The Development and Validation of the <i>Cognitions of Internet Sexual Offending</i> (C-ISO) Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tools designed to measure the cognitions of individuals who engage in sexual activities with children over the Internet are either based on knowledge about men who had committed contact sexual offenses or cognitive phenomena not specifically associated to offending behaviors. Thus, there is no validated tool specifically designed to assess the offense-supportive cognitions of men who use the Internet to sexually offend children. This study developed and validated the Cognitions of Internet Sexual Offending (C-ISO) scale. A sample of 241 men with online and contact sexual as well as with nonsexual offenses completed the C-ISO scale and its psychometric properties, and latent structure was analyzed using both Classical Test Theory (CTT) and Item Response Theory (IRT), resulting in a final version containing 31 items. The analyses indicate that the C-ISO has excellent psychometric properties and discriminates men with online sexual offenses from those with contact sexual and nonsexual offenses. Implications of the findings for clinical practice and future research are discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".