Winters, J., Christoff, K., Lipovsky, L., and Gorzalka, B. B.Winters, J., Christoff, K., Lipovsky, L., and Gorzalka, B. B.

HypothesesHypotheses1. Self reported sexual arousal will correlate with physiological sexual

arousal, as measured by penile plethysmography (PPG), during both experience and regulation trials.

2. Men will exhibit a range of physiological and self reported sexual arousal regulation success.

3. Sexual arousal regulation success will correlate positively with age, sexual experiences and sexual inhibition, and negatively with markers of sexual drive and sexual compulsivity.

4. Those men who are best at regulating their sexual arousal will also be those best at regulating other emotional responses. In the case of this study, the comparison emotion will be amusement.

MethodMethodThere were two parts to the study. First, participants completed an anonymous online survey, which included:

SampleSampleA total of 35 men completed both parts of the study.

Age 27.83 (10.14;18-67)

Ethnicity Caucasian Asian Other

24 (68.6%)6 (17.1%)5 (14.3%)

Sexual Identity Heterosexual Bisexual

31 (88.6%)4 (11.4%)

Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia

AnalysesAnalysesTo help normalize the positively skewed distribution of SCSSCS scores, a log(10) transform was used (12). The transformed score, SCSTransSCSTrans, was included in subsequent correlational analyses.

Two instruction conditions were crossed with 4 possible responses to produce 8 outcome variables:

• an online consent form• a demographics and general information questionnaire• the Sexual Excitation/Sexual Inhibition ScalesSexual Excitation/Sexual Inhibition Scales (SES/SIS; 4-

6); two of three SES/SIS subscales were of interest:

SESSES – propensity for sexual excitationSIS2SIS2 – propensity for sexual inhibition due to threat of

performance consequences (e.g. STIs, unwanted pregnancy, etc.)

• the Sexual Desire Inventory-2Sexual Desire Inventory-2 (SDI2; 7); the SDI2 produces two subscales: dyadic sexual desire (SDI-DSDSDI-DSD) and solitary sexual desire (SDI2-SSDSDI2-SSD)

• the Sexual Compulsivity ScaleSexual Compulsivity Scale (SCSSCS; 8)

• the Survey of Sexual BehavioursSurvey of Sexual Behaviours (SSB); the SSB measures partnered and solitary sexual behaviours

• the Derogatis Sexual Functioning InventoryDerogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (DSFI; 9); only the DSFI sexual experiences subscale (DSFI-SEDSFI-SE) was used

ResultsResultsDescriptive statistics, t tests and correlations are presented below. Paired samples t tests, comparing experience and regulate erotic trials, revealed significant differences for all three sexual response indicators (PPG, self reported sexual arousal and self reported erection). Experience comedy trials were rated significantly more amusing than regulate trials.

Response MeansResponse Means

* p<.05, ** p<.01, ***p<.005

CorrelationsCorrelations

* p<.05, ** p<.01

Contact information:Contact information:Jason WintersDepartment of PsychologyUniversity of British Columbia2136 West MallVancouver, BCV6T 1Z4Email: jwinters@interchange.ubc.ca

ReferencesReferences1. Adams, H. E., Motsinger, P., McAnulty, R. D., & Moore, A. L. (1992). Voluntary control of penile

tumesence among homosexual and heterosexual subjects. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 21(1), 17-31.2. Mahoney, J. M., & Strassberg, D. S. (1991). Voluntary control of male sexual arousal. Archives of

Sexual Behavior, 20(1), 1-16.Dodge, B., Reece, M., Cole, S. L., & Sandford, T. G. M. (2004). Sexual compulsivity among heterosexual college students. Journal of Sex Research, 41(4), 343-350.

3. McAnulty, R. D., & Adams, H. E. (1991). Voluntary control of penile tumescence: Effect of an incentive and a signal detection task. Journal of Sex Research, 28(4), 557-577.Kalichman, S. C., Greenberg, J., & Able, G. G. (1997a). HIV-seropositive men who engage in high-risk sexual behavior: Psychological characteristics and implications for prevention. AIDS Care, 9, 441-450.

4. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002a). The sexual inhibition (SIS) and sexual excitation (SES) scales: I. Measuring sexual inhibition and excitation proneness in men. Journal of Sex Research, 39(2), 114-126.

5. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002b). The sexual inhibition (SIS) and sexual excitation (SES) scales: Ii. Predicting psychophysiological response patterns. Journal of Sex Research, 39(2), 127-132.

6. Carpenter, D. L., Janssen, E., Graham, C. A., Vorst, H., & Wicherts, J. (2006). Estimating the factor structure, reliability, and validity of women’s scores on the Sexual Inhibition/Sexual Excitation Scales (SIS/SES). Manuscript submitted for publication.

7. Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P., & Steinberg, L. (1996). The sexual desire inventory: Development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 22, 175-190.

8. Kalichman, S. C., & Rompa, D. (1995). Sexual sensation seeking and sexual compulsivity scales: Reliability, validity, and predicting HIV risk behavior. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65(3), 586-601.

9. Derogatis, L., & Melisaratos, N. (1979). The DSFI: A multidimensional measure of sexual functioning. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 5, 244-248.Glass, G. V., & Hopkins, K. D. (1996). Statistical methods in psychology and education (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

10. Beauregard, M., Levesque, J., & Bourgouin, P. (2001). Neural correlates of conscious self-regulation of emotion. Journal of Neuroscience, 21(18), 165RC:161-166.

11. Gross, J. J. (2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 39, 281-291.

12. Glass, G. V., & Hopkins, K. D. (1996). Statistical methods in psychology and education (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

At a later date, participants underwent arousal regulation testing. While being randomly exposed to erotic and comedy video clips, participants were instructed to either experience or regulate their responses. The instruction set was borrowed from a paradigm used in emotion regulation research (10, 11). During the video clip trials, physiological sexual arousal was measured with PPG. After each trial, participants rated the previous video clip, including maximum sexual arousal and erection, and amusement, on a scale of 1 (not at all ) to 9 (maximally).

Condition Response Variable

Experience

PPG peak-base millimeters circumference change E-PPGE-PPG

Self reported maximal sexual arousal E-SRSAE-SRSA

Self reported maximum proportion full erection E-SRFEE-SRFE

Self reported amusement E-SRAE-SRA

Regulate

PPG peak-base millimeters circumference change R-PPGR-PPG

Self reported maximal sexual arousal R-SRSAR-SRSA

Self reported maximum proportion full erection R-SRFER-SRFE

Self reported amusement R-SRAR-SRA

Regulation indices were calculated by dividing average response during regulate trials by average response during experience trials. The resulting values were each multiplied by 100 to create 4 percentage regulation indices. Lower index values indicate increased regulation success.

Sexual arousal regulations success index: peak-base SAI-PBSAI-PB

Sexual arousal regulations success index: self reported

maximum arousalSAI-SRMASAI-SRMA

Sexual arousal regulations success index: self reported

maximum erectionSAI-SRMESAI-SRME

Amusement regulation success index: self reported amusement AMI-SRAAMI-SRA

Mean SD Minimum Maximum t (34)

E-PPGE-PPG 27.57 11.46 7.94 55.374.152***

R-PPGR-PPG 20.98 10.86 3.32 46.31

E-SRSAE-SRSA 5.66 1.53 2.25 8.505.833***

R-SRSAR-SRSA 4.53 1.35 2.00 6.75

E-SRFEE-SRFE 5.51 1.98 1.75 8.505.477***

R-SRFER-SRFE 4.13 1.62 1.25 8.25

E-SRAE-SRA 4.65 1.59 1.75 7.504.635***

R-SRAR-SRA 3.80 1.44 1.50 7.00

Mean SD Minimum Maximum

SAI-PBSAI-PB 77.03 25.79 28.96 118.56

SAI-SRMASAI-SRMA 81.42 19.19 52.94 133.33

SAI-SRMESAI-SRME 78.57 27.42 38.46 180.00

AMI-SRAAMI-SRA 85.10 28.47 33.33 200.00

Regulation Success Indices (%)Regulation Success Indices (%)

Participants, on average, were able to regulate their sexual responses during erotic trials and their amusement responses during comedy trials.

E-PPGE-PPG E-SRSAE-SRSA

E-SRSAE-SRSA .612**p<.001

E-SRFEE-SRFE .625**p<.001

.904**p<.001

R-PPGR-PPG R-SRSAR-SRSA

R-SRSAR-SRSA .551**p<.001

R-SRFER-SRFE .590**p<.001

.858**p<.001

Across both erotic conditions, physiological sexual arousal, self reported sexual arousal and self reported degree of erection all significantly intercorrelated

Erotic Response CorrelationsErotic Response Correlations

SAI-PBSAI-PB SAI-SRMASAI-SRMA SAI-SRMESAI-SRME

SAI-SRMASAI-SRMA .385*p=.022

SAI-SRMESAI-SRME .408*p=.015

.854**p<.001

AMI-SRAAMI-SRA .247p=.153

.383*p.023

.375*p=.027

SAI-PBSAI-PB SAI-SRMASAI-SRMA SAI-SRMESAI-SRME

AgeAge .011p=.949

.104p=.552

.215p=.216

TMTM .104p=.551

.013p=.943

.068p=.697

HPHP -.286p=.096

-.127p=.469

-.236p=.172

DSFI-SEDSFI-SE .185p=.289

.153p=.381

.259p=.133

SDI2-DSDSDI2-DSD .103p=.555

.367*p=.030

.412*p=.014

SDI2-SSDSDI2-SSD .062p=.720

.232p=.179

.267p=.121

SESSES .211p=.223

.167p=.339

.265p=.124

SIS2SIS2 -.507**p=.002

-.118p=.500

-.172p=.324

SCSTransSCSTrans .126p=.472

.150p=.389

.274p=.112

* p<.05, ** p<.01

* p<.05, ** p<.01; TM = Weekly Times Masturbating, HP= Weekly Hours Pornography

The PPG regulation index correlated negatively with sexual inhibition due to fear of performance consequences but did not correlate with any other variables of interest. The two self report sexual response regulation indices only correlated with dyadic sexual desire.

BackgroundBackgroundA small body of research on the vulnerability of penile plethymography to faking and manipulation of sexual preference indicates that men have some voluntary control over their sexual arousal (1-3). There appears to be large variation in men’s ability to regulate their arousal to preferred stimuli, with some exhibiting moderate success and others failing completely. To the best of our knowledge, no studies have examined the factors differentiating effective from ineffective regulators.

Regulation Index CorrelationsRegulation Index Correlations

The PPG regulation index correlated with both self report sexual response regulation indices but did not correlate with the amusement regulation index. The two self report sexual response regulation indices correlated with each other and also with the amusement regulation index.

ConclusionConclusionHypotheses 1, 2 and 4 were supported by our data. On the other hand, hypothesis 3 was only partially supported. Age and sexual excitation, desire, experiences and compulsivity did not correlate with physiological sexual arousal regulation; however, sexual inhibition due to fear of performance consequences did. Those men scoring highest on sexual inhibition were best able to regulate their physiological sexual arousal. Self reported sexual arousal regulation only correlated with dyadic sexual desire. Higher scores on dyadic sexual desire were related to poorer regulation, as self reported by the participants.Overall, our results suggest that only those men who score high on sexual inhibition should be able to minimize or fake their sexual preference profiles, when assessed with the PPG.