The Influence of Fantasy Proneness, Dissociation, and Vividness of Mental Imagery on Male’s Aggressive Sexual Fantasies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many researchers have studied the prevalence and content of men's aggressive sexual fantasies, including their link with rape-supportive cognition. However, little to no research has examined the link between imaginal ability and the use of such fantasies. Based on existing research and theory, we propose that men who hold hostile beliefs toward women will use aggressive sexual fantasies more often if they possess a greater ability to engage in a "rich fantasy life." Operationally, we argue this involves (a) a proneness to fantasize in general, (b) an ability to vividly envision mental imagery, and (c) frequent experiences of dissociation. To test this, the present study hypothesized that a latent variable termed "rich fantasy life," via "hostile beliefs about women," influences the use of "aggressive sexual fantasies." A sample of 159 community males was recruited. Each participant completed a measure of fantasy proneness, dissociation, and vividness of mental imagery, along with two measures that assess hostile beliefs about women. Assessing how often the participants fantasized about rape-related and sadistic themes provided a measure of aggressive sexual fantasies. Structural equation modeling (along with bootstrapping procedures) indicated that the data had a very good fit with the hypothesized model. The results offer an important contribution to our understanding of aggressive sexual fantasies, which may have implications for clinical assessment and treatment. The limitations of the study are discussed, along with suggestions for future 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".