Epstein Secrets

rackenridge, 2001; Craven, Brown, & Gilchrist, 2006; Gallagher, 1999), gaining a child's trust (Berson, 2003; Craven et al., 2006; Gillespie, 2002; Salter, 1995), making it more difficult to the child to resist or disclose the abuse (Berson, 2003; Craven et al., 2006; Gallagher, 1999; Gillespie, 2002;

N. Bennett and W. ODonobue TABLE 1 General Definitions of Grooming Author(s) Definition of Grooming (taken directly from reference) Sgroi (1982) Salter (1995) Howitt (1995) Labors (1997) Gallagher (1999) Brackenridge (2001) Gillespie (2002) Berson (2003) O'Connell (2003) Spiegel (2003) Cra

ors were used on boys versus girls. In addition, most of the grooming literature reviewed discussed male offenders. Identifying Potential Victims Elliott and colleagues (1995) interviewed 91 child sex offenders about the strategies they used when committing their offenses. They found that 33% of the

rackenridge, 2001; Craven, Brown, & Gilchrist, 2006; Gallagher, 1999), gaining a child's trust (Berson, 2003; Craven et al., 2006; Gillespie, 2002; Salter, 1995), making it more difficult to the child to resist or disclose the abuse (Berson, 2003; Craven et al., 2006; Gallagher, 1999; Gillespie, 2002;

. Bennet: and W. ODonolnie TABLE 1 General Definitions of Grooming Author(s) Definition of Grooming (taken directly from reference) Sgroi (1982) Salter (1995) 11OVAIE (1995) Lebeig (1997) Gallagher (1999) Brackenridge (2001) Gillespie (2002) Berson (2003) O'Connell (2003) Spiegel (2003) Cr

ors were used on boys versus girls. In addition, most of the grooming literature reviewed discussed male offenders. Identifying Potential Victims Elliott and colleagues (1995) interviewed 91 child sex offenders about the strategies they used when committing their offenses. They found that 33% of the

0). This step is often regarded as the central role of the grooming process, wherein the offender establishes trust and cooperation with the victim (Salter 1995; van Dam 2001). The offender accomplishes this by befriending the child, by learning about his/her interests, being helpful, showering the chi

ss, ease of access, or perceived vulnerabilities of the child (Lanning 2010; McAlinden 2006; Mooney and Ost 2013; Olson, Ellevold, and Rogers 2007). Elliott, Browne, and Kilcoyne (1995) found that when selecting a victim, offenders often focused on physical characteristics such as the child being pretty

al grooming in past literature (See Table 1), none of which have ultimately been widely accepted. Table 1. Definitions of Sexual Grooming. Source Salter (19951 Definitions of Sexual Grooming Howitt (1995) Leberg (1997) Gallagher (1999) McAlinden (20071 Brackenridge (20011 Gillespie (2002) Spie

Men Exposed to Childhood Sexual Abuse: A Qualitative Investigation." Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 21 (2):155-75. doi: 10.1080/10538712.2012.659803 Elliott, Ian A. 2017. "A Self-Regulation Model of Sexual Grooming." Trauma, Violence 6 Abuse l8 (0:83-97. doh 10.1177/1524838015591573 Elliott, Mkhele, Kev

child they love them or the child is special (Lang & Frenzel, 1988), giving the child bribes or rewards (e.g., Lang & Frenzel, 1988; Lawson, 2003; Salter, 1995; Shakeshaft, 2004), or enforcing or withholding punishment (Lawson, 2003). While Winters and Jeglic (2017) SGM addresses the limitations of p

grooming processes may differ in important ways, as there are some behaviors that are not possible online (e.g., providing the victim with alcohol; Elliott, 2017) and thus, the present study will focus solely on in-person grooming behaviors. It should also be noted that individuals who sexually abuse c