MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411970103 · doi:10.1080/1068316x.2025.2524424

The developmental antecedents of child sexual abuse perpetration: an empirical framework using a developmental approach

2025· article· en· W4411970103 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandre Gauthier, Patrick Lussier

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology Crime and Law · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInternational Centre for Comparative CriminologyUniversité LavalInstitut national de psychiatrie légale Philippe-Pinel
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologySexual abuseChild sexual abuseClinical psychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is limited research examining the developmental antecedents of child sexual abuse (CSA) perpetration and a fewer number of these studies are supported by empirical data. As a result, theories of CSA perpetration are relatively muted about the developmental pathways, focusing instead on clinical and contextual factors. Building on past research, the current study examines the developmental antecedents of a sample of individuals convicted of CSA. Combining data from multiple sources, the study examines the developmental antecedents of CSA perpetration operationalized as: (a) victim’s age; (b) number of child victims; (c) number of sex crime charges; (d) number of sex crime events involving a child victim. Using a series of structural equation modeling, the findings highlight the presence of multiple developmental pathways consistent with the heterogeneity characterizing this group. The study findings stress the importance developing a unified developmental theory of CSA perpetration recognizing the multiple developmental routes leading to CSA.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology Crime and LawSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207