Qualitative Exploration of Sexual Experiences Among Adults on the Autism Spectrum: Implications for Sex Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: The increasing prevalence of autism since the 1990s has led to growing demand for sex education that meets the needs of persons on the autism spectrum. Yet there is a dearth of research documenting the firsthand experiences and perspectives of autistic individuals. METHODS: A thematic analysis was conducted of in-depth, Internet-facilitated interviews with 24 adults on the autism spectrum who were recruited from Internet community spaces between November 2012 and May 2013. Inclusion criteria were self-identification as a person on the autism spectrum, being a U.S. resident, being aged 18 or older, and having the ability to communicate orally or through writing. RESULTS: Participants were aged 18-61 and were living in the community at the time of interview, most with limited extrafamilial support. They were less likely than the general population to be heterosexual or gender-conforming and were more likely to have experienced romantic or sexual debut after age 18. Participants' most common concerns were courtship difficulties and sensory dysregulation in the context of partnered sexuality. These concerns were exacerbated by inadequate and inappropriate sex education experiences. Participants addressed challenges by using sensory barriers (e.g., latex gloves); planning when and how to have sex; negotiating alternatives to sexual scripts predicated on nondisabled experience; and practicing explicit and intentional communication. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals on the autism spectrum would benefit from sex education that normalizes differences (e.g., in identities and experiences of sexuality), is offered throughout young adulthood, addresses disability-relevant sensory and communication needs, and includes practicing neurotypical sociosexual norms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".