MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385693666 · doi:10.1080/00224499.2023.2241860

Virtual Reality Could Help Assess Sexual Aversion Disorder

2023· article· en· W4385693666 on OpenAlexafffund
David Lafortune, Simon Dubé, Vanessa Lapointe, Jonathan Bonneau, C. Champoux, N. Sigouin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sex Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et Culture
KeywordsVirtual realityPsychologyComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual reality (VR) may improve our understanding of sexual dysfunctions’ manifestations, although research in this area remains limited. This study assessed the potential use of a VR Behavior Avoidance Test (VR-BAT) as a tool for examining the clinical features of Sexual Aversion Disorder (SAD): the experience of fear, disgust, and avoidance when facing sexual cues/contexts. A sample of 55 adults (≥ 18y) with (n = 27) and without SAD (n = 28) completed a self-report measure of sexual avoidance. Their anxiety, disgust, electrodermal activity, heart rate, and visual and behavioral avoidance were then examined during two VR-BATs involving sexual or non-sexual stimuli. Mixed repeated measures ANOVAs, t-tests, and correlational analyses were performed. Results showed that individuals in the SAD group reported greater anxiety and disgust compared to their non-SAD counterparts during the sexual stimuli condition. Sexual avoidance scores were largely positively related to anxiety and disgust during the VR sexual condition, and moderately negatively related to the time spent touching the virtual character’s genitals. This study is important given the prevalence of sexual difficulties, such as SAD, and the new research avenues offered by emerging technologies, like VR.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.294
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sex ResearchSame topicSexual function and dysfunction studiesFrench-language works237,207