Examining Implicit and Explicit Evaluations of Sexual Aggression and Sexually Aggressive Behavior in Men Recruited Online
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 purpose of the current study was to explore the relationship between implicit and explicit evaluations of sexual aggression and indicators of sexually aggressive behavior in samples of students and community men recruited online. Participants were male undergraduate students recruited online from a Canadian University ( N = 150) and men recruited from the community via an online panel ( N = 378). Participants completed measures of implicit and explicit evaluations of sexual aggression, cognitive distortions regarding rape, self-reported past sexually aggressive behavior, and self-reported proclivity to commit sexually aggressive behavior. We found that more positive explicit evaluations and more cognitive distortions were moderately to strongly associated with sexual aggression; however, this was not the case for implicit evaluations of rape. Our results suggest that explicit evaluations of sexual aggression and cognitive distortions may be relevant for understanding sexual aggression against adults, and that more research is needed exploring whether or not implicit evaluations are associated with sexually aggressive behavior.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it