MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022581706 · doi:10.1037/ort0000457

Contributors to posttraumatic stress symptoms in women sex workers.

2020· article· en· W3022581706 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jonathan Alschech, Cheryl Regehr, Carmen H. Logie, Michael C. Seto

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Orthopsychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosttraumatic stressSex workersPsychologySex workStress (linguistics)Clinical psychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthFamily medicineResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has demonstrated that women who sell sex (women sex workers [WSWs]) consistently report high levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms. The present study explores multiple factors that may contribute to the variation in WSWs' experiences of posttraumatic stress symptoms, including workers' racial identity, experiences of discrimination and control over their working conditions, the site of selling sex, and their clients' perceived sexual entitlement and violence. The study sample consisted of 314 self-identified WSWs. Online invitations to participate in a 30-min survey were sent to WSWs in the United States and Canada who advertise their services online on sites such as Facebook, the Erotic Review, and Backpages. The hypothesized structure of associations between the variables was tested using structural equation modeling. The model accounted for 68% of the variation in the traumatic stress reported, with direct and indirect effects for workers' racial identity, the site where they sell sex, and experiences of discrimination, especially by police. Clients' violence, on the contrary, was indirectly associated with traumatic stress, as violent clients were also significantly more likely to be perceived as sexually entitled, which, in turn, was the strongest predictor of higher traumatic stress. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of OrthopsychiatrySame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207