An examination of autoerotic asphyxiation in a community sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA) is a sexual interest that involves heightening sexual arousal by deliberately self-inducing a reduced supply of oxygen to the brain. Most of the literature on AEA is comprised of case studies and research based on people who have died from the practice. The present study explored information about AEA practices and the degree of overlap between AEA and other paraphilias in community participants. Participants (n = 395) were recruited through different online platforms to complete an anonymous survey and 165 were classified as having AEA by reporting mild to strong sexual arousal in AEA. These individuals reported that their interest emerged in late adolescence, and many reported that they discovered AEA via the internet. Regarding safety precautions people take during their AEA practice, 19% of participants reported that they did not use safety precautions. Most people (> 80%) were not distressed by their AEA interest. Additionally, significant relationships were found between AEA interest and many paraphilic interests with masochism being the only paraphilia associated with AEA when considering other paraphilic interests. These results suggest that most individuals engage in less risky manifestations of AEA than what is reported in the clinical literature and that AEA is appropriately conceptualized as a subtype of masochism. The results underscore the importance of gathering information about alternative sexual practices in community samples.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".