Sexual Preferences and Recidivism of Sex Offenders With Mental Retardation
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
By some accounts, sex offenders with mental retardation commit sex offenses against children because the offenders lack sexual knowledge or are socially and intellectually immature rather than because of sexually deviant interests. By other accounts, these offenders exhibit pedophilic sexual interests. In this study, phallometrically determined sexual interests, recidivism, and choices of victims of 69 sex offenders with mental retardation are examined and compared with those of 69 sex offenders of average or higher IQ. Consistent with hypotheses, sex offenders with mental retardation exhibit more deviant preferences for prepubertal children, male children, and young children than do the comparison offenders. They are also more likely to have had a prepubertal victim, a prepubertal male victim, and a very young victim. They are no more likely than the comparison offenders to exhibit preferences for extremely coercive sex with children or to exhibit deviant adult activity preferences, nor are they more likely to recidivate violently. Results support the idea that pedophilia is a disorder of neurodevelopment and point to the importance of risk assessments that include assessing sexual preferences among sex offenders with mental retardation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it