A Latent Profile Analysis of the Consensual and Non-Consensual Sexting Experiences among Canadian Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different patterns of sexting behaviors were examined to provide a more nuanced understanding of the context in which sexting occurs among adolescents. Participants were 1,000 Canadian adolescents (50.2% girls) between 12 and 18 years ( M age = 15.21, SD = 2.00) who completed measures of sexting, cyber bullying and victimization, problematic social media use, self-regulation, and demographics. Contrary to our hypotheses, three latent profiles of sexting represented the frequency of sexting rather than whether the sexting was consensual versus non-consensual or with a partner versus non-partner. Participants in the moderate and high sexting profiles representing one fifth of youth, reported less self-regulation, experienced more cyber victimization, and engaged in more cyber bullying and problematic social media use than those in the no/low sexting profile. Our findings support the normalcy approach to education, which considers some sexting among healthy developmental behaviors.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".