The Revised Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests: Predictive and Concurrent Validity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the predictive and concurrent validity of the Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests (SSPI) and its recent revision (SSPI-2), using a large sample of 2,416 sex offenders deemed not to be in need of civil management in New York State. Both SSPI and SSPI-2 scores were significantly and positively related to sexual rearrest, but the SSPI-2 provided greater discrimination in rearrest within 5 years across possible scores. Neither measure significantly added to the prediction of sexual rearrest provided by the Static-99R. We also found evidence of concurrent validity, as both measures were positively and significantly correlated with clinician ratings of sexual preoccupation, emotional identification with children, and sexual offense-related cognitions (convergent validity), but were not significantly related to clinician ratings of self-regulation problems, noncompliance with supervision, or antisocial personality (divergent validity). Overall, the results suggest that the SSPI-2 is a specific and useful screening measure of pedophilic sexual interests among sex offenders with child victims.
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 | 0.001 | 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".