Relationships, love and sexuality: what the Filipino teens think and feel

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In order to achieve a change among teens' sexual behavior, an important step is to improve our knowledge about their opinions concerning relationships, love and sexuality.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A questionnaire including topics on relationships, love and sexuality was distributed to a target population of 4,000 Filipino students from third year high school to third year college. Participants were obtained through multi-stage sampling of clusters of universities and schools. This paper concentrates on teens aged 13 to 18.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Students reported that they obtained information about love and sexuality mainly from friends. However, they valued parents' opinion more than friends'. They revealed few conversations with their parents on these topics. A majority of them would like to have more information, mainly about emotion-related topics. Almost half of respondents were not aware that condoms are not 100% effective in preventing STIs or pregnancies. More girls, compared to boys, were sensitive and opposed to several types of sexism. After adjusting for sex, age and institution, the belief of 100% condom effectiveness and the approval of pornography and sexism were associated with being sexually experienced.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>There is room for further encouraging parents to talk more with their children about sexuality, specially aspects related to feelings and emotions in order to help them make better sexual choices. Indeed, teens wish to better communicate with their parents on these issues. Condoms are regarded as safer than what they really are by almost half of the participants of this study, and such incorrect knowledge seems to be associated with sexual initiation.</p

Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: setting the baseline knowledge on the animal diversity in Brazil

The limited temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy of species lists, made available in a traditional manner in scientific publications, has always represented a problem. These lists are invariably limited to a few taxonomic groups and do not represent up-to-date knowledge of all species and classifications. In this context, the Brazilian megadiverse fauna is no exception, and the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB) (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/), made public in 2015, represents a database on biodiversity anchored on a list of valid and expertly recognized scientific names of animals in Brazil. The CTFB is updated in near real time by a team of more than 800 specialists. By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nominal species, with 125,138 that were considered valid. Most of the valid species were arthropods (82.3%, with more than 102,000 species) and chordates (7.69%, with over 11,000 species). These taxa were followed by a cluster composed of Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species), Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 species). All remaining groups had less than 1,000 species reported in Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera (628 species), Rotifera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species) representing those with more than 500 species. Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and direct efforts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil, but it is also fundamental in providing the best available list of valid nominal species to users, including those in science, health, conservation efforts, and any initiative involving animals. The importance of the CTFB is evidenced by the elevated number of citations in the scientific literature in diverse areas of biology, law, anthropology, education, forensic science, and veterinary science, among others

Run Away or Stick Together? The Impact of Organization-Specific Adverse Events on Alliance Partner Defection

Alliances are inter-organizational relationships wherein partners agree to engage in joint action and share benefits and burdens. But when might an adverse event that strikes one partner become too burdensome for another partner? Extant theories of alliance instability provide incomplete answers, which is problematic: for stricken organizations, anticipating whether their non-stricken partners will remain in the alliance can be essential for survival. Integrating insights from alliance dynamics and organizational stigma literatures, we theorize how an organization-specific adverse event affects a non-stricken partner's decision to continue with or defect from an alliance by considering factors that shift the balance between cohesive and disruptive forces. We propose that high stigmatization risk will increase the probability of partner defection through two disruptive mechanisms: relational uncertainty and stigma anxiety. Building on the idea that the same factors contributing to alliance formation may also condition partner defection, we theorize about the roles of partner resource interdependencies, relational embeddedness, and perceived partner similarity in amplifying or attenuating disruptive mechanisms triggered by an adverse event. We extend the research on partner defection and alliance instability by advancing an event-based view of alliance instability and specifying the conditions under which an alliance partner might defect