Can I assume you're familiar with this study, for example? (It's behind a firewall, so I can only post the abstract without incurring copyright problems; if you were to want the whole thing, I could backchannel you a copy under fair-use conditions)
The Utility of the Diagnosis of Pedophilia: A Comparison of Various Classification Procedures
Arch Sex Behav (2007) 36:423–436 DOI 10.1007/s10508-006-9091-x
Drew A. Kingston · Philip Firestone · Heather M. Moulden · John M. Bradford
Received: 4 November 2005 / Revised: 11 April 2006 / Accepted: 24 June 2006 / Published online: 21 December 2006 ⃝C Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006
Abstract
This study examined the utility of the diagnosis of pedophilia in a sample of extra-familial child molesters assessed at a university teaching hospital between 1982 and 1992. Pedophilia was defined in one of four ways: (1) DSM diagnosis made by a psychiatrist; (2) deviant phallometric profile; (3) DSM diagnosis and a deviant phallometric pro- file; and, (4) high scores based on the Screening Scale for Pedophilic Interest (Seto & Lalumie`re, 2001). Demographic data, psychological tests, and offence history were obtained and group differences were analyzed along with the ability of certain variables to contribute uniquely to the classification of pedophilia. Results indicated that few significant differ- ences existed on psychological measures between pedophilic and nonpedophilic extra-familial child molesters regardless of the classification system employed. Finally, results indi- cated that the procedures used to define pedophilia were not significantly related to one another. Results are discussed in terms of the utility of the diagnosis of pedophilia.
= new reply since forum marked as read