A qualitative investigation of expected versus actual initial sexual experiences before age 16
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Individuals often develop expectations prior to their initial sexual experiences based on external messages from peers and the broader culture. According to sexual script theory (Simon & Gagnon, 1986), these expectations form schemas about how an initial sexual experience should occur. When reality deviates from these schemas, dissatisfaction can occur (McCormick, 1987). The current study examines the contrast between expectations and reported initial sexual experiences before age 16. METHODS: Forty young adult participants were recruited from four local Atlantic Canadian universities (77.5% women; M age = 20.20, SD = 1.31; 75% heterosexual; 77.5% Caucasian). Semi-structured qualitative interviews on participants' actual initial sexual experiences, expectations of initial sexual experiences, and perceived consequences of initial sexual experiences were conducted. Thematic analysis of the interviews was conducted using a grounded theory framework. RESULTS: Findings indicated that respondents' expectations were influenced by sources such as various media, peers, family, and religion. Initial sexual experiences reportedly met, surpassed, or failed to meet participants' expectations. The presence or absence of a discrepancy between expected and actual sexual experiences was perceived to shape subsequent sexual encounters. A theoretical model of development and adaptations of sexual experience expectations was developed in accordance with these results. CONCLUSIONS: Comparisons between expected and actual initial sexual experiences can be perceived by youth as having consequences on their personal and interpersonal well-being. Honest communication between parents, educators, and youth should therefore be prioritized in order to establish more realistic expectations of initial sexual experiences.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".