Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:11:26.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neurocognitive differences between pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2009

YANA SUCHY ,
J. WILSON WHITTAKER ,
DONALD S. STRASSBERG  and
ANGELA EASTVOLD
YANA SUCHY*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
J. WILSON WHITTAKER
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah Special Education Department, Forest Grove School District, Forest Grove, Oregon
DONALD S. STRASSBERG
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
ANGELA EASTVOLD
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
*
*Correspondence and reprint requests to: Yana Suchy, Department of Psychology, University of Utah, 380 S. 1580 E., Room 502, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112. E-mail: yana.suchy@psych.utah.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although some evidence exists that child molesters may be characterized by structural and functional brain abnormalities, findings across studies are inconsistent. Past cognitive research in this area has been extensively criticized for relying on conceptually weak batteries, measures of questionable reliability, and poorly defined samples (i.e., failing to distinguish between pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters). The present study aimed to address the weaknesses of past research by comparing 40 child molesters (20 pedophilic and 20 nonpedophilic) and 20 demographically matched nonoffender controls on six well-defined neurocognitive composite scores of comparable reliability (i.e., semantic knowledge, executive functioning, processing speed, motor speed, auditory memory, and visual memory). Results indicated that pedophilic child molesters exhibit slower processing speed, nonpedophilic child molesters exhibit poorer semantic knowledge, and both molester groups exhibit executive weaknesses as compared to nonoffender controls. This study is the first to compare the two molester types on neurocognitive functions. The observed differences between the molester groups help explain inconsistencies in past research and demonstrate the need to distinguish between the two types of child molesters when studying neurobiologic underpinnings of sexual offending. (JINS, 2009, 15, 248–257.)

Keywords

Executive functioningProcessing speedMotor speedMemoryFrontal lobeTemporal lobeLimbicChild molestationPedophiliaCriminal offendingSexual abuse
Type
Research Articles
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , March 2009 , pp. 248 - 257
Copyright
Copyright © INS 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abel, G.G. & Osborn, C. (1992). The paraphilias: The extent and nature of sexually deviant and criminal behavior. Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 15(3), 675–687.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abracen, J., O’ Carroll, R., & Ladha, N. (1991). Neuropsychological dysfunction in sex offenders? Journal of Forensic Psychiatry 2, 167–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anckarsater, H. (2006). Central nervous changes in social dysfunction: Autism, aggression, and psychopathy. Brain Research Bulletin, 69(3), 259–265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baird, A.D., Wilson, S.J., Bladin, P.F., Saling, M.M., & Reutens, D.C. (2002). Hypersexuality after temporal lobe resection. Epilepsy & Behavior, 3(2), 173–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bergeron, T.K. & Valliant, P.M. (2001). Executive function and personality in adolescent and adult offenders vs. non-offenders. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 33(3), 27–45.Google Scholar
Birbaumer, N., Veit, R., Lotze, M., Erb, M., Hermann, C., Grodd, W., & Flor, H. (2005). Deficient fear conditioning in psychopathy: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62(7), 799–805.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanchard, R., Cantor, J.M., & Robichaud, L.K. (2006). Biological factors in the development of sexual deviance and aggression in males. In Barbaree, H.E. & Marshall, W.L. (Eds.), The juvenile sex offender (77–104). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Blanchard, R., Christensen, B.K., Strong, S.M., Cantor, J.M., Kuban, M.E., & Klassen, P.E. (2002). Retrospective self-reports of childhood accidents causing unconsciousness in phallometrically diagnosed pedophiles. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31(6), 511–526.Google Scholar
Blanchard, R., Kolla, N., Cantor, J.M., Klassen, P.E., Dickey, R., Kuban, M.E., & Blak, T. (2007). IQ, handedness, and pedophilia in adult male patients stratified by referral source. Sex Abuse, 19, 285–309.Google Scholar
Blanchard, R., Kuban, M.E., Klassen, P.E., Dickey, R., Christensen, B.K., & Cantor, J.M. (2003). Self-reported head injuries before and after age 13 in pedophilic and non-pedophilic men referred for clinical assessment. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32(6), 573–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogaert, A.F. (2001). Handedness, criminality, and sexual offending. Neuropsychologia, 39, 465–469.Google Scholar
Brower, M.C. & Price, B.H. (2001). Neuropsychiatry of frontal lobe dysfunction in violent and criminal behaviour: A critical review. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 71(6), 720–726.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burns, J.M. & Swedlow, R.H. (2003). Right orbitofrontal tumor with pedophilia and constructional apraxia. Archives of Neurology, 60, 437–440.Google Scholar
