Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Examination of the Nature of Erotic Talk

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using a mixed-methods study, we provided the first systematic documentation and exploration of erotic talk. In Study 1 (N = 95), participants provided 569 erotic talk statements in an anonymous online survey, which we classified, using a modified thematic analysis, as being representative of eight themes. In Study 2 (N = 238), we quantified individual differences in these themes, subjected them to factor analysis, and examined the nomological network surrounding them with measures of relationship and sexual satisfaction, sociosexuality, and personality. The eight initial categories represented two higher order factors, which we call individualist talk and mutualistic talk. These factors were orthogonal in factor analysis and distinct in their nomological network. While the majority of people reported using erotic talk, we found few sex differences in its use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Indeed, as individuals can have sex outside of a formal relationship, sex talk might not occur within a relationship and, therefore, there is little reason to try to build relationship satisfaction and commitment.

  2. Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism, Openness, and Conscientiousness.

  3. While allowing people to report on statements that others say and not them, we may have introduced some learned content from pornographic movies, but as we (1) will not examine particular statements and (2) feel men and women can still accurately report statements offered by men and women even from pornographic films, we feel this is a minor concern. Moreover, as most pornographic consumption in the age of Redtube (and other website devoted to pornographic clips) revolves around limited scripts and budgets, this seems like a quite minor concern.

  4. The full list of statements is available from the first author, upon request.

  5. Age was correlated with less use of the submissive themed erotic talk (r(218) = −.14, p < .05).

  6. The results were generally robust to this distinction. Indeed, the only effects suggested that those who were in committed relationships used mutualistic talk more than single participant (t(218) = 2.24, p < .05) which was driven by differences in intimate talk (t(218) = 2.15, p < .05) and reflexive talk (t(218) = 1.97, p < .05). As these are exploratory analyses and weak effects, we urge caution in their over-interpretation.

  7. Because of the small size of the latter two groups, and initial analyses showing no effect for sexual orientation, this variable was omitted from further analyses.

  8. Data on the original three dimensions are available from the first author upon request.

  9. An examination of the three dimensions of this scale proved reasonably fruitless. As our interest was to investigate sociosexuality in general as opposed to any one aspect of it, we feel this is the best approach theoretically and psychometrically.

  10. The interaction of sex and use/nonuse of erotic talk was not tested given the unequal cell sizes.

  11. Specific details regarding moderation tests can be obtained by contacting the first author.

References

  • Allport, F. H. (1924). Social psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babin, E. A. (2013). An examination of predictors of nonverbal and verbal communication of pleasure during sex and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 270–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bensman, L. (2011). Two people just make it better: The psychological differences between partnered orgasms and solitary orgasms. Doctoral Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 72(11-B), 7107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botwin, M. D., Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Personality and mate preferences: Five factors in mate selection and satisfaction. Journal of Personality, 65, 107–136.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Kitzinger, C. (2001). “Snatch,” “hole,” or “honey-pot”? Semantic categories and the problem on nonspecificity in female genital slang. Journal of Sex Research, 38, 146–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brogan, S. M., Fiore, A., & Wrench, J. S. (2009). Understanding the psychometric properties of the sexual communication style scale. Human Communication, 12, 421–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhrke, R. A., & Fuqua, D. R. (1987). Sex differences in same- and cross-sex supportive relationships. Sex Roles, 17, 339–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1983). The act frequency approach to personality. Psychological Review, 90, 105–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Susceptibility to infidelity in the first year of marriage. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 193–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Choe, J. A. E., Buunk, B. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2000). Distress about mating rivals. Personal Relationships, 7, 235–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byers, E. S. (2001). Evidence for the importance of relationship satisfaction for women’s sexual functioning. Women & Therapy, 24, 23–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byers, E. S. (2011). Beyond the birds and the bees and was it good for you?: Thirty years of research on sexual communication. Canadian Psychology, 52, 20–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, J., Kippax, S., & Waldby, C. (1994). Women’s sex talk and men’s sex talk: Different worlds. Feminism & Psychology, 4, 571–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18, 192–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Engelhardt, A., Fischer, J., Neumann, C., Pfeifer, J. B., & Heistermann, M. (2012). Information content of female copulation calls in wild long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 66, 121–134.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. J., & Arrowood, P. C. (1978). Copulatory vocalizations of Chacma baboons (Papio ursinus), gibbons (Hylobates hoolock), and humans. Science, 200, 1405–1409.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, M. A., & Hunter, J. E. (1985). Analyzing utterances as the observational unit. Human Communication Research, 12, 285–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 93–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jay, T. (1992). Cursing in America: A psycholinguistic study of dirty language in the courts, in the movies, in the schoolyards and on the streets. Herndon, VA: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jay, T. (1999). Why we curse: A neuro-psycho-social theory of speech. Herndon, VA: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jay, T. (2009). The utility and ubiquity of taboo words. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 153–161.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K. (2013). Four functions for four relationships: Consensus definitions in university students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1407–1414.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., & Buss, D. M. (2012). Avoiding entangling commitments: Tactics for implementing a short-term mating strategy. Personality and Individual Differences, 52, 606–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., & Cason, M. J. (2009). The “booty call”: A compromise between men and women’s ideal mating strategies. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 460–470.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., Li, N. P., & Richardson, J. (2010). Positioning the booty-call relationship on the spectrum of relationships: Sexual but more emotional than one-night stands. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 486–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., Strosser, G. L., Kroll, C. H., Duineveld, J. J., & Baruffi, S. A. (2015). Valuing myself over others: The Dark Triad traits and moral and social values. Personality and Individual Differences, 81, 102–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonason, P. K., Webster, G. D., & Lindsey, A. E. (2008). Solutions to the problem of diminished social interaction. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 637–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyal, C. C., Cossette, A., & Lapierre, V. (2015). What exactly is an unusual sexual fantasy? Journal of Sexual Medicine, 12, 328–340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., & Gebhard, P. H. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrance, K. A., Taylor, D., & Byers, E. S. (1996). Differences in men’s and women’s global, sexual, and ideal-sexual expressiveness and instrumentality. Sex Roles, 34, 337–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, R. J. (2006). Vocalised sounds and human sex. Sexual & Relationship Therapy, 21, 99–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDougald, D. (1961). Language and sex. In A. Ellis & A. Abarbanel (Eds.), The encyclopedia of sexual behavior (pp. 585–598). London: Hawthorn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montesi, J. L., Fauber, R. L., Gordon, E. A., & Heimberg, R. G. (2011). The specific importance of communicating about sex to couples’ sexual and overall relationship satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 28, 591–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muehlenhard, C. L., & Shippee, S. K. (2010). Men’s and women’s reports of pretending orgasm. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 552–567.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murnen, S. K. (2000). Gender and the use of sexually degrading language. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 319–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pascoal, P. M., Narciso, I. D. S. B., & Pereira, N. M. (2014). What is sexual satisfaction? Thematic analysis of lay people’s definitions. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 22–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Patrick, G. T. W. (1901). The psychology of profanity. Psychological Review, 8, 113–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penke, L., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113–1135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 21–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pfefferle, D., Brauch, K., Heistermann, M., Hodges, J. K., & Fischer, J. (2008). Female Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvanus) copulation calls do not reveal the fertile phase but influence mating outcome. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 275, 571–578.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, J., & Wetherall, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redhotpie. (2014). The great Australian sex census. Retrieved from http://www.sexcensus.com.au/Home

  • Roberts, C., Kippax, S., Waldby, C., & Crawford, J. (1995). Faking it: The story of “Ohh!” Women’s Studies International Forum, 18, 523–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, D. T., Phelan, J. E., Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Good, J. J. (2012). The gender role motivation model of women’s sexually submissive behavior and satisfaction in heterosexual couples. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 528–539.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, M. S. (1969). Viewpoints: What is the significance of crude language during sexual relations? Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 3, 8–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, J. S., & Robinson, W. L. (1979). Talking and not talking about sex: Male and female vocabularies. Journal of Communication, 29, 22–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P. (2005). Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 247–311.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1986). Sexual scripts: Permanence and change. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 15, 97–120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Štulhofer, A., & Buško, V. (2010). The New Sexual Satisfaction Scale and its short form. In T. D. Fisher, C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 530–532). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trapnell, P. D., & Paulhus, D. L. (2012). Agentic and communal values: Their scope and measurement. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94, 39–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man (pp. 136–179). Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, R. H., & Leonard, W. M. (1974). Usage of terms for sexual intercourse by men and women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 3, 373–376.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J. W. (1990). The sexual vocabularies of heterosexual and homosexual males and females for communicating erotically with a sexual partner. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 19, 139–147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiederman, M. W. (2005). The gendered nature of sexual scripts. The Family Journal, 13, 496–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. M., Cooper, B. S., Howell, T. M., Yuille, J. C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Inferring sexually deviant behavior from corresponding fantasies. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 198–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Part of the results reported represented the Master’s thesis in Clinical Psychology for the second author. We thank Adiba Icho, Katie Ireland, Laura Mansfield, and Milica Medojevic for their work as Research Assistants.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social Sciences and Psychology, University of Western Sydney, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia

    Peter K. Jonason & Gabrielle L. Betteridge

  2. Graduate School of Health, Discipline of Clinical Psychology, University of Technology Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia

    Ian I. Kneebone

Authors
  1. Peter K. Jonason
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gabrielle L. Betteridge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ian I. Kneebone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter K. Jonason.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jonason, P.K., Betteridge, G.L. & Kneebone, I.I. An Examination of the Nature of Erotic Talk. Arch Sex Behav 45, 21–31 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0585-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0585-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation