MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271359544 · doi:10.1300/j158v01n02_05

The Value of Phallometry in the Assessment of Male Sex Offenders

2001· article· en· W2271359544 on OpenAlexaff
Michael C. Seto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Forensic Psychology Practice · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedophiliaPsychologyParaphiliaValue (mathematics)Clinical psychologySexual behaviorSex offenderSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deviant sexual interests such as pedophilia (interest in prepubescent children), biastophilia (interest in forced sex), and peo-deiktophilia (interest in exposing one's penis to strangers) are important to consider in the assessment and treatment of male sex offenders. Phallometry, the measurement of erectile responses to sexual stimuli, is the best available measure of male sexual interests. This article summarizes the research on the discriminative and predictive validity of phallometrically-measured sexual interests, discusses common professional or ethical objections to the clinical use of phallometry, and comments on the advantages and disadvantages of two alternative measures (visual reaction time and sexual offense history scales).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.377 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Forensic Psychology PracticeSame topicPsychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingFrench-language works237,207