Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Referral for group or individual treatment? Factors for consideration in the case of self-referred individuals with a sexual interest in minors

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 33, pages 348–363 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

In Germany, several treatment programs offer psychotherapy for individuals with a sexual interest in minors (SIM) who are currently not in contact with the criminal justice system. The patients present anonymously in relation to the health insurance and judicial system. Group therapy plays an important role in these programs. However, to date there is poor empirical evidence on indication criteria for group vs. individual treatment for this specific group of individuals. This study examined individuals with SIM who voluntarily participated in a treatment program in Hamburg. We investigated via post-hoc analysis whether there were significant differences regarding readiness to participate in group therapy, dynamic risk factors, psychopathic characteristics, impulsivity and empathy between individuals indicated for group therapy (n = 26) and individuals referred for individual therapy (n = 47). Results show that individuals referred for individual therapy were significantly more impulsive than individuals referred for group therapy, but comparable in respect to readiness to participate in group therapy, dynamic risk, psychopathy, and empathy. These findings suggest that assignment to group vs. individual therapy is mainly based on other criteria than these characteristics. Implications for clinical practice and future research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dombert B, Schmidt AF, Banse R, Briken P, Hoyer J, Neutze J, et al. How common is men’s self-reported sexual interest in prepubescent children? J Sex Res 2016;53:214–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2015.1020108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Netzwerk “Kein Täter werden”. lieben sie kinder mehr, als ihnen lieb ist? Berlin: Universitätsklinikum Charité; 2018. https://www.kein-taeter-werden.de

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burlingame GM, Seeback JD, Janis RA, Whitcomb KE, Barkowski S, Rosendahl J, et al. Outcome differences between individual and group formats when identical and nonidentical treatments, patients, and doses are compared: a 25-year meta-analytic perspective. Psychotherapy. 2016;53:446–61. https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000090

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McRoberts C, Burlingame GM, Hoag MJ. Comparative efficacy of individual and group psychotherapy: a meta-analytic perspective. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 1998;2:101–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.2.2.101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Briken P, Berner W, Flöter A, Jückstock V, Franqué F von. Prävention sexuellen Kindesmissbrauchs im Dunkelfeld—das Hamburger Modell [Prevention of child sexual abuse out of the criminal law context—the Hamburg Model]. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2018;68:142–61. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-121680

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schmucker M, Lösel F. Sexual offender treatment for reducing recidivism among convicted sex offenders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Campbell Syst Rev. 2017. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2017.8

  7. Di Fazio R, Abracen J, Looman J. Group versus individual treatment of sex offenders: a comparison. Forum Correct Res. 2001;13:56–9.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Tozdan S, Briken P. Age of onset and its correlates in men with sexual interest in children. J Sex Med. 2019;7:61–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esxm.2018.10.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lampalzer U, Briken P. Gruppenpsychotherapie bei Menschen mit pädophilen Neigungen aus dem Dunkelfeld. Stand der Forschung zu Indikationskriterien [Group psychotherapy for individuals with pedophilic tendencies from undetected cases. State of research on indication criteria]. Psychotherapeut. 2019;64:113–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00278-019-0334-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Norcross JC, Hill CE. Empirically supported therapy relationships. Clin Psychol. 2004;57:19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fuhriman A, Burlingame GM. Consistency of matter: a comparative analysis of individual and group process variables. Couns Psychol. 1990;18:6–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000090181002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Holmes SE, Kivlighan D. Comparison of therapeutic factors in group and individual treatment processes. J Couns Psychol. 2000;47:478–84. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.47.4.478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Burlingame GM, Cox JC, Davies DR, Layne CM, Gleave R. The group selection questionnaire: further refinements in group member selection. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 2011;15:60–74. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Roback HB. Adverse outcomes in group psychotherapy. Risk factors, prevention, and research directions. J Psychother Pr Res. 2000;9:113–22.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gans JS, Counselman EF. Patient selection for psychodynamic group psychotherapy: practical and dynamic considerations. Int J Group Psychother. 2010;60:197–220. https://doi.org/10.1521/ijgp.2010.60.2.197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sawyer S, Jennings JL. Group therapy with sexual abusers: engaging the full potential of the group experience. Brandon, VT: Safer Society Press; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Jensen HH, Mortensen EL, Lotz M. Drop-out from a psychodynamic group psychotherapy outpatient unit. Nord J Psychiatry. 2014;68:594–604. https://doi.org/10.3109/08039488.2014.902499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. MacNair RR, Corazzini JG. Client factors influencing group therapy dropout. Psychotheray. 1994;31:352–62. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0090226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. MacNair-Semands RR. Predicting attendance and expectations for group therapy. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 2002;6:219–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.6.3.219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yalom ID. A study of group therapy dropouts. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1966;14:393–414. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1966.01730100057008

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yalom ID, Leszcz M. The theory and practice of group psychotherapy. 5th edn. New York, NY: Basic Books; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Harkins L, Beech AR, Thornton D. The influence of risk and psychopathy on the therapeutic climate in sex offender treatment. Sex Abuse 2013;25:103–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063212443384

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hudson K. Offending identities. Sex offenders’ perspectives of their treatment and management. Cullompton: Willan Publishing; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cantor JM. McPhail IV. Non-offending pedophiles. Curr Sex Health Rep. 2016;8:121–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-016-0076-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ferencik BM. Cognitive and affective patterns of alcoholics: implications for group therapy. Group. 1989;13:31–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01456550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rabin AS, Kaslow NJ, Rehm LP. Factors influencing continuation in a behavioral therapy. Behav Res Ther. 1985;23:695–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(85)90068-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Joyce AS, McCallum M, Piper WE, Ogrodniczuk JS. Role behavior expectancies and alliance change in short-term individual psychotherapy. J Psychother Pr Res. 2000;9:213–25.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Piper WE, Joyce AS, Rosie JS, Azim HFA. Psychological mindedness, work, and outcome in day treatment. Int J Group Psychother. 1994;44:291–311.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Jahnke S, Schmidt AF, Geradt M, Hoyer J. Stigma-related stress and its correlates among men with pedophilic sexual interests. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:2173–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0503-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Gerwinn H, Weiß S, Tenbergen G, Amelung T, Födisch C, Pohl A, et al. Clinical characteristics associated with paedophilia and child sex offending—differentiating sexual preference from offence status. Eur Psychiatry. 2018;51:74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.02.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Babchishin KM, Hanson RK, VanZuylen H. Online child pornography offenders are different: a meta-analysis of the characteristics of online and offline sex offenders against children. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:45–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0270-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lee AF, Li NC, Lamade R, Schuler A, Prentky RA. Predicting hands-on child sexual offenses among possessors of Internet child pornography. Psychol Public Policy Law. 2012;18:644–72. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ly T, Dwyer RG, Fedoroff JP. Characteristics and treatment of internet child pornography offenders. Behav Sci Law. 2018;36:216–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hanson RK, Bourgon G, Helmus L, Hodgson S. The principles of effective correctional treatment also apply to sexual offenders: a meta-analysis. Crim Justice Behav. 2009;36:865–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854809338545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Hanson RK, Yates PM. Psychological treatment of sex offenders. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2013;15:348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Andrews DA, Bonta J. The psychology of criminal conduct. 6th edition. New York, NY: Routledge; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Harkins L, Beech AR. A review of the factors that can influence the effectiveness of sexual offender treatment: risk, need, responsivity, and process issues. Aggress Violent Behav. 2007;12:615–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2006.10.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ward T, Melser J, Yates PM. Reconstructing the risk-need-responsivity model: a theoretical elaboration and evaluation. Aggress Violent Behav. 2007;12:208–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Looman J, Dickie I, Abracen J. Responsivity issues in the treatment of sexual offenders. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2005;6:330–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Jennings JL, Deming A. Review of the empirical and clinical support for group therapy specific to sexual abusers. Sex Abuse. 2017;29:731–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063215618376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Andrews DA, Bonta J. Risk-need-responsitivy model for offender assessment and rehabilitation. Ottawa, Canada: Correctional Services of Canada; 2007.

  42. Cohen LJ. Galynker II. Clinical features of pedophilia and implications for treatment. J Psychiatr Pract. 2002;8:276–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Cohen LJ. Galynker II. Psychopathology and personality traits of pedophiles: issues for diagnosis and treatment. Psychiatry. 2009;26:25–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/00131746-200209000-00004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hall RCW, Hall RCW. A profile of pedophilia: definition, characteristics of offenders, recidivism, treatment outcomes, and forensic issues. Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82:457–71. https://doi.org/10.4065/82.4.457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Cabeen CW, Coleman JC. The selection of sex-offender patients for group psychotherapy. Int J Group Psychother. 1962;12:326–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Looman J, Abracen J, Di Fazio R. Efficacy of group versus individual treatment of sex offenders. Sex Abuse Aust NZ. 2014;6:48–56.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Löffler J, Bormann B, Burlingame GM, Strauss B. Auswahl von Patient(inn)en für Gruppenpsychotherapien—Validierung der deutschen Version des Group Selection Questionnaire (GSQ) [Patient selection for group psychotherapy—a validation study of the Group Selection Questionnaire (GSQ) in German clinical samples]. Z Psychiatr Psych Ps. 2007;55:75–86. https://doi.org/10.1024/166l-4747.55.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Paulhus DL, Hemphill JD, Hare RD. Manual for the self-report psychopathy scale. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems. (In press).

  49. Paulus C. Der Saarbrücker Persönlichkeitsfragebogen SPF (IRI) zur Messung von Empathie. Psychometrische Evaluation der deutschen Version des Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Trier: Leibniz-Zentrum für Psychologische Information und Dokumentation (ZPID). 2009. http://psydok.psycharchives.de/jspui/bitstream/20.500.11780/3343/1/SPF_Artikel.pdf

  50. Davis M. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS catalogue Sel Doc Psychol. 1980;10:85.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Davis M. Measuring individual differences in empathy: evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1983;44:113–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Paulus C. Testtheoretische Kennwerte des SPF(IRI). Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes; 2017. http://bildungswissenschaften.uni-saarland.de/personal/paulus/empathy/TTSPF%28IRI%29.htm

  53. Patton JH, Stanford MS, Barratt ES. Factor structure of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale. J Clin Psychol. 1995;51:768–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(199511)51:6%3C768::aid-jclp2270510607%3E3.0.co;2-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Preuss UW, Rujescu I, Giegling I, Watzke S, Koller G, Zetzsche T, et al. Psychometrische Evaluation der deutschsprachigen Version der Barratt-Impulsiveness-Skala [Psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale]. Nervenarzt. 2008;79:305–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-007-2360-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Hanson RK, Harris AJR, Scott TL, Helmus L. Assessing the risk of sexual offenders on community supervision: the Dynamic Supervision Project. 2007-05. Ottawa: Public Safety Canada; 2007. http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/res/cor/rep/_fl/crp2007-05-en.pdf

  56. Matthes A, Rettenberger M. Die Deutsche Version des Stable-2007. Wien: Institut für Gewaltforschung und Prävention; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Rettenberger M, Matthes A, Schilling F, Eher R. Die Validität dynamisch-veränderbarer Risikofaktoren bei der Vorhersage einschlägiger Rückfälle pädosexueller Täter: Eine Studie über Stable-2000 und Stable-2007 [The validity of dynamic and changeable risk factors for the prediction of sexual recidivism in a sample of pedosexual offenders: a study of Stable-2000 and Stable-2007]. Forens Psychiatr Psychol Kriminol. 2011;5:45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Eher R, Matthes A, Schilling F, Haubner-McLean T, Rettenberger M. Dynamic risk assessment in sexual offenders using STABLE-2000 and the STABLE-2007: an investigation of predictive and incremental validity. Sex Abuse 2012;24:5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063211403164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Conover WJ. Practical nonparametric statistics. 2nd edn. New York, NY: John Wiley; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Kim TK. T test as a parametric statistic. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2015;68:540–6. https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2015.68.6.540

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Rosenthal R. Metaanalytic procedures for social research. 2nd edn. Newsbury Park, CA: Sage; 1991.

  62. Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 3rd edn. Los Angeles, CA: Sage; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Abdi H. Bonferroni and Sidak corrections for multiple comparisons. In: Salkind NJ (ed.). Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2007. p. 103–7.

  65. Armstrong RA. When to use the Bonferroni correction. Opthalmic Physiol Opt. 2014;34:502–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.12131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Cabin RJ, Mitchell RJ. To Bonferroni or not to Bonferroni: when and how are the questions. Bull Ecol Soc Am. 2000;81:246–8.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Bernard H, Burlingame G, Flores P, Greene L, Joyce A, Kobos JC, et al. Clinical guidelines for group psychotherapy. Int J Group Psychother. 2008;58:455–542. https://doi.org/10.1521/ijgp.2008.58.4.455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Mattke D, Strauss B. Indikation. Prognose, Vorbereitung und Zusammensetzung von Therapiegruppen. In: Strauss B, Mattke D (eds). Gruppenpsychotherapie. Lehrbuch für die Praxis. 2nd edn. Berlin: Springer; 2018. p. 59–68.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  69. Dally A. Indikation zur Gruppenpsychotherapie. In: Staats H, Dally A, Bolm T (eds). Gruppenpsychotherapie und Gruppenanalyse. Ein Lehr- und Lernbuch für Klinik und Praxis. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht; 2014. p. 80–84.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  70. Herpertz S. Gruppenpsychotherapie bei Borderline-Persönlichkeitsstörung. In: Tschuschke V (ed). Gruppenpsychotherapie. Von der Indikation bis zu Leitungstechniken. Thieme: Stuttgart; 2010. p. 215–20.

  71. Johnson JE. Die Behandlung von Persönlichkeitsstörungen in psychotherapeutischen Gruppen [Group treatments for personality disorders]. Gruppenpsychother Gr. 2009;45:32–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Kraus G, Reynolds DJ. The “A-B-C’s” of the cluster B’s: identifying, understanding, and treating cluster B personality disorders. Clin Psychol Rev. 2001;21:345–73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Tschuschke V. Dauer und Wirkung von Gruppenpsychotherapien bei Persönlichkeitsstörungen [Duration and effects of group therapy for patients with personality disorder]. Persönlichkeitsstörungen. 2009;13:130–5.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Sacchetti GM, Lefler EK. ADHD symptomology and social functioning in college students. J Atten Disord. 2017;21:1009–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054714557355

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Ristow I, Li M, Colic L, Marr V, Födisch C, Düring F von, et al. Pedophilic sex offenders are characterised by reduced GABA concentration in dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. Neuroimage Clin. 2018;18:335–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2018.01.018

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Carvalho J. Pedophilic sexual interest in convicted child sexual offenders: the predictive role of psychopathology and personality dimensions. J Forensic Med Forecast. 2018;1:1001.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Cohen LJ, Gans SW, McGeoch PG, Poznansky O, Itskovich Y, Murphy S, et al. Impulsive personality traits in male pedophiles versus healthy controls: is pedophilia an impulsive-aggressive disorder? Compr Psychiatry. 2002;43:127–34. https://doi.org/10.1053/comp.2002.30796

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Cohen LJ, Frenda S, Mojtabai R, Katsavdakis K, Galynker I. Comparison of sexual offenders against children with sexual offenders against adolescents and adults: data from the New York State Sex Offender Registry. J Psychiatr Pract. 2007;13:373–84. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pra.0000300123.83945.76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Cohen LJ, Grebchenko YF, Steinfeld M, Frenda SJ, Galynker I. Comparison of personality traits in pedophiles, abstinent opiate addicts, and healthy controls. Considering pedophilia as an addictive behavior. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2008;196:829–37. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0b013e31818b4e3d

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Cohen LJ, Nesci C, Steinfeld M, Haeri S, Galynker I. Investigating the relationship between sexual and chemical addictions by comparing executive functions in pedophiles, opiate addicts and healthy controls. J Psychiatr Pract. 2010;16:405–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pra.0000390759.04581.7c

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Gibbels C, Sinke C, Kneer J, Amelung T, Mohnke S, Beier KM, et al. Two sides of one coin: a comparison of clinical and neurobiological characteristics of convicted and non-convicted pedophilic child sexual offenders. J Clin Med. 2019;8:E947 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8070947

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Baltieri DA, Boer DP. Two clusters of child molestors based on impulsiveness. Braz J Psychiatry. 2015;37:139–45. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-4446-2014-1568

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Seto MC, Babchishin KM, Pullman LE, McPhail IV. The puzzle of intrafamilial child sexual abuse: a meta-analysis comparing intrafamilial and extrafamilial offenders with child victims. Clin Psychol Rev. 2015;39:42–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.04.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Lieberz K, Knoblich A, Krumm B. Gruppen- oder Einzelpsychotherapie?–Untersuchungen zur differenziellen Indikationsstellung bei den psychoanalytisch begründeten Verfahren in der Richtlinien-Psychotherapie. Ergebnisse aus dem MARS-Projekt [Group or individual psychotherapy?—investigations regarding the differential indication according to the German guidelines for psychotherapy. Results from the MARS Project]. Gruppenpsychother Gr. 2014;50:2–17. https://doi.org/10.13109/grup.2014.50.1.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Bourgon G, Bonta J. Reconsidering the responsivity principle: away to move forward. Fed Probat. 2014;78:3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Stinson JD, Becker JV. Pedophilic disorder. In: Phenix A, Hoberman HM (eds). Sexual offending. Predisposing antecedents, assessments and management. New York, NY: Springer; 2016. pp. 15–27.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  87. Hartman V. Notes on group psychotherapy with pedophiles. Can Psychiatry Assoc J. 1965;10:283–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674376501000410

