Back

Human trafficking and sexual exploitation at U.S. colleges/universities: Policy implications to halt it

Urada, L. A.; Weitensteiner, A.

2026-01-02 public and global health
10.64898/2025.12.31.25342184 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectivesHuman trafficking is a priority concern in the U.S, but few research studies have investigated the nature and extent of its occurrence on U.S. college campuses. The objective of this research was to identify the nature and extent of human trafficking/sexual exploitation among college students in San Diego County and Imperial Valley, California, where some of the highest documented rates of human trafficking occur nationally. MethodsCollege students (n = 971) from 12 campuses in Southern California responded to fliers posted on their campuses by completing online self-administered surveys. ResultsNearly one in five students (18%) reported experiencing human trafficking in college; 13% reported having heard, seen, or suspected trafficking recruitment occurring on campus. Further, students reported having known someone who sold sex or was trafficked as a college student (42%), while also describing the nature of their peers sexual exchanges as having been forced (12%), threatened (12%), coerced (26%), or deceived into selling sex (24%). They experienced physical abuse/violence (51%); rape, emotional/psychological harm (43%), and sexual assault/violence (42%) in commercial sex. ConclusionsStrategies to prevent human trafficking recruitment and to protect college students may need to mandate content for college student orientations in their first year and to test and evaluate these strategies to curb this public health crisis. Recommendations are: 1) expand Title IX implementation to encompass human trafficking/commercial sexual exploitation information at all universities, and 2) amend or introduce state laws mandating human trafficking training at schools to include colleges/universities.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.