Anxiety Sensitivity in the Sexual Context: Links between Sexual Anxiety Sensitivity and Sexual Well-Being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anxiety sensitivity, the fear of physiological arousal sensations, has been linked to lower sexual frequency, poorer sexual function, and greater sexual anxiety. The current study assessed whether anxiety sensitivity specific to the sexual context, termed sexual anxiety sensitivity, was linked to a wide range of indicators of sexual well-being over and above associations accounted for by general anxiety sensitivity. As a first step, we developed the Sexual Anxiety Sensitivity Inventory (SASI). Participants were 484 adults aged 19 to 60 years old who completed an on-line survey. To develop the SASI, we constructed parallel items to those on the Anxiety Sensitivity Scale-3 (ASI-3; Taylor et al., 2007 Taylor, S., Zvolensky, M. J., Cox, B. J., Deacon, B., Heimberg, R.G., Ledley, D.R., Abramowitz, J. S., Holaway, R. M., Sandin, B., Stewart, S. H., Coles, M., Eng, W., Daly, E. S., Arrindell, W. A., Bouvard, M., & Cardenas, S. J. (2007). Robust dimensions of anxiety sensitivity: Development and initial validation of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index—3. Psychological Assessment, 19(2), 176–188. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.19.2.176[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). The SASI demonstrated the same three-factor structure as the ASI-3 and showed high internal consistency providing evidence for its reliability. As predicted, sexual anxiety sensitivity was significantly associated with all ten of the markers of the behavioral, cognitive-affective, and functional domains of sexual well-being assessed and six of these associations remained significant after controlling for general anxiety sensitivity. The results provide evidence that sexual anxiety sensitivity is an important construct for understanding individuals’ sexual well-being and provide initial evidence that the specificity of the SASI has value as a reliable and valid measure for assessing sex-related anxiety sensitivity. Implications for clinicians and researchers are discussed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".