We analysed chat log communications between 38 adult males and children who were accessed by the men via social media for sexually exploitative purposes. Our goal was to understand how sexual offenders engage with children online and the dialogue they use to elicit compliance with sexual requests. Results revealed 72 discrete linguistic tactics, contained within eight overarching dialogue-based ‘moves’. Tactics were non-sequential (ie dynamic) and focused mainly on requests for sexual activity. Three distinct subgroup patterns of tactic use were evident. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.
References
URLs correct as at November 2021
Aitken S, Gaskell D & Hodkinson A 2018. Online sexual grooming: Exploratory comparison of themes arising from male offenders’ communications with male victims compared to female victims. Deviant Behavior 39: 1170–1190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2017.1410372
Bennett N & O’Donohue W 2014. The construct of grooming in child sexual abuse: Conceptual and measurement issues. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 23: 957–976. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538712.2014.960632
Bhatia VK 1993. Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. Pearson Education
Biber D, Connor U & Upton T A 2007. Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. John Benjamins Publishing Company
Black PJ, Wollis M, Woodworth M & Hancock JT 2015. A linguistic analysis of grooming strategies of online child sex offenders: Implications for our understanding of predatory sexual behavior in an increasingly computer-mediated world. Child Abuse & Neglect 44: 140–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.12.004
Blanca M, Alarcón R, Arnau J, Bono R & Bendayan R 2018. Effect of variance ratio on ANOVA robustness: Might 1.5 be the limit? Behavior Research Methods 50: 937–962. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0918-2
Bronfenbrenner U 1979. The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press
Chiang E 2018. Rhetorical moves and identity performance in online child sexual abuse interactions (Doctoral thesis). Aston University, Birmingham, UK. https://research.aston.ac.uk/en/studentTheses/rhetorical-moves-and-identity-performance-in-online-child-sexual-
Chiang E & Grant T 2019. Deceptive identify performance: Offender moves and multiple identities in online abuse conversations. Applied Linguistics 40: 675–698. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy007
Chiang E & Grant T 2017. Online grooming: Moves and strategies. Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito 4: 103–141. https://ojs.letras.up.pt/index.php/LLLD/article/view/2411
Grosskopf A 2010. Online interactions involving suspected paedophiles who engage male children. Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 403. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. https://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi403
Henshaw M, Darjee R & Clough JA 2020. Online child sexual offending. In I Bryce & W Petherick (eds), Child sexual abuse: Forensic issues in evidence, impact, and management. Academic Press: 85–108
Kloess JA, Hamilton-Giachritsis CE & Beech AR 2019. Offense processes of online sexual grooming and abuse of children via internet communication platforms. Sexual Abuse 31: 73-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063217720927
Kloess JA, Seymour-Smith S, Hamilton-Giachritsis CE, Long ML, Shipley D & Beech AR 2017. A qualitative analysis of offenders’ modus operandi in sexually exploitative interactions with children online. Sexual Abuse 29: 563–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063215612442
Lorenzo-Dus N & Kinzel A 2019. ‘So is your mom as cute as you?’: Examining patterns of language use in online sexual grooming of children. Journal of Corpora and Discourse Studies 2: 15–39. https://doi.org/10.18573/jcads.31
Mann RE, Hanson RK & Thornton D 2010. Assessing risk for sexual recidivism: Some proposals on the nature of psychologically meaningful risk factors. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment 22: 191–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063210366039
Mann RE, Webster S, Wakeling HC & Marshall WL 2007. The measurement and influence of child sexual abuse supportive beliefs. Psychology, Crime & Law 13: 443–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/10683160601061141
O’Connell R 2003. A typology of child cybersexploitation and online grooming practices. Preston: Cyberspace Research Unit, University of Central Lancashire. https://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Society/documents/2003/07/17/Groomingreport.pdf
Open Science Collaboration 2015. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science 349(6251). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
Ospina M, Harstall C & Dennett L 2010. Sexual exploitation of children and youth over the internet: A rapid review of the scientific literature. Alberta: Institute of Health Economics. https://www.ihe.ca/advanced-search/sexual-exploitation-of-children-and-youth-over-the-internet-a-rapid-review-of-the-scientific-literature
Powell M, Cassematis P, Benson M, Smallbone S & Wortley R 2014. Police officers’ strategies for coping with the stress of investigating internet child exploitation. Traumatology 20: 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0099378
Schneevogt D, Chiang E & Grant T 2018. Do Perverted Justice chat logs contain examples of overt persuasion and sexual extortion? A research note responding to Chiang and Grant (2017, 2018). Language and Law/Linguagem e Direito 5: 97–102. https://ojs.letras.up.pt/index.php/LLLD/article/view/4549
Swales J 2011. Aspects of article introductions. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.3985899
Wager N et al. 2018. Rapid evidence assessment: Quantifying the extent of online-facilitated child sexual abuse. Report for the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse. https://www.iicsa.org.uk/document/rapid-evidence-assessment-quantifying-extent-online-facilitated-child-sexual-abuse
Williams R, Elliott IA & Beech AR 2013. Identifying sexual grooming themes used by internet sex offenders. Deviant Behavior 34: 135–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2012.707550