International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 46 (2016) 103–109

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Law and Psychiatry

Early parenting styles and sexual offending behavior: A comparative study

Vera Sigre-Leirós a,⁎, Joana Carvalho a,b, Pedro J. Nobre a
a
Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação da Universidade do Porto, Rua Alfredo Allen, 4200-135 Porto, Portugal
b
Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Lisboa, Portugal

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 25 March 2016 Sexual offenders, in general, report problematic rearing practices from their parents, lacking however more em-
pirical research on this topic regarding particular subtypes of offenders. The current study examined the relation-
Keywords: ship between early parenting styles and different types of sexual offending. A total of 113 sexual offenders
Early parenting styles (rapists, pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters), and 51 nonsexual offenders completed the EMBU (My
Distal factors Memories of Upbringing), the Brief Symptom Inventory, and the Socially Desirable Response Set Measure. Results
Sexual offending
showed that rapists were less likely to remember their fathers as being emotionally warm compared with non-
Sexual offenders
Pedophilic offenders
sexual offenders and pedophilic child molesters. In addition, compared with rapists, pedophilic offenders per-
ceived their mothers as having been less emotionally warm to them. Overall, results showed that certain
developmental experiences with parents were able to distinguish between subtypes of offenders supporting
an association between distal interpersonal factors and sexual offending. These findings may have important im-
plications for early intervention and prevention of sexual crimes. Further research using larger samples of pedo-
philic child molesters is recommended.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Sexual offending represents a significant and widespread problem
within our society. The empirical examination of its potential causes
and risk factors is crucial to the development of effective prevention
strategies as well as adequate treatment programs aiming to decrease
the likelihood of sexual recidivism (e.g. Bumby & Hansen, 1997; Lee,
Jackson, Pattison, & Ward, 2002; Ward & Siegert, 2002).
The achievements in this field of knowledge have been significant,
evolving from the emphasis on single factors (e.g., cognitive distortions)
to the acknowledgement of the role of different types of factors includ-
ing biological, developmental, psychological, social, and situational (e.g.
Bumby & Hansen, 1997; Hall & Hirschman, 1991, 1992; Marshall &
Barbaree, 1990; Ward & Beech, 2006; Ward & Siegert, 2002). Indeed, a
comprehensive theory of sexual offending should be multifactorial, pro-
posing how developmental experiences, individual features, sociocul-
tural aspects, and subsequent mechanisms result in important
vulnerabilities (Ó Ciardha & Ward, 2013; Ward, Polaschek, & Beech,
2006; Ward & Siegert, 2002). Therefore, the conceptualization of this
behavior presupposes the interaction between two general types of
factors: distal (dispositional or vulnerability characteristics that result
from developmental history) and proximal (state or contextual factors
that trigger the underlying vulnerabilities; Ward & Hudson, 1998;
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +351 259 331 098; fax: +351 226 07 9 725.
E-mail address: vera.sigre.leiros@gmail.com (V. Sigre-Leirós).
Ward & Siegert, 2002). Overall, the present study focused on the
examination of the role of distal factors, in particular, the parental
rearing practices experienced by sex offenders during childhood and
adolescence.
1.1. Early parent–child relationships and attachment style
Bowlby (1969, 1973, 1980) has clearly influenced research and un-
derstanding about the nature of human relationships across the life
span (Pietromonaco & Barrett, 2000). According to Bowlby (1969,
1973), the attachment system is basic and biologically adaptive leading
the child to seek and maintain proximity to the primary attachment fig-
ure, particularly the mother. The quality of the responsiveness of the at-
tachment figure is an important factor in the regulation of child's
emotional experience as well as on child's later interpersonal function-
ing. Specifically, the same author proposed the concept of “internal
working models” as internalized representations of the self and others
that result from the nature of early attachment bonds. Thus, a child
whose parents are emotionally available and supportive will be able to
develop a self model as being lovable and competent. In turn, experi-
ences of emotional unavailability and lack of support will contribute to
the perception of the self as unlovable and incompetent (Bowlby, 1969,
1973). Indeed, in the first years of life, family is considered as primarily
responsible for child's care and development, and the parenting style ex-
perienced is proposed as a key precursor of the child's attachment pat-
tern (Davids, Londt, & Wilson, 2015). Particularly, attachment security
has been associated with parental attitudes of affection, emotional

