Attitudes toward premarital and casual sex in Canada: A secondary analysis of the seventh wave of the World Values Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous studies have examined associations between sociodemographic characteristics and attitudes toward premarital sex and, more recently, toward casual sex. However, no recent study has examined these associations in Canada’s general population. The present exploratory study consists of a secondary analysis of the World Values Survey’s seventh wave of data collected in 2020 from a sample of 4,018 Canadian adults. Results indicate moderately positive attitudes toward premarital sex and lower levels of approval for casual sex, on average. Religion-related variables yielded moderate to strong effect sizes, with identifying as religious, higher frequencies of religious service attendance, and greater attributed importance to religion being associated with lower levels of approval for premarital and casual sex. Small to moderate effects were found for politics-related, family-related, and ethnocultural variables. On average, participants who considered premarital and casual sex as justifiable tended to be more left-leaning, have fewer children, live together as married, have been born in Canada, identify as White, report French as the language they normally speak at home, and live in Quebec. While age and generation were weakly associated with premarital sex attitudes, they were more strongly associated with casual sex attitudes, with younger participants being somewhat more accepting of casual sex than older participants. Small gender differences were found for casual but not premarital sex attitudes. Attitudinal differences based on socioeconomic variables were overall statistically insignificant or negligible. The findings are consistent with and expand on the existing literature. They also shed light on Canada’s ethnocultural and provincial particularities.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".