Stepping stones to sexual murder: the role of developmental factors in the etiology of sexual homicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of a variety of developmental factors on sexual homicide offenders (SHOs), while taking into account other components of sexual homicide theoretical models. Design/methodology/approach A series of logistic regression models are performed using a total of 616 incarcerated adult male sexual offenders from Canada to distinguish between three groups of sexual offenders, SHOs, violent non-homicidal sex offenders (NHSOs) and NHSOs. Findings Results indicate that contrary to theoretical models, experiences of victimization are not central to the development of SHOs. Instead, it is the adoption of various problematic behaviors in childhood that appear as most important in the etiology of this particular type of sexual crime. This suggests that the various existing theoretical models of sexual homicide need to be revised and/or tested with additional empirical data. Originality/value This is the first study to look at developmental factors using two control groups of NHSOs and violent NHSOs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".