Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hebephilia refers to a sexual interest for pubescent children in Tanner Stage 2 or 3 of sexual development (i.e., early stages of secondary sex development; Blanchard, Lykins, et al., 2009). Hebephilia was recently proposed as a standalone diagnosis, alongside pedophilia, in the main diagnostic manual used by clinicians in Canada and the United States to diagnose mental health disorders, which ignited considerable controversy in the field. The dissertation examined the validity of hebephilia as a construct through three interrelated studies utilizing a large sample of sexual offenders from a Sexual Behaviours Clinic (n = 2,238). Study 1 examined the convergent validity of hebephilia in a sample of admitters and deniers. There was convergence among self-report, sexual behaviour, and sexual arousal indicators of hebephilia. Further, there was considerable overlap between pedophilia (i.e., sexual interest in prepubescent children) and hebephilia. Study 2 and Study 3 examined the association between hebephilia and sexual offending. Hebephilia is arguably most pertinent to furthering our understanding of sexual offending against children, as one could not act on this sexual interest legally without committing a sexual offence against a child. Study 2 examined concurrent validity by examining the role of hebephilia in sexual victim choice. Similar to pedophilia, hebephilia was associated with a greater number of victims under the age of 15. Further, hebephilia was associated with an increased likelihood of victim age polymorphism (i.e., having victims in other age ranges). Finally, Study 3 examined a subsample of offenders assessed at the Sexual Behaviours Clinic (n = 656) whose criminal records were coded and analyzed in order to assess the predictive validity of hebephilia. Both pedophilia and hebephilia were associated with an increased likelihood of sexual non-contact recidivism, after controlling for time at risk. Based on their high degree of overlap and similar correlates, the major conclusion of this dissertation is that pedophilia and hebephilia are more similar than they are different. Results are discussed within the context of the debate on whether hebephilia is a mental health disorder and the implications for the assessment and risk management of sexual offenders.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".