Cantor, J.M., Kabani, N., Christensen, B.K., Zipursky, R.B., Barbaree, H.E., Dickey, R., Klassen, P.E., Mikulis, D.J., Kuban, M.E., Blak, T., Richards, B.A., Hanratty, M.K., & Blanchard, R. (2008). Cerebral white matter deficiencies in pedophilic men. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 42, 167–183.Google Scholar
Cantor, J.M., Kuban, M.E., Blak, T., Klassen, P.E., Dickey, R., & Blanchard, R. (2006). Grade failure and special education placement in sexual offenders’ educational histories. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 743–751.Google Scholar
Chapman, L.J. & Chapman, J.P. (1987). The measurement of handedness. Brain and Cognition, 6, 175–183.Google Scholar
Cohen, L.J. & Galynker, I.I. (2002). Clinical features of pedophilia and implications for treatment. Journal of Psychiatric Practice, 8(5), 276–289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, L.J., Nikigforov, K., Gans, S., Poznansky, O., McGeoch, P., & Weaver, C. (2002). Heterosexual male perpetrators of childhood sexual abuse: A preliminary neuropsychiatric model. Psychiatric Quarterly, 73, 313–336.Google Scholar
Dolan, M., Deakin, W.J.F., Roberts, N., & Anderson, I. (2002). Serotonergic and cognitive impairment in impulsive aggressive personality disordered offenders: Are there implications for treatment? Psychological Medicine, 32(1), 105–117.Google Scholar
Finkel, D. & McGue, M. (2007). Genetic and environmental influences on intraindividual variability in reaction time. Experimental Aging Research, 33(1), 13–35.Google Scholar
Flor-Henry, P. (1987). Cerebral aspects of sexual deviations. In Wilson, G.D. (Ed.), Varian sexuality: Research and theory (49–83). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Flor-Henry, P., Lang, R.A., Koles, Z.J., & Frenzel, R.R. (1991). Quantitative EEG studies of pedophilia. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 10(3), 253–258.Google Scholar
Golden, C.J. & Freshwater, S.M. (1998). Stroop Color and Word Test: A manual for clinical and experimental uses. Wood Dale, IL: Stoelting Co.Google Scholar
Gorey, K.M. & Leslie, D.R. (1997). The prevalence of child sexual abuse: Integrative review adjustment for potential response and measurement biases. Child Abuse & Neglect, 21(4), 391–398.Google Scholar
Grigsby, J., Kaye, K., & Robbins, L.J. (1992). Reliabilities, norms and factor structure of the Behavioral Dyscontrol Scale. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 74(3, Pt 1), 883–892.Google Scholar
Guay, J.P., Proulx, J., Cusson, M., & Ouimet, M. (1921). Victim choice polymorphia among serious sex offenders. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 30, 521–533.Google Scholar
Hendricks, S.E., Fitzpatrick, D.F., Hartmann, K., Quaife, M.A., Stratbucker, R.A., & Graber, B. (1988). Brain structure and function in sexual molesters of children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 49(3), 108–112.Google Scholar
Hollingshead, A.A. (1975). Four factor index of social status. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Hucker, S., Langevin, R., Wortzman, G., & Bain, J. (1986). Neuropsychological impairment in pedophiles. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 18(4), 440–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyal, C.C., Black, D.N., & Dassylva, B. (2007). The neuropsychology and neurology of sexual deviance: A review and pilot study. Sex Abuse, 19, 155–173.Google Scholar
Kluver, H. & Bucy, P.C. (1939). Preliminary analysis of functions of the temporal lobes in monkeys. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 42, 979–1000.Google Scholar
Lang, R.A. (1993). Neuropsychological deficits in sexual offenders: Implications for treatment. Sexual and Marita Therapy, 8(2), 181–200.Google Scholar
Langevin, R., Wortzman, G., Wright, P., & Handy, L. (1989). Studies of brain damage and dysfunction in sex offenders. Annals of Sex Research, 2(2), 163–179.Google Scholar
Lapierre, D., Braun, C.M.J., & Hodgins, S. (1995). Ventral frontal deficits in psychopathy: Neuropsychological test findings. Neuropsychologia, 33(2), 139–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leahy, B., Suchy, Y., Sweet, J.J., & Lam, C.S. (2003). Behavioral Dyscontrol Scale deficits among traumatic brain injury patients, part I: Validation with nongeriatric patients. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17(4), 474–491.Google Scholar
Leech, S.L., Day, N.L., Richardson, G.A., & Goldschmidt, L. (2003). Predictors of self-reported delinquent behavior in a sample of young adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 23, 78–106.Google Scholar
Lezak, M.D., Howieson, D.B., & Loring, D.W. (2004). Neuropsychological assessment. New York:Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Maddocks, D. & Saling, M. (1996). Neuropsychological deficits following concussion. Brain Injury, 10(2), 99–103.Google Scholar
Maller, J.L., Sommer, M., Wagner, V., Lange, K., Taschler, H., Rader, C.H., Schuierer, G., Klein, H.E., & Hajak, G. (2003). Abnormalities in emotion processing within cortical and subcortical regions in criminal psychopaths: Evidence from a functional magnetic resonance imaging study using pictures with emotional content. Biological Psychiatry, 54(2), 152–162.Google Scholar
