Content uploaded by Nesrin Duman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Nesrin Duman on Sep 11, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
YAŞAM BECERİLERİ PSİKOLOJİ DERGİSİ
LIFE SKILLS JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY
http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd E-ISSN: 2587-1536
Yıl(Year): 2018, Cilt(Volume): 2, Sayı(Issue): 4, ARALIK(DECEMBER)
Geliş Tarihi(Received): 06/08/2018 Düzeltme Tarihi(Revised): 30/08/2018 Kabul Tarihi(Accepted): 08/09/2018
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi 2018; 2(4), 215-222. / Life Skills Journal of Psychology, 2018; 2(4), 215-222.
REVIEW / DERLEME
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi • Life Skills Journal of Psychology • http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd • E-ISSN: 2587-1536
215
IDENTIFYING PEDOPHILIA
Esra Nihan BRIDGE(*) Nesrin DUMAN(**)
Kadıköy Counseling and Research Center Bartin University
ORCID:0000-0001-5600-3129 ORCID:0000-0002-2751-8315
ABSTRACT
Pedophilia, derived from Greek words philia of pedeiktos meaning erotic love of children (Seto, 2002)
includes using children as a sexual excitement object to reach gratification. In most cultures children
are not deemed as mature enough to make decisions about sexual intercourse. In this regard, child
sexual abuse is not only intolerable, but is also sanctioned in many societies. Pedophilia is considered a
controversial and unpleasant subject for many clinicians; therefore, most of them avoid conducting
research on this topic. In the literature, there is no absolute and consistent classification and also
diagnostic criteria of pedophile has changed over time. Although different theories such as
psychoanalytic, attachment and Ferenczi’s trauma theory propose some explanations regarding the
reasons for pedophilia, there is no satisfactory elucidation about this topic. Pedophilia is a
multidisciplinary concern and requires a bio-psycho-socio-legal plan for intervention, it is crucial to
conduct research by collaboration of various disciplines and understand this subject is important and
necessary to address this issue. This current study is an attempt to understand pedophilia by looking
from different perspectives.
Key Words
Pedophilia, Child Molesters, Classification, Profile, DSM
PEDOFİLİYİ TANIMAK
ÖZ
Çocuklara yönelik erotik sevgi anlamına gelen Yunanca “pedeiktos” (çocuk) ve “philia” (sevgi)
sözcüklerinden gelen pedofili (Seto, 2002), çocukların cinsel uyarım nesnesi olarak kullanılmasını
içerir. Çoğu kültürde, çocuklar cinsel ilişki hakkında karar vermek için yeterince olgun olarak kabul
edilmezler. Bu bağlamda, çocuk cinsel istismarı sadece tahammül edilemez olarak görülmekle kalmaz,
aynı zamanda pek çok toplumda cezai yaptırıma da bağlanırr. Pedofili birçok klinisyen için tartışmalı ve
hoş olmayan bir konu olarak kabul edilir; bu nedenle, çoğu klinisyen bu konuda araştırma yapmaktan
kaçınır. Literatürde, pedofili için mutlak ve tutarlı bir sınıflandırma bulunmamaktadır. Aynı zamanda
pedofili tanı kriterlerinin de zaman içerisinde değiştiği görülmektedir. Psikanalitik, bağlanma ve
Ferenczi'nin travma teorisi gibi farklı teoriler pedofilinin nedenlerine ilişkin bazı açıklamalar
önermesine rağmen, bu konu hakkında tatmin edici bir açıklama yoktur. Pedofili çok disiplinli bir
meseledir ve biyo-psiko-sosyo-yasal bir müdahale planı gerektirmektedir, Pedofili konusunun ele
alınmasında çeşitli disiplinlerin işbirliği ile araştırma yapması ve konuyu anlaması çok önemli ve
gereklidir. Bu çalışma, farklı perspektiflerden bakılarak pedofiliyi anlama girişimidir.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Pedofili, Çocuk Tacizcisi, Sınıflandırma, Profil, DSM
*Istanbul Kadıköy Counseling and Research Center, Istanbul-TURKEY. E-mail: esranihanbridge@gmail.com
**Bartin University Psychology Department Kutlubey Campus, Bartın-TURKEY. E-mail: nesrinduman@bartin.edu.tr
Citation: Bridge, E.N., Duman, N. (2018). Identifying pedophilia. Life Skills Journal of Psychology, 2(4), 215-222.
