Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 May 29;20(5):e0306086. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306086

Factors involved in vulvar pain during sexual activity and persistence in sexual activity amidst pain

Carlotta Oesterling 1,*, Amelie Harder 2, Charmaine Borg 1,, Peter de Jong 1,
Editor: Marta Panzeri3
PMCID: PMC12122030  PMID: 40440636

Abstract

Evidence suggests that women often endure pain during sexual activity, continue engaging in such activity despite experiencing pain, and tend to avoid communicating these painful experiences to their partners. The present study aims to shed light on psychosocial factors that may contribute to vulvar pain and the engagement in sexual activity despite pain, with a specific focus on the relevance of sexual self-esteem, the definition of sex (limited to penile-vaginal intercourse or inclusive of other intimate behaviours), sexual agency, and sexual motivation. A sample of N = 277 female students of a Dutch University was included. Participants were between 18 and 33 years old. The primary outcome measures were female sexual distress, sexual function, and vulvar pain. Engagement in sexual activity despite pain, pain communication, sexual agency, and relationship satisfaction were included as mediators. The majority of participants (80.0%) reported to experience pain at least sometimes, and 15.0% reported to experience pain more than half of the time. Engaging in penile-vaginal intercourse despite experiencing pain was common, with 42.0% of participants indicating to do so always or most of the time and 65.0% at least sometimes when experiencing pain. Of the affected women, 41.0% did not communicate pain to their partners. Low sexual self-esteem, a restrictive definition of sex, limited sexual agency, and low autonomous sexual motivation were all significantly related to at least one of the primary outcome variables. These associations were partly mediated by engagement in PVI despite pain, (no) pain communication, and (low) relationship satisfaction.

Introduction

Vulvar pain during sexual intercourse is highly prevalent in women, with 10.0–28.0% of women in the general population reporting persistent pain during sexual intercourse [1]. Vulvar pain can be associated with psychosocial (i.e., intimacy, sexual communication and affection, childhood maltreatment, anxiety and depression, partner responses to pain, pain catastrophizing and self-efficacy, and sexual motivation) and biomedical factors (i.e., co-morbidities with other functional pain syndromes, genetics, hormonal factors, inflammation, musculoskeletal and neurologic mechanisms [1]). Pain symptoms persisting for over six months and causing significant sexual distress are classified as Genito-Pelvic Pain/Penetration Disorder [2], which includes vulvar pain during penetrative intercourse caused by involuntary contraction of the pelvic floor muscles upon attempted vaginal entry (vaginismus), pain (dyspareunia) localized to the vestibule of the vagina (provoked vestibulodynia), or at other vulvovaginal locations (vulvodynia), and fear and anxiety elicited by attempted penetration [2], or by merely the idea of penetration [3].

Experiencing vulvar pain during penetration can come with significant sexual distress and may negatively impact sexual arousal, desire, and lubrication. In light thereof, it is striking that research found a substantial proportion of heterosexual women affected by vulvar pain to proceed engaging in penile-vaginal intercourse (PVI) [4,5], with only 50.0% of women effectively communicating the experience of pain to their partner [6,7]. A representative survey study has further found that 60.0% of affected women indicated experiencing the motivation to continue engaging in PVI despite pain [6]. While – given the reduced focus on penetration – it is likely that these numbers are lower in non-heterosexual female couples, corresponding statistics have not yet been established.

Against the backdrop of these findings, the aim of the present study was twofold. The first aim was to test the robustness of the finding that a large proportion of women engages in sexual intercourse despite pain and avoids communicating respective pain to their sexual partners. By replicating the design applied by Carter et al. [6], it was examined to which extent women engage in sexual intercourse despite pain, whether they communicate the experience of pain to their partners, and which reasons may underlie the motivation not to do so. Second, it was aimed to improve insight in the factors that contribute to vulvar pain and women's persistence in sexual intercourse despite experiencing pain. On the basis of the available findings in the literature, the following candidate factors were included: (low) sexual self-esteem, the definition of “having sex” being limited to penetrative intercourse, (low) sexual agency, and autonomous sexual motivation. A comprehensive heuristic model (see Fig 1) was taken as a starting point to test the relevance of these factors for explaining vulvar pain, problems in sexual functioning, and sexual distress in women. Based on this model, it was further explored in how far the candidate factors are related to women engaging in penetrative intercourse despite pain, as well as not communicating the experience of pain to their partners. The heuristic model integrates findings of the literature on each of the distinct constructs and offers a novel approach to capturing how several psychosocial factors may influence each other, the engagement in PVI despite pain, and sexual pain, functioning and distress.

Fig 1. Heuristic Model.

Fig 1

Note. Green: Observed predictor variables (model allows for covariance among predictor variables). Lilac: Observed mediator variables. Yellow: Observed outcome variables. Red arrows: Direct effects. Black arrows: Indirect effects. Predictors were allowed to covary.

Sexual scripts and a restrictive definition of sex

Within the context of heterosexual relationships, both men and women follow sexual scripts directing and informing their sexual behaviour. Despite increasingly egalitarian roles of men and women in heterosexual relationships, sexual scripts have been found to remain relatively stable in short- and long-term relationships [8,9], reinforcing male agency and female receptivity [9,10]. Adherence to traditional scripts offers guidance, predictability, and clarity but may carry potential drawbacks for both women and men. Women may experience discomfort initiating sexual activity, feel responsible to hold the role of the “gate-keeper” by delaying the first sexual encounter to occur with a new partner, and limit the expression of their sexual desires and boundaries [1113].

For men, script adherence may lead to performance pressure and restricted emotional expression. The majority of studies on Sexual Scripting Theory (SST) [14], which postulates that cultural scenarios, informed by shared cultural norms and values, deeply influence personal motives and motivations as well as intrapersonal scripts [10,14,15], have been published prior to 2015. Although studies on SST thus precede recent social changes regarding gender norms and equality and the rethinking of concepts of femininity and masculinity, SST underscores that sexual behaviour and sexual expectations are deeply rooted in our cultural and social background and upbringing. The consequential deep embedding of values may partially explain why PVI remains the epitome of “normal” heterosexual sex [16,17] and women often continue to act less sexually agent than men in spite of normative changes in heterosexual relationships – which may contribute to the persisting gap in orgasm and pleasure experience between men and women that has been observed continuously in research [18,19].

Although research finds men of all sexual orientations to be more likely to achieve an orgasm than women, the largest difference is continuously found between heterosexual men, of whom 95.0% experience an orgasm usually or always, and heterosexual women, of whom only 65.0% experience an orgasm usually or always [2025]. PVI only results in orgasm in 25% - 30% of women, while 95.0% of men experience orgasm during PVI. In contrast, women who have sex with women experience an orgasm in 80.0–90.0% of the time [20] – illustrating that the widely held notion of women being biologically less prone to orgasm stems from an oversimplification of female anatomy and response [18]. Therefore, the orgasm gap may rather emanate from the pervasive influence of social norms and the prioritization of PVI in heterosexual couples. Orgasm may thus frequently not be expected by women engaging in heterosexual intercourse, and its absence is consequently not evaluated as deprivation [26], resulting in a discrepancy of orgasm (and consequential pleasure) expectancies between men and women. Germane to this, research has found that women's lower likelihood of experiencing physical pleasure and orgasm when engaging in heterosexual sex results in lower expectancies of pleasure and orgasm [27,28] and has found women to feel less entitled to their own pleasure, while prioritizing the relationship and their partner's pleasure [9,2932]. The prioritization of the partner's pleasure over their own may further emanate from feelings of shame and guilt and a desire to align with one's femininity and sexual identity [33], which might be threatened by female sexual dysfunction in light of societal norms of implying PVI as “having sex” [34] – leaving women feeling unable to fulfil their own and their partners’ expectations when refraining from penetrative sex when experiencing pain during PVI.

These commonly held notions and expectations about sexual activity and alignment to gender norms can have detrimental effects on health when it comes to vulvar pain and Genito-Pelvic Pain/Penetration Disorder. For instance, women may learn to endure higher levels of pain and discomfort without refraining from PVI. When anticipating and experiencing pain, the friction will further augment pain and tissue damage, increasing concomitant defensive responses (i.e., pelvic floor tension), low arousal, and pain expectancy and catastrophizing [35,36]. Further, it has been shown that women experiencing pain have more difficulties refusing undesired sex, feel more inferior to their partner, and place higher value on the partner's satisfaction than women without pain [29,33]. Moreover, women who continued to engage in sexual intercourse despite pain identified themselves as inadequate sexual partners, experiencing shame, guilt, and decreased desire.

In light of these findings, concern has been brought forward regarding the large proportion of women engaging in sexual intercourse despite pain. Consequentially, the need to promote the importance of women’s own satisfaction, and the engagement in sexual activities besides penetrative sex is widely expressed in research and clinic [37]. As PVI remains central to the definition of heterosexual sex, the present research will test whether a restrictive definition of sex (that does not expand to other behaviours) is associated with higher sexual distress, and possibly also reduced sexual function and increased vulvar pain, as not being able to engage in PVI may then easily be concomitant to shame, guilt, and unfulfilled expectations in heterosexual women and their partners. Thereby, it is predicted that a restrictive definition of sex may also foster engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain to avoid uncomfortable situations, conversations, and rejection. Contrarily, defining sex more broadly to include other activities would allow for engagement in behaviours that do not elicit pain but are still considered as “sexual activity”. This is seen in homosexual women, and it can reduce sexual distress and foster engagement in unpainful and enjoyable intimate activities. Further, it is suggested that a broader definition of sex and a larger array of behaviours also comes with increased communication, making it easier to communicate pain while a restrictive definition of sex may be associated with women not communicating the pain to their partners.

Sexual agency

Besides a restrictive definition of sex, there is ample evidence for sexual agency playing a significant role in sexual behaviour regarding initiation and communication of one's own sexual desires [26]. Low sexual agency can have negative consequences for heterosexual women and their partner's sexual satisfaction and may promote engagement in risky or undesired sexual behaviour, and as hypothesized in the present research, possibly also vulvar pain and sexual distress. Despite the existing consensus on the concept of sexual agency as the ability to form and communicate voluntary and informed decisions regarding one's sexual behaviour, there can be variations in its precise definition and the nuances attributed to it. As a result, the term sexual agency lacks a clear definition and a validated measurement tool; being used as synonym for sexual assertiveness and/or varying in broadness of the definition. In the present study, sexual agency is conceived of as “the ability to identify, communicate, and negotiate one's sexual needs, and to initiate behaviours that allow for the satisfaction of those needs” [26]. To test whether low sexual agency is associated with engaging in sexual intercourse despite pain and limited pain communication, as well as vulvar pain and sexual distress, a novel measurement tool yielding two separate dimensions of sexual agency (prioritization of the partner’s pleasure & shame and engagement in undesired sexual activity) was utilized.

Sexual self-esteem

Sexual self-esteem (SSE) refers to how individuals perceive themselves in terms of their sexuality. It includes aspects such as attractiveness, confidence, and self-acceptance, which are pivotal in promoting mental health and influencing one’s sexual encounters [38]. Sexual self-esteem has been identified as important for sexual satisfaction, assertiveness, and entitlement for sexual pleasure [39]. Further, sexual self-esteem has been shown to positively impact sexual communication, allowing women to verbally and non-verbally communicate which sexual behaviours they find satisfying [39]. Therefore, it is hypothesized that lower sexual self-esteem will predict increased vulvar pain and sexual distress, and lower sexual function. It is also hypothesized that lower sexual self-esteem predicts engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain and not communicating pain to one's partner, which both are thought to mediate the relationships between sexual self-esteem and the other psychosocial factors (i.e., definition of sex, sexual agency, sexual motivation) and sexual distress, vulvar pain, and sexual function.

Autonomous sexual motivation

Self-determination theory conceptualizes behavioural motives on a continuum from fully autonomous to fully externally controlled [4042]. Previous research has shown that applying self-determination theory [40,42] to sexual behaviour [43,44] may allow to derive a deeper understanding of motives for sexual interactions, and possibly also its link to sexual distress and vulvar pain. It is postulated that if individuals perceive they have efficacy (competence, i.e., self-esteem), agency (autonomy), and that they are connected to others (relatedness), they have the basis for internally motivated sexual behaviour, such as the joy of the activity itself. Therefore, in the present research it is assumed that autonomous sexual motivation reduces vulvar pain, sexual distress, and engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain, while increasing sexual function and pain communication.

Culturally embedded beliefs and expectations regarding sexual activity and one's own sexual behaviour may be adjusted through open sexual communication between partners, which positively affects sexual functioning and reduces sexual distress. Nevertheless, sexual communication is frequently inhibited in couples affected by vulvodynia [45,46], allowing for women's mere assumptions about what the partner expects and perceives as pleasurable (e.g., sexual activity including penetration as a necessity) to contribute to women frequently pursuing sexual intercourse despite pain. Therefore, predicted relationships are hypothesized to be mediated by not only whether women engage in sexual intercourse despite pain, and whether they communicate the pain to their partners, but also by dyadic sexual communication and overall relationship satisfaction (see also Fig 1).

The present study

Based on the existing literature, it is hypothesized that, in line with results of Carter et al. [6], a considerable proportion of women experiencing pain during sexual intercourse do not communicate the pain to their partners and engage in intercourse despite experiencing pain, for which potential reasons were examined using thematic analysis, i.e., by identifying and interpreting recurring patterns or themes within qualitative responses to gain insights into underlying motivations to not communicate pain. Building on previous research, the herein tested comprehensive model will integrate several psychosocial factors such as the definition of sex, sexual agency, sexual self-esteem, and autonomous sexual motivation, allowing to derive insights on how these factors relate to each other, and to vulvar pain, sexual distress, the engagement of sexual intercourse despite pain and communication of pain. Engagement of sexual intercourse despite pain, pain communication, as well as dyadic sexual communication and relationship satisfaction are expected to mediate the relationships between the tested psychosocial factors and vulvar pain and sexual distress. The hypothesized heuristic model therefore provides an integrative and novel approach to vulvar pain and sexual distress, accounting for the relatedness and interdependence of psychosocial constructs that have yet been treated as distinct. As the breadth of individuals’ definition of sex has not yet been taken into consideration when studying psychosocial correlates of sexual pain, the model provides a substantiation and extension of existing research. Highlighting the relationships among respective constructs may point to promising targets for future psychosocial interventions to address vulvar pain and sexual distress.

Method

Participants

Participants were recruited via availability sampling using SONA, a participant recruitment-platform of the University of Groningen. Data collection took place in April and May 2023. Sexually active women over 18 years of age were included into the sample, which consisted of N = 277 women between 18 and 33. Exclusion criteria comprised being pregnant, and being diagnosed with a psychiatric condition. All participants received course-credits as compensation. Following exclusions due to missing data, n = 232 women with a mean age of M = 20.04 (SD = 2.06) were included into the analyses. Of the included women, n = 171 (61.7%) identified as predominantly heterosexual, n = 4 (1.4%) identified as predominantly homosexual, and n = 52 (18.8%) identified as bisexual. Two women indicated to have children. The questionnaire was made available via Qualtrics survey software (Qualtrics, 2014) and completed online. Prior to commencement, all participants had given their written informed consent to participate in the study, which had gained approval by the ethical committee of the faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences (PSY-2223–0118).

Materials and procedure

Upon giving informed consent, participants were presented with a short online information video on the purpose and procedure of the study, followed by the online survey comprising multiple validated as well as novel, self-constructed questionnaires – which took 20–30 minutes to complete.

Descriptive variables.

Participants were asked to provide demographic information, age, gender identity, education, number of children, their sexual orientation, the gender identity of their sexual partner(s), their relationship status, if applicable the gender identity of their relationship partner(s), relationship length, their status of living (i.e., alone, with their partner, with others), their religion, and if applicable, the extent to which their religion has an impact on their life.

Vulvar pain and engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain.

Four self-constructed items were made available to assess vulvar pain and engagement of sexual intercourse despite pain. The first item appraised whether physical discomfort or pain is normally experienced upon (attempted) penetration, which could be responded to on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (No) to 4 (Yes, always). The achieved score was included as outcome variable in the model alongside female sexual function index (FSFI) and female sexual distress scale (FSDS) scores. Second, participants could choose one or more possible options for why the sexual intercourse could have been hurtful. Presented options were based on the Hite Report of Female Sexuality [47] and included options such as limited arousal and lubrication, yeast infection, and an open response box to add unmentioned causes of pain. Third, participants were asked to rate their average pain during intercourse on a scale from (1) no pain to (10) worst pain as recommended for clinical assessments of pain intensity [48]. Fourth, on a scale from 0 (No) to 4 (Yes, always), participants indicated whether they engage in intercourse despite pain, which was included as mediating variable into the model.

