MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7110703632

A Psychometric Investigation of the Consumption of Pornography Scale (COPS-G) in Undergraduate Students at a Private Christian University

2025· article· W7110703632 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - George Fox University (George Fox University) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPornographyFeelingScale (ratio)Sample (material)Internal consistencyConsumption (sociology)Psychosocial
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pornography is a multidimensional and complex topic that provokes feelings of shame, curiosity, and anxiety. In recent times, pornographic searches on the internet amounted to 25% of total search engine requests (Cooper et al., 2000). In a Canadian study on college students’ problematic pornography use, a higher level of pornography use was associated with negative psychosocial functioning and maladaptive use of cannabis, alcohol, gambling, and video games (Harper & Hodgins, 2016). Many researchers have attempted to mitigate the inconsistent measurement of pornography usage (Mckee et al., 2020; Short et al., 2012). Hatch et al. (2020) addressed these measurement issues and developed a pornography usage measure that focuses on behavior rather than subjective perception. The goal of the current study is to further evaluate the psychometric functioning of the COPS-G in a novel sample of Christian undergraduate students. We hypothesize that the COPS-G will demonstrate: (a) adequate internal consistency; (b) convergent validity; and (c) structural validity. Participants consisted of a convenience sample of undergraduate students from a private, Christian university in the Pacific Northwest. The COPSG subscales in this study demonstrated adequate internal consistency within the whole sample. The COPS-G subscales demonstrated mixed support for convergent validity. For structural validity, the three-factor models performed adequately, with the bifactor model performing the best. The present study adds to the complexity of this research and also provides some directionality for future research in regard to the behavioral elements of pornography use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - George Fox University (George Fox University)Same topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207