Advertisement

Effects of Individual Difference Variables, Gender, and Exclusivity of Sexual Attraction on Volunteer Bias in Sexuality Research

  • Samantha J. Dawson
  • Jackie S. Huberman
  • Katrina N. Bouchard
  • Meghan K. McInnis
  • Caroline F. Pukall
  • Meredith L. ChiversEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Sexuality research is often regarded as more intrusive than other types of research, contributing to sample self-selection biases. Researchers have consistently found that volunteers and non-volunteers for sexuality studies differ on a number of sexuality-related variables. Despite a large number of studies examining volunteer biases, relatively few have examined the effects of gender and exclusivity of sexual attraction on willingness to volunteer. Given that comparisons on the basis of gender and/or sexual attraction are frequently made in sexuality studies, understanding how these factors may contribute to volunteer bias is particularly important. In the current study, we investigated the impact of gender and sexual attraction, as well as individual difference variables, on hypothetical willingness to volunteer for a variety of sexuality studies, including new measurement technologies not previously investigated. Greater proportions of men and individuals with any degree of same-gender attraction reported that they were willing to volunteer for eye tracking and psychophysiology studies, whereas there were no significant effects of gender or sexual attraction on willingness to volunteer for sexuality surveys. The proportions of volunteers willing to participate were inversely related to study invasiveness. Greater sexual experience and more positive sexual attitudes were significant predictors of willingness to volunteer, whereas gender, sexual attraction, and other sexuality characteristics were not significant predictors. Implications of volunteer bias for research findings are discussed. Strategies to minimize volunteer bias and to examine whether or not recruited samples differ from the population are provided.

Keywords

Volunteer bias Sex research Gender Sexual attraction Individual differences 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported in part by an Ontario Trillium Scholarship and an Ontario Graduate Scholarship awarded to Samantha J. Dawson, and Canadian Institute for Health Research New Investigator Awards awarded to Meredith L. Chivers and to Caroline F. Pukall. This paper was presented at the annual meetings of the Canadian Sex Research Forum in Kelowna, BC, Canada, 2015, and the Society for Sex Therapy and Research in Montreal, QC, Canada, 2017.

References

  1. Albright, J. M. (2008). Sex in America online: An exploration of sex, marital status, and sexual identity in internet sex seeking and its impacts. Journal of Sex Research, 45, 175–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barker, W. J., & Perlman, D. (1975). Volunteer bias and personality traits in sexual standards research. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 4, 161–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bogaert, A. F. (1996). Volunteer bias in human sexuality research: Evidence for both sexuality and personality differences in males. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 25, 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bouchard, K. N., Huberman, J. S., Dawson, S. J., McInnis, M. K., Pukall, C. F., & Chivers, M. L. (2015, October). Just do it: Examining psychosexual differences among actual, hypothetical, and nonvolunteers in sex research. Paper presented at the meeting of the Canadian Sex Research Forum, Kelowna, BC.Google Scholar
  5. Bouchard, K. N., Stewart, J. G., Boyer, S. C., Holden, R. R., & Pukall, C. F. (2019). Sexuality and personality correlates of willingness to participate in sex research. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality.  https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.2018-0028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cowart, D. A., & Pollack, R. H. (1979). A Guttman scale of sexual experience. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 5, 3–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cowart-Steckler, D. A. (1984). A Guttman scale of sexual experience: An update. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 10, 49–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. de Visser, R. O., Smith, A. M., Rissel, C. E., Richters, J., & Grulich, A. E. (2003). Sex in Australia: Heterosexual experience and recent hetero-sexual encounters among a representative sample of adults. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 27, 146–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Farkas, G. M., Sine, L. F., & Evans, I. M. (1978). Personality, sexuality, and demographic differences between volunteers and non-volunteers for a laboratory study of male sexual behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 7, 513–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fisher, W. A., White, L. A., Byrne, D., & Kelley, K. (1988). Erotophobia–erotophilia as a dimension of personality. Journal of Sex Research, 25, 123–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gaither, G. A., Sellbom, M., & Meier, B. P. (2003). The effect of stimulus content on volunteering for sexual interest research among college students. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 240–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Graham, C. A., Sanders, S. A., & Milhausen, R. R. (2006). The Sexual Excitation/Sexual Inhibition Inventory for Women: Psychometric properties. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 397–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Griffith, M., & Walker, C. E. (1976). Characteristics associated with expressed willingness to participate in psychological research. Journal of Social Psychology, 100, 157–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grulich, A. E., de Visser, R. O., Smith, A. M., Rissel, C. E., & Richters, J. (2003). Sex in Australia: Homosexual experience and recent homosexual encounters. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 27, 155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Huberman, J. S., McInnis, M. K., Bouchard, K. N., Dawson, S. J., Pukall, C. F., & Chivers, M. L. (2019). Exploring comfort levels and the role of compensation in sexual psychophysiology study participation. Archives of Sexual Behavior.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-1458-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Janda, L. H., & Bazemore, S. D. (2011). The Revised Mosher Sex-Guilt Scale: Its psychometric properties and a proposed ten-item version. Journal of Sex Research, 48, 392–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002). The Sexual Inhibition (SIS) and Sexual Excitation (SES) Scales: I. Measuring sexual inhibition and excitation proneness in men. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 114–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kenrick, D. T., Stringfield, D. O., Wagenhals, W. L., Dahl, R. H., & Ransdell, H. J. (1980). Sex differences, androgyny, and approach responses to erotica: A new variation on the old volunteer problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 517–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: Saunders.Google Scholar
  21. Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., & Gebhard, P. H. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia: Saunders.Google Scholar
  22. Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Mercer, C. H., Tanton, C., Prah, P., Erens, B., Sonnenberg, P., Clifton, S., … Copas, A. J. (2013). Changes in sexual attitudes and lifestyles in Britain through the life course and over time: findings from the National Surveys of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal). The Lancet, 382, 1781–1794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Meston, C. M., Heiman, J. R., Trapnell, P. D., & Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Socially desirable responding and sexuality self-reports. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 148–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Morokoff, P. J. (1986). Volunteer bias in the psychophysiological study of female sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 22, 35–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Plaud, J. J., Gaither, G. A., Hegstad, H. J., Rowan, L., & Devitt, M. K. (1999). Volunteer bias in human psychophysiological sexual arousal research: To whom do our research results apply? Journal of Sex Research, 36, 171–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rosen, R., Brown, C., Heiman, J., Leiblum, S., Meston, C., Shabsigh, R., … 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 & Marital Therapy, 26, 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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
  32. Saunders, D. M., Fisher, W. A., Hewitt, E. C., & Clayton, J. P. (1985). A method for empirically assessing volunteer selection effects: Recruitment procedures and responses to erotica. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1703–1712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P., & Steinberg, L. (1996). The Sexual Desire Inventory: Development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 22, 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Stöber, J., Dette, D. E., & Musch, J. (2002). Comparing continuous and dichotomous scoring of the balanced inventory of desirable responding. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78, 370–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Strassberg, D. S., & Lowe, K. (1995). Volunteer bias in sexuality research. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24, 369–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Twenge, J. M., Sherman, R. A., & Wells, B. E. (2015). Changes in American adults’ sexual behavior and attitudes, 1972–2012. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 2273–2285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wellings, K., Collumbien, M., Slaymaker, E., Singh, S., Hodges, Z., Patel, D., & Bajos, N. (2006). Sexual behaviour in context: A global perspective. The Lancet, 368, 1706–1728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wiederman, M. W. (1993). Demographic and sexual characteristics of nonresponders to sexual experience items in a national survey. Journal of Sex Research, 30, 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wiederman, M. W. (1999). Volunteer bias in sexuality research using college student participants. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wolchik, S. A., Braver, S. L., & Jensen, K. (1985). Volunteer bias in erotica research: Effects of intrusiveness of measure and sexual background. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 14, 93–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wolchik, S. A., Spencer, S. L., & Lisi, I. S. (1983). Volunteer bias in research employing vaginal measures of sexual arousal. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 12, 399–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations