MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033680281 · doi:10.1177/107906320301500302

Distorted Attitudes and Perceptions, and Their Relationship With Self-Esteem and Coping in Child Molesters

2003· article· en· W2033680281 on OpenAlexaff
William L. Marshall, Liam E. Marshall, Sarah Sachdev, Raina-Lianne Kruger

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual Abuse · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySelf-esteemPerceptionDevelopmental psychologyCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two studies were conducted to compare various aspects of child molesters, non-sexual offenders, and community-based nonoffenders. These studies were aimed at examining some implications of our general model of sexual offending. Study 1 compared the responses of these 3 groups on measures of self-esteem, attitudes toward women and children, and social desirability tendencies. The only observed difference was that child molesters had significantly lower self-esteem than did the other 2 groups. In Study 2, child molesters displayed more cognitive distortions about sex between adults and children than did nonsexual offenders or nonoffenders. However in this study child molesters scored in the same range as the other participants on self-esteem and the tendency to use sex as a way of coping with problems. The results are discussed in terms of the differences between the present findings and earlier studies, and their implications for future research.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexual AbuseSame topicSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesFrench-language works237,207