MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1859948173 · doi:10.1111/jsm.12562

How Hot Is He? A Psychophysiological and Psychosocial Examination of the Arousal Patterns of Sexually Functional and Dysfunctional Men

2014· article· en· W1859948173 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDysfunctional familyHypoactive sexual desire disorderSexual arousalSexual desireErectile dysfunctionPsychologySex organArousalPsychosocialClinical psychologyPremature ejaculationMedicinePsychiatryHuman sexualityNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Despite much theorizing about the interchangeability of desire and arousal, research has yet to identify whether men with desire vs. arousal disorders can be differentiated based on their psychophysiological patterns of arousal. Additionally, little research has examined the relationship between subjective (SA) and genital arousal (GA) in sexually dysfunctional men. Aims To compare patterns of SA and GA in a community sample of men meeting DSM‐IV‐TR criteria for hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), erectile dysfunction (ED), both HSDD and ED (ED/HSDD), and healthy controls. Methods Seventy‐one men (19 controls, 13 HSDD, 19 ED, 20 ED/HSDD) completed self‐report measures and watched two 15‐minute film clips (neutral and erotic), while GA and SA were measured both continuously and discretely. Main Outcome Measures Groups were compared on genital temperature (as an indicator of GA), SA, and psychosocial variables (i.e., body image, emotion regulation, sexual attitudes, sexual inhibition/excitation, mood, and trauma). Results Genital temperature increased for all groups during the erotic condition, yet men with ED and ED/HSDD showed less GA than men without erectile difficulties. All groups increased in SA during the erotic condition, yet ED/HSDD men reported less SA than controls or ED men. SA and GA were highly correlated for controls, and less strongly correlated for clinical groups; men with ED showed low agreement between SA and GA. Groups also differed on body image, sexual inhibition/excitation, sexual attitudes and alexithymia. Conclusion Low desire vs. arousal sufferers have unique patterns of response, with those with both difficulties showing greatest impairment. Results have important implications for the diagnosis and treatment of these disorders. Sarin S, Amsel R, and Binik YM. How hot is he? A psychophysiological and psychosocial examination of the arousal patterns of sexually functional and dysfunctional men. J Sex Med 2014;11:1725–1740.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.243 · 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