Prediction of Recidivism in Exhibitionists: Psychological, Phallometric, and Offense Factors
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
Exhibitionists have traditionally been regarded as nuisance offenders. However, empirical studies show that some offenders can be highly recidivistic and can escalate to incidents of Hands-on sexual assault. The objective of this study was to investigate predictors of recidivism in exhibitionists and clarify the differences between Hands-on and Hands-off sexual recidivists. The hundred and twenty-one exhibitionists were assessed at a university teaching hospital between 1983 and 1996. Archival data came from medical files and police files. The Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) was assessed retrospectively. Results indicated that over a mean follow-up period of 6.84 years, 11.7, 16.8, and 32.7% of exhibitionists were charged with or convicted of sexual, violent, or criminal offenses, respectively. Sexual reoffending recidivists were less educated, and had more prior sexual and criminal offenses. Violent, recidivists were also less educated, had lower Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (DSFI) scores, higher PCL-R Totals, and more prior sexual, violent, and criminal offenses. Criminal recidivists were younger, less educated, had lower DSFI scores, higher PCL-R scores, higher Pedophile Indices, and more prior sexual, violent, and criminal offenses. Hands-on sexual recidivists demonstrated higher PCL-R ratings, higher Pedophile and Rape indices, and more prior sexual, violent, and criminal offenses than did Hands-off counterparts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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