In the published article, there was an error in Table 3 as published. For the non-forensic group, the means and standard deviations were incorrectly reported as 2.55 (0.80) for Understanding and 2.27 (0.83) for Demonstration. The correct Table 3 with the corrected means and standard deviations for Understanding 10.18 (2.67) and Demonstration 8.89 (2.15) and its legend appear below.
Table 3
| TRS-2-Items | Forensic clients | Non-forensic clients | Effect sizea | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Understanding | Demonstration | Understanding | Demonstration | Understanding | Demonstration | |
| M (SD) | M (SD) | M (SD) | M (SD) | r | r | |
| Prosocial attitudes | 2.55 (0.67) | 2.27 (0.70) | 2.55 (0.80) | 2.27 (0.83) | −0.01 | −0.01 |
| Adequate coping skills/styles | 2.05 (0.65) | 1.68 (0.48) | 2.18 (0.66) | 1.77 (0.61) | −0.11 | −0.06 |
| Adequate intimacy skills | 1.95 (0.79) | 1.64 (0.65) | 1.91 (0.75) | 1.73 (0.77) | −0.03 | −0.05 |
| Good general self-regulation | 2.18 (0.59) | 2.09 (0.61) | 2.09 (0.68) | 1.82 (0.66) | −0.06 | −0.21 |
| Good sexual self-regulation | 1.77 (0.61) | 1.64 (0.58) | 1.45 (0.67) | 1.27 (0.46) | −0.28 | −0.33 |
| Total: functioning on dynamic risk factors | 10.50 (2.35) | 9.32 (2.19) | 10.18 (2.67) | 8.89 (2.15) | −0.09 | −0.11 |
Mean scores of forensic (n = 22) and non-forensic clients (n = 22) in TRS-10- items associated with dynamic risk as well as corresponding effect sizes.
Increasing scores reflect normative functioning and therefore are negatively associated with dynamic risk factors. The exact Mann und Whitney U-Test was used for all comparisons between the subsamples. Regarding the total score, the significance level was set at α < 0.05. For the analysis of the single items, a Bonferroni corrected αcorr = α/5 = 0.01 was used. All comparisons were nonsignificant. aThe effect size r was calculated as Z statistic divided by the square root of the sample size (Z/√N).
The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Statements
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Summary
Keywords
prevention, sexual violence, pedophilia, risk, need, responsivity, sexual offense, rehabilitation
Citation
von Franqué F and Briken P (2023) Corrigendum: Mandated or voluntary treatment of men who committed child sexual abuse: Is there a difference?. Front. Psychiatry 14:1145593. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1145593
Received
16 January 2023
Accepted
26 January 2023
Published
07 February 2023
Volume
14 - 2023
Edited and reviewed by
Thomas Nilsson, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Updates
Copyright
© 2023 von Franqué and Briken.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Fritjof von Franqué ✉ f.von-franque@uke.de
This article was submitted to Forensic Psychiatry, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.