Content uploaded by Christina Bermeitinger
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Christina Bermeitinger on Nov 28, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Proceedings in
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas
The 1st Virtual International Conference
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
December 3rd – 7th, 2012
International Scientific Conference Committee
M. Manuela A. Pereira, Ph.D., Portugal
Pacala Adina, Ph.D., Romania
Ruben Alcolea, Architect, MA, Ph.D., Spain
Matilda Alexandrova, Assoc. Prof., Ph.D., Bulgaria
Deisi Altmajer Vaz, Ph.D., Spain
Morostes Anca, Ph.D., Romania
Diana
Tamila Arnania-Kepuladze, M.Sc, Georgia
Hadi Attaran, Mr, Iran
Tsvetalina Avramova Petkova, Ph.D., Bulgaria
Radu Baltasiu, Ph.D., Romania
.D., Spain
Filomena Barbosa Amorim, M.Sc., Portugal
io Avelino Batista Vieira, Ph.D., Portugal
Ana-Maria Bercu, Ph.D., Romania
Francisco Javier Blanco-Encomienda, Ph.D., Spain
Yuliya Bogoyavlenska, doc., Ph.D., Ukraine
Jan Bohacik, Eur., Ing., Dr, United Kingdom
Venelin Boshnakov, assoc. prof., Bulgaria
Richard Brunet-Thornton, FRSA, Ph.D., Czech Republic
Ovidiana Bulumac, Ph.D., Romania
Alina Camelia argu, Ph.D., Romania
Luiza Caraivan, Assoc. Prof., Ph.D., Romania
Natalja Cigankova, Assistant Professor, Dr.Philol., Latvia
Cret Daniela Cristina, Ph.D., Romania
Francisco da Silva Costa, Ph.D., Portugal
Ineta Daiktere, Dr., Latvia
Carmen del Hoyo, Prof., Dr., Spain
Parpandel Denisa - Elena, Ph.D., Romania
Carlos G.H. Diaz-Ambrona, Ph.D., Spain
Zdena D, Ing., Ph.D., Czech Republic
Lenka Drazanova, MA, Germany
Yasser Elmi Sola, M.Sc, Iran
Ramona Florea, Ph.D., Romania
Gabriela Fotache, Ph.D., Romania
Anca Gata, Ph.D., Romania
Papantoniou Georgia, Ph.D., Greece
Cristina Gheorghe, Ph.D., Romania
Nicoletta Gon
Sandra Gusta, Assoc.prof., Latvia
Florentina Halimi, Assoc.Prof., Dr, Macedonia
Ales Hladnik, Ph.D., Slovenia
Ana Huguet Ruiz, Spain
Mei-Hsin Chen, Assoc. Prof., Ph.D., Spain
Olteanu Ioana, Ph.D., Romania
Mihnea Ioana, Romania
Toma Ionut Ovidiu, Ph.D., Romania
Andre Leon Nel, Proff., South Africa
Anton
Janis Locs, Dr., sc., Ing., Latvia
Philotheos Lokkas, Ph.D., Greece
Daniela Lorena Lamas, M.Sc, Argentina
Ewa Lubina, Ph.D., Poland
Alexander Mader, Dr., Austria
Leandros Maglaras, MSc., Greece
Ph.D., Spain
Maria Marudova, Assoc. prof., Bulgaria
Abd El-monem Megahed, Dr., Egypt
Terida Mehilli, M.Sc, Albania
Martha Mendez Bautista, M.Sc, Colombia
George Metaxas, Ph.D., Greece
Stoicu Mihaela- Narcisa, Ph.D., Romania
Mahdi Moharrampour, , Iran
Arturo Morgado-Estevez, Dr., Spain
Eduard V. Musafirov, Ph.D., Belarus
Schwarz Narcisa, Ph.D., Romania
Janusz Nesterak, Ph.D., Poland
Helena Neves Almeida, Ph.D., Portugal
Fakhriddin Nuraliev, Ph.D., Uzbekistan
Artur Opalinski, Ph.D., Poland
Tomasz P. Wrobel, Master, Poland
Jorge Pastor, Ph.D., Ing., Spain
Lukas Pavelek, Mgr., Ph.D., Slovakia
Ilona Pavlovska, Dr., Sc., Eng., Latvia
Fernando Perez-, M.Sc., Spain
Laura-Rebeca Precup-Stiegelbauer, Ph.D., Romania
Agota Giedre Raisiene, Assoc. prof., dr., United Kingdom
Berlingher Remus Daniel, Ph.D., Romania
Raja Rizwan Hussain, Dr., Saudi Arabia
