MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6940437637 · doi:10.7939/r3-kkjv-fr97

Women's Experiences of Self-Compassion in Coping with Sexual Problems Following a Sexual Assault

2022· dissertation· en· W6940437637 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoping (psychology)Sexual assaultOrgasmInterpretative phenomenological analysisSexual contactSexual attractionHuman sexualitySexual relationship

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of sexual assault incidents in Canada are committed against women and girls. Among the many injurious sequelae survivors can experience post-sexual assault are sexual problems. Sexual concerns related to desire, arousal, pain, orgasm and/or sexual well-being can last for years after the assault. Given the strong association between sexual well-being and both mental and physical health, it is crucial to understand how women effectively cope with sexual concerns stemming from sexual assault. Although self-compassion has been studied as a positive way of coping with other forms of trauma, no study to date has examined self-compassion’s role in addressing the needs of female sexual assault survivors, specific to sexual issues. Thus, this study explored women’s experiences of self-compassion in coping with sexual problems following a sexual assault. Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was used to explore in detail how female survivors made sense of their world and the meanings these experiences held for them. Data were collected from 10 women across Canada in the form of semi-structured interviews held either in person or over the phone. Data analysis revealed eight themes: (a) honouring time, (b) quieting the inner critic, (c) connecting with social supports, (d) countering societal messages, (e) asserting personal boundaries and taking control, (f) engaging in regular self-care, (g) rebuilding a relationship with one’s body, and (h) persevering through emotional challenges. Clinical implications, limitations, and direction for future research are also discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207