MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029485869 · doi:10.1177/107906320101300205

Empathy Deficits and Cognitive Distortions in Child Molesters

2001· article· en· W2029485869 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual Abuse · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpathyPsychologyCognitionHarmPoison controlDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An attempt was made to examine the thesis that the apparent empathy deficits in child molesters are simply another aspect of their self-serving tendency to distort information by, in this case, failing to recognize victim harm. Thirty-four child molesters were compared on a victim empathy measure and a measure of cognitive distortions, with 24 nonsex offenders and 28 nonoffending males. Child molesters displayed greater cognitive distortions than the other subjects and their greatest empathy deficits were toward their own victims. Consistent with the theory being examined it was found that the empathy scores of the child molesters toward their own victims were significantly correlated with the responses to the cognitive distortions scale. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for theory and practice.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.751

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it