Miguel Angel Rodriguez-Florido, Ph.D., Spain
Angela Roman, Associate Professor, Ph.D., Romania
Theodoros Rousakis, Ph.D., Greece
Georgeta Valeria Sabau, Ph.D., Romania
Shahin Salarvand, Miss, Dr., Iran
Mohammad Sayedi, Iran
Richard John Selby, Ph.D., Czech Republic
a, Assoc. Prof., Colombia
Francisco Soler-Flores, Ph.D., Spain
Fildan Sorin, Ph.D., Romania
Zlatko V. Sovreski, Doc., Ing., Ph.D., Macedonia
Lucaciuc tefan- Ioan, Ph.D., Romania
Teresa Torres, Ph.D., Spain
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012
December, 3. - 7. 2012
INTERNATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
http://www.arsa-conf.com
- 2 -
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
Moldovan Iosif Florin, Ph.D., Romania
Veselina Ivanova Nedeva, Ph.D., Bulgaria
Robert Jager, JUDr., PhDr., Ph.D., Slovakia
Michail Kalogiannakis, Ph.D., United Kingdom
Kayvan Kaseb, Iran
Barbara Kaszowska, Prof., Poland
Mohammad Khubeb Siddiqui, M.Sc, Saudi Arabia
Nikolaos Kokkinos, Adj. Lecturer, Greece
ary
Zvonko Kribel, M.Sc, Slovenia
Marija Kusevska, Ph.D., Macedonia
Gintaras Labutis, Dr., United Kingdom
Maciej Laskowski, M.Sc., Eng., Poland
Jo
Janos Toth, Hungary
Anka Trajkovska, Ph.D., Macedonia
Assimina Tsibidaki, Lecturer in Special Education, Dr, Greece
Petros A. Tsioras, Dr, Greece
Zlatica Turekova, JUDr., Slovakia
Violeta Urban, Ph.D., Romania
Sonia Val Blasco, Ph.D. Engineering, Spain
.D., Slovakia
Dimitrios Ventzas, Professor, Dr, Greece
Aleksandra Vidovic, Ph.D., Bosnia and Herzegovina
Olga Yakushina, Ph.D., Russia
Jianlan You, Ph.D., United States
, M.Sc, Italy
Liviu-Petru
Gabor Zsivanovits, Dr., Bulgaria
Joanna Zukowska, dr., Poland
Poland
Conference Sections
1.
Business Management
2.
Marketing
3.
Economy and Business Economics
4.
Public service, Law
5.
Financing and Accounting
6.
Psychology, Sociology and Pedagogy, Social Science
7.
Art, Religion, History, Philosophy
8.
Linguistics
9.
Ecology
10.
Natural science (mathematics, chemistry, biology, physics)
11.
Electronics, Electrical Systems, Electrical Engineering
12.
Industrial and Civil Engineering
13.
Informatics
14.
Information Technology
15.
Medicine
16.
Veterinary medicine
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012
December, 3. - 7. 2012
INTERNATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
http://www.arsa-conf.com
- 3 -
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
Published by:
EDIS - Publishing Institution of the University of Zilina
Univerzitná 1
01026 Žilina
Slovak Republic
Editors:
Ing. Michal Mokryš, Ing. Anton Lieskovský, Ph.D.
ISBN:
978-80-554-0606-0
ISSN:
1338-9831
Pages:
2173
Printed in:
650 copies
Publication year:
2012
Other:
All published papers undergone single blind peer review.
Warning:
All rights reserved. Reproduction or publication of this material, even partial, is allowed only with the editor’s permission. Unauthorized duplication is a
violation of applicable laws.
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012
December, 3. - 7. 2012
INTERNATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
http://www.arsa-conf.com
- 4 -
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
Strawberry arouses forever?
