Content uploaded by Peter T. F. Raggatt
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Peter T. F. Raggatt on Mar 03, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
ARTICLE
Pornography, preference for porn-like sex,
masturbation, and men's sexual and relationship
satisfaction
Dan J. Miller | Kerry A. McBain | Wendy W. Li | Peter T. F. Raggatt
Department of Psychology, Division of Tropical
Health and Medicine, College of Healthcare
Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville,
Queensland, Australia
Correspondence
Dan J. Miller, Department of Psychology,
College of Healthcare Sciences, Division of
Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook
University, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia.
Email: daniel.miller1@my.jcu.edu.au
Pornography use, preference for “porn-like”sex, mastur-
bation, and sexual and relationship satisfaction were
assessed among two samples of men (N
Study 1
= 326,
N
Study 2
= 335). Frequent pornography use was associated
with sexual dissatisfaction, greater preference for porn-
like sex, and more frequent masturbation in both studies.
Pornography use was associated with relationship dissatis-
faction in Study 2 only. The data did not support the
notion that pornography negatively impacts sexual or rela-
tionship satisfaction via preference for porn-like sex. In
fact, it may bolster sexual satisfaction by promoting sex-
ual variety. The data were consistent with a model in
which pornography negatively, indirectly affects sexual
and relationship satisfaction via masturbation frequency.
Pornography use may have multiple opposing influences
on sexual satisfaction.
KEYWORDS
sexual dysfunctions, sexual fantasy, sexual health
1|INTRODUCTION
Investigating pornography's impact on romantic relationships is a relatively recent development in
pornography research literature. One focus of this nascent line of enquiry has been to determine the
nature of the association between pornography use and sexual and relationship satisfaction. Although
numerous studies (reviewed below) have indicated that frequent pornography use is associated with
sexual and relationship dissatisfaction, relatively few studies have investigated possible drivers of
these associations. Some authors (Wright, Tokunaga, Kraus, & Klann, 2017) have suggested that
This study was conducted as part of the first author's doctoral dissertation.
Received: 5 December 2017 Revised: 24 November 2018 Accepted: 26 November 2018
DOI: 10.1111/pere.12267
Personal Relationships. 2019;26:93–113. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pere © 2019 IARR 93
pornography use negatively impacts sexual and relationship satisfaction by distorting consumers'
conceptions of what sexual practices are normative and satisfying. It is argued that exposure to the
messages contained within pornography creates a preference for the kinds of sexual practices com-
monly depicted in pornography (i.e., a preference for “porn-like”sex), which leads porn users to feel
sexually dissatisfied when their preferences are not met by their sexual partners. Another possibility
is that it is not exposure to the messages contained within pornography but frequent masturbation
(which results from frequent pornography use) that undermines consumers' feelings of sexual satis-
faction by negatively impacting sexual performance, arousability, or feelings of sexual interest
toward one's partner. This article has two goals. First, it aims to replicate and extend existing research
by assessing the degree of association between pornography use, sexual satisfaction, relationship sat-
isfaction, and preferences for porn-like sex among men (who, as a group, are the more frequent con-
sumers of pornography; Hald, 2006; Petersen & Hyde, 2010). Second, it seeks to investigate two
possible drivers of the associations between pornography use and sexual and relationship dissatisfac-
tion: preference for porn-like sex and masturbation frequency.
Numerous correlation studies have been conducted examining the associations between pornogra-
phy use and relationship and sexual satisfaction. In one such study, pornography use was predictive of
sexual dissatisfaction but not relationship dissatisfaction among both men and women (Poulsen,
Busby, & Galovan, 2013). Daspe, Vaillancourt-Morel, Lussier, Sabourin, and Ferron (2018) similarly
found pornography use to correlate with sexual satisfaction but not relationship satisfaction. These
authors also found sexual and relationship satisfaction to moderate the relationship between frequency
of pornography use and feeling that one's pornography use is out of control, such that this association
was stronger among those low in sexual and relationship satisfaction. Two other studies have detected
negative relationships between pornography use and relationship and sexual satisfaction among men
but not women (Bridges & Morokoff, 2011; Morgan, 2011). Szymanski and Stewart-Richardson
(2014) similarly found pornography use to be predictive of poorer relationship quality and sexual dis-
satisfaction among their sample of young men. In contrast, some authors have found pornography use
to have no direct effect on relationship intimacy (Štulhofer, Buško, & Schmidt, 2012), to be predictive
of relationship dissatisfaction among men low in emotional intimacy only (Veit, Štulhofer, & Hald,
2017), or to have an indirect effect on sexual dissatisfaction through suppression of intimacy but only
among male consumers of paraphilic pornography (Štulhofer, Buško, & Landripet, 2010).
As can be seen, there are some inconsistencies in the literature in terms of the significance of the
associations between pornography use and sexual and relationship satisfaction. Even among the sig-
nificant results, estimates of the magnitude of these effects tend to vary. Fortunately, Wright,
Tokunaga, et al. (2017) recently conducted a meta-analysis of studies assessing pornography's impact
on intrapersonal (body image and sexual self-esteem) and interpersonal satisfaction (relationship and
sexual satisfaction). This meta-analysis found an average correlation between pornography use and
interpersonal satisfaction of −0.10. However, this relationship was moderated by gender (−0.13 for
men and −0.01 for women). Among men, the average correlation between pornography use and rela-
tionship satisfaction was −0.12, and the average correlation between pornography use and sexual sat-
isfaction was −0.14 (among women, these figures were −0.03 and 0.00, respectively). Although
correlations in the range of −0.12 to −0.14 would be considered “small”in relation to Cohen's
(1992) effect size guidelines, other factors (e.g., the commonality of predictors and severity of out-
comes) should also be considered when determining the importance of an effect of any particular
magnitude (Rosenthal, 1986; Rosnow & Rosenthal, 2003). Indeed, Hald (2015) posits that the small
(in magnitude) effect sizes commonly observed across the pornography research literature warrant
consideration as these effects may still have large social and practical repercussions if outcomes are
94 MILLER ET AL.
sufficiently adverse. This is especially relevant given the high prevalence of pornography use among
men (Hald, 2006).
Although Wright, Tokunaga, et al.'s (2017) meta-analysis suggests that pornography use is associated
with sexual and relationship satisfaction (at least among men), it tells us little about the causal direction of
these associations. Some authors (Campbell & Kohut, 2017; Kohut, Fisher, & Campbell, 2017) are criti-
cal of assuming that pornography use causes sexual or relationship dissatisfaction, arguing that it is
equally plausible that relationship or sexual dissatisfaction could cause someone to seek out pornography.
Fortunately, some longitudinal studies are available to draw on. A three-wave study of Dutch adolescents
uncovered a reciprocal directional relationship between pornography use and sexual satisfaction (Peter &
Valkenburg, 2009). Later, Doornwaard et al. (2014), who also sampled Dutch adolescents, found earlier
pornography use to be predictive of later sexual dissatisfaction. Muusses, Kerkhof, and Finkenauer
(2015) found that, among newlywed couples, husbands' pornography use was bidirectionally related to
their relationship satisfaction. However, this study did not detect a relationship between husbands' pornog-
raphy use and sexual satisfaction in either direction. More recently, a large, nationally representative sam-
ple of married U.S. adults found that men's pornography use was predictive of self-reported marriage
quality at a 6-year follow up (Perry, 2016, 2018). In addition, there is some experimental evidence to indi-
cate that pornography exposure negatively impacts satisfaction with one's sexual partner's physical appear-
ance, sexual curiosity, and sexual performance (Zillmann & Bryant, 1988). Taken together, these studies
provide preliminary evidence of pornography use causing relationship and sexual dissatisfaction.
Wright, Tokunaga, et al.'s (2017) review highlights some assertions common to many of the theoretical
explanations for how pornography may negatively impact relationships: (a) pornography creates certain
expectations of sexual relationships, shaping what is considered normative and desirable; (b) these expecta-
tions are not met by “real-world”sexual partners; (c) this incongruence between what is expected and what
actually occurs within sexual relationships leads to sexual dissatisfaction; and (d) this sexual dissatisfaction
then negatively impacts relationship satisfaction. This kind of argument is consistent with many of the the-
oretical frameworks used within the pornography effects literature (e.g., sexual script theory, gender role
conflict theory, social comparison theory, cultivation theory; Wright, Tokunaga, et al., 2017).
There is some evidence for the first of these assertions. Certainly, it seems that pornography can
shape sexual scripts. For example, pornography use is associated with greater sexual permissiveness
(Braithwaite, Coulson, Keddington, & Fincham, 2015; Wright, 2013; Zillmann & Bryant, 1988), a
greater incidence of behaviors such as “hooking up”(Braithwaite et al., 2015), and believing women
to be more likely to engage in porn-like sex in particular social situations (Miller, McBain, &
Raggatt, 2018). Perhaps more directly in support of assertion one, Morgan (2011) found that men's
pornography use was positively associated with a preference for the types of sexual practices fre-
quently depicted in pornography across all three of the domains she measured: hot sex (e.g., trying
multiple positions), kinky sex (e.g., the use of sex toys), and sexual appearance (e.g., partner dressing
in lingerie). Furthermore, college men's pornography use has been found to be predictive of
requesting pornographic sex acts from sexual partners and conjuring pornographic images during sex
to maintain arousal (Sun, Bridges, Johnson, & Ezzell, 2016). Similarly, the frequency of pornography
use was directly predictive of preferring pornographic, to partnered, sexual excitement among a con-
venience sample of German men and women (Wright, Sun, Steffen, & Tokunaga, 2017).
A large qualitative study of partnered men and women's responses to open-ended questions
regarding the impact pornography has on romantic relationships (Kohut et al., 2017) also supports
the notion that pornography influences consumers' sexual norms and preferences. Although partici-
pants in the study most commonly reported that pornography use had had no negative impact on their
relationship, a relatively common theme to emerge among respondents (indeed, the most frequently
MILLER ET AL.95
reported negative effect) was that pornography creates unrealistic expectations in the sexual domain,
particularly around sexual appearance, performance, likes and dislikes, and the willingness of part-
ners to engage in various sexual behaviors. Furthermore, several participants in the study made
explicit links between their unrealistic expectations and a decreased interest in sex with their partner.
The fourth assertion (that feelings of sexual dissatisfaction undermine relationship satisfaction) is
supported by the large positive correlation between sexual and relationship satisfaction observed across
multiple studies (Bridges & Morokoff, 2011; Muusses et al., 2015; Poulsen et al., 2013; Szymanski &
Stewart-Richardson, 2014). However, some authors (Lambert, Negash, Stillman, Olmstead, & Fincham,
2012; Muusses et al., 2015; Perry, 2016; Wright, Tokunaga, et al., 2017) posit that pornography use has a
direct effect on relationship satisfaction irrespective of its influence on sexual satisfaction. Furthermore,
one longitudinal study (Byers, 2005) found sexual and relationship satisfaction to change concurrently,
rather than sexual dissatisfaction causing relationship dissatisfaction. Accordingly, pornography's associa-
tion with both sexual and relationship satisfaction is assessed in the current article.
To the authors' best knowledge, no study has formally assessed whether the relationship between
pornography use and sexual or relationship satisfaction is mediated by preference for porn-like sex.
That being said, Wright, Sun, et al.'s (2017) aforementioned path analysis did assess whether the rela-
tionship between pornography use and sexual satisfaction is mediated by a preference for porno-
graphic, over partnered, sexual excitement. However, we contend that a preference for pornographic,
over partnered, sexual excitement is distinct from (albeit related to) a preference for porn-like sex.
The former refers to preferring to be aroused by pornographic stimuli as opposed to real-world stim-
uli (e.g., imaging pornographic images while having sex with one's partner), whereas the latter relates
to interest in engaging in the kinds of sexual practices depicted in pornography with a sexual partner.
Wright, Sun, et al.'s (2017) study found support for a model in which pornography use results in per-
ceiving pornography to be a good source of sexual information, which in turn is associated with (a) a
greater preference for pornographic, over partnered, sexual excitement and (b) the devaluation of sex-
ual communication, both of which were related to sexual dissatisfaction in the path model.
Although the notion that pornography undermines sexual and relationship satisfaction by altering
sexual preferences has received much theoretical consideration, less attention has been paid to the
role of masturbation. This is despite the fact that men typically masturbate when consuming pornog-
raphy (Böhm, Franz, Dekker, & Matthiesen, 2014; Carvalheira, Træen, & Štulhofer, 2015). It is the
current authors' contention that pornography consumption may result in male porn users masturbating
more frequently than they otherwise would. We believe this frequent masturbation may negatively
impact male porn users' sexual and relationship satisfaction by undermining their sexual performance,
arousability, or sexual interest in their romantic partners. Our argument is based on a consideration of
the male sexual response cycle, particularly the postejaculatory refractory time (PERT) phenomenon.
PERT is the period following ejaculation during which erections and further ejaculation are inhibited
(Levin, 2009). Animal research suggests the existence of absolute PERT, during which erections and ejacu-
lation are entirely inhibited, and relative PERT, during which arousal is suppressed but still possible, espe-
cially in response to novel stimuli (e.g., a new partner or a new virtual partner in the form of pornography).
The exact cause of PERT among men is unknown. However, ejaculation has been shown to increase pro-
lactin (Brody & Krüger, 2006), a hormone that reduces sex drive (Krüger et al., 2003; Krüger, Haake,
Hartmann, Schedlowski, & Exton, 2002). Postejaculatory increases in oxytocin (Levin, 2003, 2009) and
serotonin (Levin, 2009; Turley & Rowland, 2013) have also been speculated to play a role in PERT. Fre-
quent masturbation (due to frequent pornography use) could undermine male porn users' sexual perfor-
mance, arousability, or partnered sexual interest by keeping these porn users in a near-continual state of
relative PERT, in which their arousal is suppressed. This process would likely reinforce itself if the porn
96 MILLER ET AL.
user is only able to become fully sexually aroused by novel sexual stimuli (such as pornography) as a result
of already being in a state of relative PERT.
There is some extant research to support the idea that frequent masturbation may undermine
men's arousal or partnered sexual interest. Daneback, Træen, and Månsson (2009) found solitary por-
nography use to be predictive of arousal problems in partnered men, and Træen and Daneback
(2013) found that, among their sample of Norwegian men, pornography use for the purposes of solo
masturbation was associated with relationship dissatisfaction. In another study, a strong positive rela-
tionship was observed between the frequency of viewing pornography and the frequency of mastur-
bation in a sample of men with decreased sexual desire (Carvalheira et al., 2015). The same study
found masturbation frequency to be associated with greater sexual boredom and less relationship inti-
macy. Several themes consistent with this line of thinking also emerged from Kohut et al.'s (2017)
qualitative study, including pornography use resulting in decreased arousal response and decreased
interest in sex with one's partner (but not decreased interest in pornography). Some participants in the
study also connected the use of pornography as an alternative outlet to sex to decreased interest in
sex with one's partner, for example, being uninterested in having sex with one's partner due to having
used pornography to masturbate earlier in the day.
There is also some evidence linking pornography use to sexual functioning issues, such as erectile
dysfunction (Landripet & Štulhofer, 2015). On the other hand, Prause and Pfaus (2015) found hours
per week spent watching pornography to be unrelated to erectile problems in men and actually pre-
dictive of increased desire for sex with one's partner. Furthermore, Internet pornography use was
directly associated with less sexual dysfunction in an online sample of men and women (Blais-
Lecours, Vaillancourt-Morel, Sabourin, & Godbout, 2016). It is difficult to put these findings into
context given the paucity of research in this area—although some authors argue that there is enough
preliminary evidence for frequent pornography use to be considered a cause of erectile problems
among young men (Park et al., 2016).
The current article assessed the following hypotheses and research question across two samples
of heterosexual
1
men:
Hypothesis 1 Consistent with past research, pornography use will be positively associated with a
preference for porn-like sex.
Hypothesis 2 Consistent with past research, pornography use will be negatively associated with
sexual and relationship satisfaction.
Research Question 1 Can a preference for porn-like sex or masturbation frequency account for the
associations between pornography use and sexual and relationship satisfaction?
2|STUDY 1
2.1 |Method
2.1.1 |Participants and procedure
Data for this study were taken from a larger online survey on the effects of pornography use.
2
The survey was open to all adult males. Participants were recruited through web sites that host psy-
chological studies (e.g., callforparticipants.com, lehmiller.com,
3
facebook.com/
MILLER ET AL.97
psychologyparticipantsresearchers, and socialpsychology.org) and from the student participant
pool at the authors' host institution. Student participants (45.7% of final sample) received course
credit in exchange for their participation, and nonstudent participants were entered into a prize
draw for a $50 gift voucher.
A total of 470 completed responses were obtained. Eleven cases were deleted due to duplicate
data. Nine cases were deleted due to missing data on key variables (e.g., frequency of pornography
use). A further three cases were deleted due to outlying data (see Data screening and analysis below),
leaving 447 participants. Of these participants, 326 self-identified as heterosexual. The demographic
characteristics of the sample are reported in Table 1.
2.1.2 |Measures
Demographics and background variables
Several demographic and background variables were assessed, including sexual orientation (hetero-
sexual, gay, bisexual, other), age, highest level of formal education (no university study, some under-
graduate study, undergraduate degree, some postgraduate study or postgraduate degree), and
relationship status (in a relationship, cohabiting; in a relationship, not cohabiting; not in a
TABLE 1 Demographic characteristics of samples
Study 1 Study 2
Variable Mean (SD) Mean (SD)
Age 27.63 (11.16) 46.76 (14.48)
Religiosity 3.29 (2.46) 3.90 (2.62)
Relationship length (in years)
a
6.88 (9.00) 17.08 (14.23)
n(%) n(%)
Highest level of formal education
No university study 78 (23.9) 180 (53.7)
Some undergraduate study 102 (31.3) 19 (5.7)
Undergraduate degree 84 (25.8) 71 (21.2)
Some postgraduate study/degree 61 (18.7) 65 (19.4)
Missing 1 (0.3) —
Country
Australia/New Zealand 137 (42.0) 335 (100)
Asia 65 (19.9) —
Europe 23 (7.1) —
United States 86 (26.4) —
North America, other 13 (4.00 —
Other 2 (0.6) —
Relationship status
In relationship, cohabiting 102 (31.3) 299 (89.3)
In relationship, not cohabiting 73 (22.4) 36 (10.7)
Not in relationship 151 (46.3) —
Is this a sexual relationship?
a
Yes 156 (89.1) 320 (95.5)
No 19 (10.9) 15 (4.5)
Note. N
Study 1
= 326, N
Study 2
= 335.
a
Limited to partnered men.
98 MILLER ET AL.
relationship). Length of relationship, if applicable, was measured in years and months. To assess reli-
giosity, participants were asked to respond to the statement “I am religious”on a 9-point scale, where
1=extremely inaccurate and 9 = extremely accurate.
Sexual preferences
Participants' sexual preferences were measured using an instrument designed by Morgan (2011). The
instrument consists of 15 Likert-type items with response options ranging from 1 = strongly disagree
to 5 = strongly agree. All items refer to the prompt “My ideal partner would…” The instrument
breaks into three subscales: hot sex (six items, e.g., “try different positions during sex”), kinky sex
(five items, e.g., “enjoy using sex toys or props”), and sexual appearance (four items, e.g., “dress in
sexy lingerie/underwear”). Scale items were chosen to reflect acts commonly depicted in pornogra-
phy based on the instrument author's review of content analyses of pornography. Thus, higher scores
on the subscales represent a greater preference for the kinds of sexual acts commonly depicted in por-
nography. In the current study, Cronbach's alphas for the hot sex, kinky sex, and sexual appearance
subscales were 0.82, 0.74, and 0.68, respectively. The latter alpha falls slightly below the generally
accepted cut-off value of 0.70. This subscale was the shortest of the three (four items), and alphas are
generally lower for shorter scales (Widaman, Little, Preacher, & Sawalani, 2011).
Sexual and relationship satisfaction
Sexual satisfaction and relationship satisfaction were measured using the Global Measure of Sexual
Satisfaction and the Global Measure of Relationship Satisfaction (Lawrance & Byers, 1998). Partici-
pants were asked to rate their sexual relationship and overall relationship across three 7-point bipolar
scales: good-bad, satisfying-unsatisfying, and valuable-worthless. Items were summed to give an
overall sexual satisfaction score (α= 0.94) and an overall relationship satisfaction score (α= 0.92),
with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction. Relationship satisfaction items were only presented
to those who indicated they were either in a relationship and cohabiting with their partner or in a rela-
tionship but not cohabiting (n= 175). Sexual satisfaction items were only presented to partnered
men who indicated that they were in a sexual relationship (n= 156).
Pornography use
In the study, pornography was defined for participants as “Any kind of material that aims to create or
enhance sexual feelings or thoughts in the audience and, at the same time contains: (a) explicit depic-
tions of genitals, and/or (b) clear and explicit depictions of sexual acts such as vaginal intercourse,
anal intercourse, oral sex, masturbation etc.”Participants were asked to indicate if they had viewed
pornography ever and in the past 6 months. Participants who had were then asked about the fre-
quency of their pornography use over the last 6 months. This was assessed using an 8-point scale
(where 1 = less than monthly,2=monthly,3=fortnightly,4=1–2 times per week,5=3–4 times
per week,6=5–6 times per week,7=daily, and 8 = more than once a day). The same response
format was used to assess frequency of masturbation using pornography and frequency of masturba-
tion without the use of pornography over the past 6 months. Participants who indicated that they had
not viewed pornography in the previous 6 months were assigned a value of zero for frequency of por-
nography use and frequency of masturbation using pornography. Frequency of masturbation using
pornography and frequency of masturbation without pornography were summed to produce an over-
all frequency of masturbation score.
To explore the context of participants' pornography use, they were also asked whether they view
pornography more or less often when in a relationship compared to when single (ranging from
MILLER ET AL.99
1=much less often to 5 = much more often) and whether, and how commonly, they view pornogra-
phy with a sexual partner (response options ranged from never to 91–100% of the time I view
pornography).
2.2 |Data screening and analysis
Missing data analysis was performed on pertinent scale items. All scale items (e.g., items on the
Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction) were missing fewer than 2% of responses. This degree of
“missingness”is unlikely to bias data (Graham, 2009). Expectation maximization was used to obtain
estimates for missing scale item values. Some missing responses (7.7%) were observed for frequency
of masturbation without the use of pornography. Pairwise deletion was utilized for analyses involving
masturbation frequency scores. Mahalanobis distances were generated to screen for multivariate out-
liers. Three multivariate outliers were identified and deleted (using an αof 0.001; Tabachnick &
Fiddel, 2013).
2.3 |Results
2.3.1 |Pornography use
Over 90% of the total sample reported having seen pornography at some point (96.9%) and in the past
6 months (90.8%). Among those who had seen pornography in the past 6 months, median frequency
of pornography use over the past 6 months was 3–4 times per week. Median frequency of masturba-
tion using pornography was also 3–4 times per week. Median frequency of masturbation without por-
nography was fortnightly.
Almost half (51.9%) of participants reported that, when in a relationship, they view pornography
less often, or much less often, compared to when they are single; 33.7% indicated that their pornogra-
phy viewing frequency does not change when in a relationship; and 14.4% reported viewing pornog-
raphy more often, or much more often, when in a relationship. Relationship status groups (in a
relationship, cohabiting; in a relationship, not cohabiting; not in a relationship) were also compared
on pornography use frequency and masturbation frequency using analysis of variance. These groups
were not found to significantly differ in terms of frequency of pornography use, F(2, 323) = 1.55,
p= 0.214, η
2
= 0.01. Similarly, relationship status groups did not differ in terms of frequency of
masturbation, F(2, 291) = 0.87 p= 0.419, η
2
= 0.01.
Partnered pornography use was rare. Over half (54.0%) of participants indicated that they had
never viewed pornography with a sexual partner. A further 34.0% reported viewing pornography with
a sexual partner very rarely (1–10% of the occasions they view pornography). Only 1.3% of partici-
pants reported exclusive, or almost exclusive (>90% of the occasions they view pornography), par-
tnered pornography use.
2.3.2 |Hypotheses 1 and 2
Table 2 presents Pearson correlation coefficients between study variables among the heterosexual
men sampled (all tests were one-tailed). Consistent with Hypothesis 1, pornography use was signifi-
cantly positively associated with all three sexual preferences subscales: hot sex, kinky sex, and sexual
appearance. The test of Hypothesis 2 was mixed. Pornography use frequency was significantly nega-
tively associated with sexual satisfaction. However, pornography use frequency was orthogonal to
relationship satisfaction.
100 MILLER ET AL.
2.3.3 |Research question 1
The zero-order correlations reported in Table 2 were used to probe the primary research question. If
the previously observed negative associations between pornography use and sexual and relationship
satisfaction are the result of an increased preference for porn-like sex, we would expect to observe a
negative correlation between sexual preference scores and sexual and relationship satisfaction. How-
ever, none of the sexual preferences subscales (hot sex, kinky sex, and sexual appearance) showed a
significant negative correlation with sexual or relationship satisfaction.
Similarly, if the negative associations between pornography use and sexual and relationship satis-
faction are driven primarily by frequent masturbation, we would expect masturbation frequency to be
negatively associated with sexual and relationship satisfaction. We would also expect any significant
relationship between pornography use frequency and sexual or relationship satisfaction to diminish
once masturbation frequency is controlled for. Masturbation frequency did in fact show a significant
negative correlation with sexual satisfaction. Furthermore, the partial correlation between pornogra-
phy use frequency and sexual satisfaction, controlling for masturbation frequency, was nonsignifi-
cant, r(141) = −0.10, p= 0.124, in contrast to the significant zero-order correlation between
pornography use frequency and sexual satisfaction, r(152) = −0.18, p= 0.012. However, masturba-
tion frequency was orthogonal to relationship satisfaction.
2.4 |Summary
Consistent with past research, a significant negative association was observed between the frequency
of pornography use and sexual satisfaction. However, contrary to expectations, pornography use was
unrelated to relationship satisfaction among the sample.
A major goal of this study was to determine if preference for porn-like sex or masturbation fre-
quency can account for the association between pornography use and sexual and relationship satisfac-
tion. Although pornography use frequency was associated with a greater preference for the kinds of
sexual practices commonly depicted in pornography, this was unrelated to sexual or relationship sat-
isfaction among the sample. Conversely, masturbation frequency was significantly negatively associ-
ated with sexual satisfaction (but orthogonal to relationship satisfaction). In addition, the relationship
between pornography use frequency and sexual satisfaction appeared to diminish once masturbation
frequency was controlled for.
One limitation of this study is its use of a convenience sample. Self-selection may have biased
the sample to be unrepresentatively sexually liberal. Furthermore, the average age of the sample was
relatively young. Both these factors may impact the effect of pornography on sexual and relationship
satisfaction. For example, younger, sexually liberal men would be more likely to have younger,
TABLE 2 Correlations, means, and SDs for Study 1 variables
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Mean (SD)
1. Porn use frequency —0.64*** 0.36*** 0.36*** 0.24** −0.18* −0.07 4.47 (2.25)
2. Masturbation frequency —0.20*** 0.21*** 0.05 −0.17* −0.05 7.64 (2.92)
3. Hot sex —0.57*** 0.68*** −0.04 0.03 23.97 (3.74)
4. Kinky sex —0.60*** −0.03 0.02 15.82 (3.96)
5. Sexual appearance —−0.02 >0.01 14.37 (2.88)
6. Sexual satisfaction —0.59*** 17.84 (3.53)
7. Relationship satisfaction —18.27 (3.54)
Note. df = 142–324; all tests one-tailed.
*p< 0.05.; **p< 0.01.; ***p< 0.001.
MILLER ET AL.101
sexually liberal partners, and younger, sexually liberal partners may be more likely to meet porn-
driven sexual preferences (hence the lack of a negative association between pornographic sexual pref-
erences and sexual satisfaction). Another possible limitation of the study is the use of Morgan's
(2011) sexual preference scale. Although scale items were selected to reflect sexual practices com-
monly depicted in pornography, it could be argued that the instrument taps desire for sexual variety
more generally as opposed to desire for pornographic sex specifically. To account for these limita-
tions, the hypotheses and research question were assessed in a second, more representative sample of
partnered men, utilizing a more direct measure of preference for pornographic sex in addition to Mor-
gan's (2011) sexual preferences scale.
3|STUDY 2
3.1 |Measures
3.1.1 |Participants and procedure
A commercial survey panel (SurveyGizmo) was utilized to collect a sample of Australian men cur-
rently in romantic relationships. Participants received cash incentives for their participation. Time
spent on the survey was recorded. Participants who completed the survey too quickly were iteratively
disqualified, as were duplicate responses (as indicated by IP address), until 400 responses were
obtained. Twenty-two participants were deleted for data quality reasons (see Data screening and anal-
ysis below). Of the remaining 378 participants, 88.6% self-identified as heterosexual, leaving a final
Nof 335. The demographic characteristics of the final sample are reported in Table 1.
3.1.2 |Measures
Demographics and background variables
The same demographic and background variables were measured as in Study 1.
Sexual preferences
As in Study 1, Morgan's (2011) instrument was used to measure participants' preferences for the sex-
ual acts commonly depicted in pornography. Scores on the three subscales—hot sex, kinky sex, and
sexual appearance—were all found to have acceptable internal reliability (Cronbach's α= 0.83, 0.80,
and 0.72, respectively). Correlations between subscales were positive and large (correlations ranged
from 0.54 to 0.66, see Table 3). Accordingly, in the analysis of the primary research question, sub-
scale scores were summed to produce an overall preference for porn-like sex score, with higher
values indicating a greater preference for the sexual practices depicted in pornography (Cronbach's
α= 0.90 for this composite scale). In addition, participants' preference for porn-like sex was assessed
more directly with the following original item: “I would like the sex I have in real-life to be like the
sex in pornography.”Response options ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.
Sexual and relationship satisfaction
Once again, the Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction and the Global Measure of Relationship Satis-
faction (Lawrance & Byers, 1998) were utilized. Scores on these scales showed good internal reliabil-
ity (Cronbach's α= 0.94 and 0.88, respectively).
102 MILLER ET AL.
TABLE 3 Correlations, means, and SDs for Study 2 variables
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Mean (SD)
1. Porn use freq. —0.81*** 0.35*** 0.51*** 0.45*** 0.42*** −0.10* −0.19*** −0.33*** 0.04 −0.39*** 2.52 (2.22)
2. Masturbation freq. —0.36*** 0.51*** 0.45*** 0.34*** −0.15** −0.22*** −0.29*** −0.05 −0.39*** 1.93 (1.71)
3. Hot sex —0.54*** 0.66*** 0.37*** 0.19*** 0.05 −0.24*** −0.02 −0.26*** 21.98 (4.60)
4. Kinky sex —0.66*** 0.49*** −0.01 −0.13** −0.26*** 0.01 −0.30*** 13.93 (4.52)
5. Sex appearance —0.40*** 0.11* −0.08 −0.33*** −0.01 −0.39*** 13.56 (3.33)
6. Single-item, preference for porn-like sex —0.00 −0.14** −0.14** 0.14** −0.16** 3.85 (1.70)
7. Sex satisfaction —0.61*** −0.19*** 0.09 −0.11* 16.17 (4.36)
8. Relationship satisfaction —0.08 −0.07 0.09 18.36 (2.84)
9. Relationship length —−0.09 0.69*** 17.08 (14.22)
10. Religiosity —−0.06 3.90 (2.62)
11. Age —46.76 (14.48)
Note. df = 317–333; all tests are one-tailed; Spearman correlations used in place of Pearson correlations due to nonnormal distribution of pornography use frequency.
*p< 0.05.; **p< 0.01.; ***p< 0.001.
MILLER ET AL.103
Pornography use
The same approach as in Study 1 was taken to assess frequency of pornography use and masturbation
frequency over the past 6 months.
4
3.2 |Data screening and analysis
Mahalanobis distance figures were generated to screen for multivariate outliers. Eleven multivariate
outliers were detected and deleted (using an αof 0.001; Tabachnick & Fiddel, 2013). A further
11 participants were deleted for impossible or inconsistent responses (e.g., if reported frequency of
masturbation using pornography exceeded reported frequency of pornography use). Missing data
were minimal in the second sample (<1% for all variables). Expectation maximization was used to
obtain estimates for missing sexual preference scale items.
Mediation analysis was used to assess the primary research question. This was carried out via the
PROCESS (version 3.0) macro for IBM's SPSS (Hayes, 2018). PROCESS estimates indirect effects
and then bootstraps confidence intervals around these point estimates. The indirect effect is signifi-
cant if this confidence interval band does not contain zero. Models with multiple mediators were
specified (see below). Severe collinearity between predictors in multiple mediator models can affect
sampling variance and impact the width of confidence intervals (Hayes, 2018). Accordingly, variance
inflation factor (VIF) values were generated (entering all predictors and control variables) to assess
for collinearity. VIF values were small (<2.5 for all predictors), falling well below the commonly rec-
ommended value of 10 and also the more conservative cut-off value of 5 (Montgomery, Peck, & Vin-
ing, 2012).
3.3 |Results
3.3.1 |Pornography use
Just over two-thirds (70.7%) of the sample reported having viewed pornography in the last 6 months.
Among those who had viewed pornography in the previous 6 months, median frequency of pornogra-
phy use was 1–2 times per week. Around two-thirds (63.0%) of the sample reported having mastur-
bated using pornography in the previous 6 months. Among those who had, median frequency of
masturbation using pornography was 1–2 times per week. A total of 66% of participants reported
having masturbated without pornography in the previous 6 months. Among this group, median fre-
quency of masturbation without pornography was monthly.
3.3.2 |Hypotheses 1 and 2
Table 3 presents correlations between continuous study variables. As pornography use frequency was
severely positively skewed (due to the large number of participants who indicated that they had not
accessed pornography in the previous 6 months), Spearman correlation coefficients are reported in
place of Pearson correlation coefficients. All tests were one-tailed.
As can be seen, consistent with Hypothesis 1, frequency of pornography use was significantly
positively associated with all three sexual preferences subscales: hot sex, kinky sex, and sexual
appearance. Frequency of pornography use also showed a significant positive association with the
single-item measure of preference for porn-like sex.
In line with Hypothesis 2, the associations between frequency of pornography use and sexual sat-
isfaction and frequency of pornography use and relationship satisfaction were negative and
significant.
104 MILLER ET AL.
3.3.3 |Research Question 1
The primary research question asks whether preference for porn-like sex or masturbation frequency
can account for pornography's association with sexual and relation dissatisfaction. To assess this, two
parallel multiple mediator models were run: the first assessing the relationship between pornography
use frequency and sexual satisfaction and the second assessing the relationship between pornography
use frequency and relationship satisfaction. In both models, three mediators were specified: masturba-
tion frequency, responses on the single-item pornographic sexual preference index, and responses on
the multi-item pornographic sexual preference index (which, as discussed above, was calculated by
summing hot sex, kinky sex, and sexual appearance scores). Multiple mediator models are most use-
ful when mediators are correlated, as they quantify the effect of each mediator holding constant the
effect of the other mediators (Hayes, 2018).
Past research suggests several possible confounds of the relationships being tested. Relationship
length has been found to negatively correlate with sexual satisfaction (Schmiedeberg & Schröder,
2016), and research suggests that religiosity may impact the nature of the association between por-
nography use and relational outcomes (Perry & Whitehead, 2018). In addition, age was found to cor-
relate with a number of the model predictors in the preliminary analysis (Table 3). Accordingly,
relationship length, religiosity, and age were entered into the models as control variables.
Due to the severe skew in frequency of pornography use, this variable was trichotomized into
three roughly equal groups: a no consumption group (n= 98), consisting of those who had not
viewed pornography in the past 6 months; a low consumption group (n= 108), consisting of those
who had consumed pornography in the past 6 months but did so less than weekly; and a high con-
sumption group (n= 129), composed of those who consumed pornography at least weekly over the
past 6 months. This trichotomized consumption variable was treated as categorical in PROCESS.
Given the ordinal nature of the variable, sequential group coding was utilized (Hayes & Montoya,
2017; Hayes & Preacher, 2014). Under this coding system, “relative direct and indirect effects can be
interpreted as the effects of membership in one group relative to the group one step sequentially
lower in the ordered system”(Hayes & Preacher, 2014, p. S9). That is, the indirect effect of low por-
nography use on sexual or relationship satisfaction would be the indirect effect of low pornography
use relative to no pornography use. Similarly, the indirect effect of high pornography use on satisfac-
tion would be the indirect effect relative to low pornography use (rather than no pornography use, as
would be the case if using indicator group coding). Trichotomizing pornography use frequency and
then utilizing sequential coding in this way is compatible with Wright, Bridges, Sun, Ezzell, and
Johnson's (2018) argument that the association between pornography use and sexual satisfaction is a
curvilinear relationship in which pornography use has little to no negative impact on sexual satisfac-
tion until a viewing threshold is reached (around monthly in the study), with additional increases in
viewing frequency beyond this threshold resulting in disproportionally larger negative effects. A con-
ceptual diagram of the models tested is presented in Figure 1.
Relative direct and indirect effects for each model are reported in Table 4. In terms of the model
predicting sexual satisfaction, the relative indirect effects of pornography use on sexual satisfaction
through masturbation frequency were both negative and significant, meaning that, among the sample,
greater pornography use was associated with greater masturbation frequency (a
11
= 0.95, p< 0.001;
a
21
= 1.84, p< 0.001), which in turn was associated with lower sexual satisfaction (b
1
=−0.49,
p= 0.023). The relative indirect effects of pornography use on sexual satisfaction through the multi-
item sexual preferences scale were both significant. However, these effects were in the positive direc-
tion. Pornography use was associated with a more pronounced preference for the kinds of sexual acts
depicted in pornography (a
13
= 3.85, p= 0.006; a
23
= 5.28, p< 0.001), which in turn was associ-
ated with greater sexual satisfaction (b
3
= 0.08, p= 0.003). The single-item sexual preference
MILLER ET AL.105
measure was not found to mediate the relationship between pornography use and sexual satisfaction.
The omnibus direct effect of pornography use on sexual satisfaction was nonsignificant, ΔR
2
= 0.02,
F(2, 311) = 2.64, p= 0.073, whereas the omnibus total effect was significant, ΔR
2
= 0.04, F
(2, 314) = 5.95, p= 0.003. The model accounted for 9.67% of the variance in sexual satisfaction.
Neither of the sexual preference scales was found to mediate the relationship between pornogra-
phy use and relationship satisfaction. As in the first model, the relative indirect effects of pornogra-
phy use on relationship satisfaction through masturbation frequency were both negative and
significant. Again, greater pornography use was associated with more frequent masturbation
(a
11
= 1.00, p< 0.001; a
12
= 1.82, p< 0.001), which in turn was predictive of lower relationship
satisfaction (b
1
=−0.39, p= 0.005). Both the omnibus direct effect, ΔR
2
= 0.02, F(2, 326) = 4.17,
p= 0.016, and total effect, ΔR
2
= 0.05, F(2, 329) = 8.42, p< 0.001, were significant. The model
accounted for 8.98% of the variance in relationship satisfaction.
It is possible that the single-item sexual preference measure was not found to mediate the relation-
ships between pornography use and sexual or relationship satisfaction due to the simultaneous inclu-
sion of the multi-item sexual preference scale in the models. Accordingly, the models were rerun
excluding the multi-item sexual preferences measure. However, the single-item sexual preference
measure was still not found to be a significant mediator in either model.
3.4 |Summary
Pornography use was positively correlated with the preference for the kinds of sexual practices com-
monly depicted in pornography (as measured by the three sexual preference subscales) among the
sample of heterosexual Australian men in romantic relationships. Furthermore, pornography use was
positively associated with the single-item sexual preference measure (“I would like the sex I have in
real-life to be like the sex in pornography”). As expected, a significant negative correlation was
M3
Multi-Item Sex
Pref. Measure
M1
Masturbation
Frequency
M2
Single-Item Sex
Pref. Measure
Y
Sex Satisfaction/
Relationship Satisfaction
D1
Low Use Relative to
No Use
D2
High Use Relative to
Low Use
X
c’2
c’1
b3
b1
b2
a23
a11
a13
a21
a12
a22
FIGURE 1 Conceptual diagram for models assessing the effect of pornography use on sexual satisfaction (model 1) and
relationship satisfaction (model 2) through the three mediators. The models controlled for age, relationship length, and
religiosity (these variables have been omitted from the figure to save space)
106 MILLER ET AL.
TABLE 4 Relative total, direct, and indirect effects (and their 95% confidence intervals) for multiple mediator models assessing the effect of pornography use frequency on sexual
satisfaction (Model 1) and relationship satisfaction (Model 2), controlling for age, relationship length, and religiosity
Model Total effect Direct effect
Indirect effect: Masturbation
frequency
Indirect effect: Single-item
sexual preference
Indirect effect: Multi-item
sexual preference
Model 1: Porn use !sexual satisfaction
Low relative to no use −1.87 [−3.13, −0.61] −1.55 [−2.89, −0.22] −0.47 [−0.92, −0.07] −0.17 [−0.57, 0.17] 0.32 [0.06, 0.72]
High relative to low use −0.15 [−1.28, 0.97] 0.40 [−0.95, 1.57] −0.91 [−1.72, −0.14] −0.09 [−0.34, 0.09] 0.44 [0.11, 0.88]
Model 2: Porn use !relationship satisfaction
Low relative to no use −1.51 [−2.31, −0.72] −1.12 [−1.96, −0.27] −0.39 [−0.74, −0.08] −0.17 [−0.41, 0.04] 0.16 [−0.01, 0.36]
High relative to low use 0.08 [−0.64, 0.80] 0.72 [−0.14, 1.68] −0.71 [−1.33, −0.15] −0.10 [−0.28, 0.02] 0.17 [−0.01, 0.41]
Note. N
Model 1
= 320, N
Model 2
= 335; 95% confidence intervals based on 5,000 resamples; significant effects in bold.
MILLER ET AL.107
observed between pornography use and sexual satisfaction. Unlike in Study 1, pornography use was
also negatively predictive of relationship satisfaction.
The data were not consistent with the idea that pornography use has a negative indirect effect on
sexual or relationship satisfaction through its influence on sexual preferences when controlling for
the other model variables. Interestingly, the indirect effect of pornography use on sexual satisfaction
through the multi-item sexual preference measure was found to be positive. Conversely, pornography
use was found to have a significant indirect effect on both sexual and relationship satisfaction through
masturbation frequency when controlling for the other model variables.
4|DISCUSSION
This research utilized two samples of heterosexual men to explore the nature of the associations
between pornography use, preference for porn-like sex, masturbation, and sexual and relationship sat-
isfaction. Consistent with a recent meta-analysis (Wright, Tokunaga, et al., 2017), pornography use
showed a modest negative association with sexual satisfaction in both studies. The findings around
relationship satisfaction were mixed. Pornography use was negatively associated with relationship
satisfaction in Study 2 but unrelated to relationship satisfaction in Study 1. The reason for this dis-
crepancy is unclear. However, the first sample tended to skew younger; thus, an age effect may be at
play. This may also explain discrepancies in the frequency of pornography use among the two sam-
ples. Indeed, an analysis utilizing nationally representative survey data from the United States sug-
gests that pornography use does diminish with age (Price, Patterson, Regnerus, & Walley, 2016).
Consistent with Morgan's (2011) findings, frequency of pornography use was moderately to
highly positively correlated with a preference for the sexual acts commonly depicted in pornography
in both studies. Furthermore, a greater frequency of pornography use was predictive of greater agree-
ment with the statement “I would like the sex I have in real-life to be like the sex in pornography.”
Adopting a sexual script perspective (Wright & Bae, 2016), it could be argued that these findings
indicate that pornography influences men's perceptions of what is normal and desirable within a sex-
ual relationship. However, due to the correlational study design, it is not possible to rule out other
explanations (e.g., preference for porn-like sex causing pornography use or this relationship being the
result of an unmeasured third variable such as sexual liberalism).
As outlined in the Introduction, it has been argued that pornography use negatively impacts sex-
ual satisfaction by creating unrealistic expectations of sexual relationships (expectations that then go
unmet). Both sets of data were inconsistent with the idea that pornography use reduces sexual satis-
faction in this way. In Study 1, scores on the three pornographic sexual preference subscales (hot sex,
kinky sex, and sexual appearance) were unrelated to sexual and relationship satisfaction. In Study
2, neither measure of preference for porn-like sex were found to negatively mediate the relationships
between pornography use frequency and sexual or relationship satisfaction. In fact, pornography use
was found to have a significant positive indirect effect on sexual satisfaction through the multi-item
sexual preference measure. This unexpected finding raises an important question: Why did the indi-
rect effect of pornography use on sexual satisfaction differ when mediated via the multi-item and
single-item measure of preference for porn-like sex when, ostensibly, these instruments both measure
desire for pornographic sex? One possible explanation is that the single-item sexual preferences scale
(“I would like the sex I have in real-life to be like the sex in pornography”) more closely assesses
preference for porn-like sex over real-world sex, whereas high scores on Morgan's (2011) scale do
not necessarily indicate a disinterest in real-world sex. Morgan's (2011) scale assesses interest in vari-
ous sexual activities frequently depicted in pornography. In this way, it may tap preference for sexual
108 MILLER ET AL.
variety generally, in addition to measuring interest in porn-like sex. It is worth noting that, although
sexual preference subscales scores were all positively correlated with the single-item sexual prefer-
ence measure, these correlations were not exceedingly large, suggesting that the measures may be
assessing related, but distinct, constructs. With this distinction between measures in mind, the finding
that pornography use had a positive indirect effect on sexual satisfaction through the multi-item sex-
ual preferences scale is more readily understandable. It seems plausible that pornography use could
bolster interest in a greater variety of sexual behaviors and that this may, in turn, increase sexual sat-
isfaction (e.g., if new sexual practices are incorporated into one's sexual relationship in a way that is
enjoyable for both partners). In support of this, qualitative research indicates that many porn users
believe that pornography has been a valuable source of sexual ideas and has contributed positively to
sexual experimentation within their relationships (Kohut et al., 2017).
