MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074888940 · doi:10.1177/1066480706294126

Building Blocks Toward Optimal Sexuality: Constructing a Conceptual Model

2007· article· en· W2074888940 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

VenueThe Family Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualitySex therapyTranscendence (philosophy)PsychologyConnection (principal bundle)Empirical researchSocial psychologyPsychotherapistDevelopmental psychologyGender studiesSociologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need for models of optimal sexuality in sex therapy and the lack of theoretical and especially empirical foundations are discussed. Specifically, what lessons can be gleaned from those who seek and attain extraordinary sexual relations? As a preliminary part of a study of optimal sexuality, individuals who report having had “great sex” were interviewed. The six major themes emerging from the initial 50 hours are described. These are conceptualized as building blocks toward the farther reaches of human erotic potential and consist of being present, authenticity, intense emotional connection, sexual and erotic intimacy, communication, and transcendence. Clinical implications of these findings are discussed. The need for sex therapists to acquire and transmit new methods and skills is considered.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.280 · 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