Use of penile plethysmography in the court: A review of practices in Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penile plethysmography (PPG) is an objective measure of male sexual arousal in response to the presentation of a series of erotic and neutral stimuli. This measure is now widely recognized as the most reliable means of objectively measuring male sexual arousal to specific stimuli. Many clinicians and researchers consider PPG to be a vital contribution to the assessment and treatment of adult men with paraphilic interests and men who have committed sex crimes. PPG contributes to the clinical assessment of paraphilic interests, appraisal of risk of recidivism, and provides an objective measurement of changes in sexual arousal in response to treatment. There is strong support for the utility of PPG within clinical and legal contexts. This article addresses ways in which PPG has been utilized in the courts as part of expert clinical opinion. History of its use, details regarding admissibility in court, and case law are explored within the legal systems of Canada, the UK and the USA. Support for the inclusion of PPG as expert evidence is provided and judicial misunderstandings on the rationale for PPG use and its clinical utility in forensic assessments 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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".