Abstract
A false feedback paradigm was used to produce a discrepancy between expected and “actual” tumescence among 57 sexually dysfunctional and 58 sexually functional men randomly assigned to one of four false tumescence feedback conditions: negative (NEG), neutral (NEU), positive (POS), or no (NO) feedback. Participants predicted an erection score before viewing an erotic film and then received false tumescence feedback based on this score. Tumescence and cognitive ratings were obtained before and after the feedback. It was predicted that discrepancies would differ between dysfunctional and functional participants such that functional participants would have the ability to overcome discrepancies, whereas dysfunctional participants would not. As expected, POS decreased tumescence for dysfunctional participants and NO did not influence tumescence for either group. Unexpectedly, NEU decreased tumescence for dysfunctional participants and NEG decreased tumescence for functional participants. Despite tumescence changes, cognitive ratings generally followed the feedback that was given. These results only partially support current models of sexual dysfunction and behavioral regulation. Anxiety, self-focused attention, cognitive interference, and unexpectedness of the feedback could not account for the partial support. However, most feedback that was outside of the realm of the status quo for both functional and dysfunctional participants did decrease tumescence, despite outcome expectancies. These results suggest that both functional and dysfunctional men may be at risk for erectile failure should feedback about their performance be discrepant from what they expect. Prevention and treatment should focus on preparing men for occasional erectile failure and on helping them overcome discrepant feedback.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahamson, D. J., Barlow, D. H., Beck, J. G., Sakheim, D. K., & Kelly, J. P. (1985). The effects of attentional focus and partner responsiveness on sexual responding: Replication and extension. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 14, 361–371.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
Bach, A. K., Brown, T. A., & Barlow, D. H. (1999). The effects of false negative feedback on efficacy expectancies and sexual arousal in sexually functional males. Behavior Therapy, 30, 79–95.
Barlow, D. H. (1986). Causes of sexual dysfunction: The role of anxiety and cognitive interference. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 140–148.
Beck, J. G., Barlow, D. H., Sakheim, D. K., & Abrahamson, D. J. (1987). Shock threat and sexual arousal: The role of selective attention, thought content, and affective states. Psychophysiology, 24, 165–172.
Carver, C. S., Peterson, L. M., Follansbee, D. J., & Scheier, M. F. (1983). Effects of self-directed attention on performance and persistence among persons high and low in test anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 7, 333–354.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation: A control-theory approach to human behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1988). A control-process perspective on anxiety. Anxiety Research, 1, 17–22.
Earls, C. M., Quinsey, V. L., & Castonguay, L. G. (1987). A comparison of three methods of scoring penile circumference changes. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16, 493–500.
Farkas, G. M., Evans, I. M., Sine, L. F., Eifert, G., Wittlieb, E., & Vogelmann-Sine, S. (1979). Reliability and validity of the mercury-in-rubber strain gauge measure of penile circumference. Behavior Therapy, 10, 555–561.
First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L., Gibbon, M., & Williams, J. B. W. (1994). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (SCID-IV). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
Geer, J. H., & Fuhr, R. (1976). Cognitive factors in sexual arousal: The role of distraction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44, 238–243.
Ingram, R. E. (1990). Self-focused attention in clinical disorders: Review and a conceptual model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 156–176.
Kuban, M., Babaree, H. E., & Blanchard, R. (1999). A comparison of volume and circumference phallometry: Response magnitude and method agreement. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 28, 345–359.
Laws, D. R. (1977). A comparison of the measurement characteristics of two circumferential penile transducers. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 6, 45–51.
McCall, K. M., & Meston, C. M. (2007). The effects of false positive and false negative physiological feedback on sexual arousal: A comparison of women with or without sexual arousal disorder. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 518–530.
Palace, E. M. (1995). Modification of dysfunctional patterns of sexual response through autonomic arousal and false physiological feedback. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 604–615.
Raglin, J. S. (1992). Anxiety and sport performance. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, 20, 243–274.
Rich, A. R., & Woolever, D. K. (1988). Expectancy and self-focused attention: Experimental support for the self-regulation model of test anxiety. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 7, 246–259.
Sbrocco, T., & Barlow, D. H. (1996). Conceptualizing the cognitive component of sexual arousal: Implications for sexuality research and treatment. In P. Sulkouskis (Ed.), Frontiers of cognitive therapy (pp. 419–450). New York: Guilford Press.
Sbrocco, T., Weisberg, R., & Barlow, D. H. (1992). Sexual Dysfunction Inventory (SDI). Albany: State University of New York.
Spiering, M., Everaerd, W., & Elzinga, B. (2002). Conscious processing of sexual information: Interference caused by sexual primes. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31, 159–164.
Spiering, M., Everaerd, W., & Janssen, E. (2003). Priming the sexual system: Implicit versus explicit activation. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 134–145.
Spiering, M., Everaerd, W., & Laan, E. (2004). Conscious processing of sexual information: Mechanisms of appraisal. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33, 369–380.
Spurr, J. M., & Stopa, L. (2002). Self-focused attention in social phobia and social anxiety. Clinical Psychology Review, 22, 947–975.
van Lankveld, J. J., van den Hout, M. A., & Schouten, E. G. (2004). The effects of self-focused attention, performance demand, and dispositional sexual self-consciousness on sexual arousal of sexually functional and dysfunctional men. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 915–935.
Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482.
Zou, J. B., Hudson, J. L., & Rapee, R. M. (2007). The effect of attentional focus on social anxiety. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 5, 2326–2233.
Acknowledgments
The opinions and assertions contained herein are the private ones of the authors and are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of the US Department of Defense or USUHS. This study was supported by the USUHS T Grant.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stone, J.M., Clark, R., Sbrocco, T. et al. The Effects of False Physiological Feedback on Tumescence and Cognitive Domains in Sexually Functional and Dysfunctional Men. Arch Sex Behav 38, 528–537 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9370-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9370-9