The objective of this study was to develop a questionnaire to assess the online sexual solicitation and interactions of minors with adults in order to document the extent of this problem. The questionnaire was constructed in four phases: (a) a review of the previous literature; (b) interviews with convicted online child-sex offenders; (c) a review of the questionnaire items by experts; and (d) a pilot study of the questionnaire administered to adolescents. The validation sample consisted of 2,731 minors (12-15 years old, 50.6% girls). Exploratory factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure. The first factor, called “sexual solicitation,” included items referring to sexual requests from an adult to a minor. The second factor, termed “sexualized interactions,” included items indicating an adult groomed a minor with the purpose of committing a sexual offense. Of participants, 12.6% reported sexual solicitations, and 7.9% reported sexualized interactions. These findings open possible directions for research on the characteristics and consequences of online sexual solicitation and abusive interactions.
AllisonP. D. (2001). Missing data (Vol. 136). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2.
BabchishinK. M.HansonR. K.HermannC. A. (2011). The characteristics of online sex offenders: A meta-analysis. Sexual Abuse, 23, 92-123. doi:10.1177/1079063210370708
3.
BabchishinK. M.HansonR. K.VanZuylenH. (2015). Online child pornography offenders are different: A meta-analysis of the characteristics of online and offline sex offenders against children. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 45-66. doi:10.1007/s10508-014-0270-x
4.
BabchishinK. M.HelmusL. M. (2016). The influence of base rates on correlations: An evaluation of proposed alternative effect sizes with real-world data. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 1021-1031. doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0627-7
5.
BergenE.DavidsonJ.SchulzA.SchuhmannP.JohanssonA.SanttilaP.JernP. (2014). The effects of using identity deception and suggesting secrecy on the outcomes of adult-adult and adult-child or-adolescent online sexual interactions. Victims & Offenders, 9(3), 276-298. doi: 10.1080/15564886.2013.873750
6.
BlackP. J.WollisM.WoodworthM.HancockJ. T. (2015). A linguistic analysis of grooming strategies of online child sex offenders: Implications for our understanding of predatory sexual behavior in an increasingly computer-mediated world. Child Abuse & Neglect, 44, 140-149. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.12.004
7.
BriggsP.SimonW. T.SimonsenS. (2011). An exploratory study of Internet-initiated sexual offenses and the chat room sex offender: Has the Internet enabled a new typology of sex offender?Sexual Abuse, 23, 72-91. doi:10.1177/1079063210384275
8.
CohenJ. (1992). Quantitative methods in psychology: A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
9.
CooperA.PutnamD. E.PlanchonL. A.BoiesS. C. (1999). Online sexual compulsivity: Getting tangled in the net. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment and Prevention, 6(2), 79-104.
10.
DeHartD.DwyerG.SetoM. C.MoranR.LetourneauE.Schwarz-WattsD. (2017). Internet sexual solicitation of children: A proposed typology of offenders based on their chats, e-mails, and social network posts. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 23, 77-89. doi:10.1080/13552600.2016.1241309
11.
De SantistebanP.Gámez-GuadixM. (2017). Estrategias de persuasión en grooming online de menores: un análisis cualitativo con agresores en prisión [Persuasion strategies in online grooming of children: A qualitative analysis with sex offenders in prison]. Psychosocial Intervention, 26, 139-146.
12.
FieldA. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS: And sex and drugs and rock ‘n’ roll (3rd ed.). London, England: SAGE.
13.
Gámez-GuadixM.AlmendrosC.BorrajoE.CalveteE. (2015). Prevalence and association of sexting and online sexual victimization among Spanish adults. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 12, 145-154. doi:10.1007/s13178-015-0186-9
14.
Gámez-GuadixM.BorrajoE.AlmendrosC. (2016). Risky online behaviors among adolescents: Longitudinal relations among problematic Internet use, cyberbullying perpetration, and meeting strangers online. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 5, 100-107. doi:10.1556/2006.5.2016.013
15.
Gámez-GuadixM.De SantistebanP.ResettS. (2017). Sexting among Spanish adolescents: Prevalence and personality profiles. Psicothema, 29, 29-34.
16.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
17.
Holgado-TelloF. P.Chacón-MoscosoS.Barbero-GarcíaI.Vila-AbadE. (2010). Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Quality & Quantity, 44, 153-166.
18.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
19.
JonesL. M.MitchellK. J.FinkelhorD. (2012). Trends in youth Internet victimization: Findings from three youth Internet safety surveys 2000-2010. Journal of Adolescent Health, 50, 179-186. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.09.015
20.
KloessJ. A.BeechA. R.HarkinsL. (2014). Online child sexual exploitation prevalence, process, and offender characteristics. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 15, 126-139. doi:10.1177/1524838013511543
21.
KowalskiR. M.GiumettiG. W.SchroederA. N.LattannerM. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1073-1137. doi:10.1037/a0035618
22.
Lorenzo-SevaU.FerrandoP. J. (2006). FACTOR: A computer program to fit the exploratory factor analysis model. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 38, 88-91.
23.
Lorenzo-SevaU.FerrandoP. J. (2015). POLYMAT-C: A comprehensive SPSS program for computing the polychoric correlation matrix. Behavior Research Methods, 47, 884-889.
24.
ManloveJ.Terry-HumenE.IkramullahE. (2006). Young teenagers and older sexual partners: Correlates and consequences for males and females. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 38, 197-207. doi:10.1363/psrh.38.197.06
25.
McRaeK.GrossJ. J.WeberJ.RobertsonE. R.Sokol-HessnerP.RayR. D.. . . OchsnerK. N. (2012). The development of emotion regulation: An fMRI study of cognitive reappraisal in children, adolescents and young adults. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7, 11-22. doi:10.1093/scan/nsr093
26.
MitchellK. J.FinkelhorD.WolakJ. (2007a). Online requests for sexual pictures from youth: Risk factors and incident characteristics. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41, 196-203. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.03.013
27.
MitchellK. J.FinkelhorD.WolakJ. (2007b). Youth Internet users at risk for the most serious online sexual solicitations. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32, 532-537. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2007.02.001
28.
MitchellK. J.WolakJ.FinkelhorD. (2008). Are blogs putting youth at risk for online sexual solicitation or harassment?Child Abuse & Neglect, 32, 277-294. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.04.015
29.
O’ConnorB. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396-402.
30.
QuayleE.NewmanE. (2016). An exploratory study of public reports to investigate patterns and themes of requests for sexual images of minors online. Crime Science, 5(1), Article 2. doi:10.1186/s40163-016-0050-0
31.
SchulzA.BergenE.SchuhmannP.HoyerJ.SanttilaP. (2016). Online sexual solicitation of minors how often and between whom does it occur?Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 53, 165-188. doi:10.1177/0022427815599426
32.
SetoM. C.HansonR. K.BabchishinK. M. (2011). Contact sexual offending by men with online sexual offenses. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23, 124-145. doi:10.1177/1079063210369013
33.
SmithP. K. (2012). Cyberbullying and cyber aggression. In JimersonS. R.FurlongM. J. (Ed.), Handbook of school violence and school safety: International research and practice (pp. 93-103). New York, NY: Routledge.
34.
SmithP. K.ThompsonF.DavidsonJ. (2014). Cyber safety for adolescent girls: Bullying, harassment, sexting, pornography, and solicitation. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 26, 360-365.
35.
StevensJ. P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Van Gijn-GrosvenorE. L.LambM. E. (2016). Behavioral differences between online sexual groomers approaching boys and girls. Journal ofChild Sexual Abuse, 25, 577-596. doi:10.1080/10538712.2016.1189473
38.
WachsS.WolfK. D.PanC.-C. (2012). Cybergrooming: Risk factors, coping strategies and associations with cyberbullying. Psicothema, 24, 628-663.
WhittleH.Hamilton-GiachritsisC.BeechA.CollingsG. (2013). A review of online grooming: Characteristics and concerns. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18, 62-70. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2012.09.003
41.
WintersG. M.KaylorL. E.JeglicE. L. (2017). Sexual offenders contacting children online: An examination of transcripts of sexual grooming. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 23, 62-76. doi:10.1080/13552600.2016.1271146
42.
WolakJ.FinkelhorD.MitchellK. J. (2012). Trends in law enforcement responses to technology-facilitated child sexual exploitation crimes: The Third National Juvenile Online Victimization Study (NJOV-3). Durham, NH: Crimes against Children Research Center.
43.
WolakJ.FinkelhorD.MitchellK. J.YbarraM. L. (2010). Online “predators” and their victims: Myths, realities, and implications for prevention and treatment. Psychology of Violence, 1S, 13-35. doi:10.1037/2152-0828.1.S.13
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
