Well, here's the actual questions:
32. Have you ever personally experienced inappropriate or sexual remarks, comments about physical beauty, cognitive sex differences, or other jokes, at an anthropological field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you.)
The section is entitled Sexual harassment and assault so you would hope people would be contextually aware that "or other jokes" means of a sexual nature. But it's still a badly worded question. I further assume the reader is supposed to parse "inappropriate or sexual" as prefixes for the other items, but we live in a tightly wound panties world when comments about physical beauty are harassment.
39. Have you ever experienced physical sexual harassment, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual contact in which you could not or did not give consent or felt it would be unsafe to fight back or not give your consent at an anthropological field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you.)
The problem, again, is a terribly worded question. Are we to again assume physical should extend through the commas? Or is unwanted sexual contact just a fat girl asking a handsome dude to get a date after the working day is done. Is all physical contact unwanted sexual contact now?
The math for their statistical distributions is fine.
Their questions suck, lack good wording, and lack examples. [Not limited to but including... ...excluding FOO, but not limited to BAR.]
The second question also leaves "yes" as a valid response when consent was given for sexual content at an anthropological field site, but the respondent felt it would have been unsafe to fight back (despite having no need or desire to, since the sexual contact was consensual and enjoyed by all).
Fighting at a dig site while having sex is unsafe. Hell, everyone in the world could answer that question "yes" as fighting in general is unsafe.