MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109452322 · doi:10.57709/2055393

The Relationships Among Childhood Sexual Abuse, Self-Objectification, and Sexual Risk Behaviors in Undergraduate Women

2022· article· en· W2109452322 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Archive @ GSU · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGeorgia State University
KeywordsShameAlexithymiaPsychologySexual abusePsychosocialClinical psychologyObjectificationDevelopmental psychologyPoison controlInjury preventionSocial psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On a routine and daily basis, women are exposed to sexually objectifying experiences, which result in a number of harmful psychosocial outcomes (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). Five-hundred and forty-sex women attending a large, Southeastern university participated in this study that investigated a conceptual model of how childhood sexual abuse (CSA) contributes to sexual risk behaviors (SRBs) via self-objectification (S0). In order to assess the causal relationships among variables, measured variable path analyses were conducted in order to test two theoretical models. The following instruments were used in this investigation: the Sexual Abuse Subscale of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (a measure assessing experiences of childhood sexual abuse [Bernstein, Stein, Newcomb, Walker, Pogge, Ahluvia et al., 2003]); the Body Surveillance Subscale of the Objectified Body Consciousness Scale (a measure assessing self-objectification [McKinley & Hyde, 1996]); the Body Shame Subscale of the Objectified Body Consciousness Scale (a measure assessing body shame [McKinley & Hyde, 1996]); the Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (assesses alexithymic symptoms, or difficulty identifying, describing, and expressing one?s emotions [Bagby, Parker, & Taylor, 1994]), the Contraceptive Self-Efficacy Scale (assesses overall sexual self-efficacy, such as the ability to insist upon sexual protection [Levinson, 1986]), and the Sexual Risk Survey (assesses risky sexual practices [Turkchik & Garske, 2009]). Results revealed that the data fit the second model better than the first. Specifically, data revealed that CSA directly predicted SRBs and was not mediated via SO, but was partially mediated by alexithymia and body shame. That is, CSA predicted increased alexithymia and body shame. Increased alexithymia predicted SRBs, whereas body shame decreased SRBs. Results also revealed that alexithymia and body shame mediated the relationship between SO and SRBs. Specifically, self-objectification led to increased alexithymia and body shame, and alexithymia increased SRBs while body shame decreased SRBs. Last, results revealed that body shame fully mediated the relationship between both CSA and SO and sexual self-efficacy. Pathways were significant at the p < .05 level.

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)0.000
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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.223 · 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