MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221012120 · doi:10.1177/02654075221080581

Will you be happy for me? Associations between self-reported, perceived, and observed responses to positive events and sexual well-being in cohabiting couples

2022· article· en· W4221012120 on OpenAlex
Myriam Bosisio, Natalie O. Rosen, Justin P. Dubé, Marie‐Pier Vaillancourt‐Morel, Marie‐Ève Daspe, Sophie Bergeron

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social and Personal Relationships · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresDalhousie UniversityUniversité de Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyDistressWell-beingSexual attractionSocial psychologyFeelingDevelopmental psychologyAutonomyClinical psychologySexual behaviorPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whereas greater levels of intimacy have been shown to promote couples' sexual well-being, recent theories suggest that satisfying sex is maintained via the capacity to encourage the partner's individuality, while remaining intimately connected. Responses to capitalization attempts (i.e., the disclosure of a positive personal event) provide an opportunity to strengthen both the couple's intimacy and each partner's autonomy. Although responses to capitalization attempts are linked to couples' greater relationship adjustment, very little is known about their relation to couples' sexual well-being. The aim of this study was to examine the associations between self-reported, perceived, and observed responses to capitalization attempts and sexual satisfaction, sexual distress, and sexual function in 151 cohabiting couples who participated in a filmed discussion in the laboratory. They also completed self-report questionnaires pertaining to their responsiveness and to that of the partner during the discussion, as well as their sexual well-being. Results indicated that one's higher levels of self-reported and partner-perceived active-constructive responses (enthusiasm/elaboration) during the discussion were associated with one's own greater sexual satisfaction. Higher levels of perceived passive-constructive responses (quiet but interested) from one's partner were associated with one's own lower sexual satisfaction, and one's higher levels of self-reported and perceived passive-destructive responses (lack of interest/self-focus) were associated with one's own greater sexual distress. Finally, higher levels of observed active-destructive responses (undermines/denies the positive nature of the event) were associated with one's own lower sexual function, while in women, they were associated with their lower sexual satisfaction. Findings contribute to a growing body of literature underscoring the importance of intimacy for sexual well-being in long-term relationships.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.211 · 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