Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 46, Issue 1, pp 29–33 | Cite as

Toward a Theoretical Understanding of Sexual Orientation and Sexual Motivation

  • Roland Imhoff
  • Rainer Banse
  • Alexander F. Schmidt
Commentary

References

  1. Bailey, J. M. (2009). What is sexual orientation and do women have one? In D. A. Hope (Ed.), Contemporary perspectives on lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities (pp. 43–64). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailey, M. J., Vasey, P. L., Diamond, L. M., Breedlove, S. M., Vilain, E., & Epprecht, M. (2016). Sexual orientation, controversy, and science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17, 45–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Fredriks, A. M., van Buuren, S., Fekkes, M., Verloove-Vanhorick, S. P., & Wit, J. M. (2005). Are age references for waist circumference, hip circumference and waist-hip ratio in Dutch children useful in clinical practice? European Journal of Pediatrics, 164, 216–222.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Harris, G. T., & Rice, M. E. (1996). The science in phallometric measurement of male sexual interest. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, 156–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hoffmann, H., Janssen, E., & Turner, S. (2004). Classical conditioning of sexual arousal in women and men: Effects of varying awareness and biological relevance of the conditioned stimulus. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33, 43–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Imhoff, R., & Schmidt, A. F. (2014). Sexual disinhibition under sexual arousal: Evidence for domain specificity in men and women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 1123–1136.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Imhoff, R., Schmidt, A. F., Bernhardt, J., Dierksmeier, A., & Banse, R. (2011). An inkblot for sexual preference: A semantic variant of the Affect Misattribution Procedure. Cognition and Emotion, 25, 676–690.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Imhoff, R., Schmidt, A. F., Nordsiek, U., Luzar, C., Young, A. W., & Banse, R. (2010). Viewing time revisited: Prolonged response latencies for sexually attractive targets under restricted conditions. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 1275–1288.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Imhoff, R., Schmidt, A. F., Weiß, S., Young, A. W., & Banse, R. (2012). Vicarious viewing time: Prolonged response latencies for sexually attractive targets as a function of task- or stimulus-specific processing. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 1389–1401.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Joseph, P. N., Sharma, R. K., Agarwal, A., & Sirot, L. K. (2015). Men ejaculate larger volumes of semen, more motile sperm, and more quickly when exposed to images of novel women. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 1, 195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mazières, A., Trachman, M., Cointet, J.-P., Coulmont, B., & Prieur, C. (2014). Deep tags: Toward a quantitative analysis of online pornography. Porn Studies, 1, 80–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Norris, A. L., Marcus, D. K., & Green, B. A. (2015). Homosexuality as a discrete class. Psychological Science, 26, 1843–1853.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Oberlader, V. A., Ettinger, U., Banse, R., & Schmidt, A. F. (2016). Development of a cued pro- and antisaccade paradigm: An indirect measure to explore automatic components of sexual interest. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0839-7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Ogas, O., & Gaddam, S. (2012). A billion wicked thoughts: What the Internet tells us about sexual relationships. New York: Plume.Google Scholar
  15. Oliver, D. L. (1989). The native cultures of the Pacific Islands. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  16. Plaud, J. J., & Martini, R. (1999). The respondent conditioning of male sexual arousal. Behavior Modification, 23, 254–268.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Rachman, S. (1966). Sexual fetishism: An experimental analogue. Psychological Record, 16, 293–296.Google Scholar
  18. Schmidt, A. F., Babchishin, K. M., & Lehmann, R. J. B. (2016). A meta-analysis of viewing time measures of sexual interest in children. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0806-3.Google Scholar
  19. Schmidt, A. F., Banse, R., & Imhoff, R. (2015). Indirect measures in forensic contexts. In T. M. Ortner & F. J. R. van de Vijver (Eds.), Behavior-based assessment in psychology: Going beyond self-report in the personality, affective, motivation, and social domains (pp. 173–194). Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
  20. Schmidt, A. F., Mokros, A., & Banse, R. (2013). Is pedophilic sexual preference continuous? A taxometric analysis based on direct and indirect measures. Psychological Assessment, 25, 1146–1153.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Seto, M. C. (2008). Pedophilia and sexual offending against children: Theory, assessment, and intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Seto, M. C. (2012). Is pedophilia a sexual orientation? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 231–236.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Seto, M. C. (2016). The puzzle of male chronophilias. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0799-y.Google Scholar
  24. Shimokata, H., Tobin, J. D., Muller, D. C., Elahi, D., Coon, P. J., & Andres, R. (1989). Studies in the distribution of body fat: I. Effects of age, sex, and obesity. Journal of Gerontology, 44, M66–M73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Smid, W. J., & Wever, E. C. (2014). Incentive theory of sexual motivation: A framework for the description of sexual offending behaviour and the role of sexual deviance. In D. P. Boer (Ed.), The Wiley–Blackwell handbook on the assessment, treatment and theories of sexual offending (pp. 141–164). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Tanner, J. (1978). Fetus into man: Physical growth from conception to maturity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Toates, F. (2009). An integrative theoretical framework for understanding sexual motivation, arousal, and behavior. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 168–193.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Wright, L. W., & Adams, H. E. (1994). Assessment of sexual preference using a choice reaction time task. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 16, 221–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Social and Legal Psychology, Department of PsychologyJohannes Gutenberg University MainzMainzGermany
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of BonnBonnGermany
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyMedical School HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations