Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of Female Sexual Arousal in Forensic Populations

  • Sexual Disorders (G Dwyer, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Psychiatry Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sexual offenses cause significant harm to victims, their families, and society as a whole and thus are an important social concern. While it is commonly assumed that sexual offenses are committed solely by males, research has shown that approximately 5 % of sex crimes in the USA and Canada are committed by females. Penile plethysmography (PPG) is a method to measure male genital arousal, which is commonly used in the assessment and treatment of male sex offenders and men with paraphilic sexual interests. Similarly, vaginal photoplethysmography (VPP) is a test to measure female genital arousal and is commonly used to assess female sexual dysfunctions. Although VPP is currently the most validated method to measure genital arousal in women, its use with female sex offenders or females with paraphilic sexual interests has been almost nonexistent. One explanation for this is that some research has suggested that female genital arousal may not be category-specific, meaning that women will respond to any sexual cues, not just those involving their preferred sexual interests. However, not all research supports this finding. Due to the potential benefits of using VPP in the assessment and treatment of female sex offenders or females with paraphilic sexual interests, it is important that further research be done before dismissing the use of VPP in forensic populations. The purpose of this article is to review the current research on VPP and its applicability to female sex offenders and females with paraphilic sexual interests.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Prause N, Cerny J, Janssen E. The labial photoplethysmograph: a new instrument for assessing genital hemodynamic changes in women. J Sex Med. 2005;2:58–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rafiee J, Rafiee MA, Michaelsen D. Female sexual responses using signal processing techniques. J Sex Med. 2009;6:3086–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Suschinsky KD, Lalumiere ML, Chivers ML. Sex differences in patterns of genital sexual arousal: Measurement artifacts or true phenomena? Arch Sex Behav. 2009;38:559–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Meston CM, Rellini AH, McCall K. The sensitivity of continuous laboratory measures of physiological and subjective sexual arousal for diagnosing women with sexual arousal disorder. J Sex Med. 2010;7:938–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Prause N, Janssen E, Cohen J, Finn P. Effects of acute ethanol consumption on sexual arousal and sexual risk taking. Hamburg: Poster presented at the meeting of the International Academy of Sex Research; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rellini A, Meston C. The sensitivity of event logs, self-administered questionnaires and photoplethysmography to detect treatment-induced changes in female sexual arousal disorder (FSAD) diagnosis. J Sex Med. 2006;3:283–91.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Peterson ZD, Janssen E. Ambivalent affect and sexual response: the impact of co-occurring positive and negative emotions on subjective and physiological sexual responses to erotic stimuli. Arch Sex Behav. 2007;36:793–807.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gilmore AK, Schacht RL, George WH, Otto JM, Davis KC, Heiman JR, et al. Assessing women’s sexual arousal in the context of sexual assault history and acute alcohol intoxication. J Sex Med. 2010;7:2112–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Prause N, Heiman JR. Assessing female sexual arousal with the labial thermistor: response specificity and construct validity. Int J Psychophysiol. 2009;72:115–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chivers ML, Seto MC, Lalumiere ML, Laan E, Grimbos T. Agreement of self-reported and genital measures of sexual arousal in men and women: a meta-analysis. Arch Sex Behav. 2010;39:5–56.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hatch JP. Vaginal photoplethysmography: methodological considerations. Arch Sex Behav. 1979;8:357–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Meston CM. Sympathetic nervous system activity and female sexual arousal. Am J Cardiol. 2000;86:30–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Beggs VE, Calhoun KS, Wolchik SA. Sexual anxiety and female sexual arousal: a comparison of arousal during sexual anxiety stimuli and sexual pleasure stimuli. Arch Sex Behav. 1987;16:311–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chivers ML, Seto MC, Blanchard R. Gender and sexual orientation differences in sexual response to sexual activities versus gender of actors in sexual films. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007;93:1108–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. United States Department of Justice. Criminal victimization in the United States, 2005 Statistical Tables National Crime Victimization Survey. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ 215244; 2006.

  16. Gannon TA, Cortoni F. Female sexual offenders: theory, assessment, and treatment. West Sussex: Wiley; 2010.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers [ATSA]. Reducing sexual abuse through treatment and intervention with abusers. Policy and position statement. Beaverton, ON; 1996.

  18. Harrison PM. Beck AJ. Prisoners in 2005. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ 215092; 2006.

  19. Snyder H, Sickmund M. Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 national report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Crime in the United States, 2005: uniform crime reports. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Crime and victim statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cortoni F, Hanson RK. A review of the recidivism rates of adult female sexual offenders. Research Report No. R-169. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Plummer K. Pedophilia: Constructing a sociological baseline. British Journal of Psychiatry. Qual Sociol. 1981;17:63–87. As cited in Nelson, E. (1994). Females who sexually abuse children: a discussion of gender stereotypes and symbolic assailants.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Nelson ED. Females who sexually abuse children: a discussion of gender stereotypes and symbolic assailants. Qual Sociol. 1994;17:63–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. National Sex Offender Public Website [NSOPW]. Raising awareness about sexual abuse: facts and statistics. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, SMART Office; 2014.

  26. Gartner RB. Cinematic depictions of boyhood sexual victimization (Part 1). Gend Psychoanal. 1999;4:253–89.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cooper AJ, Swaminath S, Baxter D, Poulin C. A female sex offender with multiple paraphilias: a psychologic, physiologic (laboratory sexual arousal) and endocrine case study. Can J Psychiatry. 1990;35:334–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fedoroff JP, Kuban M, Bradford JM. Laboratory measurement of penile response in the assessment of sexual interests. In: Saleh F, Grudzinskas Jr A, Bradford J, Brodsky D, editors. Sex offenders: identification, risk assessment, treatment and legal issues. New York: Oxford University Press; 2009. p. 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Chivers ML. A brief review and discussion of sex differences in the specificity of sexual arousal. Sex Relat Therapy. 2005;20:377–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Peterson ZD, Janssen E, Laan E. Women’s sexual responses to heterosexual and lesbian erotica: the role of stimulus intensity, affective reaction, and sexual history. Arch Sex Behav. 2010;39:880–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Steinman DL, Wincze JP, Sakheim D, Barlow DH, Mavissakalian M. A comparison of male and female patterns of sexual arousal. Arch Sex Behav. 1981;10:529–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Dawson SJ, Chivers ML. Gender-specificity of solitary and dyadic sexual desire among gynephilic and androphilic women and men. J Sex Med. 2014;11:980–94. Gynephilic and androphilic women show different levels of category-specificity in their sexual response patterns, and sexual arousal for gynephilic women is related to gender-specific stimuli, whereas sexual arousal for androphilic women is dependant on the activity depicted in the stimulus.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Chivers ML, Rieger M, Latty E, Bailey JM. A sex difference in the specificity of sexual arousal. Psychol Sci. 2004;15:736–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rullo JE, Strassberg DS, Israel E. Category-specificity in sexual interest in gay men and lesbians. Arch Sex Behav. 2010;39:874–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Chivers ML, Timmers AD. Effects of gender and relationship context in audio narratives on genital and subjective sexual response in heterosexual women and men. Arch Sex Behav. 2012;41:185–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Prause N, Barela J, Roberts V, Graham C. Instructions to rate genital vasocongestion increases genital and self-reported sexual arousal but not coherence between genital and self-reported sexual arousal. J Sex Med. 2013;10:2219–31. Asking women to pay attention to and rate their level of genital blood flow during a sexual fantasy may increase both their subjective and genital sexual responses. However, focusing on physical arousal cues such as this, as opposed to rating their overall level of sexual arousal, may result in increased discordance between women’s subjective and genital responses.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Laan E, Janssen E. How do men and women feel? Determinants of subjective experience of sexual arousal. In: Janssen E, editor. The psychophysiology of sex. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Suschinsky KD, Lalumière ML. Prepared for anything? An investigation of female genital arousal to rape cues. Psychol Sci. 2011;22:159–65. The preparation hypothesis states that women will become genitally aroused in response to any sexual activity, not just their preferred genders or cues, because this results in lubrication which prepares the body for sexual activity and protects against injuries resulting from penetration. This hypothesis is one explanation as to why women have been found not to show category-specificity in their genital arousal responses.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Pulverman CS, Lorenz TA, Lessels BR, Sherrill BN, Proctor AB, Matlock AN, et al. Women show different patterns of genital arousal to threatening versus non-threatening sexual images. New Orleans, Louisiana: Poster presented at the meeting of the International Society for the Study of Women’s Sexual Health; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Heiman JR. Female sexual response patterns: interactions of physiological, affective, and contextual cues. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1980;37:1311–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Laan E, Everaerd W, van Bellen G, Hanewald G. Women’s sexual and emotional responses to male- and female-produced erotica. Arch Sex Behav. 1994;23:153–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Laan E, Everaerd W. Habituation of female sexual arousal to slides and film. Arch Sex Behav. 1995;24:517–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Laan E, Everaerd W, van Aanhold M, Rebel M. Performance demand and sexual arousal in women. Behav Res Ther. 1993;31:25–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Vilarinho S, Laja P, Carvalho J, Quinta-Gomes AL, Oliveira C, Janssen E, Nobre PJ. Affective and cognitive determinants of women’s sexual response to erotica. J Sex Med. 2014;1–8. Positive and negative affect, distracting thoughts and sexual arousing thoughts did not significantly impact women’s genital responses, however thoughts of sexual arousal were found to be the greatest predictor of subjective sexual arousal.

  45. Mueller K, Curry S, Ranger R, Briken P, Bradford J, Fedoroff P. Changes in sexual arousal as measured by penile plethysmography in men with pedophilic sexual interest. J Sex Med. 2014;11:1221–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This collaboration was supported in part by the University of Ottawa Distinguished Visiting Researcher award.

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

ᅟ

Conflict of Interest

Natasha M. Knack, Lisa Murphy, Rebekah Ranger, Cindy Meston, and J. Paul Fedoroff declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Forensic Research Unit, University of Ottawa Institute of Mental Health Research, 1145 Carling Ave., Ottawa, ON, K1Z7K4, Canada

    Natasha M. Knack, Rebekah Ranger & J. Paul Fedoroff

  2. Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

    Natasha M. Knack

  3. Sexual Behaviours Clinic, Integrated Forensic Program, The Royal, Ottawa, Canada

    Natasha M. Knack, Lisa Murphy, Rebekah Ranger & J. Paul Fedoroff

  4. Sexual Psychophysiology Laboratory, Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    Cindy Meston

  5. Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

    J. Paul Fedoroff

Authors
  1. Natasha M. Knack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lisa Murphy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebekah Ranger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cindy Meston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. Paul Fedoroff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Paul Fedoroff.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Sexual Disorders

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Knack, N.M., Murphy, L., Ranger, R. et al. Assessment of Female Sexual Arousal in Forensic Populations. Curr Psychiatry Rep 17, 18 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-015-0557-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-015-0557-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation