Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 48, Issue 3, pp 725–737 | Cite as

On the Content of “Real-World” Sexual Fantasy: Results From an Analysis of 250,000+ Anonymous Text-Based Erotic Fantasies

  • Martin SeehuusEmail author
  • Amelia M. Stanton
  • Ariel B. Handy
Original Paper


A recurring problem with the study of sexual fantasy is that of social desirability bias. Study participants may report fantasies that are consistent with general societal expectations of fantasy content, as opposed to themes characterized by their actual fantasies. The wide availability of erotic material on the Internet, however, facilitates the study of sexual fantasy narratives as they are anonymously expressed and viewed online. By extracting approximately 250,000 text-based erotic fantasies from a user-generated website, we sought to examine “real-world” sexual fantasies, determine the themes that were typical of these narratives, and explore the relationship between themes and story popularity (as assessed by story views per day). A principal components analysis identified 20 themes that commonly occurred across the massive corpus, and a path analysis revealed that these themes played a significant role in predicting the popularity of the sexual fantasy narratives. In particular, the empirically identified themes reflecting familial words (e.g., mother, father) and colloquial sexual words (e.g., cock, fuck) were predictive of story popularity. Other themes identified included those not obviously erotic, such as those consisting of words reflecting domesticity (e.g., towel, shower) and colors (e.g., brown, blue). By analyzing a sexual fantasy corpus of unprecedented size, this study offers unique insight into both the content of sexual fantasies and the popularity of that content.


Sexual fantasy Language Meaning extraction method Text analysis 



This work was supported in part by the Middlebury College Digital Liberal Arts Initiative.

Supplementary material

10508_2018_1334_MOESM1_ESM.docx (55 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 55 kb)


