Childhood Interpersonal Trauma and Sexual Satisfaction in Patients Seeing Sex Therapy: Examining Mindfulness and Psychological Distress as Mediators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mindful attention and awareness may promote sexual satisfaction. However, experiencing cumulative childhood interpersonal trauma (CCT; sexual abuse, neglect, etc.) is associated with distress, which might interfere with dispositional mindfulness and lead to lower sexual satisfaction. Although the concept of mindfulness emerged as an interesting variable to understand sexual difficulties, little empirical data are available on this topic. This study tested an integrative mediation model of the relation between CCT, psychological distress, dispositional mindfulness, and sexual satisfaction within a clinical sample of 410 adult patients consulting in sex therapy. Patients completed questionnaires assessing CCT, psychological distress, dispositional mindfulness, and sexual satisfaction. Results showed that the majority of patients reported experiences of childhood interpersonal trauma. Path analyses highlighted three distinct significant paths from CCT to sexual satisfaction. First, dispositional mindfulness mediated the relationship between CCT and sexual satisfaction. Second, psychological distress also mediated the relationship between CCT and sexual satisfaction. Third, the effect of CCT on sexual satisfaction was sequentially mediated through greater levels of psychological distress and lower levels of dispositional mindfulness. The model explained 19% of the variance in sexual satisfaction. Findings suggest that dispositional mindfulness and psychological distress are key processes explaining sexual satisfaction in CCT survivors.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".