Sherrie L Wilcox1, Sarah Redmond2, Teaniese L Davis3. 1. Center for Innovation and Research on Veterans & Military Families (CIR), School of Social Work, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. 2. Department of Psychology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA. 3. Department of Psychology, Morehouse College, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: More than a third of young military personnel report experiencing some level of erectile dysfunction (ED). Preoccupation with body image, particularly genitals, is a distraction that can influence sexual anxiety (SA) and sexual functioning problems (SFPs), particularly ED. AIMS: This study assessed the relationships between male genital self-image (MGSI), SA, and ED in a sample of male military personnel age 40 or younger. METHODS: Data were from a larger study on SFPs in military populations. This sample consisted of 367 male military personnel age 40 or younger. Hierarchical regression analyses and process modeling using mediation analysis were performed to examine the effects of MGSI on ED with SA as an intermediate variable. We predicted that SA would mediate the relationship between MGSI and ED. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ED severity was assessed with the International Index of Erectile Function. MGSI was assessed using the MGSI Scale. SA was assessed with the SA subscale of the Sexual Needs Scale. RESULTS: As hypothesized, greater satisfaction with MGSI was predictive of significantly lower SA (F[8, 352] = 4.07, P = 0.001) and lower ED (F[8, 352] = 13.20, P = 0.001). Lower levels of SA were predictive of lower levels of ED (F[8, 354] = 21.35, P < 0.001). Additionally, results also revealed a significant indirect effect of MGSI on ED through SA (b = -0.07, standard error = 0.03, confidence interval = [-0.14,-0.02], P < 0.05), indicating mediation of MGSI on ED via SA. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the complex etiologic basis of SFPs, particularly ED, and highlights the importance of considering psychologic contributors to ED, such as SA and MGSI. Strategies aimed at reducing SA may be useful in improving ED in young military populations and are worth considering as complements to strategies that improve SFPs.
INTRODUCTION: More than a third of young military personnel report experiencing some level of erectile dysfunction (ED). Preoccupation with body image, particularly genitals, is a distraction that can influence sexual anxiety (SA) and sexual functioning problems (SFPs), particularly ED. AIMS: This study assessed the relationships between male genital self-image (MGSI), SA, and ED in a sample of male military personnel age 40 or younger. METHODS: Data were from a larger study on SFPs in military populations. This sample consisted of 367 male military personnel age 40 or younger. Hierarchical regression analyses and process modeling using mediation analysis were performed to examine the effects of MGSI on ED with SA as an intermediate variable. We predicted that SA would mediate the relationship between MGSI and ED. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ED severity was assessed with the International Index of Erectile Function. MGSI was assessed using the MGSI Scale. SA was assessed with the SA subscale of the Sexual Needs Scale. RESULTS: As hypothesized, greater satisfaction with MGSI was predictive of significantly lower SA (F[8, 352] = 4.07, P = 0.001) and lower ED (F[8, 352] = 13.20, P = 0.001). Lower levels of SA were predictive of lower levels of ED (F[8, 354] = 21.35, P < 0.001). Additionally, results also revealed a significant indirect effect of MGSI on ED through SA (b = -0.07, standard error = 0.03, confidence interval = [-0.14,-0.02], P < 0.05), indicating mediation of MGSI on ED via SA. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the complex etiologic basis of SFPs, particularly ED, and highlights the importance of considering psychologic contributors to ED, such as SA and MGSI. Strategies aimed at reducing SA may be useful in improving ED in young military populations and are worth considering as complements to strategies that improve SFPs.
Authors: A M Kögel; A Dinkel; B Marten-Mittag; J Baron; P Albers; C Arsov; B Hadaschik; M Hohenfellner; F Imkamp; M Kuczyk; J E Gschwend; K Herkommer Journal: Urologe A Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Katharina Gehrmann; Manon Engels; Elena Bennecke; Claire Bouvattier; Henrik Falhammar; Baudewijntje P C Kreukels; Anna Nordenstrom; Nicole Reisch; Nicole Gehrmann; Nike M M L Stikkelbroeck; Marcus Quinkler; Hedi L Claahsen-van der Grinten Journal: J Endocr Soc Date: 2019-04-24
Authors: Brian Y Park; Gary Wilson; Jonathan Berger; Matthew Christman; Bryn Reina; Frank Bishop; Warren P Klam; Andrew P Doan Journal: Behav Sci (Basel) Date: 2016-08-05