Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 45–66 | Cite as

Online Child Pornography Offenders are Different: A Meta-analysis of the Characteristics of Online and Offline Sex Offenders Against Children

  • Kelly M. Babchishin
  • R. Karl Hanson
  • Heather VanZuylen
Original Paper

Abstract

The current meta-analysis compared the characteristics of online child pornography-only offenders, typical (offline) sex offenders against children, and offenders with both child pornography and contact sex offences against children (mixed). Based on 30 unique samples (comparison ns ranging from 98 to 2,702), the meta-analysis found key differences between groups. Offenders who committed contact sex offences were more likely to have access to children than those with only child pornography offences. In contrast, offenders who used the internet to commit sexual offences had greater access to the internet than those with contact sex offenders. Differences between the groups, however, were not limited to differential opportunities. Sex offenders against children and mixed offenders were found to score higher on indicators of antisociality than online child pornography offenders (CPOs). CPOs were also more likely to have psychological barriers to sexual offending than sex offenders against children and mixed offenders (e.g., greater victim empathy). Mixed offenders were found to be the most pedophilic, even more than CPOs. The findings suggest that offenders who restricted their offending behavior to online child pornography offences were different from mixed offenders and offline sex offenders against children, and that mixed offenders were a particularly high risk group.

Keywords

Sex offenders Internet Child pornography Pedophilia Paraphilias Meta-analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Public Safety Canada. Funding for this project was provided in part by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada. We would like to thank the following individuals for providing us with unpublished data or additional information for this meta-analysis: Till Amelung, Anne Burgess, David Delmonico, Liam Ennis, Ayten Erdogan, Erik Faust, Inge Hempel, Eric Imhof, Sandy Jung, Eva Kimonis, Paula Lopez, Hannah Merdian, Elicia Nademin, Olav Nielssen, Gerard Niveau, Yves Paradis, James Ray, Wineke Smid, and Gemma Wall.

References

Note. References marked with an asterisk were included in the meta-analysis.

  1. Albright, J. M. (2008). Sex in American online: An exploration of sex, marital status, and sexual identity in internet sex seeking and its impacts. Journal of Sex Research, 45, 175–186. doi: 10.1080/00224490801987481.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  3. *Armstrong, J. A. E. (2009). Internet child pornography: An examination of attachment and intimacy deficits. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
  4. Babchishin, K. M., Hanson, R. K., & Hermann, C. A. (2011). The characteristics of online sex offenders: A meta-analysis. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23, 92–123. doi: 10.1177/1079063210370708.Google Scholar
  5. *Bates, A., & Metcalf, C. (2007). A psychometric comparison of internet and non-internet sex offenders from a community treatment sample. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 13, 11–20. doi: 10.1080/13552600701365654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beier, K., Neutze, J., Mundt, I. A., Ahlers, C. J., Goecker, D., Konrad, A., et al. (2009). Encouraging self-identified pedophiles and hebephiles to seek professional help: First results of the Prevention Project Dunkelfeld (PPD). Child Abuse and Neglect, 33, 545–549. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.04.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, UK: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brand, M., Laier, C., Pawlikowski, M., Schachtle, U., Scholer, T., & Alstotter-Gleich, C. (2011). Watching pornographic pictures on the internet: Role of sexual arousal ratings and psychological–psychiatric symptoms for using internet sex sites excessively. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 371–377. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2010.0222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Briggs, P., Simon, W. T., & Simonsen, S. (2011). An exploratory study of internet-initiated sexual offences and the chat room sex offender: Has the internet enabled a new typology of sex offender? Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23, 72–91. doi: 10.1177/1079063210384275.Google Scholar
  10. Cantor, J. M., Klein, C., Lykins, A., Rullo, J. E., Thaler, L., & Walling, B. R. (2013). A treatment-oriented typology of self-identified hypersexuality referrals. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 883–893. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0085-1.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Carnes, P. J., Delmonico, D. L., & Griffin, E. (2007). In the shadows of the net: Breaking free of compulsive online sexual behavior (2nd ed.). Center City, MN: Hazeldean.Google Scholar
  12. Chaney, M. P., & Chang, C. Y. (2005). A trio of turmoil for internet sexually addicted men who have sex with men: Boredom proneness, social connectedness, and dissociation. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 12, 3–18. doi: 10.1080/10720160590933671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, L., & Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Journal of Sociology, 86, 90–118. doi: 10.2307/2094589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cooper, A., Delmonico, D. L., & Burg, R. (2000). Cybersex users, abusers, and compulsives: New findings and implications. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 7, 5–29. doi: 10.1080/10720160008400205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cooper, A., Griffin-Shelley, E., Delmonico, D. L., & Mathy, R. M. (2001). Online sexual problems: Assessment and predictive variables. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 8, 267–285. doi: 10.1080/107201601753459964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cooper, A., Scherer, C. R., Boies, S. C., & Gordon, B. L. (1999). Sexuality on the internet: From sexual exploration to pathological expression. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 30, 154–164. doi: 10.1037/0735-7028.30.2.154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. *Coward, A. I., Gabriel, A. M., Schuler, A., & Prentky, R. A. (2009, March). Child internet victimization: Project development and preliminary results. Presentation at the 2009 Annual Conference of the American Psychology—Law Society, San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
  19. Daneback, K., Cooper, A., & Månsson, S.-A. (2005). An internet study of cybersex participants. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 34, 321–328. doi: 10.1007/s10508-005-3120-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dauvergne, M., & Turner, J. (2010). Police-reported crime statistics in Canada, 2009 (Catalogue No. 85-002-X). Juristat, 30. Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics. Retrieved February 4, 2014 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2010002/article/11292-eng.htm.
  21. Delmonico, D., & Miller, J. (2003). The Internet Sex Screening Test: A comparison of sexual compulsives versus non-compulsives. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 18, 261–276. doi: 10.1080/1468199031000153900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eke, A. W., & Seto, M. C. (2012). Risk assessment of online offenders for law enforcement. In K. Ribisl & E. Quayle (Eds.), Internet child pornography: Understanding and preventing on-line child abuse (pp. 148–168). Devon, UK: Willan.Google Scholar
  23. Eke, A. W., Seto, M. C., & Williams, J. (2011). Examining the criminal history and future offending of child pornography offenders: An extended prospective follow-up study. Law and Human Behavior, 35, 466–478. doi: 10.1007/s10979-010-9252-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Elliott, I. A., & Beech, A. R. (2009). Understanding online child pornography use: Applying sexual offense theory to internet offenders. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, 180–193. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2009.03.002.
  25. *Elliott, I. A., Beech, A. R., & Mandeville-Norden, R. (2012). The psychological profiles of internet, contact, and mixed internet/contact sex offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment. doi: 10.1177/1079063212439426.
  26. Elliott, I. A., Beech, A. R., Mandeville-Norden, R., & Hayes, E. (2009). Psychological profiles of internet sexual offenders: Comparisons with contact sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 21, 76–92. doi: 10.1177/1079063208326929.Google Scholar
  27. *Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K. J., & Wolak, J. (2012). Second National Juvenile Online Victimization Incidence Study (NJOV-2) [Dataset]. Retrieved February 4, 2014 from the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect website: http://www.ndacan.cornell.edu.
  28. *Finkelhor, D., Wolak, J., & Mitchell, K. (2008). Juvenile Online Victimization Incidence Study (N-JOV) [Dataset]. Retrieved February 4, 2014 from the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect web site: http://www.ndacan.cornell.edu.
  29. Goller, A., Graf, M., Frei, A., & Dittmann, V. (2010). PW01-117—Recidivism of internet sex offenders—An epidemiological study on more than 4600 offenders in Switzerland. European Psychiatry, 25(Suppl. 1), 1533. doi: 10.1016/S0924-9338(10)71516-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Graf, M., & Dittmann, V. (2011). Forensic-psychiatric treatment for internet sex offenders. In D. P. Boer, R. Eher, L. A. Craig, M. H. Miner, & F. Pfäfflin (Eds.), International perspectives on the assessment and treatment of sexual offenders: Theory, practice, and research (pp. 479–488). West Sussex, UK: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Green, B. A., Carnes, S., Carnes, P. J., & Weinman, E. A. (2012). Cybersex addiction patterns in a clinical sample of homosexual, heterosexual, and bisexual men and women. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 19, 77–98. doi: 10.1080/10720162.2012.658343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hamilton, M. (2012). The child pornography crusade and its net widening effect. Cardoza Law Review, 33, 1679–1732.Google Scholar
  33. *Hanson, R. K. (2012). Updated risk assessment data for 411 online sex offenders and extrafamilial offenders identified in The Dynamic Supervision Project, 2007. Ottawa, ON: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada. Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar
  34. Hanson, R. K., & Bussière, M. T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348–362. doi: 10.1037//0022-006X.66.2.348.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1154–1163. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.6.1154.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2009). The accuracy of recidivism risk assessments for sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of 118 prediction studies. Psychological Assessment, 21, 1–21. doi: 10.1037/a0014421.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Harris, A. J. R., & Hanson, R. K. (2004). Sex offender recidivism: A simple question (user report 2004-03). Ottawa, ON: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.Google Scholar
  38. Hasselblad, V., & Hedges, L. V. (1995). Meta-analysis of screening and diagnostic tests. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 167–178. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.167.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. *Hempel, I. S., Buck, N. M. L., Goethals, K. R., & van Marle, H. J. C. (2013). Unraveling sexual associations in contact and noncontact child sex offenders using the single category—Implicit Association Test. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 25, 444–460. doi: 10.1177/1079063212464660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Higgins, J., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal, 327, 557–560. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. *Howitt, D., & Sheldon, K. (2007). The role of cognitive distortions in paedophilic offending: Internet and contact offenders compared. Psychology, Crime & Law, 13, 469–486. doi: 10.1080/10683160601060564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. *Jung, S., Ennis, L., Stein, S., Choy, A., & Hook, T. (2012). Child pornography possessors: Comparisons and contrasts with contact- and non-contact sex offenders. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  43. Kuhle, L. F., Neutze, J., Amelung, D., Grundmann, G., Scherner, A., Konrad, G. A., Schaefer, K. M., & Beier, K. M. (2012, September). Treatment-change in child pornography offending in pedophiles and hebephiles in the Prevention Project Dunkelfeld. Paper presented at the conference of the International Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  44. *Lee, A. F., Li, N. C., Lamade, R., Schuler, A., & Prentky, R. A. (2012). Predicting hands-on child sexual offences among possessors of internet child pornography. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law,. doi: 10.1037/a0027517.Google Scholar
  45. Levin, M. E., Lillis, J., & Hayes, S. C. (2012). When is online pornography viewing problematic among college males? Examining the moderating role of experiential avoidance. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 19, 168–180. doi: 10.1080/10720162.2012.657150.Google Scholar
  46. *Long, M. L., Alison, L. A., & McManus, M. A. (2013). Child pornography and likelihood of contact abuse: A comparison between contact child sexual offenders and noncontact offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 25, 370–395. doi: 10.1177/1079063212464398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. *Lopez, P. (2008). Descriptive and psychological data from 133 sex offenders identified in An in-depth look at northern Nevada’s sex offenders. Master’s thesis. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI: 1455648). Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar
  48. *Magaletta, P. R., Faust, E., Bickart, W., & McLearen, A. M. (2014). Exploring clinical and personality characteristics of adult male internet-only child pornography offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 58, 137–153. doi: 10.1177/0306624X12465271.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. *Marshall, L. E., O’Brien, M. D., Marshall, W. L., Booth, B., & Davis, A. (2012). Obsessive-compulsive disorder, social phobia, and loneliness in incarcerated internet child pornography offenders. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 19, 41–52. doi: 10.1080/10720162.2012.665291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. *Matsuzawa, Y. K. (2009). MMPI-2 characteristics of internet sex offenders. Doctoral dissertation. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI: 3365796).Google Scholar
  51. *McCarthy, J. (2010a). The relationship between possessing child pornography and child molestation. Doctoral thesis. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI: 3412742).Google Scholar
  52. *McCarthy, J. (2010b). Internet sexual activity: A comparison between contact and non-contact child pornography offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 16, 181–195. doi: 10.1080/13552601003760006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. *McWhaw, A. (2011). Online child pornography offenders and risk assessment: How online offenders compare to contact offenders using common risk assessment variables. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.Google Scholar
  54. *Merdian, H. L. (2012). Offenders who use child sexual exploitation material: Development of an integrated model for classification, assessment, and treatment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Waikato, New Zealand.Google Scholar
  55. Merdian, H. L., Curtis, C., Takker, J., Wilson, N., & Boer, D. P. (2013). The three dimensions of online child pornography offending. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 19, 121–132. doi: 10.1080/13552600.2011.611898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Middleton, D., Mandeville-Norden, R., & Hayes, E. (2009). Does treatment work with internet sex offenders? Emerging findings from the Internet Sex Offender Treatment Programme (i-SOTP). Journal of Sexual Aggression, 15, 5–19. doi: 10.1080/13552600802673444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mitchell, K. J., & Wells, M. (2007). Problematic internet experiences: Primary or secondary presenting problems in persons seeking mental health care? Social Science and Medicine, 65, 1136–1141. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Neutze, J., Grundmann, D., Amelung, T., Kuhle, L. F., Scherner, G., Konrad, A., et al. (2012a, September). Treatment change in dynamic risk factors in the Prevention Project Dunkelfeld. Paper presented at the International Association for the Treatment of Sexual Offenders Conference, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  59. *Neutze, J., Grundmann, D., Scherner, G., & Beier, K. M. (2012b). Undetected and detected child sexual abuse and child pornography offenders. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 35, 168–175. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2012.02.004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. *Neutze, J., Seto, M. C., Schaefer, G. A., Mundt, I. A., & Beier, K. M. (2011). Predictors of child pornography offenses and child sexual abuse in a community sample of pedophiles and hebephiles. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23, 212–242. doi: 10.1177/1079063210382043.
  61. *Paradis, Y., & Titley, S. (2011, September). Psychological data from 38 sex offenders identified in Portrait clinique sommaire d’individus condamnés pour des accusations de pornographie juvénile et évalués au Centre d’Intervention en Délinquance Sexuelle de Laval (CIDS). Paper presented at the meeting of Congrès International Francophone sur l’Agression Sexuelle, Montreaux, Suisse. Unpublished raw data.Google Scholar
  62. *Perrot, M., Benony, H., & Lopes, G. (2001, September). Les téléchargeurs d’images pédopornographiques: Un groupe clinique à part? Poster presented at the meeting of Congrès International Francophone sur l’Agression Sexuelle, Montreaux, Suisse.Google Scholar
  63. Putnam, D. E. (2000). Initiation and maintenance of online sexual compulsivity: Implications for assessment and treatment. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3, 553–563. doi: 10.1089/109493100420160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Quinsey, V. L. (1986). Men who have sex with children. In D. N. Weisstub (Ed.), Law and mental health: International perspectives (pp. 140–172). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  65. *Reijnen, L., Bulten, E., & Nijman, H. (2009). Demographic and personality characteristics of internet child pornography downloaders in comparison to other offenders. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 18, 611–622. doi: 10.1080/10538710903317232.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. *Roche, B., O’Reilly, A., Gavin, A., Ruiz, M. R., & Arancibia, G. (2012). Using behavior-analytic implicit tests to assess sexual interests among normal and sex-offender populations. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2. Retrieved February 4, 2014 from http://www.socioaffectiveneuroscipsychol.net/index.php/snp/article/view/17335.
  67. *Rooney, F. (2003). The internet and child sexual abuse: Personality and indicators of abusive behaviour. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Dublin Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
  68. Schulze, R. (2007). Current methods for meta-analysis: Approaches, issues, and developments. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 215, 90–103. doi: 10.1027/0044-3409.215.2.90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Seto, M. C. (2008). Pedophilia and sexual offending against children: Theory, assessment, and intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Seto, M. C. (2013). Internet sex offenders. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. *Seto, M. C., Cantor, J. M., & Blanchard, R. (2006). Child pornography offences are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 610–615. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.115.3.610.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Seto, M. C., & Eke, A. W. (2005). The criminal histories and later offending of child pornography offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 17, 201–210. doi: 10.1007/s11194-005-4605-y.Google Scholar
  73. Seto, M. C., Hanson, R. K., & Babchishin, K. M. (2011). Contact sexual offending by men with online sexual offences. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23, 124–145. doi: 10.1177/1079063210369013.Google Scholar
  74. Seto, M. C., Reeves, L., & Jung, S. (2010). Motives for child pornography offending: The explanations given by offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 16, 169–180. doi: 10.1080/13552600903572396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. *Seto, M. C., Wood, J. M., Babchishin, K. M., & Flynn, S. (2012). Online solicitation offenders are different from child pornography offenders and lower risk than contact sexual offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 320–330. doi: 10.1037/h0093925.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Sexual Recovery Institute. (2013). Cybersex Addiction Screening Test. Retrieved February 4, 2014 from Sexual Recovery: http://www.sexualrecovery.com/resources/self-tests/csat.php.
  77. *Sheldon, K., & Howitt, D. (2007). Sex offenders and the internet. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  78. *Sheldon, K., & Howitt, D. (2008). Sexual fantasy in paedophile offenders: Can any model explain satisfactorily new findings from a study of internet and contact sexual offenders? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 13, 137–158. doi: 10.1348/135532506X173045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. *Smid, W., Schepers, K., Kamphuis, J. H., van Linden, S., & Barteling, S. (2013). Prioritizing child pornography notification: Predicting dual offending. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  80. *Tomak, S., Weschler, F. S., Ghahramanlou-Holloway, M., Virden, T., & Nademin, M. E. (2009). An empirical study of the personality characteristics of internet sex offenders. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 15, 139–148. doi: 10.1080/13552600902823063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. *Wall, G. K., Pearce, E., & McGuire, J. (2011). Psychological data for 50 child sex offenders from North West England Probation Services identified in: Are internet offenders emotionally avoidant? Psychology, Crime & Law, 17, 381–401. [Unpublished raw data].Google Scholar
  82. Ward, T., & Beech, A. (2006). An integrated theory of sexual offending. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11, 44–63. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2005.05.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. *Webb, L., Craissati, J., & Keen, S. (2007). Characteristics of internet child pornography offenders: A comparison with child molesters. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 19, 449–465. doi: 10.1007/s11194-007-9063-2.Google Scholar
  84. Williams, K. M., Cooper, B. S., Howell, T. M., Yuille, J. C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Inferring sexually deviant behavior from corresponding fantasies: The role of personality and pornography consumption. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 36, 198–222. doi: 10.1177/0093854808327277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wolak, J. (2011, November). Child pornography possessors: Trends in offender and case characteristics. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, Toronto, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
  86. Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell, K. J. (2005). Child Pornography Possessors Arrested in Internet-Related Crimes: Findings from the National Juvenile Online Victimization Study. Alexandria: VA: National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. Retrieved February 4, 2014 from http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/pdf/jvq/CV81.pdf.
  87. Wood, H. (2011). The internet and its role in the escalation of sexually compulsive behaviour. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, 25, 127–142. doi: 10.1080/02668734.2011.576492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Yoder, V. C., Virden, T. B., & Amin, K. (2005). Internet pornography and loneliness: An association? Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 12, 19–44. doi: 10.1080/10720160590933653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Zickuhr, K., & Smith, A. (2012). Digital differences. Retrieved from Pew Research Centre’s Internet & American Life Project website: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Digital-differences.aspx.

Copyright information

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada as represented by: Public Safety Canada 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kelly M. Babchishin
    • 1
    • 2
  • R. Karl Hanson
    • 1
  • Heather VanZuylen
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Public Safety CanadaOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations