Research Methods in Sexuality Research

Uniqueness of Sexuality Research Role of theory What can be observed? Recorded? Sensitive nature of sexuality research - data collection method could profoundly affect results What role does culture play? Diversity? What does data mean? What ethical factors need to be considered?

Participant Selection Sexually Active? –Frequency of sexual activity –Type of sexual activity –Level of commitment –Sexual orientation

Participant Selection Generalizability –Who volunteers for sexuality studies? –What characteristics might they have that differ from those who don’t volunteer? –Does financial compensation affect who volunteers?

Data Collection Participant comfort: –Data collection confidential? –Data collection anonymous? –Researcher sensitive to participants feelings, concerns? Special population? (e.g., sexual abuse, dysfunction) Same sex researcher preferable appearance of researcher

Data Collection Human Studies –Self-report measures –Direct observation/measurement –Focus Groups Animal Studies

Data Collection Self-report measures (survey, interview) –Is the measure validated? On the population you are assessing? Is the measure up to date? –Is the measure reliable?

Data Collection Self-report measures –Pros: Able to assess wide range of sexual issues (e.g., behaviors, beliefs, fantasies) Not invasive

Data Collection Self-report measures –Cons: selection/sampling bias self-report bias: –Purposeful Distortion - Social Desirability: restricted by persons willingness to self- disclose (e.g., “I have had anal sex.”) –affected by persons subjective interpretation (e.g., “I have sexual fantasies at least once a day.” - what constitutes a sexual fantasy?) –Accuracy of memory –Ability to estimate correlational - no cause and effect (correlation b/w depression & low desire)

Data Collection Direct observation –at home or in a laboratory –participant, laboratory observations, animal research –observer bias?

Data Collection Direct observation –Reliability: would we get the same result if we observed it again? –Generalizability: ecological validity –Determining categories: no overlap, all areas covered –Observer role: is the participant or researcher the observer? –Ethical issues

Data Collection Direct observation: at home –example: daily dairy record experiences after sexual activity (e.g., intensity of orgasm) –pros: more natural, more generalizable, greater ecological validity –cons: difficult to control variables (e.g., time spent in foreplay)

Data Collection Dairies –structured vs. unstructured –Pros: reduces memory biases: ability to record behavior/feeling immediately –Cons: attrition due to amount of time needed failure to complete the diary as instructed (e.g., within time limit)

Data Collection Direct Observation: in the laboratory –two rooms: one for subject, one for experimenter privacy minimize influence of sounds/noises permits training standardization of study situation - experimenters behavior could affect outcome –stimulus: erotica that is designed for male vs. female audience –auditory? Visual? –Acceptable sexual behaviors? –characteristics of erotica (e.g., women with plastic surgery?) standardization of erotica

Data Collection Direct observation: in the laboratory –Pros: able to obtain direct measures of sexual behavior (e.g., sexual arousal, orgasm) –Cons: invasive, not generalizable, less ecological validity, subject selection bias

Data Collection Psychophysiological data: Sexual Arousal –Men air volumetric plethysmograph strain gauge Rigiscan Plus monitor - penile circumference and rigidity

Rigiscan Plus

Data Collection Psychophysiological data: Sexual Arousal –Women: vaginal photoplethysmograph –vaginal pulse amplitude (VPA) –vaginal blood volume (VBV) labial temperature changes in oxygen pressure

Vaginal Photoplethysmograph

Data Collection Psychophysical data: orgasm –Men & Women –latency to orgasm –measure muscular contractions

Data Collection Focus Groups –exploratory research (e.g., developing questionnaires) –to explore areas not amenable to direct observation –to gain understanding of a group with which there is relatively little information

Data Collection Animal studies –Pros: able to conduct experiments - manipulate variables conduct studies that would be unethical in humans conduct studies that would be logistically difficult in humans conduct studies that would be expensive in humans test hypotheses in animals prior to humans –Cons: generalizability to humans Is the animal physiology similar? Is the animal behavior comprable? (e.g., lordosis)

Characteristics of Sex Research Participants Are people willing to volunteer for sexuality studies? Conclusion: more invasive the study, fewer volunteers (Wolchik et al.) What is the difference between those who do/do not volunteer for an intrusive study? Conclusion: different in sex-related personality (e.g., sex guilt) but not different in general personality (e.g., extraversion, lying) (Farkas, Sine, & Evans)

Characteristics of Research Participants % Volunteered MenWomen film50%49% subjective arousal57%44% physiological arousal - forehead66%41% physiological arousal - clothed lap67%38% physiological arousal - unclothed30%13% genital gage26%13% (Wolchik)

Interpreting Research Results Sampling Considerations –Is a significant proportion of the population absent? –Were the participants selected based on sexual characteristics? –Did any subjects withdraw from the study? What characteristics might they have that differ from those who did not withdraw? –Was there any measurement error such that the true mean and the sample mean might differ?

Interpreting Research Results Threats to interpretation: –researchers’ beliefs, measurement issues, statistical results (statistical vs meaningful differences) –misunderstanding the mean the degree to which it applies to individuals (e.g., 28 day menstrual cycle) relative importance of being average (e.g., frequency of sexual activity vs. sexual compatibility and satisfaction –poor operational definitions (e.g., measuring attempted vs. completed sexual assault)

Think of the six women closest to you. Now guess which one will be raped this year.

Interpreting Research Results Threats to interpretation: –researchers’ beliefs, measurement issues, statistical results (statistical vs meaningful differences) –misunderstanding the mean the degree to which it applies to individuals (e.g., 28 day menstrual cycle) relative importance of being average (e.g., frequency of sexual activity vs. sexual compatibility and satisfaction –poor operational definitions (e.g., measuring attempted vs. completed sexual assault) –researchers’ language (e.g., “Have you had sex when you didn’t want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?” regret vs. rape?) –consider assumptions (e.g., woman as victims of sexual assault - what about men?) Interpret results at a societal level