Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 295–316 | Cite as

Sexual Content-Induced Delay With Double-Entendre Words

  • James H. Geer
  • Jeffrey S. Melton


Seventy-three men and 72 women made lexical decisions to target words that followed sentences constructed so that the last word was a sexual double-entendre. Prime target relatedness, erotic versus nonerotic target, stimulus onset asynchrony, and participant's gender were varied in a between-subjects design. A second analysis that substituted sentence context for prime target relationship also was conducted. Data were collected on the emotionality and social acceptability of priming sentences and target words. Results revealed that, as with previous research on neutral words, prime target relatedness facilitated lexical decisions. Additionally, there was evidence of slowing in making lexical decisions when erotic material was presented or was part of a contextual bias. This delay was accentuated in women. A model that proposes that sexual words evoke a more complex processing sequence is presented. The model suggests that appraisal and checking or editing mechanisms, which are accentuated in women, help explain the phenomenon.

gender double-entendre information processing lexical decisions 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Dixon, N. F. (1980). Preconscious Processing, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Erdelyi, M. H. (1974). A new look at the new look: Perceptual defense and vigilance. Psychol. Rev. 81: 1–25.Google Scholar
  3. Everaerd, W., and Geer, J. H. (1992, June). Theory development in sexuality. Paper presented at the International Academy of Sex Research meetings, Prague, Czechoslovakia.Google Scholar
  4. Forster, K., and Bednall, E. S. (1976); Terminating and exhaustive search in lexical access. Memory Cognit. 4, 53–61.Google Scholar
  5. Frijda, N. H. (1993). The place of appraisal in emotion. Cognit. Emot. 7: 357–387.Google Scholar
  6. Galbraith, G. G. (1968). Effects of sexual arousal and guilt on free associative sexual responses. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 32: 193–197.Google Scholar
  7. Galbraith, G. G., and Mosher, D. L. (1968). Associative sexual response in relation to sexual arousal, guilt, and external approval contingencies. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 10: 142–147.Google Scholar
  8. Geer, J. H. (1996). Gender differences in the organization of sexual information. Arch. Sex. Behav. 25: 91–107.Google Scholar
  9. Geer, J. H., and Bellard, H. S. (1996). Sexual content induced delays in lexical decisions: Gender and context effects. Arch. Sex. Behav. 25: 379–395.Google Scholar
  10. Geer, J. H., Judice, S. L., and Jackson, S. R. (1994). Reading times of erotic material: The pause to reflect. J. Gen. Psychol. 121: 345–352.Google Scholar
  11. Geer, J. H., and Lapour, K. (1990, June). The sexes differ in their processing of erotic romantic, and neutral sentences. Poster presented at the American Psychological Society Meetings, Dallas, Texas.Google Scholar
  12. Geer, J. H., Lapour, K. J., and Jackson, S. R. (1993). The information processing approach to human sexuality. In Birbaumer, N., and Ohman, A. (eds.), The Structure of Emotion: Psychophysiological, Cognitive and Clinical Aspects, Hogrefe-Huber, Toronto, pp. 139–155.Google Scholar
  13. Geer, J. H., and McGlone, M. S. (1990). Sex differences in memory for erotica. Cognit. Emot. 4: 71–78.Google Scholar
  14. Green, D. M., and Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Hogaboam, T. W., and Perfetti, C. A. (1975). Lexical ambiguity and sentence comprehension. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 12: 577–589.Google Scholar
  16. Jay, T. B. (1980). Sex roles and dirty words usage: A review of the literature and a reply to Haas. Psychol. Bull. 88: 614–621.Google Scholar
  17. Kerr, B. J., and Galbraith, G. G. (1975). Latencies of sexual and asexual responses to double entendre words as a function of sex-guilt and social desirability in college females. Psychol. Rep. 37: 991–997.Google Scholar
  18. Kitayama, S. (1991). Impairment of perception by positive and negative affect. Cognit. Emot. 5: 255–274.Google Scholar
  19. MacKinnon, C. A. (1987). A feminist/political approach. In Geer, J. H., and O'Donohue, W. T. (eds.), Theories of Human Sexuality, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 65–90.Google Scholar
  20. Macleod, C., Mathews, A., and Tata, P. (1986). Attentional bias in emotional disorders. J. Abn. Psychol. 95: 15–20.Google Scholar
  21. Marascuilo, L., and Serlin, R. (1988). Statistical Methods for the Social and Behavioral Sciences, W. H. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Mistler-Lachman, J. L. (1972). Levels of comprehension in processing of normal and ambiguous sentences. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 11.Google Scholar
  23. Mosher, D. L. (1961). The development and validation of a sentence completion measure of sex guilt. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  24. Mosher, D. L. (1965). Interaction of fear and guilt in inhibiting unacceptable behavior. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 29: 161–167.Google Scholar
  25. Motley, M., Camden, C., and Baars, B. (1982). Covert formulation and editing of anomalies in speech production: Evidence from experimentally elicited slips of the tongue. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 21: 570–596.Google Scholar
  26. Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In Besner, D., and Humphreys, G. (eds.), Basic Processes in Reading: Visual Word Recognition, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 264–336.Google Scholar
  27. Olson, J., and MacKay, D. (1974). Completion and verification of ambiguous sentences. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 13: 457–470.Google Scholar
  28. Onifer, W., and A Swinney, D. A. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias. Memory Cognit. 9: 225–236.Google Scholar
  29. Posner, M. I., and Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In Solso, R. L. (ed.), Information Processing and Cognition: The Loyola Symposium, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 55–85.Google Scholar
  30. Rayner, K., and Duffy, S. A. (1986). Lexical Complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory Cognit. 14: 191–201.Google Scholar
  31. Schvaneveldt, R. W., Meyer, D. E., and Becker, C. A. (1976). Lexical ambiguity, semantic context, and visual word recognition. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2: 243–256.Google Scholar
  32. Schwartz, S. (1975). Effects of sex guilt on word association responses to double entendre sexual words. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 43: 100.Google Scholar
  33. Seidenberg, M. S., Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., and Bienkowski, M. (1982). Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing. Cognit. Psychol. 14: 489–537.Google Scholar
  34. Simpson, G. B. (1981). Meaning dominance and semantic context in the processing of lexical ambiguity. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 20: 120–136.Google Scholar
  35. Simpson, G. B., and Burgess, C. (1982, November). Processing Lexical Ambiguity: A chronometric analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  36. Sneider, W. (1988). Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatables. Behav. Res. Meth. Instr. Comput. 20: 206–217.Google Scholar
  37. Tanenhaus, M., Leiman, J., and Seidenberg, M. (1979). Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts. J. Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. 18: 427–440.Google Scholar
  38. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged. (1971). Editor-in-Chief: Philip Babcock Gove and the Merriam Webster Editorial Staff, Merriam, Springfield, MA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • James H. Geer
    • 1
  • Jeffrey S. Melton
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyLouisiana State UniversityBaton Rouge
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyNew Mexico State UniversityLas Cruces

Personalised recommendations