Sexual communication pain.

As a replication of Carter et al. [6], all participants were presented with three items assessing whether they experienced pain during their most recent sexual activity 1 (not at all painful) to 5 (extremely painful), whether they had disclosed their pain to their partner (yes/no), and, if applicable, why they had not done so. The latter was presented as an open question, giving women the opportunity to bring forward any kind of reason behind not communicating their pain.

Relationship satisfaction.

To evaluate the perceived quality of the participants’ romantic relationships, the Perceived Relationship Quality Components Inventory (PRQC) [49] was employed. This self-report questionnaire consists of 18 items and assesses multiple aspects of relationship quality, including intimacy, commitment, trust, and overall satisfaction. Participants were asked to indicate the extent of their agreement or disagreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Internal consistency was high, with Cronbach’s α = .98 in the present study.

Dyadic sexual communication scale.

To measure the sexual communication within romantic relationships, the Dyadic Sexual Communication Scale (DSCS) [50] was used. The DSCS is a tool designed to assess the quality and effectiveness of sexual communication between intimate partners. It consists of 13 items and has been found to have high internal consistency by previous research, with Cronbach’s α = .81. In the present study, Cronbach’s α was lower, with α = .62.

Female sexual function.

To assess overall female sexual function, the female sexual function index was employed (FSFI) [51]. The FSFI is the most widely used screening tool and outcome measure of female sexual function [52] and consists of 19 self-report items measuring five domains, namely arousal, satisfaction, desire, pain, and lubrication. Items refer to sexual activity that has taken place within the last four weeks and are responded to on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater levels of sexual functioning on the respective item. A cutoff score of < 26 indicates the presence of clinical sexual dysfunction [52]. A total score below Psychometric properties of the FSFI are excellent, with internal consistency scores of Cronbach’s α = .97 in the present study.

Female sexual distress.

As consensus exists that for female sexual dysfunction to meet diagnostic criteria, sexual distress arises concomitant to sexual dysfunction [2], sexual distress is herein assessed using the widely used revised version of the female sexual distress scale (FSDS-R) [53]. The FSDS – R consists of 13 items and responses are provided using a response scale ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (always). A cut-off score of ≥ 15 was validated to indicate the presence of sexually related distress in a female sample [53]. Internal consistency was shown to be high, with Cronbach’s α = .94 in the present study.

Sexual self-esteem.

The short form of the Sexual Self-Esteem Inventory for Women (SSEI-W-SF) assesses the affective responses to the self-reported appraisals of sexual thoughts, feelings, and behaviours [54], and comprises 35 items of the original 81-item version [55]. Each item pertains to one of five subscales (skill/experience, attractiveness, control, moral judgement, adaptiveness) and can be responded to on a 6-point Likert scale. Response options range from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Internal consistency scores diverge from high scores found in previous studies (Cronbach’s α = .94), with a Cronbach’s α = .61 in the present study.

Sexual motives.

Sexual motivation was assessed using the sexual motives scale (SexMS) [43], a self-report questionnaire based on self-determination theory [42]. The SexMS consists of 24 items, with 4 items measuring each of six motivation styles: Amotivation, extrinsic motivation, introjected motivation, identified motivation, integrated motivation, and intrinsic motivation. Internal consistency showed to be good, with Cronbach’s α above .80 on all subscales.

The definition of sex and sexual agency.

To assess remaining psychosocial aspects that are not captured by the herein administered validated questionnaires (i.e., the definition of sex and sexual agency), a self-constructed questionnaire based on a number of questions presented in the Hite Report of Female Sexuality [47,56] was utilized. Coded qualitative responses published in the report were used as guidance for the presentation of response options. The questionnaire initially presented two descriptive items measuring the frequency of sexual activity and the frequency of how often sexual activity is desired, with response options ranging from 1 (more than once per day) to 8 (infrequently). Next, the participants’ and the partners’ definition of sex was measured by presenting various sexual behaviours that can be included or excluded into one's respective definition of “having sex”. Further items measured the actual sexual behaviour including intimacy without PVI and the engagement in sexual behaviour solely to provide pleasure to one's partner or meet one's partner’s expectations, desired sexual behaviour, sexual agency, emotional involvement during sexual activity, and importance and experience of orgasm. The questionnaire consisted of 46 items that could be responded to on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree/ never) to 5 (strongly agree/ always). For the complete questionnaire, see the S1 File.

Self-Constructed Scale Measuring Definition of Sex and Sexual Agency:

Dimension Nr. of Items Example Item
Descriptive Information 3 Please indicate, how often you engage in sexual activity with your partner
enm 5 I engage in the following behaviours during sex*
Intimacy without PVI 2 Physical touch and kissing without engaging in sexual intercourse is important to me
Engagement to please partner or meet expectation 5 I engage in the following behaviours solely to meet my partner’s expectations (more than one option possible)*
Desired sexual behaviour 5 I find the following behaviours pleasurable*
Sexual agency 18 I feel guilty about taking time in sexual play that may not be stimulating to my partner*
Emotional involvement in sexual activity 4 I am emotionally involved during sexual activity.
Importance and experience of orgasm 7 I experience orgasm during*.

*Following behaviours were presented as response options: penile-vaginal intercourse (with and without orgasm), oral sex (fellatio), oral sex (cunnilingus), giving anal sex, receiving anal sex, kissing, mutual masturbation, masturbation, intimacy and physical touch without penetration.

Data reduction and development of self-constructed questionnaire scores

Discrepancy between actual and desired sexual behaviour.

In order to derive insights into the discrepancy between actual and desired sexual behaviour, a difference score between the frequency of desired and the frequency of actual sexual behaviour was calculated (i.e., desired frequency of sexual behaviour – actual frequency of sexual behaviour). Further, it was calculated whether a discrepancy exists between the sexual behaviours that are desired and those engaged in (i.e., desired sexual behaviour – engaged in sexual behaviour).

Providing pleasure and meeting expectations.

To gain insights into the extent in which behaviours are engaged in solely to provide pleasure to one's partner or to meet one's partner’s expectation, a mean score for each of the two respective items (I engage in the following behaviours solely to provide pleasure to my partner; I engage in the following behaviours solely to meet my partner’s expectation) was calculated – the resulting scores are hereafter referred to as provide pleasure and meet expectation.

Definition of sexual activity.

To gain insights into the sexual scripts and the broadness of the definition of sexual activity, a sum score and the mean for PVI with and without orgasm and for all behaviours excluding PVI with and without orgasm (oral sex, anal sex, kissing, masturbation, mutual masturbation, and intimacy and physical touch without penetration) were calculated for the participants and their partners. In a next step, a difference score was calculated between the agreement to PVI with and without orgasm as being part of the definition of sex and other behaviours as being defined as “having sex” for participants (definition of sex PVI – definition of sex no PVI), building a score named the definition of sex, of which higher scores indicate a more restricted definition of sex.

Sexual agency.

To generate a measure for sexual agency, a principal component analysis of all items of the self-constructed “Definition of Sex and Aexual agency Questionnaire” related to the concept of sexual agency (defined as “the ability to identify, communicate, and negotiate one's sexual needs, and to initiate behaviours that allow for the satisfaction of those needs” [26]) was performed (see S2 File for more detailed information on the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)). A total of 11 items was entered, and a varimax rotation was used, maximizing the variance of squared loadings within each factor, and yielding factors that are uncorrelated to each other. The CFA gave rise to four factors with eigenvalues above 1, of which the first two were entered into the heuristic model as theoretically relevant subscales of sexual agency. Factors 1 and 2 explain a cumulative variance of 42.0%.

Factor 1.

Subscale 1 is comprised of the items I am afraid to say no to sex, I engage in sexual activity I do not desire, I feel guilty about taking time in sexual play which may not be specifically stimulating to my partner, and I feel embarrassed asking for stimulation that does not specifically stimulate my partner, which load strongly on Factor 1. Subscale 1 is named Shame & Engagement in undesired sexual activity and yields an internal consistency score of α = .76.

Factor 2.

The items I engage in the following behaviours solely to provide pleasure to my partner (provide pleasure) and I engage in the following behaviours solely to meet my partner's expectation (meet expectation) load strongly on Factor 2 and comprise Subscale 2, named Partner’s pleasure prioritization. Subscale 2 yields an internal consistency score of α = .90. The subscales are coded on a 5-point Likert scale from (0) to (4), in which high scores indicate high sexual agency, i.e., low partner’s pleasure prioritization and low shame and engagement in undesired sexual activity.

