Influence of Teens' Perceptions of Parental Disapproval and Peer Behaviour on Their Initiation of Sexual Intercourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study of 2353 grade 10 and 12 students asked whether their perceptions of parental approval/disapproval of their having sexual intercourse would predict whether or not they had ever had intercourse. Well over half of these students anticipated parental disapproval and 44% of the total sample had ever had intercourse. Logistic regression analyses showed no predictive effect of perceived parental disapproval on intercourse experience whereas students perceptions of the sexual intercourse experience of same sex and other sex friends was predictive for both sexes. Females were significantly more likely than males to anticipate fathers disapproval but the sexes did not differ with respect to mothers disapproval. Students most often cited personal experience friends and parents as main or preferred sources of information about healthy dating and relationships but generally favoured schools for information on pregnancy and STI prevention. The findings may suggest ways to support the potentially mutually reinforcing roles of schools peers and parents in adolescent sexual health. (authors)
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".