Gender Differences in the Experience of Heterosexual Intercourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the development and testing of a self-report scale delineating the components of the experience of heterosexual intercourse of both men and women. In a preliminary study, 70 men freely expressed the feelings, thoughts, and motives involved in the experience of heterosexual intercourse. A content analysis revealed that the components of the experience of heterosexual intercourse found in the men's sample are very similar to those found in a women's sample in a previous study (Birnbaum, Glaubman, & Mikulincer, 2001). On this account, the Experience of Heterosexual Intercourse Scale (EHIS), which was used by Birnbaum and her colleagues, was administered to 181 women and 178 men. Overall, the results revealed that the experience of women was more centred on both the aversive and positive relational aspects of heterosexual intercourse than the experience of men. Findings are discussed in relation to sociobiological and social influence theories.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".