Statistical analysis

Following the descriptive analyses of vulvar pain and pain communication, as well as a thematic analysis of qualitative responses of reasons for not communicating pain, structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to test the relevance of the candidate factors as agents that either (i) directly influence sexual distress (FSDS - R total score), sexual function (FSFI total score), and vulvar pain, or ii) indirectly via engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain, sexual pain communication, relationship satisfaction, and dyadic sexual communication. Sexual self-esteem, the definition of sex, shame & engagement in undesired sexual activity (sexual agency subscale 1), partner's pleasure prioritization (sexual agency subscale 2), and sexual motivation were included in the model as candidate causal agents. Due to normal distribution of the data, maximum likelihood parameter estimation was chosen [57]. The predictors were further tested for multicollinearity and were allowed to covary in the present model. Assumptions of multivariate normality and linearity were evaluated with SPSS Version 29. Fig 1 depicts the hypothesized model that was taken as starting point.

Results

Descriptive statistics

The present sample had a mean FSDS score of M = 13.8 (SD = 11.25), with 51.2% of women scoring above the cut-off score of 11, indicating sexual distress. The mean FSFI score was M = 23.76 (SD = 8.9), with 48.3% of women below the cutoff score of 26, indicating female sexual dysfunction. For indications of orgasm frequency, see Table 1.

Table 1. Orgasm frequency in percent in masturbation and partnered sex.

Masturbation Partnered Sex
Never 8.1% 10.8%
Rarely 5.9% 19.8%
Sometimes 9.5% 29.7%
Often 28.4% 33.8%
Always 48.2% 5.9%

Vulvar pain and pain communication

When asked about the presence of physical discomfort or pain during attempted or engagement in PVI with their partners, 75.9% of women reported experiencing pain at least sometimes. Furthermore, 15.7% of women indicated to experience pain more than half of the time during (attempted) PVI (see Table 2). Factors contributing to pain included extended or frequent sexual activity (29.7%), insufficient arousal or lubrication (51.3%), deep thrusts (23.7%), a partner with a too-large penis (17.2%), discomfort at the beginning of intercourse (16.4%), and yeast infections (8.2%). Additional factors given by participants included body tension, vaginismus, dyspareunia, presence of an intrauterine device, sexual trauma, and stress. The distribution of average pain level ratings in percentages is illustrated in Fig 2.

Table 2. Percentage of women experiencing pain during PVI and engaging in PVI despite pain on a scale from always to never.

Yes, always Yes, most of the times Yes, more than half of the times Yes, sometimes No, never
Experience of Pain During PVI 1.4% 6.5% 7.9% 60.2% 24.1%
Yes, always Yes, most of the times Yes, sometimes Yes, but rarely No
Engagement in PVI despite pain 15.0% 30.8% 19.6% 15.0% 19.6%

Fig 2. Percentage of average pain levels on a scale from 1 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain).

Fig 2

When asked whether participants had engaged in sexual activity despite pain, 65.4% of women in the present sample at least sometimes engaged in sexual intercourse despite pain, while 45.8% of women most of the time or always engaged in intercourse despite pain (see Table 2). Regarding whether affected women had informed their partner about being in pain during sexual activity (in case their most recent sexual activity was painful, which was the case in 53% of women), 53.4% indicated that they had communicated their pain, while 41.2% had not done so. A thematic analysis of presented reasons for not communicating the pain unveiled recurrent themes, including fear of disrupting the moment, concerns about the partner's feelings, social pressure and embarrassment, initial pain that fades eventually and is not experienced as too painful (or even as pleasurable), and avoidance of awkward conversations or situations/shame (see Table 3).

Table 3. Reasons for not communicating pain during sexual activity.

Theme Example
Fear of disrupting the moment I did not want to interrupt the moment
I did not want to bother him and make it a thing
I did not want to ruin the moment or the experience for him
It will ruin the mood
Concern about Partner’s feelings I did not want him to feel ashamed
I did not want to make him uncomfortable
I did not want to disappoint them
Social pressure, shame and guilt I felt guilty for stopping in the middle of having sex, I thought it was easier to wait until he experiences an orgasm
I was embarrassed
I was a bit ashamed
Initial pain that fades or is experienced as pleasurable Because it usually gets pleasurable after some time
Because it is usually just in the beginning
Avoidance of awkward situations or conversations I did not want to make it awkward
I did not want to bother
To avoid making a scene

Factors explaining vulvar pain during PVI and engagement in painful sexual behaviour amidst pain

The hypothesized model (χ2 (4), N = 232 = 10.688, p < .031) included direct and indirect effects of all dependent variables and mediating variables to all outcome variables (Fig 3). Missing data was imputed based on regression imputation and bootstrapping was performed as recommended by Preacher and Hayes [58], estimating 2000 resamples at a bias-corrected confidence level of 90. As can be seen in Table 4, model fit indices improved once dyadic sexual communication was removed as a mediator. As predictors were allowed to covary in the present model, their covariances and correlations can be seen in S1 Table.

Fig 3. SEM Parsimonious Model.

Fig 3

Note. Green: Observed predictor variables (model allows for covariance among predictor variables). Lilac: Observed mediator variables. Yellow: Observed outcome variables. Red arrows: Direct effects. Black arrows: Mediation effects.

Table 4. Model Fit Indices.

Model Fit Indices Model 1 (Hypothesized Model) Model 2 (Final Model)
CFI .967 .989
TLI .744 .855
RMSEA .085 .085

Due to good model fit, no further post-hoc modifications were conducted. The standardized and unstandardized coefficients of the final model are depicted in S2 Table. To improve legibility, a parsimonious model including main effects (red) and mediation effects (black) is depicted in Fig 2.

Factors influencing women’s persistence in sexual activity amidst painful experiences and pain communication

Engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain was increased in individuals with higher scores on shame and engagement in undesired sexual activity, while higher autonomous sexual motivation was associated with significantly reduced engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain. Whether women communicated their pain to their partners was associated with the degree of partner's pleasure prioritization, as higher pleasure prioritization predicted reduced communication of pain, and the definition of sex. Higher sexual self-esteem predicted higher relationship satisfaction, which was related to reduced sexual distress, and increased sexual function.

Factors influencing sexual distress, vulvar pain, and sexual functioning

Sexual distress.

A restricted definition of sex, i.e., holding a definition of sex limited to penetrative sexual intercourse, was associated with increased sexual distress whereas sexual self-esteem, relationship satisfaction, pain communication and both dimensions of sexual agency were associated with reduced sexual distress. The effect of sexual self-esteem on sexual distress was (partly) mediated by relationship satisfaction. The effects of definition of sex and partner pleasure prioritization and sexual distress were mediated by pain communication.

Vulvar pain.

A restrictive definition of sex (i.e., holding a definition of sex limited to penetrative sexual intercourse) was associated with increased vulvar pain, sexual self-esteem, pain communication, and engagement in PVI despite pain were associated with reduced vulvar pain. The effect of definition of sex on vulvar pain was mediated by pain communication. The effects of sexual agency subscale 1 and autonomous sexual motivation were mediated by engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain. The effect of sexual agency subscale 2 on vulvar pain was mediated by pain communication.

Sexual function.

Autonomous sexual motivation, sexual agency subscale 1, and relationship satisfaction were associated with increased sexual function.

Discussion

The present study showed that the experience of vulvar pain during sexual intercourse continues to be prevalent in the female population, with 80.0% of women reporting to experience pain at least sometimes, and 15.0% reporting to experience pain more than half of the time. About half of the women scored within ranges of sexual distress and sexual dysfunction, indicating a high prevalence of sexual difficulties. Engaging in sexual intercourse despite experiencing pain was common, with 42.0% of women indicating to do so always or most of the time and 65.0% at least sometimes when experiencing pain. Of the affected women, 41.0% did not communicate their pain to their partners, bringing forward reasons such as fear of disrupting the moment, concerns about the partner's feelings, social pressure and embarrassment, and avoidance of awkward conversations or situations and shame. Sexual distress, vulvar pain, and sexual function were found to be associated with the psychosocial factors that were included in the model. Precisely, sexual self-esteem and definition of sex were associated with sexual distress and vulvar pain, both sexual agency subscales were associated with sexual distress, partner pleasure prioritization (sexual agency subscale 2) was associated with vulvar pain and sexual function, and autonomous sexual motivation was associated with sexual function. These relationships were partly mediated by relationship satisfaction, sexual pain communication, and engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain.

The present results correspond to previous research finding that about 50.0% of women do not communicate pain to their partners, for reasons such as the normalisation of painful sex and avoiding uncomfortable situations, prioritising the partner's pleasure, shame and embarrassment, and for promoting the relationship [6], as well as to the previously postulated notion that engagement in sexual activity despite pain is common among women [4,5]. The heuristic model (Fig 2) extends previous research by providing insights into psychosocial factors that may play a relevant role in motivating engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain and reluctance of pain communication. While autonomous sexual motivation was associated with reduced engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain, shame and engagement in undesired sexual activity (sexual agency subscale 1) showed a positive association. Further, women with a strong tendency to prioritize their partner's pleasure (sexual agency subscale 2), showed reduced communication of pain, while a restrictive definition of sex was positively associated with pain communication – this may result from a restrictive definition of sex being related to increased vulvar pain and sexual distress, heightening the need to communicating pain as alternative intimate activities are not assigned with the same value as PVI. Accordingly, both relationships between a restrictive definition of sex and vulvar pain and sexual distress were mediated by pain communication, indicating that a restrictive definition of sex increases vulvar pain and distress, which is further augmented if pain is not communicated.

In line with expectations, each of the psychosocial factors included into the model was associated with at least one of the outcome variables – sexual distress, vulvar pain, and sexual function. As hypothesized, both sexual agency subscales were associated with reduced sexual distress. This finding demonstrates that fostering a feeling of agency and autonomy may lead to sexual behaviour more in line with desires and own preferences and prevent engagement in activities that elicit pain and discomfort, germane to the finding that partner's pleasure prioritization is associated to reduced pain communication, which is associated to increased distress. Being able to communicate sexual needs and find a balance between the partner's and one’s own pleasure may thus limit sexual distress. Furthermore, body-image and overall confidence and self-esteem may also play an explanatory role in the association between sexual agency and distress, as women with higher self-esteem and confidence may find it easier to act sexually agent and may be less prone to experience high sexual distress in painful or undesired sexual situations [59]. Furthermore, communication of sexual needs may come easier [39].

Sexual self-esteem was positively related to relationship satisfaction and showed a negative association with sexual distress and vulvar pain, indicating reduced sexual distress and pain in individuals with higher sexual self-esteem. This is in line with research finding higher SSE levels to be associated with reduced psychological distress, while decreased SSE among correlated with elevated levels of depression, anxiety, and stress in menopausal women [60], and difficulties in sexual and marital relationships [61]. However, sexual intercourse despite pain and pain communication did not mediate the relationships between sexual self-esteem and sexual distress or vulvar pain. In line with predictions, autonomous sexual motivation had a positive effect on sexual function and was negatively associated with engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain.

Clinical implications and strengths

With about half of the present sample exceeding the cut-off scores for sexual dysfunction and distress, the need for investigating causal and maintaining factors becomes apparent. The present results highlight the importance of investigating psychosocial concepts such as sexual self-esteem, sexual agency, and sexual motivation in relation to vulvar pain and sexual distress in women. Furthermore, the present study points to the relevance of establishing a broader definition of sex that is not limited to PVI to reduce sexual distress and vulvar pain in women.

The findings provide a heuristic model that may serve as theoretical underpinning and guideline for interventions for women experiencing vulvar pain and sexual distress or reduced sexual function and their partners, and points to psychosocial factors that likely play a role in the cause and/or maintenance of sexual pain and should be considered besides biological factors. The model emphasizes the importance of targeting sexual self-esteem and sexual agency in order to prevent women engaging in sexual activities that cause pain and to foster communication of pain to their partners and improve relationship satisfaction.

Further, the present study shows that acting sexually agent and discordant to traditional gender roles can be associated with sexual distress, positing one reason why women may prefer prioritizing the partner's pleasure over their own, possibly finding pleasure in the partner's pleasure. It is important to clarify that this is not necessarily negative, as long as the partner's pleasure does not come at costs of the participant's own sexual pleasure or health. Germane to previous research, the present study found women to frequently refrain from communicating pain in order to prevent awkwardness and embarrassment or shame and provide pleasure to the partner and that rates of engagement in PVI despite pain are high [6]. The high numbers of women experiencing sexual distress and reduced sexual function, hold a restricted definition of sex, and/or engage in painful sex in a “healthy” student sample also highlights the deep embeddedness of sexual scripts and social norms, that may be learned from early on and may be difficult to overcome [14]. This seems to hold in spite the general movement towards challenging gender norms and the affirmation of (sexual) empowerment and agency of women and young adults [19,62], and the increasing importance given to sexual pleasure [6365]. Therefore, the present results corroborate the idea that promoting women's own satisfaction and engagement in intimate activities beyond PVI remains necessary [18,29].

Lastly, the present study provides a novel approach to measuring sexual agency by measuring degrees of shame and guilt when asking for stimulation only pleasurable or stimulating to the women themselves, the ability to say no, and engagement in undesired sexual activities. While this measurement is preliminary and remains to be validated in a different and independent sample, it is a first step towards a methodologically sound measurement tool of sexual agency, which is yet to be developed. This study replicates findings from Carter et al. [6] and extends existing research by introducing the definition of sex as a relevant factor. It underscores the importance of sexual agency, sexual self-esteem, and sexual motivation in addressing sexual function, distress, vulvar pain, engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain, and communication of pain.

Limitations and future directions

The present study is not free of limitations and methodological shortcomings that warrant consideration. A wide array of psychosocial factors have been related to vulvar pain and sexual distress [1]. Future research may look into the role of anxiety and depression [6668], attachment style [69], history of abuse and pain catastrophizing [1,3], body image [7073], and overall self-esteem [74,75] in the context of the psychosocial factors tested in the herein presented model. This study comprised a homogenous sample of female university students, of which the majority was heterosexual or indicated to engage in sexual activities with men and had a western and educated background. While young women comprised a valuable starting point to text the hypothesized model, the homogenous sample renders the study vulnerable to selection bias. In a next step, it would therefore be important for future research to test whether the model generalizes to larger, more diverse samples. Actively sampling women who engage in sexual activity with women may be of particular value, as there may be less pressure to engage in penetrative intercourse and the definition of sex is potentially wider and less scripted. Further, the sample was, on average, very young, which may have resulted in an increased prevalence of vulvar pain compared to older women women [76]. As prevalence of vulvar pain seems to decrease with age, including older women may be relevant to derive inferences on whether sexual agency increases, while engagement in unwanted or painful sexual behaviour decreases with age and whether the relevant psychosocial factors change across different periods in women's life, for example before and after childbirth or post menopause. Next, the sexual agency questionnaire was developed for this study and requires further validation. Due to the limited sample size, the sum-scores of validated questionnaires were used instead of entering all variables as indicator variables loading on a latent construct. This may have resulted in an underestimation of measurement error. Lastly, SEM was used within the context of an inductive and data-driven approach to develop the model of best fit to represent the data. It is therefore important for future research to test the robustness of the final model in an independent sample. Future samples could extent to women affected by chronic health conditions such as mental health conditions, autoimmune or inflammatory diseases, chronic pain, or post-cancer (treatment). Women with a sexual dysfunction diagnosis or in a relationship with a partner diagnosed with sexual dysfunction could also be included to gain insights into the role of sexual agency and sexual communication in the development of secondary sexual dysfunction.

Conclusion

The present study found sexual distress and limited sexual function to be high in female university students, in line with large numbers engaging in sexual intercourse despite pain and not communicating their pain to their partners. The herein presented heuristic model suggests that sexual self-esteem, sexual agency, the definition of sex, and sexual motivation warrant consideration when considering possible causal and maintaining factors of vulvar pain and sexual distress. The fact that a restrictive definition of sex was associated with sexual distress and vulvar pain is consistent with the notion that engagement in intimacy and behaviours besides PVI should be promoted in order to move away from PVI being the epitome of “having sex” [16,17]. Further, findings point to the importance of promoting female entitlement to pleasure and sexual agency, autonomous sexual behaviour, and sexual self-esteem, which may also result in increased relationship satisfaction and overall well-being by reducing sexual distress and dysfunction.

Supporting information

S1 File. Complete questionnaire.

(DOCX)

pone.0306086.s001.docx (12KB, docx)
S2 File. Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

(DOCX)

pone.0306086.s002.docx (81.5KB, docx)
S1 Table. Covariances and correlations of predictor variables.

(DOCX)

pone.0306086.s003.docx (14.2KB, docx)
S2 Table. Standardized and unstandardized coefficients of final model.

(DOCX)

pone.0306086.s004.docx (19.6KB, docx)

Acknowledgments

The Authors thank M.Sc. students Kim Walk, Ava Tauser, and Carol Gontijo-Santos Lima, as well as B.Sc. students Julia Linnemann and Kira Krebs for their contribution to the design and implementation of the study, as well as to the data collection as partial fulfilment of their theses. Moreover, the authors thank Prof. Dr. Mark Huisman and Prof. Dr. Jeffrey Kiesner for their statistical guidance in structural equation modelling and Dr. Paula von Spreckelsen and Piet van Tuijl for their advice regarding confirmatory factor analysis. The authors thank all participants for their participation, making this study possible.

Data Availability

The data is now accessible at dataverse.nl (https://dataverse.nl/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.34894/ESGWZO), with the DOI https://doi.org/10.34894/ESGWZO. Data reference: Oesterling, Carlotta; Amelie Harder; Borg, Charmaine; de Jong, Peter, 2025, "Factors Involved in Vulvar Pain during Sexual Activity and Persistence in Sexual Activity amidst Pain", https://doi.org/10.34894/ESGWZO, DataverseNL, V1.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Bergeron S, Reed BD, Wesselmann U, Bohm-Starke N. Vulvodynia. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2020;6(1):36. doi: 10.1038/s41572-020-0164-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.American Psychiatric Association D, Association AP. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5. Washington, DC: American psychiatric association; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Borg C, de Jong PJ. Feelings of disgust and disgust-induced avoidance weaken following induced sexual arousal in women. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44111. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0044111 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Reed BD, Harlow SD, Sen A, Legocki LJ, Edwards RM, Arato N, et al. Prevalence and demographic characteristics of vulvodynia in a population-based sample. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(2):170.e1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.08.012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Rosen NO, Muise A, Bergeron S, Impett EA, Boudreau GK. Approach and Avoidance Sexual Goals in Couples with Provoked Vestibulodynia: Associations with Sexual, Relational, and Psychological Well-Being. J Sex Med. 2015;12(8):1781–90. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12948 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Carter A, Ford JV, Luetke M, Fu T-CJ, Townes A, Hensel DJ, et al. “Fulfilling His Needs, Not Mine”: Reasons for Not Talking About Painful Sex and Associations with Lack of Pleasure in a Nationally Representative Sample of Women in the United States. J Sex Med. 2019;16(12):1953–65. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.08.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Herbenick D, Schick V, Sanders SA, Reece M, Fortenberry JD. Pain experienced during vaginal and anal intercourse with other-sex partners: findings from a nationally representative probability study in the United States. J Sex Med. 2015;12(4):1040–51. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12841 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Masters NT, Casey E, Wells EA, Morrison DM. Sexual scripts among young heterosexually active men and women: continuity and change. J Sex Res. 2013;50(5):409–20. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2012.661102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Fetterolf JC, Sanchez DT. The costs and benefits of perceived sexual agency for men and women. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44(4):961–70. doi: 10.1007/s10508-014-0408-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Seabrook RC, Ward LM, Cortina LM, Giaccardi S, Lippman JR. Girl Power or Powerless Girl? Television, Sexual Scripts, and Sexual Agency in Sexually Active Young Women. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2017;41(2):240–53. doi: 10.1177/0361684316677028 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kim JL, Sorsoli CL, Collins K, Zylbergold BA, Schooler D, Tolman DL. From sex to sexuality: exposing the heterosexual script on primetime network television. J Sex Res. 2007;44(2):145–57. doi: 10.1080/00224490701263660 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Seabrook RC, Ward LM, Reed L, Manago A, Giaccardi S, Lippman JR. Our scripted sexuality: The development and validation of a measure of the heterosexual script and its relation to television consumption. Emerging Adulthood. 2016;4(5):338–55. doi: 10.1177/2167696815623686 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Scappini A, Fioravanti G. Gender Scripts and Female Sexual Functioning: The Role of Sexual Pressure and Sexual Subjectivity. J Sex Res. 2022;59(9):1110–21. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2022.2042477 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ganong J, Simon W. Sexual conduct: The social origins of sexual development. Chicago: Aldine; 1973. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Bowleg L, Burkholder GJ, Noar SM, Teti M, Malebranche DJ, Tschann JM. Sexual scripts and sexual risk behaviors among Black heterosexual men: development of the Sexual Scripts Scale. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44(3):639–54. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0193-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Farrell J, Cacchioni T. The medicalization of women’s sexual pain. J Sex Res. 2012;49(4):328–36. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2012.688227 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Thomtén J, Linton SJ. When sex hurts: Female genital pain with sexual consequences deserves attention: A position paper. Scand J Pain. 2014;5(3):202–5. doi: 10.1016/j.sjpain.2014.04.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Laan ETM, Klein V, Werner MA, van Lunsen RHW, Janssen E. In Pursuit of Pleasure: A Biopsychosocial Perspective on Sexual Pleasure and Gender. Int J Sex Health. 2021;33(4):516–36. doi: 10.1080/19317611.2021.1965689 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Klein V, Imhoff R, Reininger KM, Briken P. Perceptions of Sexual Script Deviation in Women and Men. Arch Sex Behav. 2019;48(2):631–44. doi: 10.1007/s10508-018-1280-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Frederick DA, John HKS, Garcia JR, Lloyd EA. Differences in Orgasm Frequency Among Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Men and Women in a U.S. National Sample. Arch Sex Behav. 2018;47(1):273–88. doi: 10.1007/s10508-017-0939-z [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Garcia JR, Lloyd EA, Wallen K, Fisher HE. Variation in orgasm occurrence by sexual orientation in a sample of U.S. singles. J Sex Med. 2014;11(11):2645–52. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12669 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Herbenick D, Reece M, Schick V, Sanders SA, Dodge B, Fortenberry JD. An event-level analysis of the sexual characteristics and composition among adults ages 18 to 59: results from a national probability sample in the United States. J Sex Med. 2010;7 Suppl 5:346–61. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.02020.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Laumann EO, Gagnon JH, Michael RT, Michaels S. The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. University of Chicago press; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Lloyd EA. The case of the female orgasm: Bias in the science of evolution. Harvard University Press; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Wade LD, Kremer EC, Brown J. The incidental orgasm: the presence of clitoral knowledge and the absence of orgasm for women. Women Health. 2005;42(1):117–38. doi: 10.1300/J013v42n01_07 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.McClelland SI. Intimate Justice: A Critical Analysis of Sexual Satisfaction. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2010;4(9):663–80. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00293.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Blumenstock SM. Expectations and Sexual Desire in Romantic Relationships: An Experimental Investigation of Pleasure and Emotional Closeness Expectancies among Young Adults. J Sex Res. 2022;59(3):283–302. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2021.1991260 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Mark K, Herbenick D, Fortenberry D, Sanders S, Reece M. The object of sexual desire: examining the “what” in “what do you desire?” J Sex Med. 2014;11(11):2709–19. doi: 10.1111/jsm.12683 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Elmerstig E, Wijma B, Berterö C. Why do young women continue to have sexual intercourse despite pain? J Adolesc Health. 2008;43(4):357–63. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.02.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Fritzer N, Haas D, Oppelt P, Renner S, Hornung D, Wölfler M, et al. More than just bad sex: sexual dysfunction and distress in patients with endometriosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;169(2):392–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.04.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Kettrey HH. “Bad Girls” Say No and “Good Girls” Say Yes: Sexual Subjectivity and Participation in Undesired Sex During Heterosexual College Hookups. Sexuality & Culture. 2018;22(3):685–705. doi: 10.1007/s12119-018-9498-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Roberts C, Kippax S, Waldby C, Crawford J, editors. Faking it: The story of “Ohh!”. Women’s Studies International Forum. Elsevier; 1995. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Ayling K, Ussher JM. “If sex hurts, am I still a woman?” the subjective experience of vulvodynia in hetero-sexual women. Arch Sex Behav. 2008;37(2):294–304. doi: 10.1007/s10508-007-9204-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Dion L, Boislard M-A. What “Counts” as first sex between women? Results from a study of first sex among women who have sex with women. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality. 2022;31(2):253–67. doi: 10.3138/cjhs.2022-0015 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Basson R. The recurrent pain and sexual sequelae of provoked vestibulodynia: a perpetuating cycle. J Sex Med. 2012;9(8):2077–92. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02803.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Corsini-Munt S, Bergeron S, Rosen NO. Self-Focused Reasons for Having Sex: Associations Between Sexual Goals and Women’s Pain and Sexual and Psychological Well-being for Couples Coping With Provoked Vestibulodynia. J Sex Med. 2020;17(5):975–84. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2020.01.017 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Elmerstig E, Wijma B, Swahnberg K. Prioritizing the partner’s enjoyment: a population-based study on young Swedish women with experience of pain during vaginal intercourse. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;34(2):82–9. doi: 10.3109/0167482X.2013.793665 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Mayers KS, Heller DK, Heller JA. Damaged Sexual Self-Esteem: A Kind of Disability. Sexuality and Disability. 2003;21(4):269–82. doi: 10.1023/b:sedi.0000010069.08844.04 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Wu T, Zheng Y. Effect of Sexual Esteem and Sexual Communication on the Relationship Between Body Image and Sexual Function in Chinese Heterosexual Women. J Sex Med. 2021;18(3):474–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2020.12.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Deci EL, Ryan RM. The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry. 2000;11(4):227–68. doi: 10.1207/s15327965pli1104_01 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Deci EL, Ryan RM. Self-determination theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology. 2012;1(20):416–36. doi: 10.4135/9781446249215 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Deci EL, Ryan RM, Deci EL, Ryan RM. Conceptualizations of intrinsic motivation and self-determination. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. 1985:11–40. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7_2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Gravel EE, Pelletier LG, Reissing ED. “Doing it” for the right reasons: Validation of a measurement of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation for sexual relationships. Personality and Individual Differences. 2016;92:164–73. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.12.015 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Wood J, Desmarais S, Burleigh T, Milhausen R. Reasons for sex and relational outcomes in consensually nonmonogamous and monogamous relationships: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 2018;35(4):632–54. doi: 10.1177/0265407517743082 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Rancourt KM, Rosen NO, Bergeron S, Nealis LJ. Talking About Sex When Sex Is Painful: Dyadic Sexual Communication Is Associated With Women’s Pain, and Couples’ Sexual and Psychological Outcomes in Provoked Vestibulodynia. Arch Sex Behav. 2016;45(8):1933–44. doi: 10.1007/s10508-015-0670-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Rancourt KM, Flynn M, Bergeron S, Rosen NO. It Takes Two: Sexual Communication Patterns and the Sexual and Relational Adjustment of Couples Coping With Provoked Vestibulodynia. J Sex Med. 2017;14(3):434–43. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2017.01.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Hite S. The Hite report: A nationwide study of female sexuality. Seven Stories Press; 2003. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Hjermstad MJ, Fayers PM, Haugen DF, Caraceni A, Hanks GW, Loge JH, et al. Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011;41(6):1073–93. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.08.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Fletcher GJO, Simpson JA, Thomas G. The Measurement of Perceived Relationship Quality Components: A Confirmatory Factor Analytic Approach. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2000;26(3):340–54. doi: 10.1177/0146167200265007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Catania JA. Dyadic sexual communication scale. Handbook of sexuality-related measures. Routledge; 2013. p. 152–64. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S, Meston C, Shabsigh R, et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2000;26(2):191–208. doi: 10.1080/009262300278597 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Meston CM, Freihart BK, Handy AB, Kilimnik CD, Rosen RC. Scoring and Interpretation of the FSFI: What can be Learned From 20 Years of use? J Sex Med. 2020;17(1):17–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2019.10.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Derogatis L, Clayton A, Lewis-D’Agostino D, Wunderlich G, Fu Y. Validation of the female sexual distress scale-revised for assessing distress in women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. J Sex Med. 2008;5(2):357–64. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00672.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Doyle Zeanah P, Schwarz JC. Reliability and Validity of the Sexual Self-Esteem Inventory for Women. Assessment. 1996;3(1):1–15. doi: 10.1177/107319119600300101 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Zeanah PD. The development of a measure of female sexual self-esteem. University of Connecticut; 1992. [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Hite S. The Hite report. J Sch Health. 1979;49(5):251–4. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.1979.tb03845.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications; 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods. 2008;40(3):879–91. doi: 10.3758/brm.40.3.879 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Ackard DM, Kearney-Cooke A, Peterson CB. Effect of body image and self-image on women’s sexual behaviors. Int J Eat Disord. 2000;28(4):422–9. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Heidari M, Ghodusi M, Rafiei H. Sexual Self-concept and Its Relationship to Depression, Stress and Anxiety in Postmenopausal Women. J Menopausal Med. 2017;23(1):42–8. doi: 10.6118/jmm.2017.23.1.42 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Esmalian Khamseh L, Nodargahfard M. The Effect of Cosmetic Surgery on Sexual Self-Esteem: Attitudes toward Body Image and Well-Being in Married Women. World J Plast Surg. 2020;9(2):153–9. doi: 10.29252/wjps.9.2.153 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Cense M. Rethinking sexual agency: proposing a multicomponent model based on young people’s life stories. Sex Education. 2018;19(3):247–62. doi: 10.1080/14681811.2018.1535968 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Organization WH. Defining sexual health report of a technical consultation on sexual health 28–31 January 2002. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2006. [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Klein V, Laan E, Brunner F, Briken P. Sexual Pleasure Matters (Especially for Women) — Data from the German Sexuality and Health Survey (GeSiD). Sex Res Soc Policy. 2022;19(4):1879–87. doi: 10.1007/s13178-022-00694-y [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Ford JV, Corona-Vargas E, Cruz M, Fortenberry JD, Kismodi E, Philpott A, et al. The World Association for Sexual Health’s Declaration on Sexual Pleasure: A Technical Guide. Int J Sex Health. 2022;33(4):612–42. doi: 10.1080/19317611.2021.2023718 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Pereira VM, Nardi AE, Silva AC. Sexual dysfunction, depression, and anxiety in young women according to relationship status: an online survey. Trends Psychiatry Psychother. 2013;35(1):55–61. doi: 10.1590/s2237-60892013000100007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Yıldırım EA, Hacıoğlu Yıldırım M, Karaş H. Prevalence of Depression and Anxiety Disorders and Their Relationship with Sexual Functions in Women Diagnosed with Lifelong Vaginismus. Turk Psikiyatri Derg. 2019;30(1):9–15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.ter Kuile MM, Weijenborg PTM, Spinhoven P. Sexual functioning in women with chronic pelvic pain: the role of anxiety and depression. J Sex Med. 2010;7(5):1901–10. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01414.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Brassard A, Dupuy E, Bergeron S, Shaver PR. Attachment insecurities and women’s sexual function and satisfaction: the mediating roles of sexual self-esteem, sexual anxiety, and sexual assertiveness. J Sex Res. 2015;52(1):110–9. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2013.838744 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Reese JB, Handorf E, Haythornthwaite JA. Sexual quality of life, body image distress, and psychosocial outcomes in colorectal cancer: a longitudinal study. Support Care Cancer. 2018;26(10):3431–40. doi: 10.1007/s00520-018-4204-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Michael S, Skaczkowski G, Wilson C. Sexual satisfaction and sexual distress after cancer: The role of body image disruption, self-compassion, sexual pain and relationship satisfaction. Psychooncology. 2021;30(11):1902–9. doi: 10.1002/pon.5755 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Sullivan-Myers C, Sherman KA, Beath AP, Cooper MJW, Duckworth TJ. Body image, self-compassion, and sexual distress in individuals living with endometriosis. J Psychosom Res. 2023;167:111197. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2023.111197 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Pujols Y, Seal BN, Meston CM. The association between sexual satisfaction and body image in women. J Sex Med. 2010;7(2 Pt 2):905–16. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01604.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Ethier KA, Kershaw TS, Lewis JB, Milan S, Niccolai LM, Ickovics JR. Self-esteem, emotional distress and sexual behavior among adolescent females: inter-relationships and temporal effects. J Adolesc Health. 2006;38(3):268–74. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2004.12.010 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Rehbein-Narvaez R, García-Vázquez E, Madson L. The relation between self-esteem and sexual functioning in collegiate women. J Soc Psychol. 2006;146(2):250–2. doi: 10.3200/SOCP.146.2.250-252 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Briken P, Matthiesen S, Pietras L, Wiessner C, Klein V, Reed GM, et al. Estimating the Prevalence of Sexual Dysfunction Using the New ICD-11 Guidelines. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2020;117(39):653–8. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2020.0653 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Marta Panzeri

5 Nov 2024

PONE-D-24-21802Factors involved in vulvar pain during sexual activity and persistence in sexual activity amidst painful experiences.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Oesterling,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please answer all reviewer comments, even those by reviewer #1

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 19 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Marta Panzeri, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:  When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.   1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at  https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and  https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf  2. When completing the data availability statement of the submission form, you indicated that you will make your data available on acceptance. We strongly recommend all authors decide on a data sharing plan before acceptance, as the process can be lengthy and hold up publication timelines. Please note that, though access restrictions are acceptable now, your entire data will need to be made freely accessible if your manuscript is accepted for publication. This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If you are unable to adhere to our open data policy, please kindly revise your statement to explain your reasoning and we will seek the editor's input on an exemption. Please be assured that, once you have provided your new statement, the assessment of your exemption will not hold up the peer review process. 3. Please amend either the title on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the title in the manuscript so that they are identical.

4. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: MINOR REVISION

- place the young average age within the limits and must take this into account in the discussion

- put the description of the self-constructed questionnaire in the tools section and not in the statistical analysis section

- always use the same number of decimals in percentages

Reviewer #2: This study tries to evaluate which psycho-social factors may explain the link between the presence of genital pain and the willingness to have penetrative sexual intercourse in heterosexual women. The authors reported interesting data. First, the presence of a very high prevalence of genital pain (80%) in a general population. Yet this information should be taken in mind and deserves a broader reflection on the female sexuality. Then the authors found a significant association between sexual distress, vulvar pain, and sexual function, with some other psychosocial variables: sexual self-esteem, definition of sex, sexual distress, sexual agency ,autonomous sexual motivation. These relationships were mediated by relationship satisfaction, sexual pain communication, and engagement in sexual intercourse despite pain. I really appreciate this work, which gives to the readers a broader picture of the reasons why women experiencing pain engage in penetrative sex . I think that this work can be very useful from clinical point of view. Here I listed some minor comments.

Introduction

If I correctly understand, this study is aiming at evaluating general painful sensations in relationship to sexual activity or intercourse. For this reason, I suggest adopting the name of “genital pain” rather than of “vulvar pain” (as adopted by the authors) through the manuscript.

Where the authors mention the types of vulvar pain, indicating the “idea of penetration”, I suggest adding the possible diagnosis of vaginismus.

The authors refer to PVI of heterosexual women. It could be also useful to add the information of a lack of data on non-heterosexual couples.

From my point of view, the introduction is too long. I suggest summarizing the central points related to the main topic.

Methods:

The authors have to explain how they structured the items evaluating vulvar pain and sexual intercourse.

It could be useful to add the information about the type of diagnosis related to genital pain and its prevalence. Another important variable is the type of treatment and its efficacy in acting on pain management.

Definition of sexual agency: I don’t understand if the authors adopted only a limited number of the items present in the Hite Report of Female Sexuality.

In the results, I suggest to better define the “restrictive definition of sex”.

I suggest reporting, in the text or with a table, the prevalence of sexual dysfunctions. I think that this data

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: vulvar pain plosone.doc

pone.0306086.s005.doc (27KB, doc)
PLoS One. 2025 May 29;20(5):e0306086. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306086.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 1


10 Jan 2025

Thank you very much for the positive feedback and the appreciation of our work. We have found the detailed suggestions and textual recommendations very helpful, and thus we have implemented them meticulously, hoping that sections that were somewhat unclear are clearer now. In a seperate document that can be found in the attached files, we have responded to each comment individually. We are very much looking forward to hearing your feedback.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Rebuttal_Letter_PLOSone.docx

pone.0306086.s007.docx (36.7KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Marta Panzeri

4 Feb 2025

PONE-D-24-21802R1Factors Involved in Vulvar Pain during Sexual Activity and Persistence in Sexual Activity amidst PainPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Oesterling,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Could you please address all the reviewer comments and write a rebuttal letter that addresses each point, rather than just a general sentence for all your revisions?

I would also like to mention that review #2 was intended to select minor revisions for the paper.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 21 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Marta Panzeri, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Could you please address all the reviewer comments and write a rebuttal letter that addresses each point, rather than just a general sentence for all your revisions?

I would also like to mention that review #2 was intended to select minor revisions for the paper.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: This study will evaluate, in a population of Dutch students, which psycho-social factors are involved in the painful sexual activity, and in the lack of pain-communication to the partner. The Authors find a very high percentage of young women referring to experience pain during sexual intercourse. In addition, female distress, sexual function and vulvar pain were associated with low sexual self-esteem, low self-motivation for sex, and limited sexual agency. I appreciated this work, even if some concerns are present. Here I listed my comments and suggestions.

How the authors explain the very high percentage of vulvar pain in their sample, compared with the literature data? Have the authors considered to go in depth with the analysis of the prevalence, considering separate sub-groups pf women? I think that sexual experience may profoundly change in 18- or 30-years women.

The authors must explain why they decided to measure sexual motives adopting the construct of sexual scripts.

The part dedicated to the description of sexual scripts should be shortened and more centered on the main topic of the study.

I would like to know if the authors have assesses in the first part of the study the presence of diagnosed sexual dysfunctions, of organic conditions suggesting the presence of pain, or of psychopathological traits/psychiatric diagnoses associated with vulvar pain.

I think that an assessment of partner’s sexual health could be important to detect.

The enrollment of an exclusive population of young women should represent a selection bias. I suggest adding this point to the limits.

I don’t understand if vulvar pain assessment is made with no-validated items. If yes, the authors are invited to explain the methodology for selecting and structuring these questions.

Pleasure evaluation: the authors propose to the subjects the following two questions:” I engage in the following behaviours solely to provide pleasure to my partner; I engage in the following behaviours solely to meet my partner's expectation.” From my point of view, an additional question matching together the two options (self- and partner- pleasure) is necessary.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 May 29;20(5):e0306086. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306086.r005

Author response to Decision Letter 2


19 Mar 2025

Dear Dr. Marta Panzeri, Dear Reviewers,

Hereby we would like to thank you and the reviewer for the additional time dedicated to our manuscript (PONE-D-24- 21802), entitled "Factors involved in vulvar pain during sexual activity and persistence in sexual activity amidst painful experiences."

We gladly updated our manuscript in line with the reviewer’s comments and have formulated a rebuttal letter to address each comment individually (see attached document). The constructive comments and points addressed by the reviewer are highly appreciated. We hope the remaining questions are now addressed and that the revised manuscript now fully qualifies for publication in PLOS ONE.

With warm regards,

Carlotta Oesterling,

on behalf of the co-authors.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Rebuttal Letter Oesterling et al., 28.03.2025.docx

pone.0306086.s008.docx (45.4KB, docx)

Decision Letter 2

Marta Panzeri

15 Apr 2025

Factors Involved in Vulvar Pain during Sexual Activity and Persistence in Sexual Activity amidst Pain

PONE-D-24-21802R2

Dear Dr. Oesterling,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Marta Panzeri, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Marta Panzeri

PONE-D-24-21802R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Oesterling,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Marta Panzeri

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. Complete questionnaire.

    (DOCX)

    pone.0306086.s001.docx (12KB, docx)
    S2 File. Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

    (DOCX)

    pone.0306086.s002.docx (81.5KB, docx)
    S1 Table. Covariances and correlations of predictor variables.

    (DOCX)

    pone.0306086.s003.docx (14.2KB, docx)
    S2 Table. Standardized and unstandardized coefficients of final model.

    (DOCX)

    pone.0306086.s004.docx (19.6KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: vulvar pain plosone.doc

    pone.0306086.s005.doc (27KB, doc)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Rebuttal_Letter_PLOSone.docx

    pone.0306086.s007.docx (36.7KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Rebuttal Letter Oesterling et al., 28.03.2025.docx

    pone.0306086.s008.docx (45.4KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    The data is now accessible at dataverse.nl (https://dataverse.nl/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.34894/ESGWZO), with the DOI https://doi.org/10.34894/ESGWZO. Data reference: Oesterling, Carlotta; Amelie Harder; Borg, Charmaine; de Jong, Peter, 2025, "Factors Involved in Vulvar Pain during Sexual Activity and Persistence in Sexual Activity amidst Pain", https://doi.org/10.34894/ESGWZO, DataverseNL, V1.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES