How Do Psychological Risk Factors Predict Sexual Outcomes? A Comparison of Four Models of Young Women’s Sexual Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent research findings suggest that women who report high anxiety sensitivity (AS; the fear of physiologic sensations associated with anxiety) also report increased sexual dysfunction and decreased sexual satisfaction. Moreover, findings suggest that maladaptive emotion regulation (ER) can contribute to the relation between AS and psychological distress, thereby indirectly influencing sexual outcomes. Identifying relations among these variables and how they specifically relate to sexual outcomes could be vital for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. As such, a comparison of different models of sexual outcomes that encompass psychological and sexual risk factors is needed. AIM: To compare four psychological models of women's sexual outcomes in a cross-sectional sample and specifically to investigate whether psychological factors (ie, AS, ER, psychological distress) uniquely or jointly predict related, but distinct, sexual outcomes in women: sexual functioning, sexual quality of life, and frequency of sexual activity. METHODS: Women (N = 316) completed an online survey that included the Anxiety Sensitivity Index-3, Difficulties with Emotion Regulation Scale, Depression Anxiety Stress Scales, Sexual Quality of Life Scale-Female, Female Sexual Function Index, and Sexual Experiences Questionnaire-Female. OUTCOMES: Outcome variables included women's self-reported sexual functioning, sexual quality of life, and frequency of sexual activity. RESULTS: Path analysis models demonstrated that psychological factors predicted orgasm, sexual pain, sexual quality of life, and frequency of partnered sexual activity in women but predicted sexual desire, arousal, lubrication, and frequency of solitary sexual activity to a lesser degree. We found that ER significantly accounted for the relation between AS and psychological distress through mediation and moderation pathways. CLINICAL TRANSLATION: Clinicians would benefit from incorporating psychological risk factors in their assessment and interventions of women's sexual concerns. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This is the first study to compare models of women's sexual lives using indicators of mental and sexual health. However, our study was limited to a cross-sectional sample of young women in one university setting. CONCLUSIONS: AS, ER, and psychological distress are related to sexual functioning, sexual quality of life, and frequency of partnered sexual activity in young women. Psychological risk factors should be taken into consideration to better understand women's sexual lives. Tutino JS, Ouimet AJ, Shaughnessy K. How Do Psychological Risk Factors Predict Sexual Outcomes? A Comparison of Four Models of Young Women's Sexual Outcomes. J Sex Med 2017;14:1232-1240.
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 | 0.013 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".