Mariamne R. Rose

A re-examination of female child molesters' implicit theories: evidence of female specificity?

Recent research by Beech, Parrett, Ward, and Fisher has suggested that Ward and Keenans male-derived implicit theories represent a good theoretical fit for explaining female child molesters’ offence-supportive cognitions. This paper re-examines the applicability of Ward and Keenans (1999) male-derived implicit theories for explaining the self-reported offence-supportive cognitions of 16 UK female child molesters. Using almost identical analytic methods to Beech et al., we show that it is indeed possible to code female child molesters’ offence-supportive cognitions under each of the five male-derived implicit theories proposed by Ward and Keenan. However, our results show that the content of female child molesters’ offence-supportive cognitions appears very different to that of male child molesters. Based on our findings, we discuss relevant treatment implications and offer a re-conceptualization of implicit theories for female child molesters using the sex-role stereotyping literature. We also propose that – unlike male child molesters – female child molesters are unlikely to hold generalized implicit theories that sexualize children.

Offense-Related Interpretative Bias in Female Child Molesters A Preliminary Study

Although female child molesters are hypothesized to hold offense-supportive cognitions that facilitate their sexual offenses, there have been no implicit social-cognitive studies used to investigate this. Using an implicit memory recognition paradigm, it is shown that female child molesters—relative to female offender controls—are more likely to interpret ambiguous information about males in a threatening manner. These results suggest that female child molesters hold a series of beliefs about mens dangerousness and power. The authors discuss these results and explore the possibility that these beliefs about male dangerousness are related to a risk of abusing children.

Pathways to female sexual offending : approach or avoidance?

Abstract This study forms the second part of a larger investigation into the offence process characteristics of female sexual offenders (FSOs). In the first part – documented in Gannon, Rose, and Ward (Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 20, 352–374, 2008) – we described the development of the Descriptive Model of Female Sexual Offending (DMFSO); an offence process model developed using Grounded Theory methodology to describe the sequence of cognitive, affective, behavioural and contextual factors generating female-perpetrated sexual abuse. The second study described here examines the prevalence of specific pathways characterizing the 22 FSOs originally used to develop the DMFSO. Four individuals could not be assigned to a pathway due to lack of information (18% of the overall sample). However, for the remaining 18 participants, three stable pathways to female sexual offending were identified: Explicit Approach offenders (50%, n=9), who intended to offend, and explicitly planned their offence behaviours accordingly; Directed Avoidant offenders (28%, n=5), who did not intend to offend, but did so under the direction and coercion of a male accomplice; and Implicit Disorganized offenders (22%, n=4), who did not intend to offend (i.e. they engaged in minimal planning), but offended impulsively following severe self-regulatory failure. In this paper, we present the core characteristics defining each pathway, their associated demographic features, and discuss potential treatment implications.

The simulation heuristic, paranoia, and social anxiety in a non-clinical sample

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Quality of reasoning within non-clinical paranoia and mental simulation of future paranoia themed events was investigated by use of a simulation task to determine whether paranoid individuals would be restricted or more adept at reasoning about paranoia relevant material in comparison to a social anxiety group and a group with low paranoia and social anxiety. METHOD Participants (N = 63) were divided into the three groups based on paranoia and social anxiety scores. They were presented with the beginning and end of an imaginary situation and were asked to describe, step-by-step, what they imagined would happen between those two points. They were also administered a beads task to evaluate the jumping to conclusion decision making bias. RESULTS The prediction of more adept reasoning was not supported for paranoia. However, the social anxiety comparison group on average better simulated a scenario with congruent (socially anxious) thematic content compared to ones with non-congruent content. Further, in an exploratory analysis, jumping to conclusions bias was found to be positively related to goodness of simulation for paranoia themed scenarios within the paranoia group. LIMITATIONS Study groups were relatively small and so power was an issue. CONCLUSION The results are discussed in the context of the sometimes paradoxical findings in the area of cognitive biases and paranoia.