Generational Perspectives of Unprotected Sex and Sustainable Behavior Change in Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the HIV/AIDS pandemic and over two decades of safe-sex communication and condom social marketing in Nigeria, unmarried people continue to engage in unprotected sex. Understanding their perspectives of unprotected sex will be imperative for sustainable policy and intervention design. To realize this objective, the author synthesized Giddens’s structuration theory and Rob Stones’s structurationist project research brackets to develop a long interview guide used to elicit unmarried university students’ perspectives of influences on unprotected sex, and the feasibility of sustainable behavior change in Nigeria. Participants’ constructed unprotected sex as prescripted, and the cumulative outcome of complex institutional (structural), interpersonal, and agential influences. Their narratives challenge the popular but narrow loss of control, sensation-seeking, and ignorance theses of unprotected sex. Instead, participants’ narratives implicate an interrelated web of persuasive and insidious institutional and agential influences, in a manner that privilege neither structure nor agency. To promote safer sexual practices therefore, stakeholders must concurrently engage with institutional and agential influences on unprotected sex—and not focus on unmarried people’s sexual agencies alone, as current interventions do in Nigeria.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".