Mann, R.E. & Hollin, C.R. (2007). Sexual offender’s explanations for their offending. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 13(1), 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markwardt, F.C. (1997). Peabody Individual Achievement Test—Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Marshall, W.L., Seerran, G.S., & Cortoni, F.A. (2000). Childhood attachments, sexual abuse, and their relationship to adult coping in child molesters. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 12, 17–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mendez, M.F., Chow, T., Ringman, J., Twitchell, G., & Hinkin, C.H. (2000). Pedophilia and temporal lobe disturbances. Journal of Neuropsychiatry & Clinical Neurosciences, 12(1), 71–76.Google Scholar
Miller, E. (1999). The neuropsychology of offending. Psychology, Crime & Law, 5(4), 297–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Connor, T.A. & Burns, N.R. (2003). Inspection time and general speed of processing. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(3), 713–724.Google Scholar
Ozmen, M., Erdogan, A., Duvenci, S., Ozyurt, E., & Ozkara, C. (2004). Excessive masturbation after epilepsy surgery. Epilepsy & Behavior, 5(1), 133–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pallone, N.J. & Voelbel, G.T. (1998). Limbic system dysfunction and inventoried psychopathology among incarcerated pedophiles. Current Psychology, 17, 57–74.Google Scholar
PsyCor. (1997). WAIS-III & WMS-III Technical Manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Rahman, Q. & Symeonides, D.J. (2008). Neurodevelopmental correlates of paraphilic sexual interests. Archives of sexual Behavior, 37, 166–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ruff, R. (1988). Ruff Figural Fluency Test: Administration manual. San Diego, CA: Neuropsychological Resources.Google Scholar
Schiffer, B., Peschel, T., Gizewski, E., Forsting, M., Leygraf, N., Schedlowski, M., & Krueger, T.H.C. (2007). Structural brain abnormalities in the frontostriatal systems and cerebellum in pedophilia. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 41(9), 753–762.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schiltz, K., Witzel, J., Northoff, G., Zierhut, K., Gubka, U., Fellmann, H., Kaufmann, J., Tempelmann, C., Wiebking, C., & Bogerts, B. (2007). Brain pathology in pedophilic offenders: Evidence of volume reduction in the right amygdala and related diencephalic structures. Archives of General Psychiatry, 64(6), 737–746.Google Scholar
Seto, M.C. (2008). Pedophilia and sexual offending against children: Theory, assessment, and intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Seto, M.C., Harris, G.T., Rice, M.E., & Barbaree, H.E. (2004). The Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests predicts recidivism among adult sex offenders with child victims. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33(5), 455–466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seto, M.C. & Lalumiere, M.L. (2001). A brief screening scale to identify pedophilic interests among child molesters. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 13(1), 15–25.Google Scholar
Sheppard, L.D. & Vernon, P.A. (2008). Intelligence and speed of information-processing: A review of 50 years of research. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(3), 535–551.Google Scholar
Simonen, R.L., Videman, T., Battie, M.C., & Gibbons, L.E. (1998). Determinants of psychomotor speed among 61 pairs of adult male monozygotic twins. Journals of Gerontology: Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 53A(3), M228–M234.Google Scholar
Stattin, H. & Magnussen, D. (1995). Onset of official delinquency: Its co-occurrence in time with educational, behavioral, and interpersonal problems. British Journal of Criminology, 35, 417–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, M.H. & Thompson, E.H. (2001). Executive function impairment in sexual offenders. Journal of Individual Psychology, 57(1), 51–59.Google Scholar
Suchy, Y., Blint, A., & Osmon, D.S. (1997). Behavioral Dyscontrol Scale: Criterion and predictive validity in an inpatient rehabilitation unit population. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 11(3), 258–265.Google Scholar
Suchy, Y., Derbidge, C., & Cope, C. (2005). Behavioral Dyscontrol Scale—electronic version: First examination of reliability, validity, and incremental utility. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 19(1), 4–26.Google Scholar
Suchy, Y., Leahy, B., Sweet, J.J., & Lam, C.S. (2003). Behavioral Dyscontrol Scale deficits among traumatic brain injury patients, part II: Comparison to other measures of executive functioning. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17(4), 492–506.Google Scholar
Suchy, Y., Whittaker, W.J., Strassberg, D., & Eastvold, A. (in press). Facial and prosodic affect recognition among pedophilic and non-pedophilic criminal child molesters. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment.Google Scholar
Wright, P., Nobrega, J., Langevin, R., & Wortzman, G. (1990). Brain density and symmetry in pedophilic and sexually aggressive offenders. Annals of Sex Research, 3(3), 319–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zachary, R.A. (1986). Shipley Institute of Living Scale: Revised Manual. Los Angeles, CA: Eastern Psychological Services.Google Scholar