Predicting hands-on child sexual offenses among possessors of Internet child pornography.

Abstract

The recent Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v. Comstock (2010) upheld the constitutionality of The Adam Walsh Act, which provides for civil commitment of child pornography (CP) offenders certified as sexually dangerous, thereby approving litigation of all such prisoners in the federal system. The two studies reported here sought to address the question: What is the likelihood that an individual convicted of child pornography offenses has a prior history of a hands-on sexual offense involving a child or has a high probability of committing such an offense? Our sample consisted of 349 participants: 113 who committed an Internet sexual offense only and no other known or self-reported hands-on sexual offense, 176 child molesters who reported no Internet sexual offense, and 60 child molesters that reported committing an Internet sexual offense. Study 1 yielded two scales, one reflecting Antisocial Behavior (AB) and one reflecting Internet Preoccupation (IP). Those two scales predicted membership in the combined sample of child molesters with a high degree of accuracy (c = 0.75). Study two revealed that all three groups were discrete with respect to AB and IP. By increasing the IP scale by 1 point, the odds of being an IO rather than a CM increased by 86%. The plotted conditional probabilities increased linearly as values on the AB scale increase, from 0.27 when AB = 0 to 0.84 when AB = 13. Our results are discussed in terms of risk discrimination among possessors of child pornography, relevance of risk to the statutory third prong element of serious difficulty, and the policy implications of the findings reported here.

Gateway to offending behaviour: permission-giving thoughts of online users of child sexual exploitation material

“…A substantial rise in convictions for CSEM-related offences (Radford et al, 2011) has consequently resulted in an increase in research on CSEMOs (Babchishin, Hanson, & Hermann, 2011;Babchishin, Hanson & VanZuylen, 2015;Seto, Hanson, & Babchishin, 2011). One of the most widely researched questions is whether CSEMOs are a distinct type of sex offender from contact sex offenders (CSOs) and comparison studies have identified some differences regarding psychological and offence-related variables Elliott, Beech, & Mandeville-Norden, 2012;Lee, Li, Lamade, Schuler, & Prentky, 2012;McCarthy, 2010). However, CSEMOs do not present as a homogeneous group: CSEM use has been linked to a range of functions beyond sexual satisfaction, such as financial gain or using the material to desensitise a potential contact victim (Caple, 2008;Quayle, Erooga, Wright, Taylor, & Harbinson, 2006;Seto, Reeves, & Jung, 2010;Surjadi, Bullens, Van Horn, & Bogaerts, 2010;Taylor, Holland, & Quayle, 2001;Taylor & Quayle, 2003, 2005, and research on the offence motivations of CSEMOs has revealed a range of motivators for viewing CSEM, such as a sexual interest in children, indiscriminate sexual interests, or unmet emotional needs Seto et al, 2010).…”

Kinderpornografie

“…Ein Vergleich von Internettätern (n = 113), Handson-Tätern (n = 176) und Tätern, die in beiden Bereichen delinquierten ("mixed offenders") (n = 60), zeigte, dass sich die drei Gruppen bezüglich antisozialer Verhaltensweisen und Beschäftigung mit dem Internet unterschieden, dass ein höherer Score bei "Beschäftigung mit dem Internet" die Zugehörigkeit zur Gruppe der Internettäter wahrscheinlicher machte, während zusätzlich hohe Werte auf einer Skala "antisoziale Verhaltensweisen" ein guter Prädiktor für die Zugehörigkeit zu der Gruppe der "mixed offenders" war (Lee et al 2012).…”

Repetitive Sex Offenders, Treatment of

“…The consistent differentiating factor is antisociality, with contact offenders being significantly more antisocial (Eke et al, 2011;Seto and Eke, 2005;Webb et al, 2007;Lee et al, 2012). Internet sex offenders also appear to be less deviant, less physically aggressive and less impulsive than contact offenders (Tomak et al, 2009).…”