Examining the prevalence of trans phantoms among transgender, nonbinary and gender diverse individuals: An exploratory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Trans phantoms are bodily sensations of gendered body parts that a person was not born with (i.e., a phantom penis experienced by a trans man, or a phantom vagina experienced by a trans woman). This is distinct from the experience of many transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people, who experience awareness of their bodies as missing a gendered body part, or configuration, which is a major characteristic of gender dysphoria. Aims: Our purpose was to gain greater understanding of the prevalence and quality of trans phantoms. Methods: Data was gathered through a brief, online survey on trans embodiment. Respondents who had both completed the survey, and were deemed appropriate for inclusion in the study, based on their survey responses, comprised our sample of 1,446 adults. Results: Results indicated that trans phantoms are a typical embodied experience of TGD people. Almost 50% of study participants reported experiencing a trans phantom, most of whom also reported feeling erotic sensation in their phantom. Conclusions: Though the phenomenon of trans phantoms is not universal, it is clearly one that warrants further study.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".