The registration of the reactions to the erotic stimuli related to pedophilia
Suggested citation:
Vasil'ev NG, Tkachenko AA. [The registration of the reactions to the erotic stimuli related to pedophilia]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2021;(1):53-64. Russian
In this scientific review, in order to form ideas about the possibilities of fixing reactions to erotic stimuli in pedophilia using modern technologies, the electronic resources of the scientific electronic library elibrary.ru and the MEDLINE database of the US National Library of Medicine were studied. The search was carried out using combinations of the keywords MRI, PET, EEG, event related potential with the words pedophilia, paedophilia. The theoretical concepts of the neurophysiological mechanisms of abnormal sexual preference are described, the results of the most significant psychophysiological, neuroimaging and electrophysiological studies are presented.
Keywords magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); positron emission tomography (PET); electroencephalography (EEG); pedophilia; erotic stimuli
1. Ward T, Beech RA. An integrated theory of sexual offending. Aggress Violent Behav. 2006;(11):44–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2005.05.002 2. Pennington BF. Methods of syndrome analysis. Neuropsychology. The development of psychopathology: nature and nurture. N.Y.: The Guilford Press; 2002. P. 76–101. 3. Luriya AR. Lektsii po obshchei psikhologii. Saint-Petersburg: Piter Publ.; 2006. 320 p. (In Russ.) 4. Ward T, Beech RA. An integrated theory of sexual offending – revised a multifield perspective. The Wiley Handbook on the Theories, Assessment, and Treatment of Sexual Offending. Vol. I: Theories, edited by AR Beech, T Ward. New Zealand: John Wiley & Sons; 2016. P. 123–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118574003.wattso006 5. Redoute J, Stoleru S, Gregoire M-C, et al. Brain Processing of Visual Sexual Stimuli in Human Males. Human Brain Mapping. 2000;(11):162–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0193(200011)11:3<162::aid-hbm30>3.0.co;2-a 6. Stoléru S, Fonteille V, Cornélis C, et al. Functional neuroimaging studies of sexual arousal and orgasm in healthy men and women: A review and meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2012;36(6):1481–509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.03.006 7. Kamenskov MYU, Vvedenskii GE. [Instrumental diagnosis of paraphilias with use of the polygraph: methodological problems and guidelines for their solution (analytical review)]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2014;(3):4–9. (In Russ.) 8. Grubin D, Kamenskov M, Dwyer RG, Stephenson T. Post-conviction polygraph testing of sex offenders. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2019;31(2):141–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09540261.2018.1561428; PMID: 30915870 9. Kamenskov MYU, Grubin D, Yakovchik AYU, Kuptsova DM. [International practice of using polygraph testing for sex offenders]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2020;(2):80–91. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.24411/1560-957X-2020-10210 10. Zhukov OB, Zubarev AR, Krotenkova MV, et al. Neirogennye mekhanizmy regulyatsii ehrektsii i rol' sovremennykh metodov neirovizualizatsii v diagnostike ehrektil'noi disfunktsii. Meditsinskaya vizualizatsiya. 2005;(2):9–17. (In Russ.) 11. Kamenskov MYU, Mehrfi L, Kuptsova DM. [Psycho-vegetative methods of diagnosis in the practice of forensic psychiatry]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2018;(3):61–73. (In Russ.) 12. Fromberger P, Jordan K, Steinkrauss H, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Eye Movements in Assessing Pedophilia. J Sex Med. 2012;9(7):1868–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02754.x 13. Kamenskov MYu, Vvedenskiy GE, Kupcova DM, et al. [The diagnostic value of eye-tracking for sexology]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2018;(1):78–85. (In Russ.) 14. Kamenskov MYU, Yakovchik AYU. [Prospects for the use of a binocular eye tracking system for the diagnosis of pedophilic disorder]. Zh Nevrol Psikhiatr Im SS Korsakova. 2020;120(9):72–79. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17116/jnevro202012009172 15. Spiering M, Everaerd W. The sexual unconscious. The psychophisiology of sex. Ed. Janssen E. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press; 2007. P. 166–84. 