Is Matching in Attitudes, Versus Holding More Positive Attitudes, Toward Sex in Pregnancy Predictive of New Parents’ Sexual Desire During Pregnancy and Postpartum?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People hold various attitudes toward sex in pregnancy and holding more positive attitudes toward sex in pregnancy is linked with feeling more sexually and relationally satisfied and less sexually distressed. To address current gaps in the literature, the present study employed longitudinal methods to examine how both couple members' attitudes toward sex in pregnancy, as well as whether similarity between partner attitudes toward sex in pregnancy within couples, predicts their own and their partner's sexual desire throughout pregnancy and 3-months postpartum. First-time parent couples completed surveys at 20-weeks, 32-weeks, and 3-months postpartum. When couples reported more positive attitudes toward sex early in pregnancy, they reported higher dyadic desire later in pregnancy but not in the postpartum period. No effects were observed for similarity in attitudes and desire. Findings support the importance of overall more positive attitudes, rather than similarity in attitudes, for couples' dyadic sexual desire in pregnancy. Targeting attitudes about sex through psychoeducation may be therapeutic for expectant couples.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".