MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110660189 · doi:10.3138/cjhs.2020-0013

Dispositional mindfulness among BDSM practitioners: A preliminary investigation

2020· article· en· W3110660189 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Cara R. Dunkley, Anne Barringer, Silvain S. Dang, Lori A. Brotto

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessPsychologyConsciousnessDominance (genetics)ArousalSexual arousalClinical psychologyEmpirical researchSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite increased popular interest in, and research attention to, the topic of BDSM (Bondage and Discipline, Dominance and Submission, Sadism and Masochism) in recent years, empirical literature focusing on the psychological traits of people who practice BDSM is scarce. Mindfulness, which can be defined as non-judgmental awareness and acceptance of the present moment, has been linked to a host of positive physical, psychological, and sexual outcomes (e.g., relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, sexual arousal), and there is some limited evidence that those who practice BDSM may be exercising mindfulness. The current study examined dispositional mindfulness in a sample of BDSM practitioners ( n = 160) compared to a sample of undergraduate students ( n = 190). BDSM participants were found to report higher levels of mindfulness than undergraduates after controlling for age. These findings provide preliminary support for a link between BDSM and dispositional mindfulness. The pleasant altered states of consciousness sometimes achieved through BDSM activity may foster a state of mindfulness, which in turn may foster dispositional mindfulness.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Human SexualitySame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207