I found a study from 30th January of 2026 which came to the conclusion that engaging with fiction does not lead to offending. They pretty much looked at every fictional outlet there is (stories, AI cartoons, realistic AI, sex dolls etc. pp) and took other risk factors into account.
They looked at three theories:
Fiction can prevent abuse
Fiction leads to abuse
Fiction has a neutral effect
They came to the conclusion that it has a neutral effect. A neutral effect is not negative since it shows that fighting fiction is a waste of resources, so a ban still contributes to harm. Same with the well-being of pedophiles increasing (less suicides).
I didn’t much care for how they threw in adult-related FSM, I would much prefer research that’s focused exclusively on child-like FSM and child-like sex dolls. I was worried that it, along with a generalized conceptualization for FSM, could lead to a dilution in effect, potentially undermining findings pertaining to a null hypothesis regarding specifically child-related FSM and willingness to perpetrate CSEA offenses.
I’d also like to know more about the relationship between child-related FSM and child-related sexual fantasy engagement and sexual satisfaction.
Edit: I just finished reading the whole article, and I’m feeling better about it.
There was moderate evidence in favour of the null hypothesis for both child-
related FSM use and child-related sexual fantasising and participants’ willingness to
engage in contact offending in both detection conditions.
I still would like further study into specifically child-related outlets and materials, since those don’t seem to get much attention.
Though, I can’t help but express skepticism with regard to a null hypothesis regarding impulsivity and willingness to perpetrate CSEM consumption or contact offending. I’d like further research to explore that more in-depth in relation to the use of FSM and related outlets.