Sexual Aggressors Against Women’s Sexual Lives: A Latent Class Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the day-to-day deviant and nondeviant sexuality of a sample of Canadian sexual aggressors against women ( N = 160). Using latent class analysis, three latent classes were identified: internalized deviant (ID), low sexual problem (LSP), and hypersexual deviant (HD). Following the latent class analysis, the developmental, physiological, cognitive, and criminological correlates of these lifestyles were analyzed. ID ( n = 31) aggressors were characterized by sexual dissatisfaction, sexual deviance, and a bland sexual life. LSP ( n = 116) aggressors were characterized by the absence of sexual deviance or hypersexuality. HD ( n = 13) aggressors were characterized by hypersexuality and sexual deviance. Our exploratory study suggests that the day-to-day nondeviant and deviant sexual life of sexual aggressors against women appear to affect their modus operandi. Furthermore, the adult sexual lifestyles of sexual aggressors against women appear to be extensions of their adolescent sexual lifestyles. The results of this study thus suggest avenues for research-notably, the specific influence of sexual behaviours and internalized psychosexual problems on modus operandi-that could improve the clinical management of sexual aggressors against women.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".