Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 48, Issue 3, pp 781–794 | Cite as

Assessing Cognitive Appraisals Related to Sexual Function: A Scenario-Based Approach

  • Julia VeltenEmail author
  • Simon E. Blackwell
  • Jürgen Margraf
  • Marcella L. Woud
Original Paper

Abstract

Cognitive factors play an important role in the etiology and maintenance of sexual difficulties. To date, research has mostly relied on self-report measures to assess negative cognitions related to low sexual function. To overcome the limitations of self-report questionnaires, a series of open-ended, ambiguous sexual scenarios were developed and presented to participants (N = 600, Mage = 34.2 years), who were asked to generate an ending by entering a continuation for each scenario. Valence of completed scenarios was rated by the participants, and scenario endings were coded by two independent raters on three dimensions, namely reference to sexual problems, sexual communication, and the use of sexually explicit language. Sexual function was assessed with the Female Sexual Function Index and the International Index of Erectile Function. Multiple regression analyses were performed to assess whether the scenario-based task was associated with sexual function above and beyond other predictors (e.g., sexual distress). Individuals with lower sexual function rated the completed scenarios more negatively, and their endings included more references to problems related to low sexual function. In women with low sexual function, fewer endings included sexual communication with a partner or sexually explicit language. Our findings suggest that individuals with low sexual function appraise ambiguous sexual situations more negatively than other individuals. Future studies may investigate whether such biases can be experimentally manipulated and whether changes in cognitive biases may, in turn, lead to improvements in sexual function.

Keywords

Sexual problems Sexual function Cognitive biases Cognitive appraisals Indirect measures Scenario task 

Notes

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

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.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Abraham, L., Symonds, T., & Morris, M. F. (2008). Psychometric validation of a sexual quality of life questionnaire for use in men with premature ejaculation or erectile dysfunction. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5, 595–601.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00749.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baumeister, R. F., & Twenge, J. M. (2002). Cultural suppression of female sexuality. Review of General Psychology, 6, 166.  https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2680.6.2.166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beck, J. G., & Barlow, D. H. (1986). The effects of anxiety and attentional focus on sexual responding—I: Physiological patterns in erectile dysfunction. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 24, 9–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berner, M. M., Kriston, L., Zahradnik, H.-P., Härter, M., & Rohde, A. (2004). Überprüfung der Gültigkeit und Zuverlässigkeit des deutschen Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI-d) [Inspection of the validity and reliability of the German Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI-d)]. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 64, 293–303.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-815815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borg, C., de Jong, P. J., & Schultz, W. W. (2010). Vaginismus and dyspareunia: Automatic vs. deliberate disgust responsivity. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 2149–2157.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2010.01800.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Brauer, M., Leeuwen, M. Van, Janssen, E., Newhouse, S. K., Heiman, J. R., & Laan, E. (2012). Attentional and affective processing of sexual stimuli in women with Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 891–905.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9820-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Brotto, L. A., Heiman, J. R., Goff, B., Greer, B., Lentz, G. M., Swisher, E., & Van Blaricom, A. (2008). A psychoeducational intervention for sexual dysfunction in women with gynecologic cancer. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 317–329.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9196-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Byers, E. S. (2011). Beyond the birds and the bees and was it good for you?: Thirty years of research on sexual communication. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 52, 20–28.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carpenter, J. S., Reed, S. D., Guthrie, K. A., Larson, J. C., Newton, K. M., Lau, R. J., & Shifren, J. L. (2015). Using an FSDS-R item to screen for sexually related distress: A msflash analysis. Sexual Medicine, 3, 7–13.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sm2.53.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Catania, J. A. (2013). Dyadic Sexual Communication scale. In T. D. Fisher, C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (3rd ed., pp. 130–132). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Cooper, M. (1997). Bias in interpretation of ambiguous scenarios in eating disorders. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 35, 619–626.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(97)00021-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. De Houwer, J. (2006). What are implicit measures and why are we using them? In R. W. Wiers & A. W. Stacy (Eds.), The handbook of implicit cognition and addiction (pp. 11–28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Derogatis, L. R., Clayton, A., Lewis-D’Agostino, D., Wunderlich, G., & Fu, Y. (2008). Validation of the Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised for assessing distress in women with Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5, 357–364.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00672.x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Derogatis, L. R., Rosen, R. C., Leiblum, S., Burnett, A., & Heiman, J. (2002). The Female Sexual Distress Scale (FSDS): Initial validation of a standardized scale for assessment of sexually related personal distress in women. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 28, 317–330.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00926230290001448.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Ferguson, C. J. (2011). Sexting behaviors among young Hispanic women: Incidence and association with other high-risk sexual behaviors. Psychiatric Quarterly, 82, 239–243.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-010-9165-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Gordon-Messer, D., Bauermeister, J. A., Grodzinski, A., & Zimmerman, M. (2013). Sexting among young adults. Journal of Adolescent Health, 52, 301–306.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.05.013.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hertel, P. T., Brozovich, F., Joormann, J., & Gotlib, I. H. (2008). Biases in interpretation and memory in generalized social phobia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 278–288.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.117.2.278.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Hirsch, C. R., Meeten, F., Krah, C., & Reeder, C. (2016). Resolving ambiguity in emotional disorders: The nature and role of interpretation biases. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 281–305.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-093436.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Janssen, E., Everaerd, W., Spiering, M., & Janssen, J. (2000). Automatic processes and the appraisal of sexual stimuli: Toward an information processing model of sexual arousal. Journal of Sex Research, 37, 8–23.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490009552016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Karpinski, A., & Steinman, R. B. (2006). The Single Category Implicit Association Test as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kilimnik, C. D., Boyd, R. L., Stanton, A. M., & Meston, C. M. (2018). Identification of nonconsensual nexual experiences and the sexual self-schemas of women: Implications for sexual functioning. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47, 1633–1647.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1229-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Klettke, B., Hallford, D. J., & Mellor, D. J. (2014). Sexting prevalence and correlates: A systematic literature review. Clinical Psychology Review, 34, 44–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.10.007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Kohler, P. K., Manhart, L. E., & Lafferty, W. E. (2008). Abstinence-only and comprehensive sex education and the initiation of sexual activity and teen pregnancy. Journal of Adolescent Health, 42, 344–351.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.08.026.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Lykins, A. D., Meana, M., & Minimi, J. (2011). Visual attention to erotic images in women reporting pain with intercourse. Journal of Sex Research, 48, 43–52.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490903556374.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Mark, K. P., Herbenick, D., Fortenberry, J. D., Sanders, S., & Reece, M. (2014). A psychometric comparison of three scales and a single-item measure to assess sexual satisfaction. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 159–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nobre, P. J., Gouveia, J. P., & Gomes, F. A. (2003). Sexual Dysfunctional Beliefs Questionnaire: An instrument to assess sexual dysfunctional beliefs as vulnerability factors to sexual problems. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 18, 171–204.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1468199031000061281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nobre, P. J., & Pinto-Gouveia, J. (2006). Dysfunctional sexual beliefs as vulnerability factors for sexual dysfunction. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 68–75.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490609552300.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Nobre, P. J., & Pinto-Gouveia, J. (2008). Differences in automatic thoughts presented during sexual activity between sexually functional and dysfunctional men and women. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 32, 37–49.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-007-9165-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nobre, P. J., & Pinto-Gouveia, J. (2009). Cognitive schemas associated with negative sexual events: A comparison of men and women with and without sexual dysfunction. Archives of Bexual Behavior, 38, 842–851.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9450-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roefs, A., Huijding, J., Smulders, F. T. Y., MacLeod, C. M., de Jong, P. J., Wiers, R. W., & Jansen, A. T. M. (2011). Implicit measures of association in psychopathology research. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 149–193.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021729.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. Rosen, R. C., Brown, J., Heiman, S., Leiblum, C., Meston, R., Shabsigh, D., & D’Agostino, R. (2000). The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): A multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 26, 191–208.  https://doi.org/10.1080/009262300278597.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Rosen, R. C., Cappelleri, J. C., & Gendrano, N. (2002). The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): A state-of-the-science review. International Journal of Impotence Research, 14, 226–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rosen, R. C., Riley, A., Wagner, G., Osterloh, I. H., Kirkpatrick, J., & Mishra, A. (1997). The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): A multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology, 49, 822–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rude, S. S., Wenzlaff, R. M., Gibbs, B., Vane, J., & Whitney, T. (2002). Negative processing biases predict subsequent depressive symptoms. Cognition and Emotion, 16, 423–440.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930143000554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. van Lankveld, J. J. D. M., Bandell, M., Bastin-Hurek, E., van Beurden, M., & Araz, S. (2018). Implicit and explicit associations with erotic stimuli in women with and without sexual problems. Archives of Sexual Behavior.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1152-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. van Lankveld, J. J. D. M., Odekerken, I., Kok-Verhoeven, L., Hooren, S., Vries, P., Hout, A., & Verboon, P. (2015). Implicit and explicit associations with erotic stimuli in sexually functional and dysfunctional men. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 12, 1791–1804.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12930.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Velten, J., & Margraf, J. (2017). Satisfaction guaranteed? How actor, partner, and relationship factors impact sexual satisfaction within partnerships. PLoS ONE, 12, e0172855.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172855.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Wenzlaff, R. M., & Bates, D. E. (1998). Unmasking a cognitive vulnerability to depression: How lapses in mental control reveal depressive thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wiederman, M. W. (1999). Volunteer bias in sexuality research using college student participants. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 59–66.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499909551968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wiegel, M., Meston, C., & Rosen, R. C. (2005). The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): Cross-validation and development of clinical cutoff scores. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 31, 1–20.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00926230590475206.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Wiltink, J., Hauck, E. W., Phädayanon, M., Weidner, W., & Beutel, M. E. (2003). Validation of the German version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) in patients with erectile dysfunction, Peyronie’s disease and controls. International Journal of Impotence Research, 15, 192–197.  https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900997.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Woud, M. L., & Becker, E. S. (2014). Editorial for the special issue on cognitive bias modification techniques: An introduction to a time traveller’s tale. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 38, 83–88.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-014-9605-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Woud, M. L., Cwik, J. C., de Kleine, R. A., Blackwell, S. E., & Margraf, J. (2018). Assessing trauma-related appraisals by means of a scenario-based approach. Cognitive Therapy and Research.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-018-9956-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Woud, M. L., Fitzgerald, D. A., Wiers, R. W., Rinck, M., & Becker, E. S. (2012). “Getting into the spirit”: Alcohol-related interpretation bias in heavy-drinking students. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 26, 627–632.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029025.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Woud, M. L., Pawelczak, S., Rinck, M., Lindenmeyer, J., Souren, P., Wiers, R. W., & Becker, E. S. (2014). Alcohol-related interpretation bias in alcohol-dependent patients. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 38, 1151–1159.  https://doi.org/10.1111/acer.12334.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mental Health Research and Treatment Center, Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Faculty of PsychologyRuhr-Universität BochumBochumGermany

Personalised recommendations