ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2022
Exploring the Ownership of Child-Like Sex Dolls.
Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Misrepresenting the "MAP" Literature Does Little to Advance Child Abuse Prevention: A Critical Commentary and Response to Farmer, Salter, and Woodlock.Trauma, violence & abuse · 2026Article
- 'I have no desire to hurt a child': prosocial navigation of sexual attraction to children.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026Article
- Child-like sex dolls: legal, empirical, and ethical perspectives.International journal of impotence research · 2024Review
- Sex Doll Specifications versus Human Body Characteristics.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Article
- A Thing like a Human? A Mixed-Methods Study on Sex Doll Usage.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a fervent social debate ongoing that relates to the ownership of child-like sex dolls. On the one hand, some proponents of dolls suggest that they offer a safe sexual outlet for minor-attracted people (MAPs) and could be used in efforts to prevent the sexual abuse of children. On the other side of the debate, child-like dolls are seen as articles that sexualize children, encourage deviant fantasies, and increase offending risk. To date, no empirical analyses have been undertaken with people who own such dolls. In this paper, we present data from child-like sex doll owners (n = 85) and MAPs who do not own dolls (n = 120) recruited from online forums visited by people who own sex dolls or forums for people with sexual attractions to children. Specifically, we compared their psychological characteristics and proclivities for sexual aggression. Among non-owners, 79.2% of participants declared an interest in owning a sex doll, which is higher than the 20-40% rate reported in adult-attracted samples of non-owners. We found few differences between the groups on most personality variables, with doll owners being less antisocial and anxiously attached than non-owners, but exhibiting more schizotypal traits. Related to offending proclivities, doll ownership was associated with lower levels of sexual preoccupation and self-reported arousal to hypothetical abuse scenarios, but higher levels of sexually objectifying behaviors and anticipated enjoyment of sexual encounters with children. We discuss these data in relation to a functional model of child-like sex doll ownership among MAPs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.