U.S. Department of Justice 

Office of Justice Programs 

Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking 

SEX OFFENDER MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT and PLANNING INITIATIVE 

Luis C.deBaca, Director • July 2015 

Internet-Facilitated 

Sexual Offending 

by Michael Seto, Ph.D. 

Introduction 

T

here is increasing public and professional concern about Internetfacilitated sexual offending, reflected in a greater number of prosecutions 

and clinical referrals for these crimes (Middleton, Mandeville-Norden, 

& Hayes, 2009; Motivans & Kyckelhahn, 2007; DOJ, 2010). Internet sexual 

offending comprises a range of crimes, including possession or distribution 

of child pornography; production of child pornography; sexual solicitations 

(online interactions with minors for sexual purposes, including plans to meet 

offline); and conspiracy crimes, for example, collaborating with others to 

distribute or produce child pornography or to solicit minors. The large majority 

of online offenses involve possession or distribution of child pornography. 

It is hard to obtain precise estimates of Internet sexual offending in the United 

States, as there is no national system for integrating information about Internet 

offenders at the state level and there are state-by-state variations in the 

applicable laws. However, the National Juvenile Online Victimization survey, 

conducted in 2000 and again in 2009, indicates that the number of arrests in the 

United States for Internet sex crimes has tripled over that time (Wolak, 2012; 

Wolak, Finkelhor, & Mitchell, 2011). 

The increase in Internet sexual offending has been paralleled by a decrease 

in the number of reported child sexual abuse cases, and a decrease in violent 

crime more broadly (Mishra & Lalumière, 2009; Finkelhor & Jones, 2006). 

This indicates that Internet sexual offending is a new phenomenon that may 

not be influenced by the same contextual factors as other kinds of sexual or 

violent crime. An important research question is the extent to which Internet 

sex offenders represent a new type of sex offender, or whether they reflect the 

transformation of conventional sexual offending through the adoption of new 

technologies (Seto & Hanson, 2011). 

SOMAPIRESEARCH

BRIEF
 

About SOMAPI 

In 2011, the SMART Office 

began work on the Sex Offender 

Management Assessment and 

Planning Initiative (SOMAPI), a 

project designed to assess the 

state of research and practice in 

sex offender management. As part 

of the effort, the SMART Office 

contracted with the National 

Criminal Justice Association (NCJA) 

and a team of subject-matter 

experts to review the literature on 

sexual offending and sex offender 

management and develop 

summaries of the research for 

dissemination to the field. These 

summaries are available online at 

http://smart.gov/SOMAPI/index. 

html. 

A national inventory of 

sex offender management 

professionals also was conducted 

in 2011 to gain insight about 

promising practices and pressing 

needs in the field. Finally, a 

Discussion Forum involving 

national experts was held in 2012 

for the purpose of reviewing 

the research summaries and 

inventory results and refining 

what is currently known about sex 

offender management. 

Based on the work carried out 

under SOMAPI, the SMART Office 

has published a series of Research 

Briefs, each focusing on a topic 

covered in the sexual offending 

and sex offender management 

literature review. Each brief is 

designed to get key findings 

from the literature review into 

the hands of policymakers and 

practitioners. Overall, the briefs are 

intended to advance the ongoing 

dialogue related to effective 

interventions for sexual offenders 

and provide policymakers and 

practitioners with trustworthy, upto-date information they can use 

to identify what works to combat 

sexual offending and prevent 

sexual victimization. 
2 

This brief addresses Internet-facilitated sexual offending. 

It summarizes what is scientifically known about the 

topic and identifies policy implications, knowledge 

gaps, and unresolved controversies that emerge from 

the extant research and that might serve as a catalyst for 

future empirical study. 

Summary of Research Findings 

Offender Motivations 

Sexual interest in children 

Many, but not all, Internet offenders are motivated by a 

sexual interest in children. This has been demonstrated 

in a recent study showing that the majority of Canadian 

child pornography offenders assessed at a sexual 

behavior clinic showed more sexual arousal (assessed 

through penile plethysmography responses in the 

laboratory) to children than to adults and, in fact, 

showed a stronger relative response than do offenders 

with contact victims (Seto, Cantor, & Blanchard, 

2006). The relationship between child pornography 

offending and pedophilia is sufficiently robust that 

child pornography use has been included as specific 

behavioral evidence in the proposed revision of the 

psychiatric diagnostic criteria for pedophilia, defined 

clinically as “persistent sexual attraction to prepubescent 

children” (www.dsm5.org; Seto, 2010). 

Sexual interest in adolescents 

In addition, research by the Crimes against Children 

Research Center suggests that solicitation offenders 

target young adolescents, typically between the ages 

of 13 and 15, which would not be consistent with the 

clinical diagnosis of pedophilia (because many of the 

adolescents involved would be showing some signs of 

sexual and physical maturation) (Wolak et al., 2008). 

Briggs and colleagues (2011) have suggested that there 

is a distinction between fantasy-driven and contactdriven solicitation offenders. The former group engages 

in online activities (such as sexual chat, exchange of 

pornographic images, or exhibitionism via Webcam) that 

are gratifying in and of themselves, often resulting in 

orgasm while online, but are not interested in or likely 

to commit contact sexual offenses against children. The 

latter group, in contrast, engages in online activities 

in order to arrange real-world meetings; their online 

activity is more directed towards meeting offline and 

shorter in duration than the online interactions of 

fantasy-driven offenders. Given the small sample size 

(30 contact-driven and 21 fantasy-driven offenders) and 

exploratory nature of this study, more research is needed 

to determine if this distinction between solicitation 

offenders is valid and meaningful. 

For cases resulting in actual meetings between an 

adult and a minor, sexual contact typically occurred 

on multiple occasions (Wolak et al., 2008). Solicitation 

offenders may have more in common with statutory 

sex offenders—who have sexual contacts with minors 

who agree to the interactions but are below the legally 

defined age of consent—than they do with pedophilic 

offenders who target young children. 

Contact Offending History 

In a recent meta-analysis (an analysis combining the 

results of many evaluations into one large study with 

many subjects), Seto and colleagues (2011) reviewed 

available studies and identified 21 samples of Internet 

offenders (a total of 4,464 mostly child pornography 

offenders, although some samples also included 

solicitation offenders) with information about their 

contact offending histories. On average, 1 in 8 online 

offenders had an official criminal record for contact 

sexual offending. In the six samples with self-report 

data, a little over half (55 percent) admitted to a history 

of contact sexual offending, usually as a result of clinical 

involvement and/or polygraph examination. Therefore, 

the established risk measures that are available for 

contact sex offenders may not apply to the Internet 

population. Further research is needed to identify the 

factors that distinguish those who have committed 

hands-on offenses against a child from those who do not 

commit such offenses. This empirical knowledge would 

advance the understanding of the risk of recidivism and 

the relationship between online and offline offending. 

Contact Offending in the Future 

Seto and colleagues (2011) also reviewed recidivism rates 

from nine samples of Internet offenders (2,630 online 

offenders) followed for an average of slightly more 

than 3 years. They found that 4.6 percent of Internet 

offenders committed a new sexual offense of some kind 

during this time period, with 2 percent committing a 

contact sexual offense and 3.4 percent committing a new 

child pornography offense; some offenders committed 

both types of crimes. Although the followup times are 

relatively short for this kind of research, and recidivism 
3 

Internet-Facilitated Sexual Offending

rates are expected to increase with more opportunity, 

these recidivism rates are lower than those observed 

in recidivism studies of offline offenders (Hanson 

& Morton-Bourgon, 2005) and belie the idea that all 

Internet offenders pose a high risk of committing contact 

offenses in the future. 

Recidivism Risk Factors 

Research is beginning to emerge on the factors that 

predict recidivism among Internet sex offenders, 

although more studies—using large samples, a set 

of theoretically or empirically plausible risk factors, 

longer followup times, and comprehensive criminal 

records—are clearly needed. These initially identified 

risk factors appear to be the same kinds of risk factors 

seen in decades of research on contact sex offenders, 

and in research on all kinds of offenders generally. 

For example, recent studies have shown that wellestablished nonsexual criminological factors such as 

offender age at time of first arrest, prior criminal history, 

and failure on prior conditional release (such as bail 

or parole) can predict sexual recidivism among child 

pornography offenders (Seto & Eke, 2005; Eke, Seto, & 

Williams, 2011). Unpublished data suggest that other 

factors (such as substance use problems and admissions 

of sexual interest in children) can also predict contact 

sexual offending (e.g., Eke & Seto, 2012). Among child 

pornography offenders, the ratio of content depicting 

boys compared to girls predicts child pornography 

recidivism (Eke & Seto, 2012), which is in line with much 

research showing that contact sex offenders who target 

boys are more likely to be pedophiles and more likely 

to sexually reoffend than those who target girls (Seto, 

2008). 

As well, Wakeling and colleagues (2001) showed that 

a modified version of an established risk measure (the 

Risk Matrix 2000; Thornton, 2007) could predict sexual 

recidivism in a large sample of Internet offenders in the 

United Kingdom. Risk Matrix items include offender 

age, sexual offense and any other sentencing history, 

having a male victim, having a stranger victim, ever 

having a live-in romantic relationship, and having 

any noncontact offenses. Wakeling and her colleagues 

obtained recidivism data on 1,326 offenders followed 

for 1 year (2.1 percent recidivism rate) and 994 of these 

offenders followed for 2 years (3.1 percent recidivism 

rate). The Risk Matrix was significantly predictive to a 

similar degree as with contact offenders. Three-quarters 

of the new sexual offenses were for Internet crimes. If 

this research—showing that the same risk factors that 

are useful in predicting recidivism among conventional 

contact sex offenders operate in a similar fashion for 

Internet offenders—holds up in subsequent replications, 

then clinicians will be empirically justified in using 

modified versions of existing risk measures to assess 

Internet offenders, such as the Static-99 (Harris et al., 

2003) or Risk Matrix 2000. 

Intervention 

There is relatively little literature on the treatment 

of Internet offenders. Typically, knowledge about 

characteristics and risk of recidivism is established 

before knowledge about treatment approaches and 

outcomes, because of the time it takes to develop 

and implement programs and then evaluate them for 

recidivism. Sex offender treatment and supervision 

professionals are struggling to respond to the increasing 

influx of Internet offenders. Key questions have yet to 

be addressed regarding intervention—including what 

the priority treatment targets are, how they should 

be targeted, and whether interventions can reduce 

recidivism. 

The most clearly articulated program at this time 

appears to be the Internet Sex Offender Treatment 

Programme (i-SOTP) developed by Middleton and 

colleagues in the United Kingdom. This program was 

created as a result of treatment provider concerns about 

mixing Internet and contact offenders in group therapy 

as well as questions about the applicability of some 

treatment components and targets of conventional 

contact sex offender treatment programs (McGrath et 

al., 2009). The program is intended to be less intense 

than the standard conventional sex offender program 

available in the United Kingdom; it involves fewer (20 

to 30) sessions in either individual or group format 

and more Internet-relevant content. Research is needed 

to determine if the treatment approach is effective for 

Internet offenders. 

Research Limitations, 

Conclusions, and Policy 

Implications 

It is clear from this review that research on Internet 

offending is relatively new and that there are substantial 

gaps in our knowledge about Internet offenders and 

the crimes they commit. At the same time, research 
4 

conducted over the past 10 years (paralleling the 

emergence of the Internet in everyday life) sheds some 

helpful light on some key issues. 

Increasing demand 

There is consistent evidence that the number of Internet 

sexual offending cases is increasing rapidly, with major 

implications for law enforcement, criminal justice, 

correctional, and clinical agencies. More precise state-bystate data are needed, however, to better understand the 

breadth and depth of this increasing demand in order to 

allocate resources wisely. 

Solicitation offenders 

Most of the research on Internet offenders has focused 

on child pornography offenders. Less is known about 

the characteristics, contact offending history, and risk 

of recidivism posed by solicitation offenders, and the 

extent to which they differ from child pornography 

offenders and contact sex offenders. 

Internet offending types 

Emerging research suggests that solicitation offenders 

are different from child pornography offenders in 

meaningful ways. In particular, child pornography 

offenders are likely to be pedophiles, whereas 

solicitation offenders appear to be predominantly 

interested in adolescent girls. This apparent difference 

in Internet offender motivations may translate to 

differences in contact offending history, risk of 

recidivism, and the likely targets of other criminal 

sexual behavior (young children vs. adolescent minors). 

Overlap with contact offending 

Only 1 in 8 Internet offenders has an official record for 

contact offending, based on available studies (Seto, 

Hanson, & Babchishin, 2011). The proportion rises to 

approximately 4 in 8 when self-reported offending is 

added, but this still falls short of the idea that most or 

all Internet offenders have already committed contact 

offenses. Internet offenders and conventional sex 

offenders are not synonymous groups. An important 

area for future research is to explore the relationship 

between Internet and contact offending. 

Risk to reoffend 

More research is needed, but an analysis of nine 

available follow-up studies suggests that Internet 

offenders, as a group, have a relatively low risk of 

sexually recidivating compared to conventional contact 

sex offenders. Research distinguishing between different 

types of Internet offenders will likely be helpful in 

identifying higher risk Internet offenders who need 

more intensive interventions. 

Intervention 

More research on the onset and maintenance of 

Internet sexual offending is needed to design effective 

interventions for those who require it. Existing 

interventions represent adaptations of current sex 

offender treatment models, which may or may not work 

for Internet offenders. Although other areas require 

research attention as well, intervention is the area with 

the largest gaps in knowledge. 

References 

Briggs, P., Simon, W.T., & Simonsen, S. (2011). An 

exploratory study of Internet-initiated sexual offenses 

and the chat room sex offender: Has the Internet enabled 

a new typology of sex offender? Sexual Abuse: A Journal 

of Research and Treatment, 23, 72–91. 

Eke, A.W., & Seto, M.C. (2012). Risk assessment of online 

offenders for law enforcement. In K. Ribisl & E. Quayle 

(Eds.), Internet Child Pornography: Understanding and 

Preventing On-line Child Abuse (pp. 148–168). Devon, 

England: Willan. 

Eke, A.W., Seto, M.C., & Williams, J. (2011). Examining 

the criminal history and future offending of child 

pornography offenders: An extended prospective 

follow-up study. Law and Human Behavior, 35, 466–478. 

Finkelhor, D., & Jones, L. (2006). Why have child 

maltreatment and child victimization declined? Journal 

of Social Issues, 62, 685–716. 

Hanson, R.K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. (2005). The 

characteristics of persistent sex offenders: A metaanalysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and 

Clinical Psychology, 73, 1154–1163. 

Harris, A., Phenix, A., Hanson, R.K., & Thornton, D. 

(2003). Static-99 Coding Rules Revised—2003. Ottawa, 
5 

Internet-Facilitated Sexual Offending

Ontario, Canada: Solicitor General Canada. Retrieved 

from: http://static99.org/pdfdocs/static-99-codingrules_e.pdf. 

McGrath, R.J., Cumming, G.F., Burchard, B.L., Zeoli, S., 

& Ellerby, L. (2009). Current Practices and Emerging Trends 

in Sexual Abuser Management: The Safer Society 2009 North 

American Survey. Retrieved May 9, 2011, from http://bit. 

ly/fkLYTb. 

Middleton, D., Mandeville-Norden, R., & Hayes, E. 

(2009). Does treatment work with Internet sex offenders? 

Emerging findings from the Internet Sex Offender 

Treatment Programme (i-SOTP). Journal of Sexual 

Aggression, 15, 5–19. 

Mishra, S., & Lalumière, M.L. (2009). Is the crime drop 

of the 1990s in Canada and the USA associated with a 

general decline in risky and health-related behaviors? 

Social Science and Medicine, 68, 39–48. 

Motivans, M., & Kyckelhahn, T. (2007). Federal 

Prosecution of Child Sex Exploitation Offenders, 2006. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of 

Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 

Seto, M.C. (2008). Pedophilia and Sexual Offending 

Against Children: Theory, Assessment, and Intervention. 

Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. 

Seto, M.C. (2010). Child pornography use and Internet 

solicitation in the diagnosis of pedophilia [Letter to the 

editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 591–593. 

Seto, M.C., Cantor, J.M., & Blanchard, R. (2006). Child 

pornography offenses are a valid diagnostic indicator of 

pedophilia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 610–615. 

Seto, M.C., & Eke, A.W. (2005). The future offending of 

child pornography offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of 

Research and Treatment, 17, 201–210. 

This research brief was produced by the National Criminal 

Justice Association under grant number 2010-DB-BX-K086, 

awarded by the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, 

Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking 

(SMART), Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department 

of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or 

recommendations expressed in this research brief are those 

of the author(s) and contributors and do not necessarily 

represent the official position or policies of the SMART 

Office or the U.S. Department of Justice. 

Seto, M.C., & Hanson, R.K. (2011). Introduction. Special 

issue on Internet-facilitated sexual offending. Sexual 

Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 23, 3–6. 

Seto, M.C., Hanson, R.K., & Babchishin, K.M. (2011). 

Contact sexual offending by men arrested for child 

pornography offenses. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research 

and Treatment, 23, 124–145. 

Thornton, D. (2007). Scoring Guide for the Risk Matrix 

2000.9/SVC: February 2007 Version. Retrieved from: 

http://www.bhamlive1.bham.ac.uk/Documents/ 

college-les/psych/RM2000scoringinstructions.pdf. 

U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). (2010). The National 

Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction: 

A Report to Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department 

of Justice. Retrieved from: www.justice.gov/psc/docs/ 

natstrategyreport.pdf. 

Wakeling, H.C., Howard, P., & Barnett, G. (2011). 

Comparing the validity of the RM2000 scales and 

OGRS3 for predicting recidivism by Internet sex 

offenders. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and 

Treatment, 23, 146–168. 

Wolak, J. (2012). Statement to the U.S. Sentencing 

Commission Public Hearing on Federal Child 

Pornography Offenses. Retrieved from: http://www. 

ussc.gov/Legislative_and_Public_Affairs/Public_ 

Hearings_and_Meetings/20120215-16/Testimony_15_ 

Wolak.pdf. 

Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., & Mitchell, K.J. (2011). Child 

pornography possessors: Trends in offender and case 

characteristics. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and 

Treatment, 23, 22–42. 

Wolak, J., Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K.J., & Ybarra, M.L. 

(2008). Online “predators” and their victims: Myths, 

realities, and implications for prevention and treatment. 

American Psychologist, 63, 111–128. 

ABOUT SMART 

The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 

2006 authorized the establishment of the Sex Offender 

Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and 

Tracking (SMART) Office within OJP. SMART is responsible 

for assisting with implementation of the Sex Offender 

Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), and also for 

providing assistance to criminal justice professionals across 

the entire spectrum of sex offender management activities 

needed to ensure public safety.