@article{ref1,
title="A re-examination of female child molesters' implicit theories: evidence of female specificity?",
journal="Psychology, crime and law",
year="2012",
author="Gannon, T.A. and Hoare, J.A. and Rose, M.R. and Parrett, N.",
volume="18",
number="2",
pages="209-224",
abstract="Recent research by Beech, Parrett, Ward, and Fisher has suggested that Ward and Keenan's male-derived implicit theories represent a good theoretical fit for explaining female child molesters' offence-supportive cognitions. This paper re-examines the applicability of Ward and Keenan's (1999) male-derived implicit theories for explaining the self-reported offence-supportive cognitions of 16 UK female child molesters. Using almost identical analytic methods to Beech et al., we show that it is indeed possible to code female child molesters' offence-supportive cognitions under each of the five male-derived implicit theories proposed by Ward and Keenan. However, our results show that the content of female child molesters' offence-supportive cognitions appears very different to that of male child molesters. Based on our findings, we discuss relevant treatment implications and offer a re-conceptualization of implicit theories for female child molesters using the sex-role stereotyping literature. We also propose that - unlike male child molesters - female child molesters are unlikely to hold generalized implicit theories that sexualize children.<p />",
language="",
issn="1068-316X",
doi="10.1080/10683161003752303",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10683161003752303"
}