↓ Skip to main content

The DSM Diagnostic Criteria for Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Sexual Behavior, September 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
Title
The DSM Diagnostic Criteria for Paraphilia Not Otherwise Specified
Published in
Archives of Sexual Behavior, September 2009
DOI 10.1007/s10508-009-9552-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin P. Kafka

Abstract

The category of "Not Otherwise Specified" (NOS) for DSM-based psychiatric diagnosis has typically retained diagnoses whose rarity, empirical criterion validation or symptomatic expression has been insufficient to be codified. This article reviews the literature on Telephone Scatologia, Necrophilia, Zoophilia, Urophilia, Coprophilia, and Partialism. Based on extant data, no changes are suggested except for the status of Partialism. Partialism, sexual arousal characterized by "an exclusive focus on part of the body," had historically been subsumed as a type of Fetishism until the advent of DSM-III-R. The rationale for considering the removal of Partialism from Paraphilia NOS and its reintegration as a specifier for Fetishism is discussed here and in a companion review on the DSM diagnostic criteria for fetishism (Kafka, 2009). In the DSM-IV and DSM-IV-TR, the essential features of a Paraphilia are recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors generally involving nonhuman objects, the suffering or humiliation of oneself or one's partner, or children or other nonconsenting persons that occur over a period of at least 6 months (Criterion A). Given consideration for the erotic focus of Partialism and Autoerotic Asphyxia, amending the operational criteria for Paraphilia should be considered to include an atypical focus involving human subjects (self or others).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
New Zealand 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 76 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 18%
Student > Bachelor 13 16%
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 19 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 39%
Social Sciences 9 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 8%
Arts and Humanities 3 4%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 19 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,120,874
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Sexual Behavior
#571
of 3,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,963
of 108,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Sexual Behavior
#5
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,778 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 108,596 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.