An Experimental Investigation of the Interactive Effects of Alcohol and Sexual Arousal on Intentions to Have Unprotected Sex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We manipulated both alcohol intoxication and sexual arousal and presented male participants (N = 79) with a video vignette in which two undergraduates decide whether to have unprotected sexual intercourse. Participants were asked what they would do if they were in a similar situation, and we found that among sober participants, those assigned to a sexually arousing or neutral condition did not differ in their intentions to engage in unprotected sexual intercourse. Among intoxicated participants (M blood alcohol level = 0.08%), however, those assigned to the sexually arousing condition reported that they were more likely to have unprotected sex than did those assigned to the neutral cue condition. These findings support alcohol myopia theory (Steele & Josephs, Citation1990) and are consistent with prior nonexperimental work (MacDonald, MacDonald, Zanna, & Fong, Citation2000). Through the use of an experimental design, this study makes a new contribution by demonstrating that sexual arousal and alcohol intoxication interact to exert a causal influence on intentions to engage in risky sexual behavior.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".