Abstract
Assessment procedures currently in use with sexual offenders which measure their patterns of sexual arousal are reviewed, and their application to rapists found to be of questionable validity. These techniques primarily emphasize features of the laboratory stimuli used to elicit sexual arousal in males; that is, these methods compare sexual arousal elicited by consensual versus forceful sexual depictions. These procedures assume that greater erectile responses to depictions of sexual assault relative to consensual sex bear an important relationship to sexually aggressive behavior. This review suggests that such a relation is tenuous because arousal to the stimuli employed is not usually a functional antecedent or aspect of sexual assault. Furthermore, arousal patterns do not reliably distinguish rapists from non-rapists, and suppression of arousal to aggressive stimuli is unproved as a useful treatment target for rapists. It is concluded that this form of assessment had limited usefulness for determinations of dangerousness, prognosis, or treatment needs. This paper outlines an alternative model in which sexual assaults against adults are based upon the compatibility of the responses of sexual arousal and coercion, rather than upon arousal to deviant stimulus configurations.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
