Use of sexual stimuli in research and clinical settings: expert opinion and recommendations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sexual stimuli, such as sexual videos, images, and narratives describing sexual interactions, are one of many tools used by clinicians and researchers to elicit or augment sexual response. Given the wide variability within sexual stimuli and their effects on sexual response, we provide guidance on when and how to use sexual stimuli, selecting sexual stimuli, and standardizing the use and reporting of sexual stimuli in research and clinical practice. Aim: This expert opinion review article discusses standard operating procedures when using sexual stimuli in clinical and research applications, addressing 3 broad areas: settings in which sexual stimuli are used, characteristics and contexts of the stimuli, and practical and ethical considerations when using the stimuli. Methods: This article is based on an expert opinion review of the sexual psychophysiology literature. Results: First, we discuss the settings in which sexual stimuli are typically used and evaluate the ecological validity of each setting. Second, we review the types of sexual stimuli used in sexual response research, including physical characteristics, depicted sexual activity, and context, and the impacts of these characteristics on sexual response. Last, we discuss the practical and ethical considerations that come with the choice and use of sexual stimuli in clinical and research settings. We address potential limitations of certain sexual stimuli, including practical and ethical considerations such as participant vs experimenter choice, diversity and representation, and proper sourcing of sexual stimuli for use in clinical and research applications. Discussions on the future applications of sexual stimuli, such as the use of virtual reality, and ethical considerations in terms of user-generated Internet sexual stimuli are also explored. Conclusion: We provide an expert opinion review of the literature regarding use of sexual stimuli for clinical and research applications and offer best use practices and recommendations.
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.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it