Detección de depredadores sexuales en los chats y la captación de menoresel papel de la lingüística forense.

Referencias bibliográficas

• Aitken, S., Gaskell, D. & Hodkinson, A. (2017).Online Sexual Grooming: Exploratory comparison of themes a rising from male offenders’ communications with male victims compared to female victims. Deviant Behavior, 39(9),1170-1190. Doi: 10.1080/01639625.2017.1410372
• Black, P.J., Wollis, M., Woodworth, M. & Hancock, J.T. (2015). A linguistic analysis of grooming strategies of online child sex offenders: Implications for our understanding of predatory sexual behavior in an increasingly computer-mediatedworld. Child Abuse & Neglect, 44,140-149. Doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.12.004
• Cano, A.E., Fernández, M. & Alani, H. (2014).Detecting Child Grooming Behavior Patterns on Social Media. En L.M. Aiello & D. McFarland (Eds.) Social Informatics. SocInfo 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8851. Springer, Cham. Doihttps://Doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-319-13734-6_30
• Chiang, E. & Grant, T. (2017). Online grooming: moves and strategies Language and Law / Linguagem e Direito,4(1), 103-141.
• Choo,K. (2009).Online child grooming: a literature review on the misuse of social networking sites for grooming children for sexual offences. Research and public policy series no. 103. Camberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. Reports, Research and Public Policy Series, 103,1-132.
• Cotterill, J. (2003).Language and Power in Court. Londres: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Coulthard, M. (2004).Author identification, idiolect, and linguistic uniqueness. Applied Linguistics,25(4), 431-447. Coulthard, M.&
• Johnson, A. (2007).An Introduction to Forensic Linguistic. Language in Evidence. Abingdon: Routledge.
• Craven, S., Brown, S. & Gilchrist, E.(2006). Sexual grooming of children: Review of literature and theoretical considerations. Journal of Sexual Aggression,12(3), 287–299. Doi:10.1080/13552600601069414
• Crystal, D. (2011).Internet Linguistics: A Student Guide. Londres: Routledge.
• Davidson, J. & Gottschalk, P. (2011). Characteristics of the Internet for criminal child sexual abuse by online groomers. Criminal Justice Studies, 24(1), 23-36. Doi:10.1080/1478601X.2011.544188
• de Santisteban P. &Gámez-Guadix, M. (2018). Prevalence and risk factors among minors for online sexual solicitations and interactions with adults. Journal of Sex Research, 55, 939–950.Doi: 10.1080/00224499.2017.1386763
• Drouin, M., Boyd, R.L., Hancock, J.T.& James, A. (2017). Linguistic analysis of chat transcripts from child predator undercover sex stings. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 28(4), 437-457. Doi: 10.1080/14789949.2017.1291707
• Durkin, K. (1997). Misuse of the Internet by pedophiles: Implication for law enforcement and probation practice. Federal Probation, 61(3), 14-18.
• Egan, V., Hoskinson, J. & Shewan, D. (2011). Perverted justice: a content analysis of the language used by offenders detected attempting to solicit children for sex. En R.M. Clarke (Ed.)Antisocial Behavior: Causes, Correlations and Treatments(pp. 119-133). Nueva York: Nova Science Publishers.
• Eke, A. (2016). Online predators. Interview with an expert. En B. Schell (Ed.) Online Health and Safety: From Cyberbullying to Internet Addiction: From ciberbulling to Internet addiction(pp. 75-100).Santa Bárbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, LLC.
• Ezioni, L. (2020). The crime of grooming. Child and Family Law Journal, 8(1), 1-19.
• Fencepost, F. & Von Erck, J. (2002).Perverted Justice. Disponible en: Perverted-Justice.com. [Fecha de consulta: 18/03/2020].
• Forsyth, E.N. & Martell, C.H. (2007). Lexical and discourse analysis of online chat dialog. PROC. International Conference on Semantic Computing ICSC. Irvine, CA (pp. 19-26). Doi: 10.1109/ICSC.2007.55.
• Garayzábal, E., Queralt, S. & Reigosa, M. (2019).Fundamentos de la lingüística forense. Madrid: Síntesis.
• Grant, T. & Macleod, N. (2016).As summing identities online: Experimental linguistics applied to the policing of online paedophile activity. Applied Linguistics, 37(1), 50–70.
• Gibbons, J. (1999).Language and the Law. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 19, 156-173.
• Gibbons, J. (2003).Forensic Linguistics. An introduction to language in the justice system. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
• Gottschalk, P. (2011). A dark side of computing and information sciences: Characteristics of online groomers. Journal of Emerging Trends in Computing and Information Sciences, 2(9), 447-455.
• Gunawan, F.E., Ashianti, L., Candra, S. & Soewito, B. (2016).Detecting online child grooming conversation. 11th International Conference on Knowledge, Information and Creativity Support Systems (KICSS), Yogyakarta (pp. 1-6).
