The time course of genital response cue-specificity among androphilic women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women’s genital responses measured with a vaginal photoplethysmograph (VPP) demonstrate relatively low cue-specificity for gender/sex cues—the difference in genital responses between sexual stimuli with male or female content is relatively small compared to that of men. Cue-specificity for gender/sex cues is particularly low for androphilic women. It is common practice to compare responses to sexual stimuli (typically 60–120 s film clips) using a mean or peak (highest) value. This approach overlooks the continuous and dynamic nature of sexual responding during a stimulus. Recent results suggest that cue-specificity of genital response may increase throughout the duration of a sexual stimulus. We tested this possibility in a sample of 18 androphilic women. Sexual stimuli consisted of 240 s audiovisual film clips depicting male and/or female partnered sex or solitary masturbation. Gender/sex cue-specificity, assessed using VPP, did not vary across time: The degree of cue-specificity and the magnitude of genital response were established by approximately 60–90 s and were consistent throughout the stimulus duration. Low cue-specificity for genital response was observed despite variation in self-reported sexual arousal across stimulus categories. The findings are discussed within the context of initial- and later-occurring aspects of the sexual response, according to the information processing model of sexual arousal. The results also suggest that 90–120 s stimuli are of sufficient duration to capture vaginal photoplethysmographic responses to audiovisual stimuli in sexual psychophysiological research.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".