What’s God Got to Do With It? The Relationship Between Religion, Sadism, and Masochism

Abstract

Although “BDSM” (i.e., bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism, and masochism) has become increasingly present in popular media in recent years, much remains unknown about the etiology and correlates of BDSM. Research has demonstrated a relationship between religion and sexual behaviours/attitudes; therefore, religion could also be associated with sadism and masochism. To address gaps in existing knowledge, we conducted an online survey of 515 participants who answered a questionnaire on sexual life and behaviour, including questions on arousal in response to sadism and masochism scenarios, associated negative impacts, and religion. We found a higher prevalence of arousal in response to sadism scenarios amongst non-religious participants (64.6%; n = 228/353) than religious participants (54.7%; n = 88/161) with a small, but potentially meaningful effect size (Φ = -.095, p = .032). Increased impact of religious beliefs on sex life was associated with slightly lower sadism arousal, r (499) = -.080, p = .075. This association was strong enough to be considered a potentially meaningful factor but was not statistically significant. There was also a small negative correlation between masochism arousal and impact of religious beliefs on sex life and behaviour, r (500) = -.129, p = .004. Based on these findings, we conclude that there could be a limited but meaningful relationship between religion and sadism/masochism arousal. Further research should explore specific religious affiliations and beliefs as potentially associated with sadism and masochism arousal.

Full text

Research Article
What’s God Got to Do With It? The Relationship
Between Religion, Sadism, and Masochism
Brooke Davis1, Crystal Evanoff2, Kelly M. Babchishin1
[1]Department of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada. [2]Department of Psychology, University of
British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada.
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention, 2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341,
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341
Received: 2023-11-29 •Accepted: 2024-06-06 •Published (VoR): 2024-09-30
Handling Editor: Skye Stephens, Saint Mary's University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Corresponding Author: Kelly M. Babchishin, 1125 Colonel By Dr, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada. E-mail:
Kelly.Babchishin@carleton.ca
Related: This article is part of the SOTRAP Special Thematic Collection “Paraphilias and Sexual Offending”, Guest
Editors: Skye Stephens, Saint Mary's University, Halifax, NS, Canada & L. Maaike Helmus, Simon Fraser University,
Burnaby, BC, Canada; Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention, 19, https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.arco1
Supplementary Materials: Materials [see Index of Supplementary Materials]
Abstract
Although “BDSM” (i.e., bondage, discipline, dominance, submission, sadism, and masochism) has
become increasingly present in popular media in recent years, much remains unknown about the
etiology and correlates of BDSM. Research has demonstrated a relationship between religion and
sexual behaviours/attitudes; therefore, religion could also be associated with sadism and
masochism. To address gaps in existing knowledge, we conducted an online survey of 515
participants who answered a questionnaire on sexual life and behaviour, including questions on
arousal in response to sadism and masochism scenarios, associated negative impacts, and religion.
We found a higher prevalence of arousal in response to sadism scenarios amongst non-religious
participants (64.6%; n = 228/353) than religious participants (54.7%; n = 88/161) with a small, but
potentially meaningful effect size (Φ = -.095, p = .032). Increased impact of religious beliefs on sex
life was associated with slightly lower sadism arousal, r(499) = -.080, p = .075. This association was
strong enough to be considered a potentially meaningful factor but was not statistically signiicant.
There was also a small negative correlation between masochism arousal and impact of religious
beliefs on sex life and behaviour, r(500) = -.129, p = .004. Based on these indings, we conclude that
there could be a limited but meaningful relationship between religion and sadism/masochism
Theory, Research, and Prevention
Sexual Offending
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License, CC BY 4.0, which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction, provided the original work is properly cited.

arousal. Further research should explore speciic religious afiliations and beliefs as potentially
associated with sadism and masochism arousal.
Keywords
sadism, masochism, religion, paraphilias
Non-Technical Summary
Background
Paraphilias are deined as sexual interest focused on an atypical activity or target. According
to the World Health Organization, such interest can be considered “paraphilic” if it is
persistent, intense, and paired with distress or behaviour that involves a signiicant risk
of death or injury. Sadism (i.e., arousal in response to inlicting pain) and masochism (i.e.,
arousal in response to experiencing pain) are examples of such paraphilias that have become
increasingly mainstream; however, there is still much that is unknown about these two
paraphilias.
Why was this study done?
Despite a growing understanding of the prevalence of sadism and masochism in the general
population, gaps remain in the understanding of arousal related to paraphilias and paraphilic
interests, including correlated demographic characteristics.
What did the researchers do and ind?
We asked an online sample consisting of undergraduate students and community partici
pants about their sexual interests, their religious afiliation, and the impact of their religion
on their sex life. Religious participants were less likely than non-religious participants to
report arousal in response to sadism. Additionally, increased self-reported impact of religion
on sex life was associated with decreased masochism and sadism arousal. The results indica
ted a high prevalence of arousal in response to sadism (62%) and masochism (76%) amongst
sample participants.
What do these indings mean?
The indings of this research suggest that there could be a weak negative relationship
between religion and arousal in response to sadism and masochism. These indings also
suggest that interest in sadism and masochism arousal is common in the general population,
with more than half of the participants indicating at least some arousal in response to
sadism and masochism. The methods applied in this study limit its generalizability. The
majority of participants were non-religious, which is not relective of the general population
from which the data were drawn. Additionally, the sample used in this study was one of
convenience and could, therefore, be meaningfully different from the general population.
The current study was cross-sectional, so cause and effect cannot be determined. More
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 2
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

research is needed to better understand the relationship between religion and these two
paraphilias.
Highlights
• 515 student and online participants responded to an online survey related to sexual
orientation, arousal, fantasies, masturbation, and demographic information.
• Sadism arousal was slightly more prevalent for non-religious participants than
religious participants.
• More self-reported impact of religion on sex life was related to lower masochism and
sadism arousal.
While bondage, discipline, sadism, and masochism, often referred to as BDSM, have be
come increasingly mainstream in recent years, widespread acceptance and understanding
are lacking (e.g., Freeburg & McNaughton, 2017). Accordingly, there is still much that
is unknown about the two sexual paraphilias related to BDSM: sadism and masochism.
There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that sexual interest in sadism and
masochism is both prevalent in the general population (e.g., Bártová et al., 2021) and not
meaningfully related to mental health outcomes (e.g., Brown et al., 2023). Research with
community samples has reported varying rates of prevalence of sexual interest in sadism
ranging from about 7% to 72% (Median [Mdn] = 12.8%; Ahlers et al., 2011; Bártová et al.,
2021; Dawson et al., 2016; Holvoet et al., 2017; Joyal & Carpentier, 2017; Seto et al., 2021).
Similarly, reported prevalence of sexual interest in masochism also varies, ranging from
about 15% to 69% (Mdn = 20.4%; Ahlers et al., 2011; Bártová et al., 2021; Dawson et al.,
2016; Holvoet et al., 2017; Joyal & Carpentier, 2017; Seto et al., 2021).
Paraphilia is deined as an atypical sexual interest greater than or equal to nonpar
aphilic sexual interests (i.e., “sexual interests in genital stimulation or preparatory fon
dling with phenotypically normal, physically mature, consenting human partners”, Diag
nostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: Fifth Edition, Text Revision [American
Psychiatric Association, 2022; DSM-5-TR, p. 779]). The prevalence of sadism and maso
chism paraphilias in community samples has been found to be lower than the prevalence
of interest in sadism and masochism activities. For example, one study found that
between 0.3% and 1.2% of a sample of adults that was representative of the uébec
population (a large Canadian province) had a sadism paraphilia, whereas between 1.4%
and 4.9% had a masochism paraphilia (Joyal & Carpentier, 2017). A study conducted in
Australia found that 1.8% of sexually active people had engaged in BDSM behaviour
in the past year (Richters et al., 2008); however, behaviours do not necessarily indicate
paraphilic interest or disorder. Paraphilic disorders are identiied and deined in the
World Health Organization’s (2019) International Statistical Classification of Diseases and
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 3
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

Related Health Problems, (11th edition; ICD-11) as persistent and intense atypical sexual
arousal. This atypical sexual arousal is considered a disorder if the person is distressed
by this arousal or the paraphilic behaviour involves a signiicant risk of death or injury
(World Health Organization, 2019).
There is a limited understanding of the correlates of paraphilic interests. Research
suggests that increased interest in certain paraphilias could be related to multiple fac
tors, such as sex drive (Dawson et al., 2016), psychopathic traits (Brown et al., 2023),
and attitudes supporting paraphilias (Brown et al., 2023). Research also suggests that
paraphilia-related fantasies can start in childhood (Cantor, 2012) and that there is a
relationship between childhood experiences, such as abuse, especially sexual abuse, and
paraphilic interests in adulthood (e.g., Abrams et al., 2022; Pedneault et al., 2020).
Religion and Sexuality
Research has previously demonstrated relationships between religion and sexual atti
tudes and behaviours. Therefore, religion could be a source of further information about
psychological factors underlying arousal in response to paraphilias. For example, there
is evidence that increased religiosity, or the extent of one’s involvement in religion,
is associated with more sexually conservative attitudes (Ahrold et al., 2011). Intrinsic
religiosity (r = -.26, p < .01; Marcinechová & Zahorcova, 2020) and spirituality (r = -.43,
p < .001; Murray et al., 2007) have both been found to be negatively correlated with
sexual permissiveness. Furthermore, rules related to sexuality appear to be of particular
importance in religious morality, as religious people rate violations of sexual morality as
worse than violations of cooperation morality, such as cheating on taxes (Hone et al.,
2021).
Religious fundamentalism, intrinsic religiosity, spirituality, and religious beliefs have
been shown to be positively related to “sex guilt” (Emmers-Sommer et al., 2018; Woo et
al., 2012), which is deined as guilt experienced as a result of “violating or anticipating
violating standards of proper sexual conduct” (Mosher & Cross, 1971, p. 27). This could
be related to a more general relationship between religion and shame, as research has
found that negative religious coping strategies (e.g., feeling punished by God) are asso
ciated with increased shame proneness (Ladis et al., 2023). However, research to date
does not universally support the theory that religion is positively associated with shame
around sex. For example, one study exploring the relationship between shame, guilt, and
hypersexual behaviours noted that there was no relationship observed between religious
afiliation and guilt as a result of hypersexual behaviours (Gilliland et al., 2011).
Religion and Paraphilias
Historically, religion was a key consideration in deining what was “sexually deviant”
(De Block & Adriaens, 2013). While much has changed regarding acceptable sexual
practices, sexual morality continues to be a part of some religious belief systems. For
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 4
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

example, some Christian religions emphasize the importance of moderate sexual rela
tions and prohibit sexual practices focused on pleasure rather than procreation (Johnson
& Jordan, 2006). Therefore, it is possible that religious afiliation could inluence its
members’ sexual interests and behaviours, including with regard to sexual paraphilias,
such as sadism and masochism.
Common religious themes, such as obedience and submission to dominant authority
igures, in contrast, are reminiscent of elements of sadism and masochism (e.g., Hamman,
2000). As such, religious people may be more interested in or open to sadism and
masochism than non-religious people. In recognition of some of the evident similarities
between masochism and certain religious practices (e.g., self-lagellation), the DSM-5-TR
(American Psychiatric Association, 2022) highlights the importance of not conlating the
two. There is also some indication that people can have spiritual experiences during
BDSM acts (e.g., Baker, 2018), suggesting another possible positive association between
religion, sadism, and masochism.
Alternatively, there may be an inverse relationship between religion, sadism, and
masochism (i.e., religious people having less interest). A recent study found that religiosi
ty was positively associated with negative attitudes about BDSM (Grigoropoulos, 2022).
Ruppelius (2019) found evidence that paraphilic interests and behaviours are associated
with distress for people who are higher in religiosity; however, the generalizability of
this inding is limited as participants were exclusively college students in one geographic
location (Hawaii). Therefore, a relationship between religion, sadism, and masochism
could also exist due to non-supportive attitudes about these behaviours or distress expe
rienced by religious people when their sexual fantasies conlict with their religiously
rooted attitudes and beliefs about sex.
Current Study
This study aims to contribute to the body of research on sadism and masochism arousal
and paraphilic interests in the general population. In particular, we examined the charac
teristics of those with a sexual interest in sadism and/or masochism and explored the
nature of the relationship between religion, sadism, and masochism in an online survey
of 515 participants.
Method
Participants
A total of 309 students and 584 online participants started the online survey. Participants
were excluded from this study if they did not complete the survey (n = 191), indicated
they had been less than fully honest (n = 173), or did not respond to the questions on
sadism or masochism (n = 14). A total of 515 participants met these criteria (57.7% of the
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 5
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

total); however, one participant did not respond to the necessary questions on sadism
arousal. Participants in this study overlap with an earlier study that examined the link
between paraphilic interests and sexual and life satisfaction (see Mundy & Cioe, 2019).
Participants in this study were predominantly female (67%) and straight (63%) and
reported having a variety of ethnicities, with European being the most commonly repor
ted ethnicity (42%). The average reported age of participants was 24 years old. Detailed
characteristics of participants for the sadism and masochism samples are included in
Table 1.
Table 1
Sample Characteristics (n = 515)
Sample
Student 48.9%
Online 51.1%
Sex assigned at birth
Male 33.0%
Female 67.0%
Religion
None 68.7%
Christian, Orthodox 4.1%
Christian, Roman Catholic 9.5%
Christian, Evangelist 4.7%
Jewish 0.8%
Islamic 1.2%
Hindu 1.0%
Buddhist 1.2%
Other 8.9%
Ethnicity
Aboriginal 1.2%
African 1.4%
Asian 10.3%
Caribbean 0.8%
European 42.1%
Latin, Central, and South American 3.1%
North American 28.5%
Oceania 4.9%
Othera7.2%
Not applicable 0.6%
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 6
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

Ageb
< = 19 28.2%
20-29 57.2%
30-39 9.6%
40-49 3.3%
50-59 1.5%
60-69 0.2%
Sexual orientationc
Straight 84.4%
Not straight 15.6%
aThe other category was not deined. b36 participants did not provide their age.
cOne participant did not respond to the question on sexual orientation.
Measures
The Sexual Life and Behaviour uestionnaire (SLBQ; Ahlers et al., 2011) includes 87
sections of questions related to sexual orientation, arousal, fantasies, and masturbation,
along with questions on demographic information, including religion, age, and sexual
orientation. The questions of interest for this analysis asked participants to rate their
level of sexual arousal in response to sadism/masochism (“How sexually arousing do you
ind it when your sexual partner is dominant [e.g., handcuffs you, causes you pain]?” /
“How sexually arousing do you ind it when you are dominant (e.g., you handcuff your
partner, you cause pain)?”) and report the duration of this fantasy. Participants were
also asked about their normative sexual interests (“How sexually arousing do you ind
adult women and the adult female body [fully developed igure, developed pubic hair,
breasts]?” / “How sexually arousing do you ind adult men and the adult male body [fully
developed masculine igure, developed pubic hair, genitalia]?”). Response options for
sexual arousal questions were “Not at all,” “Slightly,” “Moderately,” “Very,” or “Extremely.”
If participants indicated at least some interest in the paraphilia, they were asked two
questions on related negative impact (“How often are you negatively affected by this
fantasy?” and “How often does this fantasy negatively impact your relationship, social,
and work life?”). Response options were “Never,” “Rarely,” “Sometimes,” “Often,” and
“Almost always.”
Religion
Participants were also asked if they belonged to a religion and were provided with the
following response options: “No,” “Christian, Orthodox,” “Christian, Roman Catholic”,
“Christian, Evangelist,” “Jewish”, “Islamic”, “Hindu,” “Buddhist”, and “Other, please speci
fy.” Participants also indicated the extent to which their religion impacts their sex life
(“How much do your religious beliefs impact your sexual life and sexual behaviour?”).
Response options were “Not at all,” “Slightly,” “Moderately,” “Very,” or “Extremely.”
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 7
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

Procedure
Participants for this study were recruited in an earlier study (Mundy & Cioe, 2019) from
an undergraduate participant subject pool and an online survey. Community sample
participants were recruited via a recruitment poster that described the purpose of the
study (to understand sexual interests) and provided the link to the questionnaire on
online forums (r/sex, r/SampleSize and r/TwoXChromosomes). After completing the
questionnaire, participants were asked to rate their honesty, provided a debrieing form,
and provided the link either to enter a draw for a gift card (1 in 39 chances of winning
$50 gift card; community sample) or to submit their name for course credit (university
pool). To address risks related to participants possibly disclosing criminal activities,
participants were informed about information storage and applicable laws and advised
that they could withdraw at any time without penalty. Efforts were taken to protect
participants’ identities, including not requesting any identifying information. Ethics ap
proval for the original study was obtained (H15-00752). Ethics approval was not required
for the current study as it involved secondary data analysis of anonymized data.
Data Analyses
Indices
Three thresholds of interest in sadism and masochism were considered in this analysis:
any interest, paraphilic interest, and paraphilic disorder, as deined by the DSM-5-TR
(American Psychiatric Association, 2022). We considered an interest paraphilic if the
level of arousal was intense, persistent, and greater than or equal to arousal in response
to normative sex. We considered paraphilic interest to be a disorder if it was coupled
with distress or impairment of important functioning. We veriied that none of the
participants considered to have paraphilic interest/disorder had reported no arousal in
response to normative sex and no arousal in response to sadism or masochism.
Participants were considered “straight” if they indicated that their assigned gender at
birth was male and that they were interested in exclusively or mostly women or if they
indicated that their assigned gender at birth was female and that they were interested
in exclusively or mostly men. Male participants were considered to be “not straight” if
they indicated that they were interested in both men and women, mainly or exclusively
men or other. Additionally, female participants were considered to be “not straight” if
they indicated that they were interested in both men and women, mainly or exclusively
women or other.
Participants were considered to have at least some interest in sadism (n = 316) or
masochism (n = 393) if they selected “Slightly,” “Moderately,” “Very,” or “Extremely”
in response to the relevant sadism or masochism arousal questions. Participants were
considered to have a paraphilic interest in sadism (n = 54) or masochism (n = 122) if their
level of reported arousal was intense (i.e., “Very” or “Extremely”), greater than or equal
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 8
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

to their highest reported arousal in response to adults, and started at puberty/irst sexual
experience or more than six months ago. Participants were considered to have sadism
(n = 22) or masochism (n = 57) disorder if they met the threshold for paraphilic interest
and also reported at least some negative impact (i.e., they selected “Rarely,” “Sometimes,”
“Often,” or “Almost always” for either of the two questions on negative impact).
Due to sample size limitations, religious afiliation was treated as a dichotomous
variable. Participants who selected any religion options (n = 161) were included in the
religion group, and the rest were included in the no religion group (n = 354).
Analyses
Analyses were conducted using SPSS version 28.0.1.1 (version 14) and RStudio version
2023.06.2+561. T-tests were conducted to determine if average arousal in response to
sadism and masochism for religious and non-religious participants was statistically
signiicantly different. Cohen’s d was calculated to determine if the effect size was
small (.2), medium (.5) or large (.8; Cohen, 1992). Chi-squared statistics were calculated
to compare prevalence across religious afiliation groups on any interest, paraphilic
interests and negative impact for both sadism and masochism. Phi (Φ) was calculated
to determine if effect sizes were small (.1), medium (.3) or large (.5; Cohen, 1992). The
relationship between the reported impact of religion on sex life and arousal in response
to sadism and masochism was assessed using Pearson correlation coeficients. A Pearson
correlation coeficient of .1 was considered a small effect, .3 was considered a medium
effect and .5 was considered a large effect (Cohen, 1992). As these are arbitrary cut-offs,
we considered Cohen’s d of +/- .15 a meaningful effect size for identifying individual risk
factors (Mann et al., 2010), which corresponds to an r of +/-.075 and phi of +/-.075.
As an exploratory analysis, we applied a hierarchical linear regression analysis to
sadism and masochism separately to explore the extent to which variability in arousal
was explained by religion when controlling for key demographic information. The irst
model assessed the relationship between religion (afiliation and impact of religion on
sex life) and arousal. This model was compared to a second model that added two
potential covariates, age and sexual orientation, in order to control for any relationship
those variables have with religion and arousal in response to sadism and masochism.
Results
Prevalence
Most participants reported some arousal to scenarios of sadism (61.5%; 316/514) and
masochism (76.3%; 393/515). About one in 10 participants had a paraphilic interest in
sadism (i.e., interest in sadism is equal to or higher than normative sexual interest;
10.5%; 54/513) and approximately one in four participants had a paraphilic interest in
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 9
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

masochism (23.8%, 122/513). Finally, about one in 20 participants in this sample had
sadism paraphilic disorder (i.e., paraphilic interest also reporting distress; 4.3%, 22/513),
and about one in 10 participants had masochism paraphilic disorder (11.1%, 57/513).
While there was variation in the prevalence of sadism and masochism paraphilic
interests across several variables, many differences did not reach the threshold for
statistical signiicance (see Davis et al., 2024S, Table S1). There were, however, small
statistically signiicant differences across sample type (student vs. online), sex assigned at
birth, and sexual orientation.
Religious Afiliation
The relationships between sadism and masochism and religious afiliation generally had
small effect sizes. Non-religious participants were slightly more likely to report any
arousal in response to sadism (64.6%, 228/353) than religious participants (54.7%, 88/161),
χ2(1, n = 514) = 4.61, p = .032, Φ = -.095; see Figure 1. This relationship reached the
conventional statistical signiicance threshold and the Mann et al. (2010) threshold for a
meaningful risk factor. Non-religious participants (77.1%, 272/354) had similar arousal to
masochism than religious participants (74.5%, 120/161); the difference was not statistical
ly signiicant, and the effect size was small, χ2(1, n = 515) = .409, p = .523, Φ = -.028, and
below the Mann et al. (2010) threshold of a meaningful factor.
Figure 1
Prevalence of Any Arousal in Response to Sadism and Masochism
Note. 95% conidence intervals were calculated for each sample proportion.
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 10
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

Average reported arousal in response to sadism was higher for non-religious participants
(x = 2.34, σ = 1.26) than religious participants (x = 2.14, σ = 1.26), t(512) = 1.723, p =
.086, d = .16. While not statistically signiicant, this effect size was larger than the Mann
et al. (2010) threshold for a meaningful factor. The average reported masochism arousal
was similar for non-religious participants (x = 3.02, σ = 1.43) and religious participants
(x = 2.84 σ = 1.43); this effect was smaller than the Mann et al. (2010) threshold for a
meaningful factor, t(513) = 1.29, p = .197, d = .12, and not statistically signiicant.
The results of the hierarchical linear regression analysis suggest that age and sexual
orientation did not inluence the relationship between religion and sadism and maso
chism arousal (see Davis et al., 2024S, Tables S3 and S4).
Paraphilic Interests
Non-religious participants had a similar level of paraphilic interest in sadism (11.1%,
39/352) to religious participants (9.3%, 15/161), χ2(1, n = 513) = .36, p = .546, Φ = -.027.
Similarly, non-religious participants had similar paraphilic interest in masochism (24.4%,
86/352) to religious participants (22.4%, 36/161), χ2(1, n = 513) = .26, p = .609, Φ = -.023.
None of these analyses reached conventional thresholds for statistical signiicance or met
the threshold for a meaningful factor by Mann et al. (2010).
Reporting Experiencing Negative Impact
The prevalence of any negative impact experienced as a result of sadism and masochism
arousal was compared across religious and non-religious participants. A negative impact
of sadism arousal was slightly more prevalent among non-religious participants (26.0%;
59/227) than religious participants (18.0%; 16/89). This difference did not reach statistical
signiicance convention but did reach meaningful effect as per Mann et al. (2010), χ2(1,
n= 316) = 2.268, p = .132, Φ = -.085. Non-religious participants did not differ on their re
ported negative impact as a result of masochism-related arousal (30.4%, 83/273) compared
to religious participants (28.3%, 34/120), χ2(1, n = 393) = .171, p = .679, Φ = -.021.
Impact of Religion on One’s Sex Life
In addition to the role of religious afiliation, religion's importance in participants’ sex
lives was also considered to see if it was related to sadism and masochism. Of partici
pants who responded to the related question (n = 501), sadism arousal was weakly and
negatively correlated with the impact of religious beliefs on sex life and behaviour, r(499)
= -.080, p = .075. This correlation is slightly higher than the Mann et al. (2010) threshold
for a meaningful factor but was not statistically signiicant. For participants who respon
ded to the relevant questions for masochism (n = 502), there was a statistically signiicant
negative correlation between the level of arousal and the impact of religious beliefs on
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 11
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

sex life and behaviour, r(500) = -.129, p = .004. This correlation was both statistically
signiicant and large enough to be considered meaningful.
Discussion
We found a limited relationship between religion and arousal in response to sadism
and masochism. The effect sizes for the observed associations were small compared to
Cohen’s thresholds (1992). However, given the complexity of sexuality and the likely
large number of contributing factors, we would not expect individual factors to have
large or even moderate effects. Informed by research on risk factors (Mann et al., 2010),
we would argue that individual variables should be considered meaningful contributors
to understanding sexuality at lower thresholds than the general levels speciied by Cohen
(1992). Several small effect sizes observed in this study surpass the Mann et al. (2010)
threshold for meaningful risk factors, suggesting that religion may provide some helpful
information on arousal in response to sadism and masochism. Speciically, we found
a higher prevalence of self-reported arousal in response to sadism scenarios amongst
non-religious participants compared to religious participants and a non-signiicant but
potentially meaningful negative correlation between impact of religion on sex life and
sadism arousal. Additionally, while we found no meaningful relationship between reli
gious afiliation and masochism arousal, we observed a negative association between the
impact of religion on sex life and masochism arousal. That is, as participants’ self-repor
ted impact of their religious beliefs on their sex life increased, their reported level of
masochism arousal decreased. While the indings suggest a negative association between
religion and both sadism and masochism, it is not clear why the indings were different
for sadism and masochism (i.e., sadism arousal is potentially related to both religious
afiliation and impact, while masochism is only related to impact).
The observed direction of the relationship between religious afiliation and the self-
reported negative impact of both sadism and masochism arousal (i.e., religious afiliation
was associated with a lower prevalence of negative impact), while not signiicant, was
negative. This was not expected given previous research (e.g., Ruppelius, 2019) and also
did not align with the potential explanation that religious participants report less arousal
from sadism and masochism due to discomfort. However, participants only responded to
negative impact questions if they indicated some arousal; consequently, participants who
denied any arousal, perhaps due to associated distress, would not be included. Therefore,
it is possible that the relationship between religion and negative impact of sadism and
masochism is not fully captured in this analysis.
While not the focus of this study, it is worth noting that straight participants were
statistically signiicantly less likely to have a paraphilic interest in masochism than
non-straight participants. Further exploration is needed as this result could be due to
sexual openness expressed both as openness to a variety of sexual partners and a variety
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 12
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

of sexual practices. However, this does appear to be consistent with previous research
that found higher rates of recent BDSM behaviours amongst bisexual, gay, and lesbian
people than straight people (Richters et al., 2008).
Sexual arousal and behaviours are likely complicated and inluenced by a number of
variables. Although we have not controlled for all possible confounding variables, we
did ind an association between arousal in response to sadism and masochism and two
potential confounding variables: sexual orientation and age. However, adding these vari
ables to the model did not meaningfully change the nature of the relationship between
religion and arousal in response to sadism and masochism.
Religiosity has been found to inluence sexuality, for example, by being associated
with more conservative attitudes (Ahrold et al., 2011) and less sexual permissiveness
(Marcinechová & Zahorcova, 2020; Murray et al., 2007). Given that religion seems to in
luence sexuality variables, it follows that it could also inluence atypical sexualities, such
as sadism and masochism. In the current study, we found a weak negative relationship
between religion and arousal in response to sadism and masochism. Additional research
suggests that involvement in church and belief in religion could facilitate desistance in
men with sexual offences (Harris et al., 2017) and crime in general (e.g., Pirutinsky, 2014).
Religious afiliation’s potential association with paraphilias (as a possible protective
factor) warrants further exploration.
Limitations and Future Research Directions
This is a modest study using cross-sectional design and a convenience sample of online
participants and students. A number of factors limit the broad applicability of the ind
ings of this study. First, participants’ interest in sadism and masochism was determined
exclusively with information gathered via self-report. A recent meta-analysis on the role
of social desirability in self-reporting of sexual behaviours found correlations between
social desirability and underreporting of a number of sexual behaviours (e.g., same-sex
relations, anal sex, and extramarital affairs; King, 2022). While this is a common chal
lenge in sex research with a community sample, it is potentially especially challenging in
the context of the research questions explored in this study. Previous research suggests
that religiosity is associated with impression management (Gillings & Joseph, 1996), and
intrinsic religiosity is correlated with social desirability (Trimble, 1997). There is also
evidence that religiosity is negatively correlated with acknowledging pornography use
(Grubbs et al., 2015). However, studies conducted to explore the role of social desirability
in self-reporting of pornography consumption and virginity found no difference in so
cially desirable responding between religious and non-religious participants (Rasmussen
et al., 2018; Regnerus & Uecker, 2007). Therefore, it is not clear how religion impacts the
self-disclosure of sexual behaviours/interests generally or how it would impact self-dis
closure related to paraphilic arousal or behaviours.
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 13
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

As such, religious people could experience less arousal in response to masochism
and sadism. Alternatively, it could be that religious people are less willing to report
arousal in response to masochism and sadism, perhaps because this arousal is viewed
as undesirable. To address the challenge of socially desirable responding, future research
should consider including indirect measures of sexual interest (Pedneault et al., 2021).
For example, applying the bogus pipeline method, which has been shown to increase
the accuracy of self-reporting of sexual arousal (e.g., Suschinsky et al., 2020), measuring
viewing time (e.g., Schmidt, Babchishin, & Lehmann, 2017), or using methods such as
video clips to depict activities while assessing viewing time (Lalumière et al., 2018), could
help to address this challenge.
The prevalence of religious afiliation in this sample also limits the applicability of
the indings of this study. As only one-third of participants reported having a religion,
there was not a suficient number of participants in each religion category to explore
differences between religious groups. If there is a relationship between religion, sadism
or masochism, it is likely to vary depending on the nature and importance of the speciic
religious teachings about sexuality. For example, Hinduism, which has been identiied
as a religion that tolerates “deviance” (Bhugra et al., 2010), would likely have a different
impact on paraphilic interests than a more socially conservative religion. Therefore, the
approach taken in this study could have missed meaningful relationships between specif
ic religions, sadism, and masochism. Recruitment of a larger sample with a suficient
representation of religions would help to address these issues.
Furthermore, questions in this study used to measure participants’ religion focus
on participants’ current religious afiliation and reported impact of religion (e.g., “Do
you belong to a religion?” and “How much do your religious beliefs impact your sexu
al life and sexual behaviours?”). However, previous research suggests that childhood
experiences can be related to adult interest in paraphilias (e.g., Abrams et al., 2022).
Therefore, childhood religious inluences, which would not be captured in this study,
may be more relevant to arousal in response to sadism and masochism than current
religious involvement. Future research can address this limitation by including measures
of childhood religion.
The rate of religious afiliation in this sample is very low compared to the prevalence
in Canada (the sample’s origin), which was 68.3% in 2019 (Cornelissen, 2021). This
suggests that the sample for this study is not representative of the Canadian population
in terms of religion. The average age of participants was also young (24 years old),
so indings may not generalize to older populations. As the importance of religious
belief decreases as birth year increases amongst Canadians (Cornelissen, 2021), a younger
sample, such as the sample in this study, could be less inluenced by religion, including
with regard to sexual arousal and behaviour. A larger, more representative sample would
address this challenge.
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 14
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

We did not have a representative sample, so the prevalence rates in our sample are
not likely representative. Indeed, the prevalence of any arousal in response to sadism
(61.5%) was at the high end of the expected range based on previous research (e.g.,
Ahlers et al., 2011; Bártová et al., 2021; Dawson et al., 2016; Holvoet et al., 2017; Joyal
& Carpentier, 2017; Seto et al., 2021), and the prevalence of masochism arousal (76.3%)
was notably higher than the observed prevalence in previous research (e.g., Ahlers et al.,
2011; Bártová et al., 2021; Dawson et al., 2016; Holvoet et al., 2017; Joyal & Carpentier,
2017; Seto et al., 2021). It is possible that this sample is unique in some way and,
therefore, not in line with samples from previous research or representative of the gen
eral population. For example, 51.0% of participants were recruited from predominantly
sex-oriented websites. Alternatively, the observed higher prevalence could be due to
the wording of the questions used to gather information on arousal in response to
sadism and masochism, which were broad and used relatively mild examples of these
paraphilias (e.g., one example of sadism was “you handcuff your partner”). Additionally,
the generalizability of our indings could be limited by bias introduced as a result of
participants self-selecting into the study (e.g., Andrade, 2020).
Concluding Remarks
Religious participants reported slightly less arousal in response to sadism, and the
reported impact of religion on sex life was negatively associated with sadism arousal.
For masochism, only the impact of religion on sex life was negatively associated with
arousal. Based on these indings, we conclude that there could be a limited but poten
tially meaningful relationship between religion and sadism/masochism arousal. Future
research using more representative samples and more objective measures would be
needed to understand what role, if any, religion has in these seemingly mainstream
paraphilic interests.
Funding: The authors have no funding to report.
Acknowledgments: The authors have no additional (i.e., non-inancial) support to report.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Data Availability: The research data that support the indings of this study is available upon request.
Supplementary Materials
The Supplementary Materials contain the following items (for access, see Davis et al., 2024S):
• Table S1: summarizing the characteristics of participants with paraphilic interests
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 15
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

• Table S2: summarizing the outcome of a hierarchical linear regression on the relationship
between religion and sadism arousal when controlling for key demographic information
• Table S3: summarizing the outcome of a hierarchical linear regression on the relationship
between religion and masochism arousal when controlling for key demographic information
Index of Supplementary Materials
Davis, B., Evanoff, C., & Babchishin, K. M. (2024S). Supplementary materials to "What’s God got to
do with it? The relationship between religion, sadism, and masochism" [Additional information].
PsychOpen GOLD. https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.15244
References
Abrams, M., Chronos, A., & Milisavljevic Grdinic, M. (2022). Childhood abuse and sadomasochism:
New insights. Sexologies, 31(3), 240–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sexol.2021.10.004
Ahlers, C. J., Schaefer, G. A., Mundt, I. A., Roll, S., Englert, H., Willich, S. N., & Beier, K. M. (2011).
How unusual are the contents of paraphilias? Paraphilia-associated sexual arousal patterns in a
community-based sample of men. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 8(5), 1362–1370.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01597.x
Ahrold, T. K., Farmer, M., Trapnell, P. D., & Meston, C. M. (2011). The relationship among sexual
attitudes, sexual fantasy, and religiosity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(3), 619–630.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9621-4
American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Paraphilic disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual
of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.).
https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425787.x19_Paraphilic_Disorders
Andrade, C. (2020). The limitations of online surveys. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine,
42(6), 575–576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620957496
Baker, A. C. (2018). Sacred kink: Finding psychological meaning at the intersection of BDSM and
spiritual experience. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 33(4), 440–453.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2016.1205185
Bártová, K., Androvičová, R., Krejčová, L., Weiss, P., & Klapilová, K. (2021). The prevalence of
paraphilic interests in the Czech population: Preference, arousal, the use of pornography,
fantasy, and behavior. Journal of Sex Research, 58(1), 86–96.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2019.1707468
Bhugra, D., Popelyuk, D., & McMullen, I. (2010). Paraphilias across cultures: Contexts and
controversies. Journal of Sex Research, 47(2-3), 242–256.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224491003699833
Brown, A., Barker, E. D., & Rahman, Q. (2023). Psychological and developmental correlates of
paraphilic and normophilic sexual interests. Sexual Abuse, 35(4), 428–464.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10790632221120013
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 16
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

Cantor, J. M. (2012). Is homosexuality a paraphilia? The evidence for and against. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 41(1), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9900-3
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
Cornelissen, L. (2021). Religiosity in Canada and its evolution from 1985 to 2019. Statistics Canada.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2021001/article/00010-eng.htm
Dawson, S. J., Bannerman, B. A., & Lalumière, M. L. (2016). Paraphilic interests: An examination of
sex differences in a nonclinical sample. Sexual Abuse, 28(1), 20–45.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063214525645
De Block, A., & Adriaens, P. R. (2013). Pathologizing sexual deviance: A history. Journal of Sex
Research, 50(3-4), 276–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.738259
Emmers-Sommer, T. M., Allen, M., Schoenbauer, K. V., & Burrell, N. (2018). Implications of sex
guilt: A meta-analysis. Marriage & Family Review, 54(5), 417–437.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2017.1359815
Freeburg, M. N., & McNaughton, M. J. (2017). Fifty shades of grey: Implications for counseling
BDSM clients. VISTAS, 13, 1–11.
https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=fac_articles
Gilliland, R., South, M., Carpenter, B. N., & Hardy, S. A. (2011). The roles of shame and guilt in
hypersexual behavior. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 18(1), 12–29.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2011.551182
Gillings, V., & Joseph, S. (1996). Religiosity and social desirability: Impression management and
self-deceptive positivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 21(6), 1047–1050.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00137-7
Grigoropoulos, I. (2022). Towards a greater integration of “spicier” sexuality into mainstream
society? Social-psychological and socio-cultural predictors of attitudes towards BDSM.
Sexuality & Culture, 26(6), 2253–2273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-022-09996-0
Grubbs, J. B., Exline, J. J., Pargament, K. I., Hook, J. N., & Carlisle, R. D. (2015). Transgression as
addiction: Religiosity and moral disapproval as predictors of perceived addiction to
pornography. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(1), 125–136.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0257-z
Hamman, J. (2000). The rod of discipline: Masochism, sadism, and the Judeo-Christian religion.
Journal of Religion and Health, 39(4), 319–328. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010356918097
Harris, D. A., Ackerman, A., & Haley, M. (2017). “Losing my religion:” An exploration of religion
and spirituality in men who claim to have desisted from sexual offending. Criminal Justice
Studies, 30(2), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2017.1300385
Holvoet, L., Huys, W., Coppens, V., Seeuws, J., Goethals, K., & Morrens, M. (2017). Fifty shades of
Belgian gray: The prevalence of BDSM-related fantasies and activities in the general
population. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 14(9), 1152–1159.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2017.07.003
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 17
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

