The Self and the Ideal Self: Methodological Study of Pedophiles

Abstract

Ratings of the self and of the ideal self were obtained from 215 institutionalized child molesters and 143 child molesters who were living in the community. The discrepancy between the two ratings of the self is seen to be related to the descriptive terms used to depict the self Words that are clearly evaluative in nature did not lead to discrepancies in the two ratings. Words that were descriptive but nonevaluative gave rise to large differences between ratings of the ideal self and the real self. There were few apparent differences between the child molesters in the community and those in the institution.

Child molesters' construal of themselves, other adults, and children

“…A further construct suggested by our clinical experience with child molesters is big-small, with children often described by abusers as "big" or "large," in spite of evidence to the contrary. This view was also expressed by Frisbie et al (1967), who suggested that clean-dirty, hard-soft, and hot-cold may also reflect differences between molesters and sexual normals.…”

“…In terms of self-descriptions, molesters describe( themselves as dirty more often than the community sample did (see Frisbie et al, 1967), but not more often than the nonmolesting prison comparisons did. This finding, then, may be a reflection of incarceration, rather than a negative self-image among child molesters.…”

“…A second problem with the six-scale version of the semantic differential concerns range restriction. Several writers (e.g., Frisbie et al, 1967;Howells, 1979Howells, , 1981 have noted that adults are unlikely to be sexually attracted to children simply because of physical characteristics, just as general sexual attraction appears multifaceted (Rook & Hammen, 1977;Winter, 1988). The more general meaning of children to child molesters needs to be examined by the inclusion of more bipolar scales.…”

“…One application of an expanded semantic differential with child molesters was provided by Frisbie and her colleagues (Dingman et al, 1968;Frisbie et al, 1967). They described the technique as "nonthreatening" and "relatively ambiguous" (Frisbie et al, 1967, p. 700), and they argued that it and similar psychological assessments are important "because an adult male's selection of a child as a sexual object seems to be related to his perceptions of the self, his role in a given social structure, and his recognhion and/or acceptance of ethical values and social expectations" (p. 699).…”

Incarcerated Child Molesters' Perceptions of Themselves and Others

“…As Frisbie, Vanasek, and Dingman (1967) observed, &dquo;An adult male's selection of a child as a sexual object seems to be related to his perceptions of the self, his role in a given social structure, and his recognition and/or acceptance of ethical values and social expectations&dquo; (p. 699). Whether there is reference specifically to values, attitudes, beliefs, or personal constructs-the distinctions made between these psychological constructs may be more apparent than real (Horley, 1991)-the concern is with offenders' thoughts about themselves and others, as well as with the relationship between these views and molesters' offending behavior.…”