MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899339319 · doi:10.3138/cjhs.2017-0041

The battle against bedroom boredom: Development and validation of a brief measure of sexual novelty in relationships

2018· article· en· W2899339319 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarah J. Matthews, Traci A. Giuliano, Marissa N. Rosa, Kayleigh H. Thomas, Brooke A. Swift, Nicki D. Ahearn, Aarón García, Skylar R. Smith, Casey M. Niblett, Mattie M. Mills

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoveltyPsychologyBoredomRomanceScale (ratio)Human sexualitySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a crucial component to preventing sexual boredom and maintaining sexual and relationship satisfaction, sexual novelty is a relational characteristic that warrants considerable empirical attention; however, there is relatively little research on the role that sexual novelty plays in long-term, committed relationships. As such, we developed a brief, reliable measure of sexual novelty to stimulate additional research in this area. Participants consisted of 518 U.S. citizens in committed relationships of 6 months or longer who were recruited online through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to complete surveys assessing “sexual relationships.” Across two samples, the unidimensional Sexual Novelty Scale (SNS) demonstrated high internal consistency and test-retest reliability, as well as convergent and divergent validity. Our results indicate that the 5-item Sexual Novelty Scale is a brief, reliable, and valid measure of the extent to which partners in committed romantic relationships engage in sexually novel behaviour.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Human SexualitySame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207