Underreporting of Bestiality Among Juvenile Sex Offenders: Polygraph Versus Self‐Report

Abstract

Juvenile sex offenders (JSO) are a specific subset of delinquent adolescents that are receiving more attention because of the crimes they commit and the issues surrounding how to successfully treat their deviant behaviors. Given JSO are such predominant treatment concerns in society, it is essential to identify and target key risk factors. One sexual behavior, bestiality, may be of particular importance to address in treatment. In a meta-analysis conducted by Seto and Lalumiere, a 14% rate of bestiality among JSO was reported. This current study examined the differences in JSO (n = 32) who admitted bestiality based upon a self-report measure, the Multiphasic Sexual Inventory-II (MSI-II), compared to information elicited by polygraphs. The results indicated extensive underreporting of bestiality behaviors between these two sources of information (MSI-II = 37.5%; polygraph = 81.25%). These findings are important given the reliance treatment programs place on information elicited from self-report tools.

The Utility of Post-Conviction Polygraph Testing Among Sexual Offenders

“…In thirteen studies it was reported that some/all of the participants were also receiving (inpatient and outpatient) psychological therapy (O'Connell, 1997;Stovering, Nelson, & Hart., 2013;Heil, Ahlmeyer, & Simons, 2003;Van Arsdale et al, 2012;Cook et al, 2014;McGrath et al, 2007;English et al, 2003;English et al, 2000;Schenk et al, 2014;Kokish et al 2005;Grubin et al, 2004;Grubin & Madsen, 2006;Buschman et al, 2010). However, one study controlled for these treatment effects in the analysis by comparing a treatment only with a combined polygraph treatment group (McGrath et al, 2007).…”

“…The maintenance polygraph test was used in three studies (McGrath et al, 2007;Gannon et al, 2014;Grubin et al, 2004) and the specific issue test in two of the included studies (Schenk et al, 2014;Bourke et al, 2014). Combinations of test types were used in four of the reviewed studies (Grubin, 2010;English et al, 2000;Stovering, Nelson, & Hart.…”

“…Nine studies employed a single intervention group study design with no comparison group that assessed participants before and following a polygraph but did not follow-up after completion of the polygraph (English et al, 2000;Schenk et al, 2014;Van Arsdale et al, 2012;Bourke et al, 2014;Stovering, Nelson, & Hart., 2013;O'Connell, 1997;Emerick & Dutton., 1993;Buschman et al, 2009;English et al, 2003). Two studies explored selfreported accuracy and utility from a single intervention design (Kokish et al, 2005;Grubin & Madsen, 2006).…”

“…Two studies explored selfreported accuracy and utility from a single intervention design (Kokish et al, 2005;Grubin & Madsen, 2006). Four studies followed a quasi-experimental design with a polygraph intervention and comparison group, (McGrath et al, 2007;Gannon et al, 2014;Cook et al, 2014;Schenk et al, 2014); others included a polygraph unaware group (Grubin et al, 2004), a between samples comparison, i.e. parolee vs. prisoner (Heil et al, 2000;Heil, Ahlmeyer, & Simons, 2003), or a within subjects comparison between multiple polygraphs (Ahlmeyer et al, 2000).…”

Paraphilias

“…Referring to the results of a systematic literature review, Solla et al [16 & ] reported the incidence of rare paraphilic behaviour, such as telephone scatology, zoophilia and klismaphilia, as a side-effect of Parkinson's disease treatment with dopaminomimetic medication [16 & ]. Schenk et al [26] examined juvenile sex offenders for the incidence of bestiality by comparing polygraph results when asked about bestiality with self-reported results. They reasoned that self-reported measuring of juvenile sex offenders might underreport the prevalence of bestiality.…”