Female Multiple Orgasm: An Exploratory Internet-Based Survey
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
Women’s multiorgasmic capacity has long been mentioned in the human sexuality literature. However, due in part to the conceptual vagueness surrounding this phenomenon, few empirical studies have focused on this topic, and our scientific knowledge is currently limited. This exploratory research is mainly aimed at providing a much-needed assessment of the profiles of women reporting multiorgasmic experiences. For this study, 419 sexually diverse women ages 18 through 69 who identified as multiorgasmic completed an online survey assessing variables pertaining to sociodemographic background, context and characteristics of a recent/typical multiorgasmic experience, relationships between multiple orgasm and sexual/nonsexual aspects of life, and sexual and orgasmic history. Data reduction analyses using principal component analysis pointed out that 15 variables of interest were distributed across six components, accounting for a large proportion of the sample’s variance. A k-means cluster analysis further revealed that four distinct groups of women could be parsed out. These four groups could be differentiated by three sets of variables—sexual motivation, sexual history, and multiple orgasm characteristics—suggesting that female multiple orgasm is not a unitary phenomenon. This research provides to date the most comprehensive picture of female multiple orgasm and helps refine our conceptual understanding.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it