16. Kihlstrom JF, Mulvaney S, Tobias BA, Tobis IP. The emotional unconscious. In: Eich E, Bower GH, Forgas JP, Niedenthal PM (Eds). Cognition and emotion. London: Oxford University Press; 2000. P. 30–86. 17. Schacter D, Buckner RL. Priming and the brain. Neuron. 1998;20(2):185–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80448-1; PMID: 9491981 18. Dehaene S, Naccache L. Towards a cognitive neuroscience of consciousness: Basic evidence and a workspace framework. Cognition. 2001;79(1–2):1–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00123-2; PMID: 11164022 19. Zamansky HS. A technique for assessing homosexual tendencies. J Personal. 2006;24(4):436–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1956.tb01280.x 20. Harris GT, Rice ME, Quinsey VL, et al. Viewing time as a measure of sexual interest among child molesters and normal heterosexual men. Behav Res Ther. 1996;34(4):389–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(95)00070-4 21. Abel GG, Lawry SS, Karlstrom EM, et al. Screening tests for pedophilia. Criminal Justice Behav. 1994;21:115–31. 22. Mokros A, Gebhard M, Heinz V, et al. Computerized assessment of pedophilic sexual interest through self-report and viewing time: reliability, validity, and classification accuracy of the affinity program. Sex Abuse. 2012;25(3):230–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063212454550 23. Schmidt AF, Babchishin KM, Lehmann RJB. A meta-analysis of viewing time measures of sexual interest in children. Arch Sex Behav. 2017;46(1):287–300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0806-3 24. Geer JH, Bellard HS. Sexual content induced delays in unprimed lexical decisions: gender and context effects. Arch Sex Behav. 1996;25(4):379–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02437581 25. Mokros A, Dombert B, Osterheider M. Assessment of pedophilic sexual interest with an Attentional Choice Reaction Time Task. Arch Sex Behav. 2010;39(5):1081–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9530-6 26. Dombert B, Antfolk J, Kallvik L, et al. Identifying Pedophilic Interest in Sex Offenders against Children with the Indirect Choice Reaction Time Task. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2015;33:345–51. 27. Poeppl TB, Nitschke J, Dombert B, et al. Functional cortical and subcortical abnormalities in pedophilia: a combined study using a choice reaction time task and fMRI. J Sex Med. 2011;8(6):1660–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02248.x 28. Beech AR, Kalmus E, Tipper SP, et al. Children induce an enhanced attentional blink in child molesters. Psychol Assess. 2008;20(4):397–402. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013587 29. Zappalà A, Antfolk J, Dombert B, et al. Identifying deviant sexual interest in a sex offender sample using dual-target rapid serial visual presentation task. J Forensic Psychiatry Psychol. 2016;27(2):281–307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2015.1122820 30. Gray NS, Brown AS, MacCulloch MJ, et al. An implicit test of the associations between children and sex in pedophiles. J Abnormal Psychol. 2005;114(2):304–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.114.2.304 31. Hempel IS, Buck NML, Goethals KR. Unraveling sexual associations in contact and noncontact child sex offenders using the single category. Implicit Association Test. Sexual Abuse. 2013;25(5):444–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063212464660 32. Brown AS, Gray NS, Snowden RJ. Implicit measurement of child associations in child sex abusers: Role of victim type and denial. Sexual Abuse. 2009;21(2):166–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063209332234 33. Tkachenko AA, Kamenskov MYu, Demidova LYu. [Contemporary diagnosis of sexual preference disorders (international practices)]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2017;(6):60–9. (In Russ.) 34. Dreßing H, Obergriesser T, Tost H, et al. Homosexual pedophilia and functional networks – An fMRI case report and literature review. Fortschritte der Neurol Psychiatr. 2001;69(11):539–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2001-18380 35. Cohen LJ, Nikiforov K, Gans S, et al. Heterosexual male perpetrators of childhood sexual abuse: A preliminary neuropsychiatric model. Psychiatric Quarterly. 