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2016.02.042
0160-2527/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
104 V. Sigre-Leirós et al. / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 46 (2016) 103–109
warmth and the promotion of the child's autonomy and independence.
In turn, attachment insecurity has been related to a parental style charac-
terized by indifference, neglect, or overprotection, representing a signif-
icant pathogenic variable (Bogaerts, Vanheule, & Declercq, 2005;
Giotakos, Vaidakis, Markianos, Spandoni, & Christodoulou, 2004;
Parker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979).
The majority of the available studies aiming to investigate the
individual's perception of early parenting behavior have been conduct-
ed with the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI; Parker et al., 1979), which
is comprised of two dimensions (care and overprotection/control), or
with the Egna Minnen Betraffande Uppfostra — My Memories of Upbring-
ing (EMBU; Perris, Jacobsson, Linndstrom, Von Knorring, & Perris, 1980)
which is comprised of three dimensions (emotional warmth, rejection,
and overprotection), separately for the mother and the father
(Petrowski et al., 2009). In all, it has been found that parental rearing be-
havior, particularly lack of maternal care, is a significant factor for the
vulnerability of psychopathology in adulthood (Enns, Cox, & Clara,
2002; Gao, Raine, Chan, Venables, & Mednick, 2010; Petrowski et al.,
2009). Additionally, Baker and Hoeger (2012) found that parental
warmth was associated with better intra and interpersonal adjustment,
self-regulation and academic performance. In turn, parental rejection
was related to internalizing clinical symptoms such as anxiety whereas
parental overcontrol was most associated with hypomanic activation
and psychoticism. Overall, the quality of parental rearing practices in
the first years of life is proposed as a determinant factor of both child
and adult interpersonal and emotional functioning.
1.2. Early parenting styles in sexual offenders
Within the sexual offending field, the Marshall and Barbaree's Inte-
grated Theory (1990) was the first model to propose the influence of de-
velopmental adversities such as attachment problems and different
forms of early abuse on this behavior. In a latter work, Marshall and
Marshall (2000) underlined this assumption, considering that poor
childhood relationships with parents constitute the first etiological
step to sexual offending. Indeed, available literature has shown that sex-
ual offenders' developmental histories are characterized by high levels
of family dysfunction, interpersonal problems and different types of
abuse (sexual, physical, emotional and neglect; e.g., Burk & Burkhart,
2003; Connoly & Woollons, 2008; Lee et al., 2002; Maniglio, 2012).
Regarding recalled rearing behavior from parents, sexual offenders,
in general, report inconsistent and problematic practices including
high levels of neglect, rejection, control, and low levels of care
(Bogaerts et al., 2005; Craissati, McClurg, & Browne, 2002; Marsa et al.,
2004). Recent studies aiming to describe the early family environment
of adult sex offenders found that many of them had witnessed domestic
violence situations, had a negative relationship with the mother, and
had been separated from their parents (Londt & Roman, 2014). Further-
more, using a sample of non-admitting sex offenders it was found that
many had been raised without a paternal figure, and when father was
present, their relationship was frequently marked by physical and emo-
tional abuse (Davids et al., 2015). These developmental experiences are
likely associated with the development of an insecure attachment style
which is proposed as a risk factor for later sexual offending (e.g. Burk &
Burkhart, 2003; Maniglio, 2012; Marshall, 1989, 1993; Marshall &
Barbaree, 1990; Marshall & Marshall, 2000). Specifically, according to
Burk and Burkhart (2003), insecure attachment functions as a diathesis
for this behavior given that it may inhibit the development of basic self-
regulation skills, resulting in distorted self-perceptions and negative
emotional states. This difficulty to deal with emotional states can result
in a lack of control, which in the presence of sexual desire, can be related
to the use of sex as a way to satisfy the individual's emotional and sexual
needs (Ward & Beech, 2006).
In the last two decades, independent studies have compared differ-
ent types of offenders on their perceptions of rearing behavior from
both mother and father. Despite some variability across studies, in
general, findings seem to indicate a differential relationship between
early maternal and paternal practices and later sexual offending sub-
types (Simons, Wurtele, & Durham, 2008; Smallbone & Dadds, 1998;
Smallbone & McCabe, 2003). Specifically, some studies have found
that rapists and child molesters reported more problematic relation-
ships with their fathers than with their mothers, although this seemed
to be more frequent in rapists (Lisak, 1994; McCormack, Hudson, &
Ward, 2002). When compared with nonoffenders, rapists reported
higher father abusiveness whereas child molesters reported higher
mother abusiveness (Giotakos et al., 2004).
Regarding attachment styles, contrary to child molesters who re-
ported more anxious attachment bonds to both mother and father, rap-
ists reported more avoidant attachment bonds particularly to the father
(Simons et al., 2008).
Following a more specific purpose, Smallbone and Dadds (1998)
found that intrafamiliar child molesters reported more problematic rela-
tionships with their mothers whereas rapists remembered their fathers
as having been particularly uncaring, abusive, and violent to them. In a
later work, both rapists and intrafamiliar child molesters were found to
present higher rates of childhood insecure attachment with their fathers
compared with extrafamiliar child molesters (Smallbone & McCabe,
2003).
Moreover, regarding the factors associated with recidivism
among sex offenders, besides important indicators of pedophilia
(e.g., phallometrically assessed sexual arousal to children, having a
boy victim, having extrafamiliar victims; Hanson & Bussière, 1998;
Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004; Seto, Abramowitz, & Barbaree,
2008), a negative relationship with mothers was the only developmen-
tal variable related to sexual recidivism (Hanson & Bussière, 1998).
Nonetheless, dysfunctional early relational experiences with parents
are characteristic of both sexual and nonsexual offenders (e.g. Maniglio,
2012; McCormack et al., 2002). Accordingly, further research on this
topic is necessary to clarify the hypothesis of whether specific combina-
tions of parent–child relationships are related to specific types of sexual
offending behavior (e.g., higher frequency of problematic rearing prac-
tices from father and mother, respectively in rapists and child mo-
lesters; e.g., Giotakos et al., 2004; Smallbone & Dadds, 1998).
Furthermore, sex offenders are a heterogeneous group and there are
different subtypes and categories likely with specific features and ther-
apeutic needs (e.g., Gannon, Collie, Ward, & Thakker, 2008; Groth, 1979;
Knight & Prentky, 1990; Sigre-Leirós, Carvalho, & Nobre, 2015a,b).
Given the higher risk of sexual recidivism associated with pedophilia
(Seto, 2009; Seto et al., 2008), for preventive and clinical purposes it
may be relevant to discriminate child molesters with and without pedo-
philic interests. Specifically, pedophilia (or pedophilic disorder) consists
of a paraphilic disorder characterized by “recurrent, intense sexually
arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity
with a prepubescent child” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013,
p. 697). Besides different assessment methods such as self-report, view-
ing time, and phallometry, pedophilia can be also assessed on the basis
of offender's sexual behavior history (Seto, 2009). In particular, child
sexual abusers with boy victims, multiple child victims, younger or un-
related victims are more likely to be pedophiles compared with of-
fenders with only girl victims, a single child victim, older or related
victims (Seto, 2009). All this information can be obtained using the
Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests (Seto & Lalumière, 2001), which
is proposed by the authors as a useful research instrument when
phallometric data are unavailable. Overall, empirical research on devel-
opmental experiences of subtypes of sex offenders, such as early parent-
ing styles, may have important implications regarding increasingly
effective early intervention and prevention strategies.
1.3. The present study
The present study examined the relationship between early parenting
styles and different types of sexual offending behavior. Specifically, three
 V. Sigre-Leirós et al. / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 46 (2016) 103–109
subtypes of sex offenders (pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters,
and rapists) and a non-sex offender group were compared on the basis of
perceived parental rearing behavior during childhood and adolescence.
Overall, considering the findings of available studies on this topic
(e.g. Giotakos et al., 2004; Lisak, 1994; McCormack et al., 2002;
Smallbone & Dadds, 1998), it was hypothesized that both pedophilic
and nonpedophilic child molesters would be more likely to report a
negative view of their mother's rearing behavior. In addition, it was ex-
pected that rapists would be characterized by a more negative percep-
tion of their father's attitudes toward them.
2. Methods
2.1. Participants and procedures
This study involved the participation of 113 male convicted sexual
offenders, namely 63 child molesters and 50 rapists. Child molesters
were convicted for sexual crimes against children (males or females)
under the age of 14. Rapists were convicted for sexual crimes against fe-
male victims over the age of 14. A group of 51 male convicted nonsexual
offenders also participated in the study. Among their crimes were fraud,
burglary, robbery and homicide. Based on criminal files' information,
nonsexual offenders did not commit sexual offenses. Within the group
of child molesters, two subgroups were identified according to the
Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests (Seto & Lalumière, 2001): pedo-
philic child molesters (n = 20; pedophiles), and nonpedophilic child
molesters (n = 43; nonpedophiles).
In all, participants were recruited from four Portuguese prisons. All
participants were informed about the purposes of the study and signed
an informed consent form before completing the measures voluntarily
and individually, with the help of the primary investigator. In order to
collect factual information about the characteristics of the crimes, the
criminal records of the participants were checked. Data were collected
between January 2012 and October 2013. The study's ethical approval
was given by Direcção Geral dos Serviços Prisionais in Portugal.
The sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are pre-
sented in Table 1. The groups differed significantly with respect to age
(pedophiles and nonpedophiles were significantly older than rapists
and nonsex offenders) and years of school education (nonpedophiles
and rapists were the less educated). The groups did not significantly dif-
fer in marital status (see Table 1).
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interests (SSPI)
The SSPI (Seto & Lalumière, 2001; translated to Portuguese by
Carvalho, 2011) is a four-item measure used to assess pedophilic sexual
Table 1
Participant sociodemographic characteristics.
Rapists
(n = 50)
Age (years)
M (SD) 37.96a (9.13)
Range 24–60
F(3160) = 3.81*
Marital status (%)
Single 58
Married/cohabiting 34
Separated/divorced/Widowed 8 25
χ2 = 12.51; df = 6; p N .05
Education (years)
M (SD) 7.74ab (3.02)
Range 4–12
F(3160) = 6.23**
Note. Means in the same row with different superscripts letters differ significantly from each other.
*p b .05, **p b .01.
105
interests among sex offenders with child victims. The scale is scored based
on file information related to offenders' sexual behavior history, particu-
larly the characteristics of their victims (any male victim; more than
one victim; any prepubescent victim; and any unrelated/extrafamilial vic-
tim). The SSPI is significantly correlated with phallometric testing (Seto &
Lalumière, 2001).The total score of the scale ranges from 0 to 5 and higher
scores are indicative of pedophilic sexual interests (Seto & Lalumière,
2001). Accordingly, in this study, men convicted for child sexual abuse
were distributed into two comparative subgroups based on low (i.e., 0–
2) and high (i.e., 3–5) SSPI total score (i.e., nonpedophiles and pedophiles,
respectively).
2.2.2. Egna Minnen Betraffande Uppfostra — My Memories of Upbringing
(EMBU)
The EMBU (Perris et al., 1980) is a self-report measure of the individ-
uals' perceptions of parental rearing practices during childhood and ad-
olescence. It is comprised of 23 items consisting of three dimensions
separately for father and mother: emotional warmth (refers to parental
behaviors of affection and support), rejection (refers to critical, punitive
and abusive parental attitudes), and overprotection (refers to anxious,
intrusive, and overinvolved parenting patterns; Arrindell et al., 1999).
The EMBU has demonstrated good indicators of reliability and validity,
and structural invariance across different samples (e.g., Arrindell et al.,
1999). The Portuguese version of the scale also shows acceptable psy-
chometric properties (global Cronbach's alpha values: .73 for father,
and .74 for mother; Canavarro, 1999).
2.2.3. Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI)
The BSI (Derogatis & Spencer, 1982) assesses current/state psycho-
pathology on the basis of nine dimensions of symptoms (somatization,
depression, hostility, anxiety, phobic anxiety, psychoticism, obsessive–
compulsive, paranoid ideation, and interpersonal sensitivity) and
three global indexes (the General Severity Index [GSI], the Positive
Symptom Distress Index [PSDI], and the Positive Symptom Total
[PST]). The GSI has been proposed as the best indicator of current psy-
chological distress (Derogatis & Melisaratos, 1983). As with the original
scale, the Portuguese version of the BSI presents acceptable psychomet-
ric properties with Cronbach's alpha values ranging from .62 for
psychoticism to .80 for somatization (Canavarro, 2007).
2.2.4. Socially Desirable Response Set Measure (SDRS-5)
The SDRS-5 (Hays, Hayashy, & Stewart, 1989) is a five-item scale of
the participant's social desirability levels which may influence the valid-
ity of self-reported data. Accordingly, it may be introduced as covariate
in multivariate analysis. Internal consistency of the scale is acceptable
(Cronbach's alpha = .68; Hays et al., 1989). The Portuguese version of
the scale presents a Cronbach's alpha of .70 (Carvalho, 2011).
Pedophiles Nonpedophiles Nonsex offenders
(n = 20) (n = 43) (n = 51)
45.70b (14.32) 44.42b (9.72) 40.63ab (12.17)
23–76 27–73 25–78
50 30.2 43.1
25 41.9 27.5
27.9 29.4
9.20bc (3.83) 6.51a (3.04) 9.29c (3.74)
4–15 4–15 4–15
106 V. Sigre-Leirós et al. / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 46 (2016) 103–109

Table 2
Means and standard deviations of the EMBU's dimensions by group and for the total sample.

Group
EMBU's dimensions Rapists Pedophiles Nonpedophiles Nonsex offenders Total sample
(n = 50) (n = 20) (n = 43) (n = 51) (N = 164)

F_Emotional Warmth 17.00 (5.65) 16.95 (5.61) 17.84 (5.30) 19.35 (5.58) 17.95 (5.58)
F_Rejection 11.40 (4.06) 9.65 (2.01) 10.47 (3.00) 11.20 (4.28) 10.88 (3.70)
F_Overprotection 14.34 (4.07) 12.50 (3.69) 13.47 (3.57) 15.06 (3.82) 14.11 (3.88)
M_Emotional Warmth 20.12 (4.34) 17.65 (5.19) 19.33 (4.77) 19.73 (4.96) 19.49 (4.77)
M_Rejection 12.40 (3.83) 12.30 (3.96) 11.77 (3.18) 12.96 (4.58) 12.40 (3.94)
M_Overprotection 15.46 (3.80) 14.05 (4.39) 13.98 (3.70) 15.53 (3.31) 14.92 (3.74)

Note. F = father; M = mother.

2.3. Data analyses
Statistical analyses were carried out using the Statistical Package for
the Social Sciences (SPSS, version 18.0). Univariate analyses of variance
were conducted to examine differences among the four offender groups
in age and years of school education. Chi-square analysis was conducted
to test group differences in marital status. Correlation analyses were
also performed between all predictors. Furthermore, the relationship
between perceived parental rearing behavior (assessed by the EMBU)
and different types of sexual offending was examined through sets of
Multinomial Logistic Regression analyses (MLR; see Maroco, 2011;
Petrucci, 2009; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Significant group differences
in age and school education were found, thus these variables were en-
tered in the analyses as covariates. Additionally, social desirability and
current psychological distress (GSI) were also introduced as covariates
because of the participants' incarcerated condition and their potential
effects on self-report data. Indeed, given the heterogeneity of the
study population, among other factors, the combination of these vari-
ables could confound the findings.
The MLR results are interpreted in terms of odds ratio with odds ratio
greater than 1 indicating a greater likelihood for the event of interest and
odds ratio less than 1 indicating a lower likelihood for the event of inter-
est. To identify whether particular parenting styles would be specific to a
subtype of offenders, comparisons between all groups were conducted.
In particular, to compare pedophiles, nonpedophiles and rapists with
nonsex offenders, the nonsex offenders were entered in the analysis as
the reference category. To compare pedophiles and nonpedophiles
with rapists, rapists were then entered as the reference category. Finally,
to compare pedophiles with nonpedophiles, the regression analyses
were rerun with nonpedophiles as the reference category.
3. Results
correlation matrix of all predictors is presented. Looking specifically to
parental rearing dimensions, all dimensions were significantly correlat-
ed. Negative correlations between father's and mother's emotional
warmth and father's and mother's rejection were found.
3.2. Offender type as a function of perceived parental rearing behavior
A MLR was conducted entering the covariates [i.e., age, school educa-
tion, social desirability (assessed by the SDRS-5) and GSI (assessed by
the BSI)], and the three dimensions of father's and mother's rearing be-
havior (respectively, emotional warmth, rejection, and overprotection;
assessed by the EMBU) as predictors. Regarding assumption testing,
an examination of the standard errors of coefficients did not indicate
numerical problems (i.e., SEB b 2.0; see Table 4). Additionally, the corre-
lation matrix between the predictors did not show collinearity prob-
lems (rs b 0.80; see Table 3). The full model was significantly reliable,
χ2 (30, N = 164) = 69.591, p b .001, accounting for between 35%
(Cox and Snell R2) and 37% (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance in offender
status. The classification accuracy rate for each category was the follow-
ing: 56% for rapists; 20% for pedophiles; 48.8% for nonpedophiles; and,
54.9% for nonsex offenders. The model's overall classification accuracy
rate was 49.4% which improves the proportional-by-chance accuracy
rate of 34.3%, thus showing adequate accuracy (cf. Petrucci, 2009).
In Table 4, the parameter estimates for the different runs of the anal-
ysis are presented.
The odds ratio shown in the table indicated that, after controlling for
group differences in covariates, rapists were less likely to perceive their
fathers as emotionally warm when compared with nonsex offenders
(OR = .85, p ≤ .05). Similarly, compared with rapists, pedophiles were
more likely to report their fathers as emotionally warm (OR = 1.23,
p b .05). Additionally, pedophiles recalled their mothers as having been
less warm toward them than rapists (OR = .77, p b .05) (see Table 4).

3.1. Descriptive results 4. Discussion

Table 2 shows the Means and Standard Deviations of the EMBU's di- The present study compared three subtypes of sex offenders (rap-
mensions for each of the groups and for the total sample. In Table 3, the ists, pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters) and a nonsex

Table 3
Correlation matrix of predictor variables (N = 164).