Effects of pre-information and real consumption
of a common aphrodisiac on arousal ratings
Christina Bermeitinger, Anna-Leena Feldkötter, Julia Hildebrand, Lydia Schmieder, Laila Sellner
Institute of Psychology
University of Hildesheim
Hildesheim, Germany
bermeitinger@uni-hildesheim.de
Abstract—It is a centuries-old issue whether and how various
substances can have an aphrodisiacal effect. In scientific
research, a lot of studies evidence that pre-knowledge and
expectancies can explain aphrodisiacal effects more than actual
ingredients. In this vein, we tested whether information
regarding an aphrodisiacal vs. anti-aphrodisiacal effect of a
common aphrodisiac (i.e., strawberry) would have differential
effects on arousal ratings for different pictures including erotic,
neutral person, object and fruit pictures. There were no
differences between the aphrodisiacal vs. anti-aphrodisiacal
information group for erotic, neutral, and object pictures.
However, for strawberries, participants who were informed that
strawberries have an aphrodisiacal effect (i.e., aphrodisiacal
group) gave higher arousal ratings than participants who were
informed that strawberries have an anti-aphrodisiacal effect (i.e.,
anti-aphrodisiacal group). No group difference in arousal ratings
was found for other fruits. As perceptual effects, familiarity,
general priming, specific ingredients in strawberries, and higher
arousal due to information contrary to common beliefs cannot
explain the results, the effect is interpreted as a cognitive switch
for one specific object and the respective information.
Keywords: pre-information; expectancy; aphrodisiac; arousal;
strawberry; picture rating; women
I. INTRODUCTION
There is a long lasting debate on the efficacy of substances
and foodstuffs as aphrodisiacs [1, 2, 3]. Aphrodisiacs are
means to increase sexual desire or performance. In this sense,
aphrodisiacs can be described as primes for later behavior and
feeling. Several substances are commonly known as
aphrodisiacs. However, scientific evidence for such effects is
rare [4, 5]. It is additionally discussed, why aphrodisiacs may
influence libido or sexual behavior. For example, do they act
due to their ingredients directly at the level of the central
nervous system or do they act via associations (color, shape
etc.) with genitalia or other body parts [6, 7]?
A. Expectancies
Recently, Friedman, McCarthy, Förster, and Denzler [8]
investigated the influence of expectancies on the efficacy of a
specific substance (i.e., alcohol) on sexual arousal in male
participants. Participants were confronted with suboptimal (i.e.,
unconscious) presentations of alcohol-related words or control
words. Thereafter, they had to either rate attractiveness or
intelligence of several photographs of young women. The
authors found (by trend) increased ratings of sexual
attractiveness when participants were exposed to alcohol-
related stimuli compared to control stimuli. In contrast, there
was no difference between exposure conditions (i.e., alcohol-
related stimuli vs. control stimuli) for intelligence ratings.
However, this pattern was true only for men who expected an
aphrodisiacal effect of alcohol. Stronger expectancies predicted
higher attractiveness ratings of the photographs after alcohol-
related stimuli.
Expectancies can be enduring and are able to influence
information processing, starting from perception to decision
making and behavior (see above, [8]). However, it is unclear
whether new information regarding the (non-)efficacy of
commonly known aphrodisiacs would influence subsequent
arousal judgments. This issue was the central question of our
study.
B. The Present Study
We tested females and informed have of them that new
evidence shows an anti-aphrodisiacal effects of strawberries.
The other group was informed that strawberries have an
aphrodisiacal effect, which typically reflects the common belief
regarding strawberries. After this, they had to eat some
strawberries. The coverstory for this and the preceding
information was that we wanted to test whether organic
products can be distinguished from conventional products.
Thereafter, participants had to rate arousal and valence of
several pictures, including non-sexual pictures with persons
(e.g., children with their grandfathers, some business people,
older persons on their bikes etc.), erotic/sexual pictures with
persons (men, women, and couples), fruit pictures (including
strawberries and several other fruits), and pictures of common
objects (e.g., candle, scissors, CD, marble). If short-term
information regarding the (anti-)aphrodisiacal effects of
substances is able to influence participants’ arousal level or
their expectancies of their arousal, we would expect higher
arousal ratings for females who are informed that strawberries
had an aphrodisiacal effect, especially for erotic/sexual
pictures.
SECTION
6. Psychology, Sociology and Pedagogy, Social Science
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012
December, 3. - 7. 2012
INTERNATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
http://www.arsa-conf.com
- 751 -
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
II. METHOD
A. Participants and Design
The sample consisted of 40 female students from the
University of Hildesheim. The median age was 21 years
(ranging from 19 to 43 years).