Identifying Pedophilia
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi • Life Skills Journal of Psychology • http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd
216
Definition
The word of pedophilia is derived from Greek words philia of pedeiktos which means
erotic love of children (Seto, 2002). This erotic love of children includes using children
as a sexual excitement object to reach gratification. Pedophilia is considered a
controversial and unpleasant subject for many clinicians; therefore, most of them
avoid conducting research on this topic. However, in order to understand the term
and meaning it is essential to review the literature.
Even though the community is inclined to consider all child sexual abusers or child
sexual molesters having pedophilia, every adult who commits sexual violence against
a child is not a pedophilic. To address this issue, American Psychiatric Association
diagnosed several pieces of criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (DSM). Pedophilia has been taken part in DSMs, a guide to classifying
mental disorders since the first day published. Pedophilia in the first DSM-I published
in 1952; is seen under the general title of personality disorders as a symptom of
sociopathic personality disorders. Pedophilia continued keeping its place under
personality disorders in DSM-II. But in this DSM, pedophilia and the other paraphilias
began to be seen as sexual deviations more than being just a symptom of sociopathic
personality disorder. However, over time, the proposals and suggestions from
pedophile study groups - the judicial events have had a major impact on these
proposals and the changes that were made- diagnostic criteria of the pedophilia and
the titles they have taken on changed. In DSM-III published in 1980, pedophilia was no
longer defined as a personality disorder but psychosexual disorder. Fourteen years
later when the DSM-IV released, pedophilia was listed under sexual and gender
identity disorders. This title hasn’t been changed in DSM-IV TR. In the last DSM-V,
published in 2013 which is currently in use, pedophilia and the other paraphilias are
took place as a disorder under the general and separate title of paraphilic disorders
(Table 1). The current approach of DSM-V to pedophilia and also other paraphilias is
differentiated from other DSM manuals’ by distinguishing paraphilia and paraphilic
disorder. According to DSM-V many people engage in paraphilias and paraphilia itself
doesn’t require clinical intervention. It means that it is not a diagnosis and so that it is
not the consideration of manual. The important feature of paraphilia here is being a
disorder, meeting the criteria of disorder. Paraphilia here is a necessary but not a
sufficient condition for having a paraphilic disorder (American Psychiatric
Association, 1952; 1968; 1980; 1987; 1994; 2000; 2013).
Table 1. Pedophilia classification in DSM manual
DSM-I
DSM-II
DSM-III
DSM-III R
DSM-IV
DSM-IVTR
DSM-V
Personality
Disorders
Personality
Disorders And
Certain Other Non-
Psychotic Mental
Disorders
Psychosexual
Disorders
Sexual Disorders
Sexual And
Gender Identity
Disorders
Sexual And Gender
Identity Disorders
Paraphilic Disorders
Sociopathic
Personality
Disturbance
Sexual Deviations
Paraphilias
Paraphilias
Paraphilias
Paraphilias
Voyeuristic Disorder
Exhibitionistic Disorder
Frotteuristic Disorder
Sexual Masochism Disorder
Sexual Sadism Disorder
Pedophilic Disorder
Fetishistic Disorder
Transvestic Disorder
Other Specified Paraphilic
Disorder
Unspecified Paraphilic
Disorder
Sexual Deviation
Homosexuality
Fetishism
Pedophilia
Transvestism
Exhibitionism
Voyarism
Sadism
Masohism
Other Sexual
Deviations
Unspecified Sexual
Deviations
Fetishism
Transvestism
Zoophilia
Pedophilia
Exhibitionism
Voyeurism
Sexual Masochism
Sexual Sadism
Atypical Paraphilia
Exhibitionism
Fetishism
Frotteurism
Pedophilia
Sexual
Masochism
Sexual Sadism
Transvestic
Fetishism
Voyeurism
Paraphilia NOS
Exhibitionism
Fetishism
Frotterism
Pedophilia
Sexual Mashosizm
Sexual Sadism
Transvestic
Fetishism
Voyarism
Paraphilia NOS
Exhibitionism
Fetishism
Frotterism
Pedophilia
Sexual Mashosizm
Sexual Sadism
Transvestic
Fetishism
Voyarism
Paraphilia NOS
Homosexuality
Transvestism,
Pedophilia,
Fetishism,
Sexual Sadism
(İncluding Rape,
Sexual Assault,
Mutilation)
According to DSM-V’s definition, pedophilia is “Over a period of at least six months,
recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving
Identifying Pedophilia
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi • Life Skills Journal of Psychology • http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd
217
sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger)
(Criteria A)” It is seen in Criteria B that the individual has acted on these sexual urges,
or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty
(APA, 2013:697). In addition to this factor, DSM-V also emphasizes that the person
who has a pedophilic interest “should be at least age 16 years old (5 years older than
the child/children) to be diagnosed (Criteria C)” (APA, 2013:697). First of all this
explanation shows that if 13-year-old children sexually abuse other children, this
cannot be called a pedophilic action. In addition, if the person feels this sexual urges
through 15 years old puberty, it cannot be called pedophilic either. This means the
target child must be younger than 15 years old. Third, from this definition, it can be
understood that it is enough to have sexual fantasy to be considered as pedophilic, the
person does not necessarily need to have penetration. This criteria also emphasizes
that all child sexual abuse is not the product of a pedophilia, and it helps to
differentiate pedophilia from a child sexual molester, which is non-pedophilic child
sexual abuse.
Classification
Although there is no absolute and consistent classification in the literature, pedophilia
can be classified regarding several different factors such as victimized child’s family
position and type of sexual action. These classifications bolster clarification of the
concept of pedophilia in many aspects.
The first and most common classification of pedophile is regarding the victimized
child’s family position in other words whether the victimized child is from internal
family or external family. While some pedophiles choose a child from their internal
family, which is called familial offenders or intra-familial pedophile, others may
choose their victim from their external family which is called non-familial offenders or
extra-familial pedophile (Fagan, Wise, Schmidt & Berlin, 2002). In the literature,
external familial pedophile usually includes pedophiles who work with children,
however in some resources pedophiles who work with children are addressed
separately (Turner, Rettenberger, Lohmann & Eher, 2014).
In addition to child’s family position, pedophiles are categorized based on their sexual
actions. These sexual actions may be grouped as touching or non-touching actions. As
it was stated before, every pedophile does not get involved in sexual action with the
children. In fact, some of them can gratify their sexual impulses only in the fantasy
level (Fagan et al, 2002). Moreover, the pedophilic action may be only watching a
naked child (voyeuristic pedophile) or exposing oneself to the child (exhibitionist
pedophile). Pedophilic action which involves touching may vary from only gentle
touching of the child (frotteuristic pedophile) to penetration (Bahroo, 2005). Fagan et
al. (2002) also categorized their sexual actions regarding pedophiles’ approach. While
some of them can be called seductive, others may appear aggressive.
Pedophilia can also be categorized into two groups: Primary pedophilia and
secondary pedophilia. Secondary pedophilia is described as comorbidity of other
disorders such as schizophrenia or organic disorders which means appearing due to
other existent disorders. On the other hand, in primary pedophilia, disorder has the
fundamental function (Glasser, 1988).
In the literature, it was stated that most pedophiliac individuals are only sexually
attracted toward little boys. While some pedophiliacs may appear exclusively with
children, others may be both attracted to children and adults (Fagan et al, 2012).
Glasser (1988) mentions that primary pedophilia can be divided into two groups. The
first group is called as invariant pedophilia who only involves with children in
particular little boys. The second group is called pseudoneurotic pedophilia whose
sexual orientation is both heterosexual and children (Glasser, 1988). According to
their sexual orientation pedophilic group can vary from heterosexual pedophile to
homosexual and bisexual (Bogaert, Kuban & Blanchard, 1997). These groups’
differences and will be elaborated in general characteristics.
Identifying Pedophilia
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi • Life Skills Journal of Psychology • http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd
218
General Characteristics
Studies on child sexual abuse showed that child molesters and pedophiles cannot be
considered the same. To explain this issue, Strassberg, Eastvold, Kenney and Suchy
(2012) conducted research on 25 pedophilic and 25 non-pedophilic men who were all
convicted of having sexually offended against a child. Then, results were compared to
the control group of 24 men’s data. The aim of their study was to show differences
with these groups on psychopathic level which describes diminished empathy and
anti-social behavior. The study showed that psychopathy level of 25 pedophilic child
molesters are meaningfully less than non-pedophilic group. The results also indicated
that non-pedophilic molesters are more likely to be self-centered, impulsive, uncaring
of others, manipulative, and free of conscience (Strassberg et al., 2012).
Studies also showed that around “25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys”
(Blanchard et al., 2000). While pedophilic individuals’ primarily sexual interest is
usually in boys who are older than 8 years old, child molesters are usually attracted to
girls aged between 8 to 10-years-olds (Bahroo, 2005). Seto (2002) stated that
pedophiles have multiple victims, low level of force or threat, and are unlikely to
engage in nonsexual offenses. On the other hand, child molesters usually use higher
levels of violence and they commit sexual and nonsexual offenses (Seto, 2002). Similar
to previous research findings, child sexual abusers also supported that pedophiles
shows more social orientation than the non-pedophilic child sexual molesters.
Looking at child sexual molesters crime records showed that pedophiles have fewer
convictions and socially violent crimes such as drunk driving or substance abuse
compared to non-pedophilic group (Turner, Rettenberg, Lohmann& Eher, 2014).
Strassberg et al. (2012) emphasized that pedophilic individuals also felt remorse
because of their sexual orientation. Glasser (1988) supported this idea by explaining
pedophilic individuals intense experience of guilt and shame due to their archaic
superego organization. Seto (2002) suggested that many pedophiles have difficulty
with relationship to others such as engaging a conversation. They have deficits in
skills such as approaching people, engaging them in pleasant conversations, and
decoding affective cues during one-on-one interactions (Seto, 2002). Glasser (1988)
also addresses the narcissistic organization of pedophilic individuals. They quickly
withdrawn and isolate themselves from relationships with others (Glasser, 1988).
According to Glasser (1988), the invariant pedophile, who only involves with children,
demonstrates a rigid personality with a limited range of interests and activities. This
group also demonstrates more neurotic features, such as some tension in their
relationships and sexual apathy to their partners (Glasser, 1988).
When taking a closer look at their social life, it is easy to notice that many pedophiles
work regularly, some of them are surprisingly married, they do not have criminal
records, and they seem like ordinary people. Most of pedophilic and non-pedophilic
child sexual molesters preferred to work in a job, or be a volunteer in a place which
they can contact with children easily such as schoolteachers, sports coaches, or
caretakers (Turner, Rettenberg, Lohmann & Eher, 2013).
Research indicates that in order to maintain children's interests and their obedience
the pedophilic individual can be interested in a child’s needs and therefore develop
relationship with child. This intimate relationship with child also prevents children
from reporting crime. When this strategy does not work, blackmailing, threatening,
particularly threatening to kill children's family, frequently is used as a second
technique to keep children silence (Bahroo, 2005).
Seto (2010) emphasized that many pedophilic individuals also possess several images
of prepubescent children and frequently use child pornography. While pedophilic
individuals use child pornography for sexual gratification, antisocial men who
victimize children sexually do not commonly involve child pornography offenses
(Seto, Cantor& Blanchard, 2006). He suggested that child pornography offenses can be
considered as an indicator of pedophilia (Seto, 2010).
Identifying Pedophilia
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi • Life Skills Journal of Psychology • http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd
219
Reasons
Although there are many genetic, biological and evolutional reasons of pedophilia, this
article will only focus on psychological reasons. These causes will include aspects of
different theories as well as pedophiliacs’ early lives.
Looking at the early life of pedophiles, it can be seen that the foremost striking
characteristic is related to their own experiences of childhood sexual abuse (Fagan et
al, 2002). Being a victim of sexual violence as a child is a traumatic experience for
many children and this can be considered as a threat to children’s psychological unity.
