MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1842669445 · doi:10.1080/0092623x.2015.1061075

Sexual Functioning in Young Women and Men: Role of Attachment Orientation

2015· article· en· W1842669445 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sex & Marital Therapy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyOrgasmAttachment theoryDevelopmental psychologySexual orientationHuman sexualityArousalSexual functionClinical psychologySexual behaviorSexual dysfunctionSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prior research has documented various ways in which adult attachment styles are characteristic of differential behavioral and cognitive patterns within romantic relationships and sexuality. However, few studies have examined the direct influence of anxious or avoidant attachment orientation on sexual function. The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of insecure attachment on sexual function. Undergraduate students completed questionnaires measuring attachment style and sexual functioning. Among women, attachment avoidance tended to be associated with impairments in all aspects of sexual function, whereas anxious attachment tended to be associated with declines in arousal, satisfaction, and ability to achieve orgasm. A different trend was seen in men: Anxious attachment tended to be associated with multiple facets of sexual dysfunction, while avoidant attachment did not correlate with any sexual function deficits and was associated with superior physiological competence. These results suggest that both anxious and avoidant attachment styles are important yet differential predictors of sexual function in men and women.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.277 · 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