Hone, L. S. E., McCauley, T. G., Pedersen, E. J., Carter, E. C., & McCullough, M. E. (2021). The sex
premium in religiously motivated moral judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
120(6), 1621–1633. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000296
Johnson, T. J., & Jordan, M. D. (2006). Christianity. In D. S. Browning, M. C. Green, & J. Witte, Jr.
(Eds.), Sex, marriage, and family in world religions (pp. 77-149). Columbia University Press.
Joyal, C. C., & Carpentier, J. (2017). The prevalence of paraphilic interests and behaviors in the
general population: A provincial survey. Journal of Sex Research, 54(2), 161–171.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1139034
King, B. M. (2022). The inluence of social desirability on sexual behavior surveys: A review.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 51(3), 1495–1501. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-02197-0
Ladis, I., Abrams, D., & Calkins, C. (2023). Differential associations between guilt and shame
proneness and religious coping styles in a diverse sample of young adults. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 38(1-2), 670–697. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605221081931
Lalumière, M. L., Babchishin, K. M., & Ebsworth, M. (2018). The use of ilm clips in a viewing time
task of sexual interests. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47(3), 627–635.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1108-0
Mann, R. E., Hanson, R. K., & Thornton, D. (2010). Assessing risk for sexual recidivism: Some
proposals on the nature of psychologically meaningful risk factors. Sexual Abuse, 22(2), 191–
217. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210366039
Marcinechová, D., & Zahorcova, L. (2020). Sexual satisfaction, sexual attitudes, and shame in
relation to religiosity. Sexuality & Culture, 24(6), 1913–1928.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-020-09727-3
Mosher, D. L., & Cross, H. J. (1971). Sex guilt and premarital sexual experiences of college students.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36(1), 27–32. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030454
Mundy, C. L., & Cioe, J. D. (2019). Exploring the relationship between paraphilic interests, sex, and
sexual and life satisfaction in non-clinical samples. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality,
28(3), 304–316. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.2018-0041
Murray, K. M., Ciarrocchi, J. W., & Murray-Swank, N. A. (2007). Spirituality, religiosity, shame and
guilt as predictors of sexual attitudes and experiences. Journal of Psychology and Theology,
35(3), 222–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/009164710703500305
Pedneault, C. I., Babchishin, K. M., Lalumière, M. L., & Seto, M. C. (2020). The association between
childhood sexual abuse and sexual coercion in men: A test of possible mediators. Journal of
Sexual Aggression, 26(2), 193–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2019.1613575
Pedneault, C. I., Hilgard, J., Pettersen, C., Hermann, C. A., White, K., & Nunes, K. L. (2021). How
well do indirect measures assess sexual interest in children? A meta-analysis. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 89(4), 350–363. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000627
Pirutinsky, S. (2014). Does religiousness increase self-control and reduce criminal behavior? A
longitudinal analysis of adolescent offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 41(11), 1290–1307.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854814531962
Religion, Sadism, and Masochism 18
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341

Rasmussen, K. R., Grubbs, J. B., Pargament, K. I., & Exline, J. J. (2018). Social desirability bias in
pornography-related self-reports: The role of religion. Journal of Sex Research, 55(3), 381–394.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2017.1399196
Regnerus, M. D., & Uecker, J. E. (2007). Religious inluences on sensitive self-reported behaviors:
The product of social desirability, deceit, or embarrassment? Sociology of Religion, 68(2), 145–
163. https://doi.org/10.1093/socrel/68.2.145
Richters, J., De Visser, R. O., Rissel, C. E., Grulich, A. E., & Smith, A. M. A. (2008). Demographic and
psychosocial features of participants in bondage and discipline, “sadomasochism” or
dominance and submission (BDSM): Data from a national survey. Journal of Sexual Medicine,
5(7), 1660–1668. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00795.x
Ruppelius, S. E. N. (2019). Paraphilic-like behaviors and their relation to distress and religiosity
[Master’s thesis, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa]. Prouest Dissertations and Theses Global.
Schmidt, A. F., Babchishin, K. M., & Lehmann, R. J. B. (2017). A meta-analysis of viewing time
measures of sexual interest in children. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(1), 287–300.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0806-3
Seto, M. C., Curry, S., Dawson, S. J., Bradford, J. M. W., & Chivers, M. L. (2021). Concordance of
paraphilic interests and behaviors. Journal of Sex Research, 58(4), 424–437.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2020.1830018
Suschinsky, K. D., Fisher, T. D., Maunder, L., Hollenstein, T., & Chivers, M. L. (2020). Use of the
bogus pipeline increases sexual concordance in women but not men. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 49(5), 1517–1532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01737-4
Trimble, D. E. (1997). The Religious Orientation Scale: Review and meta-analysis of social
desirability effects. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57(6), 970–986.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164497057006007
Woo, J. S. T., Morshedian, N., Brotto, L. A., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2012). Sex guilt mediates the
relationship between religiosity and sexual desire in East Asian and Euro-Canadian college-
aged women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(6), 1485–1495.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9918-6
World Health Organization. (2019). Paraphilic disorders. In International statistical classification of
diseases and related health problems (11th ed.).
https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en#http%3A%2F%2Fid.who.int%2Ficd%2Fentity%2F2110604642
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research,
and Prevention (SOTRAP) is the
oficial journal of the International
Association for the Treatment of
Sexual Offenders (IATSO).
PsychOpen GOLD is a publishing
service by Leibniz Institute for
Psychology (ZPID), Germany.
Davis, Evanoff, & Babchishin 19
Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention
2024, Vol. 19, Article e13341
https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.13341