The Relationships Among Childhood Sexual Abuse, Self-Objectification, and Sexual Risk Behaviors in Undergraduate Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".