MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625773048 · doi:10.1055/s-2002-32401

On the History of the International Academy of Sex Research

2002· article· de· W2625773048 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenneth J. Zucker

Bibliographic record

VenueZeitschrift für Sexualforschung · 2002
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceLibrary scienceEconomic historyHistoryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Academy of Sex Research (IASR) was founded in 1973 by Richard Green as a non-profit (and hence tax-exempt) scientific society. Its first annual meeting was held in 1975 and has met annually since then. Table [ 1 ] lists the meeting sites, the local hosts, and the officers over its 28 years of existence. The IASR has had a rather simple mission. As stated in its Constitution, the Academy is “committed to promoting interdisciplinary scholarship in the field of sex research. The fundamental role of biological, psychological, and cultural processes in shaping sexuality is recognized. The Academy gives priority to scholarship that facilitates communication, understanding, and ultimately research collaboration among the various disciplines involved in developing the science of sexology.” Since 1985, the Archives of Sexual Behavior , published by Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, was adopted as the official publication of the IASR and its members receive the journal at a discounted price, which is covered, in part, by the annual payment of dues. In the beginning, the IASR had a membership of 54 individuals (see Green 1985). At the end of the 2001 meeting in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, the membership had grown to 302, with representatives from 24 countries. In its early days, the organizational aspect was relatively informal. By 1980, at the time of the 6 th annual meeting, more structure was introduced and Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg, the third secretary-treasurer of the IASR (1980-1989), was designated the Program Chair. In 1982, an “International” Program Committee was established, consisting of three Germans, two of whom were in voluntary exile in the United States: Meyer-Bahlburg, Anke A. Ehrhardt, and Gunter Schmidt. In 1983, the Program Committee expanded to a membership of five and, by 2001, it had expanded further to over a dozen members. I joined the IASR in 1983 as a new Ph.D. During the 1980's, I recall that one of the mysteries of the IASR was who exactly got to be on the Program Committee. This seemed important to some members, since it was the Program Committee that was responsible for organizing the scientific content of the meeting (Invited Lectures, Symposia, and so on). When I was elected to Secretary-Treasurer in 1989 (a position that I subsequently held for 6 two-year terms), things became less mysterious. At each annual meeting, the elected officers (the President, the Past President, the President-Elect, and the Secretary-Treasurer) reviewed the roster of member participants. From it, efforts were made to select a Program Committee that included members of various theoretical persuasions, disciplines, and country of origin. The Program Committee then met for two (always intense) sessions during the meeting, reviewed submissions by the membership regarding proposals for the next annual meeting and, through a consensus process, made preliminary decisions about the content of the next meeting. It was then largely the work of the Secretary-Treasurer to delegate contact responsibilities. Since 1982, over 100 members of the Academy had served at least once on the Program Committee. Despite the frenetic pace of the Program Committee process, it always seemed to work out (the fax machine and then e-mail helped speed things up during the 1990s). In its early years, the annual meetings consisted largely of invited lectures, symposia, and brief communications. By the mid-1980's, the growth of the IASR necessitated the introduction of Poster Sessions, which began to replace the brief communications, in order to accommodate the larger number of individuals interested in presenting new data. The first Poster Session was at the 1986 meeting in Amsterdam and consisted of 7 presentations. There was a respite at the 1987 meeting in Tutzing, but since 1988, in Minneapolis, Poster Sessions became an Academy staple. At the 2001 meeting in Montreal, there were a total of 54 poster session presentations. To some, the IASR has had a reputation as an “elite” scientific society. This is because one had to be elected to membership (either as an Associate Member or as a Full Member). One could not simply “join.” The Full Member-Associate Member distinction was another apparent mystery about the IASR although the Constitution explained it quite clearly: a “member shall be an individual who has established an enduring reputation as a distinguished scholar in the field of sexual behavior, and is currently engaged in scholarly research in that field... [an] associate member shall be an individual who is currently actively engaged in scholarly research in the area of sexual behavior but has not yet attained the enduring reputation required of the full member. ...Members and associate members shall have the same rights and privileges except that only members shall be entitled to vote in any election or on any issue or business matter pertaining to the Academy.” A Full Member would nominate a prospective applicant by submitting the individual's curriculum vitae to the Secretary-Treasurer, along with a letter of recommendation. The officers would then review the applications and make a recommendation for admission as full or associate (or to defer or reject). Applications were reviewed at the annual Business Meeting (always a rancourous and fully enjoyable discussion) and admission was decided by majority vote. The rule-of-thumb for admission as an Associate was a minimum of three first-authored sexology papers in peer-reviewed journals. Admission as a Full Member was 10+ sexology publications, with a preference for peer-reviewed publications. Table 1Chronological List of Meetings and Officers Year Meeting (Host) President Past President President-Elect Secretary-Treasurer 1975 Stony Brook, NY, USA(Richard Green) Richard Green(Founding President) John Bancroft 1976 Hamburg, West Germany(Gunter Schmidt) John BancroftJan Rabocha Richard Green Frank A. Beach Richard E. Whalenb Virginia Johnsonc 1977 Bloomington, IN, USA(Paul H. Gebhard) Frank A. Beach John Bancroft Jan Raboch Richard E. Whalen 1978 Toronto, Canada (Kurt Freund) Jan Raboch Frank A. Beach Paul H. Gebhard Anke A. Ehrhardt 1979 Prague, Czechoslovakia(Jan Raboch) Paul H. Gebhard Jan Raboch Richard E. Whalen Anke A. Ehrhardt 1980 Tucson, AZ, USA (Diane Fordney) Richard E. Whalen Paul H. Gebhard Gunter Schmidt Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1981 Haifa, Israel (Zwi Hoch) Gunter Schmidt Richard E. Whalen Anke A. Ehrhardt Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1982 Copenhagen, Denmark(Gorm Wagner) Anke A. Ehrhardt Gunter Schmidt Joseph Herbert Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1983 Harriman, NY, USA(Anke A. Ehrhardt) Joseph Herbert Anke A. Ehrhardt Gorm Wagner Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1984 Cambridge, United Kingdom(Joseph Herbert) Gorm Wagner Joseph Herbert Ira L. Reiss Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1985 Seattle, WA, USA(Julia R. Heiman) Ira L. Reiss Gorm Wagner Julia R. Heiman Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1986 Amsterdam, The Netherlands(Walter Everaerd) Julia R. Heiman Ira L. Reiss Walter Everaerd Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1987 Tutzing, West Germany(Götz Kockott, Eva-Maria Fahrner) Walter Everaerd Julia R. Heiman John H. Gagnon Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1988 Minneapolis, MN, USA(Sharon Satterfield) John H. Gagnon Walter Everaerd Götz Kockott Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1989 Princeton, NJ, USA(Sandra Leiblum, Raymond C. Rosen) Götz Kockott John H. Gagnon Raymond C. Rosen Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg 1990 Sigtuna, Sweden (Per O. Lundberg) Raymond C. Rosen Götz Kockott Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg Kenneth J. Zucker 1991 Barrie, Canada(Ron Langevin) Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg Raymond C. Rosen Per O. Lundberg Kenneth J. Zucker 1992 Prague, Czechoslovakia(Jiri Raboch, Jaroslav Zverina) Per O. Lundberg Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg Leonore Tiefer Kenneth J. Zucker 1993 Pacific Grove, CA, USA(Norma McCoy) Leonore Tiefer Per O. Lundberg Judith V. Becker Kenneth J. Zucker 1994 Edinburgh, Scotland(John Bancroft) Judith V. Becker Leonore Tiefer A. Koos Slob Kenneth J. Zucker 1995 Provincetown, MA, USA(Richard Pillard) A. Koos Slob Judith V. Becker Raul C. Schiavi Kenneth J. Zucker 1996 Rotterdam, The Netherlands(A. Koos Slob) Raul C. Schiavi A. Koos Slob John Bancroft Kenneth J. Zucker 1997 Baton Rouge, LA, USA(James H. Geer) John Bancroft Raul C. Schiavi James H. Geer Kenneth J. Zucker 1998 Sirmione, Italy (Cesare Carani) James H. Geer John Bancroft Milton Diamond Kenneth J. Zucker 1999 Stony Brook, NY, USA(Richard Green) Milton Diamond James H. Geer Richard Green Kenneth J. Zucker 2000 Paris, France(Alain Giami) Richard Green Milton Diamond Ulrich Clement Kenneth J. Zucker 2001 Montreal, Canada(Joanne-L. Rouleau) Ulrich Clement Richard Green Kim Wallen Kenneth J. Zucker 2002 Hamburg, Germany(Gunter Schmidt, Hertha Richter-Appelt) Kim Wallen Ulrich Clement Theo Sandfort J. Michael Bailey a“Vice president” (Office was subsequently abolished) bSecretary cTreasurer (Offices were subsequently combined) a „Vice president” (Office was subsequently abolished) As the IASR approaches its 30 th birthday, it appears to be thriving. Although there are many more competing scientific sexology meetings than there were in the beginning, each annual meeting is always informative, containing much of the best of sexual science. During my tenure as Secretary-Treasurer through 2001, I am particularly proud of the growth of the membership, including many of the best of the „next generation” of scientists who do sex research. I am also pleased at the Academy’s continued insistence on hearing the work of scholars from a variety of disciplines and theoretical persuasions. I can think of no other scientific sexology society that has been as good as the IASR in its commitment to such diversity. And lastly, a personal note: It has been my great pleasure as the Secretary-Treasurer for 12 years to have made so many friends from so many places. For me, the IASR has been an extended family that I will cherish for years to come.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZeitschrift für SexualforschungSame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207