| Literature DB >> 33121015 |
Patrícia M Pascoal1,2,3, Catarina F Raposo3, Magda Sofia Roberto1.
Abstract
Sexual distress is a core characteristic of sexual dysfunction; however, little is known about its correlates. In the current study, we aimed to contribute to the understanding of both sexual distress and its positive counterpart, sexual pleasure, by taking a transdiagnostic approach to sexual distress using two types of repetitive negative thinking: worry and rumination. Because sexual activity mostly occurs in a dyadic context, we also looked at the potential mediating effect of co-worry and co-rumination, and we used them as mediators. Our preliminary exploratory quantitative study used a cross-sectional design, with a sample of 206 partnered heterosexual people. We used path analysis with parallel mediation, with structural equation modelling being performed using lavaan designed for R environment. Overall, our results show that repetitive negative thinking is associated with both sexual distress and sexual pleasure, and that neither co-rumination nor co-worry mediates these associations. The exception is the indirect effect of rumination on sexual pleasure that is mediated by co-rumination. These results demonstrate that a transdiagnostic approach to sexual distress is a new field worth exploring, and they contribute to establishing the relevance of a cognitive approach to sexual dysfunction.Entities:
Keywords: co-rumination; co-worry; perseverative cognitions; repetitive negative thinking; rumination; sexual distress; sexual pleasure; transdiagnostic factors; worry
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33121015 PMCID: PMC7663705 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17217864
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Conceptual mediation model of the relationships between repetitive negative thinking and sexual distress and sexual pleasure.
Figure 2Results of the association of repetitive negative thinking with sexual distress and sexual pleasure. Note: The model is saturated, with no adjustment index. Only the indirect effect for pleasure through co-rumination is significant: Rumination > Co-rumination > Pleasure (Estimate = 0.07; SE = 0.03; p = 0.029). *** p < 0.001. ** p < 0.01. * p < 0.05. The estimates are positioned above the line they refer to.
Sociodemographic characteristics of participants (n = 208).
| Characteristics |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Age (mean ± SD) | 35.34 ± 10.029 | - |
| Min | 18 | - |
| Max | 67 | - |
| Gender | - | - |
| Female | 160 | 76.9 |
| Male | 46 | 22.1 |
| Non-binary | 1 | 0.5 |
| Agender | 1 | 0.5 |
| Transgender a | - | - |
| Yes | 11 | 5.3 |
| No | 194 | 93.3 |
| Don’t know | 2 | 1.0 |
| Sexual orientation | - | - |
| Heterosexual | 185 | 88.9 |
| Gay | 1 | 0.5 |
| Lesbian | 7 | 3.4 |
| Bisexual | 11 | 5.3 |
| Undefined | 1 | 0.5 |
| Other | 3 | 1.4 |
| Relationship duration (mean ± SD) | 8.54 ± 7.490 (years) | - |
| Min | 6 (months) | - |
| Max | 40 (years) | - |
| Relationship status a | - | - |
| Civil union/cohabitation | 72 | 34.6 |
| Marriage | 70 | 33.7 |
| Single in a committed relationship | 60 | 28.8 |
| Other | 5 | 2.4 |
| Educational level | - | - |
| Middle school | 2 | 1.0 |
| High school | 52 | 25.0 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 82 | 39.4 |
| Master’s degree | 54 | 26.0 |
| Doctoral degree | 12 | 5.8 |
| Other | 6 | 2.9 |
| Area of residence a | - | - |
| Urban area | 99 | 47.6 |
| Suburban area | 70 | 33.7 |
| Urbanised centre of a rural area | 14 | 6.7 |
| Rural area next to an urban area | 13 | 6.3 |
| Rural area with high population density | 5 | 2.4 |
| Rural area with little population density | 4 | 1.9 |
a Ns do not sum to the total, due to missing values: transgender (1), marital and relationship status (1), area of residence (3).
Descriptive statistics for variables in the study (n = 208).
| Variable | |
|---|---|
| 1. Rumination | 19.50 (5.70) {9–34} |
| 2. Worry | 22.29 (9.12) {8–40} |
| 3. Co-rumination | 66.31 (21.02) {29–128} |
| 4. Co-worry | 20.44 (7.02) {8–38} |
| 5. Sexual Pleasure | 18.35 (4.73) {3–21} |
| 6. Sexual Distress | 12.71 (13.74) {0–52} |
Note: Mean (M), standard deviation (SD), range values {min–max}. 1 and 2 are predictors, 3 and 4 are mediators, 5 and 6 are outcomes. *** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05.