Literature DB >> 22258278

Effects of sex and sexual orientation on self-reported attraction and viewing times to images of men and women: testing for category specificity.

Richard A Lippa1.   

Abstract

In a paradigm that asked participants to rate the sexual attractiveness of male and female swimsuit models, Lippa, Patterson, and Marelich (2010) showed that heterosexual men's category specificity exceeded heterosexual women's in two ways: (1) Heterosexual men showed much larger differences in their attraction and viewing times to male versus female photo models than heterosexual women, and (2) heterosexual men's attractions to female but not male models increased with model attractiveness whereas heterosexual women's attractions to both sexes increased with model attractiveness. The current study used the same paradigm to study category specificity in homosexual and heterosexual participants. In addition to replicating previous findings for heterosexual men and women, the results showed that homosexual men were high on category specificity, like heterosexual men, whereas lesbians showed lower levels of category specificity than men, but sometimes higher levels than heterosexual women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22258278     DOI: 10.1007/s10508-011-9898-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Sex Behav        ISSN: 0004-0002


  9 in total

1.  Samoan Men's Sexual Attraction and Viewing Time Response to Male-to-Feminine Transgender and Cisgender Adults.

Authors:  Lanna J Petterson; Paul L Vasey
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2021-01-25

Review 2.  The Empirical Status of the Preparation Hypothesis: Explicating Women's Genital Responses to Sexual Stimuli in the Laboratory.

Authors:  Martin L Lalumière; Megan L Sawatsky; Samantha J Dawson; Kelly D Suschinsky
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2020-02-05

3.  Cognitive processing of sexual cues in asexual individuals and heterosexual women with desire/arousal difficulties.

Authors:  Natalie B Brown; Diana Peragine; Doug P VanderLaan; Alan Kingstone; Lori A Brotto
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Straight but Not Narrow; Within-Gender Variation in the Gender-Specificity of Women's Sexual Response.

Authors:  Meredith L Chivers; Katrina N Bouchard; Amanda D Timmers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-02       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Pupillary Response as an Age-Specific Measure of Sexual Interest.

Authors:  Janice Attard-Johnson; Markus Bindemann; Caoilte Ó Ciardha
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2016-02-08

6.  Measurement of Sexual Interests with Pupillary Responses: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Janice Attard-Johnson; Martin R Vasilev; Caoilte Ó Ciardha; Markus Bindemann; Kelly M Babchishin
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2021-09-23

7.  Consequences of Beauty: Effects of Rater Sex and Sexual Orientation on the Visual Exploration and Evaluation of Attractiveness in Real World Scenes.

Authors:  Aleksandra Mitrovic; Pablo P L Tinio; Helmut Leder
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  Neural Correlates of Sexual Orientation in Heterosexual, Bisexual, and Homosexual Women.

Authors:  Adam Safron; Victoria Klimaj; David Sylva; A M Rosenthal; Meng Li; Martin Walter; J Michael Bailey
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Sexual Orientation, Sexual Arousal, and Finger Length Ratios in Women.

Authors:  Luke Holmes; Tuesday M Watts-Overall; Erlend Slettevold; Dragos C Gruia; Jamie Raines; Gerulf Rieger
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2021-07-23
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.