Unveiling Sexting’s Dark Side: Exploring the Psychological and Childhood Correlates of Coercive Sexting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexting has become an increasingly popular sexual behaviour, and with this, sexting coercion has become a new form of sexual victimization. Archival data from an anonymized community sample (18-30 years old), previously collected for a study related to consensual and unsolicited sexting was used for the current study. Approximately 1 in 4 participants (29%; 816/2812; Nwomen = 569, Nmen = 184) reported being pressured or threatened into sexting. Odds ratio analyses were used to assess psychological and childhood correlates of coercive sexting. Results found that gender (OR = .262, p < .001, 95% CI [.215, .320]), higher reported peer pressure (OR = 1.508, p < .001, 95% CI [1.402, 1.623]), and increased familial instability during childhood (OR = 3.378, p < .001, 95% CI [2.176, 5.245]) were significant correlates for experiencing coercive sexting. The current findings will help inform educational materials and prevention efforts to decrease rates of sexting victimization.
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".