual usted
tuvo sexo
porque le dio
cosas que son
importantes
para usted, le
ayudó a pagar
por algunas
cosas o le dio
dinero?
(Seleccione
todos los que
correspondan)

54

Preoccupations
(N=15, 28%),
Unclear
reference
(N=11, 20%),
Missing
options (N=8,
15%)

proxeneta?
101018: Pues ahí si
no la comprendo.

you?
A: Well, I do not
understand it.

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Porque seguro él las
amenaza, diciéndole
que no le puede decir
a nadie y si no las
mata o… las lleva
para otro país para
que le hagan daño

Because he
threatens them,
telling him that
they cannot tell
anyone and if
they do, he will
kill them or ... he
takes them to
another country
to hurt them
Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:
Entrevistador: Ok,
¿crees que una joven
de tu edad se
preocuparía por las
opiniones de los
demás? ¿Porque?
201003: No les gusta
hablar de eso.
Entrevistador: ¿Sí
alguien cae en dos
categorías, es una
misma? ¿Cómo
contestaría?
201003: No creo que
respondan. No les
gusta hablar de eso.
Unclear Reference:
Entrevistador:
¿Cuáles no
entiendes?
201005: ‘Un hombre
que conocí por
internet’...

63

Q: Okay, do you
think a girl about
your age would
worry about the
opinions of
others? Why?
A: They do not
like to talk about
it.
Q: If someone
falls into two
categories, it´s the
same one? How
would you
answer?
A: I do not think
they will respond.
They do not like
to talk about it.
Unclear
Reference:
Q: Which ones do
not you
understand?

*Only change is
grammatical.
¿Quién fue la persona
con la cual tuviste sexo
porque te dió cosas que
son importantes para ti,
te ayudó a pagar por
algunas cosas o te dió
dinero? (Selecciones
todos los que
correspondan)

A=Amigo/a
B=Profesor/a
C=Líder de la
comunidad/líder
religioso/a
D=Empleador/a
E=Novio/a, pareja
F=Ex-novio/a, expareja
G=Compañero/a de
clase
H=Vecino/a
I=Policía/miembro del
ejército
J=Soldado
K=Familiar
L=Turista/extranjero/a
M=Desconocido
N=Hombre/mujer que
conocí por el internet/la
red
O=Patrón/Jefe
X=Otro hombre
Z=No sabe/no responde

Entrevistador: ¿Es
lo mismo que ‘un
hombre
desconocido’?
201005: Es lo
mismo.

A: 'A man I met
online' ...
Q: Is it the same
as 'an unknown
man'?
A: It's the same.
Missing Options:

Missing Options:

F504

How old
were you
the first
time you
entered into
a
relationship
because
someone
provided
you things
that are
important,
helped you
with
expenses or
gave you
money?

¿Cuantos años
tenía cuando
por primera
vez comenzó
una relación
con alguien
porque le dio
cosas que son
importantes
para usted, le
ayudó a pagar
por algunas
cosas o le dio
dinero?

49

Preoccupations
(N=21, 43%),
Limited
applicability
(N=9, 18%)

Entrevistadora:
¿Ninguna otra
categoría?
101012: Padrastro,
incluye también
Preoccupations:
Entrevistador:
¿Usted cree que las
personas que la
respondan se
preocuparían de lo
que nosotros
podemos pensar
como
entrevistadores?
101027:Sí
Entrevistador: ¿Sí?
101027: Sí, porque
ellos le pueden
responder y después
dirán “Uy, ¿Qué
pensará el periodista
sobre la respuesta que
le dí? Cuando yo tuve
relaciones era una
joven de tantos años”

Limited
Applicability:
Hay niñas que si se

64

Q: No other
categories?
A: Stepfather,
also includes

Preoccupations:
Q: Do you think
respondents
would worry
about what we
might think of as
interviewers?
A: Yes
Q: Yes?
A: Yes, because
they can answer
you and then they
will say, "Oh,
what will the
journalist think
about the answer
I gave him?
When I had
sexual relations I
was a young
woman, it was so
many years ago "
Limited
Applicability:
There are girls
who throw their

*Instances of lack of
clarity of meaning were
minimal. Some
respondents thought
that younger
adolescents may not
have experience with
sex or awareness of
transactional sex. Thus,
only suggested changes
are grammatical.
¿Cuantos años tenías
cuando por primera vez
comenzaste una
relación con alguien
porque te dió cosas que
son importantes para ti,
te ayudó a pagar por
algunas cosas o te dió
dinero?

none

F507

In the last
12 months,
how many
times did
you have
sex with
someone
because
they
provided
you things
that are
important,
helped you
with
expenses or
gave you
money?

¿En los
últimos 12
meses,
cuantas veces
ha tenido sexo
con alguien
porque le dio
cosas que son
importantes
para usted, le
ayudó a pagar
por algunas
cosas o le dio
dinero?

