MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075261509 · doi:10.1037/a0018571

Psychologists’ sexual education and training in graduate school.

2010· article· en· W2075261509 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyTraining (meteorology)Graduate educationGraduate studentsMedical educationApplied psychologyPedagogyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study explored the sex education and training that clinical and counselling psychologists receive during graduate school, practicum placements and internship. There were 162 psychologists who completed an Internet survey. Although nearly all participants had received some form of education related to sexuality during their graduate training, the depth and breadth of training was limited and was not related to how long clinicians had been practising. Modelling and feedback appeared to be underutilized as training methods. Participants reported more training related to sexual problems (e.g., sexual violence, sexual disorders) than healthy sexuality (e.g., contraception, STIs/STDs). Sexuality-specific training experiences but not participant characteristics (e.g., gender, religiosity) or cognitive-affective factors predicted the amount of sex therapy experience gained during graduate school. This suggests that training programs may be largely responsible for the (limited) amount of sex education and training received by students.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.380
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.052 · 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