Past Bullying Victimization Experiences and Current Sexual Risk Taking among Emerging Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A growing body of research suggests that a history of bullying victimization is a risk factor for sexual risk taking (e.g., unprotected sex, multiple sexual partners, using drugs or alcohol before or during sex). However, previous studies that have examined the association between bullying victimization and sexual risk taking used only single, or very few, items to measure sexual risk taking. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to use a more comprehensive, psychometrically validated self-report measure to better capture the construct of sexual risk taking as an outcome linked with a history of bullying victimization (N = 650; 336 women, 314 men; Mage = 20.07, SD = 1.70). Negative binomial regression analyses provided support for hypotheses. Emerging adults with a history of bullying victimization were more likely to engage in various sexual risk behaviors such as casual sex, risky sex acts, impulsive sexual behaviors, intent to have risky sexual behaviors, risky anal sex acts, and overall sexual risk taking compared to emerging adults without a history of bullying victimization. These results may have implications for informing interventions to help emerging adults better manage past bullying experiences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".