2002;73(4):313–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020416101092 36. Poeppl TB, Nitschke J, Dombert B, et al. Functional cortical and subcortical abnormalities in pedophilia: A combined study using a choice reaction time task and fMRI. J Sex Med. 2011;6(8):1660–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02248.x 37. Ponseti J, Granert O, Jansen O, et al. Assessment of pedophilia using hemodynamic brain response to sexual stimuli. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2012;69(2):187–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.130 38. Schiffer B, Paul T, Gizewski E, et al. Functional brain correlates of heterosexual paedophilia. Neuroimage. 2008;41(1):80–91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.02.008 39. Walter M, Witzel J, Wiebking C, et al. Pedophilia is Linked to Reduced Activation in Hypothalamus and Lateral Prefrontal Cortex During Visual Erotic Stimulation. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;62(2):698–701. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.10.018 40. Lang PJ, Bradley MM, Cuthbert BN. International Affective Picture System (IAPS): Technical Manual and Affective Ratings. NIMH Center for the Study of Emotion and Attention, Gainesville. 1997. р. 39–58. 41. Schiffer B, Krueger T, Paul T, et al. Brain response to visual sexual stimuli in homosexual pedophiles. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2008;33(1):23–33. 42. Sartorius A, Ruf M, Kief C, et al. Abnormal amygdala activation profile in pedophilia. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2008;258(5):271–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-008-0782-2 43. Habermeyer B, Esposito F, Händel N, et al. Immediate processing of erotic stimuli in paedophilia and controls: A case control study. BMC Psychiatry. 2013;13:88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-13-88 44. Fonteille V, Redouté J, Lamothe P, et al. Brain processing of pictures of children in men with pedophilic disorder: A positron emission tomography study. NeuroImage Clin. 2019;21:101647. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2018.101647 45. Ristow I, Foell J, Kärgel C, et al. Expectation of sexual images of adults and children elicits differential dorsal anterior cingulate cortex activation in pedophilic sexual offenders and healthy controls. NeuroImage Clin. 2019;23:101863. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101863 46. Flor-Henry P, Lang RA, Koles ZJ, Frenzel RR. Quantitative EEG studies of pedophilia. Int J Psychophysiol. 1991;10(3):253–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8760(91)90036-W 47. Anokhin AP, Golosheykin S, Sirevaag E, et al. Rapid discrimination of visual scene content in the human brain. Brain Res. 2006;1093(1):167–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.03.108 48. Howard RC, Longmore FJ, Mason PA, Martin JL. Contingent negative variation (CNV) and erotic preference in self-declared homosexuals and in child sex offenders. Biol Psychol. 1994;38(2–3):169–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-0511(94)90037-X 49. Knott V, Impey D, Fisher D, et al. Pedophilic brain potential responses to adult erotic stimuli. Brain Res. 2016;1632:127–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2015.12.004 50. Rosburg T, Deuring G, Boillat C, et al. Inhibition and attentional control in pedophilic child sexual offenders – An event-related potential study. Clin Neurophysiol. 2018;129(9):1990–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2018.06.029 51. Başar E, Guntekin B. Review of delta, theta, alpha, beta, and gamma response oscillations in neuropsychiatric disorders. Application of Brain Oscillations in Neuropsychiatric Diseases. Suppl Clin Neurophysiol. 2013;62:303–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ b978-0-7020-5307-8.00019-3 52. Bochkarev VK, Vasil'ev NG, Kirenskaya AV, et al. [Neurophysiological correlates of erotic visual stimulation in pedophilia]. Rossiiskii psikhiatricheskii zhurnal [Russian Journal of Psychiatry]. 2019;(4):42–9. (In Russ.). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24411/1560-957X-2019-11935 53. Krylova M, Ristow I, Marr V, Borchardt V, Li M, Witzel J, et al. MEG reveals preference specific increases of sexual-image-evoked responses in paedophilic sexual offenders and healthy controls. World J Biol. Psychia. 2020;16:1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15622975.2020.1789216
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.47877/1560-957Х-2021-10106
Article Metrics
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM