Program of Study Pedophilia, or a predominant sexual interest in children, is a topic that is understandably of intense public concern, with child sexual abuse affecting as much as 6% of all boys and 13% of all girls (Barth, Bermetz, Heim, Trelle, & Tonia, 2012). The public has sensationalized the concept of pedophilia to where the mere mention of the term evokes fear and disgust. In addition, the terms pedophile and child molester tend to be used interchangeably (Cantor, 2012), with anyone who harms a child being accused of being a pedophile. However, research shows that many acts of child abuse are solitary cases committed by non- pedophilic men (i.e., they do not meet the DSM-5 criteria for pedophilia; Blanchard, Kuban, Blak, Cantor, Klassen, & Dickey, 2009). While pedophilic interest is one of the strongest predictors of child sexual abuse (Babchishin, Hanson, & VanZuylen, 2015), as many as 2.6% of pedophilic individuals report never having offended against a child (Dombert et al., 2015) and having no desire to ever do so (Cantor & McPhail, 2016). With such barriers to treatment as mandatory reporting regulations (e.g. Child Welfare, 2015) and stigma (Cantor & McPhail, 2016; Jahnke. Imhoff, & Hoyer, 2015), there is a large group of high-risk individuals being neglected or overlooked by researchers, practitioners, and lay people alike. As such, my proposed doctoral research is aimed at increasing awareness and visibility of non-offending pedophiles. Researchers have established that the expansion of the internet and technology has provided a setting for individuals with pedophilic sexual fantasies to support each other (Holt, Blevins, & Burkert, 2010). Individuals can now connect and exchange information with people who endorse similar behaviours/cognitions, and find vindication for their sexual desires (Jenkins, 2001). There exist several web forums where pedophilic individuals can connect with others who share their opinions (Holt et al., 2010), and a thorough exploration of several dominant sites (e.g., BoyChat.org, VirPed.org) reveals that there are two distinct groups of non-offending pedophiles or Minor Attracted Persons (MAPs) as they prefer to be called (Collins, Harkins, & Ò Ciardha, 2017). These groups can be referred to as Virtuous Pedophiles, which refers to individuals with pedophilic interest who are anti-contact with children, and Child-Love Pedophiles, which refers to individuals who are pro-contact with children but do not offend simply to avoid legal trouble. Very little is known about MAPs who are outside the criminal justice system. One group of researchers referred to this as the ‘dark field’ (‘dunkelfeld’ in Germany where the study was conducted) of pedophilia (Beier, Grundmann, Kuhle, Scherner, Konrad, & Amelung, 2014). Beier et al. (2014) used the media to seek pedophilic individuals who were looking for treatment and ways to desist from, or resist, offending. They interviewed and tested the individuals with self-report measures both pre- and post- treatment to determine if their treatment program had any effect on reducing dynamic risk factors for sexual offending. They found pedophilic men to be compliant with treatment even though that treatment was outside the requirement of the criminal justice system (i.e., not mandated), that treatment reduced a number of dynamic risk factors, and many men had an increase in sexual self-regulation (Beier et al., 2014). However, a significant majority of the men in this study reported a continuation of problematic sexual behaviours while undergoing treatment. While this research has opened new doors, very little is still known about MAPs. Through my doctoral research I hope to fill this gap and shed light on this ‘dark field’ of pedophilia. My proposed program has 3 studies. In study 1, I am examining what cognitive or behavioural offence-avoidance strategies are used by non-offending pedophiles when they are in a position to offend. To start, I travelled to the University of Kent in Canterbury, England on the Queen Elizabeth the II Diamond Jubilee Scholarship to collaborate with Dr. Caoilte Ò Ciardha. While there, I collected 6 months of forum posts, totalling 4522 threads of varying lengths and relating to a range of topics. These forum posts were collected from 3 prominent online support groups with upwards of 1500 members who post numerous threads and replies daily. These support groups have vastly different missions; namely anti- vs pro-contact. Virtuous Pedophiles is anti-contact with children, focusses on gaining recognition for pedophilia as a sexual orientation, and aides its members in remaining law-abiding. BoyChat and GirlChat on the other hand are generally pro-contact and promote child-love (i.e., the idea of not just being sexually attracted to children but harbouring romantic feelings and desiring ‘consensual’ relationships with them), and they urge their Program of Study members to remain law-abiding simply to avoid contact with the criminal justice system. I am conducting a thematic analysis to determine specific strategies used by each group and to determine if there are differences depending on which forum individuals subscribe to. I hypothesize that individuals who subscribe to anti-contact forums will utilize more proactive strategies to limit their contact with children, whereas individuals who subscribe to pro-contact forums will utilize more reactive strategies once they are already in a position to offend. To date, 688 threads have been read from the BoyChat.org posts and several preliminary examples have been found. For example, it appears that individuals use an education strategy to inform their young friends (i.e., children with whom they spend time or have a special bond) of the boundaries that must be maintained between them (Collins, Harkins, & Ò Ciardha, 2017). Study 2 aims to expand on the small body of literature about MAPs by evaluating several mental health outcomes that have been suggested as possible treatment targets for MAPs (e.g., Levenson & O’Grady, 2017). In addition, I will expand on study 1 by asking MAPs directly which strategies they have employed when in an offending position. For this study, I am recruiting MAPs from the same forums previously described in study 1 (e.g., Virtuous Pedophiles), as well as a community sample through social media. A priori power analysis revealed I will need a sample size of 256 participants to find an effect size of d = 0.5 with = 0.05 and power = 95%. Several validated measures will be distributed to measure morality (i.e. The Moral Foundations Questionnaire; Graham et al., 2011), socio-affective functioning (i.e. UCLA Loneliness𝛼𝛼 Scale; Russel, Peplau, & Ferguson, 1978), general empathy (i.e. The Interpersonal Reactivity; Davis, 1980), hopelessness (i.e., The Beck’s Hopelessness Scale; Beck, Weissman, Lester, & Trexler, 1974), and shame/guilt (i.e., The Personal Feelings Questionnaire – 2; Harder & Zalma, 1990). I also developed a general questionnaire to assess alcohol and drug use, experiences with seeking treatment and therapy, and demographic variables. To date, 114 participants have been collected from BoyChat.org and from social media. Preliminary results indicate that MAPs do no significantly differ from community members on many of the measures (Collins & Harkins, 2017). When considering pedophilic interest, MAPs report significantly more arousal to sexual situations with children, but not necessarily more behavioural propensity to engage in them nor enjoyment of them, particularly in high force situations. Finally, in study 3 I am surveying licensed psychology practitioners and general medical practitioners to assess potential barriers to treatment for MAPs. First, participants will be asked about their biased beliefs about MAPs regarding dangerousness (i.e., pedophiles are dangerous; The Dangerousness Scale; Jahnke, Imhoff, & Hoyer, 2015), controllability (i.e., pedophiles can control their sexual desire; The Controllability Scale; Jahnke, Imhoff, & Hoyer, 2015), and social distance (i.e., pedophiles should be socially isolated; The Social Distance Scale; Jahnke, Imhoff, & Hoyer, 2015). Finally, I have created a qualitative questionnaire assessing attitudes toward MAPs (e.g., What would you do if an individual disclosed a sexual interest in children to you?), and opinions/experience with treatment of MAPs (e.g., What could increase the likelihood of you being willing to treat an individual with pedophilia?). Participants are being recruited from the Canadian Psychiatric Association, American Psychological Association, the British Psychological Society, the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers and the College of Surgeons and Physicians of Ontario. I am currently in the third year of my doctoral studies under the supervision of Dr. Leigh Harkins at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology. My research assesses personality tendencies and social beliefs about a stigmatized group of individuals, which falls squarely within the research objectives of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Through this research I hope to aid in the development of educational material around pedophilia to increase clinician’s amenability to offering support. It is also my hope that knowledge of the potential differences in pedophilic offenders and non-offenders could be disseminated to increase the positive opinions and attitudes of clinicians. Finally, this research could be used to inform policy development regarding mandatory reporting laws, if there are indicators that could discriminate MAPs who do not offend from those who do.