  1. Ahlers, C. J., Shaefer, G. A., Mundt, I. A., Roll, S., Englert, H., Willich, S. N., & Beier, K. M. (2011). How unusual are the content of paraphilias? Paraphilia-associated sexual arousal patterns in a community-based sample of men. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 8(5), 1362–1370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bargh, J. A., McKenna, K. Y. A., & Fitzsimons, G. M. (2002). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the Internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benoint, K., Watanabe, K., Nulty, P., Obeng, A., Wang, H., Lauderdale, B., & Lowe, W. (2017). quanteda: Quantitative analysis of textual data. R Package version: 0.9.9-65.Google Scholar
  4. Bivona, J., & Critelli, J. (2009). The nature of women’s rape fantasies: An analysis of prevalence, frequency, and contents. Journal of Sex Research, 46(1), 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyd, R. L. (2014). MEH: Meaning extraction helper (version 1.4.15) [Software].
  6. Boyd, R. L., Wilson, S. R., Pennebaker, J. W., Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D. J., & Mihalcea, R. (2015). Values in words: Using language to evaluate and understand personal values. In D. Quercia (Ed.), Proceedings of the ninth international AAAI conference on web and social media (pp. 31–40). Palo Alto, California: The AAAI Press.Google Scholar
  7. Briere, J., & Runtz, M. (1989). University males’ sexual interest in children: Predicting potential indices of “pedophilia” in a nonforensic sample. Child Abuse and Neglect, 13(1), 65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, T. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.Google Scholar
  9. Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (1998). Information theory and log-likelihood models: A basis for model selection and inference. In Model selection and inference (pp. 32–74). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. Chung, C. K., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2008). Revealing dimensions of thinking in open-ended self-descriptions: An automated meaning extraction method for natural language. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(1), 96–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dodou, D., & de Winter, J. C. (2014). Social desirability is the same in offline, online, and paper surveys: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 487–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dombert, B., Schmidt, A. F., Banse, R., Briken, P., Hoyer, J., Neutze, J., & Osterheider, M. (2016). How common is men’s self-reported sexual interest in prepubescent children? Journal of Sex Research, 53(2), 214–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ellis, B. J., & Symons, D. (1990). Sex differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary psychological approach. Journal of Sex Research, 27(4), 527–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  15. Frohmuth, M. E., Burkhart, B. R., & Jones, C. W. (1991). Hidden child molestation: An investigation of adolescent perpetrators in a nonclinical sample. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6(3), 376–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gilden, A. (2016). Punishing sexual fantasy. William & Mary Law Review, 58, 419–491.Google Scholar
  17. Gold, S. R., Balzano, B. F., & Stamey, R. (1991). Two studies of females’ sexual force fantasies. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 17(1), 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greaney, D. (Writer) & Afflek, N. (Director). (1998). This little Wiggy [Television series episode]. In M. Groening (Ed.), The Simpsons. Los Angeles: Gracie Films.Google Scholar
  19. Handy, A. B., Wassersug, R. J., Ketter, J. T., & Johnson, T. W. (2015). The sexual side of castration narratives: Fiction written by and for eunuchs and eunuch “wannabes”. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 24(2), 151–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hornik, K., Mair, P., Rauch, J., Geiger, W., Buchta, C., & Feinerer, I. (2013). The textcat package for n-gram based text categorization in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 52(6), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(2), 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Joyal, C. C., & Carpentier, J. (2017). The prevalence of paraphilic interests and behaviors in the general population: A provincial survey. Journal of Sex Research, 54(2), 161–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Joyal, C. C., Cossette, A., & Lapierre, V. (2015). What exactly is an unusual sexual fantasy? Journal of Sexual Medicine, 12(2), 328–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kincaid, J., Fishburne Jr., R., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S. (1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (auomated readability index, fog count, and flesch reading ease formula) for Navy enlisted personnel (No. RBR-8-75). Naval Technical Training Command Millington TN Research Branch.Google Scholar
  27. Leitenberg, H., & Henning, K. (1995). Sexual fantasy. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 469–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maniglio, R. (2010). The role of deviant sexual fantasy in the etiopathogenesis of sexual homicide: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15(4), 294–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pornhub’s 2016 Year in Review. (2017). Retrieved September 5, 2017, from
  30. R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
  31. Salton, G., & Smith, M. (1989). On the application of syntactic methodologies in automatic text analysis. ACM SIGIR Forum, 23, 137–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Seifert, K., Boulas, J., Huss, M. T., & Scalora, M. J. (2017). Response bias on self-report measures of sexual fantasies among sexual offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61(3), 269–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stanton, A. M., Boyd, R. L., Pulverman, C. S., & Meston, C. M. (2015). Determining women’s sexual self-schemas through advanced computerized text analysis. Child Abuse and Neglect, 46, 78–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Strassberg, D. S., & Lowe, K. (1995). Volunteer bias in sexuality research. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24(4), 369–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  37. United States v. Curtin, 489 F.3d 935, 958-59 (9th Cir., 2007).Google Scholar
  38. Weisband, S., & Kiesler, S. (1996). Self disclosure on computer forms: Meta-analysis and implications. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3–10). New York, New York: ACM Publications.Google Scholar
  39. Williams, K. M., Cooper, B. S., Howell, T. M., Yuille, J. C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Inferring sexually deviant behavior from corresponding fantasies: The role of personality and pornography consumption. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36(2), 198–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wolf, M., Chung, C. K., & Kordy, H. (2010). Inpatient treatment to online aftercare: E-mailing themes as a function of therapeutic outcomes. Psychotherapy Research, 20(1), 71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Woodworth, M., Freimuth, T., Hutton, E. L., Carpenter, T., Agar, A. D., & Logan, M. (2013). High-risk sexual offenders: An examination of sexual fantasy, sexual paraphilia, psychopathy, and offence characteristics. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 36(2), 144–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wurtele, S. K., Simons, D., & Moreno, T. (2014). Sexual interest in children among an online sample of men and women: Prevalence and correlates. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 26, 546–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yarkoni, T. (2010). Personality in 100,000 words: A large-scale analysis of personality and word use among bloggers. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(3), 363–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zhang, Y., Chen, W., Wang, D., & Yang, Q. (2011). User-click modeling for understanding and predicting search-behavior. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International conference on knowledge discovery and data mining-KDD’11, (p. 1388). New York: ACM Publications.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Seehuus
    • 1
    Email author
  • Amelia M. Stanton
    • 2
    • 3
  • Ariel B. Handy
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyMiddlebury CollegeMiddleburyUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychiatryMassachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations