Deciphering Maritime Students-Based Standpoints on Sexual Ethics
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
Standpoints on sexual issues are viewed from several angles. When acted upon, these standpoints are beneficial to the individual and others, but some results may be detrimental. Many studies have been conducted about students’ stances concerning masturbation, pornography, homosexual sex, premarital sex, and extramarital sex. Still, there is no existing study about sexual standpoints based on maritime students, even in the Philippines. This study assessed the sexual ethical perspectives of the 360 first-year maritime students of the University of Cebu for S.Y. 2020-2021. This study has used the descriptive-quantitative survey method. The frequency counts, the simple percentages, the weighted means, and the standard deviations were calculated. The questionnaire was adopted from the study. Data revealed that most respondents were uncertain whether pornography is immoral, disagreed with the idea that masturbation is immoral, agreed with the notion that homosexual sex and premarital sex are immoral, and strongly agreed on the immorality of extramarital sex. There is a correlation between gender and the respondents’ standpoints on masturbation but not pornography, homosexual sex, premarital sex, and extramarital sex. Further, there is no significant relationship between age and the respondents’ standpoints. This study will contribute to the body of knowledge in so far as it will provide facts and figures to help the government and ethics teachers of the Philippines to promote the use of books and the creation of teaching materials that include sexuality and its implications to prepare Filipino maritime students to face future sexual moral challenges.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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