Normal and Persistent Genital Arousal in Women: New Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interest in women's sexual functioning has increased in recent years although the primary emphasis has been on deficits in both genital and subjective sexual response. Female sexual psychophysiology research suggests that women are capable of greater sexual responsiveness than previously thought and can experience genital response in the absence of a subjective experience of sexual arousal. Women who report relatively persistent genital arousal, both with and without accompanying distress, provide case examples of the potential for dissociation between genital and psychological sexual response. In this article, we provide case illustrations of women reporting unprovoked genital arousal both with and without distress and suggest that what appears to be spontaneous genital arousal in some women may be the result of either subconscious processing of sexual stimuli in the environment - stimuli that are either consciously unacceptable or not noticed. Finally, we suggest that there may exist three types of genital arousal in women: 1) spontaneous sensations of genital arousal that are appraised as mildly pleasurable; 2) persistent feelings of genital arousal that are experienced as mildly distracting but not especially unwelcome or bothersome; and 3) continuous, intense, and persistent genital arousal that is extremely distracting, distressing, and worrisome. A variety of psychological, pharmacological, vascular, and neurological factors may account for these differences in women's genital arousal responsiveness. However, a full understanding of the range and variation in women's sexual experience remains to be elucidated.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".