YBOP COMMENTS: This study is often touted (by sexologists) as proof that porn use causes no harm. Note that the date is 2010, but the data is from 2006. It is a retrospective study on what occurred at age 14, which means that few if any of the subjects had high-speed during the time in question.
As for data collection, it was an anonymous online questionnaire passed around by email to friends of friends.
- sample was not random
- pretty much anyone of any age could have answered
- one person could answer multiple times
STUDY: In November 2006, a generic e-mail message was sent to college students’ mailing lists at several Croatian universities and a number of electronic forums. It contained a brief explanation of the research study, the link to on-line questionnaire, and a request which asked the recipient to forward the message to their friends and acquaintances of a certain age (18-25).
FROM THE FULL STUDY:
Two hypotheses were proposed based on the outlined model.
Comments: They concocted their own model to assess the data – Sexual Scripts Overlap Scaled – only they know how valid it is, since only they have used it.
STUDY: Firstly, effects of early SEM exposure on sexual satisfaction–positive, negative or combined—would be mediated by sexual scripting. In regard to positive effects, our analyses focused on educational benefits or the informational effect of SEM, which was expected to result in a more varied sex life.
Comments: In the author’s view “more varied” = positive outcome. That’s it. No doubt Internet porn is quite capable of inducing this “positive outcome”.
STUDY: As for the possible negative effects, we measured relationship intimacy to assess the level of emotional involvement. The indicator of intimacy served as a proxy for sexual callousness (absence of intimacy) which was suggested to increase with SEM use (Manning, 2006; Paul, 2005; Zillmann, 2000).
Comments: The negative effect assessed in this study was less intimacy. Below is what they found:
STUDY: While the observed positive effects were associated with the range of sexual experiences, the negative effects were related to relationship intimacy.
Comments: So….less intimacy, but cravings for more variety. And this study is the one touted as showing no negative effects of porn? They state that less intimacy occurs only with the guys who used fetish porn. How many teens use fetish porn? In 2013?
Arch Sex Behav. 2010 Feb;39(1):168-78. doi: 10.1007/s10508-008-9387-0.
Stulhofer A, Busko V, Landripet I.
Abstract
In spite of a growing presence of pornography in contemporary life, little is known about its potential effects on young people’s sexual socialization and sexual satisfaction. In this article, we present a theoretical model of the effects of sexually explicit materials (SEM) mediated by sexual scripting and moderated by the type of SEM used. An on-line survey dataset that included 650 young Croatian men aged 18-25 years was used to explore empirically the model.
Descriptive findings pointed to significant differences between mainstream and paraphilic SEM users in frequency of SEM use at the age of 14, current SEM use, frequency of masturbation, sexual boredom, acceptance of sex myths, and sexual compulsiveness.
In testing the model, a novel instrument was used, the Sexual Scripts Overlap Scale, designed to measure the influence of SEM on sexual socialization. Structural equation analyses suggested that negative effects of early exposure to SEM on young men’s sexual satisfaction, albeit small, could be stronger than positive effects.
Both positive and negative effects-the latter being expressed through suppression of intimacy-were observed only among users of paraphilic SEM. No effect of early exposure to SEM was found among the mainstream SEM users.
To counterbalance moral panic but also glamorization of pornography, sex education programs should incorporate contents that would increase media literacy and assist young people in critical interpretation of pornographic imagery.
;