38

Preoccupations
(N=8, 21%)

tiran a la vida así, hay
personas como las
peladas que usted
encuentra en bares y
así, entonces, podrías
coger y preguntarles
porqué, pero ya una
niña decente, que tu
digas de casa, sería
como más difícil

lives; there are
people like other
girls that you can
find them in bars,
so, you could
pick and ask them
why, but if you
ask a decent girl,
a home-girl,
would be like
more difficult

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Porque tal vez, como
le digo, le da mucha
pena referirse a
ustedes los
reporteros, que si lo
que están hablando
con ustedes lo va a
saber otras personas,
pienso que puede ser
más reservada

Because, perhaps,
as I say, it is very
sad to refer to you
reporters, people
can think that
whatever they say
to you, you will
probably tell
other people. I
think it may be
more reserved

65

*Instances of lack of
clarity of meaning were
minimal, thus, only
suggested changes are
grammatical
¿En los últimos 12
meses, cuantas veces
has tenido sexo con
alguien porque te dió
cosas que son
importantes para ti, te
ayudó a pagar por
algunas cosas o te dió
dinero?

none

Table 9. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Physical Violence Perpetration Questions
Question
No.

Question in
English

F200A
Have you ever
done any of the
following to a
current or
previous
boyfriend,
romantic
partner/husband:
A. slapped,
pushed, shoved,
shook, or
intentionally
threw something
at you to hurt
you?

F200B
Have you ever
done any of the
following to a
current or
previous
boyfriend,
romantic
partner/husband:
B. punched,
kicked, whipped,
or beat them?

Question in
Spanish

Number of
participants
asked

Most common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of
example (English)

Suggested change
to question
wording in
Spanish

Suggested
change to
answer
options in
Spanish

¿Alguna vez ha
hecho algo de lo
siguiente a su
actual o anterior
novio/a, pareja o
esposo/a:

65

Preoccupations
(N=30, 46%),
Unclear
reference
(N=9, 14%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

none

Porque tal vez no tenga
confianza, no tenga confianza
con la persona, porque si yo te
cuento a ti algo tú lo puedes
decir a otro

Because they may
not have
confidence, they
do not trust you,
because if I tell
you something
you can say it to
someone else

¿Alguna vez has
hecho algo de lo
siguiente a tu
actual o anterior
novio/a, pareja o
esposo/a:

A. Le ha dado una
cachetada,
empujado,
sacudido o
lanzado algo
intencionalmente
para hacerles
daño?

¿Alguna vez ha
hecho algo de lo
siguiente a su
actual o anterior
novio, pareja o
esposo:
B. le ha dado
puñetazos,
patadas, le dio
latigazos, o le
golpeó con algún
objeto?

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: ¿Esa frase no
se entiende?
101025: Sí, pero lanzó, es
como que él cogió algo
(silencio) es como si cogiera la
mano y te pegara y fue
intencionalmente y ya

80

Preoccupations
(N=27, 34%)

Unclear
Reference:

Preoccupations:

Q: is that phrase
understood?
A: Yes, but he
threw, it's like he
took something
(silence) it's as if
he took the hand
and hit you and it
was intentional…
Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: Ahora esta, le
ha dado puñetazos, patadas, le
ha dado latigazos o le ha
golpeado con algún objeto
¿Usted cree que se puedan
preocupar por lo que nosotros
los entrevistadores pensemos
de su respuesta?
201016: Sí
Entrevistador: ¿Por qué?
201016: Si porque, por
preguntas tan intimas, son

Q: … Do you
think people could
worry about what
the interviewers
would think of
their response?
A: Yes
Q: Why?
A: Because,
because there are
intimate questions,
they are very

66

A. Le has dado
una cachetada,
empujado,
sacudido o tirado
algo
intencionalmente
para hacerles
daño?

*Instances of lack
of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus,
only changes
suggested are
grammatical
¿Alguna vez has
hecho algo de lo
siguiente a tu
actual o anterior
novio, pareja o
esposo:

none

F200C
Have you ever
done any of the
following to a
current or
previous
boyfriend,
romantic
partner/husband:
C. choked,
smothered, tried
to drown, or
intentionally burn
them?

C. le trató de
estrangular,
asfixiar, ahogar o
le quemó
intencionalmente?

84

Preoccupations
(N=26, 31%),
Unclear
reference
(N=9, 11%)

preguntas muy intimas y uno
al fin y al cabo no sabe qué
pueda pasar

intimate questions
and after all
people does not
know what can
happen

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: ¿Cree que nos
contestarían esta con
sinceridad?
201018: No
Entrevistador: ¿Por qué no?
201018: Es como algo que no
es debido hacer, ya es algo
hasta demandable, más que
todo pensarán en lo malo que
vayan a decir de uno, que es
agresivo o es violento, o algo
así

Q: Do you think
people would
honestly answer
this question?
A: No
Q: Why not?
A: It's something
that should not be
done, it's
something
demandable, most
of all they will
think about how
bad people are
going to talk about
them, that is
aggressive or
violent, or
something like
that

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: ¿Qué
significa en tus palabras
asfixiar?
101001: La mamá está
enferma, tiene asfixia

Unclear
Reference:
Q: What does
asphyxiate means
in your words?
A: Mom is sick,
she has
suffocation

67

B. Le has dado
puñetazos,
patadas, le diste
latigazos, o le
golpeaste con
algún objeto?
*Instances of lack
of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, and
mostly reflected a
lack of
understanding of
the word 'asfixiar'
(smothered).
Respondents did
not identify
synonyms that
were easier to
understand. Thus,
only changes
suggested are
grammatical.
C. Le trataste de
estrangular,
asfixiar, ahogar o
le quemaste
intencionalmente?

none

F200D
Have you ever
done any of the
following to a
current or
previous
boyfriend,
romantic
partner/husband:
D. used or
threatened to use
a knife, gun or
other weapon
against them?

