Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction The culture plays an important role in sexuality. Although each ethnocultural group has its own sexual attitudes, in multicultural contexts, the acculturation process could modify the sexual attitudes of these groups. The aim of the study was to perform a systematic literature review of the studies that have examined the relationship between acculturation and sexual attitudes. Method The review was carried out in the ProQuest and Scopus databases. There was no time restriction in literature search. Results A total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria. The year of publication of the studies ranged from 1982 to 2020. The studies were conducted in the USA and/or in Canada and included mainly Asians and Latinos/Hispanics. Proxy indicators, unidimensional, and bidimensional measures were used to measure acculturation. In general, results show that mainstream acculturation is positively related to liberal or positive sexual attitudes. Relevant interaction and mediation effects were also found: (1) mainstream dimension moderates the relationship between heritage dimension and sexual attitudes, (2) heritage dimension moderates the relationship between mainstream dimension and sexual attitudes, (3) acculturation moderates the relation between gender and sexual attitudes, (4) gender moderates the relation between acculturation and sexual attitudes, (5) the ethnocultural origin moderates the relationship between acculturation and sexual attitudes, and (6) sex guilt mediated the relationship between mainstream acculturation and sexual desire. Conclusion The acculturation process is related to sexual attitudes. Policy Implications Knowing the acculturation process could be important to achieve greater equity in sexual health among different groups.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".