Alexithymia, masculinity and sexual behavior among Brazilian men / Alexitimia, masculinidade e comportamento sexual entre homens Brasileiros
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Normative masculinity and alexithymia may negatively affect sexual life and men’s well-being. In this study, the endorsement of traditional male norms, alexithymia and sexual behavior were assessed through an online survey directed to Brazilian men. Relationship status and religion were also addressed, and associations and correlations between variables were carried out. The survey presented 66 items, including standardized questionnaires, such as Meanings of Adolescent Masculinity Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale and Male Sexual Quotient. The sample consisted in 528 Brazilian men with high socioeconomic and educational levels. Alexithymia was negatively correlated with sexual satisfaction. The endorsement of traditional male norms was positively correlated with pornography use and was also associated with sharing of pornographic material through social media. Married men had the lowest levels of alexithymia, with significant difference when compared with men who are not currently in a relationship. Furthermore, having a religion was associated with greater endorsement of traditional male norms. These findings suggest that alexithymia may have greater influence on behaviors associated with interpersonal relations, including sexual satisfaction and relationship status. Conversely, normative masculinity was linked to personal variables, which did not involve a partner, including pornography consumption and religion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".