Ethnic differences in sexual guilt between Anglo-Canadians and Franco-Québécois emerging adults: The mediating roles of family and religion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although research suggests that there are differences in sexual guilt, no research to date has compared different groups of European descent in North America. This is surprising considering that research in Canada has found differences pertaining to sexuality between Anglo-Canadians and Franco-Quebecote (Barrett et al., 2004). Research has also shown that family and religion are important predictors of sexual guilt, although the relative contribution of these factors to differences in sexual guilt has seldom been examined. The present study sought to determine whether Anglo-Canadians and Franco-Quebecois students differed with respect to sexual guilt and whether these potential differences would be mediated by differences in parental sexual permissiveness and religiosity. A total of 269 university students completed a questionnaire assessing sexual guilt, parental sexual permissiveness, and religiosity. Franco-Quebecois students reported lower levels of sexual guilt than Anglo-Canadian students. Multiple mediation analysis suggests that this result was mediated by differences in parental sexual permissiveness and religiosity. Franco-Quebecois students reported greater sexual permissiveness and lower religiosity in their parents than did Anglo-Canadian students which, in turn, accounted for their lower levels of sexual guilt. Our findings highlight the sociocultural nature of sexual guilt and the relevance of conceptualizing groups of European descent as ethnic in cross-cultural sexuality research.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".