Independent Component Analysis of Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Pedophiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Neuroimaging and other studies have changed the common view that pedophilia is a result of childhood sexual abuse and instead is a neurologic phenomenon with prenatal origins. Previous research has identified differences in the structural connectivity of the brain in pedophilia. AIM: To identify analogous differences in functional connectivity. METHODS: Functional magnetic resonance images were recorded from three groups of participants while they were at rest: pedophilic men with a history of sexual offenses against children (n = 37) and two control groups: non-pedophilic men who committed non-sexual offenses (n = 28) and non-pedophilic men with no criminal history (n = 39). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Functional magnetic resonance imaging data were subjected to independent component analysis to identify known functional networks of the brain, and groups were compared to identify differences in connectivity with those networks (or "components"). RESULTS: The pedophilic group demonstrated wide-ranging increases in functional connectivity with the default mode network compared with controls and regional differences (increases and decreases) with the frontoparietal network. Of these brain regions (total = 23), 20 have been identified by meta-analytic studies to respond to sexually relevant stimuli. Conversely, of the brain areas known to be those that respond to sexual stimuli, nearly all emerged in the present data as significantly different in pedophiles. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the presence of significant differences in the functional connectivity of the brain in pedophilia consistent with previously reported differences in structural connectivity. The connectivity differences detected here and elsewhere are opposite in direction from those associated with anti-sociality, arguing against anti-sociality and for pedophilia as the source of the neuroanatomic differences detected.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".