The potential role of mindfulness in protecting against sexual insecurities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has identified the detrimental effects of sexual insecurities on various sexual outcomes. However, few studies have investigated factors that may protect against the development and maintenance of these insecurities. Mindfulness has shown promise in promoting sexual well-being in several recent investigations, and may play a role in protecting against sexual insecurities and enhancing sexual satisfaction. Therefore, the goal of this investigation was to determine whether mindfulness was related to reduced sexual insecurities and whether mindfulness mediated the relationship between sexual insecurities and sexual satisfaction. An online survey measuring sexual insecurities, sexual satisfaction and mindfulness was administered to female (n=687) and male (n=334) undergraduate students. Multiple regression analyses revealed that higher levels of mindfulness were associated with fewer sexual insecurities and greater sexual satisfaction in men and women. A series of bootstrap multiple mediation analyses indicated that mindfulness partially mediated the relationship between sexual insecurities and several aspects of sexual satisfaction. These research findings suggest that mindfulness may promote sexual satisfaction and mitigate sexual insecurities in men and women. Investigating the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions in the reduction of sexual insecurities represents a promising area of future research.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it