MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970291781 · doi:10.3138/cjhs.2019-0027

Pleasure is just the tip of the iceberg: Social representations, personal beliefs, and attributed meanings to partnered orgasm

2019· article· en· W2970291781 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Léa J. Séguin, Martin Blais

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrgasmPsychologyPleasureSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyHuman sexualityGender studiesSexual dysfunctionSociologyPsychoanalysisPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orgasm is highly symbolic and much personal, interpersonal, and sociocultural importance has been accorded to it. Given its significance, the absence of orgasm can be experienced as a source of personal distress and can also lead to relationship difficulties. However, previous orgasm research did not distinguish between cultural and intrapsychic orgasm scripts. The present study aimed to explore (1) how male and female orgasm are represented in Canadian culture (including Quebec culture); and (2) individuals’ beliefs, expectations, and ascribed meanings to orgasm in different-gender relationship contexts among a sample of women and men. Data from 27 interviews conducted among individuals in committed different-gender relationships (15 women, 11 men, 1 queer person; 21–68 years old), were analyzed using thematic analysis. Two overarching themes describing sociocultural representations of orgasm were developed: (1) Male sexual pleasure is innate/female sexual pleasure is acquired, and (2) Orgasm is part of (hetero)sex. Four main themes describing participants’ personal orgasm-related beliefs were also developed: (1) Orgasm is not part of (hetero)sex, (2) Orgasm is partner-dependent, (3) Orgasm is self-dependent, and (4) Orgasm is a dyadic experience. Many participants endorsed conflicting orgasm scripts and representations simultaneously. The data show several distinct, co-existing, yet conflicting prescriptive and gendered scripts, as well as personal responsibility and relationship discourses that are endorsed simultaneously by participants. This finding suggests shifts and developments in current sexual scripts. The present study’s findings can be used in future research examining sexual wellbeing and function, and relationship outcomes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Human SexualitySame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207