Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Structure, Covariates, and Etiology of Hypersexuality: Implications for Sexual Offending

  • Sexual Disorders (LE Marshall, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Psychiatry Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

A substantial increase in research on the structure, covariates, and etiology of hypersexuality has emerged during the last decade. It is the goal of this review to summarize and integrate this research and to indicate some practical implications for clinical and forensic practice, especially as applied to those who have sexually offended.

Recent Findings

Studies from the last half-decade converge on the conclusion that hypersexuality has both problematic and high sexual drive components. Both aspects have consistently been found to be distributed dimensionally and not categorically. Each subdimension covaries differentially with specific types of impulsivity. In addition to sexual abuse, psychological or emotional abuse has emerged to be a potent developmental antecedent of hypersexuality.

Summary

Current research has focused on the problematic dimension of hypersexuality and has neglected to specify the criteria for high sexual drive. Lacking are large-scale representative and clinical samples that provide determination of optimal cutoffs for treatment and dispositional decisions for both dimensions of hypersexuality. Research on the etiology of both aspects of hypersexuality is in its infancy, and more differentiated assessments of developmental abuse histories are required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Kraft-Ebbing R. Psychopathia sexualis New York: Stein & Day: Original Work Published; 1886.

  2. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 3th ed. Washington: American Psychiatric Association; 1980.

  3. American Psychiatric Association. Anxiety Disorders. In: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. Washington: American Psychiatric Association; 2013. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.dsm05.

  4. World Health Organization, editor. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. 11th ed: World Health Organization; 2019.

  5. Bancroft J, Graham CA, Janssen E, Sanders SA. The dual control model: current status and future directions. J Sex Res. 2009;46(2-3):121–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490902747222.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kafka MP. Hypersexual disorder: a proposed diagnosis for DSM-V. Arch Sex Behav. 2010;39:377–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9574-7.

  7. Ley D, Prause N, Finn P. The emperor has no clothes: a review of the ‘pornography addiction’ model. Curr Sex Health Rep. 2014;6:94–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-014-0016-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hook JN, Hook JP, Davis DE, Worthington EL Jr, Penberthy JK. Measuring sexual addiction and compulsivity: a critical review of instruments. J Sex Marital Ther. 2010;36:227–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00926231003719673.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Knight RA, Prentky RA, Cerce DD. The development, reliability, and validity of an inventory for the multidimensional assessment of sex and aggression. Crim Justice Behav. 1994;21(1):72–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854894021001006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Montgomery-Graham S. Conceptualization and assessment of hypersexual disorder: a systematic review of the literature. Sex Med Rev. 2017;5:146–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sxmr.2016.11.001This review article provides a detailed description of the major psychometric instruments used to measure compulsive sexual behavior or the problematic aspects of hypersexuality. It compares their reliability and validity and makes recommendations for clinical and research use.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Womack SD, Hook JN, Ramos M, Davis DE, Penberthy JK. Measuring hypersexual behavior. Sex Addict Compuls. 2013;20:65–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2013.768126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kinsey AC, Pomeroy WB, Martin CE. Sexual behavior in the human male. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 1948.

  13. Kafka MP. Hypersexual desire in males: an operational definition and clinical implications for males with paraphilias and paraphilia-related disorders. Arch Sex Behav. 1997;26:505–26. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1024507922470.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kalichman SC, Rompa D. Sexual sensation seeking and sexual compulsivity scales: validity, and predicting HIV risk behavior. J Pers Assess. 1995;65(3):586–601. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6503_16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Parsons JT, Rendina HJ, Ventuneac A, Moody RL, Grov C. Hypersexual, sexually compulsive, or just highly sexually active? Investigating three distinct groups of gay and bisexual men and their profiles of HIV-related sexual risk. AIDS Behav. 2016;20:262–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-015-1029-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Winters J, Christoff K, Gorzalka BB. Dysregulated sexuality and high sexual desire: distinct constructs? Arch Sex Behav. 2010;39:1029–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9591-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cantor JM, Klein C, Lykins A, Rullo JE, Thaler L, Walling BR. A treatment-oriented typology of self-identified hypersexuality referrals. Arch Sex Behav. 2013;42:883–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0085-1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Sutton KS, Stratton N, Pytyck J, Kolla NJ, Cantor JM. Patient characteristics by type of hypersexuality referral: a quantitative chart review of 115 consecutive male cases. J Sex Marital Ther. 2015;41:563–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2014.935539.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Burke K, Haltom TM. Created by god and wired to porn: redemptive masculinity and gender beliefs in narratives of religious men’s pornography addiction recovery. Gend Soc. 2020;34(2):233–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243220905815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Grubbs JB, Perry SL. Moral incongruence and pornography use: a critical review and integration. J Sex Res. 2019;56(1):29–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2018.1427204This article considers the role of moral or religious incongruence in determining the level of perceived distress in pornography use. It suggests that such incongruence, rather than only the actual frequency of this sexual behavior, contributes substantially to attributions of loss of control and perceived addiction. The data presented identify incongruence as an important confound in the measurement of problematic sexuality.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Walton MT, Cantor JM, Bhullar N, Lykins AD. Hypersexuality: a critical review and introduction to the “sexhavior cycle”. Arch Sex Behav. 2017;46:2231–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-0991-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Carvalho J, Štulhofer A, Vieira AL, Jurin T. Hypersexuality and high sexual desire: exploring the structure of problematic sexuality. J Sex Med. 2015;12:1356–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12865This is the first study to challenge empirically the notion that hypersexuality is a univocal construct. Using both cluster and factor analysis on a large sample of online respondents, the authors identified distinct problematic sexuality and sexual drive/desire subdimensions.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Štulhofer A, Jurin T, Briken P. Is high sexual desire a facet of male hypersexuality? Results from an online study. J Sex Marital Ther. 2016;42:665–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2015.1113585.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grubbs JB, Hoagland KC, Lee BN, Grant JT, Davison PM, Reid R, Kraus S. Sexual addiction 25 years on: a systematic review of empirical literature on compulsive sexual behavior and an agenda for future research. Clin Psychol Rev. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101925.

  25. Reid RC. How should severity be determined for the DSM-5 proposed classification of hypersexual disorder? J Behav Addict. 2015;4(4):221–5. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.4.2015.041.

  26. Daversa MT, Knight RA. A structural examination of the predictors of sexual coercion against children in adolescent sexual offenders. Crim Justice Behav. 2007;34:1313–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854807302411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Knight RA, Sims-Knight JE. Risk factors for sexual violence. In: Violence against women and children, Volume 1: Mapping the terrain. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2011. p. 125–50.

  28. Hanson RK, Morton-Bourgon K. Predictors of sexual recidivism: an updated meta-analysis (Corrections User Report No. 2004-02). Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada; 2004.

  29. Kingston DA, Bradford JM. Hypersexuality and recidivism among sexual offenders. Sex Addict Compuls. 2013;20(1-2):91–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2013.768131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Brankley AE, Babchishin KM, Hanson RK. STABLE-2007 demonstrates predictive and incremental validity in assessing risk-relevant propensities for sexual offending: A metaanalysis. Sex Abus. 2021;33(1):34–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063219871572.

  31. Olver ME, Wong SC. Psychopathy, sexual deviance, and recidivism among sex offenders. Sex Abus. 2006;18(1):65–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11194-006-9006-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Thornton D, Knight RA. Construction and validation of SRA-FV need assessment. Sex Abus. 2015;27(4):360–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063213511120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Worling JR, Bookalam D, Litteljohn A. Prospective validity of the estimate of risk of adolescent sexual offense recidivism (ERASOR). Sex Abus. 2012;24(3):203–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063211407080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Meehl PE, Yonce LJ. Taxometric analysis: I. Detecting taxonicity with two quantitative indicators using means above and below a sliding cut (MAMBAC procedure). Psychol Rep. 1994;74:1059–274.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Meehl PE, Yonce LJ. Taxometric analysis: II. Detecting taxonicity using covariance of two quantitative indicators in successive intervals of a third indicator (MAXCOV procedure). Psychol Rep. 1996;78:1091–227. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1996.78.3c.1091.

  36. Ruscio J, Ruscio AM. Clarifying boundary issues in psychopathology: the role of taxometrics in a comprehensive program of structural research. J Abnorm Psychol. 2004;113(1):24–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.113.1.24.

  37. Haslam N, McGrath MJ, Viechtbauer W, Kuppens P. Dimensions over categories: a meta-analysis of taxometric research. Psychol Med. 2020;50(9):1418–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003329172000183XThis meta-analysis of four decades of taxometric research in psychopathology documents the infrequency of categorical distributions in this domain. Their results support the hypothesis that the vast majority of psychological and psychopathological differences among individuals are latently continuous.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ruscio J, Haslam N, Ruscio AM. Introduction to the taxometric method: a practical guide. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006.

  39. Walters GD, Knight RA, Långström N. Is hypersexuality dimensional? Evidence for the DSM-5 from general population and clinical samples. Arch Sex Behav. 2011;40(6):1309–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9719-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Graham FJ, Walters GD, Harris DA, Knight RA. Is hypersexuality dimensional or categorical? Evidence from male and female college samples. J Sex Res. 2016;53(2):224–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2014.1003524This study provides strong evidence that both the problematic (compulsive) and sexual drive (sexual preoccupation) subdimensions of hypersexuality are distributed as dimensions for college samples of both females and males.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kingston DA, Olver ME, Levaque E, Sawatsky ML, Seto MC, Lalumière ML. Establishing Canadian metrics for self-report measures used to assess hypersexuality. Can J Hum Sex. 2020;29(1):65–78. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.2019-0055This study reports the results of online surveys about sexual behavior in two samples of Canadian males and females. It documents that there are substantial differences in the potential base rates for hypersexuality using established sexual drive versus problematic sexual cutoffs. It highlights the need for studying representative samples and establishing appropriate age, sex, and subculture cutoffs for both subdimensions of sexuality.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wakefield JC. The concept of mental disorder: on the boundary between biological facts and social values. Am Psychol. 1992;47(3):373–88. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.47.3.373.

  43. Kingston DA, Walters GD, Olver ME, Levaque E, Sawatsky M, Lalumière ML. Understanding the latent structure of hypersexuality: a taxometric investigation. Arch Sex Behav. 2018;47(8):2207–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1273-9This study replicated the prior taxometric results from the Knight laboratory, supporting the hypothesis that measures of compulsive sexuality are distributed as dimensions for males and females.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Dickenson JA, Gleason N, Coleman E, Miner MH. Prevalence of distress associated with difficulty controlling sexual urges, feelings, and behaviors in the United States. JAMA Netw Open. 2018;1(7):e184468. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.4468.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Lewczuk K, Glica A, Nowakowska I, Gola M, Grubbs JB. Evaluating pornography problems due to moral incongruence model. J Sex Med. 2020;17(2):300–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.11.259.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Rissel C, Richters J, De Visser RO, McKee A, Yeung A, Caruana T. A profile of pornography users in Australia: findings from the second Australian study of health and relationships. J Sex Res. 2017;54(2):227–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1191597.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Pullman LE, Kingston DA, Lalumière ML, Levaque E, Renaud M, Sawatsky ML. How much is too much? An examination of total sexual outlet in the general population. Vancouver: Paper presented at the 37th Annual Conference of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers; 2018.

  48. Swets JA, Dawes RM, Monahan J. Psychological science can improve diagnostic decisions. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2000;1(1):1–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/1529-1006.001.

  49. Meehl PE, Lykken DT, Schofield W, Tellegen A. Recaptured-item technique (RIT): a method for reducing somewhat the subjective element in factor naming. J Exp Res Pers. 1971;5(3):171–90.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Reid RC, Garos S, Carpenter BN. Reliability, validity, and psychometric development of the Hypersexual Behavior Inventory in an outpatient sample of men. Sex Addict Compuls. 2011;18(1):30–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720162.2011.555709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ballester-Arnal R, Castro-Calvo J, Gil-Julia B, Giménez-García C, Gil-Llario MD. A validation study of the Spanish version of the Hypersexual Behavior Inventory (HBI): paper-and-pencil versus online administration. J Sex Marital Ther. 2019;45(4):283–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2018.1518886.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bőthe B, Bartók R, Tóth-Király I, Reid RC, Griffiths MD, Demetrovics Z, et al. Hypersexuality, gender, and sexual orientation: a large-scale psychometric survey study. Arch Sex Behav. 2018;47(8):2265–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1201-z.

  53. Bőthe B, Kovács M, Tóth-Király I, Reid RC, Griffiths MD, Orosz G, et al. The psychometric properties of the Hypersexual Behavior Inventory using a large-scale nonclinical sample. J Sex Res. 2019;56(2):180–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2018.1494262This study of a large nonclinical sample replicated the three-factor structure that had previously been established for the Hypersexual Behavioral Inventory, establishing its generalizability and reliability in nonclinical contexts. The low prevalence of hypersexuality in the sample did not allow the generation of an adequate cutoff score.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Castro-Calvo J, Ballester-Arnal R, Billieux J, Gil-Julia B, Gil-Llario MD. Spanish validation of the Sexual Addiction Screening Test. J Behav Addict. 2018;7(3):584–600. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.7.2018.57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Efrati Y, Mikulincer M. Individual-based Compulsive Sexual Behavior Scale: its development and importance in examining compulsive sexual behavior. J Sex Marital Ther. 2018;44(3):249–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2017.1405297.

  56. Castro-Calvo J, Gil-Llario MD, Giménez-García C, Gil-Juliá B, Ballester-Arnal R. Occurrence and clinical characteristics of compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD): a cluster analysis in two independent community samples. J Behav Addict. 2020;9(2):446–68. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2020.00025.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Bőthe B, Potenza MN, Griffiths MD, Kraus SW, Klein V, Fuss J, et al. The development of the Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder Scale (CSBD-19): an ICD-11 based screening measure across three languages. J Behav Addict. 2020;9(2):247–58. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2020.00034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Du R, Knight RA. The structure of hypersexuality and its relation to impulsivity. Manuscript submitted for publication; 2021. This study replicated the two-dimensional overarching structure of hypersexuality, using a new set of self-report scales that captured the components of each dimension that had previously been identified. It also demonstrated that each hypersexual subdimension (problematic sexuality versus sexual drive/desire) covaried differently with different types of impulsivity (dysregulated disinhibition versus risk-taking manipulativeness).

  59. MIDSA clinical manual (2011). Bend: Augur Enterprises, Inc.

  60. Janssen E, Vorst H, Finn P, Bancroft J. The sexual inhibition (SIS) and sexual excitation (SES) scales: II. Predicting psychophysiological response patterns. J Sex Res. 2002;39(2):127–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490209552131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Cronbach LJ, Meehl PE. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol Bull. 1955;52(4):281–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957.

  62. Kalichman SC, Johnson JR, Adair V, Rompa D, Multhauf K, Kelly JA. Sexual sensation seeking: scale development and predicting AIDS-risk behavior among homosexually active men. J Pers Assess. 1994;62:385–97. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6203_1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Bancroft J, Herbenick D, Barnes T, Hallam-Jones R, Wylie K, Janssen E. Members of BASRT*. The relevance of the dual control model to male sexual dysfunction: the Kinsey Institute/BASRT collaborative project. Sex Relat Ther. 2005;20(1):13–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681990512331298275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Gaither GA, Sellbom M. The sexual sensation seeking scale: reliability and validity within a heterosexual college student sample. J Pers Assess. 2003;81(2):157–67. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA8102_07.

  65. Coleman MM, Ohlerking F, Raymond N. E. Compulsive Sexual Behavior Inventory: a preliminary study of reliability and validity. J Sex Marital Ther. 2001;27(4):325–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/009262301317081070.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Preacher KJ, Rucker DD, MacCallum RC, Nicewander WA. Use of the extreme groups approach: a critical reexamination and new recommendations. Psychol Methods. 2005;10(2):178–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.10.2.178.

  67. Kowalewska E, Grubbs JB, Potenza MN, Gola M, Draps M, Kraus SW. Neurocognitive mechanisms in compulsive sexual behavior disorder. Curr Sex Health Rep. 2018;10(4):255–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-018-0176-zThis review provides a comprehensive summary of the research on the neurobiological correlates of compulsive sexual behavior (CSB). It attempts to apply such data to the debate about the locus of CSB in the overarching nomological network of psychopathology.

  68. Reid RC, Cyders MA, Moghaddam JF, Fong TW. Psychometric properties of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale in patients with gambling disorders, hypersexuality, and methamphetamine dependence. Addict Behav. 2014;39(11):1640–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.11.008.

  69. Seok JW, Sohn JH. Response inhibition during processing of sexual stimuli in males with problematic hypersexual behavior. J Behav Addict. 2020;9(1):71–82. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2020.00003This study is an excellent example of the research strategy of the categorical approach to identifying differences between those diagnosed with problematic sexual behavior versus unspecified controls. It is not possible to determine whether the neurobiological and behavioral/cognitive results that emerged should be attributed to the high sex drive or problematic sexual components of the problematic sexual behavior.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Reid RC, Garos S, Carpenter BN, Coleman E. A surprising finding related to executive control in a patient sample of hypersexual men. J Sex Med. 2011;8(8):2227–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02314.x.

  71. Miner MH, Romine RS, Raymond N, Janssen E, MacDonald A III, Coleman E. Understanding the personality and behavioral mechanisms defining hypersexuality in men who have sex with men. J Sex Med. 2016;13(9):1323–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.06.015.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Bőthe B, Tóth-Király I, Potenza MN, Griffiths MD, Orosz G, Demetrovics Z. Revisiting the role of impulsivity and compulsivity in problematic sexual behaviors. J Sex Res. 2019;56(2):166–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2018.1480744.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. • Gola M, Draps M. Ventral striatal reactivity in compulsive sexual behaviors. Front Psychiatr. 2018;9(546):1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00546This is a short review of the functional magnetic resonance imaging studies that examined the covariation of ventral striatal activation and compulsive sexual behavior. The few studies that are available support the hypothesis of increased ventral striatal reactivity for erotic stimuli in those diagnosed as having a compulsive sexual behavior disorder. The studies do not, however, differentiate the subdimensions of problematic sexual behavior.

  74. Stoléru S, Fonteille V, Cornélis C, Joyal C, Moulier V. Functional neuroimaging studies of sexual arousal and orgasm in healthy men and women: a review and meta-analysis. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2012;36(6):1481–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.03.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Knight RA, Graham FJ. Hypersexuality: equifinal, cohesive, clinical presentation or symptom cluster with multiple underlying mechanisms? Arch Sex Behav. 2017;46(8):2261–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1089-zThis is the first publication to propose the hypothesis that different subdimensions of hypersexuality (problematic sexuality and sexual drive/desire) covary differentially with subtypes of impulsivity (dysregulated disinhibition and risk taking and manipulative).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Knight RA, Guay JP. The role of psychopathy in sexual coercion against women: an update and expansion. New York: The Guilford Press; 2018. p. 662–81.

  77. Patrick C, Durbin C, Moser J. Reconceptualizing antisocial deviance in neurobehavioral terms. Dev Psychopathol. 2012;24(3):1047–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579412000533.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Young SE, Friedman NP, Miyake A, Willcutt EG, Corley RP, Haberstick BC, et al. Behavioral disinhibition: liability for externalizing spectrum disorders and its genetic and environmental relation to response inhibition across adolescence. J Abnorm Psychol. 2009;118(1):117–30. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014657.

  79. Hyde LW, Byrd AL, Votruba-Drzal E, Hariri AR, Manuck SB. Amygdala reactivity and negative emotionality: divergent correlates of antisocial personality and psychopathy traits in a community sample. J Abnorm Psychol. 2014;123(1):214–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035467.

  80. Blair RJ. Psychopathy, frustration, and reactive aggression: the role of ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Br J Psychol. 2010;101(3):383–99. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712609X418480.

  81. Glenn AL, Raine A. Psychopathy: an introduction to biological findings and their implications: NYU Press; 2014.

  82. Patrick CJ, Fowles DC, Krueger RF. Triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: developmental origins of disinhibition, boldness, and meanness. Dev Psychopathol. 2009;21(3):913–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579409000492.

  83. Drislane LE, Patrick CJ. Integrating alternative conceptions of psychopathic personality: a latent variable model of triarchic psychopathy constructs. J Personal Disord. 2017;31(1):110–32. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi_2016_30_240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Knight RA, Sims-Knight JE. The developmental antecedents of sexual coercion against women: testing alternative hypotheses with structural equation modeling. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2003;989(1):72–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2003.tb07294.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Knight RA, Sims-Knight JE. Testing an etiological model for male juvenile sexual offending against females. J Child Sex Abus. 2004;13:33–55. https://doi.org/10.1300/J070v13n03_03.

  86. Benning SD, Patrick CJ, Hicks BM, Blonigen DM, Krueger RF. Factor structure of the psychopathic personality inventory: validity and implications for clinical assessment. Psychol Assess. 2003;15(3):340–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.15.3.340.

  87. Buckholtz JW, Treadway MT, Cowan RL, Woodward ND, Benning SD, Li R, et al. Mesolimbic dopamine reward system hypersensitivity in individuals with psychopathic traits. Nat Neurosci. 2010;13(4):419–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2510.

  88. Bjork JM, Chen G, Hommer DW. Psychopathic tendencies and mesolimbic recruitment by cues for instrumental and passively obtained rewards. Biol Psychol. 2012;89(2):408–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.12.003.

  89. Baskin-Sommers AR, Curtin JJ, Newman JP. Altering the cognitive-affective dysfunctions of psychopathic and externalizing offender subtypes with cognitive remediation. Clin Psychol Sci. 2015;3(1):45–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702614560744.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Jespersen AF, Lalumière ML, Seto MC. Sexual abuse history among adult sex offenders and non-sex offenders: a meta-analysis. Child Abuse Negl. 2009;33:179–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.07.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Seto MC, Lalumiere ML. What is so special about male adolescent sexual offending? A review and test of explanations through meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2010;136(4):526–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Leroux EJ, Clow KA, Motayne G, Seto MC. The association of childhood sexual abuse with non-paraphilic and paraphilic sexual behaviors among adolescents who have sexually offended. J Sex Res. 2020;57:1189–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2020.1749821.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Grabell AS, Knight RA. Examining childhood abuse patterns and sensitive periods in juvenile sexual offenders. Sex Abus. 2009;21(2):208–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063209333133.

  94. Berman AK, Knight RA. The relation of familiarity with sexual abusers to subsequent developmental adaptation in youths who have sexually offended. Sex Abus. 2015;27(6):587–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/1079063214544329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Bernstein DP, Fink L. Childhood Trauma Questionnaire: a retrospective self-report manual. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation; 1998.

  96. Felitti VJ, Anda RF, Nordenberg D, Williamson DF, Spitz AM, Edwards V, et al. Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) study. Am J Prev Med. 1998;14(4):245–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00017-8

  97. Widom CS. Long-term impact of childhood abuse and neglect on crime and violence. Clin Psychol (New York). 2017;24(2):186–202. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpsp.12194This review summarizes the research on the contribution of various forms of child maltreatment to subsequent violent and criminal consequences, including sexual offending. It provides a balanced overview of the methodological issues that plague the attempt to establish causative connections between developmental experiences and subsequent aggressive outcomes.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Chatzittofis A, Savard J, Arver S, Öberg KG, Hallberg J, Nordström P, et al. Interpersonal violence, early life adversity, and suicidal behavior in hypersexual men. J Behav Addict. 2017;6(2):187–93. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.027.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Davis KA, Knight RA. The relation of childhood abuse experiences to problematic sexual behaviors in male youths who have sexually offended. Arch Sex Behav. 2019;48(7):2149–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1279-3Examining a sample of male juveniles who had sexually offended this study replicated Kingston et al.’s [101] finding in an adult sample that psychological or emotional abuse, especially perpetrated by a male caregiver, is a potentially more important developmental antecedent of hypersexuality than sexual abuse.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Efrati Y, Gola M. The effect of early life trauma on compulsive sexual behavior among members of a 12-step group. J Sex Med. 2019;16(6):803–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.03.272.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Kingston DA, Graham FJ, Knight RA. Relations between self-reported adverse events in childhood and hypersexuality in adult male sexual offenders. Arch Sex Behav. 2017;46(3):707–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0873-5This is the first study to establish empirically a covariation between hypersexuality and psychological or emotional abuse, especially that perpetrated by a male caregiver.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Cecil CA, Viding E, Fearon P, Glaser D, McCrory EJ. Disentangling the mental health impact of childhood abuse and neglect. Child Abuse Negl. 2017;63:106–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.11.024.

  103. Kosson DS, Schraft CV, Brieman CL, McBride CK, Knight RA. Parental rejecting behaviors: validating a behaviorally based youth-report measure of parental emotional abuse. Assessment. 2020;28(3):899–917. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191120918943.

  104. Paul E, Eckenrode J. Childhood psychological maltreatment subtypes and adolescent depressive symptoms. Child Abuse Negl. 2015;47:38–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.05.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Liu RT, Alloy LB, Abramson LY, Iacoviello BM, Whitehouse WG. Emotional maltreatment and depression: prospective prediction of depressive episodes. Depress Anxiety. 2009;26(2):174–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20545.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  106. Miller AB, Jenness JL, Oppenheimer CW, Gottleib AL, Young JF, Hankin BL. Childhood emotional maltreatment as a robust predictor of suicidal ideation: a 3-year multi-wave, prospective investigation. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2017;45(1):105–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-016-0150-z.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  107. Kendler KS, Ohlsson H, Sundquist J, Sundquist K. Familial transmission of externalizing syndromes in extended Swedish families. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2018;177(3):308–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.b.32611.

  108. Wu EY, Reeb BT, Martin MJ, Gibbons FX, Simons RL, Conger RD. Paternal hostility and maternal hostility in European American and African American families. J Marital Fam Ther. 2014;76(3):638–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12107

  109. Moretti MM, Craig SG. Maternal versus paternal physical and emotional abuse, affect regulation and risk for depression from adolescence to early adulthood. Child Abuse Negl. 2013;37(1):4–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2012.09.015

  110. Hoeve M, Stams GJJM, van der Put CE, Dubas JS, van der Laan PH, Gerris JRM. A meta-analysis of attachment to parents and delinquency. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2012;40(5):771–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-011-9608-1.

  111. Hahn AM, Simons RM, Simons JS. Childhood maltreatment and sexual risk taking: the mediating role of alexithymia. Arch Sex Behav. 2016;45(1):53–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0591-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Knight RA, Sims-Knight JE. The structure and covariates of sexual harassment and coercion. Vancouver: Symposium presented at the 37th Annual Conference of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers; 2018.

  113. Haslam N. Evidence that male sexual orientation is a matter of degree. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997;73(4):862–70. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.4.862.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Brandeis University, MS 062, Waltham, MA, 02454-9110, USA

    Raymond A. Knight & Rui Du

Authors
  1. Raymond A. Knight
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rui Du
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raymond A. Knight.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

We have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Sexual Disorders

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Knight, R.A., Du, R. The Structure, Covariates, and Etiology of Hypersexuality: Implications for Sexual Offending. Curr Psychiatry Rep 23, 50 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-021-01260-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-021-01260-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation