Young and Midlife Single (or Recently Single) Heterosexual North American Adultsâ Typical First Date Scripts and Their Retrospective Perceptions of Their First Date Experiences
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Midlife adults who have divorced or never married represent a growing demographic in North America. Despite this fact, little research has examined the dating and sexual behaviours of these individuals. Research has instead focused on the dating and sexual lives of young adults, particularly undergraduate students. The current research program examined young (aged 18-24 years) and midlife (aged 35-54 years) single (or recently single) heterosexual North American adultsâ typical first date scripts and their retrospective perceptions of their first date experiences. More specifically, Study 1 examined young and midlife adultsâ typical first date scripts. Participants were asked to list at least 20 actions that a woman would typically perform on a first date with someone new, from the beginning of the date to its end, putting the actions in the order in which they would occur. Participants were then instructed to carry out the task a second time, focusing on the actions that a man would typically perform on a first date with someone new. Study 2 examined young and midlife adultsâ retrospective accounts of their actual first date scripts, as well as their actual first date sexual behaviour. Participants were asked to list at least 20 actions that they performed on their most recent first date, from the beginning of the date to its end, putting them in the order in which they occurred. They were also asked to complete a revised Guttman scale of sexual behaviours, checking off from a list the behaviours that occurred on their most recent first date. Across both studies, analyses revealed three key patterns with respect to gender roles. First, contrary to expectations, young adults tended to be more traditional than midlife adults with respect to first dates. Second, midlife adult women tended to be less traditional than expected with respect to first dates. Lastly, in keeping with expectations, women were depicted as taking a passive role and men were depicted as taking a more active role in the scripts. Implications of the findings and recommendations for future research follow.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».