Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 40, Issue 4, pp 713–723 | Cite as

Theoretical Issues in the Study of Asexuality

  • CJ DeLuzio ChasinEmail author
Original Paper


Academic interest in asexual people is new and researchers are beginning to discuss how to proceed methodologically and conceptually with the study of asexuality. This article explores several of the theoretical issues related to the study of asexuality. Researchers have tended to treat asexuality either as a distinct sexual orientation or as a lack of sexual orientation. Difficulties arise when asexual participants are inconsistent in their self-identification as asexual. Distinguishing between sexual and romantic attraction resolves this confusion, while simultaneously calling into question conceptualizations of the asexual population as a single homogenous group. Arguments are considered in favor of exploring diversity within the asexual population, particularly with respect to gender and romantic orientation, proposing that the categorical constructs employed in (a)sexuality research be replaced with continuous ones. Furthermore, given the recently noted bias toward including only self-identified asexuals, as opposed to non-self-identified asexuals or “potential-asexuals,” in research about asexuality, the nature and meaning of asexual self-identification are discussed. Particular attention is paid to the theoretical importance of acknowledging asexual self-identification or lack thereof in future research into asexuality. This article discusses what these current theoretical issues mean for the study of asexuality and sexuality more generally, including a brief consideration of ethical implications for research with asexual participants. Finally, directions for future research are suggested.


Asexuality Sexual orientation Sexual desire Romantic attraction Sexuality 



I would like to thank my doctoral supervisor Charlene Senn for her guidance, particularly as I tried to nagivate safely through my first substantive encounter with the peer-review process.


  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text revision). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Asexual Visibility and Education Network. (2008). About AVEN. Retrieved August 11, 2009, from AVEN: The Asexual Visibility and Education Network Web Site:
  3. Bogaert, A. F. (2004). Asexuality: Prevalence and associated factors in a national probability sample. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 279–287.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bogaert, A. F. (2006). Toward a conceptual understanding of asexuality. Review of General Psychology, 10, 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bradac, J. J. (1983). The language of lovers, flovers, and friends: Communicating in social and personal relationships. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 2, 141–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brotto, L. A., Knudson, G., Inskip, J., Rhodes, K., & Erskine, Y. (2010). Asexuality: A mixed methods approach. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 599–618.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brotto, L. A., & Yule, M. A. (2009). Reply to Hinderliter [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 622–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brotto, L. A., & Yule, M. A. (2010). Physiological and subjective sexual arousal in self-identified asexual women. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:  10.1007/s10508-010-9671-7.
  9. Brown, L. S. (1989). New voices, new visions: Toward a lesbian/gay paradigm for psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 445–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Carrigan, M. (in press). There’s more to life than sex: Difference and commonality within the asexual community. Sexualities. Google Scholar
  12. Chivers, M. L., & Bailey, J. M. (2007). The sexual psychophysiology of sexual orientation. In E. Janssen (Ed.), The psychophysiology of sex (pp. 458–474). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Chivers, M. L., Rieger, G., Latty, E., & Bailey, J. M. (2004). A sex difference in the specificity of sexual arousal. Psychological Science, 15, 736–744.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chivers, M. L., Seto, M. C., Lalumiere, M. L., Laan, E., & Grimbos, T. (2010). Agreement of self-reported and genital measures of sexual arousal in men and women: A meta-analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 5–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Diamond, L. M. (2003). What does sexual orientation orient? A biobehavioral model distinguishing romantic love and sexual desire. Psychological Review, 110, 173–192.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Diamond, L. M. (2008). Sexual fluidity: Understanding women’s love and desire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Edley, N. (2001). Analysing masculinity: Interpretive repertoires, ideological dilemmas and subject positions. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse as data (pp. 189–228). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Gazzola, S. B., & Morrison, M. A. (2011). Asexuality: An emergent sexual orientation. In T. G. Morrison, M. A. Morrison, M. Carrigan, & D. T. McDermott (Eds.), Sexual minority research in the new millennium. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.Google Scholar
  19. Gergen, K. J. (1973). Social psychology as history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 309–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gergen, K. J. (1997). The place of the psyche in a constructed world. Theory & Psychology, 7, 723–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hinderliter, A. C. (2009). Methodological issues for studying asexuality [Letter to the Editor]. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 619–621.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  23. Kitzinger, C. (1999). Lesbian and gay psychology: Is it critical? Annual Review of Critical Psychology, 1, 50–66.Google Scholar
  24. Kuban, M., Barbaree, H. E., & Blanchard, R. (1999). A comparison of volume and circumference phallometry: Response magnitude and method agreement. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 28, 345–359.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Labov, W. (1973). The boundaries of words and their meanings. In C. J. N. Bailey & R. W. Shuy (Eds.), New ways of analyzing variations in English (pp. 340–373). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Miller, L. J. (2000). The poverty of truth-seeking: Postmodernism, discourse analysis, and critical feminism. Theory & Psychology, 10, 313–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Potter, J. (2003). Discourse analysis and discursive psychology. In P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes, & L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 73–94). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Prause, N., & Graham, C. (2007). Asexuality: Classification and characterization. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 341–356.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rieger, G., Chivers, M., & Bailey, J. M. (2005). Sexual arousal patterns in bisexual men. Psychological Science, 16, 579–584.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sandfort, T. G. M., & Dodge, B. (2008). “…And then there was the Down Low’’: Introduction to Black and Latino male bisexualities. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 675–682.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Scherrer, K. (2008). Asexual identity: Negotiating identity, negotiating desire. Sexualities, 11, 621–641.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Scherrer, K. S. (2010a). Asexual relationships: What does asexuality have to do with polyamory? In M. Barker & D. Langdridge (Eds.), Understanding non-monogamies (pp. 154–159). New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  33. Scherrer, K. S. (2010b). How asexuality contributes to the same-sex marriage discussion. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services, 22, 56–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shotter, J. (1997). Sociocentric accounts of the mind. Theory & Psychology, 7, 422–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Snape, D., & Spencer, L. (2003). The foundations of qualitative research. In J. Ritchie & J. Lewis (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers (pp. 1–23). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  36. Statistics Canada. (2004, June 15). Canadian community health survey. The Daily, Statistics Canada Catalogue no 82-221-XIE. Retrieved July 8, 2010 from Statistics Canada Web Site:
  37. Storms, M. D. (1980). Theories of sexual orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 783–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of WindsorWindsorCanada

Personalised recommendations