F200.A

In the past when
you have done
this to your
current or
previous
boyfriend,
romantic
partner/husband,
were you
drinking alcohol?

¿Alguna vez ha
hecho algo de lo
siguiente a su
actual o anterior
novio/a, pareja o
esposo/a:

80

Preoccupations
(N=23, 29%)

D. utilizó o le
amenazó con un
cuchillo, pistola u
otra arma?

En el pasado
cuando hiciste esto
a tu actual
novio(a)/pareja
romántica, ex
novio(a)/pareja
romántica, marido
o ex marido,
estabas bajo el
efecto del alcohol?
Usted diría que:
Ninguna de las
veces, Algunas
veces, La mayoría
de las veces,
Todas las veces,
NS/NR

73

Preoccupations
(N=25, 34%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: ¿Por qué se
preocuparían de contarme de
estas cosas?
201001: Por pena lo que
piense o no se vayan a sentir
seguros porque les están
haciendo esas preguntas o si le
van a denunciar...

Q: Why would
anyone worry
about telling me
about these
things?
A: Because of
shame, or they
won´t feel safe
about someone
asking those
questions, maybe
they may think
that you would
report them…

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: ¿Usted cree
que la gente se preocuparía
por lo que nosotros pensemos
si la persona responde que
siempre que le pegaba estaba
borracho ¿O cree que no se
preocuparía?
201026: No, no te
respondería, es un caso,
digamos puede ser yo, que le
pego a mi mujer, peor lo hago
solo cuando estoy borracho,
no te voy a decir nunca
Entrevistador: ¿Nunca?
201026: Nunca
Entrevistador: Ni porque le
diga que hay confidencialidad
201026: No, antes te voy a
hablar bonito de ella
Entrevistador: Ok ¿Hay una
manera para que la gente nos
conteste honestamente?
201026: Yo creo que no

Q: Do you think
people would
worry about what
we think if the
person responds
that whenever he
hits his couple he
was drunk? Or do
you think he
would not be
worry?
A: No, he would
not respond that
question, …, Let´s
say it can be me, I
hit my wife, worse
I do it only when
I'm drunk, I will
never tell you
Q: Never?
A: Never
Q: What about if I
tell you that there

68

*Instances of lack
of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus, no
changes
suggested.

none

¿Alguna vez has
hecho algo de lo
siguiente a tu
actual o anterior
novio/a, pareja o
esposo/a:
D. Utilizaste o le
amenazaste con
un cuchillo,
pistola u otra
arma?
*Instances of lack
of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus, no
changes
suggested.

none

F426.1

F201

In the last 12
months, how
often did you see
your partner
drunk? Every
day, 1-2 times
per week, 1-3
times per month,
Never, DN/DA

En los últimos 12
meses, ¿con qué
frecuencia ha visto
a su pareja bajo el
efecto del alcohol
o borracha? Usted
diría que:
Todos los días, 1-2
veces por semana,
1-3 veces al mes,
nunca, NS/NR

74

Have you ever
done any of the
following to
someone who is
not a current or
previous
boyfriend,
romantic partner,
or husband:

Alguna vez le has
hecho lo siguiente
a alguien que no
es tu actual
novio(a)/pareja
romántica, ex
novio(a)/pareja
romántica, marido
o ex marido:
A. Puñetazos,
patadas,

39

A. slapped,

Preoccupations
(N=8, 11%)

Preoccupations:
101010: Por que ella no puede
decir o si el marido estaba tan
borracho o pelió y así, ella no
quiere que todos se den de
cuenta de eso

Preoccupations
(N=10, 26%)

is confidentiality?
A: No, I would
never tell you. I
will tell you
something nice
about her
Q: Ok It's there a
way for people to
honestly answer
us that question?
A: I do not think
so
Preoccupations:
A: Because she
cannot say if the
husband was
drunk …, she does
not want everyone
to notice that

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistadora: ¿Sería difícil
revelar?
101004: Sí

Q: Would it be
difficult to reveal?
A: Yes
Q: Is there another
way to ask this
question in order
for them to
respond more

Entrevistadora: ¿Hay una
manera de hacer esa pregunta
para que nos respondan de
manera más honesta?
101004: No

69

*Instances of lack
of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus,
only changes
suggested are
grammatical.
En los últimos 12
meses, ¿con qué
frecuencia has
visto a tu pareja
bajo el efecto del
alcohol o
borracha? Dirías
que:
Todos los días, 12 veces por
semana, 1-3 veces
al mes, nunca,
NS/NR
*Instances of lack
of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus, no
changes
suggested.

none

none

pushed, shoved,
shook, or
intentionally
threw something
at you to hurt
you?
B. punched,
kicked, whipped,
or beat them?
C. choked,
smothered, tried
to drown, or
intentionally burn
them?
D. used or
threatened to use
a knife, gun or
other weapon
against them?

zarandeada o
golpeado a el(ella)
B. Asfixiado,
sofocado, trató de
ahogar
C. Uso o amenaza
de uso de un
cuchillo/puñal …:

sincerely?
A: No

70

Table 10. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence Questions
Question
No.

Question in
English

Question in
Spanish

Number of
participants
asked

Most common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of example
(English)

Suggested change
to question
wording in Spanish

Suggested
change to
answer
options in
Spanish

F104.1

Was this
person also
involved in
community
violence?

