Sexual Well-Being in Older Women: The Relevance of Sexual Excitation and Sexual Inhibition
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to use the dual control model of sexual response (DCM) to investigate variation in sexual well-being among women 50 years of age and older. Data from 185 women 50 years of age and older (M = 59.46, SD = 6.96) were used to examine the relationships between sexual excitation (SE) and sexual inhibition (SI) and their lower-order factors to indicators of sexual well-being (i.e., sexual functioning, satisfaction, distress, frequency of sexual activity, and breadth of sexual behavior). Possible moderating factors were also explored. Independently, SE and SI were associated with the majority of the indicators of sexual well-being, and the directions of associations were consistent with the tenets of the DCM. SE and SI lower-order factors were significant predictors of sexual function, satisfaction, and frequency of sexual activity. Sexual distress was predicted more strongly by SI factors and breadth of sexual behavior by one SE lower-order factor (arousability). Partner physical and mental health and participant's own mental health were identified as moderating variables of these associations. Findings of this study are discussed considering the contribution of the DCM to understanding the role of diversity in older women's sexual well-being.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it