The validity of phallometric assessment with rapists: comments on Looman & Marshall (2005).
In a recent article Looman and Marshall (2005) questioned the validity of phallometric assessment of rapists based on the results of a study of incarcerated rapists and child molesters. In this commentary we offer (1) a critique of the methods used and conclusions reached by Looman and Marshall and (2) a discussion of important methodological issues relevant to phallometry. We conclude that the correct inference from Looman and Marshall's study is that rapists, as a group, show a pattern of sexual arousal to audiotaped scenarios of coercive and non-coercive sex that significantly differs from the pattern of groups of non-sex offenders, in agreement with the general literature on this question.
Lalumière
Martin L
ML
University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Canada. martin.lalumiere@uleth.ca
Rice
Marnie E
ME
D002648:Child; D002650:Child Abuse, Sexual / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000523:psychology; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010378:Pedophilia / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000523:psychology; D010410:Penile Erection; D010413:Penis; D010991:Plethysmography / Q000379:methods; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011594:Psychometrics; D011902:Rape / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000523:psychology; D018570:Risk Assessment / Q000379:methods; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires