MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169882729 · doi:10.1177/1077801212456529

Effect of Sexual Coercion Proclivity, Insult and Fantasy on Emotional Reactivity and Appeal of Sexual Aggression

2012· article· en· W2169882729 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsey A. Thomas, Boris B. Gorzalka

Bibliographic record

VenueViolence Against Women · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsultPsychologyFantasySexual arousalSexual coercionAggressionCoercion (linguistics)Affect (linguistics)AngerPoison controlClinical psychologyInjury preventionSocial psychologyMedicineArousalMedical emergencyArtCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fifty-nine heterosexual university males were assessed for Sexual Coercion Proclivity (SCP) and randomly assigned to one of three conditions: Insult/nonsexually coercive fantasy material; no insult/sexually coercive fantasy material; or, insult/sexually coercive fantasy material. Although not differing in terms of anger or anxiety, the high SCP became more frustrated than the low group, particularly when exposed to both insult and sexually coercive (SC) fantasy material. Changes in negative affect predicted anticipated likelihood of engaging in SC among the low SCP group and anticipated enjoyment of SC in the high SCP group. Acculturation accounted for differences observed between Caucasian and Chinese men.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueViolence Against WomenSame topicSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesFrench-language works237,207