Content uploaded by Robert Tokunaga
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Robert Tokunaga on Jul 17, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Human Communication Research ISSN 0360-3989
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Pornography Consumption and Satisfaction:
A Meta-Analysis
Paul J. Wright1, Robert S. Tokunaga2, Ashley Kraus1, & Elyssa Klann3
1 The Media School, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA
2 Department of Communicology, University of Hawaii, Manoa, HI 96822, USA
3 School of Education, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA
A classic question in the communication literature is whether pornography consumption
aects consumers’ satisfaction. e present paper represents the rst attempt to address
this question via meta-analysis. Fiy studies collectively including more than 50,000 par-
ticipants from 10 countries were located across the interpersonal domains of sexual and
relational satisfaction and the intrapersonal domains of body and self satisfaction. Pornog-
raphy consumption was not related to the intrapersonal satisfaction outcomes that were
studied. However, pornography consumption was associated with lower interpersonal satis-
faction outcomes in cross-sectional surveys, longitudinal surveys, and experiments. Associ-
ations between pornography consumption and reduced interpersonal satisfaction outcomes
were not moderated by their year of release or their publication status. But analyses by sex
indicted signicant results for men only.
Keywords: Pornography, Sexually Explicit Media, Satisfaction, Meta-Analysis.
doi:10.1111/hcre.12108
Does consuming pornography have any discernable impact on consumers’ satisfac-
tion?Andifso,isthisimpactnegativeorpositive?esequestionshavestimulated
a large number of studies, but uncertainty about their answers remains among com-
munication scholars.
In early papers, authors primarily hypothesized that pornography had detrimental
eects on satisfaction (e.g., Kenrick, Gutierres, & Goldberg, 1989; Weaver, Masland, &
Zillmann, 1984; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988). is hypothesis was based on two assump-
tions. First, that satisfaction is a subjective state inuenced by comparisons to others
and their experiences. Second, that pornographic actors are more sexually attractive
and skilled than most consumers and their partners and that the gratications from
sex depicted in pornography exceed the gratications that most consumers expe-
rience in their own lives. In more recent papers, however, it has become common
for authors to reason that pornography may enhance the satisfaction of consumers
Corresponding author: Paul J. Wright; e-mail: paulwrig@indiana.edu
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 1
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
(e.g., Kvalem, Traeen, & Ianta, 2015; Morrison, Bearden, Harriman, Morrison, &
Ellis, 2004; Traeen et al., 2014). One reason for this shi in thinking has been that con-
sumers report primarily positive eects when asked directly about how pornography
has aected them.
For example, in a series of studies, Hald and colleagues (Hald & Malamuth, 2008;
Hald, Smolenski, & Rosser, 2013; Mulya & Hald, 2014) found that when queried
about how pornography has impacted them, consumers report that their use has
increased their satisfaction with their sexual knowledge, outlook, ecacy, skill,
relations,experiences,andeventheirlifeingeneral.Peoplewhoconsumepornog-
raphy more frequently and for longer durations are especially likely to perceive such
positive impacts (Hald & Malamuth, 2008; Mulya & Hald, 2014). One interpretive
option for such results is to take them at face value and conclude that pornography
has predominantly positive eects on consumers and more regular and intense
consumption only enhance these positive eects. However, the authors of these
studies caution that these self-perceived eects may also be due to rationalization,
justication, and biased optimism. It is common for people to rationalize and justify,
andtoperceivethemselvesaspersonallylesssusceptibleto,anynegativeimpactsof
behaviors that provide them with immediate and powerful rewards (Chapin, 2001;
Dillard, McCaul, & Klein, 2006; Jamieson, Mushquash, & Mazmanian, 2003; Pickard,
2016). It is also common for people to believe that they are personally unaected by
any pernicious eects that others may experience from using media with antisocial
elements (Perlo, 2009; Sun, Pan, & Shen, 2008). Such perceptions may reect a
self-enhancement bias, a desire to reduce cognitive dissonance, or a psychological
reactance against the insinuation that they should stop consuming the media in
question (Bushman & Huesmann, 2014; Taylor & Huesmann, 2014).
Becauseofthevaliditythreatposedbyaskingpornographyconsumersdirectly
how pornography has aected them, most scholars have preferred to investigate the
nature and extent of pornography’s inuence on satisfaction through pornography
exposure experiments or surveys correlating separate measures of pornography use
and satisfaction. e present paper provides a meta-analytic review of this literature.
Specically, the present paper reports results of meta-analyses on experimental and
correlational survey studies of pornography consumption and relational, sexual, self,
and body satisfaction.
Terminology and organizational framework
A survey of the literature on pornography and satisfaction indicates that researchers
have been interested in two basic questions: “Does pornography aect consumers’
satisfaction with their interactions with others?” and “Does pornography aect
consumers’ satisfaction with themselves?” In other words, research on pornography
and satisfaction has been interested in consumers’ satisfaction with their relations
with others (abbreviated as interpersonal satisfaction in the present manuscript) and
satisfaction with themselves (abbreviated as intrapersonal satisfaction in the present
manuscript).
2Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
isdualinterestwaspreviewedbyprobablythebest-knownstudyinthisarea,
Zillmann and Bryant’s (1988) experiment on the eects of prolonged exposure to
pornography on sexual satisfaction. e central ndings of the study involved the rst
question of whether pornography impacts consumers’ satisfaction with their interac-
tions with others. is is reected in their summary of key results, which states that
“aer consumption of pornography, subjects reported less satisfaction with their inti-
mate partners —specically with these partners’ aection, physical appearance, sexual
curiosity, and sexual performance proper” (p. 438). But the paper also foreshadowed
the second question of whether pornography impacts satisfaction with oneself, which
was explored in later studies. In their concluding discussion, Zillmann and Bryant
wondered whether “consumers grant themselves sexual adequacy, even superior sta-
tusinthesexualrealm”or“areintimidatedbythelooksandactionsoftheirgender
peers in pornography and come to perceive themselves…as decient and inade-
quate” (p. 451).
Relational and sexual satisfaction are the interpersonal satisfaction variables most
frequently investigated in pornography studies (Muusses, Kerkhof, & Finkenauer,
2015; Szymanski & Stewart-Richardson, 2014). Relational satisfaction is dened
as participants’ contentedness with their romantic relationships (e.g., Willoughby,
Carroll, Busby, & Brown, 2016). Sexual satisfaction is dened as participants’ con-
tentedness with their sexual lives (e.g., Morgan, 2011). On the other hand, the most
frequently investigated intrapersonal satisfaction variables in pornography studies
are body and self satisfaction (Kvalem et al., 2015; Morrison et al., 2004). Self satis-
faction is dened as participants’ positive regard for themselves overall (self-esteem,
e.g., Rasmussen, Ortiz, & White, 2015) or for their sexual self specically (sexual
self-esteem, e.g., Morrison et al., 2004). Body satisfaction is dened as participants’
contentedness with their overall body or with specic body parts (e.g., Burnham,
2013; Peter & Valkenburg, 2014). e terms “relationship,” “sexual,” “body,” and
“self” in reference to satisfaction were oen used in the studies meta-analyzed (e.g.,
Hill, 2011; Kvalem et al., 2015; Maddox, Rhoades, & Markman, 2011; Minarcik,
2010). However, the abbreviating title or phrase chosen for a variable by the authors
of a study was not the deciding factor in whether or not results associated with it were
included. Rather, the contents of its measurement items and their correspondence
with the paper’s conceptual denitions were the deciding factors.
Finally, following the recent meta-analyses of Hald, Malamuth, and Yuen (2010)
and Wright, Tokunaga, and Kraus (2016), pornography was dened as media intended
to sexually arouse consumers through the depiction of nudity or explicit sexual behav-
ior. is denition aligns with both early and more recent studies of pornography and
satisfaction (see Maddox et al., 2011; Muusses et al., 2015; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988).
Pornography and interpersonal satisfaction
A number of theoretical frameworks have been used to cra hypotheses about
pornography and interpersonal satisfaction outcomes, most commonly predict-
ing adverse eects. Social comparison theory posits that feelings of satisfaction
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 3
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
are, in part, determined by comparisons between one’s own and others’ situations
(Festinger, 1954; Suls, Martin, & Wheeler, 2002). Upward comparisons (i.e., com-
parisons to superior situations) can result in decreased satisfaction. Scholars have
variously asserted that pornography consumers will, in comparison to pornographic
depictions, nd the physical appearance, performance, enthusiasm, availability,
responsiveness, and adventurousness of their actual or potential sex partners lacking
(Doran & Price, 2014; Kenrick et al., 1989; Lambert, Negash, Stillman, Olmstead, &
Fincham, 2012; Muusses et al., 2015; Peter & Valkenburg, 2009; Poulsen, Busby, &
Galovan, 2013; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988; see also Brosius, Weaver, & Staab, 1993;
Jensen & Dines, 1998).
Some studies have incorporated similar arguments from a sexual scripts per-
spective (Poulsen et al., 2013; Rowell, 2011). Sexual scripts are socially constructed
guidelines for sexual encounters, can be inuenced by pornography, and address
the questions of who one should have sex with, how the sex should unfold, and
what the consequences of the sex should be (Gagnon & Simon, 2005; Wright &
Donnerstein, 2014). e basic position has been that reduced sexual satisfaction is
likely if pornography consumers contrast the sexual attractiveness of their partners
with actors in pornography, evaluate how their sexual encounters unfold against the
positively planned and framed encounters depicted in pornography, and juxtapose
theirownandtheirpartners’levelsofblissandelationpostsexwiththeraptureand
delight exhibited by pornographic performers (Stulhofer, Busko, & Landripet, 2010;
Willoughby et al., 2016). e majority of this research has used the scripting concept
heuristically, as opposed to testing particular tenets of theoretical models designed
specically to explain the eects of sexual media, such as the sexual script acquisition,
activation, application model (3AM; Wright, 2011, 2014; Wright & Bae, 2016; Wright,
Malamuth, & Donnerstein, 2012).
