MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914122095 · doi:10.29173/cjfy29408

Influence of Social Media on Sexual Behaviour of Youth in Kwara State, Nigeria: Implications for Counselling Practice

2019· article· en· W2914122095 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lateef Omotosho Adegboyega

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la Jeunesse · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaPsychologySexual behaviorData collectionDescriptive researchState (computer science)Null hypothesisSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologySociologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the influence of social media on the sexual behaviour of youth in Kwara State. Descriptive research design was adopted for the study. A total of 395 youth participated in the study. One research question was raised while three null hypotheses were formulated and tested at 0.05 level of significance. The instrument used for data collection for this study was a researcher-designed questionnaire entitled “Influence of Social Media Questionnaire” (ISMQ). The findings revealed that social media has considerable influence on the sexual behaviour of youth in Kwara State. Social media leads students to the act of sending erotic messages, watching pornographic films and movies, and also increases risky sexual behaviour such as masturbation. There were no significant differences in the influence of social media on sexual behaviour of youth in Kwara State based on gender, age and university attended. It was therefore recommended that counsellors should expose students to the danger inherent in negative uses of social media and analyze the possible result of proper usage of social media. Counsellors should also provide information specifically on the safe and respectful use of technology, as well as consequences of the negative use of social media to students of different genders, ages and universities attended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la JeunesseSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207