|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|94456||160298||2016||10 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||دانلود کنید|
• Previous research indicates users of Child Sexual Exploitation Material (CSEM) are distinct from contact child abusers.
• This suggests they have their own set of core beliefs (implicit theories) that underlie their offense-supportive cognitions.
• Using a Grounded Theory approach, the existing literature on CSEM users was analysed to conceptualize implicit theories.
• Five offense-specific implicit theories are proposed.
• The proposed content and function of each implicit theory is offered, along with some research and practice implications.
Contact sexual offenders have been proposed to hold a set of distorted core beliefs about themselves, others, and the world. These beliefs (or ‘implicit theories’) bias information in an offense-supportive manner, and are proposed to contribute to the etiology and maintenance of sexual offending. In recent years, there has been an increased research interest in online ‘child sexual exploitation material’ (CSEM) users, particularly since research has shown they are distinct from contact child abusers. In light of their distinction, it is hypothesized that CSEM users will possess their own set of implicit theories that guide their interpretation of intra/interpersonal information in a manner that influences the viewing and downloading of CSEM. Following a qualitative analysis of the existing empirical CSEM literature, an initial conceptualization of the implicit theories held by CSEM users is offered in the present paper. These include: ‘Unhappy World’, ‘Children as Sexual Objects’, ‘Nature of Harm (CSEM variant)’, ‘Self as Uncontrollable’, and ‘Self as Collector’, each of which is contextualized by a general assumption about the reinforcing nature of the Internet. The paper provides a detailed account of each implicit theory, including its content and function. Practical and research implications are also highlighted.
Journal: Aggression and Violent Behavior - Volume 26, January–February 2016, Pages 16–25