Because sexual satisfaction is strongly predictive of relational satisfaction, any
eect of pornography on the former likely impacts the latter (Bridges & Moroko,
2011). But some authors have suggested that there may also be direct eects of
pornography on relational satisfaction (Doran & Price, 2014; Poulsen et al., 2013).
e investment model of commitment (Rusbult, 1983) can be used to theorize that
people who are relationally satised are also more committed to their partner and
more invested in their relationship (Etcheverry, Le, Wu, & Wei, 2013). Environmental
factors that reduce relational investment and relational commitment may, therefore,
reduce relational satisfaction. If pornography displaces partnered sex (reducing
investment) and primes the possibility of a better relationship or encourages the
pursuit of extrarelational encounters (reducing commitment), it may lower rela-
tional satisfaction (Doran & Price, 2014; Lambert et al., 2012; Muusses et al., 2015;
Poulsen et al., 2013). Gender role conict theory (O’Neil, Helms, Gable, David, &
Wrightsman, 1986) was also referenced to predict a negative eect (Szymanski &
Stewart-Richardson, 2014). Gender role conict occurs when the rigid internalization
of gender roles results in interpersonal dispute. Popular pornography oen displays
hypermasculine men and hyperfeminine women (Bridges, Wosnitzer, Scharrer, Sun,
4Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
& Liberman, 2010; Klaassen & Peter, 2015). Conict and relational disappointment
may result if romantic partners fail to meet pornography consumers’ expectations
for hypergendered behavior (Doran & Price, 2014).
Hypotheses predicting that more pornography consumption will be associated
with less interpersonal satisfaction are at odds with the perceptions of pornogra-
phy consumers, however. Pornography consumers are signicantly more likely to
perceive positive than negative eects on their sex life, for example, and disagree
with the notion that pornography has adversely impacted their relationships (Hald
& Malamuth, 2008; Mulya & Hald, 2014). Consistent with this, the ndings of an
early experiment suggested that exposing people to sexually explicit content could
increase their positive feelings toward their partner (Dermer & Pyszczynski, 1978).
e rst research question of the present meta-analysis asks:
RQ1: Is pornography consumption associated with relational and sexual satisfaction?
Pornography and intrapersonal satisfaction
Similar to studies of interpersonal satisfaction outcomes, studies of intrapersonal
satisfaction outcomes have typically referenced social comparison theory and/or
sexual script theory to predict reduced satisfaction eects due to upward com-
parisons by consumers to idealized actors and sexual encounters in pornography.
Arguments about detrimental eects on body satisfaction have been based on the
position that men in pornography have large, “preternaturally erect” penises (Mor-
rison et al., 2004, p. 145), at stomachs, and muscular physiques while women are
slender and beautiful, with perky breasts, smooth vulvas, and petite labia (Bramwell,
2002; Duggan & McCreary, 2004; Morrison, Ellis, Morrison, Bearden, & Harriman,
2006; Peter & Valkenburg, 2014; Schick, Rima, & Calabrese, 2011; Vandenbosch &
Eggermont, 2013). Detrimental eects on self satisfaction have been rooted in the
stance that performers in pornography have enviable stamina, virility and technique,
the capacity to delay orgasm interminably or climax on call, the ability to attract
numerous attractive partners, and the attributes of traditional masculinity (e.g.,
status, dominance) and femininity (e.g., desired by others, youthful; Doornwaard
et al., 2014; Frable, Johnson, & Kellman, 1997; Kvalem et al., 2015; Morrison et al.,
2004; Morrison et al., 2006; Tylka, 2014; Vandenbosch & Eggermont, 2013).
On the other hand, there are several reasons to believe that pornography either
has no impact or even a positive impact on consumers’ intrapersonal satisfaction.
First, as indicated previously, aer nding in their experiment that pornography expo-
sure reduced participants’ satisfaction with partners across a variety of domains, Zill-
mann and Bryant (1988) speculated that consumers’ upward comparisons may center
on their partners, not on themselves. Second, Traeen et al. (2014) and Kvalem et al.
(2015) reasoned that consumers could just as readily learn from, model, and focus
on the similarities between themselves and actors in pornography, thereby increasing
positive self perceptions, as make ego-threatening upward comparisons. ird, and
consistent with the positions of Traeen et al. and Kvalem et al., when asked directly
about pornography’s eects on them, many consumers report positive results in areas
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 5
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
such as learning new sexual techniques, discovering new sexual desires, and experi-
menting with new sexual behaviors; they also deny negative eects such as increased
performance anxiety (Hald & Malamuth, 2008; Hald et al., 2013; Mulya & Hald, 2014).
Fourth, although in a subsequent survey the authors found the opposite association
(Morrison et al., 2006), in an early survey on the topic Morrison et al. (2004) found
that pornography consumption correlated positively with sexual self-esteem. Conse-
quently, the second research question of the present meta-analysis asks:
RQ2: Is pornography consumption associated with body and self satisfaction?
Potential moderators
Findings regarding pornography consumption and satisfaction may not be uniform
across participants, samples, and methods. e examination of moderating variables
in a meta-analysis is determined by the characteristics of the located studies. e mod-
erators that can be tested are limited by the samples and methods reported.
Sex
A common suggestion in the literature is that the eects of pornography on satis-
faction may dier for men and women. e majority of authors highlighted reasons
why adverse eects may be more likely for men. Regarding interpersonal satisfaction,
many authors surmised that negative associations would be more likely for men given
ndings indicating that men are more likely to consume pornography in solitude for
self-stimulation while women are more likely to view pornography with partners and
ndings suggesting that solitary consumption is more detrimental to relationships
than coviewing (Bridges & Moroko, 2011; Daneback, Traeen, & Mansson, 2009;
Maddox et al., 2011; Muusses et al., 2015; Poulsen et al., 2013; Traeen & Daneback,
2013). Satisfaction is higher when couples have sex more frequently (Doran & Price,
2014). Coviewing may encourage coupled sex and increase satisfaction while soli-
tary consumption for masturbatory purposes may displace coupled sex and decrease
satisfaction (Bridges & Moroko, 2011; Maddox et al., 2011; Manning, 2006). Con-
sequently, men’s solitary consumption of pornography may displace sex with their
partner and lead to decreased satisfaction while women’s coupled pornography con-
sumption may increase their partnered sex and their satisfaction. at the content of
pornographyviewedbymenmaybemorelikelytoemphasizenonrelational,objec-
tifying, and gender-stereotypical sex was another reason suggested for why men’s
interpersonal satisfaction may be more negatively aected (Bridges & Moroko, 2011;
see Malamuth, 1996, and Salmon, 2012, for a discussion of the origins of gender dif-
ferences in sexual content preferences). Sex that is solely for physical pleasure, that
treats partners as objects to be acquired rather than individuals to connect with, and
that emphasizes men’s dominance and women’s submission may ultimately leave men
emotionally unlled, alienated from their partners, and sexually and relationally dis-
satised (Brooks, 1995; Doran & Price, 2014; Stock, 1997; Tylka, 2014; Willoughby
et al., 2016).
6Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
Intrapersonally, three reasons why men may be more adversely aected were put
forth. First, because the ability to obtain sex with multiple physically attractive part-
ners is more central to men’s masculine sense of self than is the ability to have casual
sex with uninvested partners is for women’s feminine sense of self, men may be more
likely to make upward comparisons to performers in pornography than women (Peter
& Valkenburg, 2009; Vandenbosch & Eggermont, 2013). Second, because idealized,
perfected depictions of women’s bodies are near ubiquitous in media, women may
be more able to “ignore or confront” such imagery than men (Duggan & McCreary,
2004, p. 47). ird, it is more socially acceptable for women to discuss body image
issues than it is for men, so men may be more likely to internalize their insecurities
(Duggan & McCreary, 2004; Vandenbosch & Eggermont, 2013).
Not all studies that have examined sex as a moderator have found an interaction
eect, however (Peter & Valkenburg, 2009; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988), and theoriz-
ing in the body-image literature does not suggest that men are more impacted than
women (American Psychological Association, 2007; Tiggemann, 2013). Accordingly,
this meta-analysis’ third research question asks:
RQ3: Do associations between pornography consumption and satisfaction dier by sex?
Year
It was rare for a study in the present meta-analysis to argue that more recent investiga-
tions should produce larger eect sizes. Yet some academic (Dines, 2010; Jensen, 2007)
and much popular discourse (Maltz & Maltz, 2008; Paul, 2005) suggests that nega-
tive impacts on consumers and their relationships have become more pronounced
over time as advances in communication technology such as the Internet have made
pornography, in general, and dehumanizing and aggressive pornography, in partic-
ular,moreaccessible.Arecentmeta-analysisofpornographyandsexualaggression,
however, did not nd that eect sizes diered in studies conducted pre and post Inter-
net (Wright et al., 2016). e eect sizes were constant between the time periods,
indicating that pornography consumption was associated with an increased likeli-
hood of sexually aggressive behavior across time. Consequently, this meta-analysis’
fourth research question asks:
RQ4: Do associations between pornography consumption and satisfaction vary by year?
Method
Dierent research methods allow for varying levels of causal inference and ecological
generalization (Babbie, 2004; Hocking, Stacks, & McDermott, 2003). Experimental
studies provide the best evidence of cause, as they can demonstrate that variables
change together systematically (covariation), that a cause temporally precedes
its eect (time-order), and that no third-variable is responsible for the covariation
between the independent and dependent variables (nonspuriousness). Social psycho-
logical experiments, however, are oen critiqued as lacking real-world applicability,
especially in pornography research (Linz & Malamuth, 1993). Cross-sectional survey
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 7
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
studies are more ecologically valid, as they simply correlate participants’ responses
and do not contain any manipulations, but reverse causality and unmeasured
third-variable confounds are possibilities. Longitudinal surveys maintain the advan-
tage of ecological validity but also address the reverse causation threat. us, it is
when the results of experiments, cross-sectional surveys, and longitudinal surveys
align that the most powerful evidence of a media eect is demonstrated (Wright,
2011). Accordingly, this meta-analysis’ h research question asks:
RQ5: Do associations between pornography consumption and satisfaction vary by
method?
Publication status
It is critical to compare unpublished and published studies for two reasons. First,
published studies may be of superior quality, having been evaluated by peer review-
ers (Neuman, Davidson, Joo, Park, & Williams, 2008). Second, unpublished studies
may be more likely to report null correlations if journal editors and reviewers favor
signicant ndings over nonsignicant ndings (Rothstein & Bushman, 2012). is
meta-analysis’ sixth research question asks:
RQ6: Do associations between pornography consumption and satisfaction vary by
publication status?
Method
Literature search
e study’s authors conducted the literature search as part of an ongoing eort
to archive and review studies on the eects of sexual media. e search for the
current study continued until the end of 2015. We used electronic database (e.g.,
Academic Search Premier, All Academic, Cinahl Complete, EbscoHost, Communi-
cation & Mass Media Complete, ERIC, Google Scholar, JSTOR, Medline, ProQuest,
PsycINFO, PubMed, Sociological Abstracts) and ancestral (e.g., Ezzell, 2014; Hald,
Seaman, & Linz, 2014; Harkness, Mullan, & Blaszczynski, 2015; Owens, Behun, Man-
ning, & Reid, 2012; Short, Black, Smith, Wetterneck, & Wells, 2012) searches to locate
published and unpublished scientic reports. We used the following search terms and
their combinations: pornography [pornography, sexually explicit media/materials,
SEM, erotica, sexual content, sexual media] and satisfaction [satisfaction, dissatisfac-
tion, partner, couple, relationship, body, body image, self, self-concept, self-esteem].
Many of the electronic databases (e.g., All Academic, Google Scholar, ProQuest)
included unpublished studies, such as theses, dissertations, and works presented
at conferences. Ancestral (i.e., reference section) searches were also potential sites
for the location of unpublished studies. Aer this compilation eort, we contacted
multiple leading media sex scholars and asked them to indicate omissions. None
were identied. Not all papers that included measures germane to the present inves-
tigation reported the results required for analysis. Whenever contact information for
8Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
the authors of these papers was locatable, they were contacted and asked to provide
additional information. Papers whose authors generously provided such information
are identied by a “†” in the reference section.
Criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis were twofold. First, the study had to
include a quantitative assessment of pornography exposure. As an example of a typical
self-report assessment, Doornwaard et al. (2014) asked participants “How oen do
youusetheInternettoviewapornWebsite(aWebsitewithpicturesormoviesthat
show nudity or people having sex)?” (p. 1105). In manipulated exposure experiments,
pictures of nude models or videos of explicit sexual acts were common stimuli (e.g.,
Kenrick et al., 1989; Weaver et al., 1984; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988).
Second, the study had to include a quantitative assessment of relational, sexual,
self, and/or body satisfaction. Twenty-four studies measured relational satisfaction.
As an illustration of a typical relational satisfaction index, Maddox et al. (2011) asked
participants about their relational happiness, thoughts about relational dissolution,
and overall perceptions of how well their relationship was going. Twenty-eight
studies measured sexual satisfaction. As an illustration of a typical sexual satisfaction
assessment, Peter and Valkenburg (2009) asked participants how happy and how
satised they were with their sex life. Self satisfaction assessments came from nine
studies that measured either self-esteem in general or sexual self-esteem speci-
cally. Regarding general self-esteem, Rasmussen et al. (2015) utilized Rosenberg’s
Self-Esteem Scale and Daneback et al. (2009) assessed participants’ habitually nega-
tive self-perceptions. As illustration of a typical sexual self-esteem item, Traeen et al.
(2014) asked participants about their level of agreement with the statement “I am
better at sex than most other people” (p. 17). Body satisfaction assessments came
from 16 studies that measured either body satisfaction in general (e.g., satisfaction
with “body build”—Burnham, 2013) or satisfaction with specic body parts (e.g.,
penis, breasts—Peter & Valkenburg, 2014).
e studies meeting these criteria are overviewed in Tables 1 and 2. In total, 50
studies from 47 papers were identied. Doran and Price (2014) used the General
Social Survey (GSS) to assess married U.S. adults’ pornography consumption and
relational satisfaction. ey analyzed data between 1973 and 2010. Because the GSS is
publicly available, we replicated their analyses using data up until 2014 (Smith, Mars-
den, & Houtem, 2014).
Moderator variables
We coded four potential moderator variables: biological sex of participants, the year
the study was released, the method of the study, and whether or not the study was
published. We coded the biological sex of participants as male or female. We used the
citationyearprovidedbythestudy’sreferencetocodetheyearofthestudy.Studies’
methods were coded as cross-sectional survey, longitudinal survey, or experiment.
Studies included either published journal articles or unpublished student theses.
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 9
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
Table 1 Overview of Studies in Meta-Analysis
Study by Year Age of Sample Sex of Samplea,b Design of StudycReport Type Country of Study
1. Dermer and Pyszczynski (1978) Adults M Experiment Article United States
2. Weaver et al. (1984) Adults M Experiment Article United States
3. Zillmann and Bryant (1988) Adults M, F Experiment Article United States
4. Kenrick et al. (1989) Adults M, F Experiment Article United States
5. Amelang and Pielke (1992), Study 1 Adults M, F Experiment Article Germany
6. Amelang and Pielke (1992), Study 2 Adults M, F Experiment Article Germany
7. Duggan and McCreary (2004) Adults M CS Survey Article Canada
8. Morrison et al. (2004) Adults M, F CS Survey Article Canada
9. Deloy (2006) Adults M CS Survey esis United States
10. Morrison et al. (2006) Adults M CS Survey Article Canada
11. Dellner (2008) Adults M, F CS Survey esis United States
12. Hosley, Caneld, O’Donnell, and Roid (2008) Adults M CS Survey Article United States
13. Daneback et al. (2009) Adults M, F CS Survey Article Norway
14. Peter and Valkenburg (2009) Adolescents M, F L Survey Article Netherlands
15. Minarcik (2010) Adults M, F CS Survey esis United States
16. Stulhofer et al. (2010) Adults M CS Survey Article Croatia
17. Bridges and Moroko (2011) Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
18. Hill (2011) Adults F CS Survey esis United States
19. Maddox et al. (2011) Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
20. Morgan (2011) Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
21. Rowell (2011) Adults F Experiment esis United States
22. Johnston (2012) Adults M, F CS Survey esis United States
23. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 1 Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
24. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 3 Adults M, F Experiment Article United States
25. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 5 Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
26. Stulhofer, Busko, and Schmidt (2012) Adults M, F CS Survey Article Croatia
10 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
Table 1 Continued
StudybyYear AgeofSample SexofSample
a,b Design of StudycReport Type Country of Study
27. Vandenbosch and Eggermont (2012) Adolescents F CS Survey Article Belgium
28. Burnham (2013) Adults F CS Survey esis United States
29. Emmers-Sommer, Hertlein, and Kennedy (2013) Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
30. Poulsen et al. (2013) Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
31. Stana (2013) Adults M, F CS Survey esis United States
32. Traeen and Daneback (2013) Adults M, F CS Survey Article Norway
33. Vandenbosch and Eggermont (2013) Adolescents M CS Survey Article Belgium
34. Brown (2014) Adults M, F CS Survey esis United States
35. Doornwaard et al. (2014) Adolescents M, F L Survey Article Netherlands
36. Kvalem, Traeen, Lewin, and Stulhofer (2014) Adults M, F CS Survey Article Norway, Sweden
37. Laier, Pekal, and Brand (2014) Adults F CS Survey Article Germany
38. Peter and Valkenburg (2014) Adolescent, adult mix M, F L Survey Article Netherlands
39. Smith et al. (2014) Adults M, F CS Survey Article/GSSdUn ited St ate s
40. Szymanski and Stewart-Richardson (2014) Adults M CS Survey Article United States
41. Traeen et al. (2014) Adults M CS Survey Article United States
42. Tylka (2014) Adults M CS Survey Article United States
43. Carvalheira, Træen, and Stulhofer (2015) Adults M CS Survey Article Portugal, Croatia, Norway
44. Kvalem et al. (2015) Adults M CS Survey Article Norway
45. Muusses et al. (2015) Adults M, F L Survey Article Netherlands
46. Rasmussen et al. (2015) Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
47. Sun: Germany (2016) Adults M, F CS Survey Article Germany
48. Sun: Korea (2016) Adults M, F CS Survey Article Korea
49. Sun: United States (2016) Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
50. Willoughby et al. (2016) Adults M, F CS Survey Article United States
aM=Male, F =Female. bAlthough females and males may have both been sampled, results for each sex were not always reported. cCS =Cross-sectional,
L=Longitudinal. dGeneral Social Survey; analysis followed Doran and Price (2014)
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 11
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
Table 2 Measures of Satisfactiona,b
Study by Year Relational Satisfaction Sexual Satisfaction Body Satisfaction
General
Self Satisfaction
Sexual Self
Satisfaction
1. Dermer and Pyszczynski
(1978)
Love for partner Partner’s sexual receptivity — — —
2. Weaver et al. (1984) — Partner’s sexual appeal — — —
3. Zillmann and Bryant (1988) — Sexual happiness — — —
4. Kenrick et al. (1989) Love for partner Partner’s sexual
attractiveness
———
5. Amelang and Pielke (1992),
Study 1
Love for partner Partner’s sexual receptivity — — —
6. Amelang and Pielke (1992),
Study 2
Love for partner Partner’s sexual receptivity;
passionate love
———
7. Duggan and McCreary
(2004)
——Muscularitysatisfaction——
8. Morrison et al. (2004) — — Genital satisfaction — Sexual self-esteem
9. Deloy (2006) Aection; autonomy;
conict management;
equality; intimacy
Sexual activity satisfaction — — —
10. Morrison et al. (2006) — — Body and genital
satisfaction
— Sexual self-esteem
11. Dellner (2008) Relationship assessment Sexual inventory — — —
12. Hosley et al. (2008) Marital satisfaction — — — —
13. Daneback et al. (2009) — — — Habitual
self-perceptions
—
14. Peter and Valkenburg
(2009)
—Sexualsatisfaction———
15. Minarcik (2010) — Sexual satisfaction — — —
12 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
Table 2 Continued
Study by Year Relational Satisfaction Sexual Satisfaction Body Satisfaction
General
Self Satisfaction
Sexual Self
Satisfaction
16. Stulhofer et al. (2010) Relational intimacy Sexual life satisfaction,
sexual boredom
———
17. Bridges and Moroko (2011) Relationship satisfaction Sexual satisfaction — — —
18. Hill (2011) — — Body image, shame, shape;
genital satisfaction
——
19. Maddox et al. (2011) Dedication; relational
adjustment
Sexual satisfaction — — —
20. Morgan (2011) Relationship satisfaction Sexual satisfaction — — —
21. Rowell (2011) — Sexual satisfaction Body attitudes — —
22. Johnston (2012) Relationship satisfaction Sexual satisfaction — — —
23. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 1 Relational commitment — — — —
24. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 3 Relational commitment — — — —
25. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 5 Relational commitment — — — —
26. Stulhofer et al. (2012) Relational intimacy — — — —
27. Vandenbosch and Eggermont
(2012)
— — Appearance ideals — —
28. Burnham (2013) — — Bodily attitudes — Sexual self-esteem
29. Emmers-Sommer et al. (2013) Relational commitment — — — —
30. Poulsen et al. (2013) Relationship satisfaction Sexual quality — — —
31. Stana (2013) — — Body self-consciousness — Sexual self-esteem
32. Traeen and Daneback (2013) — Sexual satisfaction — — —
33. Vandenbosch and Eggermont
(2013)
— — Appearance ideals — —
34. Brown (2014) — Sexual satisfaction — — —
35. Doornwaard et al. (2014) — Sexual experience
satisfaction
Physical self-esteem — —
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 13
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
Table 2 Continued
Study by Year Relational Satisfaction Sexual Satisfaction Body Satisfaction
General
Self Satisfaction
Sexual Self
Satisfaction
36. Kvalem et al. (2014) — — Genital satisfaction — Sexual self-esteem
37. Laier et al. (2014) — Sexual satisfaction — — —
38. Peter and Valkenburg (2014) — — Body, stomach, breast or
penis satisfaction
——
39. Smith et al. (2014) Marital happiness — — — —
40. Szymanski and
Stewart-Richardson (2014)
Dyadic adjustment quality Sexual satisfaction — — —
41. Traeen et al. (2014) — — — — Sexual self-esteem
42. Tylka (2014) Romantic attachment — Body fat and muscularity
satisfaction; body
appreciation
——
43. Carvalheira et al. (2015) Relationship intimacy Sexual boredom — — —
44. Kvalem et al. (2015) — Sexual relationship
self-esteem
——Sexualpartner
self-esteem
45. Muusses et al. (2015) Dyadic adjustment quality Sexual satisfaction — — —
46. Rasmussen et al. (2015) — — — Self-esteem —
47. Sun: Germany (2016) — Sexual satisfaction Genital satisfaction — —
48. Sun: Korea (2016) — Sexual satisfaction Genital satisfaction — —
49. Sun et al. (2016a, 2016b):
United States (2016)
— Sexual satisfaction Genital satisfaction — —
50. Willoughby et al. (2016) Relationship satisfaction — — — —
aHyphens (— ) indicate that the study either did not measure or report applicable results for that particular category of satisfaction. be titles in the table reect the
variable namesused in each study with the goal of facilitating readers’ ability to locate the variables in the original report. Because the title of a variableandtheactual
phenomenon measured by its items can dier, we used the content of the items, not the variable name chosen by the study author, when deciding which variables
were applicable.
14 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
e specic numbers of eect sizes for each moderator test of each satisfaction
comparison are reported in the results section. Moderator analyses were conducted
only when three or more eect sizes for each subgroup being compared were available.
Eect size extraction and correction for measurement error
We reviewed papers for their eect size estimates. In many instances, the Pear-
son correlation coecient, r, between pornography consumption and satisfaction
was reported. Some studies, however, reported an unadjusted odds ratio, tvalue,
and/or Fvalue to represent the relationship between pornography consumption
and satisfaction. In these cases, the eect sizes were transformed into the common
eect size, r.
Measurement error, which attenuates eect sizes, was a study artifact that we
corrected in this meta-analysis (Schmidt & Hunter, 2015). Because attenuation
from measurement error can occur disproportionately across subgroups of studies,
correcting for measurement error is particularly important for moderator anal-
yses. e alpha reliabilities reported in each study were used in the correction
equation. When a reliability coecient was not reported for a measure, the number
of reported items was used in the Spearman-Brown formula to estimate its reliability.
e average number of items of a construct across all studies in the meta-analysis
was used in the Spearman-Brown formula when neither the number of items nor
the reliability was reported. e average number of items and single-item alphas
used to estimate the reliability in the meta-analysis of pornography consumption
and the indicators of interpersonal satisfaction were as follows: pornography con-
sumption (αsingle-item =.71, Mitem =2) and interpersonal satisfaction (αsingle-item =.68,
Mitem =8). e average number of items and single-item alphas for the pornography
consumption and intrapersonal satisfaction meta-analyses were: pornography con-
sumption (αsingle-item =.57, Mitem =4) and intrapersonal satisfaction (αsingle-item =.59,
Mitem =11).
Results
Analytic approach
We used random-eects model meta-analyses to estimate the combined eect of the
corrected correlations extracted from the studies. Random-eects models assume that
the true eect size can vary across studies beyond variance attributable to sampling
error (Anker, Reinhart, & Feeley, 2010; Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein,
2009; Hedges & Vevea, 1998). e random-eects model estimates the mean of a dis-
tribution of correlations between pornography consumption and satisfaction drawn
from a superpopulation of eect sizes. To test the proposed moderators, subgroup
analyses were undertaken using a mixed-eects model approach. In this approach,
the average correlations within each subgroup are estimated using random-eects
models and a xed-eect model compares the average correlations between or among
dierent subgroups (Table 3).
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 15
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
Table 3 Uncorrected and Corrected Correlations by Category
Interpersonal Satisfaction Intrapersonal Satisfaction
StudybyYear rr’rr’
1. Dermer and Pyszczynski (1978) .193 .194
2. Weaver et al. (1984) −.287 −.294
3. Zillmann and Bryant (1988) −.364 −.402
4. Kenrick et al. (1989) −.250 −.261
5. Amelang and Pielke (1992), Study 1 .021 .022
6. Amelang and Pielke (1992), Study 2 −.105 −.107
7. Duggan and McCreary (2004) −.065 −.083
8. Morrison et al. (2004) .165 .200
9. Deloy (2006) −.180 −.190
10. Morrison et al. (2006) −.223 −.255
11. Dellner (2008) −.085 −.089
12. Hosley et al. (2008) −.125 −.125
13. Daneback et al. (2009) −.055 −.057
14. Peter and Valkenburg (2009) −.120 −.126
15. Minarcik (2010) −.287 −.290
16. Stulhofer, Busko, and Landripet
(2010)
.068 .075
17. Bridges and Moroko (2011) −.017 −.017
18. Hill (2011) −.041 −.042
19. Maddox et al. (2011) −.117 −.124
20. Morgan (2011) −.130 −.130
21. Rowell (2011) .042 .044 .019 .020
22. Johnston (2012) .031 .031
23. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 1 −.200 −.225
24. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 3 −.410 −.418
25. Lambert et al. (2012), Study 5 −.140 −.160
26. Stulhofer et al. (2012) −.021 −.026
27. Vandenbosch and Eggermont
(2012)
−.130 −.142
28. Burnham (2013) .218 .259
29. Emmers-Sommer et al. (2013) −.009 −.010
30. Poulsen et al. (2013) −.059 −.067
31. Stana (2013) .127 .136
32. Traeen and Daneback (2013) −.030 −.031
33. Vandenbosch and Eggermont
(2013)
−.180 −.197
34. Brown (2014) −.095 −.103
35. Doornwaard et al. (2014) −.154 −.154 .158 .167
36. Kvalem et al. (2014) .080 .087
37. Laier et al. (2014) .043 .043
16 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
Table 3 Continued
Interpersonal Satisfaction Intrapersonal Satisfaction
Study by Year rr’rr’
38. Peter and Valkenburg (2014) −.073 −.086
39. Smith et al. (2014) −.050 −.050
40. Szymanski and
Stewart-Richardson (2014)
−.145 −.152
41. Traeen et al. (2014) −.090 −.093
42. Tylka (2014) −.280 −.292 −.180 −.188
43. Carvalheira et al. (2015) −.085 −.092
44. Kvalem et al. (2015) −.080 −.084 .020 .022
45. Muusses et al. (2015) −.120 −.124
46. Rasmussen et al. (2015) −.005 −.005
47. Sun: Germany (2016) −.190 −.190 −.015 −.015
48. Sun: Korea (2016) −.140 −.140 −.045 −.045
49. Sun et al. (2016a, 2016b):
United States (2016)
−.168 −.168 −.114 −.114
50. Willoughby et al. (2016) −.090 −.096
Overall association results
Research questions one and two asked about the overall associations between pornog-
raphy consumption and the indicators of interpersonal and intrapersonal satisfaction.
Results for these research questions are presented next.
Research question 1: Relational and sexual satisfaction
irty-seven eect sizes were extracted from studies that examined the relationship
between pornography consumption and interpersonal satisfaction. In some studies,
more than one correlation could be extracted. Combining multiple eects from the
same study in a meta-analysis violates the independence of eects assumption and
biases estimates of sampling variance (Cheung & Chen, 2008). In these cases, the
pooled within-study corrected correlation was used as the eect-size estimate, and
the samplewise-adjusted corrected sample sizes used for the weights (see Cheung &
Chan, 2014). e indicators of interpersonal satisfaction in this meta-analysis were
relational and sexual satisfaction. e total sample for this meta-analysis was 46,524,
with an average sample size of 1,257 (Mdn =434) per study. e cumulative eect size
across the cases demonstrated a signicant negative association between pornography
consumption and interpersonal satisfaction, r=−.10, 95% CI [−.13, −.08], p<.001,
random-eects variance (τ)=.004. e eect sizes in the meta-analysis were hetero-
geneous, Q(36) =52.83, p=.04, I2=31.86, suggesting that the variation across the
correlations may be explained by moderating variables.
We conducted a subgroup analysis to test whether the eect sizes of studies
measuring relational satisfaction diered from studies measuring sexual satisfaction.
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 17
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
Because some cases reported correlations between pornography consumption and
both relational and sexual satisfaction, the assumption of independence of eect
sizes would be violated if all correlations were used in the subgroup analysis. To
overcome this methodological limitation, the meta-analysis was treated as a two-level
multilevel model, with individual correlations at Level 1 nested within studies at Level
2 (see Cheung, 2014; Field, 2015; Konstantopoulos, 2011). e multilevel model was
specied as yi=β
0+β
1(Interpersonal Satisfaction Type) +ui+ei. Relational satis-
faction was coded as “0” and sexual satisfaction was coded as “1” in the regression
model. e results demonstrated that the average eect size of the 24 correlations of
pornography consumption and relational satisfaction (r=−.09, 95% CI [−.12, −.05])
was not signicantly dierent from the average eect size of the 28 correlations of
pornography consumption and sexual satisfaction (r=−.11, 95% CI [−.14, −.07]),
β=−.04, SE =.05, p=.32.
Research question 2: Self and body satisfaction
To estimate the relationship between pornography consumption and intrapersonal
satisfaction, we calculated a weighted mean correlation across the 20 eect sizes
extracted from the studies. Body and self satisfaction were the indicators of intraper-
sonal satisfaction. e total sample for this meta-analysis was 12,427, with an average
of 621 (Mdn =575) participants per study. e average eect size of the relationship
between pornography consumption and intrapersonal satisfaction was nonsigni-
cant, r=−.03, 95% CI [−.08, .03], p=.401, τ=.015. e test of homogeneity showed
no signicant variance across the correlations, Q(19) =19.34, p=.44, I2=1.76.
e nonsignicant homogeneity test indicated that these studies shared a common
true eect size and no third variables moderate this relationship. Accordingly, no
follow-up subgroup analyses were conducted for this meta-analysis.
Moderation results
Researchquestionsthreethroughsixaskedwhetherassociationsbetweenpornog-
raphy consumption and satisfaction were moderated by other variables. Moderator
tests for the intrapersonal satisfaction variables were not justied due to the non-
signicance of the homogeneity test. Moderator tests for the interpersonal satisfaction
variables were justied, however, and are presented next. Because the results for rela-
tional and sexual satisfaction were empirically indistinguishable, and because doing
so allowed for a more comprehensive analysis of potential moderators, these studies
were grouped into a single pool.1
Research question 3: Sex
Biological sex of the participants was examined as a moderator of the relationship
between pornography consumption and the indicators of interpersonal satisfaction.
e mixed-eects model subgroup analysis indicated that sex was a signicant mod-
erator in the relationship between pornography consumption and interpersonal satis-
faction, Qb=24.82, Zdi =4.98, p<.001. e mean correlation for men (r=−.13, 95%
18 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
CI [−.16, −.10], k=29), which was signicant, was signicantly dierent from the
nonsignicant average correlation for women (r=−.01, 95% CI [−.05, .02], k=22).
Research question 4: Year
We used the year the study was disseminated as a moderator of the relationship
between pornography consumption and the indicators of interpersonal satisfaction.
Study year was treated as a continuous variable in a maximum-likelihood metaregres-
sion. e goal of this test was to see if the strength and/or direction of the association
changed as studies became more recent. Because the eect size drawn from the (GSS;
Smith et al., 2014) reected data aggregated across four decades, we excluded it from
this analysis. e results of the metaregression demonstrated that year was not a
signicant moderator for the associations between pornography consumption and
interpersonal satisfaction (β=.03, SE =.002, p=.86).
Research question 5: Method
e method of the study was also explored as a potential moderator of the relationship
between pornography consumption and the indicators of interpersonal satisfaction.
Method was not a signicant moderator, Qb(2) =0.62, Zdi =0.79, p=.73. e mean
eect of studies using cross-sectional survey designs (r=−.10, 95% CI [−.13, −.07],
k=26) was not signicantly dierent from longitudinal survey designs (r=−.14, 95%
CI [−.23, −.04], k=3) or experimental designs (r=−.12, 95% CI [−.21, −.03], k=8).2
Research question 6: Publication status
We examined the possibility that results from unpublished papers diered from pub-
lished papers by testing whether report type was a moderator. We categorized cases
into either an unpublished paper or published paper group. e subgroup analysis
for the relationship between pornography consumption and the indicators of inter-
personal satisfaction was not signicant, Qb=0.29, Zdi =0.54, p=.59. e average
correlation of the six unpublished studies (r=−.09, 95% CI [−.16, −.01]) was not sig-
nicantly dierent from the mean correlation of the 31 published studies (r=−.11,
95% CI [−.14, −.08]). Rosenthal’s fail-safe N,ametricofhowmanystudieswithnull
ndings must be included to make the overall correlation nonsignicant, was 3,228.
e association between eect size and its standard error, represented by Begg and
Mazumdar’s rank correlation, was nonsignicant, Kendall’s τ=−.21, p=.06. In sum,
publication bias was not a signicant concern.
Discussion
is paper presented results from meta-analyses of survey and experimental studies
on pornography consumption and sexual and relational satisfaction (summarized as
interpersonal outcomes) and body and self satisfaction (summarized as intrapersonal
outcomes). In an overall, combined-sample analysis of relational and sexual satisfac-
tion studies, the consumption of p ornography was associated with lower interpersonal
satisfaction. Analyzes broken down by interpersonal satisfaction type indicated that
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 19
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
associations between pornography consumption and sexual satisfaction and pornog-
raphy consumption and relational satisfaction were indistinguishable, leading to the
grouping of these studies together into a single pool.
Associations between pornography consumption and interpersonal satisfaction
did not vary by publication status, year of release, or method. Consuming pornog-
raphy was associated with lower interpersonal satisfaction in results from published
and unpublished studies, regardless of the year the study was circulated, and regard-
less of the method. Sex was a signicant moderator in a mixed-eects model subgroup
analysis, however, and only the negative correlation for males was signicant.
As with the interpersonal results, analyses broken down by intrapersonal satisfac-
tion type indicated that associations between pornography consumption and body
satisfaction and pornography consumption and self satisfaction were indistinguish-
able, supporting the grouping of these studies together into a single pool. Analysis of
these intrapersonally oriented results indicated a negative, but null, overall relation-
ship and a homogeneity among the eect sizes. us, no further moderator analysis
was undertaken.
Several inferences can be drawn from these results. First, contrary to the state-
ments of consumers when asked directly about how pornography has positively
impacted them (Hald & Malamuth, 2008; Mulya & Hald, 2014), it seems unlikely that
an increase in the frequency and intensity of consumption would, on the average,
lead to a corresponding increase in satisfaction with oneself or one’s sexual or roman-
tic relationships. e results of the studies analyzed in the present paper, whose
designs seem less likely to trigger defensive and rationalizing responses, suggest
thatwomen’ssatisfactionwouldonaveragebeunaectedwhilemen’ssexualand
relational satisfaction would on the average be adversely aected.
Second, we can infer from the lack of a moderating eect for year that increasing
access to pornography in general and extreme pornography in particular has not
on average resulted in larger detrimental eects on consumers’ satisfaction. is
does not mean that an increase in access opportunities or a shi toward more
violent and dehumanizing content preferences would not adversely aect a partic-
ular consumer. It means only that the increased availability of pornography (both
standard and extreme) does not appear in and of itself to have changed the nature of
pornography-satisfaction associations. ird, we can infer that a publication bias has
not aected research on pornography and satisfaction.
erearemanyimportantquestionsthatremainunaddressedbytheextantlit-
erature. As one example, too few studies included mechanism tests for any type of
mediational meta-analysis. Mediation tests are needed to evaluate the appropriateness
of the theories that have been proposed (e.g., Gagnon & Simon, 2005; O’Neil et al.,
1986; Rusbult, Martz, & Agnew, 1998; Suls et al., 2002). Future studies could address
whether and which particular social comparison dynamics (e.g., upward compar-
isons to partners’ physical beauty, performance, eagerness, readiness, receptiveness,
adventurousness) help to explain associations between men’s pornography consump-
tion and lower interpersonal satisfaction (Doran & Price, 2014; Kenrick et al., 1989;
20 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
Lambert et al., 2012; Muusses et al., 2015; Peter & Valkenburg, 2009; Poulsen et al.,
2013; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988). Future studies could also explore whether there
are particular masculine sexual scripts (e.g., for multiple partners or for youthful
partners) that trigger feelings of dissatisfaction in men when they view pornogra-
phy (Brooks, 1995; Malamuth, 1996). ey could also test whether there is veracity
to hypotheses derived from the investment model of commitment that pornogra-
phy consumption reduces men’s interpersonal satisfaction by priming the option of a
better relationship, inspiring the pursuit of extrarelational encounters, and supplant-
ing partnered sex (Doran & Price, 2014; Lambert et al., 2012; Muusses et al., 2015;
Poulsen et al., 2013). Future studies could also examine whether using pornography
leads to interpersonal conicts and corresponding reductions in interpersonal satis-
faction, as gender role conict theory would predict (Brooks, 1995; Doran & Price,
2014; Szymanski & Stewart-Richardson, 2014).
Additional moderation analysis is also needed. at the average associations
between women’s satisfaction and pornography consumption were not signi-
cant does not mean that certain subsets of women less frequently studied are not
impacted, for example. Perhaps women who aspire to hyperfemininity but view the
performances in pornography as unattainable are aected (Vandenbosch, 2015). It
is conceivable that only women with precarious self and body esteem are impacted
(Doornwaard et al., 2014). It may be the case that solitary consumption adversely
aects the relationships of women as much as men but is rarer and thus harder to
detect with conventional sampling procedures (Daneback et al., 2009). It may also
be the case that dehumanizing, aggressive, gender-rigid content impacts women
in addition to men, but women’s consumption is more infrequent and therefore
less likely to impact associations generated from entire samples (Sun, Wright, &
Steen, 2015). is may also explain why the average interpersonal association was
signicant for men but not for women.
e discussions of several authors also suggested a need for comparative analyses
by sexual orientation, particularly among men (Duggan & McCreary, 2004; Kvalem
et al., 2015; Peter & Valkenburg, 2014; Szymanski & Stewart-Richardson, 2014; Traeen
& Daneback, 2013; Vandenbosch & Eggermont, 2013). Reasons cited were dieren-
tial levels of pornography consumption, masturbation to pornography, acceptance
of pornography, use of pornography for orientation validation, concern over body
image, and ascriptions of masculinity to muscularity. Discussion of additional poten-
tial moderators can be found in Wright (2011, 2014) and Wright and Bae (2016).
Conclusion
To conclude, the present meta-analysis addressed a classic question in the com-
munication literature: Is there an association between pornography consumption
and satisfaction? Although many questions about possible mediating mechanisms
and contingent eects remain, the study provided several important answers. First,
there appears to be no overall or global association between women’s pornography
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 21
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
consumptionandtheelementsofsatisfactionstudiedbyresearcherstodate.If
women’ssatisfactioninthesedomainsispositivelyornegativelyaected,itisforcer-
tain subgroups less frequently studied or under circumstances not yet identied. Men
as a group, on the other hand, do demonstrate lower sexual and relational satisfaction
(but apparently not self and body satisfaction) as a function of their pornography
consumption. While there may be a reciprocal element to these dynamics (i.e., lower
sexual and relational satisfaction leading to pornography consumption), the conver-
genceofresultsacrosscross-sectionalsurvey,longitudinalsurvey,andexperimental
results points to an overall negative eect of pornography on men’s sexual and
relational satisfaction.
Notes
1 We also conducted four random-eects model meta-analyses on the relationships between
pornography consumption and relational, sexual, body, and sexual self-esteem satisfaction
independently (data for general self-esteem indicators were available from only two studies
so no independent meta-analysis was conducted). e cumulative correlations between
pornography consumption and relational satisfaction (r=−.09, 95% CI -.12, −.05], k=24,
Q(23) =47.49, p=.002) and sexual satisfaction (r=−.11, 95% CI [−.14, −.07], k=28,
Q(27) =31.74, p=.24) were signicant, but pornography consumption was related to
neither body satisfaction (r=−.02, 95% CI [−.08, .05], k=16, Q(15) =15.29, p=.43) nor
sexual self-esteem satisfaction (r=.04, 95% CI [−.08, .16], k=7, Q(6) =10.87, p=.09).
e ndings from the moderator tests, where there were enough studies to conduct them,
paralleled the main analyses presented in the results section. ese results are available as a
supplemental online table.
2 Wealsoexaminedwhetherthetypeofpornographymeasurementinthesurveystudies
moderated the relationship between pornography exposure and the indicators of
interpersonal satisfaction. We grouped studies by whether pornography consumption was
measured with a single-item dichotomous measure, a single-item continuous measure, or a
summated scale. e mixed-eects model subgroup analysis showed that pornography
measurement was not a signicant moderator, Qb(2) =3.84, p=.14. e average
correlation of studies where pornography was measured with a single-item dichotomous
measure (r=−.05, 95% CI [−.13, .03], k=4) did not signicantly dier from studies that
used single-item continuous (r=−.12, 95% CI [−.16, −.09], k=21) and multi-item
(r=−.07, 95% CI [−.14, .01], k=4) measures.
Supporting Information
Additional supporting information may be found in the online version of this article:
Table S 1 Mean Correlations and Moderator Tests
References
*Indicates a paper included in the meta-analysis.
†Indicates a paper whose authors generously provided additional results.
22 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
*Amelang, M., & Pielke, M. (1992). Eects of erotica upon men’s and women’s loving and
liking responses for their partners. Psychological Reports,71, 1235–1245.
doi:10.2466/pr0.1992.71.3f.1235
American Psychological Association (2007). ReportoftheAPATaskForceonthesexualization
of girls. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Anker, A. E., Reinhart, A. M., & Feeley, T. H. (2010). Meta-analysis of meta-analyses in
communication. Communication Quarterly,58, 257 – 278. doi:10.1080/01463373.2010
Babbie, E. (2004). e practice of social research. Belmont, CA: omson.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to
meta-analysis.WestSussex,England:JohnWiley&Sons.
Bramwell, R. (2002). Invisible labia. Sexual and Relationship erapy,17, 187–190.
doi:10.1080/14681990220121293
*Bridges, A. J., & Moroko, P. J. (2011). Sexual media use and relational satisfaction in
heterosexual couples. Personal Relationships,18, 562– 585.
doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01328.x
Bridges, A. J., Wosnitzer, R., Scharrer, E., Sun, C., & Liberman, R. (2010). Aggression and
sexual behavior in best-selling pornography videos: A content analysis update. Violence
Against Women,16, 1065 – 1085. doi:10.1177/1077801210382866
Brooks, G. (1995). e centerfold syndrome. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brosius, H. B., Weaver, J. B., & Staab, J. F. (1993). Exploring the social and sexual reality of
contemporary pornography. Journal of Sex Research,30, 161–170.
doi:10.1080/00224499309551697
*Brown, C. (2014). Me, you, and porn: A common-fate analysis of pornography use and
sexualsatisfaction among married couples. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation
Database.
Bushman, B. J., & Huesmann, L. R. (2014). Twenty-ve years of research on violence in digital
games and aggression. European Psychologist,19, 47 – 55. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000164
*†Carvalheira, A., Træen, B., & Stulhofer, A. (2015). Masturbation and pornography use
among coupled heterosexual men with decreased sexual desire: How many roles of
masturbation? Journal of Sex & Marital erapy,41, 626 – 635. doi:10.1080/0092623X.
