Sexual growth and destiny beliefs: Longitudinal associations with dyadic coping among couples seeking medically assisted reproduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Medically assisted reproduction is a vulnerable time for couples' sexual health. Believing that sexual challenges can be worked through (i.e., sexual growth beliefs) or that these challenges indicate incompatibility (i.e., sexual destiny beliefs) may be related to dyadic coping-the strategies couples use to cope-with the physical and psychological stressors of medically assisted reproduction. AIM: In the current study we aimed to examine the longitudinal associations between typical (i.e., average) levels of sexual growth and destiny beliefs and positive and negative facets of dyadic coping and how greater than typical levels of these constructs predicted each other across time. METHODS: Couples (n = 219) seeking medically assisted reproduction were recruited for an online longitudinal, dyadic study. OUTCOMES: Couples completed online measures of sexual growth and destiny beliefs and positive and negative dyadic coping at baseline, 6-and 12-months. RESULTS: Random intercept cross-lagged panel models demonstrated that at the within-person level, reporting higher sexual growth beliefs at baseline, relative to their average across time points, was associated with lower negative dyadic coping at 6 months. Higher negative dyadic coping at 6 months, relative to their average, was linked to lower sexual growth beliefs at 12-months. When individuals reported higher sexual destiny beliefs at 6-months, relative to their average, they and their partners reported higher negative dyadic coping at 12 -months. At the between-person level, higher overall levels of sexual destiny beliefs were related to higher overall levels of negative dyadic coping. No associations with positive dyadic coping were identified. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Couples may benefit from identifying and reducing unhelpful beliefs about sex and negative dyadic coping. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Strengths of this study include our large, inclusive sample, engagement of community partners, and novel analytical approach to assess change over time. However, following couples in 6-month increments and not using questionnaires specific to medically assisted reproduction may have limited our ability to detect nuanced changes that couples experience during this time. CONCLUSION: Lower sexual growth and higher sexual destiny beliefs may promote couples' engagement in less adaptive coping behaviors as they seek medically assisted reproduction.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".