Cognitive distortions in sex offenders are specific or general beliefs/attitudes that violate commonly accepted norms of rationality that have been shown to be associated with the onset and maintenance of sexual offending. In this article, we describe the major theories that have been formulated to explain the role of distorted cognition in initiating and maintaining sexual offending. We evaluate each theory in light of a set of theory appraisal criteria and the available empirical research. Finally, we conclude by drawing together the results of this theory evaluation process and highlight the major implications for treatment and future research.
In the visual processing of sexual content, pupil dilation is an indicator of arousal that has been linked to observers’ sexual orientation. This study investigated whether this measure can be extended to determine age-specific sexual interest. In two experiments, the pupillary responses of heterosexual adults to images of males and females of different ages were related to self-reported sexual interest, sexual appeal to the stimuli, and a child molestation proclivity scale. In both experiments, the pupils of male observers dilated to photographs of women but not men, children, or neutral stimuli. These pupillary responses corresponded with observer’s self-reported sexual interests and their sexual appeal ratings of the stimuli. Female observers showed pupil dilation to photographs of men and women but not children. In women, pupillary responses also correlated poorly with sexual appeal ratings of the stimuli. These experiments provide initial evidence that eye-tracking could be used as a measure of sex-specific interest in male observers, and as an age-specific index in male and female observers.
This paper forms the second part of a debate lead by Marshall, Marshall, and Kingston (2011) regarding the need to address so-called cognitive distortions in sexual offender treatment. In their paper, Marshall et al. argue that so-called cognitive distortions may not necessarily require intense and focussed attention or challenge throughout treatment. In evaluating Marshall et al."s arguments, we highlight some inherent differences in how both Marshall et al. and ourselves choose to define the term cognitive distortion. We surmise that these key definitional differences appear to account for many of the issues that we "debate". In particular, for example, Marshall et al. focus their arguments regarding cognitive distortions more explicitly upon excuses, denial and minimizations whereas we choose to focus upon schemas and higher order belief structures. Thus, we argue that the broadness and vagueness of the term cognitive distortion can lend itself to quite different interpretations and research foci. We offer some alternative views to Marshall et al."s position and advocate the consideration of cognitions with an aetiological role in offending. We conclude with some suggestions for future research and treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.