A Dyadic Analysis of Sexual Assertiveness and Sexual Outcomes in Adolescent Romantic Relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amid adolescence, youth are developing the relational skills necessary to form and maintain positive intimate relationships. Sexual assertiveness is a key skill that could be related to couples’ sexual outcomes (i.e. sexual satisfaction, sexual concerns, and sexual function). However, dyadic studies are lacking, and associations between sexual assertiveness and adolescents’ sexual health and well-being remain underexplored. This cross-sectional dyadic study examined associations between dimensions of sexual assertiveness and sexual outcomes in adolescent romantic relationships. The Actor-Partner Interdependence Model guided analyses of self-reported questionnaires from 110 romantic dyads (aged 14–19 years; M = 16.51). Participants’ gender was considered in the models, and gender differences emerged in the associations between study variables. Path analyses revealed that sexual needs and desires communication, refusal of unwanted sex, sexual intimacy initiation, and comfort talking about sex have significant actor and partner effects on adolescents’ sexual outcomes in mixed-gender dyads. These findings suggest that authentically expressing one’s own sexual needs, desires, and limits in adolescence may influence not only one’s own sexual satisfaction, sexual concerns, and sexual function, but also their partner’s. The aforementioned dimensions of sexual assertiveness could be important targets for research-based interventions to promote sexual health and well-being in adolescent romantic relationships.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".