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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.690

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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