Talk:Research: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
The Admins (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:[chemical] Castration. | :[chemical] Castration. | ||
*'''The effects of media exposure during childhood''' | |||
:The instant effects of viewing prohibited material. What can these correlational studies tell us about the long-term effects, and are the conclusions supported? | |||
*'''The [Roman Catholic] Church''' | *'''The [Roman Catholic] Church''' |
Revision as of 19:38, 6 May 2009
Potential topic reviews
- Children in the Courtroom
- Is there any evidence to suggest that the legal testimony of small children in abuse cases is nearly always honest? Can small children lie?
- What do cases in which minors refuse to testify tell us about the underlying circumstances?
- CSO [cognitive behavioural] treatment; effectiveness of
- Contrary to the social desirability hypothesis, the untreated child molesters did not respond significantly faster than controls when they disagreed with the cognitive distortion sentences. Most surprising, however, was the finding challenging the treatment effect hypothesis: treated child molesters were significantly more rapid than both control groups in disagreeing with the cognitive distortion sentences, and their response times more closely resembled their processing speeds for beliefs requiring simplistic semantic judgments than other groups. These results do not appear to be consistent with the idea that treatment teaches these men to be more honest and self-reflective in responding. (Gannon... see cognitive distortion)
- [chemical] Castration.
- The effects of media exposure during childhood
- The instant effects of viewing prohibited material. What can these correlational studies tell us about the long-term effects, and are the conclusions supported?
- The [Roman Catholic] Church
- Are offending rates among RC clergy higher than in other denominations? Are rates higher among clergy than among teachers, biological parents, foster parents etc?
- Satanic Ritual Abuse
- The debunking of an abuse panic that was once widely accepted among clinicians.
- Modern inventions - "Sexting", "Teen Dating Violence"
- CSO laws
- In an attempt to reduce the occurrence of childhood sexual abuse, some state governments have passed legislation allowing the public access to sex offender registries. One of the ways this access is granted is through the world wide web (web). There is, however, limited research on the impact this type of community notification has on actual rates of child sexual abuse. This study investigates the opinions of 133 mental health professionals who work with sex offenders regard ing the implications of public sex offender registry web sites. Over 80% of the participants in this study do not believe that sex offender registry sites will affect the number of children who are sexually abused each year. Seventy percent of the respondents also believe that a listing of sex offenders on the web will create a false sense of security for parents, and over 60% of the respondents believe that sex offenders who are listed on these sites will become targets of vigilantism in their community. Implications, for future research are provided.[1]
- Despite the fact that the federal and many state governments have enacted registration and community notification laws as a means to better protect communities from sexual offending, limited empirical research has been conducted to examine the impact of such legislation on public safety. Therefore, utilizing time-series analyses, this study examined differences in sexual offense arrest rates before and after the enactment of New York State's Sex Offender Registration Act. Results provide no support for the effectiveness of registration and community notification laws in reducing sexual offending by: (a) rapists, (b) child molesters, (c) sexual recidivists, or (d) first-time sex offenders. Analyses also showed that over 95% of all sexual offense arrests were committed by first-time sex offenders, casting doubt on the ability of laws that target repeat offenders to meaningfully reduce sexual offending.[2]
- Releasing a sex offender from prison or placing the offender on community-based sanctions, only to have the offender commit a new sex crime, is a policy-maker’s worst nightmare. Fueled by misperceptions and public fear, sex offender laws have developed piecemeal and without rigorous empirical insight and testing. While policies and practices are well-intended, they are unlikely to resolve the very real social problem of sexual violence and may inadvertently increase victimization. Such is the possibility with residence restrictions. This type of law is among the newest in an ever-growing barrage of legislation designed specifically for sexual criminals yet what little research that exists suggests there is no correlation between residence and sexual recidivism. This article identifies 30 states with state-level residence restrictions and conducts a content analysis of each state’s legislation. Geographical and other assessments are also conducted.[3]