Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 46, Issue 8, pp 2377–2388 | Cite as

Development of a Cued Pro- and Antisaccade Paradigm: An Indirect Measure to Explore Automatic Components of Sexual Interest

  • Verena A. OberladerEmail author
  • Ulrich Ettinger
  • Rainer Banse
  • Alexander F. Schmidt
Original Paper

Abstract

We developed a cued pro- and antisaccade paradigm (CPAP) to explore automatic components of sexual interest. Heterosexual participants (n = 32 women, n = 25 men) had to perform fast eye movements toward and away from sexually relevant or irrelevant stimuli across a congruent (i.e., prosaccade toward sexually relevant stimuli, antisaccade away from sexually irrelevant stimuli) and an incongruent condition (i.e., prosaccade toward sexually irrelevant stimuli, antisaccade away from sexually relevant stimuli). We hypothesized that pro- and antisaccade performance would be influenced by the sexual interest-specific relevance of the presented stimulus (i.e., nude female or male stimulus) and the instructed task (i.e., pro- or antisaccade) and, thus, differ meaningfully between conditions. Results for prosaccades toward sexually relevant stimuli in the congruent condition showed that error rates were lower and latencies were shorter compared with prosaccades toward sexually irrelevant stimuli in the incongruent condition, but only for male participants. In addition, error rates for antisaccades away from sexually irrelevant stimuli in the congruent condition were lower than for antisaccades away from sexually relevant stimuli in the incongruent condition, for both female and male participants. Latencies of antisaccades, however, did not differ between conditions. In comparison with established indirect sexual interest paradigms, the CPAP benefits from measuring highly automated processes less prone to deliberate control. To this end, the CPAP could be applied to explore the interplay of early automatic and deliberate components of sexual information processing.

Keywords

Sexual interest Sexual orientation Indirect measurement Pro- and antisaccade paradigm Eye tracking 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest was declared by any author.

Informed Consent

The study protocol adhered to the criteria of informed consent through all stages of the present research for all participants.

