Typologies of sexually motivated abductions: a latent class analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, sexually motivated abductions have not received as much attention from researchers in comparison to the acts of abduction and sexual assault alone. Further, the majority of research that is conducted on abductions focuses solely on child victims, creating a gap in the literature. The current study was set forth to identify qualitatively different subgroups of offenders who commit sexually motivated abductions. Using victim, crime, and offender characteristics taken from sexual abduction cases (n = 1288), a latent class analysis was conducted. Results from the latent class analysis revealed that four subgroups of sexually motivated abductors exist: Convenience Opportunist, Strategic Opportunist, Child Opportunist, and Familiar Opportunist. In addition, bivariate analyses were run to test the latent class solution with different characteristics; results suggest that these subgroups of sexually motivated offenders may not be dependent on some victim lifestyle characteristics. These results provide evidence that there are qualitatively different subgroups of offenders who commit sexually motivated abductions, which may be useful for law enforcement when conducting investigations.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".