Analysis of the Reasons for Infidelity in Women with Extra-marital Relationships: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Due to the higher statistics of male infidelity, the focus of previous studies has been on investigating the reasons for infidelity in this gender group. On the other hand; since marital infidelity is a phenomenon that affects every country’s culture, people, and even families, the results of research studies conducted overseas cannot be fully implicated to Iranian families. To this end, this study aimed at analyzing the reasons behind infidelity in women with extra-marital relationships in the form of a qualitative study. This study was conducted through a qualitative research approach and by using the content analysis method. Participants included 11 women referred to the counseling centers in the city of Isfahan. Purposive sampling was used and continued until data saturation. Semi-structured interviews were employed as the primary method of data collection. The data were analyzed via qualitative content analysis and constant comparative analysis methods. After the examination and division of the basic concepts, 800 initial codes were extracted from interviews. The categories were created based on the codes following several reviews and summarizations on the basis of similarities. By the nature, these conceptual and abstract themes were named in three categories of intrapersonal factors, marital conflicts, and sexual reasons. The factors affecting female infidelity in this study had three dimensions. These factors included intrapersonal factors, marital conflicts, and sexual reasons. These findings can help psychologists, family counselors, and planners in the field of the social sciences identify the efficient scopes and purposes.</p>
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".