Estaba esa
persona
también
involucrada
con algún tipo
de violencia
en la
comunidad?

80

Preoccupations
(N=17, 21%),
Unclear
reference
(N=11, 14%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

none

Entrevistador: ¿Piensas que un
joven nos va a responder
sinceramente a esta pregunta?
¿O tendrían miedo?
201005: Van a tener miedo.
Entrevistador: ¿Por qué? ¿Va
a tener miedo de que la pareja
se entere?
201005: Ujum...
Entrevistador: ¿O no?
201005: Sí, de pronto de que
la pareja se entere.
Entrevistador: ¿Qué le puede
hacer la pareja?
201005: Lo puede demandar o
algo así.

Q: Do you think a
young man will
sincerely answer this
question? Or were they
afraid?
A: They will be afraid.
Q: Why? Afraid that
the couple will find
out?
A: Ujum ...
Q: Or not?
A: Yes, afraid that the
couple will find out.
Q: What can the
couple do to that
person?
A: She can sue him or
something.

*Propose removing
this question and
using question
104.2 only.

*Recommend
using this question
instead of question
104.1

none

Unclear Reference:
Entrevistadora: ¿Qué significa
el término violencia en la
comunidad?
101001: Si el hombre es
mujeriego se pone a buscar
otra mujeres

F104.2

Was this
person also a
homeboy or
involved in a
clicka?

¿Era esa
persona
también
miembro de
una pandilla o
un grupo

82

Unclear
reference
(N=23, 28%),
Preoccupations
(N=19, 23%)

Unclear Reference:

Unclear Reference:

Q: What does the term
“violence in the
community” means?
A: If the man is a
womanizer, he goes to
look for another
woman
Unclear Reference:

Entrevistadora: ¿Para ti qué
significa la palabra pandilla?
101001: Pandilla, es que es
ratero

Q: What does the word
gang mean to you?
A: Gang, It´s like a
thief

71

armado
ilegal?

F105

F106

Was this
person older
than you,
younger than
you, or about
the same age?

Was this
person more
than 10 years
older than
you, 5-10
years older or
less than 5
years older?

¿Esta persona
era mayor que
usted, menor
que usted, o
más o menos
de su misma
edad?

¿Esta persona
era más de 10
años mayor
que usted, 510 años
mayor que
usted o menos
de 5 años
mayor que
usted?

40

39

Limited
applicability
(N=1, 3%)

Preoccupations
(N=2, 5%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistadora:¿Una joven
de tu edad estaría preocupada
en contestar esa pregunta?
101012: Si tiene un novio así
sí
Entrevistadora: ¿Por qué?
101012: Porque le daría
miedo perjudicarlo a él

Q: Would a young
woman of your age be
worried about
answering this
question?
A: If she has a
boyfriend, yes
Q: Why?
A: Because she would
be afraid to hurt him
--

[None included]

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistadora: ¿Por qué?
401017: … las personas no
quisieran contar la vida
privada de ellos

Q: Why?
401017: …
People doesn’t want to
tell their private lives

*Instances of lack
of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus, only
changes suggested
are grammatical
¿Esta persona era
de mayor edad que
ti, menor que ti, o
más o menos de ti
misma edad?
*Instances of lack
of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus, no
changes suggested.
¿Esta persona era
más de 10 años
mayor que ti, 5-10
años mayor que ti
o menos de 5 años
mayor que ti?

72

none

none

Table 11. Common Issues and Suggested Changes to Arms/Weapons Questions
Questio
n No.

Question in
English

Question in Spanish

Number of
participant
s asked

Most
common
issues

Example (Spanish)

Translation of
example (English)

Suggested
change to
question wording
in Spanish

F1210A

During the
past 30 days,
on how many
days did you
carry a
weapon such
as, gun,
knife, or
club?

1. Durante los últimos 30
días, ¿cuántos días usted
portó un arma tal como
una pistola, cuchillo o un
garrote?

46

Preoccupatio
ns (N=9,
20%),
Unclear
reference
(N=8, 17%),
Missing
options
(N=8, 17%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

160810_101-013:
Pues por miedo,
porque como aquí la
policía dice que no se
puede cargar armas sin
tener una licencia, es
que le dicen a eso,
entonces pensaría que
lo van castigar o a
multar.

A: Because of fear,
because the police
say that you cannot
carry weapons
without having a
license, …, then
they would think
that they will punish
or fine them.

Durante los
últimos 30 días,
¿cuantas veces
has cargado un
arma tal como
una pistola,
cuchillo o un
garrote?

a. 0 días
b. 1 día
c. 2 o 3 días
d. 4 o 5 días
e. 6 o más días

Unclear Reference:
Unclear Reference:
Navaja es lo mismo
que cuchillo.

Knife is the same as
kitchen knife.
Missing Options:

Missing Options:
Un bolígrafo puede ser
un arma, con un
bolígrafo te pueden
chuzar, si te cogen una
parte de los órganos te
puede matar, cepillo
dental, en la prisión no
dejan entrar esas cosas
porque las pueden
volver un arma, hay
muchas cosas que se
pueden volver arma

73

A pen can be a
weapon, with a
ballpoint pen you
can be stab. It can
kill you. A
toothbrush, in prison
don’t let these things
enter because people
can turn it into a
weapon, there are
many things that can
be weapon

Suggested
change to
answer options
in Spanish

a. nunca
b. una vez
c. pocas veces
d. varias veces
e. siempre

F1210B

F1210C

What is the
main reason
that you carry
a weapon
such as, gun,
knife, or
club, during
the past 30
days?

During the
past 30 days,
on how many
days did you
carry a gun
onto school
property?

2. ¿Cuál es la razón
principal para usted portar
un arma tal como una
pistola, cuchillo o un
garrote durante los últimos
30 días?

44

Preoccupatio
ns (N=8,
18%),
Missing
options
(N=5, 11%)

a. Para protección de
ataques por otras personas
b. Porque mis amigos
portan armas
c. Porque me hace sentir
importante
d. Para "mostrar" o
impresionar a mis amigos
e. Porque quería herir a
alguien
f. Otra
_____________________
_____________

3. Durante los últimos 30
días, ¿cuántos días usted
portó un arma de
fuego/pistola al interior de
la escuela?
a. 0 días
b. 1 días
c. 2 o 3 días
d. 4 o 5 días
e. 6 o más días

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Los jóvenes no por
miedo, a que se
enteren los demás y
digan “Ay no este
llevó un arma” ya van
a estar prevenidos los
demás, en cambio los
niños no, casi no les
gusta decir así por así
mentiras

A: The young
people won´t
[answer] because of
fear, to let others
know and say "Oh
no, he has a gun".
The others are going
to be forewarned
with him.
Missing Options:

Missing Options:
Podría ser también por
venganza

40

Preoccupatio
ns (N=8,
20%)

A: It could also be
for revenge

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: ¿Si le
hiciera una pregunta a
una persona de 24
años, cree que nos
puede contestar
honestamente?
201023: No
Entrevistador: ¿Por
qué?
201023: Porque si esa
persona por algunas
razones tiene un arma
y decir que yo la tuve

Q: If you asked this
question to a person
of 24 years old, do
you think the person
can answer
honestly?
A: No
Q: Why?
A: Because if that
person for some
reasons has a gun in
the school, he won´t
tell the truth

74

*Instances of
lack of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus, no
changes
suggested.
¿Cuál es la razón
principal que
portas un arma
tal como una
pistola, cuchillo o
un garrote
durante los
últimos 30 días?

Durante los
últimos 30 días,
¿has portado un
arma de
fuego/pistola al
interior del
colegio?

*There was
one suggestion
to 'take care of
my business',
which could
imply
involvement in
the drug trade.
Considering
the fears of
disclosure and
safety for this
section, and
controversial
nature of the
drug trade in
sustaining the
armed conflict,
we would not
recommend
adding this
option, as it
could
potentially
compromise
the safety of
the
interviewers.
a. si
b. no

dentro de la escuela,
no te dice la verdad

F1210D

During the
past 30 days,
on how many
days did you
carry a gun in
your
community
or
neighborhood
?

4. Durante los últimos 30
días, ¿cuántos días portó
un arma de fuego/pistola
en su comunidad o barrio?
a. 0 días
b. 1 días
c. 2 o 3 días
d. 4 o 5 días
e. 6 o más días

43

Preoccupatio
ns (N=8,
19%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: Ok.
Por ejemplo ¿Usted
cree que las personas
nos responderían con
sinceridad, cuántas
veces han usado un
arma para lesionar otra
persona o amenazarla?
201022: No, no
responden con
sinceridad
Entrevistador: ¿Por
qué?
201022: Porque le
daría cosa qué es lo
que piensen ustedes,
por ejemplo usó el
arma, como tiene su
arma quería dispararle
a otra y lesionarlo en
el pie, ya le daría
miedo contar lo que él
hacía
Entrevistador:
¿Miedo porque
nosotros qué podemos
hacer con esa
información?
201022: Miedo porque
no sabe que manejo le
den ustedes a la
información, le daría
miedo contar

Q: Okay. For
example, do you
think people would
respond honestly,
how many times
have they used a
weapon to injure or
threaten another
person?
A: No, they won´t
respond sincerely
Q: Why?
A: Because he
would worry about
what you can think
about him, for
example he used the
gun, as he has his
gun he wanted to
shoot another and
injure his foot, in
that case, he would
be afraid to tell what
he did to you
Q: Afraid about
what can we do with
that information?
A: Fear because he
doesn´t know what
will you do with the
information, he
would be afraid to
tell.

75

Durante los
últimos 30 días,
¿has portado un
arma de
fuego/pistola en
tu
comunidad/vecin
dario/ o barrio?

a. si
b. no

F1210E

F1210F

F1210G

During the
past 30 days
when you
carried a gun,
where did
you get the
gun?

During the
past 12
months, how
many times
did you use a
machete to
threaten or
injure
another
person?
During the
past 12
months, on
how many
times did you
use a gun to
threaten or
injure

¿Durante los últimos 30
días, cuando portó un
arma de fuego/pistola,
dónde había conseguido el
arma?

45

Preoccupatio
ns (N=8,
18%),
Missing
options
(N=5, 11%)

a. Yo no porté un arma
durante los últimos 30 días
b. La había tomado de mi
casa, pertenecía a mis
padres u otro familiar
c. La había comprado en
una tienda que vende
armas
d. La había comprado "en
la calle"
e. Me la había prestado un
amigo o alguien que
conozco
f. Era un arma robada
g. Otra

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Porque no creo que
vayan a hablar tan
abierto del tema, tal
vez por miedo a que…
no que lo juzguen,
sino sería como más
miedo, como temor a
la policía o algo así.

