Literature DB >> 24661177

Understanding processing speed weaknesses among pedophilic child molesters: response style vs. neuropathology.

Yana Suchy1, Angela D Eastvold2, Donald S Strassberg1, Emilie I Franchow1.   

Abstract

Research shows that pedophilic (PED) child molesters exhibit slower performance speed and greater performance accuracy when compared to nonpedophilic (N-PED) child molesters or other criminal and noncriminal controls. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether these differences reflect a slow/deliberate response style among PEDS (as we have previously hypothesized; Eastvold, Suchy, & Strassberg, 2011; Suchy, Whittaker, Strassberg, & Eastvold, 2009a, 2009b), or a fundamental neuropathological weakness in processing speed. Data came from a larger study examining neurocognition among sex offenders. Processing speed in three different domains (motor speed, visual-perceptual speed, and visual-motor integration) was examined in 20 phallometrically identified PEDs, 20 N-PEDs, and 20 nonsexual offenders, using both clinical (Finger Tapping, Symbol Search, Digit Symbol Coding) and experimental measures (Inspection Time Task [ITT]). The ITT assessed speed of visual-perceptual processing independent of response speed. On clinical measures, PEDs exhibited slower visual perception [F(2, 57) = 5.24, p = .008] and visual-motor integration [F(2, 57) = 5.02, p = .010] than the other groups, with no differences for simple motor speed. On the ITT, PEDs performed less accurately than the other groups [F(2, 57) = 3.95, p = .025], clearly indicating that slow processing speed cannot be explained by a deliberate response style. Group differences persisted after controlling for other potential confounds (age, estimate IQ, working memory, ethnicity, and substance use). PEDs' slower performance is due to a fundamental neurocognitive weakness, rather than a slow/deliberate response style. These results are consistent with Cantor et al.'s (2008) work identifying white matter abnormalities among PEDs and provide further support for a neurodevelopmental etiology of pedophilia. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24661177     DOI: 10.1037/a0035812

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Abnorm Psychol        ISSN: 0021-843X


  4 in total

1.  Evidence for superior neurobiological and behavioral inhibitory control abilities in non-offending as compared to offending pedophiles.

Authors:  Christian Kärgel; Claudia Massau; Simone Weiß; Martin Walter; Viola Borchardt; Tillmann H C Krueger; Gilian Tenbergen; Jonas Kneer; Matthias Wittfoth; Alexander Pohl; Hannah Gerwinn; Jorge Ponseti; Till Amelung; Klaus M Beier; Sebastian Mohnke; Henrik Walter; Boris Schiffer
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 2.  The Neurobiology and Psychology of Pedophilia: Recent Advances and Challenges.

Authors:  Gilian Tenbergen; Matthias Wittfoth; Helge Frieling; Jorge Ponseti; Martin Walter; Henrik Walter; Klaus M Beier; Boris Schiffer; Tillmann H C Kruger
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 3.169

3.  Expectation of sexual images of adults and children elicits differential dorsal anterior cingulate cortex activation in pedophilic sexual offenders and healthy controls.

Authors:  Inka Ristow; Jens Foell; Christian Kärgel; Viola Borchardt; Shijia Li; Dominik Denzel; Joachim Witzel; Krasimira Drumkova; Klaus Beier; Tillmann H C Kruger; Jorge Ponseti; Boris Schiffer; Kolja Schiltz; Henrik Walter; Martin Walter
Journal:  Neuroimage Clin       Date:  2019-05-22       Impact factor: 4.881

4.  Brain structure and clinical profile point to neurodevelopmental factors involved in pedophilic disorder.

Authors:  Christoph Abé; Roberth Adebahr; Benny Liberg; Christian Mannfolk; Alexander Lebedev; Jonna Eriksson; Niklas Långström; Christoffer Rahm
Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 6.392

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.