Developmental Trajectories and Outcomes of Online Child Sexual Abuse: A Systematic Review of Longitudinal Studies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5644/ama2006-124.500Keywords:
Online Child Sexual Abuse, Grooming, Electronic Sexual Coercion, AdolescenceAbstract
Background. OCSA includes adult grooming or solicitation and peer electronic sexual coercion. Due to its negative conse- quences, it has become a public mental health concern. While prevalence is well established, the developmental timing of onset, predictors, and outcomes can only be clarified through longitudinal studies.
Objective. This review synthesizes longitudinal evidence on online child sexual abuse (OCSA) in minors, with an emphasis on developmental timing, prospective risk and pro- tective factors, and downstream outcomes. Methods. A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guide- lines. Eligible studies enrolled participants under 18 years of age at baseline, used a longitudinal design, and examined OCSA. Twelve studies were identified through database searches (2000-2025) and citation chasing, all of which were published from 2013 onwards. Discussion. The narrative synthesis identified that the risk for OCSA was concentrated in mid-adolescence. Peer electronic coercion rose through early-mid adolescence and plateaued around the age of 16-17. The cumulative onset reached approximately one in three by age 18. The predictors included depressive symptoms, maltreatment, adverse childhood experi- ences, and risky digital behaviors. Protective parental monitoring buffered escalation, especially in early adolescence. In terms of consequences, adult solicitation predicted poorer quality of life and emotional distress, whereas peer coercion increased depres- sion and delinquency. Bidirectional feedback loops emerged between adolescent sexting and adult solicitation. A school-based trial demonstrated that even brief prevention efforts can reduce the risk of OCSA. Conclusion. Longitudinal evidence suggests that OCSA follows an age-graded developmental pattern and is associated with potentially modifiable risk and protective fac- tors. Prevention should focus on mid-adolescent hazard windows, minority-sensitive support, family-based monitoring, and digital safety education. The proposed Developmental-Online-Trajectories of Sexual abuse (DOTS) framework integrates these findings to guide future research, practice, and prevention.
References
Nesi J, Choukas-Bradley S, Prinstein MJ. Transformation of Adolescent Peer Relations in the Social Media Context: Part 1-A Theoretical Framework and Application to Dyadic Peer Relationships. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2018;21(3):267-94. doi: 10.1007/s10567-018-0261-x.
Van Ouytsel J, Lu Y, Ponnet K, Walrave M, Temple JR. Longitudinal associations between sexting, cyberbullying, and bullying among adolescents: Cross-lagged panel analysis. J Adolesc. 2019;73:36-41. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence. 2019.03.008. Epub 2019 Apr 5.
Buljan Flander G, Selak Bagarić E, Prijatelj K, Čagalj Farkas M. Analysis of current trends in use of social networks among first and third grade students of secondary schools in Croatia [Ispitivanje aktualnih trendova u korištenju društvenim mrežama kod učenika prvog i trećeg razreda srednjih škola u Hrvatskoj]. Kriminologija i socijalna integracija. 2020;28(2):277-94. doi: 10.31299/ksi.28.2.6.
Ofcom. Children and parents: Media use and attitudes report 2025. London: Ofcom; 2025. [cited 2025 Sep 11]. Available from: https://www.ofcom.org.uk/media-useand-attitudes/media-habits-children/children-and-parents-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2025.
Smahel D, Machackova H, Mascheroni G, Dedkova L, Staksrud E, Ólafsson K, et al. EU Kids Online 2020: Survey results from 19 countries. London: EU Kids Online, London School of Economics and Political Science; 2020. doi: 10.21953/lse.47fdeqj01ofo.
Bainotti L, Caliandro A, Gandini A. From archive cultures to ephemeral content, and back: Studying Instagram Stories with digital methods. New Media Soc. 2020;23(12):3656-76. doi:10.1177/1461444820960071.
Taylor SH, Brisini KS. Parenting the TikTok algorithm: An algorithm awareness-as-process approach to online risks and opportunities. Comput Human Behav. 2023;150:107975. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2023.107975.
Noll JG, Haag AC, Shenk CE, Wright MF, Barnes JE, Kohram M, et al. An observational study of Internet behaviours for adolescent females following sexual abuse. Nat Hum Behav. 2022;6(1):74-87. doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01187-5.
Barth J, Bermetz L, Heim E, Trelle S, Tonia T. The current prevalence of child sexual abuse worldwide: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Public Health. 2013;58(3):469-83. doi: 10.1007/s00038-012-0426-1.
Ybarra ML, Mitchell KJ. How risky are social networking sites? A comparison of places online where youth sexual solicitation and harassment occurs. Pediatrics. 2008;121(2):e350-7. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-0693.
Noll JG, Shenk CE, Barnes JE, Haralson KJ. Association of maltreatment with high-risk internet behaviors and offline encounters. Pediatrics. 2013;131(2):e510-7. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-1281.
Maas MK, Bray BC, Noll JG. Online sexual experiences predict subsequent sexual health and victimization outcomes among female adolescents: A latent class analysis. J Youth Adolesc. 2019;48(5):837-49. doi: 10.1007/s10964-019-00995-3.
Whittle H, Hamilton-Giachritsis C, Beech A, Collings G. A review of online groom-ing: Characteristics and concerns. Aggress Violent Behav. 2013;18(1):62-70. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2012.09.003.
Finkelhor D, Turner H, Colburn D. Prevalence of online sexual offenses against chil-dren in the US. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(10):e2234471. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.34471.
Wolak J, Finkelhor D, Mitchell KJ, Ybarra ML. Online “predators” and their victims: Myths, realities, and implications for prevention and treatment. Am Psychol. 2008;63(2):111-28. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.2.111.
Schaathun IL, Nenseth IR, Rognmo K, Hafstad GS. Factors differentiating risk of sexual abuse victimization by adults and peers among adolescents. Child Abuse Negl. 2024;151:106707. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2024.106707.
Gámez-Guadix M, Mateos-Pérez E, Alcázar MA, Martínez-Bacaicoa J, Wachs S. Stability of the online grooming victimization of minors: Prevalence and association with shame, guilt, and mental health outcomes over one year. J Adolesc. 2023;95(8):1715-24. doi: 10.1002/jad.12240.
Jonsson LS, Fredlund C, Priebe G, Wadsby M, Svedin CG. Online sexual abuse of adolescents by a perpetrator met online: A cross-sectional study. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2019;13:32. doi: 10.1186/s13034-019-0292-1.
Turner HA, Finkelhor D, Colburn D. Predictors of online child sexual abuse in a US national sample. J Interpers Violence. 2023;38(11-12):7780-803. doi: 10.1177/08862605221149090.
ECPAT International. Terminology guidelines for the protection of children from sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. 2nd ed. 2025. [cited 2025 Sep 5]. Available from: https://ecpat.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Second-Edition-Terminology-Guidelines-final.pdf.
INHOPE. INHOPE Annual Report 2021. 2021. [cited 2025 Sep 5]. Available from: https://stopline.bee-secure.lu/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/inhope-annual-report-2021.pdf.
Henry N, Flynn A, Powell A. Image-based sexual abuse: Victims and perpetrators. Trends Issues Crime Crim Justice. 2019;(572):1-20. doi: 10.52922/ti09975.
Powell A, Scott AJ, Flynn A, Henry N. Image-based sexual abuse: An international study of victims and perpetrators - A summary report. Melbourne: RMIT University; 2020. [cited 2025 Sep 6]. Available from: https://researchmgt.monash.edu/ws/portalfiles/portal/319918063/Image-BasedSexualAbuseReport_170220_WEB_2.pdf.
UNICEF. Ending online child sexual exploitation and abuse. New York: UNICEF; 2021. [cited 2025 Sep 7]. Available from: https://www.unicef.org/documents/ending-online-child-sexual-exploitation-and-abuse.
Quayle E. Online child sexual exploitation and abuse. In: Brown JM, Horvath MAH, editors. The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2021. p. 333-51. doi:
10.1017/9781108848916.018.
Patchin JW, Hinduja S. Sextortion among adolescents: Results from a national survey of US youth. Sex Abuse. 2020;32(1):30-54. doi: 10.1177/1079063218800469.
de Santisteban P, Gámez-Guadix M. Longitudinal and reciprocal relationships of depression among minors with online sexual solicitations and interactions with adults. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2018;21(6):355-60. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2017.0641.
Ortega-Barón J, Machimbarrena JM, Calvete E, Orue I, Pereda N, González-Cabrera J. Epidemiology of online sexual solicitation and interaction of minors with adults: A longitudinal study. Child Abuse Negl. 2022;131:105759. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105759.
Thulin EJ. Electronic dating violence in adolescence: Trajectories, implications for depressive symptoms and delinquency, and identifying events and behaviors that are most predictive of EDV engagement [dissertation]. Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan; 2022. doi: 10.7302/4663.
Kernsmith PD, Victor B, Smith-Darden JP. Online, offline, and over the line: Coercive sexting among adolescent dating partners. Youth Soc. 2018;50(2):1075-93. doi: 10.1177/0044118X18764040.
Zweig JM, Lachman P, Yahner J, Dank M. Correlates of cyber dating abuse among teens. J Youth Adolesc. 2014;43(8):1306-21. doi: 10.1007/s10964-013-0047-x.
Livingstone S, Stoilova M. The 4Cs: Classifying online risk to children. Hamburg: Leibniz-Institut für Medienforschung | Hans-Bredow-Institut (HBI); 2021. (CO:RE Short Report Series on Key Topics). doi: 10.21241/ssoar.71817.
Gámez-Guadix M, Mateos-Pérez E. Longitudinal and reciprocal relationships between sexting, online sexual solicitations, and cyberbullying among minors. Comput Human Behav. 2019;94:70-6. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.003.
Yang SJ, Stewart R, Lee JY, Kim JM, Kim SW, Shin IS, et al. Prevalence and correlates of problematic internet experiences and computer-using time: A two-year longitudinal study in Korean school children. Psychiatry Investig. 2014;11(1):24-31. doi: 10.4306/pi.2014.11.1.24.
Patchin JW, Hinduja S. Addressing youth sexting through rational legislation and education. J Adolesc Health. 2024;75(4):530-2. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2024.07.001.
Ray A, Henry N. Sextortion: A scoping review. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2024;26(1):138-55. doi: 10.1177/15248380241277271.
Wolak J, Finkelhor D, Walsh W, Treitman L. Sextortion of minors: Characteristics and dynamics. J Adolesc Health. 2018;62(1):72-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.08.014.
WeProtect Global Alliance. Global Threat Assessment 2023: Assessing the scale and scope of child sexual abuse online. London: WeProtect; 2023. Available from: https://www.weprotect.org/wp-content/uploads/Global-Threat-Assessment-2023-English.pdf.
WeProtect Global Alliance. AI-produced child sexual abuse material: Insights from dark-web forum discussions. London: WeProtect; 2024.
Thorn; National Center for Missing & Exploited Children. Trends in financial sextortion: An investigation of sextortion reports in NCMEC CyberTipline data. San Francisco: Thorn; 2024. [cited 2025 Sep 7]. Available from: https://info.thorn.org/hubfs/Research/Thorn_TrendsIn-FinancialSextortion_June2024.pdf.
Fry D, Krzeczkowska A, Ren J, Lu M, Fang X; Into the Light Index Study Group. Prevalence estimates and nature of online child sexual exploitation and abuse: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2025;9(3):184-93. doi: 10.1016/S2352-4642(24)00329-8.
Cohen LE, Felson M. Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. Am Sociol Rev. 1979;44(4):588-608. doi: 10.2307/2094589.
Holt TJ, Bossler AM. Examining the applicability of lifestyle-routine activities theory for cybercrime victimization. Deviant Behav. 2008;30(1):1-25. doi: 10.1080/01639620701876577.
Wachs S, Michelsen A, Wright MF, Gámez-Guadix M, Almendros C, Kwon Y, et al. A routine activity approach to understand cybergrooming victimization among adolescents from six countries. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2020;23(4):218-24. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2019.0426.
Blakemore SJ, Mills KL. Is adolescence a sensitive period for sociocultural pro-cessing. Annu Rev Psychol. 2014;65:187-207. doi: 10.1146/annurevpsych-010213-115202.
Casey BJ, Jones RM, Hare TA. The adolescent brain. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008;1124:111-26. doi: 10.1196/annals.1440.010.
Crone EA, Dahl RE. Understanding adolescence as a period of social-affective en-gagement and goal flexibility. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012;13(9):636-50. doi: 10.1038/nrn3313.
Shulman EP, Smith AR, Silva K, Icenogle G, Duell N, Chein J, et al. The dual sys-tems model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2016;17:103-17. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2015.12.010.
Somerville LH. The teenage brain: Sensitivity to social evaluation. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2013;22(2):121-7. doi: 10.1177/0963721413476512.
Steinberg L. A dual systems model of adolescent risktaking. Dev Psychobiol. 2010;52(3):216-24. doi: 10.1002/dev.20445.
Schittenhelm C, Kops M, Moosburner M, Fischer SM, Wachs S. Cybergrooming vic-timization among young people: A systematic review of prevalence rates, risk factors, and outcomes. Adolesc Res Rev. 2025;10:169-200. doi: 10.1007/s40894-024-00248-w.
Schoeps K, Peris Hernández M, Garaigordobil M, Montoya-Castilla I. Risk factors for being a victim of online grooming in adolescents. Psicothema. 2020;32(1):15-23. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2019.179.
Thulin EJ, Kusunoki Y, Kernsmith PD, Smith-Darden JP, Grogan-Kaylor A, Zim-merman M, et al. Longitudinal effects of electronic dating violence on depressive symptoms and delinquent behaviors across adolescence. J Interpers Violence. 2024;39(11-12):2526-51. doi: 10.1177/08862605231221281.
Thulin EJ, Kernsmith P, Fleming PJ, Heinze JE, Temple J, Smith-Darden J. Coer-cive-sexting: Predicting adolescent initial exposure to electronic coercive sexual dating violence. Comput Human Behav. 2023;141:107641. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107641.
Calvete E, Orue I, Gámez-Guadix M. A preventive intervention to reduce risk of online grooming among adolescents. Psychosoc Interv. 2022;31(3):177-84. doi: 10.5093/pi2022a14.
Moola S, Munn Z, Tufanaru C, Aromataris E, Sears K, Sfetcu R, et al. Chapter 7: Sys-tematic reviews of etiology and risk. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Adelaide: JBI; 2020. doi: 10.46658/JBIMES-20-01.
Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Elbers RG, Blencowe NS, Boutron I, et al. RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898.
Campbell M, McKenzie JE, Sowden A, Katikireddi SV, Brennan SE, Ellis S, et al. Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: Reporting guideline. BMJ. 2020;368:l6890. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6890.
Chang FC, Chiu CH, Miao NF, Chen PH, Lee CM, Chiang JT. Predictors of unwanted exposure to online pornography and online sexual solicitation of youth. J Health Psychol. 2016;21(6):1107-18. doi: 10.1177/1359105314546775.
Braams BR, van Duijvenvoorde ACK, Peper JS, Crone EA. Longitudinal changes in adolescent risk-taking: A comprehensive study of neural responses to rewards, puber-tal development, and risk-taking behavior. J Neurosci. 2015;35(18):7226-38. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4764-14.2015.
Odgers CL, Jensen MR. Annual Research Review: Adolescent mental health in the digital age—facts, fears, and future directions. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2020;61(3):336-48. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.13190.
Choi J, Seo M, Kim JW, Kim K. The relationship of risky online behaviors and ad-verse childhood experiences to online sexual victimization among Korean female adolescents. J Interpers Violence. 2023;38(3-4):3637-60. doi: 10.1177/08862605221109888.
Zetterström Dahlqvist H, Gillander Gådin K. Online sexual victimization in youth: Predictors and cross-sectional associations with depressive symptoms. Eur J Public Health. 2018;28(6):1018-23. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/cky102.
