其他特定嗜淫障碍:性暴力犯罪评估中的使用模式。

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Nicole Graham, Cynthia Calkins, Elizabeth Jeglic
{"title":"其他特定嗜淫障碍:性暴力犯罪评估中的使用模式。","authors":"Nicole Graham, Cynthia Calkins, Elizabeth Jeglic","doi":"10.1177/10790632241271086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>\"Sexually violent predator\" (SVP) legislation requires, in part, that an individual has a mental abnormality that causes difficulty in controlling sexual behavior. Previous research has found paraphilia not otherwise specified (NOS) as one of the most prevalent diagnoses proffered in SVP evaluations. However, the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5) modified paraphilia NOS diagnosis in two ways. First, this diagnosis was divided into two new diagnostic categories: other specified paraphilic disorder (OSPD) and unspecified paraphilic disorder. Second, OSPD required an added specifier to indicate the individual's source of sexual arousal. To date, no study has systematically explored how the revision to paraphilia NOS has affected diagnoses within SVP evaluations. The current study explored the frequency and diagnostic reliability of paraphilic disorders in a sample of 190 adult men evaluated for SVP civil commitment using the DSM-5. Results indicated that OSPD was the second most common paraphilic disorder, next to pedophilic disorder. However, there was poor to fair agreement (<i>kappa</i> = 0.21, <i>p</i> < .01) between independent evaluators in providing this diagnosis. Additionally, the two most common OSPD specifiers were non-consent and hebephilia, despite recent debate and rejection of these constructs from the DSM-5. While these constructs were the most prevalent, the specifiers contained quite varied terminology, suggesting vague diagnostic tendencies within these evaluations. Given that the presence of a mental abnormality is the cornerstone to the constitutionality of SVP commitment, diagnostic practices should be based in reliable and valid techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":21828,"journal":{"name":"Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment","volume":" ","pages":"10790632241271086"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Other Specified Paraphilic Disorder: Patterns of Use in Sexually Violent Predator Evaluations.\",\"authors\":\"Nicole Graham, Cynthia Calkins, Elizabeth Jeglic\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10790632241271086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>\\\"Sexually violent predator\\\" (SVP) legislation requires, in part, that an individual has a mental abnormality that causes difficulty in controlling sexual behavior. Previous research has found paraphilia not otherwise specified (NOS) as one of the most prevalent diagnoses proffered in SVP evaluations. However, the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5) modified paraphilia NOS diagnosis in two ways. First, this diagnosis was divided into two new diagnostic categories: other specified paraphilic disorder (OSPD) and unspecified paraphilic disorder. Second, OSPD required an added specifier to indicate the individual's source of sexual arousal. To date, no study has systematically explored how the revision to paraphilia NOS has affected diagnoses within SVP evaluations. The current study explored the frequency and diagnostic reliability of paraphilic disorders in a sample of 190 adult men evaluated for SVP civil commitment using the DSM-5. Results indicated that OSPD was the second most common paraphilic disorder, next to pedophilic disorder. However, there was poor to fair agreement (<i>kappa</i> = 0.21, <i>p</i> < .01) between independent evaluators in providing this diagnosis. Additionally, the two most common OSPD specifiers were non-consent and hebephilia, despite recent debate and rejection of these constructs from the DSM-5. While these constructs were the most prevalent, the specifiers contained quite varied terminology, suggesting vague diagnostic tendencies within these evaluations. Given that the presence of a mental abnormality is the cornerstone to the constitutionality of SVP commitment, diagnostic practices should be based in reliable and valid techniques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21828,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10790632241271086\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10790632241271086\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10790632241271086","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于 "性暴力犯罪者"(SVP)的立法部分要求当事人有精神异常,导致难以控制性行为。以往的研究发现,在 SVP 评估中,未另作说明的性变态(NOS)是最常见的诊断之一。然而,《诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)从两个方面修改了 "非特定性欲障碍 "诊断。首先,这一诊断被分为两个新的诊断类别:其他特定性欲障碍(OSPD)和未指定性欲障碍。其次,"其他特定性欲障碍 "需要添加一个特定词来说明患者的性兴奋来源。迄今为止,还没有任何研究系统地探讨了 "性欲障碍 NOS "的修订对 SVP 评估中的诊断有何影响。本研究使用 DSM-5 对 190 名接受 SVP 民事收容评估的成年男性进行了抽样调查,探讨了奸淫障碍的发生频率和诊断可靠性。结果表明,OSPD 是仅次于恋童癖的第二大常见奸淫障碍。然而,独立评估人员在提供这一诊断时的一致性较差到一般(kappa = 0.21,p < .01)。此外,两个最常见的 OSPD 指定词是非经同意和异性恋,尽管最近有争论,DSM-5 中也摒弃了这些概念。虽然这些概念是最常见的,但这些特定术语包含了相当多的不同术语,表明这些评估中存在模糊的诊断倾向。鉴于精神异常的存在是特殊自愿承诺合宪性的基石,诊断实践应该以可靠有效的技术为基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Other Specified Paraphilic Disorder: Patterns of Use in Sexually Violent Predator Evaluations.

"Sexually violent predator" (SVP) legislation requires, in part, that an individual has a mental abnormality that causes difficulty in controlling sexual behavior. Previous research has found paraphilia not otherwise specified (NOS) as one of the most prevalent diagnoses proffered in SVP evaluations. However, the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5) modified paraphilia NOS diagnosis in two ways. First, this diagnosis was divided into two new diagnostic categories: other specified paraphilic disorder (OSPD) and unspecified paraphilic disorder. Second, OSPD required an added specifier to indicate the individual's source of sexual arousal. To date, no study has systematically explored how the revision to paraphilia NOS has affected diagnoses within SVP evaluations. The current study explored the frequency and diagnostic reliability of paraphilic disorders in a sample of 190 adult men evaluated for SVP civil commitment using the DSM-5. Results indicated that OSPD was the second most common paraphilic disorder, next to pedophilic disorder. However, there was poor to fair agreement (kappa = 0.21, p < .01) between independent evaluators in providing this diagnosis. Additionally, the two most common OSPD specifiers were non-consent and hebephilia, despite recent debate and rejection of these constructs from the DSM-5. While these constructs were the most prevalent, the specifiers contained quite varied terminology, suggesting vague diagnostic tendencies within these evaluations. Given that the presence of a mental abnormality is the cornerstone to the constitutionality of SVP commitment, diagnostic practices should be based in reliable and valid techniques.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
17.40%
发文量
33
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信