Setting the Agenda: Latina/x Tri-Generational Family Communication About Reproductive and Sexual Health Toward Wellbeing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The family is an important site of information, communication, and advocacy regarding sexual and reproductive health behaviors, particularly for individuals assigned female at birth (Byers, 2011 Byers, E. S. (2011). Beyond the birds and the bees and was it good for you?: Thirty years of research on sexual communication. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 52(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022048[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). For Latina women, the health messages received from family members may be especially meaningful. This essay explores tri- and multi-generational family communication among Latina women, centering on the communication that transpires among different female generations regarding reproductive and sexual health topics. We call attention to the importance of further exploring if and how transparency, honesty, and non-judgment conversations can provide a culture of mutual respect and openness among women within the Latinx community as they attempt to negotiate their sexual behavior. We call on family communication scholars, especially those of Latinx descent, to consider how their work can contribute to setting an agenda for this important culture and topic, and we recommend specific research areas to investigate sexual and reproductive health communication in Latinx families.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".