MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200516231 · doi:10.1080/0092623x.2021.2011808

Insecure Attachment and Sexual Satisfaction: A Path Analysis Model Integrating Sexual Mindfulness, Sexual Anxiety, and Sexual Self-Esteem

2021· article· en· W4200516231 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sex & Marital Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPath analysis (statistics)Insecure attachmentAssociation (psychology)Sexual behaviorAttachment theoryRelevance (law)Sexual relationshipMindfulness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the intermediary role of three variables (sexual mindfulness, sexual anxiety, and sexual self-esteem) in a path analysis model to explain the association between insecure attachment and sexual satisfaction. A community sample of 543 adults completed an online survey. Results supported our hypothesized integrative model, which explained 44.1% of the variance in sexual satisfaction and presented satisfactory fit indices. This study suggests that the association between attachment insecurities and lower sexual satisfaction could be partially explained by a proximal association with lower sexual mindfulness, which emphasizes the relevance of examining sexual mindfulness during the screening and treatment of people presenting low sexual satisfaction.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2021.2011808 .

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.267 · 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