MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053982978 · doi:10.1080/10720160802289249

Problematic Hypersexuality: A Review of Conceptualization and Diagnosis

2008· review· en· W2053982978 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSexual Addiction & Compulsivity The Journal of Treatment and Prevention · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationHypersexualitySexual addictionPsychologyExtant taxonSexual behaviorImpulsivityAddictionBehavioral addictionPsychotherapistClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been considerable debate regarding the conceptualization and diagnosis of individuals exhibiting problematic hypersexuality. Various terms such as sexual addiction, sexual compulsivity, and sexual impulsivity have been applied based predominantly on the perceived psychopathological mechanisms guiding the behavior. Unfortunately, such descriptive diversity has inhibited adequate conceptualization and current diagnostic practices, which in turn, have negatively impacted treatment design. This paper critically reviews the extant literature regarding the conceptualization and diagnosis of problematic hypersexuality. Additionally, this review highlights the utility of a relatively new conceptualization of problematic hypersexuality, the Sexual Desire Disorders model, which accounts for many of the limitations inherent in previous explanatory models. Finally, diagnostic, conceptual, and treatment implications are discussed.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.293 · 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