MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338163567 · doi:10.1080/00918369.2016.1172883

“Hedge Your Bets”: Technology’s Role in Young Gay Men’s Relationship Challenges

2016· article· en· W2338163567 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Homosexuality · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsAIDS VancouverUniversity of TorontoUniversity of GuelphUniversity of British ColumbiaWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanceJealousyThematic analysisPsychologyReproductive healthHuman sexualitySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyHeteronormativityInterpersonal relationshipSexual relationshipHomosexualityGender studiesQualitative researchSociologyPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology is playing an increasingly pervasive role among young gay men in the process of meeting potential romantic or sexual partners. We investigated challenges posed by technology related to young gay men's relationships. Focus groups (n = 9) of young gay men aged 18-24 (n = 43) were transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was used to identify two major themes regarding challenges to relationship development and maintenance. Subthemes include unrealistic expectations of relationships, inauthentic self-presentation online, sexual primacy over romance, increased opportunities for infidelity, and jealousy. The implications of this study for sexual education and sexual health promotion are discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.282 · 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