, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 326-327
Date: 16 Oct 2008

Are There “Hebephiles” Among Us? A Response to Blanchard et al. (2008)

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access
This is an excerpt from the content

Blanchard et al. (2008) call for the addition of a paraphilic condition to the DSM-V termed hebephilia. Beyond the fact that there was no control group employed by Blanchard et al. in order to compare the obtained results against normative patterns of sexual arousal of men, there were multiple methodological issues that preclude a call for the establishment of hebephilia as a diagnostic entity in the DSM-V.

I find no problem with the plethysmography methodology employed by Blanchard et al.; however, I would note that Blanchard et al. did not specify whether the procedure for eliciting self-report of the subjects described as “a great deal of exploration” preceded or followed the physiological measurements. It would have been more sound for this procedure to follow physiological measurement so as not to serve as a potential sensitizing factor which could confound the results. Further, the grouping algorithm employed concerns me. There appears to be a significant amount of variability amo ...