Age School GSI Social F_Emotional F_Rejection F_Overprotection M_Emotional M_Rejection M_Overprotection
education desirability Warmth Warmth

Age –
School education −.19* –
GSI −.15 −.11 –
Social desirability .25** −.16* −.11 –
F_Emotional Warmth −.14 .17* −.03 .02 –
F_Rejection .03 −.19* .21** −.03 −.23** –
F_Overprotection −.02 −.16* .19* .04 .39*** .35*** –
M_Emotional Warmth −.17* .12 −.02 −.02 .64*** −.18* .23** –
M_Rejection .00 −.05 .26** −.05 −.19* .66*** .25** −.32*** –
M_Overprotection −.00 −.08 .29*** −.01 .20* .25** .79*** .32*** .31*** –

Note. F = father; M = mother.

*p b .05, **p b .01, ***p b .001.
 V. Sigre-Leirós et al. / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 46 (2016) 103–109 107

Table 4
Multinomial logistic regression analysis of offender type as a function of perceived parental rearing behavior.

Predictor B SEB Wald Odds 95% CI

statistic ratio

Pedophiles vs. nonsex offendersa Age .04 .03 2.14 1.04 .99–1.09
School education −.01 .10 .00 1.00 .83–1.20
GSI 1.73 .67 6.72** 5.66 1.53–21.01
Social desirability .23 .23 .99 1.25 .80–1.96
F_Emotional Warmth .04 .11 .16 1.04 .85–1.29
F_Rejection −.15 .16 .93 .86 .63–1.17
F_Overprotection −.30 .17 3.12 .74 .53–1.03
M_Emotional Warmth −.13 .12 1.13 .88 .70–1.11
M_Rejection −.06 .11 .29 .94 .75–1.18
M_Overprotection .12 .16 .60 1.13 .83–1.53
Nonpedophiles vs. nonsex offendersa Age .01 .02 .26 1.01 .97–1.06
School education −.27 .08 12.86*** .76 .66–.88
GSI .37 .57 .43 1.45 .48–4.44
Social desirability .19 .18 1.05 1.20 .85–1.71
F_Emotional Warmth −.07 .09 .61 .93 .78–1.11
F_Rejection −.06 .11 .31 .94 .76–1.17
F_Overprotection −.10 .16 .38 .90 .66–1.24
M_Emotional Warmth .09 .10 .88 1.10 .91–1.33
M_Rejection −.02 .11 .04 .98 .80–1.20
M_Overprotection −.07 .16 .18 .93 .68–1.29
Rapists vs. nonsex offendersa Age −.04 .02 2.37 .97 .92–1.01
School education −.14 .07 3.65 .87 .76–1.00
GSI 1.15 .51 5.13* 3.15 1.17–8.52
Social desirability .14 .17 .71 1.15 .83–1.60
F_Emotional Warmth −.16 .08 3.83* .85 .73–1.00
F_Rejection −.01 .10 .01 .99 .81–1.21
F_Overprotection −.04 .14 .06 .97 .73–1.28
M_Emotional Warmth .13 .09 2.21 1.14 .96–1.36
M_Rejection −.06 .10 .40 .94 .78–1.14
M_Overprotection −.01 .14 .01 .99 .75–1.31
Pedophiles vs. Rapistsa Age .07 .03 6.97** 1.08 1.02–1.14
School education .13 .10 1.82 1.14 .94–1.38
GSI .59 .65 .80 1.80 .50–6.47
Social desirability .09 .23 .13 1.09 .69–1.72
F_Emotional Warmth .20 .10 3.92* 1.23 1.00–1.50
F_Rejection −.14 .15 .88 .87 .65–1.17
F_Overprotection −.27 .17 2.51 .77 .55–1.07
M_Emotional Warmth −.26 .12 5.05* .77 .61–.97
M_Rejection .00 .12 .00 1.00 .80–1.26
M_Overprotection .13 .16 .73 1.14 .84–1.55
Nonpedophiles vs. rapistsa Age .05 .02 4.18* 1.05 1.00–1.10
School education −.14 .08 3.23 .87 .75–1.01
GSI −.77 .54 2.09 .46 .16–1.32
Social desirability .04 .18 .06 1.05 .74–1.48
F_Emotional Warmth .09 .07 1.62 1.09 .95–1.26
F_Rejection −.05 .10 .31 .95 .78–1.15
F_Overprotection −.07 .15 .19 .94 .70–1.25
M_Emotional Warmth −.04 .08 .27 .96 .82–1.12
M_Rejection .04 .10 .17 1.04 .86–1.27
M_Overprotection −.06 .15 .14 .94 .70–1.27
Pedophiles vs. nonpedophilesa Age .03 .03 1.05 1.03 .98–1.08
School education .27 .10 7.45** 1.31 1.08–1.58
GSI 1.36 .68 3.96* 3.90 1.02–14.87
Social desirability .04 .24 .03 1.04 .65–1.67
F_Emotional Warmth .11 .11 1.10 1.12 .91–1.38
F_Rejection −.09 .16 .32 .92 .68–1.24
F_Overprotection −.20 .18 1.21 .82 .57–1.17
M_Emotional Warmth −.22 .12 3.26 .80 .63–1.02
M_Rejection −.04 .12 .11 .96 .76–1.22
M_Overprotection .19 .17 1.22 1.21 .86–1.70

Note. N = 164; SEB = standard error of the regression coefficient; 95% CI = 95% confidence interval of odds ratio; GSI = General Severity Index; F = father; M = mother; *p ≤ .05, **p ≤ .01,
***p b .001.
a
Reference category.

offender group on the basis of perceived parental rearing behavior dur-
ing childhood and adolescence. Guided by the hypothesis about a differ-
ential relationship between early maternal and paternal practices and
later sexual offending subtypes (e.g. Smallbone & Dadds, 1998;
Smallbone & McCabe, 2003), we expected to give some new contribu-
tion to the available literature on this topic by comparing pedophilic
and nonpedophilic offenders.
Given the heterogeneity of the study population, some potential
confounding variables (i.e., age, school education, social desirability,
and current psychological distress) were controlled. Overall, after ac-
counting for group differences in these covariates, our hypotheses
were partially supported. In particular, results showed that rapists
were less likely to remember their fathers as emotionally warm com-
pared with nonsex offenders and pedophiles. In addition, compared
108 V. Sigre-Leirós et al. / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 46 (2016) 103–109
with rapists, pedophiles perceived their mothers as having been less
emotionally warm toward them. Thus, among the three factors assessed
by the EMBU (emotional warmth, rejection, and overprotection respec-
tively for the father and the mother) only significant differences were
found with respect to the emotional warmth dimension. Accordingly,
we can speculate about the particular relevance of early emotional envi-
ronment on rape and pedophilic behavior.
The emotional warmth dimension refers to parental attitudes of affec-
tion, acceptance, support, and valuing (Arrindell et al., 1999). In line with
the present findings, evidence for rapists' negative perception of paternal
practices as well as poor attachment bonds with the father is relatively
consistent among available studies (e.g. Lisak, 1994; McCormack et al.,
2002; Simons et al., 2008; Smallbone & Dadds, 1998).
Regarding child molesters, findings have been less consistent, de-
spite some trend for a more negative view of mothers' rearing behavior,
particularly by intrafamiliar child molesters (e.g. Craissati et al., 2002;
Giotakos et al., 2004; Smallbone & Dadds, 1998). Nonetheless, it was
also previously found that rapists as well as intrafamiliar child molesters
are more likely to report insecure attachment with fathers than
extrafamiliar child molesters (Smallbone & McCabe, 2003). Given that
in this study rapists perceived their fathers as less emotionally warm
than pedophiles, and considering that the SSPI criteria for the pedophilic
group includes the presence of unrelated/extrafamiliar victims, we may
conclude that results were partially consistent with Smallbone and
McCabe's (2003) findings. Moreover, in the Hanson and Bussière’
meta-analysis (1998), a negative relationship with mothers was the
only developmental variable related to sexual recidivism. Similarly, in
this study pedophilic offenders reported lesser maternal emotional
warmth (i.e., mother inconsistent, unresponsive, or unavailable) and
available evidence suggests that pedophiles are more likely to sexually
reoffend (Seto, 2009).
It may be also relevant to note that, according to Baker and Hoeger's
(2012) findings, the EMBU's parental warmth dimension was related to
three important areas of functioning in early adulthood, namely overall
self-regulation, academic performance, and intra and interpersonal ad-
justment (e.g., greater warmth toward, and trust in others). Therefore,
we may presuppose that the lack of parental emotional warmth will
have a negative and contrary impact on adult socio-emotional function-
ing, likely resulting in important relational and intimacy deficits. In fact,
available literature has shown that sex offenders, in general, lack the
basic social skills (e.g., assertiveness and self-confidence) necessary to
develop adequate interpersonal relationships with peers (e.g. Bumby
& Hansen, 1997; Geer, Estupinan, & Manguno-Mire, 2000; Maniglio,
2012; Marshall, Barbaree, & Fernandez, 1995; Pervan & Hunter, 2007;
Sigre-Leirós et al., 2015b). Moreover, it has been proposed that individ-
uals who grow up in an emotionally poor environment are frequently
unable to deal with their emotions adequately, reacting with aggression
in emotional situations (e.g. Simons et al., 2008; Ward & Beech, 2006).
Regarding pedophilic offenders, the present results indicated a rela-
tionship between maternal rearing style (namely the lack of mother's
emotional support) and pedophilic behavior. Consistent with this,
prior research has also shown the relatively greater impact of lack of
maternal care on adult psychological disorders (and indeed pedophilia
is a paraphilic disorder) compared with paternal care (Enns et al.,
2002; Gao et al., 2010). However, given the small size of the pedophilic
group, these results are only preliminary, and further research with
larger samples is clearly necessary.
Overall, results showed that certain developmental experiences
with parents were able to distinguish between subtypes of offenders,
indicating an association between distal interpersonal factors and sexu-
al offending. Significant differences were found for rapists and pedo-
philic child molesters. Specifically, during childhood and adolescence,
while rapists perceived less emotional support by the father, pedophilic
offenders perceived less emotional support by the mother. Accordingly,
as previously proposed (e.g. Smallbone & Dadds, 1998; Smallbone &
McCabe, 2003), the findings seem to support the hypothesis about the
role of differential patterns of developmental experiences on later sexu-
al offending. If more robust studies corroborate the present findings, it
would be possible to provide further empirical support for the concep-
tualization models of sexual offending and particularly of pedophilia.
Despite the quasi-experimental nature of the study design, given
that data are cross-sectional, it is important to underline that findings
cannot be interpreted as establishing causal relationships, and some im-
portant limitations must be acknowledged. As already recognized, the
group of pedophilic child molesters is clearly small and further studies
with larger samples are of utmost relevance. Likewise, the constitution
of the pedophilic group was only based in the SSPI data, and further rep-
lications including additional criteria for pedophilia (e.g., phallometry)
are required. Moreover, although sociodemographic data, social desir-
