MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158832145 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.7620

Sexual relationships and self-esteem: Why do Women Get the Short-End of the Stick?

2017· article· en· W3158832145 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Morgan Craig-Broadwith

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingPsychologyPerspective (graphical)Self-esteemSexual relationshipDevelopmental psychologyId, ego and super-egoSocial psychologyHuman sexualityGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My study will investigate sex differences in the relationship between number of sexual partners and self-esteem. Previous research has found a moderate positive relationship between number of sexual partners and self-esteem in men, while finding a strong negative relationship in women. Women who engage in more short-term sexual relationships are left feeling vulnerable, depressed, and have lower scores of self-esteem. Men on the other hand, appear to have an ego boost with the more short-term sexual partners they have. Why is this? My study, using an evolutionary psychological perspective, will investigate the relationship between number of sexual partners and self-esteem in hopes of piecing together why men and women are affected so differently.

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)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorFrench-language works237,207