References

  1. Abegg, M., Sharma, N., & Barton, J. J. S. (2012). Antisaccades generate two types of saccadic inhibition. Biological Psychology, 89, 191–194. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2013.11.008.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aichert, D. S., Derntl, B., Wöstmann, N. M., Groß, J. K., Dehning, S., Cerovecki, A., … Ettinger, U. (2013). Intact emotion–cognition interaction in schizophrenia patients and first-degree relatives: Evidence from an emotional antisaccade task. Brain and Cognition, 82, 329–336. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2013.05.007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, A. K., Christoff, K., Panitz, D. A., De Rosa, E., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2003). Neural correlates of the automatic processing of threat facial signals. Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 5627–5633.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Attard-Johnson, J., Bindemann, M., & Ciardha, C. Ó. (2016). Pupillary response as an age specific measure of sexual interest: An exploratory study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 855–870. doi: 10.1007/s10508-015-0681-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Bar-Anan, Y., & Nosek, B. A. (2014). A comparative investigation of seven implicit measures of social cognition. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 668–688. doi: 10.3758/s13428-0130410-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolmont, M., Cacioppo, J. T., & Cacioppo, S. (2014). Love is in the gaze: An eye-tracking study of love and sexual desire. Psychological Science, 25, 1748–1756.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Both, S., Spiering, M., Everaerd, W., & Laan, E. (2004). Sexual behavior and responsiveness to sexual stimuli following laboratory-induced sexual arousal. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 242–258. doi: 10.1080/00224490409552232.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouchard, K. N., Timmers, A. D., & Chivers, M. L. (2015). Gender-specificity of genital response and self-reported sexual arousal in women endorsing facets of bisexuality. Journal of Bisexuality, 15, 180–203. doi: 10.1080/15299716.2015.1023389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradley, M. M., Costa, V. D., & Lang, P. J. (2015). Selective looking at natural scenes: Hedonic content and gender. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 98, 54–58. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.06.008.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Brenk-Franz, K., & Strauß, B. (2011). Der multidimensionale Fragebogen zur Sexualität (MFS) Erste Evaluation der deutschsprachigen Version des Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaires [Multidimensional questionnaire on sexuality—First evaluation of the German version of the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire (MSQ)]. Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung, 24, 256–271. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-128706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00750.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Dawson, S. J., & Chivers, M. L. (2016). Gender-specificity of initial and controlled visual attention to sexual stimuli in androphilic women and gynephilic men. PLoS One, 11, e0152785. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152785.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. De Houwer, J., & Moors, A. (2010). Implicit measures: Similarities and differences. In B. Gawronski & B. K. Payne (Eds.), Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measurement, theory, and applications (pp. 176–193). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  14. Derakshan, N., Ansari, T. L., Hansard, M., Shoker, L., & Eysenck, M. W. (2009). Anxiety, inhibition, efficiency, and effectiveness: An investigation using the antisaccade task. Experimental Psychology, 56, 48–55. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169.56.1.48.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Deubel, H., & Schneider, W. X. (1996). Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism. Vision Research, 36, 1827–1837. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(95)00294-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Everaerd, W. (1988). Commentary on sex research: Sex as an emotion. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 1, 3–15.Google Scholar
  17. Fathi, A., Elahi, T., & Hasani, J. (2014). Recognition of the facial emotional states in extraversion/neuroticism personality dimensions: The modulatory role of working memory. Advances in Cognitive Science, 16, 57–68.Google Scholar
  18. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Findlay, J. M., & Walker, R. (1999). A model of saccade generation based on parallel processing and competitive inhibition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 661–721.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Fromberger, P., Jordan, K., Steinkrauss, H., von Herder, J., Stolpmann, G., Kroner-Herwig, B., & Müller, J. L. (2013). Eye movements in pedophiles: Automatic and controlled attentional processes while viewing prepubescent stimuli. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 587–599. doi: 10.1037/a0030659.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Fromberger, P., Jordan, K., von Herder, J., Steinkrauss, H., Nemetschek, R., Stolpmann, G., & Müller, J. L. (2012). Initial orienting towards sexually relevant stimuli: Preliminary evidence from eye movement measure. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 919–928. doi: 10.1007/s10508-011-9816-3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hallett, P. E. (1978). Primary and secondary saccades to goals defined by instructions. Vision Research, 18, 1279–1296.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Hutton, S. B., & Ettinger, U. (2006). The antisaccade task as a research tool in psychopathology: A critical review. Psychophysiology, 43, 302–313. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00403.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Imhoff, R., & Schmidt, A. F. (2014). Sexual disinhibition under sexual arousal: Evidence for domain specificity in men and women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 1123–1136. doi: 10.1007/s10508-014-0329-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Imhoff, R., Schmidt, A. F., Nordsiek, C. L., Young, A. W., & Banse, R. (2010). Viewing time effects revisited: Prolonged response latencies for sexually attractive targets under restricted task conditions. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 1275–1288. doi: 10.1007/s10508-009-9595-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Imhoff, R., Schmidt, A. F., Weiß, S., Young, A. W., & Banse, R. (2012). Vicarious viewing time: Prolonged response latencies for sexually attractive targets as a function of task- or stimulus-specific processing. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 1389–1401. doi: 10.1007/s10508-011-9879-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Janssen, E., Everaerd, W., Spiering, M., & Janssen, J. (2000). Automatic processes and the appraisal of sexual stimuli: Towards an information processing model of sexual arousal. Journal of Sex Research, 37, 8–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jellison, W. A., McConnell, A. R., & Gabriel, S. (2004). Implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: Ingroup preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and straight men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 629–642. doi: 10.1177/0146167203262076.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  30. 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
  31. Kistemaker, L. (2013). Sexuelle Objektifizierung. Valider Effekt oder Methodenartefakt? [Sexual objectification. Valid effect or methodological artefact?]. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Bonn, Bonn.Google Scholar
  32. Krupp, D. B. (2008). Through evolution’s eyes: Extracting mate preferences by linking visual attention to adaptive design. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 57–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Land, M. F., & Tatler, B. W. (2009). Looking and acting: Vision and eye movements in natural behaviour. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lavie, N., Hirst, A., De Fockert, J. W., & Viding, E. (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 339–354. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. LeDoux, J. E. (1995). Emotion: Clues from the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 209–235.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Leigh, R. J., & Zee, D. S. (1999). The neurology of eye movements. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Lippa, R. (2006). Is high sex drive associated with increased sexual attraction to both sexes? Psychological Science, 17, 46–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01663.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Liversedge, S. P., Gilchrist, I. D., & Everling, S. (2011). The oxford handbook of eye movements. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Massen, C. (2004). Parallel programming of exogenous and endogenous components in the antisaccade task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 475–498.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Morris, J. S., De Gelder, B., Weiskrantz, L., & Dolan, R. J. (2001). Differential extrageniculostriate and amygdala responses to presentation of emotional faces in a cortically blind field. Brain, 124, 1241–1251. doi: 10.1093/brain/124.6.1241.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Mueller, S. C., Hardin, M. G., Mogg, K., Benson, V., Bradley, B. P., Reinholdt-Dunne, M. L., … Ernst, M. (2012). The influence of emotional stimuli on attention orienting and inhibitory control in pediatric anxiety. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53, 856–863. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02541.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Munoz, D. P., & Everling, S. (2004). Look away: The anti-saccade task and the voluntary control of eye movement. Nature Review Neuroscience, 5, 218–228. doi: 10.1038/nrn1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ogas, O., & Gaddam, S. (2011). A billion wicked thoughts: What the internet tells us about sexual relationships. New York: Penguin Group.Google Scholar
  44. Öhman, A. (1986). Face the beast and fear the face: Animal and social fears as prototypes for evolutionary analyses of emotion. Psychophysiology, 23, 123–145.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Prause, N., Janssen, E., & Hetrick, W. P. (2008). Attention and emotional response to sexual stimuli and their relationship to sexual desire. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 934–949. doi: 10.1007/s10508-007-9236-6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2005). Kurzversion des Big Five Inventory (BFI-K): Entwicklung und Validierung eines ökonomischen Inventars zur Erfassung der fünf Faktoren der Persönlichkeit [Short version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI-K): Development and validation of an economical inventory to assess the five factors of personality]. Diagnostica, 51, 195–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rieger, G., Cash, B. M., Merrill, S. M., Jones-Rounds, J., Dharmavaram, M., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (2015). Sexual arousal: The correspondence of eyes and genitals. Biological Psychology, 104, 56–64. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.11.009.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Rönspies, J., Schmidt, A. F., Melnikova, A., Krumova, R., Zolfagari, A., & Banse, R. (2015). Indirect measurement of sexual orientation: Comparison of the Implicit Relational Assessment Procedure, viewing time, and choice reaction time tasks. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 1483–1492. doi: 10.1007/s10508-014-0473-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Schmidt, A. F., Banse, R., & Imhoff, R. (2015). Indirect measures in forensic contexts. In T. M. Ortner & F. J. R. van de Vijver (Eds.), Behavior-based assessment in psychology: Going beyond self-report in the personality, affective, motivation, and social domains (pp. 173–194). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  50. Snowden, R. J., & Gray, N. S. (2013). Implicit sexual associations in heterosexual and homosexual women and men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 475–485. doi: 10.1007/s10508-012-9920-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P., & Steinberg, L. (1996). The Sexual Desire Inventory: Development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 22, 175–190.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220–247.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wenban-Smith, M. G., & Findlay, J. M. (1991). Expresssaccades: Is there a separate population in humans? Experimental Brain Research, 87, 218–222.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Wiedermann, M. W., & Allgeier, E. R. (1993). The measurement of sexual-esteem: Investigation of Snell and Papini’s (1989) Sexuality Scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 27, 88–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Verena A. Oberlader
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ulrich Ettinger
    • 2
  • Rainer Banse
    • 1
  • Alexander F. Schmidt
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Psychology, Social and Legal Psychology, Institute of PsychologyRheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität BonnBonnGermany
  2. 2.Department of Psychology, Cognitive Psychology Unit, Institute of PsychologyRheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität BonnBonnGermany
  3. 3.Department of Psychology, Legal PsychologyMedical School HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations