An Efficient Measure of Sexual Interest in Children: The Revised Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests (SSPI-2)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the convergent, divergent, predictive, and incremental validity of the Revised Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests (SSPI-2) in a sample of 264 men adjudicated for sexual offenses against at least one child under the age of 15. We found evidence of construct validity as the SSPI-2 had small to medium correlations with phallometric testing ( r = .31), recorded pedohebephilic diagnoses ( r = .52), and attitudes tolerant of sexual offending against children ( r = .23), in addition to small and non-significant correlations with the PCL-R ( r = −.07), VRAG-R ( r = −.09), BARR-2002R ( r = −.06), and conduct disorder ( r = −.07). As indicated by DeLong tests, the SSPI-2 was a better predictor of 5-year sexual ( Z = −2.44) and non-contact sexual recidivism ( Z = −2.46) than the SSPI. The SSPI-2 also added incremental predictive accuracy to risk tools such as the BARR-2002R, PCL-R, VRAG-R, and Static-99R. Overall, our findings suggest that the SSPI-2 is a valid measure of sexual interest in children and may be useful as a screening tool to help inform prioritization and management.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".