Challenging the Standard Model of Sexual Response: Evidence of a Variable Male Sexual Response Cycle
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically the male sexual response cycle was seen as uniform and used as the standard for women. Recent research has suggested that men's sexual response cycle may vary more than previously thought. We asked 520 sexually active men between the ages of 18-73 to report on their sexual desire and arousal patterns during their last sexual experience. Using a latent class mixture model from retrospective sexual response data, we found five classes of desire and arousal patterns. These patterns were examined for associations with demographics, outcomes during the sexual experience, and outcomes for the global relationship. The experiences of arousal and desire appear to be indistinguishable for men in this sample. The Fluctuation sexual response class (19% of men) and the High sexual response class (40%) were significantly different from most of the other classes in duration of their sexual experiences and overall satisfaction with their sexual experiences. Still, most sexual response patterns were associated with healthy relational and sexual outcomes. Variability in the male sexual response cycle is important to acknowledge and normalize.
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.
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 | 0.029 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it