MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W163737735

The Role of the Clitoris in Sexual Behaviour and Reward In the Female Rat

2013· dissertation· en· W163737735 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mayte Parada

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsClitorisPsychologyStimulationSexual arousalAmygdalaPleasureProceptive phaseSex organSexual functionDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscienceSexual behaviorMedicineEndocrinologyBiologyPsychoanalysisHormone
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sexual behaviour encompasses a variety of sensory stimuli that makes sex rewarding in both humans and rats alike. Despite what we know about the clitoris’ contribution to sexual pleasure in human females there is still a lack of research focusing on the function of the clitoris and its role in learning, sexual development, and sexual expression. The rat is a good animal model for the study of sexual function and dysfunction and can be used to add to our understanding of clitoral stimulation and function. Accordingly, the five chapters encompassing this thesis were designed to expand our comprehension of the role that the clitoris plays in female sexual behaviour and reward in the rat. Chapter 1 showed that the clitoris is important for interpreting genital signals that differentiate stimulation received from males during copulation. It also showed that sexual experience buffers female rat pacing behaviour from the disruptive effects of lidocaine administration to the clitoris. Chapter 2 showed that manual external clitoral stimulation (CLS) is rewarding as assessed by the development of robust conditioned place preference, and activates immediate early gene c-fos expression selectively in the medial preoptic area (mPOA) and medial amygdala (MeA). Chapter 3 showed that manual external CLS could be paired with a neutral olfactory stimulus in sexually naïve rats and induced a copulatory partner preference for a male bearing the odour cue during the female’s first sexual experience with males. Moreover, if CLS was applied to sexually naïve \nrats in the presence of a scented but inaccessible male, those females solicited more an unscented male during their first sexual experience with males. Thus, the ability \n \n \n \nof CLS to be a positive reinforcer is context-dependent. Chapter 4 examined the sexual reward state induced by paced mating or CLS and its dependence on ovarian hormones. The conditioned place preference (CPP) induced by CLS developed regardless of the hormonal state of the female, whereas paced-mating induced CPP required hormonal priming. This shows that the reward state induced by CPP is independent of ovarian hormones, whereas the sexual behaviors that entice males to mount and intromit (thus bringing the clitoris into contact with the male’s penis and perineum at the female’s preferred rate) are not. Finally, Chapter 5 showed that prior copulatory experience with males eliminated the ability of CLS alone to induce CPP, suggesting either that experience with full internal and external CLS provided by a male conspecific has a greater reward magnitude and/or that copulatory experience renders subsequent external CLS alone ineffective as an unconditioned stimulus due to sensory preconditioning. Taken together, these data show that external CLS is a powerful reinforcer to a sexually naïve female rat. Although its hedonic value is not dependent on ovarian hormones, the sexual behaviors required to receive it are, and copulatory experience appears to reduce or eliminate its hedonic value.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFrench-language works237,207