Gender role conflict and sexual health and relationship practices amongst young men living in urban informal settlements in South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Qualitative research suggests that men's inability to achieve dominant forms of masculinity may be related to HIV-risk behaviours and intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration. Using clustered cross-sectional data, we assessed how young men's gender role conflict was associated with HIV-risk behaviours in urban informal settlements in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Gender Role Conflict and Stress (GRC/S) was measured using a South African adaptation of the GRC/S scale comprising three sub-scales: subordination to women; restrictive emotionality; and success, power and competition. In random-effect models adjusting for socio-demographics, we tested the relationship with GRC/S sub-scales and sexual health behaviours (transactional sex, use of sex workers, ≥2 main partners and ≥2 casual/once off partners), and relationship practices (relationship satisfaction, relationship control, partnership type and perpetration of IPV). Overall, 449 young men (median age = 25, Q1, Q3 = 23-28) were included in the analysis. Higher GRC/S scores, denoting more GRC/S, were associated with increased relationship control and increased odds of having ≥2 casual or one-off partners and engaging in transactional sex. We found differences in associations between each sub-scale and sexual health and relationship practices, highlighting important implications for informing both theoretical understandings of masculinity and gender transformative efforts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".