Even though all children who were sexually abused are not pedophilic, the number of
pedophiles who were sexually abused in their childhood is significant finding. Seto
(2002) indicates that sexually abused children more likely use sex to cope with the
negative affect of this traumatic event. When sexually abused children become adults,
they might search inappropriate ways to experience their sexual life (Seto, 2002). In
order to analyze this topic, it is important to understand Ferenczi’s term of
“identification with the aggressor” in his trauma theory. Identification with the
aggressor is described as a way to cope with traumatic event. He states that when
minors experience traumatic event, they have difficulty to understand what happened
(Frankel, 2002). While they are processing this intolerable experience, in order to
survive, they split off from this experience by dissociating from their own feelings and
perceptions (Howell, 2014). During this negative experience, children perceive an
image of the abuser into their own head. This way, children internalize the aggressor,
the bad object. By doing that the self, emotions, thoughts, and behaviors of the
children transform into the abuser’s and they imitate the aggressors’ behaviors
(Frankel, 2002). Hence, children’s passive traumatic sexual abuse experience turns
into active by acting like an aggressor (Howell, 2014).
Pedophile’s invasion of generational differences can be better understood with
psychoanalytic perspective. In psychoanalysis, these generational differences were a
subject in oedipal complex. In oedipal complex, children’s sexual fantasy about
seducing parent was an unconscious wish; however, in pedophilia oedipal
relationship seemed reverse upside down. Moreover, children’s sexual abuse by older
generation-especially by parents- violates generational boundaries and sexual
barriers. According to Campbell (2014) pedophilic relationship can be a trigger for the
abuser’s unconscious oedipal fantasy. Glasser (1988) states that when pedophilic
individuals were "boys", they had intense sexual feelings towards their parents. When
they became an adult, they believe that the child who is the object of pedophilic
interest has the similar sexual feelings towards themselves. This idea can be an
explanation for some pedophilic individuals’ beliefs about children are capable of
consenting to sex (Seto, 2002). Bahroo (2005) also supported this idea by stating
many pedophilias claim their action has “educational value” for the child, child also
had “sexual pleasure” from the act, or the child was “sexually provocative.”
Some researchers suggest that pedophiles seek children because they cannot fulfill
their emotional needs in the relationship with peers (Seto, 2002). Bahroo (2005)
suggests that pedophilic individuals may want to satisfy their emotional loneliness
and search for dominance in relationships. Freud did not specifically address
pedophile; however, he used “child-self” in his writings to address this type of
organization. Fixation of child inner image also shows itself as a protest against
maturity (Scarfone, 2014). By being never grown up, pedophiliacs can keep the child
inner self-image and also they can keep their childhood relationship to their parents
(Glasser, 1988).
Bowlby’s attachment theory also proposes an explanation for pedophilia from the
perspective of a child victim. This theory’s aspects of pedophilia suggests that
inadequate attachment style from early relationships is a risk factor for pedophilia
(Fagan et al, 2012). In dysfunctional families, poor relationships between children and
parents lead to weak and insecure attachment between parents and child. A weak
bond between parent-child has an influence on child seeking relationship with other
adults in other word a new parent object in order to compensate this poor attachment
(Seto, 2002; Bahroo, 2005).
Identifying Pedophilia
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi • Life Skills Journal of Psychology • http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd
220
To be able to clarify the reasons of pedophilia, family relationships, birth order and
choosing a target was also explored in the studies. Bogaert, Kuban and Blanchard
(1997) conducted research in order to examine the existance of relationship between
birth order and erotic preference of pedophiliacs. In their study, the sample group is
chosen among homosexual, bisexual, and heterosexual pedophiliacs who have
siblings. Their study revealed that homosexual and bisexual pedophiliacs are
characterized with having a later birth order (Bogaert, Kuban & Blanchard, 1997).
Blanchard et al. (2000) found in their study that pedophiles with more older brothers
have more sexual interest in boys rather than in girls. These findings also need to be
evaluated deeply in the light of theories mentioned above.
Conclusion
Studies indicate that childhood sexual abuse is a serious threat for children’s healthy
development (Fagan et al.,2002). For this reason, child sexual molesters who sexually
abuse children are not only intolerable, but also are sanctioned in many societies.
Although in the public mind, all children molestation is considered as a product of
pedophilia, literature suggests that this criminal act can also be a product of antisocial
behavior. Research showed that every child molesters are not pedophilic and
emphasizing the difference of a psychopathy level is essential to distinguish
pedophilia and non-pedophilia (Strassberg et al., 2012).
Even though there are myriad of knowledge regarding victims of childhood sexual
abuse, there is a lack of study regarding pedophilic offenders. Since pedophilia is
multidisciplinary concern, it requires a bio-psycho-socio-legal plan for intervention.
However, this article did not focus on interventions and/or treatment. In order to
understand the reasons of pedophile and address this subject, it is crucial to conduct
research by collaboration of various disciplines (Seto, 2002; Campbell, 2014; Bahroo,
2005).
Identifying Pedophilia
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi • Life Skills Journal of Psychology • http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd
221
References
American Psychiatric Association. (1952). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (DSM-I). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (1968). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (DSM-II). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (3rd ed.; DSM-III.). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (3rd ed., rev.; DSM-III-R). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (4th ed., text rev. ; DSM-IV-TR). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders, (Fifth Edition; DSM-V). Washington, DC: Author.
Bahroo, B.A. (2005). Pedophilia, psychiatric insights. Family Court Review an
Interdisciplinary Journal. 41(4), 497-507.
Blanchard, R., Barbaree, H. E., Bogaert, A. F., Dickey, R., Klassen, P., Kuban, M. E. and
Zucker, K. J. (2000). Fraternal birth order and sexual orientation in pedophiles.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29,(5). Doi: 10.1023/A:1001943719964.
Bogaert, A.F., Kuban, M., Blanchard, M. (1997) Pedophilia, sexual orientation, and birth
order. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106(2), 331-335. doi: 10.1037//0021-
843X.106.2.331.
Campbell, D. (2014). Doubt in the psychoanalysis of a paedophile. The International
Journal of Psychoanalysis, 95(3), 441-463. doi: 10.1111/1745-8315.12196.
Fagan, P.J., Wise, T.N., Schmidt, C.W., & Berlin, F.S. (2002). Pedophilia. The Journal of
the American Medical Association. 288(19), 2458-65.
Frankel, J. (2002). Exploring Ferenczi's concept of identification with the aggressor:
Its role in trauma, everyday life, and the therapeutic relationship. Psychoanalytic
Dialogues, 12(1), 101-139.
Glasser, M. (1988). Psychodynamic aspects of paedophilia. Psychoanalytic
Psychotherapy, 3(2), 121-135, doi:10.1080/02668738700700111.
Howell, E. F. (2014). Ferenczi’s concept of identification with the aggressor:
Understanding dissociative structure with interacting victim and abuser self-
states. The American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 74(1), 48-59.
Scarfone, D. (2014). The three essays and the meaning of the infantile sexual in
psychoanalysis. The Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 83(2), 327-344.
Seto, M.C. (2002). Pedophilia and sexual offending against children. Washington DC:
American Psychological Association.
Seto, M.C. (2010). Child pornography use and internet solicitation in the diagnosis of
pedophilia. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39(3), 591-593. DOI 10.1007/s10508-010-
9603-6.
Seto, M.C., Cantor, J. M., Blanchard, R. (2006). Child pornography offenses are a valid
diagnostic indicator of pedophilia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115(3), 610-
615. Doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.115.3.610.
Identifying Pedophilia
Yaşam Becerileri Psikoloji Dergisi • Life Skills Journal of Psychology • http://dergipark.gov.tr/ybpd
222
Strassberg, D. S., Eastvold, A., Kenney, J. W., & Suchy, Y. (2012). Psychopathy among
pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters. Child Abuse & Neglect, 36(4), 379-
382.
Turner, D., Rettenberger, M., Lohmann, L., Eher, R., & Briken, P. (2014). Pedophilic
sexual interests and psychopathy in child sexual abusers working with children.
Child Abuse & Neglect, 38(2), 326-335.
