Cognitive Distortions Among Child Molesters and Rapists: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Cognitive distortions are considered central to the aetiology and maintenance of sexual offending. This meta-analysis quantified differences in cognitive distortions between sexual offenders ( individuals who committed sexual offences against children and individuals who committed rape) and non-offending controls. Following the PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we systematically searched Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science. Of 191 records, 9 studies (16 independent comparisons) met the inclusion criteria. Random-effects meta-analyses, with Hedges’ g as the effect size, were conducted separately for individuals who committed sexual offences against children(k = 12) and individuals who committed rape (k = 4); study quality was appraised using the adapted Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Child molesters showed markedly higher levels of cognitive distortions than controls, with negligible heterogeneity. Rapists also exhibited significantly elevated cognitive distortions, accompanied by moderate heterogeneity; however, these estimates were derived from only two primary studies and should therefore be interpreted with caution. The combined analysis across all sexual offenders yielded a large overall effect, and publication bias appeared minimal for child-molester samples. These findings outline the robustness and magnitude of offense-supportive cognition in sexual offenders and support its central role in aetiological models, risk assessment, and treatment planning. This meta-analysis is the first to integrate explicit and implicit measures across offender subtypes within a unified analytic framework and to quantify the consistency of effects using contemporary heterogeneity and bias metrics.