ability and current levels of psychopathological symptoms were statisti-
cally controlled, because of the retrospective nature of the assessment of
parenting styles, results may reflect current constructions of past events
rather than the true developmental experiences. Thus, the interpreta-
tion of the present results should be done having these limitations in
mind.
Overall, despite the need for more robust studies on this topic, the
findings may have important general implications for early intervention
and prevention of sexual offending. Specifically, preventive efforts
might consider early family dynamics, namely parental rearing behavior
in childhood. In particular, the importance of attending to the child's
early emotional/relational experiences is highlighted given that they
function as a prototype for later interpersonal behavior and emotional
self-regulation (e.g., Bowlby, 1969, 1973). Therefore, the early identifi-
cation and intervention with families with dysfunctional dynamics (in-
cluding, for instance, family psychoeducation and parent management
training) may be implemented as a general prevention approach.
5. Conclusion
In conclusion, the present study corroborated the association between
distal interpersonal factors and sexual offending behavior. Specifically,
the findings indicated a relationship between specific developmental ex-
periences, particularly the lack of parental emotional warmth, and differ-
ent manifestations of offensive sexual behavior. These findings may have
important implications for early intervention and prevention of sexual
offending focused on the family relational context. Further research on
this topic using larger samples of pedophilic offenders is needed. We
hope that the present study motivates further empirical investigation
on the role of developmental factors in pedophilia.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a grant from the Fundação para a
Ciência e a Tecnologia in Portugal (SFRH/ BD/73032/2010).
References
American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disor-
ders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Arrindell, W. A., Sanavio, E., Aguilar, G., Sica, C., Hatzichristou, C., Eisemann, M., ... Ende, J.
(1999). The development of a short form of the EMBU: Its appraisal with students in
Greece, Guatemala, Hungary and Italy. Personality and Individual Differences, 27,
613–628.
Baker, C. N., & Hoeger, M. (2012). Parental child-rearing strategies influence self-
regulation, socio-emotional adjustment, and psychopathology in early adulthood:
Evidence from a retrospective cohort study. Personality and Individual Differences,
52, 800–805.
Bogaerts, S., Vanheule, S., & Declercq, F. (2005). Recalled parental bonding, adult attach-
ment style, and personality disorders in child molesters: A comparative study. The
Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 16, 445–458.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 2. Separation. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 3. Loss. New York: Basic Books.
Bumby, K. M., & Hansen, D. J. (1997). Intimacy deficits, fear of intimacy, and loneliness
among sexual offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 24, 315–331.
 V. Sigre-Leirós et al. / International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 46 (2016) 103–109
Burk, L. R., & Burkhart, B. R. (2003). Disorganized attachment as a diathesis for sexual de-
viance developmental experience and the motivation for sexual offending. Aggression
and Violent Behavior, 8, 487–511.
Canavarro, M. C. (1999). Relações afectivas e saúde mental. Coimbra: Quarteto Editora.
Canavarro, M. C. (2007). Inventário de Sintomas Psicopatológicos: Uma revisão crítica dos
estudos realizados em Portugal. In M. Simões, C. Machado, M. M. Gonçalves, & E. L.
Almeida (Eds.), Avaliação Psicológica. Instrumentos Validados para a População
Portuguesa, Vol. III, Coimbra: Quarteto Editora.
Carvalho, J. (2011). Vulnerability factors for sexual aggression. Doctoral Thesis Aveiro,
Portugal: Universidade de Aveiro.
Connoly, M., & Woollons, R. (2008). Childhood sexual experience and adult offending: An
exploratory comparison of three criminal groups. Child Abuse Review, 17, 119–132.
Craissati, J., McClurg, G., & Browne, K. (2002). The parental bonding experiences of sex of-
fenders: A comparison between child molesters and rapists. Child Abuse and Neglect,
26, 909–921.
Davids, O., Londt, M., & Wilson, L. (2015). Imprisoned sex offenders' chronic denial and
their childhood family environment. The Open Family Studies Journal, 7, 42–47.
Derogatis, L. R., & Melisaratos, N. (1983). The brief symptom inventory: An introductory
report. Psychological Medicine, 13, 595–605.
Derogatis, L. R., & Spencer, P. M. (1982). The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI): Administration,
and procedures manual — I. Baltimore, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.
Enns, M. W., Cox, B. J., & Clara, I. (2002). Parental bonding and adult psychopathology: Re-
sults from the US National Comorbidity Survey. Psychological Medicine, 32, 997–1008.
Gannon, T. A., Collie, R. M., Ward, T., & Thakker, J. (2008). Rape: Psychopathology, theory
and treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 982–1008.
Gao, Y., Raine, A., Chan, F., Venables, P. H., & Mednick, S. A. (2010). Early maternal and pa-
ternal bonding, childhood physical abuse and adult psychopathic personality.
Psychological Medicine, 40, 1007–1016.
Geer, J. H., Estupinan, L. A., & Manguno-Mire, G. M. (2000). Empathy, social skills, and
other relevant cognitive processes in rapists and child molesters. Aggression and
Violent Behavior, 5, 99–126.
Giotakos, O., Vaidakis, N., Markianos, M., Spandoni, P., & Christodoulou, G. N. (2004). Tem-
perament and character dimensions of sex offenders in relation to their parental rear-
ing. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 19, 141–150.
Groth, A. N. (1979). Men who rape: The psychology of the offender. New York: Plenum
Press.
Hall, G. C. N., & Hirschman, R. (1991). Toward a theory of sexual aggression: A quadripar-
tite model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 662–669.
Hall, G. C. N., & Hirschman, R. (1992). Sexual aggression against children: A conceptual
perspective of etiology. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 19, 8–23.
Hanson, R., & Bussière, M. (1998). Predicting relapse: A meta-analysis of sexual offender
recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 86, 348–362.
Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2004). Predictors of sexual recidivism: An updated
meta-analysis. Ottawa, Canada: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada.
Hays, R. D., Hayashy, T., & Stewart, A. L. (1989). A five-item measure of socially desirable
response set. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 629–636.
Knight, R. A., & Prentky, R. A. (1990). Classifying sexual offenders: The development and
corroboration of taxonomic models. In W. L. Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree
(Eds.), Handbook of sexual assault: Issues, theories, and treatment of the offender
(pp. 23–52). New York: Plenum Press.
Lee, J. K., Jackson, H. J., Pattison, P., & Ward, T. (2002). Developmental risk factors for sex-
ual offending. Child Abuse and Neglect, 26, 73–92.
Lisak, D. (1994). Subjective assessment of relationships with parents by sexually aggres-
sive and nonaggressive men. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9, 399–411.
Londt, M., & Roman, N. (2014). The effect of child abuse on adult perpetrators of sex of-
fences: A developmental perspective. Child Abuse Research: A South African Journal,
15, 1–6.
Maniglio, R. (2012). The role of parent–child bonding, attachment, and interpersonal
problems in the development of deviant sexual fantasies in sexual offenders.
Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 13, 83–96.
Maroco, J. P. (2011). Análise Estatística com o SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Pêro Pinheiro:
ReportNumber.
Marsa, F., O'Reilly, G., Carr, A., Murphy, P., O'Sullivan, M., Cotter, A., & Hevey, D. (2004). At-
tachment styles and psychological profiles of child sex offenders in Ireland. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 19, 228–251.
Marshall, W. L. (1989). Intimacy, loneliness, and sexual offenders. Behavior Research and
Therapy, 27, 491–503.
109
Marshall, W. L., & Barbaree, H. E. (1990). An integrated theory of the etiology of sexual
offending. In W. L. Marshall, D. R. Laws, & H. E. Barbaree (Eds.), Handbook of Sexual
Assault: Issues, Theories, and Treatment of the Offender (pp. 257–275) New York
Plenum.
Marshall, W. L., & Marshall, L. (2000). The origins of sexual offending. Trauma, Violence &
Abuse, 1, 250–263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1524838000001003003.
Marshall, W. L., Barbaree, H. E., & Fernandez, Y. M. (1995). Some aspects of social compe-
tence in sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 7,
113–127.
Marshall, W. L. (1993). The role of attachments, intimacy and loneliness in the etiology
and maintenance of sexual offending. Sexual and Marital Therapy, 8, 109–121.
McCormack, J., Hudson, S. M., & Ward, T. (2002). Sexual offender's perceptions of their
early interpersonal relationships: an attachment perspective. The Journal of Sex
Research, 39, 85–93.
Ó Ciardha, C., & Ward, T. (2013). Theories of cognitive distortions in sexual offending
what the current research tells us. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 14, 5–21.
Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, L. B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument. British
Journal of Medical Psychology, 52, 1–10.
Perris, C., Jacobsson, L., Linndstrom, H., Von Knorring, L., & Perris, H. (1980). Development
of a new inventory for assessing memories of parental rearing behaviour. Acta
Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 61, 265–274.
Pervan, S., & Hunter, M. (2007). Cognitive distortions and social self-esteem in sexual of-
fenders. Applied Psychology in Criminal Justice, 3, 75–91.
Petrowski, K., Berth, H., Schmidt, S., Schumacher, J., Hinz, A., & Braehler, E. (2009). The as-
sessment of recalled parental rearing and its relationship to life satisfaction and inter-
personal problems: A general population study. BMC Medical Research Methodology,
6, 17–22.
Petrucci, C. J. (2009). A primer for social worker researchers on how to conduct a multi-
nomial logistic regression. Journal of Social Service Research, 35, 193–205.
Pietromonaco, P. R., & Barrett, L. F. (2000). The Internal Working Models concept: What
do we really know about the self in relation to others? Review of General
Psychology, 4, 155–175.
Seto, M. C. (2009). Pedophilia. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 5, 391–407.
Seto, M. C., & Lalumière, M. L. (2001). A brief screening scale to identify pedophilic inter-
ests among child molesters. Sexual abuse: A journal of research and treatment, 13,
15–25.
Seto, M. C., Abramowitz, C. S., & Barbaree, H. E. (2008). Paraphilias. In J. Hunsley, & E. J.
Mash (Eds.), Assessments that work (pp. 488–514). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Sigre-Leirós, V., Carvalho, J., & Nobre, P. (2015a). Cognitive schemas and sexual offending:
Differences between rapists, pedophilic and nonpedophilic child molesters, and non-
sexual offenders. Child Abuse and Neglect, 40, 81–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
chiabu.2014.10.003.
Sigre-Leirós, V., Carvalho, J., & Nobre, P. (2015b). Adult interpersonal features of subtypes
of sexual offenders. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 34, 5–10. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jflm.2015.04.015.
Simons, D. A., Wurtele, S., & Durham, R. L. (2008). Developmental experiences of child
sexual abusers and rapists. Child Abuse & Neglect, 32, 549–560.
Smallbone, S. W., & Dadds, M. R. (1998). Childhood attachment and adult attachment in
incarcerated adult male sex offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 555–573.
Smallbone, S. W., & McCabe, B. (2003). Childhood attachment, childhood sexual abuse,
and onset of masturbation among adult sexual offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of
Research and Treatment, 15, 1–9.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Pear-
son Education, Inc.
Ward, T., & Beech, A. (2006). An integrated theory of sexual offending. Aggression and
Violent Behavior, 11, 44–63.
Ward, T., & Hudson, S. M. (1998). The construction and development of theory in the sex-
ual offending area: A meta-theoretical framework. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research
and Treatment, 10, 47–63.
Ward, T., & Siegert, R. J. (2002). Toward and comprehensive theory of child sexual abuse:
A theory knitting perspective. Psychology, Crime & Law, 9, 319–351.
Ward, T., Polaschek, D. L. L., & Beech, A. (2006). Theories of sexual offending. Sussex, UK:
Wiley.