Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38596769›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health2023

Multiple Casual Sex Scripts: Shared Beliefs about Behavior among Portuguese Emerging Adults.

Rita Luz, Ana Pegado, Cristina Godinho, Cícero Pereira, Maria-João Alvarez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The Longitudinal Relationships among Casual Sex and Psychological Well-Being in Chinese College Student.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rita LuzFaculdade de Psicologia, CICPSI, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Ana PegadoFaculdade de Psicologia, CICPSI, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Cristina GodinhoCatólica Research Centre for Psychological, Family and Social Wellbeing, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Cícero PereiraInstituto de Ciências Sociais, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Maria-João AlvarezFaculdade de Psicologia, CICPSI, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6048-3778

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Empirical research to differentiate casual sex scripts is still limited. We aimed to ascertain the sexual scripts for three main types of casual sexual relationships: Methods: Through a mixed-method approach, we performed a study consisting in two sequential tasks to (1) complete three lists of script actions, and (2) identify the most agreed-upon actions for each casual sexual relationship. Results: An important number of actions and events were identified for the three casual sexual scripts, reflecting a high level of elaboration and structure. Following a cognitive-script methodology, the actions retained for the content of the script for each casual sexual relationship were those obtaining at least 60% in respect to the mean of their centrality to the encounter. Only 16.5% of actions were shared among the three scripts, demonstrating their distinctiveness. Conclusion: Knowledge about the different casual sex scripts can be used to develop relational and personal skills within CSRs and decrease unwanted experiences such as condomless sex.

Indexed as

Casual sexual relationshipscasual sexual scriptscondom useemerging adultssexual behavior

Identifiers

PMID38596769
PMCPMC10903638

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.