MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389849116 · doi:10.1007/s11195-023-09824-9

Positive and Negative Sexual Cognitions of Autistic Individuals

2023· article· en· W4389849116 on OpenAlexaff
Marta García-Barba, Shana Nichols, Rafael Ballester‐Arnal, E. Sandra Byers

Bibliographic record

VenueSexuality and Disability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersUniversidad de Zaragoza
KeywordsNeurotypicalPsychologyCognitionPopulationDiversity (politics)Developmental psychologySexual desireClinical psychologyHuman sexualityAutismMedicinePsychiatryAutism spectrum disorder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sexual cognitions are an important aspect of sexual well-being for all individuals; however, little is known about the sexual cognitions of autistic individuals. Therefore, our study aimed to explore the diversity, content, and frequencies of positive (PSC) and negative (NSC) sexual cognitions in this population. A total of 332 participants (57.5% women; 42.5% men) between the ages of 21 and 73 (M = 37.72, SD = 11.15) completed an online survey. Our results showed that almost all participants had experienced both positive and negative sexual cognitions. PSC were more diverse and experienced with greater frequency than NSC. In addition, gender (self-identified as being male) and having had relationship experience were associated with greater diversity and frequency of PSC, but not NSC. In terms of content, the most common experienced sexual cognitions for both men and women were intimacy-related. The men experienced 22 of the 56 PSC and 3 of the 56 NSC significantly more frequently than did the women; there were no cognitions that the women experienced more frequently than the men. A comparison to the results of studies of sexual cognitions among neurotypical individuals suggests that autistic individuals experience sexual cognitions in much the same way as their peers. However, sexual cognitions occur slightly less frequently and are somewhat less diverse. Nonetheless, the way in which they are experienced, and the content of the most frequent cognitions (mainly PSC about intimacy) may be indicative of sexual well-being.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexuality and DisabilitySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207