MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138865836 · doi:10.1007/s12144-021-01632-8

Sex addiction in Turkey: A large-scale survey with a national community sample

2021· article· en· W3138865836 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kağan Kırcaburun, Hüseyin Ünübol, Gökben Hızlı Sayar, Jaklin Çarkçı, Mark D. Griffiths

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Psychology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAddictionAlexithymiaToronto Alexithymia ScaleAffect (linguistics)TurkishClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Prior studies on sex addiction have mostly relied on a narrow range of risk factors among small and heterogeneous samples. The purpose of the present study was to examine the psychological markers related to sex addiction in a large-scale community sample of Turkish adults. A total of 24,380 individuals completed a survey comprising the Sex Addiction Risk Questionnaire, the Brief Symptom Inventory, the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, the Personal-Wellbeing Index Adult Form, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, and the Experiences in Close Relationships-Revised (50% males; mean age = 31.79 years; age range = 18 to 81 years). Utilizing hierarchical regression analysis, sex addiction was associated with being male, being younger, having a lower education level, being single, being an alcohol and nicotine user, psychiatric distress, low personal wellbeing, positive and negative affect, alexithymia, and anxious attachment. This study suggests that socio-demographic factors and aforementioned detrimental psychological factors exacerbate higher engagement in addictive sexual behaviors among the Turkish community. However, more studies are needed to better understand the factors associated with sex addiction in Turkey.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.302 · 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.

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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent PsychologySame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207