MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409393685 · doi:10.1177/10790632251326550

Viewing Child Sexual Abuse Material for the First Time: Findings From an Anonymous Survey of Internet Users

2025· article· en· W4409393685 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Napier, Michael C. Seto, Rita Shackel, Judy Cashmore, Kevin McGeechan

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual Abuse · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health Centre
FundersUniversity of Sydney
KeywordsThe InternetInternet privacySexual abusePsychologyChild sexual abuseMedicineSuicide preventionMedical emergencyWorld Wide WebPoison controlComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of reports of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) detected on online platforms has increased dramatically in the last decade. Research has suggested that some individuals engage in a progression from typical adult pornography to atypical adult pornography (e.g., bondage, discipline, sadism, and masochism (BDSM), bestiality) to CSAM. Examining the onset to adult pornography and CSAM can therefore help identify intervention points for prevention and disruption. To investigate first exposure to adult pornography and CSAM, we anonymously surveyed a community sample of 5512 adults in five different countries: 742 (13.5%) survey participants self-reported viewing CSAM; 77% were male, 19.5% were female and 3.5% identified as another gender/sex. Majorities of respondents who viewed CSAM (71.2%), BDSM adult pornography (66.6%), and bestiality adult pornography (62.4%) were first exposed to this material prior to age 18. Females were significantly more likely than males to view adult content at younger ages. Younger age of exposure to typical and atypical adult pornography predicted younger age of exposure to CSAM, and respondents aged under 40 years were significantly more likely to view CSAM at younger ages ( p < .001). Self-reported CSAM viewers predominantly first discovered CSAM unintentionally (86.1%) and when alone (76%). The findings suggest a need for increased interventions that prevent exposure to CSAM and illegal adult content among adolescents.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexual AbuseSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207