A: Because I don´t
think they will talk
so openly about that,
perhaps for fear that
... not because the
judgement, but it
would be more like
fear, like fear for the
police or something
like that.

Missing Options:
Missing Options:
Por ejemplo en las
ollas.

6. Durante los últimos 12
meses, ¿cuántas veces usó
un machete para amenazar
o lesionar a otra persona?
a. O veces
b. 1 vez
c. 2 – 4 veces
d. 5 o más veces

49

7. Durante los últimos 12
meses, ¿cuántas veces usó
un arma de fuego/pistola
para amenazar o lesionar a
otra persona?
a. O veces
b. 1 vez
c. 2 – 4 veces
d. 5 o más veces

34

A: For example in
the "Pots".

Preoccupatio
ns (N=7,
14%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: ¿Por
qué?
201005: Porque de
pronto también le
daría cosa que usted lo
vaya denunciar...

Q: Why?
A: Because, he
would be afraid that
maybe you will
report it.

Preoccupatio
ns (N=7,
21%)

Preoccupations:

Preoccupations:

Entrevistador: ‘En
los últimos 12 meses
¿Cuántas veces portó
un arma para herir a
alguien?’. ¿Un joven
nos respondería esta
pregunta

Q: 'In the last 12
months, how many
times did you carry a
gun to hurt
someone?' Would a
young man honestly
answer this

76

*Instances of
lack of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus,
only changes
suggested are
grammatical
¿Durante los
últimos 30 días,
cuando has
portado un arma
de fuego/pistola,
dónde has
conseguido el
arma?

Durante los
últimos 12
meses, ¿has
usado un
machete para
amenazar o
lesionar a otra
persona?

Durante los
últimos 12
meses, ¿has
usado un arma de
fuego/pistola
para amenazar o
lesionar a otra
persona?

a. Yo no porté
un arma
durante los
últimos 30 días
b. La conseguí
de mi casa,
pertenecía a
mis padres u
otro familiar
c. La compre
en una tienda
que vende
armas
d. La compre
"en la calle"
e. La encontré
sin que alguien
me la diera
e. Me la presto
un amigo o
alguien que
conozco
f. Era un arma
robada
g. Otra
a. si
b. no

a. si
b. no

another
person?

F1210H

How old
were you the
first time you
carried a
gun?
(Do not count
times when
you carried a
gun for
hunting or
sport).

8. ¿Qué edad tenía usted la
primera vez que
llevó/portó un arma de
fuego? (No cuentan las
veces cuando llevó un
arma para la caza o
deporte).
AÑOS DE EDAD ____
____

43

Preoccupatio
ns (N=8,
19%)

sinceramente?
201001: En realidad
creo que no.
Entrevistador: ¿Por
qué no? Porque es algo
ilegal…
201001: Si, es algo
ilegal. Aquí todavía no
está legal entonces les
daría miedo que le
fueran a decir a la
policía o algo así.
Entrevistador: Los
jóvenes que nos
contestan… ¿Nos
darían una respuesta
exacta?
201001: Creo que no.
Si le contesta le
hablará pero no le dirá
toda la verdad.
Preoccupations:

question?
A: Actually I don´t
think so.
Q: Why not?
Because it's illegal ...
A: Yes, it's illegal. It
is not legal here so I
would be afraid to
tell the police or
something.
Q: The young
people who answer
us ... Would they
give us an exact
answer?
A: I don´t think so.
If he answers, he
will speak, but he
won´t tell the whole
truth.

Pues puede ser lo de
las armas, también lo
de la sexualidad
porque eso por acá no
es muy constante,
entonces sería un poco
incómodo.

Well it may be the
weapons, also the
sexuality part,
because that is not
very constant here,
then it would be a
bit uncomfortable.

Preoccupations:

*Instances of
lack of clarity of
meaning were
minimal, thus,
only changes
suggested are
minimal.
¿Qué edad tenías
la primera vez
que
llevaste/portaste
un arma de
fuego? (No
cuentan las veces
cuando llevaste
un arma para la
caza o deporte).
AÑOS DE
EDAD ____
____

77

none

Appendix A. Codebook for Analysis
Code
*parent codes
in bold
Limited
Applicability

Definition

When to Use

When NOT to Use

Responses noting
groups or situations for
which the item would
NOT be appropriate

When a participant
believes that a younger
age group does not
have experience with
the particular topic,
and would not
understand for this
reason.

When a participant
believes that the the
question content
would be
appropriate for
any/all age groups.

Example

¿Podemos hacer esta
pregunta a niños entre las
edades de 13 a 14?
101004: No
Entrevistadora: ¿Porqué?
101004: Ellos no saben cómo
está la casa, ellos no tienen
idea cómo hablar de violencia

Unclear
reference

Unclear
Perspective

Responses that reflect a
lack of clarity regarding
the situation to which
the word or phrase is
referring.

When the participant
understands a different
meaning of a
particular word or
phrase, indicates that
there are multiple
meanings of the
phrase, or provides a
response that indicates
an existing meaning of
the word/phrase, but
not the one intended in
the question.

When a participant
responds with an
answer not specific
to the question

¿Qué entiendes por bebida?