• Gunawan, F. E., Ashianti, L. & Sekishita, N. (2018). A simple classifier for detecting online child grooming conversation. Telkomnika, 16(3), 1239-1248. Doi:http://dx.Doi.org/10.12928/TELKOMNIKA.v16i3.674
• Gupta, A., Kumaraguru, P. & Sureka, A. (2012). Characterizing pedophile conversations on the internet using online grooming. Computers and Society.
• Heydon, G. (2005).The Language of Police Interviewing. A critical analysis. Londres: Palgrave MacMillan.
• IAB (2019).Estudio anual de Redes Sociales.
• International Association of Forensic Linguists (IAFL).www.iafl.org. Informe Qustodio (2019).Menores e Internet: la asignatura pendiente de los padres españoles.
• nstituto Nacional de Tecnologías de la Comunicación-INTECO y Agencia Española de Protección de Datos-AEPD (2009). Estudio sobre la privacidad de los datos personales y la seguridad de la información en las redes sociales online. INTECO. Madrid.
• Instituto Nacional de Tecnologías de la Comunicación-INTECO (2012).Guía de actuación contra el ciberacoso. Madrid: Ministerio de Industria, Energía y Turismo.
• Kloess, J. A., Beech, A. R. & Harkins, L. (2014). Online child sexual exploitation: prevalence, process, and offender characteristics. Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 15(2), 126-139. https://Doi.org/10.1177/1524838013511543
• Larner, S. (2014).Forensic Authorship Analysis and the World Wide Web. Londres: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Larner, S. (2018).Forensic Linguistics. En A. Phakiti, P. De Costa, L. Plonsky, y S. Starfield (Eds.) The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research Methodology (pp. 703-718). Londres: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Larrakoetxea, I. (2017). Identificación del grooming. Análisis empírico de conversaciones con contenido pedófilo. Trabajo Fin de Grado. Universidad del País Vasco.
• Leonard, R. (2005).Forensic Linguistics. Applying the Scientific Principles of Language Analysis to Issues of the Law. International Journal of the Humanities, 3, 65-69.
• Lin, J. (2007). Automatic author profiling of online chat logs. Tesis doctoral. California.Naval Postgraduate School.
• Lorenzo-Dus, N.; Izura, C.& Pérez-Tattam, R. (2016). Understanding grooming discourse in computer-mediated environments. Discourse, Context Media 12, 40-50. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2016.02.004
• Lorenzo-Dus, N.& Izura, C. (2017). ‘‘cause ur special’’: understanding trust and complimenting behavior in online grooming discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 112, 68-82. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.01.004.
• Lorenzo-Dus, N.; Kinzel, A.& Di Cristofaro, M. (2020). The communicative modus operandi of online child sexual groomers: Recurring patterns in their language use. Journal of Pragmatics, 155, 15-27. Doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.09.010
• Machimbarrena, J. M.; Calvete, E.; Fernández-González, L.; Álvarez-Bardón, A.; Álvarez-Fernández, L. & González-Cabrera, J. (2018). Internet risks: An overview of victimization in cyberbullying, cyber dating abuse, sexting, online grooming and problematic internet use. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(11), 2471. https://Doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112471
• MacLeod, N.& Grant, T. (2012). Whose Tweet? Authorship analysis of micro- blogs and other short-form messages. En 10thBiennial Conference International Association of Forensic Linguists (IAFL). Birmingham (pp. 210–224).
• MacLeod, N.& Grant, T. (2017). “go on cam but dnt be dirty”: linguistic levels of identity assumption in undercover online operations against child sex abusers. Language and Law / Linguagem e Direito, 4(2), 157-175.
• Maldonado Guzmán, D.J. (2019). El mal denominado delito de grooming online como forma de violencia sexual contra menores. Problemas jurídicos y aspectos criminológicos. Revista Electrónica de Estudios Penales y de la Seguridad, 5 (especial), 1-18.
• Martellozzo, E. (2013). Online child sexual abuse: Grooming, policing and childprotection in a multi-media world. Londres: Routledge.
• McAlinden, A.M.(2006). ‘Setting ‘em up’: Personal, familial and institutional grooming in the sexual abuse of children. Social & Legal Studies,15(3), 339–362. Doi:10.1177/0964663906066613
• McAlinden, A.M. (2012). 'Grooming' and the Sexual Abuse of Children: Institutional, Internet and familial dimensions. Clarendon Series in Criminology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Montiel, I.; Carbonell, M.S. &Salom, M. (2014). Victimización infantil sexual: online grooming, ciberabuso y ciberacoso sexual. En M. Lameiras y E. Orts (Eds.) Delitos sexuales contra menores. Abordaje psicológico, jurídico y policial (pp. 203-224). Valencia: Tirant lo Blanc.
• Mooney, J.L., &Ost, S. (2013).Group localized grooming: What is it and what challenges does it pose for society and law? Child and Family Law Quarterly, 25(4), 1–20.
• National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children-NSCPP (2019). Recorded online sexual grooming crimes rise by a third.
