addressed in the later section on risk assessment
because their unchangeable nature means they are
unlikely to form the basis of clinical psychological
intervention (e.g., past sex offending history, past his-
tory of other criminal conduct, having experienced
abuse, neglect, or abandonment as a child, etc.).
Similarly, recent research has strongly suggested that
various neurophysiological and neuroanatomical mea-
sures are related to sexual offending against children,
but again, it would currently be unclear what could be
done about such problems in clinical intervention, and
therefore, they would be expected to have lower prior-
ity in typical clinical assessment with sex offenders.
Conversely, other psychological constructs, especially
intellectual ability as one example, do not distinguish
sex offenders and are very unlikely to be a target for
intervention but would usually be assessed because
they are probably relevant to program assignment and
design. Acute symptoms of psychosis might be another
rarer example in this category.
What are the psychological characteristics that dis-
tinguish sex offenders from other men or are related to
recidivism among sex offenders? There is no doubt
that the two most important domains are sexual prefer-
ences and life-course-persistent antisociality; these are
discussed at greater length in the next two sections.
Several other variables are clearly relevant, especially
the age and sex of victims and the victim–offender
relationship. Sex offenders who target males and
adults represent greater than average risk, while those
who have targeted only children in their own families
represent lower than average risk. Thus, thorough
investigation of such details pertaining to all victims,
involving collateral sources is probably essential.
Although not specific to sex offending, it is probable
that assessment for substance abuse problems is rele-
vant to clinical services with all sex offenders.
Evidence supports efforts by forensic psychologists
supervising sex offenders under conditional release to
assess fluctuations in hostility, anger, and noncompli-
ance, and to monitor (via direct observation and collat-
eral reports) access to potential victims.
Much more equivocal evidence relates to the assess-
ment of several other domains including attitudes,
beliefs, and symptoms. In this category are assessments
of specific justifications and excuses for sexually coer-
cive behavior (e.g., endorsing the idea that victims
deserve or enjoy being sexually assaulted) or attitudes
supporting generally exploitative and selfish conduct.
Similarly, lack of social competence and clinicallysignificant depression have been reported to be relevant
in some studies but disconfirmed by others. Polygraphy
has been recommended as an adjunct assessment for sex
offenders, but evidence to support its use is sparse and
equivocal. Some clinical constructs can, on the basis of
available evidence, be ruled out as worthwhile assess-
ment concerns among sex offenders. Based on available
evidence, self-esteem, anxiety, specific victim empathy,
loneliness, denial, and insight would be difficult to sup-
port as targets for assessment and intervention among
sex offenders. Novel theories about the causes of sex
offending might imply new approaches to intervention
that would, in turn, imply new ways of assessing these
constructs or the measurement of psychological charac-
teristics not yet entertained among sex offenders. Such
novel interventions could be ethically attempted as a test
of such novel explanations but only in the context of a
rigorous outcome evaluation. Comprehensive discus-
sions of the psychometric and other properties of the
many formal assessment tools for these characteristics
as well as advice about sources of information and inter-
viewing tactics are provided in the recommended read-
ings and related entries.Assessment of Sexual Preferences
The only assessment shown to reliably distinguish sex
offenders from other men (especially offenders without
sex offenses) and also to predict recidivism among adju-
dicated sex offenders is phallometrically evaluated sex-
ual preferences. Phallometry is the measurement of
penile tumescence in response to controlled stimuli.
Research clearly shows that, on average, men who have
sexually assaulted prepubescent children exhibit rela-
tively greater erectile responses to stimuli that sexually
depict children (versus adult stimuli) compared with
men without such sexual histories. Such “pedophilic”
sexual test results are also related to the likelihood of
recidivism among such sex offenders. Similarly, several
meta-analyses have demonstrated that men who have
committed coercive sexual assaults against women
exhibit relatively greater erectile response to depictions
of rape and violence (vs. depictions of consensual sex)
compared with men without such sexual histories, and
there is evidence that such test results are related to
recidivism. Although the theoretical meaning of these
robust and reliable relationships pertaining to sexual
preferences has not been fully settled, it seems
inescapable that the scientific explanation of sex offend-
ing will at least partly depend on them.Sex Offender Assessment——— 717S-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:44 PM Page 717