Inferring Sexually Deviant Behavior From Corresponding Fantasies
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
There is widespread concern that deviant sexual fantasies promote corresponding behaviors. The authors investigated whether that concern is valid in nonoffender samples. Self-reports of nine deviant sexual fantasies and behaviors were compared in two samples of male undergraduates. In Study 1, 95% of respondents reported experiencing at least one sexually deviant fantasy, and 74% reported engaging in at least one sexually deviant behavior. The correlations were all positive and averaged .44. However, only 38% of the high-fantasy group reported acting out fantasies. The effect of pornography use on deviant behaviors was partially mediated by increases in deviant fantasies. Study 2 investigated possible moderators, including eight personality variables. The fantasy-behavior association held only for those high in self-reported psychopathy. In addition, the association between pornography use and deviant sexual behavior held only for participants high in psychopathy. Overall, theoretically relevant individual difference variables moderated the relation between sexually deviant fantasies and behaviors and between pornography use and deviant behaviors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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