Differences in Visual Attention Patterns to Sexually Mature and Immature Stimuli Between Heterosexual Sexual Offenders, Nonsexual Offenders, and Nonoffending Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Men, whether gynephilic or androphilic, show both early and late attention toward adults and not toward children. We examined early and late visual attention to sexually mature versus immature stimuli in four groups of heterosexual men: sexual offenders against children (SOAC = 18), sexual offenders against adults (SOAA = 16), nonsexual offenders (NSO = 18), and nonoffending men (NOM = 19). We simultaneously presented adult and child stimuli and measured time to first fixation, number of first fixations, total duration of fixation, and fixation count to four areas of interest: entire body, then face, chest, and pelvis. We found a significant interaction where only SOAC tended to fixate more first times to child than to adult stimuli. Conversely, we found longer total duration of fixations for the bodies of adults compared to the bodies of children in all groups; however, in both the total duration of fixations and the fixation count for the whole body, but especially in the chest, SOAC tended to fixate longer and more often on child stimuli than the other two groups of offenders, but not longer or more often than NOM. This study adds to the limited research using eye-tracking techniques in samples of SOAC.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".