MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101718231 · doi:10.1177/0265407505050942

Dyadic assessment of sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction in heterosexual dating couples

2005· article· en· W2101718231 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

VenueJournal of Social and Personal Relationships · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySelf-disclosureSexual attractionDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyClinical psychologySexual behavior

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined two proposed pathways between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction. According to the proposed expressive pathway, reciprocal sexual self-disclosure contributes to relationship satisfaction, which in turn leads to greater sexual satisfaction. According to the instrumental pathway, own sexual self-disclosure leads to greater partner understanding of sexual likes and dislikes, which in turn leads to a more favorable balance of sexual rewards and costs and thus to higher sexual satisfaction. Seventy-four heterosexual dating couples completed questionnaires assessing self-disclosure, sexual and relationship satisfaction, as well as own and partner positive and negative sexual exchanges. Support was found for the instrumental pathway for both women and men and for the expressive pathway for women. For men, the expressive pathway was between own nonsexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction. These results are interpreted in light of the more instrumental role for men in sexual relationships.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.349 · 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