MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182315982 · doi:10.47779/ajhs.2015.174

Using Social Cognitive Theory to Predict Safer Sex Behaviors in College Students

2020· article· en· W3182315982 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amar Kanekar, Manoj Sharma, Russell Bennett

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican journal of health studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial cognitive theorySafer sexSAFERPsychologySituational ethicsPerceptionSample (material)Variance (accounting)Quarter (Canadian coin)Theory of planned behaviorHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Social psychologyDevelopmental psychologyControl (management)CondomMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Young adults engage themselves in unsafe sexual behaviors exposing themselves to getting aSTD and/or HIV/AIDS. The purpose of this study was to use social cognitive theory in predicting safer sex behaviors among college students. A cross-sectional study design was implemented among a sample of 180 sexually active college students. More than half of the survey responders were monogamous and less than a quarter had two sexual partners. A step-wise multiple regressions model indicated a statistically significant predictive model with self-efficacy, situational perceptions and self-control towards safer sex as significant predictors (48% predicted variance) of self-reported sexual behaviors.

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)0.007
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.268
GPT teacher head0.560
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican journal of health studiesSame topicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive HealthFrench-language works237,207