The factor information was varied between participants. 19
participants were assigned to the aphrodisiacal group. They
were informed that strawberries have an aphrodisiacal effect.
The remaining 21 participants were assigned to the anti-
aphrodisiacal group. They were informed that strawberries
have an inhibitory effect on sexual arousal. The factor picture
category (erotic / persons / fruits / objects) was varied within
participants. We additionally analyzed the difference between
strawberry and other fruit pictures. Arousal ratings served as
dependent variable.
B. Material and Procedure
Participants were recruited via emails in which they were
informed on the supposed aim of the study, that is, they were
told that we wanted to test whether it would be possible to
distinguish organic from conventional products and to what
extent this could depend on pre-knowledge on organic
products. After arrival, participants worked through several
questions regarding their attitudes on organic products,
regarding their menstrual cycle and their contraception. Then,
participants read a four-sided booklet including several articles
on organic products. One of these articles was entitled “Is(s)t
Aphrodite bio?” (Does Aphrodite eat organic things/Is
Aphrodite organic?). Therein, the manipulation was integrated.
Both groups got exactly the same text except of one word. The
translated text was: “Organic as well as conventional
strawberries have a strong cumulative/inhibitory effect on our
sexual arousal and our libido. A significant difference in sexual
excitability was found in women shortly after the consumption
of strawberries, in comparison to women who did not eat
strawberries. The substance Lamonol influences in this case
our sexual sensation.” To ensure that participants actually read
all articles attentively, they were told that a memory test would
follow at the end of the session.
Then, participants got a dish with several pairs of
strawberries. Each strawberry was labeled. Participants were
requested to decide for each pair of strawberries which
strawberry was organic and which strawberry was
conventional. Actually, all strawberries were conventional.
Thereafter, participants were told that they should take part
in another study with the aim to get new norms regarding
valence and arousal ratings for commonly used pictures of the
International Affective Picture System (IAPS [9]) and newly
chosen pictures. They were told that the results will be used for
future studies. Additionally, they were told that the rating was
completely independent to the other parts of the experiment
and introduced to extend the time span between information
(i.e., booklet reading) and memory test. In this rating part,
participants worked through two blocks. In the first block
participants, should rate the arousal of 120 pictures. In the
second block, participants should rate the same 120 pictures for
their valence. There were 40 pictures showing persons ranging
from childhood to old age in non-sexual situations. 40 further
pictures showed one or two persons in a sexual/erotic context.
20 pictures displayed different fruits – one of them showed a
strawberry. 20 pictures showed various everyday objects.
Pictures were chosen either from the IAPS or were selected
from the internet. Order of pictures was chosen randomly by
the computer. Each picture was presented at the center of the
white screen.
The rating tasks roughly followed the Self Assessment
Manikin (SAM) rating scale for valence and arousal (Lang et
al., 2008). The five figures from the SAM scales were
presented and responses could be made on any of the five
figures or in between. This resulted in 9-point scales for both
arousal and valence. For the arousal dimension, the SAM
figures ranged from a wide-eyed, excited figure to a relaxed
figure. The endpoints of the scale were given the labels “not at
all exciting” on the left and “very exciting” on the right. For the
valence dimension, SAM ranged from a frowning, unhappy
figure to a smiling, happy figure. The endpoints of the scale
were given the labels “very negative” on the left and “very
positive” on the right.
Each trial started with a fixation cross (1000 ms).
Thereafter, the picture was presented for 500 ms. Then, the
SAM scale was presented until a response was given. The
border of the chosen button (either a SAM picture or a point in
between) changed its color for 350 ms. The next trial started
after an inter trial interval of 750 ms.
After the rating part, participants were requested to answer
several questions concerning the information given in the
booklet. This memory test was introduced to ensure that
participants read the relevant information and to maintain the
cover-story. At the end of the session, participants were
thanked and informed that they will get full information on the
aim of the study after the end of data collection. Then, they
were fully debriefed and informed on the results of the study.
III. RESULTS
A. Arousal Ratings
First, we conducted a 2 (group) x 4 (picture category)
analysis of variance (ANOVA) with group as between-subjects
variable, picture category as within-subjects variable, and
arousal ratings as dependent variable. The results showed a
main effect of picture category, F(3, 114) = 161.97, MSE =
0.93, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.81. The highest arousal ratings were
found for erotic pictures (M = 6.02, SD = 1.31), followed by
person pictures (M = 3.71, SD = 1.34) and fruit pictures (M =
2.33, SD = 1.35), and the lowest arousal ratings were found for
object pictures (M = 1.62, SD = 0.65). Repeated contrasts
showed that arousal ratings for erotic pictures differed
significantly from arousal ratings for person pictures, F(1, 38)
= 100.33, MSE = 2.16, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.73, arousal ratings for
person pictures differed significantly from arousal ratings for
fruit pictures, F(1, 38) = 39.02, MSE = 1.87, p < 0.001, ηp² =
0.51, and arousal ratings for fruit pictures differed significantly
from arousal ratings for object pictures, F(1, 38) = 20.11, MSE
= 1.05, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.35. In contrast to our hypotheses,
there was neither a main effect of group, F(1, 38) < 1, p = 0.93,
SECTION
6. Psychology, Sociology and Pedagogy, Social Science
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012
December, 3. - 7. 2012
INTERNATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
http://www.arsa-conf.com
- 752 -
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
nor an interaction of group and picture category, F(3, 114) =
1.16, p = 0.33 (see also Figure 1).
Figure 1. Arousal ratings for erotic, person, fruit, and object pictures,
separately depicted for the aphrodisiacal and the anti-aphrodisiacal group.
Error bars represent the standard error of the means.
Second, we tested whether there was a difference between
arousal ratings for strawberries and other fruits and whether
this difference was still present in the aphrodisiacal group.
Thus, we conducted a 2 (group) x 2 (picture category:
strawberry vs. all other fruits) ANOVA. The results showed a
main effect of picture category, F(1, 38) = 10.39, MSE = 0.80,
p = 0.003, ηp² = 0.22. There were higher arousal ratings for
strawberries (M = 2.93, SD = 2.02) than for other fruits (M =
2.30, SD = 1.34). The main effect of group missed the criterion
for being significant, F(1, 38) = 2.10, MSE = 4.86, p = 0.16, ηp²
= 0.05. By trend, the aphrodisiacal group showed higher
arousal ratings than the anti-aphrodisiacal group. Most
interesting, there was a significant interaction of picture
category and group, F(1, 38) = 4.65, MSE = 0.80, p = .037, ηp²
= 0.11: Strawberries were rated higher in the aphrodisiacal
group than in the anti-aphrodisiacal group, t(38) = 1.85, p =
0.036 (one-tailed). There was no difference between groups in
the arousal ratings for other fruits, t(38) = 0.66, p = 0.25 (one-
tailed) (see also Figure 2).
Figure 2. Arousal ratings for strawberry and other fruit pictures, separately
depicted for the aphrodisiacal and the anti-aphrodisiacal group. Error bars
represent the standard error of the means.
B. Valence Ratings
The same analyses on valence ratings showed no main or
interaction effects with group (all ps > 0.20). There were
significant main effects of picture category (F(3, 114) = 70.85,
MSE = 0.39, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.65, for person vs. erotic vs. fruit
vs. object pictures, and F(1, 38) = 19.50, MSE = 0.65, p <
0.001, ηp² = 0.34, for strawberries vs. all other fruits). The
highest positive valence ratings were found for person pictures
(M = 6.65, SD = 0.83), followed by erotic pictures (M = 6.03,
SD = 0.81) and fruit pictures (M = 5.64, SD = 0.81), and the
lowest valence ratings were found for object pictures (M =
4.67, SD = 0.65). Repeated contrasts showed that valence
ratings for person pictures differed significantly from valence
ratings for erotic pictures, F(1, 38) = 16.65, MSE = 0.94, p <
0.001, ηp² = 0.31, valence ratings for erotic pictures differed
significantly from valence ratings for fruit pictures, F(1, 38) =
5.47, MSE = 1.03, p = 0.03, ηp² = 0.13, and valence ratings for
fruit pictures differed significantly from valence ratings for
object pictures, F(1, 38) = 60.43, MSE = 0.64, p < 0.001, ηp² =
0.61. Further, strawberries (M = 6.40, SD = 1.43) were rated
more positive than other fruits (M = 5.60, SD = 0.81).
IV. DISCUSSION
It is a centuries-old issue whether and how various
substances can have an aphrodisiacal effect. In scientific
research, a lot of studies evidence that pre-knowledge and
expectancies can explain aphrodisiacal effects more than actual
ingredients. In this vein, we tested whether information
regarding an aphrodisiacal vs. anti-aphrodisiacal effect of a
common aphrodisiac (i.e., strawberry) would have differential
effects on arousal ratings for different pictures including erotic,
neutral person, object and fruit pictures. There were no
differences between the aphrodisiacal vs. anti-aphrodisiacal
information group for erotic, neutral, and object pictures.
However, for strawberries, participants who were informed that
strawberries have an aphrodisiacal effect (i.e., aphrodisiacal
group) gave higher arousal ratings than participants who were
informed that strawberries have an anti-aphrodisiacal effect
(i.e., anti-aphrodisiacal grou). No group difference in arousal
ratings were found for other fruits.
First of all, there was no general increase of arousal ratings
and no specific increase of arousal ratings for erotic or sexual
pictures after information that strawberries have aphrodisiacal
effects (compared to information that strawberries have anti-
aphrodisiacal effects). That is, information regarding the (anti-
)aphrodisiacal effect of a substance commonly known as
aphrodisiac (and the following consumption of this substance)
has no influence on general arousal ratings. This finding fits in
general very well with findings from Chivers and colleagues
[10, 11, 12]. These authors showed that sexual arousal in men
is category-specific, that is, heterosexual men are aroused by
female and homosexual men are aroused by male sexual
stimuli. The assessment of genital and subjective arousal
showed that women reacted nonspecifically to sexual stimuli in
that they showed genital and subjective arousal (not sexual
desire) irrespective of category (female or male stimuli) and
irrespective of their own sexual orientation. Based on these
findings, it was rather likely that women would rate sexual
pictures as arousing irrespective of the specific content.
SECTION
6. Psychology, Sociology and Pedagogy, Social Science
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012
December, 3. - 7. 2012
INTERNATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
http://www.arsa-conf.com
- 753 -
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
Further, we could show that pre-information about – so to
speak – their own sexual arousal did not influence the general
high arousal ratings of sexual pictures.
However, arousal ratings for strawberries differed between
groups. There were higher arousal ratings in the aphrodisiacal
than the anti-aphrodisiacal group. There are a couple of
possible explanations of this effect which can be excluded.
First, the effect cannot be explained by specific shape or visual
nature of strawberries. If the effect of higher arousal for
strawberries is simply due to perceptual reasons, higher arousal
ratings for strawberries compared to other fruits will be
expected in the anti-aphrodisiacal group as well. This was not
the case. Second, explanations due to differences in familiarity
or simple priming can be excluded as both groups were
confronted with the same amount of information and the same
amount of strawberries. The only difference was in the specific
information regarding the effect of strawberries. Third, the
effect can be explained by ingredients. Both groups got the
same amount on strawberries (which was definitely too little
for a physiological effect). Fourth, the effect cannot be the
result of felt arousal/dissonance or deeper processing resulting
from information which is contrary to pre-information or
expectancy. Novel information contrary to common knowledge
should result in deeper processing and higher arousal for the
specific object which is affected by the new information. If
higher arousal based on dissonance or deeper processing is
responsible for differences in arousal ratings of the specific
object, higher arousal ratings would occur in the anti-
aphrodisiacal group in which novel information was given.
That is, the effect found seems to be a rather specific effect
not based on the pure confrontation with the object that is later
used as the target object (which has to be rated). In turn, the
effect seems to be based on a cognitive switch regarding the
effect of a single fruit. However, the question whether we deal
with a coupling of stimuli and specific information
(aphrodisiacal vs. anti-aphrodisiacal effect) or whether there is
a bodily mediation is open to future research. As we did not
test control subjects who get neutral information regarding the
effect of strawberries and/or get no strawberries to eat, it is
unclear whether the found effect is the result of an increase in
arousal (ratings) in the aphrodisiacal group or a decrease in
arousal (ratings) in the anti-aphrodisiacal group or both.
Taken together, we showed evidence that information on
the (anti-)aphrodisiacal effect of a commonly known
aphrodisiac (i.e., strawberry) is not able to influence arousal
ratings in general and specifically for erotic/sexual pictures.
That is, information regarding a specific aphrodisiac and its
effect (aphrodisiacal or anti-aphrodisiacal) has no differential
aphrodisiacal vs. anti-aphrodisiacal effects in arousal ratings of
sexual/erotic picutres. However, strawberries were rated as
more arousing after the information that strawberries have
aphrodisiacal effects compared to the information that
strawberries have anti-aphrodisiacal effects. This result seems
to be based on a cognitive switch specifically for the object
(strawberry) and the information given before the rating
(aphrodisiacal vs. anti-aphrodisiacal effect).
REFERENCES
[1] J. Bates, “Genetics,” The Journal of Materia Medica, vol. VI, 1-14, 1867
[2] P. Sandroni, “Aphrodisiacs past and present: A historical review,”
Clinical Autonomic Research, vol. 11, 303-307, 2001.
[3] D. K. Patel, R. Kumar, S. K. Prasad, and S. Hemalatha,
“Pharmacologically screened aphrodisiac plant: A review of current
scientific literature,” Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Biomedicine, vol.
1, S131-S138, 2011.
[4] J. P. Melnyk, and M. F. Marcone, “Aphrodisiacs from plant and animal
sources: A review of current scientific literature,” Food Research
International, vol. 44, 840-850, 2011.
[5] R. Shamloul, “Natural aphrodisiacs,” The Journal of Sexual Medicine,
vol. 7, 39-49, 2010.
[6] C. V. da Silva, F. M. Borges, and E. S. Velozo, “Phytochemistry of
some Brazilian plants with aphrodisiac activity,” in Phytochemicals: A
global perspective of their role in nutrition and health, V. Rao. Rijeka:
InTech, 2012, pp. 307-326.
[7] R. Slovenko, “Aphrodisiacs: Then and now,” The Journal of Psychiatry
& Law, vol. 29, 103-116, 2001.
[8] R. S. Friedman, D. M. McCarthy, D. M., J. Förster, and M. Denzler, M.,
“Automatic effects of alcohol cues on sexual attraction,” Addiction, vol.
100, 672-681, 2005.
[9] P. J. Lang, M. M. Bradley, and B. N. Cuthbert, “International affective
picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction
manual,” University of Florida, Gainesville, FL: Technical Report A-8,
2008.
[10] M. L. Chivers, G. Rieger, E. Latty, and J. M. Bailey, “A sex difference
in the specificity of sexual arousal,” Psychological Science, vol. 15, 736-
744, 2005.
[11] M. L. Chivers, M. C. Seto, M. L. Lalumière, and T. Grimbos,
“Agreement of genital and subjective measures of sexual arousal in men
and women: A meta-analysis,” Archives of Sexual Behavior, vol. 39, 5-
56, 2010.
[12] M. L. Chivers, “A brief update on the specificity of sexual arousal,”
Sexual and Relationship Therapy, vol. 25, 407-414, 2010.
SECTION
6. Psychology, Sociology and Pedagogy, Social Science
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012
December, 3. - 7. 2012
INTERNATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
http://www.arsa-conf.com
- 754 -
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
Published by:
EDIS - Publishing Institution of the University of Zilina
Univerzitná 1
01026 Žilina
Slovak Republic
Editors:
Ing. Michal Mokryš, Ing. Anton Lieskovský, Ph.D.
ISBN:
978-80-554-0606-0
ISSN:
1338-9831
Pages:
2173
Printed in:
650 copies
Publication year:
2012
Other:
All published papers undergone single blind peer review.
Warning:
All rights reserved. Reproduction or publication of this material, even partial, is allowed only with the editor’s permission. Unauthorized duplication is a
violation of applicable laws.
Advanced Research in Scientific Areas 2012
December, 3. - 7. 2012
INTERNATIONAL VIRTUAL CONFERENCE
http://www.arsa-conf.com
- 2174 -
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
A
R
S
A
2
0
1
2
-
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d
R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h
i
n
S
c
i
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
A
r
e
a
s
-
V
I
R
T
U
A
L
C
O
N
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
-
Proceedings in Advanced Research in Scientific Areas
The 1st Virtual International Conference
December 3rd – 7th, 2012
Slovak Republic
ISBN 978-80-554-0606-0
ISSN 1338-9831
