Cited by 70Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual OffendingCybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesChild Abuse and Trauma

Progression, maintenance, and feedback of online child sexual grooming: A qualitative analysis of online predators

de Santisteban, Patricia, del Hoyo, Joana, Alcázar-Córcoles, Miguel Ángel, Gámez-Guadix, Manuel·2018·Child Abuse & Neglect

Abstract

The limited literature on online child grooming has focused mainly on studying the characteristics of perpetrators and victims that facilitate the sexual abuse of minors. Little attention has been given to the perceptions of the perpetrators about the abuse process and the strategies used to sustain it over time. In the present study, after identifying a sample of 12 men convicted of online grooming, we used qualitative grounded theory through in-depth interviews and comparisons with the proven facts of their convictions. The results show how aggressors actively study the structural environment, the needs and vulnerabilities of the minors). In this way, the aggressors adapt by using most effective strategies of persuasion at all times, so that the child feels like an active part of the plot. This allows the aggressors to have sexual interactions with minors either online or offline and in a sporadic or sustained manner. This process is maintained with some distorted perceptions about minors and the abuse process, which seem to feed back to the beginning of the cycle with other potential victims. The interaction between the persuasive processes and the distorted perceptions of the aggressor leads to a potential work focus for treatment as well as detection and prevention. Trying to visualize the complexity of the phenomenon could also help researchers to understand processes from this approach that may be applied with other types of vulnerable populations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.03.026

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 47 · Cited by 70

Authors
de Santisteban, P., del Hoyo, J., Alcázar-Córcoles, M. Á., & Gámez-Guadix, M.
Venue
Child Abuse & Neglect
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-06
Volume
80
Pages
203-215
ISSN
0145-2134 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2796338054
Cited by
70
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
7.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Child Abuse & Neglect (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
Keywords
online predators, child sexual abuse, perpetrator perceptions, persuasion techniques, child vulnerability
MeSH terms
Adult, Child, Child Abuse, Child Abuse, Sexual, Female, Humans, Male, Persuasive Communication, Sexual Behavior, Crime Victims, Internet, Minors, Vulnerable Populations, Human Trafficking

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review