Sexuality in Later Life: Examining Beliefs and Perceptions of Undergraduate Students
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
Understanding students' beliefs and perceptions of sex/sexuality in later life can reduce and prevent ageist myths and stereotypes. The objective of this study was to gauge undergraduate students' knowledge of several myths, stereotypes, and facts regarding sex/sexuality in later life, including lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) older adults. More than 85% of students held a positive view of sex/sexuality in later life with 65% believing that they would engage in sexual activity past age 80 (N=125). Correct responses to true/false questions were higher for those with a positive perspective on aging, and recognizing that sexual behavior does not cease to be important with aging was the strongest predictor of holding a positive view on sexuality in later life. No significant differences were observed from responses regarding LGBT older adults or constraints to sexuality in long term care facilities. The positive perceptions among students in the current study suggest an increased acceptance of sexuality and diversity that should be maintained in university curricula.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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