Responses reflecting
lack of clarity regarding
the perspective from
which the item should
be answered

When a participant
responds or is
confused on who the
question is referring to

When a participant
is confused by the
question

Siguiente, ¿Le has hecho algo
de esto a alguien que no sea
tu novio o pareja?

101004: Como de alcohol

101012: Que no sea no iría
ahí, porque si están hablando
de la pareja…
Entrevistadora: No, primero
hablamos de la pareja ahora
hablamos de alguien que no
sea la pareja
101012: Ah ya, un tercero

Wording or
Tone

Rephrasing

Responses about
specific words or
phrases that are
unfamiliar to
participants, or
offensive.
Such as when a
participant suggests a
potential way to
rephrase a question

When a Participant
suggests a new or
better way to ask the
question

78

When a participant
is confused by the
phrasing of a
question and asks
for clarification

La palabra cargar se
entiende?
101012: ¿Cargar? Es tener
algo, dependiendo porque uno

carga un bebé, uno carga un
bolso
Entrevistadora: ¿Es la
palabra adecuada o puede ser
“llevar”?
101012: Llevar es mejor,
espérese miro
Entrevistadora: ¿Cuál se
entiende mejor “cargar” o
“llevar”?
101012: Las mujeres que
llevan muchos preservativos
tienen relaciones sexuales con
muchos hombres
Word
comprehension

Or examples in which it
is obvious that a
participant does not
understand wording or
phrasing.

When a participant
claims to not
understand a particular
word or phrase

When a participant
does not respond;
When the
participant
understands but
indicates that there
are multiple
meanings of the
phrase or question

Entrevistadora: ¿Qué tal tiró
algo intencionalmente? Si yo
tiro algo, ¿eso sí lo
entiendes?
000000: ¿Si yo tiro algo?
Entrevistadora: Sí, o boto
algo o lo tiro, cuando algo…
¿cuál palabra utilizas para
decir eso: tirar, botar?
000000: botar? Yo casi no
entiendo tu palabra yo, está
difícil.

Tone

Instances where a
participant suggests that
wording is harsh or has
a negative connotation

When a participant
explains that the
wording is too harsh or
has a negative or
accusatory implication

When a participant
suggests a different
way to phrase the
question; when the
participant indicates
that the question
could be interpreted
in different ways

Qué significa cargar
condones? ¿Es mejor otra
palabra?
101012: Preservativo
Entrevistadora: ¿Preservativo
se entiende más que condón?
101012: Pues es que condón
es como muy ay, como muy
vulgar

Preocupaciones

Suggestion that a
question would lead
future respondents to
worry about disclosure
due to concerns over
confidentiality,
community pressures,
social appropriateness
or future retaliation.

When a participant
reports that a question
would lead future
respondents to worry
about disclosure due to
concerns over
confidentiality,
community pressures,
social appropriateness
or future retaliation.

79

When a participant
feels that a
particular question
will not cause
people to worry

¿Puedes pensar en una razón
que una joven de tu edad
preocuparía por dar una
respuesta honesta?
101004: Sí
Entrevistadora: ¿Porqué?
101004: Si le preocuparía
porque ellos o ellas me
preguntarían de qué estaban
hablando de ese amenazo y yo
le daría un concepto de

amenaza, que es matar para
que no amenace las mujeres o
una amiga
Entrevistadora: ¿Es difícil
hablar de eso?
101004: Ajá
Missing options

If a participant suggests
an option in a list that is
missing in the current
survey

When a respondent
suggests an addition or
augmentation to a
current list in the
survey

When a respondent
proposes a way to
conduct the survey
or way to rephrase a
question

Listo. Otro ejemplo,
golpeándote con un objeto tal
como un cinturón, un cable,
un palo, una escoba
¿Agregarías algo a la lista?
101012: El rejo de vaca
Entrevistadora: ¿Qué es eso?
¿Una cuerda?
101012: Eso
Entrevistadora: ¿Otro que
hace falta que utilizan en
Colombia para pegar a los
niños? Que no esté acá
101012: Faltaba era ese

Conceptions
of community

Community
context

Descriptions of the
word community or of
the community context
for the community to
which the Participant
belongs.
Responses that
elucidate how a
particular phrase or
question is interpreted
in the community or by
members of the
community.

When a participant
describes a situation
from the perspective
of their community

When a participant
provides an example
of violence in the
community

…Entrevistadora: Sí, digo
como del barrio, de tu grupo
de amigos
101012: Ahí influye la raza,
porque digamos los negros
son más destapados, los afro
son destapados, los indígenas
no
Entrevistadora: ¿Qué
significa destapados?
101012: Destapados en el
termino vulgar son más libres
de hablar y los indígenas no,
ellos son muy reservados,
ellos manejas sus leyes y sus
costumbres entonces para una
indígena si sería difícil
responder, difícil bastante, ni
la responderían porque los
que están metidos, porque los
otros los que están estudiados
de pronto sí, peor en su
mayoría no responderían, eso
es lo que yo he analizado

80

desde mi punto de vista y de
lo que he reunido con algunos
Definitions of
community

When a participant
provides a definition
of
community/vecindario
/barrio

When a participant
defines other terms
for the interviewer

Otra pregunta ¿Cuáles son
las razones principales para
no sentirse segura en su
comunidad? Entonces
¿entiendes? ¿Una joven de tu
edad entiende lo que es
“comunidad”?
101004: Ajá, que viven las
personas en una comunidad

Perceptions of
Violence

Definitions or
descriptions of
violence/abuse/maltreat
ment or aggression in
the context of
Colombia.

When a participant
describes different
forms of violence or
highlights an anecdote
or example of violence
in the community

When a participant
believes that
someone would be
worried about
someone finding out
their answer to a
question and
responding
violently.

Cómo crees que se sentiría
una mujer, una niña,
respondiendo si esa persona
que era su pareja, era
también miembro de una
pandilla o un grupo armado?
¿En el contexto donde viven
ustedes, qué significa grupo
armado?
101004: Los que andan de
matar de gente, o
amenazadores o violadores,
uno no tiene problema y se le
mata por una cosa o lo roban
or
¿Hay otro tipo de cosas en la
comunidad por las que ella no
se sentiría segura?
101004: Sí
Entrevistadora: Como cuáles
101004: Como, porque ella
está viendo que en la
comunidad hay muchos
violadores, hay muchos
rateros, por eso ella no está
sintiendo que esté viviendo en
un seguro, no está viviendo en
seguro, tampoco muchos
violadores

81

Suggestions
for VACS

Suggestions from
participants regarding
methods and protocols
for future
implementation

When a participant
mentions non-wording
related suggestions for
conducting the survey
in the future.

When a participant
mentions a way to
rephrase a question
for easier
understanding.

Para que nos contesten de
manera honesta ¿Cómo
podríamos cambiar el
instrumento? Para que nos
contesten
101012: ¿Pa’ que les digan la
verdad sobre ellos? Tienen
que generar la pregunta
diciendo que eso no va a
saberlo nadie, que solamente
lo va a saber ustedes, yo, o
sea, generarle confianza a la
persona, diga la gente, eso no
lo va a saber nadie pero uno
no sabe si puede cambiar la
cosa y si lo sepa la gente
entonces tienen que tratar de
generarle confianza a la
persona para que la persona
responda las preguntas sin
problema

82

Gender
Relations

Responses that reflect
gender normative
interpretations of
questions, articulate that
different perspectives
exists along gender
lines, or clarify gender
relations in the
community.

When a participant
does not believe that a
question applies to
them based on their
gender or when a
participant explains
the dynamics or roles
of women and men in
the community.

When a participant
describes a situation
from the perspective
of their regional
community

Cuando un hombre cuando
deseaba a una mujer, que no,
que vamos a hacer la
relación, cuando una mujer
responde no, cuando una
mujer cuando es virgen le da
miedo también meterse con un
hombre… el hombre le gustan
desearse, desearse y ahí
mismo…

Or
Entonces, si yo le hago esta
pregunta a alguien de tu
edad, van a estar pensando lo
que yo pienso de ellos.
101002: No, porque una
mujer piensa diferente y el
hombre piensa también
diferente.

83

Appendix B. Resources on Violence against Children in Colombia
National Registries:
o Sistema de Vigilancia de Violencia Intrafamiliar, Sexual y Contra las Mujeres SIVIGILA
o Registro Individual de Prestación de Servicios (RIPS)
o SIVELCE Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses
o Sistema Integral de Información de la Protección Social en Colombia SISPRO
Surveys:
"o Encuesta Nacional de Demografía y Salud ENDS""o Encuesta Nacional de Salud ENS"
"o Encuesta Nacional de Salud Mental"
"o Encuesta Nacional de Consumo de Sustancias Psicoactivas en Jóvenes Escolares"
o DANA - Encuesta de Comportamientos y Actitudes Sexuales de Niños y Niñas adolescentes
_ECA
Observatories:
o Observatorio de Asuntos de Género de la Alta Consejería Presidencial para la Equidad de la
Mujer
o Observatorio Nacional de Violencias – Línea de Violencia Basada en Género
o Observatorio para medición de desigualdades y análisis de equidad en salud ODES Colom-bia.
o Observatorio Nacional de Salud Mental (ONSM).
o Sistema de Seguimiento a la Atención de las Víctimas del Conflicto Armado
o Registro de Actividades Preventivas en Salud (menor y mujer maltratada).
o Sistema Estándar de Indicadores SES de Convivencia y Seguridad Ciudadana.

84

Appendix C. Dynamics of a study in the National System of Studies and
Population Health Surveys
Dinámica de un estudio en el Sistema Nacional de Estudios y
Encuestas Poblacionales para la Salud

85

Appendix D. Flowchart of study management and population surveys
performed by the MSPS
Flujograma de la gestión de los estudios y encuestas poblacionales
que realiza el MSPS

86

Appendix E. Institutions: Subcommittee on Information Systems of
Gender-Based Violence

-

Institutions:
Subcomité de Sistemas de Información en Violencias de Género
Ministerio del Interior
Ministerio del Trabajo
Ministerio de Justicia
Ministerio de Defensa
Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social
Dirección Nacional de Planeación - DNP
Consejería Presidencial para la Equidad de la Mujer
Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística - DANE
Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar – ICBF
Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses
Instituto Nacional de Salud
Defensoría del Pueblo
Consejo Superior de la Judicatura
Fiscalía General de la Nación
Unidad Nacional de Protección
Unidad de Víctimas para Atención Integral y la Reparación
Policía Nacional
Consejería Presidencia en Derecho Humanos
Procuraduría General de la Nación

_
87