The Revised Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests (SSPI–2): Development and Criterion-Related Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests (SSPI) is a structured rating scale of four child victim characteristics: number, age, gender, and relationship of victims. Sexual offenders against children who score higher on the SSPI are more likely to be identified as having pedophilic sexual arousal and are more likely to sexually reoffend. Recent research suggests that child pornography offending is a valid and perhaps independent indicator of pedophilia. In this study, we examined whether child pornography offending would add to the criterion-related validity of the SSPI. In the construction sample of 950 offenders with child victims, the SSPI with a fifth item of child pornography (Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests-2 [SSPI-2]) was significantly associated with phallometrically assessed sexual arousal to children. In a validation sample of 950 offenders with child victims, the SSPI-2 was again related to phallometrically assessed sexual arousal to children, outperforming the original SSPI. We recommend clinicians and researchers use the SSPI-2 as a structured method of assessing pedophilic sexual interests based on offending behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".