Read more about terminology. Clicking on the title will take you to more details from the article or book.
Ames, A. & Houston, D.A., "Legal, social, and biological definitions of pedophilia," Archives of Sexual Behavior, vol. 19, 1990, pp. 333-342.
Researchers from Indiana University elaborate on the distinction between child molestation and pedophilia, writing that confusion of the two hinders scientific understanding.
Feierman, J., "Introduction and A Biosocial Overview," in Feierman, J., ed., Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions, New York: Springer-Verlag, 1990a, pp. 1-68.
Jay Feierman of the University of New Mexico defines pedophilia, pedosexual behavior, ephebophilia, hebephilia, and ephebosexual behavior. He also discusses the relationship between adult-minor sexual behavior and child sexual abuse in terms of consent and harm.
Fergusson, D.M. & Mullen, P.E., Childhood sexual abuse: An evidence based perspective, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 1999.
David M. Fergusson and Paul E. Mullen describe the way in which CSA is defined based on normative moral standards, and explain why there can never be a single universal definition of CSA. They criticize the popular belief among professionals and the public that CSA is a syndrome identifiable by certain symptoms. They also find fault with "trite conclusions" about CSA that are "chanted like sacred mantras." They propose a straightforward scientific approach to definitional problems.
Freund, K., "Assessment of pedophilia," in Cook, M. & Howells, K. (Eds.), Adult sexual interest in children, London: Academic Press, 1981, pp. 139-179.
Kurt Freund of the University of Toronto makes a distinction between pedophilia and hebephilia, and describes misleading conclusions that result from criminological research which confuses pedophilia with pedosexual behavior.
Green, R., “Is pedophilia a mental disorder?”, Archives of Sexual Behavior, vol. 31, no. 6, 2002, pp. 467-471.
British sexologist Richard Green describes changing definitions of pedophilia in successive editions of DSM and writes that the current definition is logically incoherent. He writes that it fails to meet the DSM’s own criteria for classification as a mental disorder.
Haugaard, J.J. & Emery, R.E., "Methodological issues in child sexual abuse research," Child Abuse & Neglect, vol. 13, 1989, pp. 89-100.
University of Virginia researchers describe their study which found that the definition of CSA significantly affects findings regarding the prevalence and consequences of CSA.
Okami, P. & Goldberg, A., "Personality Correlates of Pedophilia: Are They Reliable Indicators?", Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 29, No. 3, 1992, pp. 297-328.
UCLA researchers describe common inconsistent usage of the terms child and pedophilia--usage based on law and morality rather than science. They explain in detail why sex offenders against children are most likely a very different group of people from pedophiles. They also criticize the use of terms that suggest violence to refer to adult-child sexual interactions when overwhelming data show a lack of force or violence in such interactions. They argue in favor of making a distinction between actual violence and moral violation.
Sandfort, T., Boys on their contacts with men: A study of sexually expressed friendships, New York: Global Academic Publishers, 1987.
University of Utrecht researcher Theodorus Sandfort defines children according to Dutch law as those under age 16, and accordingly defines pedophile and pedosexuality. He argues in favor of limiting the term abuse to situations in which the adult uses his power or some other method to compel the child to have sex with him.
West, D.J. & Woodhouse, T.P., "Sexual encounters between boys and adults," in Li, C.K., West, D.J., & Woodhouse, T.P., Children’s sexual encounters with adults, London: Duckworth, 1990, pp. 3-137.
British researchers describe varying definitions of "child" and "abuse" found among researchers, and argue against the use of the blanket term "abuse" for all sexual contacts between minors and adults.