Cargando…

Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans

BACKGROUND: Human sexual classical conditioning effects are less robust compared with those obtained in other animals. The artificiality of the laboratory environment and/or the unconditioned stimulus (US) used (e.g. watching erotic film clips as opposed to participating in sexual activity) may cont...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hoffmann, Heather, Peterson, Kathryn, Garner, Hana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Co-Action Publishing 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3960046/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24693347
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17336
_version_ 1782308106133307392
author Hoffmann, Heather
Peterson, Kathryn
Garner, Hana
author_facet Hoffmann, Heather
Peterson, Kathryn
Garner, Hana
author_sort Hoffmann, Heather
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Human sexual classical conditioning effects are less robust compared with those obtained in other animals. The artificiality of the laboratory environment and/or the unconditioned stimulus (US) used (e.g. watching erotic film clips as opposed to participating in sexual activity) may contribute to this discrepancy. The present experiment used a field study design to explore the conditioning of human sexual arousal. METHOD: Seven heterosexual couples were instructed to include a novel, neutrally preferred scent as the conditioned stimulus (CS + ) during sexual interaction and another novel scent during non-sexual coupled-interaction (e.g. watching a movie, studying together). Seven control couples used both scents during non-sexual interaction. Conducted over a 2-week period, both experimental and control couples had three sexual interactions (oral sex and/or intercourse). In addition, experimental couples had three, while the controls had six, non-sexual interactions. Genital responding to and affective preference for the odors were assessed in the laboratory before and after the experience in the men. RESULTS: We observed significantly increased genital responding to the CS+ in the experimental relative to the control group; however, conditioned responses were not much stronger than those obtained during laboratory conditioning. Experimental males also showed a trend for decreased preference for the CS– odor. They may have learned that this odor predicted that sexual interaction with their partner would not occur. CONCLUSION: The present study provides another demonstration of conditioned sexual arousal in men, specifically an instance of such learning that happened in a real-world setting. It also suggests that inhibitory learning may occur, at least with the affective measure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3960046
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Co-Action Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39600462014-04-01 Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans Hoffmann, Heather Peterson, Kathryn Garner, Hana Socioaffect Neurosci Psychol The Neuroscience and Evolutionary Origins of Sexual Learning BACKGROUND: Human sexual classical conditioning effects are less robust compared with those obtained in other animals. The artificiality of the laboratory environment and/or the unconditioned stimulus (US) used (e.g. watching erotic film clips as opposed to participating in sexual activity) may contribute to this discrepancy. The present experiment used a field study design to explore the conditioning of human sexual arousal. METHOD: Seven heterosexual couples were instructed to include a novel, neutrally preferred scent as the conditioned stimulus (CS + ) during sexual interaction and another novel scent during non-sexual coupled-interaction (e.g. watching a movie, studying together). Seven control couples used both scents during non-sexual interaction. Conducted over a 2-week period, both experimental and control couples had three sexual interactions (oral sex and/or intercourse). In addition, experimental couples had three, while the controls had six, non-sexual interactions. Genital responding to and affective preference for the odors were assessed in the laboratory before and after the experience in the men. RESULTS: We observed significantly increased genital responding to the CS+ in the experimental relative to the control group; however, conditioned responses were not much stronger than those obtained during laboratory conditioning. Experimental males also showed a trend for decreased preference for the CS– odor. They may have learned that this odor predicted that sexual interaction with their partner would not occur. CONCLUSION: The present study provides another demonstration of conditioned sexual arousal in men, specifically an instance of such learning that happened in a real-world setting. It also suggests that inhibitory learning may occur, at least with the affective measure. Co-Action Publishing 2012-03-15 /pmc/articles/PMC3960046/ /pubmed/24693347 http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17336 Text en © 2012 Heather Hoffmann et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle The Neuroscience and Evolutionary Origins of Sexual Learning
Hoffmann, Heather
Peterson, Kathryn
Garner, Hana
Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans
title Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans
title_full Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans
title_fullStr Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans
title_full_unstemmed Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans
title_short Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans
title_sort field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans
topic The Neuroscience and Evolutionary Origins of Sexual Learning
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3960046/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24693347
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17336
work_keys_str_mv AT hoffmannheather fieldconditioningofsexualarousalinhumans
AT petersonkathryn fieldconditioningofsexualarousalinhumans
AT garnerhana fieldconditioningofsexualarousalinhumans