2014.958790
Chapin, J. (2001). It won’t happen to me: e role of optimistic bias in African American
teens’ risky sexual practices. Howard Journal of Communication,12, 49 – 59.
doi:10.1080/10646170119661
Cheung, M. W.-L. (2014). Modeling dependent eect sizes with three-level meta-analyses: A
structural equation modeling approach. Psychological Methods,19, 221–229.
doi:10.1037/a0032968
Cheung, S. F., & Chan, D. K.-S. (2008). Dependent correlations in meta-analysis: e case of
heterogeneous dependence. Educational and Psychological Measurement,68, 760– 777.
doi:10.1177/0013164408315263
Cheung, S. F., & Chan, D. K.-S. (2014). Meta-analyzing dependent correlations: An SPSS
macro and an R script. Behavior Research Methods,46, 331–345.
doi:10.3758/s13428-013-0386-2
*†Daneback, K., Traeen, B., & Mansson, S. A. (2009). Use of pornography in a random sample
of Norwegian heterosexual couples. Archives of Sexual Behavior,38, 746 –753.
doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9314-4
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 23
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
*Dellner, D.K. (2008). Pornography use, relationship functioning and sexual satisfaction: e
mediating role of dierentiation in committed relationships.RetrievedfromProQuest
Dissertation Database.
*Deloy, J. (2006). Patterns of relationship satisfaction and sexual behavior as a function of
pornography use among college men. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation Database.
*Dermer, M., & Pyszczynski, T. A. (1978). Eects of erotica upon men’s loving and liking
responses for women they love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,36,
1302–1309. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.11.1302
Dillard, A. J., McCaul, K. D., & Klein, W. M. (2006). Unrealistic optimism in smokers:
Implications for smoking myth endorsement and self-protective motivation. Journal of
Health Communication,11, 93– 102. doi:10.1080/10810730600637343
Dines, G. (2010). Pornland: How porn has hijacked our sexuality. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
*†Doornwaard, S. M., Bickham, D. S., Rich, M., Vanwesenbeeck, I., van den Eijnden, R. J., &
Ter Bogt, T. F. (2014). Sex-related online behaviors and adolescents’ body and sexual
self-perceptions. Pediatrics,134, 1103– 1110. doi:10.1542/peds.2014-0592
Doran, K., & Price, J. (2014). Pornography and marriage. JournalofFamilyandEconomic
Issues,35, 489–498. doi:10.1007/s10834-014-9391-6
*Duggan, S. J., & McCreary, D. R. (2004). Body image, eating disorders, and the drive for
muscularity in gay and heterosexual men: e inuence of media images. Journal of
Homosexuality,47, 45 –58. doi:10.1300/J082v47n03_03
*Emmers-Sommer, T., Hertlein, K., & Kennedy, A. (2013). Pornography use and attitudes:
An examination of relational and sexual openness variables between and within gender.
Marriage & Family Review,49, 349– 365. doi:10.1080/01494929.2012.762449
Etcheverry, P. E., Le, B., Wu, T., & Wei, M. (2013). Attachment and the investment model:
Predictors of relationship commitment, maintenance, and persistence. Personal
Relationships,20, 546–567. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01328.x
Ezzell, M. B. (2014). Pornography makes the man: e impact of pornography as a
component of gender and sexual socialization. In L. Coleman & J. M. Hald (Eds.), e
philosophy of pornography: Contemporary perspectives (pp. 17–34). New York, NY:
Rowman & Littleeld.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations,7, 117 – 140.
doi:10.1177/001872675400700202
Field, A. P. (2015). Dread returns to mega-silly one. Health Psychology Review,9, 15–20.
doi:10.1080/17437199.2013.879198
Frable, D. E., Johnson, A. E., & Kellman, H. (1997). Seeing masculine men, sexy women, and
gender dierences: Exposure to pornography and cognitive constructions of gender.
Journal of Personality,65, 311–355. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00957.x
Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (2005). Sexual conduct: e social sources of human sexuality (Vol.
,2nd ed.). Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Hald, G. M., & Malamuth, N. M. (2008). Self-perceived eects of pornography consumption.
Archives of Sexual Behavior,37, 614–625. doi:10.1007/s10508-007-9212-1
Hald, G. M., Malamuth, N. M., & Yuen, C. (2010). Pornography and attitudes supporting
violence against women. Aggressive Behavior,36, 14–20. doi:10.1002/ab.20328
Hald, G. M., Seaman, C., & Linz, D. (2014). Sexuality and pornography. In D. L. Tolman & L.
M. Diamond (Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology: Vol. 2. Contextual
approaches (pp. 3– 35). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
24 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
Hald, G. M., Smolenski, D., & Rosser, B. R. (2013). Perceived eects of sexually explicit media
among men who have sex with men and psychometric properties of the pornography
consumption eects Scale. e Journal of Sexual Medicine,10, 757–767.
doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02988.x
Harkness, E. L., Mullan, B., & Blaszczynski, A. (2015). Association between pornography use
and sexual risk behaviors in adult consumers. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social
Networking ,18, 59 –71. doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0343
Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998). Fixed- and random-eects models in meta-analysis.
Psychological Methods,3, 4868504. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.486
*Hill, M. L. (2011). Body image and pornography use. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation
Database.
Hocking, J., Stacks, D., & McDermott, S. (2003). Communication research. Boston: Pearson.
*†Hosley, R., Caneld, K., O’Donnell, S. L., & Roid, G. (2008). Father closeness: Its eect on
marriedmen’ssexualbehaviors,marital,andfamilysatisfaction.Sexual Addiction &
Compulsivity,15, 59–76. doi:10.1080/10720160701878761
Jamieson, J., Mushquash, C., & Mazmanian, D. (2003). Why do gamblers over-report wins?
Journal of Gambling Issues,9, 1–13. doi:10.4309/jgi.2003.9.10
Jensen, R. (2007). Getting o: Pornography and the end of masculinity.Cambridge,MA:South
End Press.
Jensen, R., & Dines, G. (1998). e content of mass-marketed pornography. In G. Dines, R.
Jensen&A.Russo(Eds.),Pornography: e production and consumption of inequality (pp.
65–100). New York, NY: Routledge.
*†Johnston, J. B. (2012). Early exposure to pornography: Indirect and direct eects on sexual
satisfaction in adulthood. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation
Database.
*Kenrick, D. T., Gutierres, S. E., & Goldberg, L. L. (1989). Inuence of popular erotica on
judgments of strangers and mates. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,25,
159–167. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(89)90010-3
Klaassen, M. J., & Peter, J. (2015). Gender (in)equality in internet pornography: A content
analysis of popular pornographic internet videos. Journal of Sex Research,52, 721– 735.
doi:10.1080/00224499.2014.976781
Konstantopoulos, S. (2011). Fixed eects and variance components estimation in three-level
meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods,2, 61–76. doi:10.1002/jrsm.35
*†Kvalem, I. L., Traeen, B., Lewin, B., & Stulhofer, A. (2014). Self-perceived eects of Internet
pornography use, genital appearance satisfaction, and sexual self-esteem among young
Scandinavian adults. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace,8.
doi:10.5817/CP2014-4-4
*†Kvalem, I. L., Traeen, B., & Ianta, A. (2015). Internet pornography use, body ideals, and
sexual self-esteem in Norwegian gay and bisexual men. Journal of Homosexuality,63,
522–540. doi:10.1080/00918369.2015.1083782
*Laier, C., Pekal, J., & Brand, M. (2014). Cybersex addiction in heterosexual female users of
Internet pornography can be explained by gratication hypothesis. Cyberpsychology,
Behavior and Social Networking,17, 505 – 511. doi:10.1089/cyber.2013.0396
*Lambert, N. M., Negash, S., Stillman, T. F., Olmstead, S. B., & Fincham, F. D. (2012). A love
that doesn’t last: Pornography consumption and weakened commitment to one’s
romantic partner. JournalofSocialandClinicalPsychology,31, 410–438.
doi:10.1521/jscp.2012.31.4.410
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 25
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
Linz, D., & Malamuth, N. (1993). Pornography.NewburyPark,CA:Sage.
*Maddox, A. M., Rhoades, G. K., & Markman, H. J. (2011). Viewing sexually-explicit
materials alone or together: Associations with relationship quality. Archives of Sexual
Behavior,40, 441– 448. doi:10.1007/s10508-009-9585-4
Malamuth, N. M. (1996). Sexually explicit media, gender dierences, and evolutionary
theory. Journal of Communication,46, 8–31. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01486.x
Maltz, L., & Maltz, W. (2008). e porn trap.NewYork,NY:Harper.
Manning, J. C. (2006). e impact of Internet pornography on marriage and the family: A
review of the research. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity,13, 131– 165.
doi:10.1080/10720160600870711
*Minarcik, J. (2010). Sexually explicit material use and relationship dynamics. Retrieved from
ProQuest Dissertation Database.
*Morgan, E. M. (2011). Associations between young adults’ use of sexually explicit materials
and their sexual preferences, behaviors, and satisfaction. Journal of Sex Research,48,
520–530. doi:10.1080/00224499.2010.543960
*Morrison, T. G., Bearden, A., Harriman, R., Morrison, M. A., & Ellis, S. R. (2004). Correlates
of exposure to sexually explicit material among Canadian post-secondary students. e
Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality,13, 143–156.
*†Morrison, T. G., Ellis, S. R., Morrison, M. A., Bearden, A., & Harriman, R. L. (2006).
Exposure to sexually explicit material and variations in body esteem, genital attitudes,
and sexual esteem among a sample of Canadian men. e Journal of Men’s Studies,14,
209–222. doi:10.3149/jms.1402.209
Mulya, T. W., & Hald, G. M. (2014). Self-perceived eects of pornography consumption in a
sample of Indonesian university students. Media Psychology,17, 78 –101.
doi:10.1080/15213269.2013.850038
*†Muusses, L. D., Kerkhof, P., & Finkenauer, C. (2015). Internet pornography and
relationship quality: A longitudinal study of within and between partner eects of
adjustment, sexual satisfaction and sexually explicit internet material among newly-weds.
Computers in Human Behavior,45, 77– 84. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.077
Neuman, W. R., Davidson, R., Joo, S. H., Park, Y. J., & Williams, A. E. (2008). e seven
deadly sins of communication research. Journal of Communication,58, 220–237.
doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00382.x
O’Neil, J. M., Helms, B. J., Gable, R. K., David, L., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1986). Gender-role
conict scale. Sex Roles,14, 335–350. doi:10.1007/BF00287583
Owens, E. W., Behun, R. J., Manning, J. C., & Reid, R. C. (2012). e impact of Internet
pornography on adolescents: A review of the research. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity,
19, 99–122. doi:10.1080/10720162.2012.660431
Paul, P. (2005). Pornied.NewYork,NY:Holt.
Perlo, R. M. (2009). Mass media, social perception, and the third-person eect. In J. Bryant
&M.B.Oliver(Eds.),Media eects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 252–268). New
Yo r k , N Y : R o u t l e d g e .
*Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2009). Adolescents’ exposure to sexually explicit internet
material and sexual satisfaction: A longitudinal study. Human Communication Research,
35, 171–194. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01343.x
*Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2014). Does exposure to sexually explicit Internet material
increase body dissatisfaction? A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior,36,
297–307. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.071
26 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
Pickard, H. (2016). Denial in addiction. Mind & Language,31, 277 –299.
doi:10.1111/mila.12106
*†Poulsen, F. O., Busby, D. M., & Galovan, A. M. (2013). Pornography use: Who uses it and
how it is associated with couple outcomes. Journal of Sex Research,50, 72 – 83.
doi:10.1080/00224499.2011.648027
*†Rasmussen, E. E., Ortiz, R. R., & White, S. R. (2015). Emerging adults’ responses to active
mediation of pornography during adolescence. Journal of Children and Media,9,
160–176. doi:10.1080/17482798.2014.997769
Rothstein, H. R., & Bushman, B. J. (2012). Publication bias in psychological science.
Psychological Methods,17, 129–136. doi:10.1037/a0027128
*Rowell, E. A. (2011). Inuence of sexually explicit media and potential buers on female
sexual satisfaction, body dissatisfaction, social comparison and self-objectication.
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation Database.
Rusbult, C. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: e development (and
deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology,45, 101 – 117.
Rusbult, C. E., Martz, J. M., & Agnew, C. (1998). e investment model scale: Measuring
commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal
Relationships,5, 357–387. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x
Salmon, C. (2012). e pop culture of sex. Review of General Psychology,16, 152– 160.
doi:10.1037/a0027910
Schick, V. R., Rima, B. N., & Calabrese, S. K. (2011). Evulvalution: e portrayal of women’s
external genitalia and physique across time and the current Barbie doll ideals. Journal of
Sex Research,48, 74– 81. doi:10.1080/00224490903308404
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in
research ndings.ousandOaks,CA:Sage.
Short, M. B., Black, L., Smith, A. H., Wetterneck, C. T., & Wells, D. E. (2012). A review of
Internet pornography use research. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking,15,
13–23. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0477
*Smith, T. W., Marsden, P. V., & Houtem, M. (2014). General Social Surveys, 1972– 2014.
Chicago, IL: National Opinion Research Center.
*Stana, A. (2013). An examination of relationships between exposure to sexually explicit media
content and risk behaviors: A case study of college students. Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertation Database.
Stock, W. E. (1997). Sex as commodity: Men and the sex industry. In R. F. Levant & G. R.
Brooks (Eds.), Men and sex (pp. 100– 132). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
*†Stulhofer, A., Busko, V., & Landripet, I. (2010). Pornography, sexual socialization, and
satisfaction among young men. Archives of Sexual Behavior,39, 168 –178.
doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9387-0
*†Stulhofer, A., Busko, V., & Schmidt, G. (2012). Adolescent exposure to pornography and
relationship intimacy in young adulthood. Psychology & Sexuality,3, 95 –107.
doi:10.1080/ 19419899.2010.537367
Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with what
eect? Current Directions in Psychological Science,11, 159 – 163. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.
00191
*†Sun, C., Bridges, A., Johnson, J., & Ezzell, M. (2016a). Culture and sexuality survey: United
States. Unpublished data, School of Professional Studies, NYU. Associated article: Sun, C.,
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 27
Pornography and Satisfaction P. J. Wright et al.
Bridges, A., Johnson, J., & Ezzell, M. (2016). Pornography and the male sexual script: An
analysis of consumption and sexual relations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 983–994.
*†Sun, C., Miezan, E., Lee, N., & Shim, J. (2016b). Culture and sexuality survey: Korea.
Unpublished data, School of Professional Studies, NYU. Associated article: Sun, C.,
Miezan, E., Lee, N., & Shim, J. (2015). Korean men’s pornography use, their interest in
extreme pornography, and dyadic sexual relationships. International Journal of Sexual
Health, 27 , 16 –35.
*†Sun, C., Wright, P. J., & Steen, N. (2015). Culture and sexuality survey: Germany.
Unpublished data, School of Professional Studies, NYU. Associated article: Wright, P.J.,
Sun, C., Steen, N., & Tokunaga, R.S. (2015). Pornography, alcohol, and male sexual
dominance. Communication Monographs,82, 252 – 270.
Sun, Y., Pan, Z., & Shen, L. (2008). Understanding the third-person perception: Evidence
from a meta-analysis. Journal of Communication,58, 280–300.
doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00385.x
*Szymanski, D. M., & Stewart-Richardson, D. N. (2014). Psychological, relational, and sexual
correlates of pornography use on young adult heterosexual men in romantic
relationships. e Journal of Men’s Studies,22, 64– 82. doi:10.3149/jms.2201.64
Taylor, L., & Huesmann, L. R. (2014). Answering the attacks on the media violence
consensus. In D. Gentile (Ed.), Media violence and children (pp. 355–380). Santa Barbara,
CA: Praeger Publishing.
Tiggemann, M. (2013). Objectication theory: Of relevance for eating disorder researchers
and clinicians. Clinical Psychologist,17, 35–45. doi:10.1111/cp.12010
*Traeen, B., & Daneback, K. (2013). e use of pornography and sexual behaviour among
Norwegian men and women of diering sexual orientation. Sexologies,22, e41 – e48.
doi:10.1016/j.sexol.2012.03.002
*†Traeen, B., Hald, G. M., Noor, S. W., Ianta, A., Grey, J., & Rosser, B. S. (2014). e
relationship between use of sexually explicit media and sexual risk behavior in men who
have sex with men: Exploring the mediating eects of sexual self-esteem and condom use
self-ecacy. International Journal of Sexual Health,26, 13 –24. doi:10.1080/19317611.
2013.823900
*Tylka, T. L. (2014). No harm in looking, right? Men’s pornography consumption, body
image, and well-being. Psycholog y of Men & Masculinity,16, 97–107. doi:10.1037/
a0035774
Vandenbosch, L. (2015). Antecedents of adolescents’ exposure to dierent types of sexually
explicit Internet material: A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior,50,
439–448. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.032
*†Vandenbosch, L., & Eggermont, S. (2012). Understanding sexual objectication: A
Comprehensive approach toward media exposure and girls’ internalization of beauty
ideals, self-objectication, and body surveillance. Journal of Communication,62,
869–887. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01667.x
*†Vandenbosch, L., & Eggermont, S. (2013). Sexualization of adolescent boys: Media
exposure and boys’ internalization of appearance ideals, self-objectication, and body
surveillance. Men and Masculinities, 16,283–306. doi: 10.9718/4X13477866.
*Weaver, J. B., Masland, J. L., & Zillmann, D. (1984). Eect of erotica on young men’s
aesthetic perception of their female sexual partners. Perceptual and Motor Skills,58,
929–930. doi:10.2466/pms.1984.58.3.929
28 Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association
P. J. Wright et al. Pornography and Satisfaction
*†Willoughby, B. J., Carroll, J. S., Busby, D. M., & Brown, C. C. (2016). Dierences in
pornography use among couples: Associations with satisfaction, stability, and relationship
processes. Archives of Sexual Behavior,45, 145–158. doi:10.1007/s10508-015-0562-9
Wright, P. J. (2011). Mass media eects on youth sexual behavior. Communication Yearbook,
35, 343–386.
Wright, P. J. (2014). Pornography and the sexual socialization of children: Current knowledge
and a theoretical future. Journal of Children and Media,8, 305– 312.
doi:10.1080/17482798.2014.923606
Wright, P. J., & Bae, S. (2016). Pornography and male sexual socialization. In Y. J. Wong & S.
R. Wester (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of men and masculinities (pp. 551– 568).
Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Wright, P. J., Malamuth, N., & Donnerstein, E. (2012). Research on sex in the media: What do
we know about eects on children and adolescents? In D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (Eds.),
Handbook of children and the media (pp. 273– 302). ousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wright, P. J., & Donnerstein, E. (2014). Sex online: Pornography, sexual solicitation, and
sexting. Adolescent Medicine: State of the Art Reviews,25, 574 – 589.
Wright, P. J., Tokunaga, R. S., & Kraus, A. (2016). A meta-analysis of pornography
consumption and actual acts of sexual aggression in general population studies. Journal of
Communication,66, 183–205. doi:10.1111/jcom.12201
*Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1988). Pornography’s impact on sexual satisfaction. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology,18, 438– 453. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb00027
Human Communication Research (2017) © 2017 International Communication Association 29
