... |
... |
@@ -132,191 +132,4 @@ |
132 |
132 |
|
133 |
133 |
💥 If this works, we can move on to the next study! 🚀 Let me know how it looks! |
134 |
134 |
|
135 |
|
-I'll process the next study and populate the template accordingly. Let me extract the key details from the uploaded document now. |
136 |
136 |
|
137 |
|
-Here's the structured summary for the next study: |
138 |
|
- |
139 |
|
---- |
140 |
|
- |
141 |
|
-{{expand title="Study: Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018" expanded="false"}} |
142 |
|
-**Source:** *JAMA Network Open* |
143 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2020* |
144 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Ueda P, Mercer CH, Ghaznavi C, Herbenick D.* |
145 |
|
-**Title:** *"Trends in Frequency of Sexual Activity and Number of Sexual Partners Among Adults Aged 18 to 44 Years in the US, 2000-2018"* |
146 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833](https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3833) |
147 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Public Health, Sexual Behavior, Demography* |
148 |
|
- |
149 |
|
---- |
150 |
|
- |
151 |
|
-## **Key Statistics** |
152 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
153 |
|
- - Study analyzed **General Social Survey (2000-2018)** data. |
154 |
|
- - Found **declining trends in sexual activity** among young adults. |
155 |
|
- |
156 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
157 |
|
- - Decreases in sexual activity were most prominent among **men aged 18-34**. |
158 |
|
- - Factors like **marital status, employment, and psychological well-being** were associated with changes in sexual frequency. |
159 |
|
- |
160 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
161 |
|
- - Frequency of sexual activity decreased by **8-10%** over the studied period. |
162 |
|
- - Number of sexual partners remained **relatively stable** despite declining activity rates. |
163 |
|
- |
164 |
|
---- |
165 |
|
- |
166 |
|
-## **Findings** |
167 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
168 |
|
- - A significant decline in sexual frequency, especially among **younger men**. |
169 |
|
- - Shifts in relationship dynamics and economic stressors may contribute to the trend. |
170 |
|
- |
171 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
172 |
|
- - More pronounced decline among **unmarried individuals**. |
173 |
|
- - No major change observed for **married adults** over time. |
174 |
|
- |
175 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
176 |
|
- - **Mental health and employment status** were correlated with decreased activity. |
177 |
|
- - Social factors such as **screen time and digital entertainment consumption** are potential contributors. |
178 |
|
- |
179 |
|
---- |
180 |
|
- |
181 |
|
-## **Critique and Observations** |
182 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
183 |
|
- - **Large sample size** from a nationally representative dataset. |
184 |
|
- - **Longitudinal design** enables trend analysis over time. |
185 |
|
- |
186 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
187 |
|
- - Self-reported data may introduce **response bias**. |
188 |
|
- - No direct causal mechanisms tested for the decline in sexual activity. |
189 |
|
- |
190 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
191 |
|
- - Further studies should incorporate **qualitative data** on behavioral shifts. |
192 |
|
- - Additional factors such as **economic shifts and social media usage** need exploration. |
193 |
|
- |
194 |
|
---- |
195 |
|
- |
196 |
|
-## **Relevance to Subproject** |
197 |
|
-- Provides evidence on **changing demographic behaviors** in relation to relationships and social interactions. |
198 |
|
-- Highlights the role of **mental health, employment, and societal changes** in personal behaviors. |
199 |
|
- |
200 |
|
---- |
201 |
|
- |
202 |
|
-## **Suggestions for Further Exploration** |
203 |
|
-1. Investigate the **impact of digital media consumption** on relationship dynamics. |
204 |
|
-2. Examine **regional and cultural differences** in sexual activity trends. |
205 |
|
- |
206 |
|
---- |
207 |
|
- |
208 |
|
-## **Summary of Research Study** |
209 |
|
-This study examines **trends in sexual frequency and number of partners among U.S. adults (2000-2018)**, highlighting significant **declines in sexual activity, particularly among young men**. The research utilized **General Social Survey data** to analyze the impact of **sociodemographic factors, employment status, and mental well-being** on sexual behavior. |
210 |
|
- |
211 |
|
-This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study's contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis. |
212 |
|
- |
213 |
|
---- |
214 |
|
- |
215 |
|
-## **📄 Download Full Study** |
216 |
|
-{{velocity}} |
217 |
|
-#set($doi = "10.1001_jamanetworkopen.2020.3833") |
218 |
|
-#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf") |
219 |
|
-#if($xwiki.exists("attach:$filename")) |
220 |
|
-[[Download>>attach:$filename]] |
221 |
|
-#else |
222 |
|
-{{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}} |
223 |
|
-#end |
224 |
|
-{{/velocity}} |
225 |
|
- |
226 |
|
-{{/expand}} |
227 |
|
- |
228 |
|
-{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
229 |
|
- |
230 |
|
- |
231 |
|
-{{expand title="Study: One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness" expanded="false"}} |
232 |
|
-**Source:** *Current Psychology* |
233 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2024* |
234 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Brandon Sparks, Alexandra M. Zidenberg, Mark E. Olver* |
235 |
|
-**Title:** *"One is the Loneliest Number: Involuntary Celibacy (Incel), Mental Health, and Loneliness"* |
236 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z](https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04275-z) |
237 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Psychology, Mental Health, Social Isolation* |
238 |
|
- |
239 |
|
---- |
240 |
|
- |
241 |
|
-## **Key Statistics** |
242 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
243 |
|
- - Study analyzed **67 self-identified incels** and **103 non-incel men**. |
244 |
|
- - Incels reported **higher loneliness and lower social support** compared to non-incels. |
245 |
|
- |
246 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
247 |
|
- - Incels exhibited **higher levels of depression, anxiety, and self-critical rumination**. |
248 |
|
- - **Social isolation was a key factor** differentiating incels from non-incels. |
249 |
|
- |
250 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
251 |
|
- - 95% of incels in the study reported **having depression**, with 38% receiving a formal diagnosis. |
252 |
|
- - **Higher externalization of blame** was linked to stronger incel identification. |
253 |
|
- |
254 |
|
---- |
255 |
|
- |
256 |
|
-## **Findings** |
257 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
258 |
|
- - Incels experience **heightened rejection sensitivity and loneliness**. |
259 |
|
- - Lack of social support correlates with **worse mental health outcomes**. |
260 |
|
- |
261 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
262 |
|
- - **Avoidant attachment styles** were a strong predictor of incel identity. |
263 |
|
- - **Mate value perceptions** significantly differed between incels and non-incels. |
264 |
|
- |
265 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
266 |
|
- - Incels **engaged in fewer positive coping mechanisms** such as emotional support or positive reframing. |
267 |
|
- - Instead, they relied on **solitary coping strategies**, worsening their isolation. |
268 |
|
- |
269 |
|
---- |
270 |
|
- |
271 |
|
-## **Critique and Observations** |
272 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
273 |
|
- - **First quantitative study** on incels’ social isolation and mental health. |
274 |
|
- - **Robust sample size** and validated psychological measures. |
275 |
|
- |
276 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
277 |
|
- - Sample drawn from **Reddit communities**, which may not represent all incels. |
278 |
|
- - **No causal conclusions**—correlations between isolation and inceldom need further research. |
279 |
|
- |
280 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
281 |
|
- - Future studies should **compare incel forum users vs. non-users**. |
282 |
|
- - Investigate **potential intervention strategies** for social integration. |
283 |
|
- |
284 |
|
---- |
285 |
|
- |
286 |
|
-## **Relevance to Subproject** |
287 |
|
-- Highlights **mental health vulnerabilities** within the incel community. |
288 |
|
-- Supports research on **loneliness, attachment styles, and social dominance orientation**. |
289 |
|
-- Examines how **peer rejection influences self-perceived mate value**. |
290 |
|
- |
291 |
|
---- |
292 |
|
- |
293 |
|
-## **Suggestions for Further Exploration** |
294 |
|
-1. Explore how **online community participation** affects incel mental health. |
295 |
|
-2. Investigate **cognitive biases** influencing self-perceived rejection among incels. |
296 |
|
-3. Assess **therapeutic interventions** to address incel social isolation. |
297 |
|
- |
298 |
|
---- |
299 |
|
- |
300 |
|
-## **Summary of Research Study** |
301 |
|
-This study examines the **psychological characteristics of self-identified incels**, comparing them with non-incel men in terms of **mental health, loneliness, and coping strategies**. The research found **higher depression, anxiety, and avoidant attachment styles among incels**, as well as **greater reliance on solitary coping mechanisms**. It suggests that **lack of social support plays a critical role in exacerbating incel identity and related mental health concerns**. |
302 |
|
- |
303 |
|
-This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the study’s contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis. |
304 |
|
- |
305 |
|
---- |
306 |
|
- |
307 |
|
-## **📄 Download Full Study** |
308 |
|
-{{velocity}} |
309 |
|
-#set($doi = "10.1007_s12144-023-04275-z") |
310 |
|
-#set($filename = "${doi}.pdf") |
311 |
|
-#if($xwiki.exists("attach:$filename")) |
312 |
|
-[[Download>>attach:$filename]] |
313 |
|
-#else |
314 |
|
-{{html}}<span style="color: red; font-weight: bold;">🚨 PDF Not Available 🚨</span>{{/html}} |
315 |
|
-#end |
316 |
|
-{{/velocity}} |
317 |
|
- |
318 |
|
-{{/expand}} |
319 |
|
- |
320 |
|
-{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
321 |
|
- |
322 |
|
- |