Ybarra ML, Leaf PJ, Diener-West M. Sex differences in youth-reported depressive symptomatology and unwanted Internet sexual solicitation. J Med Internet Res. 2004;6(1):e5. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6.1.e5.
Mitchell KJ, Finkelhor D, Wolak J. Risk factors for and impact of online sexual solic-itation of youth. JAMA. 2001;285(23):3011-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.23.3011.
Wells M, Mitchell KJ. How do high-risk youth use the internet? Characteristics and implications for prevention. Child Maltreat. 2008;13(3):227-34. doi: 10.1177/1077559507312962.
Livingstone S, Helsper E. Parental mediation of children’s internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 2008;52(4):581-599. doi: 10.1080/08838150802437396.
Mitchell KJ, Ybarra ML, Korchmaros JD. Sexual harassment among adolescents of different sexual orientations and gender identities. Child Abuse Negl. 2014;38(2):280-95. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.09.008.
OECD. Towards digital safety by design for children. OECD Digital Economy Pa-pers. 2024;(363). doi: 10.1787/c167b650-en.
Orben A. Teenagers, screens and social media: A narrative review of reviews and key studies. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2020;55(4):407-14. doi: 10.1007/s00127-019-01825-4.
Bayer JB, Triệu P, Ellison NB. Social media elements, ecologies, and effects. Annu Rev Psychol. 2020;71:471-97. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-050944.
Mitchell KJ, Finkelhor D, Wolak J. Youth Internet users at risk for the most serious online sexual solicitations. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32(6):532-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2007.02.001.
Temple JR, Choi HJ, Brem M, Wolford-Clevenger C, Stuart GL, Peskin MF, et al. The temporal association between traditional and cyber dating abuse among adolescents. J Youth Adolesc. 2016;45(2):340-9. doi: 10.1007/s10964-015-0380-3.
Zweig JM, Dank M, Yahner J, Lachman P. The rate of cyber dating abuse among teens and how it relates to other forms of teen dating violence. J Youth Adolesc. 2013;42(7):1063-77. doi: 10.1007/s10964-013-9922-8.
Seto MC, Roche K, Nicholas M, Newton J. Predictors of online child sexual exploita-tion through image-sharing. Child Protection and Practice. 2024;2:100045. doi: 10.1016/j.chipro.2024.100045.
Henry N, Beard G. Image-based sexual abuse perpetration: A scoping review. Trau-ma Violence Abuse. 2024;25(5):3981-98. doi: 10.1177/15248380241266137.
Paradiso MN, Rollè L, Trombetta T. Image-based sexual abuse associated factors: A systematic review. J Fam Violence. 2023;39(5):931-48. doi: 10.1007/s10896-023-00557-z.
Chiu J, Quayle E. Understanding online grooming: An interpretative phenomenologi-cal analysis of adolescents’ offline meetings with adult perpetrators. Child Abuse Negl. 2022;128:105600. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105600.
Wolak J, Mitchell KJ, Finkelhor D. Close online relationships in a national sample of adolescents. Adolescence. 2002;37(147):441-55. doi: 10.1006/jado.2002.0494.
Umbach R, Henry N, Beard G. Prevalence and impacts of image-based sexual abuse victimization: A multinational study. In: CHI ’25: Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM; 2025. p. 1-20. doi: 10.1145/3706598.3713545.
Mitchell KJ, Colburn D, Finkelhor D, Gewirtz-Meydan A, Turner HA, Jones LM. Links between image-based sexual abuse and mental health in childhood among young adult social media users. Child Abuse Negl. 2025;164:107471. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2025.107471.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
Corcoran EM, Doty J, Wisniewski P, Gabrielli J. Youth sexting and associations with parental media mediation. Comput Human Behav. 2022;132:107125. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107125.
Wright MF. The moderating effect of parental mediation in the longitudinal associa-tions among cyberbullying, depression, and self-harm among Chinese and American adolescents. Front Psychol. 2024;15:1459249. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1459249.
Downloads
Published
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Krešimir Prijatelj
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
