The lifelong orgasm gap: exploring age’s impact on orgasm rates
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
Background: Research demonstrates significant gender- and sexual orientation-based differences in orgasm rates from sexual intercourse; however, this "orgasm gap" has not been studied with respect to age. Aim: The study sought to examine age-related disparities in orgasm rates from sexual intercourse by gender and sexual orientation. Methods: A survey sample of 24 752 adults from the United States, ranging in age from 18 to 100 years. Data were collected across 8 cross-sectional surveys between 2015 and 2023. Outcomes: Participants reported their average rate of orgasm during sexual intercourse, from 0% to 100%. Results: Orgasm rate was associated with age but with minimal effect size. In all age groups, men reported higher rates of orgasm than did women. Men's orgasm rates ranged from 70% to 85%, while women's ranged from 46% to 58%. Men reported orgasm rates between 22% and 30% higher than women's rates. Sexual orientation impacted orgasm rates by gender but not uniformly across age groups. Clinical Translation: The persistence of the orgasm gap across ages necessitates a tailored approach in clinical practice and education, focusing on inclusive sexual health discussions, addressing the unique challenges of sexual minorities and aging, and emphasizing mutual satisfaction to promote sexual well-being for all. Strengths and Limitations: This study is the first to examine the orgasm gap with respect to age, and does so in a large, diverse sample. Findings are limited by methodology, including single-item assessments of orgasm and a sample of single adults. Conclusion: This study revealed enduring disparities in orgasm rates from sexual intercourse, likely resulting from many factors, including sociocultural norms and inadequate sex education.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it