Let’s Talk about Sex… and ADHD: Findings from an Anonymous Online Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity. A dearth of studies have investigated psychosexuality in this population, often with few (predominantly male) participants. We recruited individuals with and without ADHD via an anonymous online survey distributed electronically by ADHD support organizations and social media. We investigated sexual history; interests and practices; and relationships. Of 1392 respondents, we classified an ‘ADHD’ group (n = 541; 30.5% male) and compared them to individuals of similar ages without ADHD, (‘Other’ group; n = 851; 37.6% male). The ADHD group (both males and females) had a significantly higher preference for same-sex or either-sex partners; and higher rates of electronic sexual exchanges, masturbation, and sexually transmitted diseases. They were more adventurous in sexual interests and practices and substantially less satisfied with their partners, both sexually and generally. Within the ADHD group, significant sex differences emerged: females had younger onset of sexual activities, used contraception less frequently, had more sexual partners and practiced more infidelity. Sexual interests differed between the sexes, but females more commonly acted on them, whereas males did not. Findings suggest both sexes engage in risky sexual behaviors, perhaps driven by impulsivity, but risk is substantially greater for females with ADHD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".