CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 4Legal and Social Justice StudiesCybercrime and Law Enforcement StudiesSexual Assault and Victimization Studies

Extended reality environments and child safety: Examining the emerging risks for child sexual exploitation and abuse and discussing prevention and response through a technologised neo-ecological perspective

Open access
Gaitis, Konstantinos Kosmas, Vermeulen, Inga, Stevenson, James Gregory, Fry, Deborah·2025·International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice
DOI 10.1016/j.ijlcj.2025.100786
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper examines the harms and risks for child sexual exploitation and abuse arising from emerging Extended Reality technologies, together with challenges and suggestions for prevention and response through a technologised neo-ecological perspective. To do so, we conducted a scoping review of scholarly and grey literature due to the emerging nature of this topic and the evidence on it, in order to summarise existing knowledge and understand the gaps in theory and policymaking; as well as qualitative online interviews with professionals with expertise in technology, child protection, social work, law and policymaking that were informed by our scoping review and aimed to further explore the gaps and themes that arose through our examination of emerging literature. Evidently, the risks arising from Extended Reality may impact all layers of a child's ecology and may therefore have long-term repercussions for children, negatively affecting their growth and welfare, as well as their immediate and wider environments. Given the multidimensionality of these harms, preventative and responsive efforts need to follow an equally multidimensional approach to safeguard children in these new, immersive online worlds.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijlcj.2025.100786

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Recent work shows that modalities often intersect in practice, for example, where text-based LLMs are used to optimise prompts for downstream image or video generators, or where immersive extended reality (XR) platforms incorporate generative AI features that heighten CSEA risks.

    “Recent work shows that these modalities often intersect in practice, for example, where text-based LLMs are used to optimise prompts for downstream image or video generators, or where immersive extended reality (XR) platforms incorporate generative AI features that heighten CSEA risks (Kurian 2025; Yu et al. 2025; Gaitis et al. 2025).”

    From Generative AI in child sexual exploitation and abuse: views from UK law enforcement (2026) · cites this paper as Gaitis et al. 2025

  • Participants described offenders experimenting with VR, AR and other technology-enabled spaces before AI became central to their concerns.

    “Participants described offenders experimenting with VR, AR and other technology-enabled spaces before AI became central to their concerns (02), echoing arguments by Gaitis et al. (2025) that XR environments raise child-safety risks that cannot be addressed through traditional content moderation alone.”

    From Generative AI in child sexual exploitation and abuse: views from UK law enforcement (2026) · cites this paper as Gaitis et al. (2025)

  • Generative AI modalities often intersect in practice, for example where text-based LLMs are used to optimise prompts for downstream image or video generators, or where immersive XR platforms incorporate generative AI features that heighten CSEA risks.

    “Recent work shows that these modalities often intersect in practice, for example, where text-based LLMs are used to optimise prompts for downstream image or video generators, or where immersive XR platforms incorporate generative AI features that heighten CSEA risks (Kurian 2025; Yu et al. 2025; Gaitis et al. 2025).”

    From Generative AI in child sexual exploitation and abuse: views from UK law enforcement (2026) · cites this paper as Gaitis et al. 2025

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gaitis, K. K., Vermeulen, I., Stevenson, J. G., & Fry, D.
Affiliations
University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Gaitis, Konstantinos Kosmas
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-12
Volume
83
Pages
100786
ISSN
  • 0194-6595 (ISSN-L)
  • 1756-0616
DOI
10.1016/j.ijlcj.2025.100786
OpenAlex
W4415258108
Cited by
3
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 3
FWCI
18.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International journal of law, crime and justice (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
His Majesty's Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (COM-6326/PO4234261)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal and Social Justice Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Keywords
extended reality, child sexual exploitation, child sexual abuse, child safety, child protection, immersive technologies, child welfare

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