MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2411742820 · doi:10.1111/jftr.12141

A Historical and Empirical Review of Pornography and Romantic Relationships: Implications for Family Researchers

2016· article· en· W2411742820 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 Family Theory & Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPornographyRomancePsychologyAppealSocial psychologyAggressionEmpirical researchPolitical scienceEpistemologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article provides a broad overview of pornography's effects on romantic relationships since the late 1960s, examining the literature through the family impact lens and focusing on pornography's potential influence on relational stability. Pornography's effects are relevant for consumers, public officials, and family scholars concerned with the stability of committed relationships. In particular, findings suggest that pornography can reduce satisfaction with partners and relationships through contrast effects, reduce commitment by increasing the appeal of relationship alternatives, and increase acceptance of infidelity. Evidence connecting pornography to rape or sexual aggression remains mixed, although these effects continue to have important implications for how romantic partners interact. The theoretical perspectives underlying these effects 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.292
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.179 · 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