Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 46, Issue 7, pp 1973–1991 | Cite as

Development and Validation of the Pretending Orgasm Reasons Measure

  • Danya L. GoodmanEmail author
  • Omri Gillath
  • Parnia Haj-Mohamadi
Original Paper


Pretending orgasm is a widespread phenomenon, reported by both men and women. We report here on the development of a new measure to assess reasons for pretending. In three studies, using large diverse samples, we obtained a comprehensive list of reasons for pretending orgasms (Study 1; N = 46) and conducted both exploratory (Study 2; N = 416) and confirmatory (Study 3; N = 1010) factor analyses identifying six reasons for pretending an orgasm: feels good, for partner, not into sex, manipulation/power, insecurity, and emotional communication. Sexual dysfunction was correlated with frequency of pretending orgasms for reasons such as insecure, not into sex, for partner, and emotional communication. Usefulness for future research and clinical implications are discussed.


Pretending Orgasm Sexual behaviors Sexual dysfunction  


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1990). On the equivalence of factors and components. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 67–74. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Birnbaum, G. E. (2007). Attachment orientations, sexual functioning, and relationship satisfaction in a community sample of women. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24, 21–35. doi: 10.1177/0265407507072576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss (Vol. 1): Attachment. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28, 759–775. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.28.5.759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brewer, G., & Hendrie, C. A. (2011). Evidence to suggest that copulatory vocalizations in women are not a reflexive consequence of orgasm. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 559–564. doi: 10.1007/s10508-010-9632-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bryan, T. S. (2001). Pretending to experience orgasm as a communicative act: How, when, and why some sexually experienced college women pretend to experience orgasm during various sexual behaviors. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, p. 2049.Google Scholar
  7. Cole, T. (2001). Lying to the one you love: The use of deception in romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 107–129. doi: 10.1177/0265407501181005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cooper, E. B., Fenigstein, A., & Fauber, R. L. (2014). The Faking Orgasm Scale for Women: Psychometric propertiesArchives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 423–435. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0212-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Darling, C. A., & Davidson, J. K. (1986). Enhancing relationships: Understanding the feminine mystique of pretending orgasm. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 12, 182–196. doi: 10.1080/00926238608415405.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Davidson, K., & MacGregor, M. W. (1998). A critical appraisal of self-report defense mechanism measures. Journal of Personality, 66, 965–992. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.00039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis, D., Shaver, P. R., & Vernon, M. L. (2004). Attachment style and subjective motivations for sex. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1076–1090. doi: 10.1177/0146167204264794.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Everett, C. C. (1891). Ethics for young people. Boston, MA: Ginn & Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4, 272–299. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gosling, S. D., Sandy, C. J., John, O. P., & Potter, J. (2010). Wired but not WEIRD: The promise of the Internet in reaching more diverse samples. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 94–95. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X10000300.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Griffin, C., & Phoenix, A. (1994). The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Lessons from feminist psychology. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 4, 287–298. doi: 10.1002/casp.2450040408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hill, C. A., & Preston, L. K. (1996). Individual differences in the experience of sexual motivation: Theory and measurement of dispositional sexual motives. Journal of Sex Research, 33, 27–45. doi: 10.1080/00224499609551812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hite, S. (1976). The Hite report: A nationwide study on female sexuality. Oxford: Macmillan, Oxford.Google Scholar
  18. Hoyle, R. H., & Panter, A. T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 158–176). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  19. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76–99). Thousand Saks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hurlbert, D. F., White, L. C., Powell, R. D., & Apt, C. (1993). Orgasm consistency training in the treatment of women reporting hypoactive sexual desire: An outcome comparison of women-only groups and couples-only groups. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 24, 3–13. doi: 10.1016/0005-7916(93)90003-F.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson, S. M. (1996). The practice of emotionally focused couples therapy: Creating connection. Philadelphia: Brunner-Mazel.Google Scholar
  23. Kaighobadi, F., Shackelford, T. K., & Weekes-Shackelford, V. (2011). Do women pretend orgasm to retain a mate? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 1121–1125. doi: 10.1007/s10508-011-9874-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Loehlin, J. C. (1990). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: A case of disputed authorship. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 29–31. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr2501_2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84–99. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McCormick, N. B. (2010). Sexual scripts: Social and therapeutic implications. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 25, 96–120. doi: 10.1080/14681990903550167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McCoy, M. G., Welling, L. L., & Shackelford, T. K. (2015). Development and initial psychometric assessment of the Reasons for Pretending Orgasm Inventory. Evolutionary Psychology, 13, 129–139. doi: 10.1177/147470491501300108.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. McGahuey, C. A., Gelenberg, A. J., Laukes, C. A., Moreno, F. A., Delgado, P. L., McKnight, K. M., & Manber, R. (2000). The Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX): Reliability and validity. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 26, 25–40. doi: 10.1080/009262300278623.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2007). Why humans have sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 477–507. doi: 10.1007/s10508-007-9175-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246–268. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.246.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Muehlenhard, C. L., & Shippee, S. K. (2010). Men’s and women’s reports of pretending orgasm. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 552–567. doi: 10.1080/00224490903171794.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus (version 6). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  34. Opperman, E., Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Rogers, C. (2014). “It feels so good it almost hurts”: Young adults’ experiences of orgasm and sexual pleasure. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 503–515. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2012.753982.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Park, H. S., Dailey, R., & Lemus, D. (2002). The use of exploratory factor analysis and principal components analysis in communication research. Human Communication Research, 28, 562–577. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00824.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rudy, R. M., Popova, L., & Linz, D. G. (2010). The context of current content analysis of gender roles: An introduction to a special issue. Sex Roles, 62, 705–720. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9807-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Rundle-Thiele, S. (2009). Bridging the gap between claimed and actual behaviour: The role of observational research. Qualitative Market Research, 12, 295–306. doi: 10.1108/13522750910963818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Salisbury, C. M., & Fisher, W. A. (2014). “Did you come?” A qualitative exploration of gender differences in beliefs, experiences, and concerns regarding female orgasm occurrence during heterosexual sexual interactions. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 616–631. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2013.838934.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Saris, W. E., Revilla, M., Krosnick, J. A., & Shaeffer, E. M. (2010). Comparing questions with agree/disagree response options to questions with item-specific response options. Survey Research Methods, 4, 61–79.Google Scholar
  40. Schachner, D. A., & Shaver, P. R. (2004). Attachment dimensions and sexual motives. Personal Relationships, 11, 179–195. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2004.00077.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schaefer, L. C. (1973). Women and sex: Sexual experiences and reactions of a group of thirty women as told to a female psychotherapist. Oxford: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  42. Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. Journal of Educational Research, 99, 323–338. doi: 10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Séguin, L. J., Milhausen, R. R., & Kukkonen, T. (2015). The development and validation of the Motives for Feigning Orgasms Scale. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 24, 31–48. doi: 10.3138/cjhs.2613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Steiner, A. E. (1981). Pretending orgasm by men and women: An aspect of communication in relationships. Dissertation Abstracts International, p. 2553.Google Scholar
  45. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  46. Tolman, D. L., Striepe, M. I., & Harmon, T. (2003). Gender matters: Constructing a model of adolescent sexual health. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 4–12. doi: 10.1080/00224490309552162.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Wiederman, M. W. (1997). Pretending orgasm during sexual intercourse: Correlates in a sample of young adult women. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 23, 131–139. doi: 10.1080/00926239708405314.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of KansasLawrenceUSA
  2. 2.Counseling and Psychological ServicesEmerson CollegeBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations