Skip to main content
NCBI home page
International Journal of Sexual Health logoLink to International Journal of Sexual Health
. 2021 Mar 10;33(2):222–228. doi: 10.1080/19317611.2021.1888170

Exploratory Findings on U.S. Adolescents’ Pornography Use, Dominant Behavior, and Sexual Satisfaction

Paul J Wright a,✉, Debby Herbenick b, Bryant Paul a, Robert S Tokunaga c
PMCID: PMC10903642  PMID: 38596752

Abstract

Objectives: Sexual satisfaction is an important component of sexual health and wellbeing across the life course, including adolescence. While research on pornography use and sexual satisfaction has become increasingly common, the vast majority of studies have focused on adults. An additional limitation of studies to date is a lack of assessment of mediating mechanisms.

Methods: To help address these gaps in the literature, this study used data from a population-based probability survey of U.S. adolescents to assess whether an increased likelihood of engaging in dominant sexual behaviors such as choking, spanking, and name calling was a possible mediator.

Results: Path analytic results supported a conceptual model whereby youth with greater exposure to pornography are more likely to engage in sexually dominant behaviors, distancing them from their partners, and reducing their sense of sexual satisfaction.

Conclusion: These results, while preliminary due to a small analytical sample and cross-sectional design, should serve as a springboard for larger-scale efforts in this important area of human sexuality.

Keywords: Pornography, sexual satisfaction, sexual health, dominance, 3AM

Introduction

Sexual satisfaction is an important component of sexual health and wellbeing across the life course, including adolescence (Flynn et al., 2016; Ford et al., 2019; Hensel & Fortenberry, 2013; Tolman & McClelland, 2011; Ventegodt et al., 2005). Research on pornography use and sexual satisfaction has become increasingly common. However, the vast majority of studies have focused on adults. For instance, a recent meta-analytic review of 50 studies found only two on adolescents’ pornography use and sexual satisfaction (Wright et al., 2017). A systematic narrative review published two years later identified only the same two studies (Grubbs et al., 2019). Additional data are needed on the nature of the relationship between adolescents’ use of pornography and sexual satisfaction.

Whether among adolescents or adults, an additional limitation of studies to date is a lack of assessment of mediating mechanisms (i.e., the processes by which change in one variable leads to change in another). In fact, the first limitation Wright et al. (2017) listed in the conclusion of their quantitative literature synthesis was that there were not enough studies to conduct a mediational meta-analysis. Using data from a U.S. population-based probability study, the purpose of this brief report is to make an inroad toward reducing the magnitude of these deficiencies in the literature.

Present study

Studies finding that pornography consumers are less satisfied with partnered sex have often hypothesized that sexual scripting processes are at least partially responsible for the association (Grubbs et al., 2019). Sexual scripts provide viewers with socially constructed guidelines for particular sexual roles and behaviors (Gagnon & Simon, 1973; Laws & Schwartz, 1977). For example, Wright’s (2011, 2014) script acquisition, activation, application model (3AM) of sexual media socialization theorizes that sexual media can provide youth with novel scripts (acquisition), prime scripts that youth have previously acquired (activation), and encourage youth to personally use scripts by portraying particular behaviors as normative and appropriate (application).

Given research on the positive benefits of warm, intimate, tender behaviors during sex (Dogan et al., 2018; Fisher et al., 2015; Herbenick et al., 2017; Skałacka & Gerymski, 2019) and the common depiction of the converse in popular pornography (Bridges et al., 2010; Fritz et al., 2020; Gorman et al., 2010; Sun et al., 2008; Vannier et al., 2014), it might be expected that (a) youth with greater exposure to pornography are more likely to engage in sexually dominant behaviors such as choking, spanking, and name calling that (b) emotionally distance them from their partners and reduce their sense of sexual satisfaction.1 Findings from Wright et al. (2019) provide preliminary evidence supporting the plausibility of this mediational pathway. In this study of German adults, pornography consumers were less likely to engage in affectionate sexual communication. However, adults who engaged in affectionate communication were more sexually satisfied than those who did not. Thus, the present study posits a path model wherein greater pornography exposure is associated with sexually dominant behavior, which in turn is associated with lower sexual satisfaction (pornography → dominant behavior → lower sexual satisfaction).

Method

Procedure and participants

The data for the present paper came from the National Survey of Porn Use, Relationships, and Sexual Socialization (NSPRSS), a population-based probability survey of Americans aged 14 to 60. Study measures and protocols were reviewed and approved by the institutional review board at the first author’s institution. Research funding was provided by The Harnisch Foundation, Artemis Rising Foundation, The Fledgling Fund, and Embrey Family Foundation, among others (see acknowledgements).

NSPRSS was conducted using the Ipsos (formerly GfK) KnowledgePanel® (Menlo Park, CA). KnowledgePanel® has been used for various sexuality-related research studies in the United States, including those focused on adolescents (e.g., Beckmeyer et al., 2020; Cuffe et al., 2016; Fortenberry et al., 2010). Participants were sampled from KnowledgePanel®, a probability-based online panel designed to be nationally representative of non-institutionalized, English-speaking Americans. The KnowledgePanel® was initially constructed using address-based sampling via the U.S. Postal Service’s Delivery Sequence File. Individuals in the United States are thus randomly selected to be invited into the panel; those without access to the internet are provided with access if they wish to join the panel. Poststratification statistical weights were used to correct for nonresponse or under or over coverage.

The target population consisted of adults aged 18–60 as well as an oversample of adults and their 14- to 18- year old son or daughter. Adults were recruited directly from KnowledgePanel, whereas adolescents were recruited through their participating parents. Parents were assured that their children would only be asked questions correspondent to their level of relational and sexual experience. For instance, only adolescents who were in a relationship were asked about sexual satisfaction and only adolescents who were sexually experienced were asked about their sexually dominant behavior. Parents were asked to provide their adolescent respondent with total privacy while taking the survey and all participants were told that researchers would have no access to their names or other identifiers.

The 14- to 18- year old NSPRSS adolescent sub-sample (N = 614) is the focus of the present analysis. Of these, 91 were currently in a relationship as well as sexually experienced (i.e., had engaged in oral, vaginal, or anal sex), and provided data on their pornography exposure, sexually dominant behavior, and sexual satisfaction. They averaged 16.97 years in age (SD = 1.13) and came from 27 states. Additional participant details are provided in Table 1.

Table 1.

Participant demographics.

Characteristic n (%)
Sex assigned at birth  
 Male 41 (45.05)
 Female 50 (54.95)
Gender identity  
 Man 41 (45.05)
 Woman 48 (52.75)
 Transgender 2 (2.20)
Age  
 14 4 (4.40)
 15 4 (4.40)
 16 21 (23.07)
 17 23 (25.27)
 18 39 (42.86)
Race/ethnicity  
 White, non-Hispanic 39 (42.86)
 Black, non-Hispanic 19 (20.88)
 Other, non-Hispanic 2 (2.20)
 Hispanic 29 (31.86)
 Multiple races/ethnicities 2 (2.20)
Sexual orientation  
 Heterosexual/straight 78 (85.71)
 Gay or lesbian 2 (2.20)
 Bisexual 11 (12.09)
 Other 0 (0.00)
Open in a new tab

Note. Participants’ came from 27 states spanning the west coast, south west, midwest, south, southeast, and northeast.

Focal measures

Pornography

Participants who indicated they had seen pornography were asked whether they had viewed eight categories suggested by content analyses to feature dominant sexual behaviors (Bridges et al., 2010; Fritz et al., 2020; Fritz & Paul, 2017; Gorman et al., 2010; Hald & Stulhofer, 2016; Klaassen & Peter, 2015; Paul, 2009; Sun et al., 2008; Vannier et al., 2014). The categories were rough oral sex (i.e., a male forces or aggressively thrusts his penis in and out of a person’s mouth), double-penetration (i.e., two or more penises or objects in one person’s vagina and/or anus at the same time), gangbang (i.e., multiple different people having sex with one person after another), facial ejaculation (i.e., a male ejaculating on a person’s face), amateur (i.e., “regular” people who are ostensibly not professional models or actors), BDSM (e.g., bondage/domination), coercion (i.e., someone seems to be persuaded or forced to do something sexually they are unsure if they want to do or don’t want to do), and simulated rape. Youth who had not seen the category in question, or who had indicated they had never seen pornography, were coded 0. Youth who had seen the category in question were coded 1. Responses were summed to form a pornography exposure index (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.79), with higher scores indicating greater exposure (M = 2.69, SD = 2.68).

Sexually dominant behavior

Three sexually dominant behaviors (Sun et al., 2017; Wright et al., 2015) that have been found in content analyses of popular pornography (Bridges et al., 2010; Fritz et al., 2020) were assessed: spanking (i.e., spanking partner’s butt as part of sex play), choking (choking partner as part of sex play), and name calling (i.e., calling partner derogatory names as part of sex play). Youth who had engaged in a behavior were coded 1; youth who had not engaged in a behavior were coded 0. Responses were summed to form an index of sexually dominant behavior (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.58), with higher scores indicating greater sexual dominance (M = 0.51, SD = 0.79). Although the alpha for this index was lower than “rules-of-thumb” generally indicate (Iacobucci & Duhachek, 2003), a summation approach was deemed optimal due to the consistent zero-order correlations between the three items (average r = 0.33) and because alpha is attenuated when fewer items are used (Osburn, 2000).

Sexual satisfaction

Using an item adapted from established measures of sexual function (Rosen et al., 1997; 2000), and following prior studies of pornography use and sexual satisfaction (Morgan, 2011; Peter & Valkenburg, 2009), youth were asked how satisfied they had been over the past 4 weeks with their sexual relationship with their partner on a scale ranging from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied), M = 3.88, SD = 1.05). Higher scores were indicative of greater sexual satisfaction.

Results

Path analysis was used to test the hypothesized model of pornography consumption leading to sexually dominant behavior, which in turn predicts sexual satisfaction. To test whether sexually dominant behavior mediates the relationship between pornography consumption and sexual satisfaction, the indirect effect was also calculated.

The fit indices of the path analysis demonstrated that the proposed model fits the data well, χ2(1) = 0.74, p = 0.39, comparative fit index (CFI) > 0.99, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.00, 90% CI [0.00, 0.26], square root mean residual (SRMR) = 0.03. An illustration of the hypothesized model with the standardized path coefficients is presented in Figure 1. Greater pornography consumption predicts the use of dominant behaviors during sex (β = 0.53, SE = 0.08, p < 0.001). These sexually dominant behaviors are in turn negatively associated with sexual satisfaction with partners (β = −0.36, SE = 0.09, p < 0.001). The overall fit of the model and the path coefficients supported the proposed process of pornography’s statistical effect on sexual satisfaction. The mediation test identifies whether the effect of pornography consumption on sexual satisfaction flows through the mediating variable, which in this case is sexually dominant behavior. The indirect effect estimate, testing the mediation, was significant (b = −0.07, SE = 0.02, p = 0.002).2

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Path results for the hypothesized model. Estimates are standardized path coefficients. ***p < 0.001.

Conclusion

Because of a paucity of research on adolescents’ pornography use and sexual satisfaction specifically and a lack of research on the mechanisms linking pornography use to lower sexual satisfaction among all age groups, this brief report used data from a population-based probability study of youth in the United States to assess whether an increased likelihood of engaging in dominant sexual behaviors such as choking, spanking, and name calling was one possible mediator. Path analytic results supported a model wherein greater adolescent pornography exposure predicts engaging in dominant sexual behaviors, which in turn result in a lower sense of sexual satisfaction with one’s partner. Some adolescent pornography viewers may be curious about and/or sexually aroused by such behaviors in the context of solo consumption and masturbation, and may even believe that the behaviors will have positive interactive benefits. However, their actual enactment in dyadic relationships may cause young people or their partners to feel hurt, anxious, scared, and/or emotionally distanced, particularly if the dominant behaviors were not desired or communicated about (e.g., Herbenick et al., 2019; Lofgren-Martenson & Mansson, 2010; Rothman et al., 2015). A dynamic of pornography leading to heightened satisfaction for masturbatory purposes but diminished satisfaction with partnered sex would be consistent with recent theorizing on both the rewards and drawbacks of pornography viewing on sexual quality (Leonhardt et al., 2019). These findings underscore recent calls in the literature for pornography literacy programs for adolescents (Rothman et al., 2018, 2020).

It must be emphasized, however, that these findings are preliminary. The analytic sample was small, precluding the assessment of moderating factors (e.g., gender – Wright et al., 2018). The data were gathered in one country. The design was cross-sectional. Thus, the generalizability of the findings, as well as the time-ordering of the correlations that were modeled, need replication (but see Wright, 2021b). Because of the centrality of sexual satisfaction to sexual health and wellbeing and longitudinal and experimental evidence of pornography’s effects on adult sexual satisfaction and other sexual outcomes (Allen et al., 1995; Hald et al., 2010; Tokunaga et al., 2019, 2020; Wright et al., 2016, 2017), however, it is important that the findings serve as a springboard for future efforts in this important area of adolescent sexual development.3

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the following for their generous support of our research: Julie Parker Benello, Abigail E. Disney, Natasha and David Dolby, Embrey Family Foundation, The Fledgling Fund, Ruth Ann Harnisch and The Harnisch Foundation, Chandra Jessee, Suzanne Lerner, Cristina Ljungberg, Ann Lovell, Nion McEvoy, Regina K. Scully, Artemis Rising Foundation, Lindsey Taylor Wood and Jacki Zehner. We are also grateful to Jill Bauer, Ronna Gradus, and Rashida Jones for their participation in survey development, including their review and feedback on survey drafts.

Notes

1

Although these behaviors do not necessarily result in emotional distancing, especially among sexually experienced adults with strong sexual self-concepts and communication skills, we hypothesize that this is the most likely outcome among adolescents.

2

Three post hoc analyses were conducted at the request of a reviewer. In the first analysis, one item from the pornography (i.e., amateur) and one item from the sexually dominant behaviors (i.e., name calling) measures were removed to see if parameter estimates of the models changed. The revised model fit the data well, χ2(1) = 1.01, p = 0.32, CFI > 0.99, RMSEA = 0.01, 90% CI [0.00, 0.28], SRMR = 0.03. Pornography consumption remained a predictor of sexually dominant behaviors (β = 0.52, SE = 0.08, p < 0.001), which in turn was associated with lower sexual satisfaction (β = –0.35, SE = 0.09, p < 0.001). The indirect effect representing mediation also remained significant (b = –0.08, SE = 0.02, p = 0.002). The subsequent analyses included several control variables (i.e., age, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation) in the original and revised models to determine whether their inclusion would affect the hypothesized path estimates (see Wright, 2021a, for a critique of control variable usage in pornography effects research). The control variables were modeled as predictors of the sexually dominant behaviors and sexual satisfaction constructs. In the original model reported in the main analysis, the inclusion of the control variables did not substantively affect model fit, χ2(1) = 0.40, p = 0.53, CFI > 0.99, RMSEA = 0.01, 90% CI [0.00, 0.24], SRMR = 0.01. Pornography consumption was positively associated with sexually dominant behaviors (β = 0.48, SE = 0.09, p < 0.001), which was then negatively associated with sexual satisfaction (β = –0.39, SE = 0.10, p < 0.001). The indirect effect of pornography consumption on sexual satisfaction through sexually dominant behaviors, with the control variables manifest, was significant (b = –0.07, SE = 0.03, p = 0.005). Finally, the control variables were added to the revised model. The model satisfactorily fit the data, χ2(1) = 0.70, p = 0.40, CFI > 0.99, RMSEA = 0.01, 90% CI [0.00, 0.26], SRMR = 0.01. Pornography consumption predicted sexually dominant behaviors (β = 0.47, SE = 0.10, p < 0.001), and these dominant behaviors subsequently predicted lower sexual satisfaction (β = –0.38, SE = 0.10, p < 0.001). The mediation result in this model was similar to the other models (b = –0.08, SE = 0.03, p = 0.06).

3

A reviewer also suggested that future focus group studies ask teenagers to describe and rank sexual behaviors that they feel are most and least dominant.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

References

  1. Allen, M. I. K. E., D'Alessio, D. A. V. E., & Brezgel, K. E. R. I. (1995). A meta-analysis summarizing the effects of pornography II: Aggression after exposure. Human Communication Research, 22(2), 258–283. 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1995.tb00368.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Beckmeyer, J. J., Herbenick, D., Fu, T. C., Dodge, B., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2020). Prevalence of romantic experiences and competencies among 14 to 17 year olds: Implications for the primary care setting. Clinical Pediatrics, 59(2), 116–126. 10.1177/0009922819885659 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bridges, A. J., Wosnitzer, R., Scharrer, E., Sun, C., & Liberman, R. (2010). Aggression and sexual behavior in best-selling pornography videos: A content analysis update. Violence against Women, 16(10), 1065–1085. 10.1177/1077801210382866 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cuffe, K. M., Newton-Levinson, A., Gift, T. L., McFarlane, M., & Leichliter, J. S. (2016). Sexually transmitted infection testing among adolescents and young adults in the United States. Journal of Adolescent Health, 58(5), 512–519. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.01.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Dogan, J., Hargons, C., Meiller, C., Oluokun, J., Montique, C., & Malone, N. (2018). Catchin’ feelings: Experiences of intimacy during black college students’ sexual encounters. Journal of Black Sexuality and Relationships, 5(2), 81–107. 10.1353/bsr.2018.0021 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fisher, W. A., Donahue, K. L., Long, J. S., Heiman, J. R., Rosen, R. C., & Sand, M. S. (2015). Individual and partner correlates of sexual satisfaction and relationship happiness in midlife couples: Dyadic analysis of the international survey of relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(6), 1609–1620. 10.1007/s10508-014-0426-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Flynn, K. E., Lin, L., Bruner, D. W., Cyranowski, J. M., Hahn, E. A., Jeffery, D. D., Reese, J. B., Reeve, B. B., Shelby, R. A., & Weinfurt, K. P. (2016). Sexual satisfaction and the importance of sexual health to quality of life throughout the life course of US adults. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 13(11), 1642–1650. 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.08.011 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Ford, J. V., Corona Vargas, E., Finotelli, I., Jr, Fortenberry, J. D., Kismödi, E., Philpott, A., Rubio-Aurioles, E., & Coleman, E. (2019). Why pleasure matters: Its global relevance for sexual health, sexual rights and wellbeing. International Journal of Sexual Health, 31(3), 217–230. 10.1080/19317611.2019.1654587 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fortenberry, J. D., Schick, V., Herbenick, D., Sanders, S. A., Dodge, B., & Reece, M. (2010). Sexual behaviors and condom use at last vaginal intercourse: A national sample of adolescents ages 14 to 17 years. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 305–314. 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.02018.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Fritz, N., & Paul, B. (2017). From orgasms to spanking: A content analysis of the agentic and objectifying sexual scripts in feminist, for women, and mainstream pornography. Sex Roles, 77(9–10), 639–652. 10.1007/s11199-017-0759-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Fritz, N., Malic, V., Paul, B., & Zhou, Y. (2020). A descriptive analysis of the types, targets, and relative frequency of aggression in mainstream pornography. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 49(8), 3041–3053. 10.1007/s10508-020-01773-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Aldine. [Google Scholar]
  13. Gorman, S., Monk-Turner, E., & Fish, J. N. (2010). Free adult Internet web sites. Gender Issues, 27(3–4), 131–145. 10.1007/s12147-010-9095-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Grubbs, J. B., Wright, P. J., Braden, A. L., Wilt, J. A., & Kraus, S. W. (2019). Internet pornography use and sexual motivation: A systematic review and integration. Annals of the International Communication Association, 43(2), 117–155. 10.1080/23808985.2019.1584045 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Hald, G. M., & Stulhofer, A. (2016). What types of pornography do people find arousing and do they cluster? Assessing types and categories of pornography in a large-scale online sample Journal of Sex Research, 53(7), 849–859. 10.1080/00224499.2015.1065953 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Hald, G. M., Malamuth, N. M., & Yuen, C. (2010). Pornography and attitudes supporting violence against women: Revisiting the relationship in nonexperimental studies. Aggressive Behavior, 36(1), 14–20. 10.1002/ab.20328 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hensel, D. J., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2013). A multidimensional model of sexual health and sexual and prevention behavior among adolescent women. Journal of Adolescent Health, 52(2), 219–227. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.05.017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Herbenick, D., Bartelt, E., Fu, T. C., Paul, B., Gradus, R., Bauer, J., & Jones, R. (2019). Feeling scared during sex: Findings from a US probability sample of women and men ages 14–60. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 45(5), 424–439. 10.1080/0092623X.2018.1549634 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Herbenick, D., Bowling, J., Fu, T. C. J., Dodge, B., Guerra-Reyes, L., & Sanders, S. (2017). Sexual diversity in the United States: Results from a nationally representative probability sample of adult women and men. PLoS One, 12(7), e0181198. 10.1371/journal.pone.0181198 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Iacobucci, D., & Duhachek, A. (2003). Advancing alpha: Measuring reliability with confidence. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(4), 478–487. 10.1207/S15327663JCP1304_14 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Klaassen, M. J., & Peter, J. (2015). Gender (In)equality in internet pornography: A content analysis of popular pornographic internet videos. Journal of Sex Research, 52(7), 721–735. 10.1080/00224499.2014.976781 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Laws, J. L., & Schwartz, P. (1977). Sexual scripts: The social construction of female sexuality. Dryden. [Google Scholar]
  23. Leonhardt, N. D., Spencer, T. J., Butler, M. H., & Theobald, A. C. (2019). An organizational framework for sexual Media’s influence on short-term versus long-term sexual quality. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(8), 2233–2249. 10.1007/s10508-018-1209-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lofgren-Martenson, L., & Mansson, S. A. (2010). Lust, love, and life: A qualitative study of Swedish adolescents’ perceptions and experiences with pornography. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 568–579. 10.1080/00224490903151374 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Morgan, E. M. (2011). Associations between young adults’ use of sexually explicit materials and their sexual preferences, behaviors, and satisfaction. Journal of Sex Research, 48(6), 520–530. 10.1080/00224499.2010.543960 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Osburn, H. G. (2000). Coefficient alpha and related internal consistency reliability coefficients. Psychological Methods, 5(3), 343–355. 10.1037/1082-989X.5.3.343 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Paul, B. (2009). Predicting internet pornography use and arousal: The role of individual difference variables. Journal of Sex Research, 46(4), 344–357. 10.1080/00224490902754152 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2009). Adolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit internet material and sexual satisfaction: A longitudinal study. Human Communication Research, 35(2), 171–194. 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01343.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Rosen, R., Brown, J., Heiman, S., Leiblum, C., Meston, R., Shabsigh, D., Ferguson, R., & D'Agostino, R. (2000). The female sexual function index (FSFI): A multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 26, 191–208. 10.1080/009262300278597 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Rosen, R., Riley, A., Wagner, G., Osterloh, I. H., Kirkpatrick, J., & Mishra, A. (1997). The international index of erectile function (IIEF): A multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology, 49(6), 822–830. 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00238-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Rothman, E. F., Adhia, A., Christensen, T. T., Paruk, J., Alder, J., & Daley, N. (2018). A pornography literacy class for youth: Results of a feasibility and efficacy pilot study. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 13(1), 1–17. 10.1080/15546128.2018.1437100 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Rothman, E. F., Daley, N., & Alder, J. (2020). A pornography literacy program for adolescents. American Journal of Public Health, 110(2), 154–156. 10.2105/AJPH.2019.305468 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Rothman, E. F., Kaczmarsky, C., Burke, N., Jansen, E., & Baughman, A. (2015). “Without Porn … I Wouldn’t Know Half the Things I Know Now”: A qualitative study of pornography use among a sample of urban, low-income, black and hispanic youth”. Journal of Sex Research, 52(7), 736–746. 10.1080/00224499.2014.960908 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Skałacka, K., & Gerymski, R. (2019). Sexual activity and life satisfaction in older adults. Psychogeriatrics: The Official Journal of the Japanese Psychogeriatric Society, 19(3), 195–201. 10.1111/psyg.12381 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Sun, C., Bridges, A., Wosnitzer, R., Scharrer, E., & Liberman, R. (2008). A comparison of male and female directors in popular pornography: What happens when women are at the helm? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32(3), 312–325. 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00439.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Sun, C., Wright, P. J., & Steffen, N. (2017). German heterosexual women’s pornography consumption and sexual behavior. Sexualization, Media, and Society, 3(1), 237462381769811–237462381769812. 10.1177/2374623817698113 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Tokunaga, R. S., Wright, P. J., & Roskos, J. E. (2019). Pornography and impersonal sex. Human Communication Research, 45(1), 78–118. 10.1093/hcr/hqy014 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Tokunaga, R. S., Wright, P. W., & Vangeel, L. (2020). Is pornography a risk-factor for condomless sex? Human Communication Research, 46(2–3), 273–299. 10.1093/hcr/hqaa005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Tolman, D. L., & McClelland, S. I. (2011). Normative sexuality development in adolescence: A decade in review, 2000–2009. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 242–255. 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00726.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Vannier, S. A., Currie, A. B., & O'Sullivan, L. F. (2014). Schoolgirls and soccer Moms: A content analysis of free “Teen” and “MILF” online pornography. Journal of Sex Research, 51(3), 253–264. 10.1080/00224499.2013.829795 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Ventegodt, S., Vardi, G., & Merrick, J. (2005). Holistic adolescent sexology: How to counsel and treat young people to alleviate and prevent sexual problems. BMJ Rapid Responses, 330, 107–110. 10.1136/bmj.330.7483.107 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Wright, P. J. (2011). Mass media effects on youth sexual behavior. Annals of the International Communication Association 35, 343–386. 10.1080/23808985.2011.11679121 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Wright, P. J. (2014). Pornography and the sexual socialization of children: Current knowledge and a theoretical future. Journal of Children and Media 8, 305–312. 10.1080/17482798.2014.923606 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Wright, P. J. (2021a). Overcontrol in pornography research: Let it go, let it go… Archives of Sexual Behavior 50, 387–392. 10.1007/s10508-020-01902-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Wright, P. J. (2021b). Let it go, let it go II: Pornographic socialization as “selective-exposure. Archives of Sexual Behavior 50, 393-399. 10.1007/s10508-021-01922-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Wright, P. J., Bridges, A. J., Sun, C., Ezzell, M. B., & Johnson, J. A. (2018). Personal pornography viewing and sexual satisfaction: A quadratic analysis. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 44(3), 308–315. 10.1080/0092623X.2017.1377131 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Wright, P. J., Sun, C., Steffen, N. J., & Tokunaga, R. S. (2015). Pornography, alcohol, and male sexual dominance. Communication Monographs, 82(2), 252–270. 10.1080/03637751.2014.981558 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Wright, P. J., Sun, C., Steffen, N. J., & Tokunaga, R. S. (2019). Associative pathways between pornography consumption and reduced sexual satisfaction. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 34(2), 422–439. 10.1080/14681994.2017.1323076 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Wright, P. J., Tokunaga, R. S., & Kraus, A. (2016). A meta-analysis of pornography consumption and actual acts of sexual aggression in general population studies. Journal of Communication, 66(1), 183–205. 10.1111/jcom.12201 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Wright, P. J., Tokunaga, R. S., Kraus, A., & Klann, E. (2017). Pornography consumption and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research, 43(3), 315–343. 10.1111/hcre.12108 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of Sexual Health are provided here courtesy of Taylor & Francis

RESOURCES