Replication of the Massachusetts Treatment Center Child Molester Typology in a Canadian Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of a comprehensive typology for the classification of sexual offenders has important implications for both risk prediction and treatment. To date, the most comprehensive typological system has been developed by Knight and Prentky (1990). These authors have developed typologies for both child molesters and rapists. The system for rapists has been replicated on at least two samples (Barbaree, Seto, Serin, Amos, & Preston, 1994; Brown & Forth, 1997); however, the child molester typology has yet to be fully replicated outside the MTC. In the present study, 109 child molesters who were assessed or treated at the Regional Treatment Centre (Ontario) were classified according to the MTC child molester typology. Interrater reliabilities were obtained for 20 participants and ranged from .90 to .40, which are comparable to those obtained in the MTC sample. Groups were compared on a number of meaningful variables, such as number of victims and sexual deviance.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".