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Craissati J, McClurg G. The Challenge Project: a treatment program evaluation for perpetrators of child sexual abuse. Child Abus Negl. 1997;21:637–48.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Travin S, Bluestone H, Coleman E, Cullen K, Melella J. Pedophilia: an update on theory and practice. Psychiatr Q. 1985;57:89–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01064327

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Gillies LA, Hashmall JM, Hilton NZ, Werster CD. Relapse prevention in pedophiles: clinical issues and program development. Can Psychol. 1992;33:199–210. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0078714

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Marshall WL, Marshall LE, Serran GA, O’Brien MD (eds.). Rehabilitating sexual offenders: a strength-based approach. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Studer LH, Aylwin AS. Pedophilia: the problem with diagnosis and limitations of CBT in treatment. Med Hypotheses. 2006;67:774–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2006.04.030

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Culbert-Kviring K. Considerations in the development of treatment options for individuals with pedophilic attractions. WUPJ. 2016; 4. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/wupj/vol4/iss1

  94. Santtila P, Antfolk J, Räfså A, Hartwig M, Sariola H, Sandnabba NK, et al. Men’s sexual interest in children: one-year incidence and correlates in a population-based sample of Finnish male twins. J Child Sex Abuse. 2015;24:115–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2015.997410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Mitchell RC, Galupo MP. Interest in child molestation among a community sample of men sexually attracted to children. J Sex Aggress. 2016;22:224–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2015.1056263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Tozdan S, Briken P. The earlier, the worse? Age of onset of sexual interest in children. J Sex Med. 2015;12:1602–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12927

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Long ML, Alison LA, McManus MA. Child pornography and likelihood of contact abuse: a comparison between contact child sexual offenders and noncontact offenders. Sex Abuse. 2013;25:370–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063212464398

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Aslan D, Edelmann R. Demographic and offence characteristics: a comparison of sex offenders convicted of possessing indecent images of children, committing contact sex offences or both offences. J Forens Psychiatry Psychol. 2014;25:121–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2014.884618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Ly T, Murphy L, Fedoroff JP. Understanding online child sexual exploitation offenses. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2016;18:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-016-0707-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Seto MC, Cantor JM, Blanchard R. Child pornography offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of pedophilia. J Abnorm Psychol. 2006;115:610–5. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.115.3.610

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Eckert J. Indikation und Prognose. In: Tschuschke V (ed). Gruppenpsychotherapie. Von der Indikation bis zu Leitungstechniken. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2010. p. 44–50.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Mattke D. Durchführung einer psychodynamischen Gruppenpsychotherapie. Indikation—Selektion—Komposition—Prognose—Phasen der Gruppenentwicklung—prozessorientierte Gruppenleitung—Interventionstechnik. In: Mattke D, Reddemann L, Strauss B. Keine Angst vor Gruppen! Gruppenpsychotherapie in Praxis und Forschung. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta; 2009. pp. 95–142.

  103. Janssen PL, Sachs G. Psychodynamische Gruppenpsychotherapie. Theorie, Setting und Praxis. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta; 2018.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all participants for giving their informed consent to analyze and publish their data. We would like to thank the therapists of the Institute for Sex Research, Sexual Medicine and Forensic Psychiatry for collecting the data in their outpatient treatment center. Moreover, we would like to thank Samantha-Insine Schröder, M.Sc., for English proofreading.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Sex Research, Sexual Medicine and Forensic Psychiatry, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

    Ute Lampalzer, Safiye Tozdan, Fritjof von Franqué & Peer Briken

Authors
  1. Ute Lampalzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Safiye Tozdan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fritjof von Franqué
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peer Briken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ute Lampalzer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lampalzer, U., Tozdan, S., von Franqué, F. et al. Referral for group or individual treatment? Factors for consideration in the case of self-referred individuals with a sexual interest in minors. Int J Impot Res 33, 348–363 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-0296-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-020-0296-7

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links