• National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children-NSCPP (2019). Grooming. [Fecha de consulta 21/04/2020]
• O’Connell, R. (2003).A typology of child cybersexploitation and online grooming practices. University of Central Lancashire.
• Penna, L.; Clark, A.& Mohay, G. (2005).Challenges of automating the detection of paedophile activity on the Internet. First International Workshop on Systematic Approaches to Digital Forensic Engineering (SADFE'05).Taipei (pp. 206-220). Doi: 0.1109/SADFE.2005.4
• Pfister, J. (2017). Conversational strategies of online sexual predators: A conversation analysis of the grooming process. Tesis doctoral. Hofstra University.
• Pranoto, H.; Gunawan, F.E. & Soewito, B. (2015). Logistic models for classifying online grooming conversation. Procedia Computer Science, 59, 357 – 365.
• Queralt, S. & Giménez, R. (2019).Soy lingüista, lingüista forense: Licencia para analizar tus palabras. Madrid: Pie de página.
• Salter, A. (1995). Transforming Trauma: A guide to understanding and treating adult survivors of child sexual abuse. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
• Shuy, R. (2006).Linguistics in the courtroom. A practical guide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Solon, O. (2020). Child sexual abuse images and online exploitation surge during pandemic. .
• Svartvik, J. (1968).The Evans statements: a case for forensic linguistics. Göteborg: University of Gothenburg Press.
• Tabbert, U. (2013).Crime through a corpus: The linguistic construction of offenders, victims and crimes in the German and UK press. Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Huddersfield.
• Tiersma, P. (2008).The nature of Legal Language. En J. Gibbons & M.T. Turell (Eds.) Dimensions of Forensic Linguistics (pp. 7-25). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Tiersma, P. (2010). The Origins of legal language. En L. Solan & P. Tiersma (Eds.) Oxford Handbook On Language And Law. Loyola-LA Legal Studies Paper No. 2009-45. Oxford University Press.
• van Dam, C. (2001). Identifying child molesters: Preventing child sexual abuse by recognizing the patterns of offenders. Binghamton, NY:The Haworth Press.
• van de Loo, A.; De Pauw, G. & Daelemans, W. (2016).Text-Based age and gender prediction for online safety monitoring. International Journal of Cyber-Security and Digital Forensics-IJCSDF, 5(1), 46-60. Doi: 10.17781/P002012
• van Gijn-Grosvenor, E.L., & Lamb, M.E. (2016).Between online sexual groomers approaching boys and girls. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 25(5), 577-596. Doi: 10.1080/10538712.2016.1189473.
• Vartapetiance, A. & Gillam, L. (2014).“Our Little Secret”: pinpointing potential predators. Secur Inform3 (3). Doi: https://Doi.org/10.1186/s13388-014-0003-7
• Villacampa, C. & Gómez, M. (2016). Nuevas tecnologías y victimización sexual de menores por online Grooming. Revista electrónica de ciencia penal y criminología, 18(2), 1-27.
• Villacampa, C. (2017). Predadores sexuales online y menores: grooming y sexting en adolescentes. Revista Electrónica de Ciencias Criminológicas. 1-34.
• Walsh, W. A. & Wolak, J. (2005). Nonforcible Internet-related sex crimes with adolescent victims: Prosecution issues and outcomes. Child Maltreatment, 10(3), 260–271. Doi:10.1177/1077559505276505
• Webster, S.; Davidson, J.; Bifulco, A.; Gottschalk, P.; Caretti, V.; Pham, T. et al. (2012).European Online Grooming Project. Final Report. European Commission Safer Internet Plus Programme. European Union.
• Williams, A. (2015).Child sexual victimization: ethnographic stories of stranger and acquaintance grooming. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 21(1), 28–42. http://dx.Doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2014.948085
• Whittle, H.C., Hamilton-Giachritsis, C.E., & Beech, A.R. (2015).A comparison of victim and offender perspectives of grooming and sexual abuse. Deviant Behavior, 36(7), 539–564. Doi:10.1080/01639625.2014.944074
• Winters, G.M. & Jeglic, E.L. (2017). Stages of sexual grooming: Recognizing potentially predatory behaviors of child molesters. Deviant Behavior, 38(6), 724-733. Doi: 10.1080/01639625.2016.1197656
• Wolak, J.; Finkelhor, D. & Mitchell, K. J. (2004). Internet-initiated sex crimes against minors: Implications for prevention based on findings from a national study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 35(5), 424.e11-424.e20.Doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.05.006
• Wood, P.B.; Wilson, J.A., & Thorne, D.P. (2015). Offending patterns, control balance, and affective rewards among convicted sex offenders. Deviant Behavior, 36 (5), 368–387. Doi:10.1080/01639625.2012.707550
• Wood, P.B., & Wheatcroft, J.M. (2020). Young adult perceptions of Internet communications and the grooming concept. Sage Open. January- March, 1-12.https://Doi.org/10.1177/21582440209145
• Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K. J. & Wolak, J. (2000). Online victimization: A report on the Nation’s Youth. National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Washington DC.