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

Abstract

Recent research by Beech, Parrett, Ward, and Fisher has suggested that Ward and Keenan's 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 Keenan's (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.

Keywords:

• female
• sexual offender
• implicit theories
• child molesters
• child sexual abuse

Notes

1. The low Kappas for Nature of Harm and Male Entitlement may represent the fact that these two concepts are often implied by participants, rather than directly acknowledged, thereby creating more ambiguity in coding and more potential for disagreement between coders.