Special Issue of <i>Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment</i> —Connecting Theory With Research: Testing Hypotheses About the Causes of Sexual Offending
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identifying causes of sexual offending is the foundation of effective and efficient assessment and intervention aimed at managing and reducing sexual offending. Although laudable advances have been made in our field, there is still much to learn about the causes of sexual offending. There are a number of influential theories and models that speculate about factors that may lead some people to sexually offend, such as the Four Factor Model (Finkelhor, 1984), Integrated Theory of the Etiology of Sexual Offending (Marshall & Barbaree, 1990), Quadripartite Models (Hall & Hirschman, 1991, 1992), Hierarchical-Mediational Confluence Model (Malamuth, 2003), Self-Regulation Model (Ward & Hudson, 1998), Pathways Model (Ward & Siegert, 2002), Evolutionary Explanations of Rape (Lalumiere, Harris, Quinsey, & Rice, 2005), Integrated Theory of Sexual Offending (Ward & Beech, 2006), Motivation-Facilitation Model of Sexual Offending (Seto, 2008), Multi-Model Self-Regulation Theory (Stinson, Sales, & Becker, 2008), and the Developmental Life Course perspective (Lussier, 2015). To date, there have been relatively few strong empirical tests of the assertions made in these and other theories and models of sexual offending. Testing such assertions is admittedly difficult, but methodological rigor is a matter of degree and there is certainly room for improvement. In part, the scarcity of rigorous tests may be due to uncertainty about the relevant empirical evidence available and the optimal methodological approaches required. The main goals for this special issue are to take stock of the state of the available evidence regarding theoretical assertions about the causes of sexual offending, provide guidance for future research, and, ultimately, facilitate more rigorous and relevant research on the causes of sexual offending. Accordingly, this special issue will focus 617372 SAXXXX10.1177/1079063215617372Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and TreatmentNunes and Hermann research-article2015
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 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.011 |
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".