The Characteristics of Online Sex Offenders: A Meta-Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is much debate as to whether online offenders are a distinct group of sex offenders or if they are simply typical sex offenders using a new technology. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the extent to which online and offline offenders differ on demographic and psychological variables. Online offenders were more likely to be Caucasian and were slightly younger than offline offenders. In terms of psychological variables, online offenders had greater victim empathy, greater sexual deviancy, and lower impression management than offline offenders. Both online and offline offenders reported greater rates of childhood physical and sexual abuse than the general population. Additionally, online offenders were more likely to be Caucasian, younger, single, and unemployed compared with the general population. Many of the observed differences can be explained by assuming that online offenders, compared with offline offenders, have greater self-control and more psychological barriers to acting on their deviant interests.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it