These issues aside, neither study found evidence for the notion that pornography use undermines
sexual satisfaction by promoting a preference for porn-like sex. There are several possible explana-
tions for this. Porn users may desire their real-world sex to be more like the sex depicted in pornogra-
phy but not feel any less sexually satisfied if their porn-induced sexual preferences are not met by
their partners (perhaps because they recognize that pornography is a fantasy). Alternatively, it may
be the case that most porn users' romantic partners are accommodating of porn-induced sexual prefer-
ences. As partner acceptance of one's sexual preferences was not measured, this cannot be assessed.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, pornography use frequency was highly positively correlated with mastur-
bation frequency in both samples, suggesting that pornography is commonly used for masturbation—
a finding consistent with existing research (Böhm et al., 2014; Carvalheira et al., 2015). A major goal
of this research was to understand the degree to which masturbation may drive the negative associa-
tions between pornography use and sexual and relationship satisfaction.
In the Introduction, we suggested that access to pornography allows men to masturbate more fre-
quently than they otherwise would, that frequent masturbation may partially suppress arousal toward
one's partner (due to postejaculatory refractory effects), and that this suppression of arousal may
result in sexual or relationship dissatisfaction. This argument would be undermined if it was found
that the average porn user consumes pornography primarily when partnered sex is unavailable. How-
ever, in Study 1, relationship status groups were not found to differ in terms of pornography use fre-
quency or masturbation frequency. Furthermore, roughly half of participants indicated that, when in a
relationship, they sustain the same level of pornography use or increase their usage of pornography.
The results of Study 1 are inconsistent with the idea that men only use pornography when partnered
sex is unavailable. Rather, it appears that many men use pornography (and, by extension, masturbate)
in addition to having sex with their partners.
Consistent with the notion that frequent masturbation undermines sexual satisfaction, masturba-
tion frequency was significantly negatively associated with sexual satisfaction in Study 1. Further-
more, the relationship between pornography use frequency and sexual satisfaction diminished once
masturbation frequency was controlled for. Study 2 data lend more credence to the notion that mas-
turbation plays an integral role in the relationships between pornography use and sexual and relation-
ship satisfaction. The data were consistent with a model in which pornography use undermines
sexual and relationship satisfaction through increased masturbation frequency. However, it should be
acknowledged that, due to the cross-sectional study design, direction of causation cannot be deter-
mined with certainty. It is also possible that sexual or relationship dissatisfaction causes an increase
in solitary masturbation, which then causes men to seek out pornography to facilitate this masturba-
tion. Alternatively, more frequent masturbation may result in more frequent pornography use while
also independently negatively impacting sexual and relationship satisfaction. Nonetheless, we feel
MILLER ET AL.109
that the findings of Studies 1 and 2, when considered alongside extant research connecting masturba-
tion frequency to poorer sexual arousal (see Introduction), provide enough evidence to warrant
exploring the relationship between pornography use, frequency of masturbation, and sexual and rela-
tionship satisfaction in a longitudinal context.
Four limitations should be considered when parsing the research findings. First, the use of a con-
venience sample for Study 1 may have introduced self-selection bias in a way that undermined the
generalizability of results. A commercial panel service was utilized in the second study to avoid this
self-selection problem as much as possible. It should be noted that findings were largely consistent
between Studies 1 and 2.
Second, as mentioned above, the use of a cross-sectional research design undermined our ability
to be definitive regarding the direction of causation. That being said, the hypotheses tested were con-
ceptualized based on a literature that does include longitudinal research designs.
Third, several newly identified moderators and mediators of the relationship between pornogra-
phy use and relational outcomes were not controlled for in the present research. For example, Wright,
Sun, et al.'s (2017) recent path analysis underscores the role that perceiving pornography to be a valid
source of sexual information plays in the relationship between pornography use and sexual dissatis-
faction, and research conducted by Blais-Lecours et al. (2016) highlights the importance of pornogra-
phy use-related distress to sexual satisfaction. Work by Perry (2018) suggests that one's opinion on
the morality of pornography may moderate the relationship between pornography use and relation-
ship quality, and as mentioned above, it is possible that the degree to which one's sexual partner is
accommodating of one's sexual preferences may act to moderate the indirect effect of pornography
use on sexual satisfaction through preference for porn-like sex.
Fourth, frequency of pornography use was assessed in a way that did not separate solitary pornog-
raphy use from use with one's romantic partner. Campbell and Kohut (2017) have called for investiga-
tors to pay greater attention to the context of pornography use within relationships. This stems from a
growing body of research suggesting that, unlike solitary pornography use, coupled pornography use
may not be associated with poorer relational outcomes (Kohut, Balzarini, Fisher, & Campbell, 2018;
Maddox, Rhoades, & Markman, 2011; Træen & Daneback, 2013; Willoughby, Carroll, Busby, &
Brown, 2016; Yucel & Gassanov, 2010). However, the consistent findings around the sizeable gender
gap in the use of pornography (see Hald, 2006; Petersen & Hyde, 2010) would suggest that partnered
pornography use is relatively uncommon, at least when compared to men's solitary use. Furthermore, a
recent survey of heterosexual couples (Carroll, Busby, Willoughby, & Brown, 2017) found that women
commonly reported couple-based pornography use, whereas men were much more likely to report
always viewing pornography alone. In line with these findings, in Study 1, partnered pornography use
was found to be relatively rare (less than 2% of the sample indicated that they always, or almost always,
view pornography with a sexual partner). Nonetheless, future studies may include more detailed mea-
sures of pornography use to enable researchers to separate the effects of partnered and solitary use. Fur-
thermore, for the reasons discussed above, future studies may also seek to measure perceptions of
pornography as a source of sexual information, pornography use-related distress, perceptions of the
morality of pornography, and partner acceptance of one's sexual preferences.
Despite these limitations, the studies provide researchers and clinicians some evidence as to the
mechanisms underpinning pornography's impact on sexual and relationship dissatisfaction. Although
the data are entirely consistent with the idea that pornography promotes a desire to engage in the
kinds of sexual practices commonly depicted in pornography, this does not appear to result in feel-
ings of sexual or relationship dissatisfaction. In fact, this may have a positive impact on sexual rela-
tionships by promoting an interest in a diversity of sexual activities. Conversely, the data suggest that
110 MILLER ET AL.
frequent masturbation plays a key role in the association between pornography use and sexual and
relationship dissatisfaction.
ENDNOTES
1
The majority of previous studies in this area focus on heterosexual individuals or heterosexual relational dyads. It may be the
case that pornography use differently impacts the romantic relationships of gay and lesbian people. As this paper wishes to
investigate the nature of the previously observed associations between pornography use and sexual and relationship satisfac-
tion, we have chosen to focus exclusively on self-identified heterosexual men. Readers who are interested in findings regarding
the gay and bisexual men sampled are welcome to contact the first author.
2
A discussion of the sample's self-perceptions around the effects of their pornography use can be found in Miller, Hald, and
Kidd (2018).
3
A total of 45 participants indicated that they accessed the study via lehmiller.com, a blog dedicated to communicating sex
research to the general public.
4
In Study 1, participants were not given an option to indicate that they had not masturbated without pornography in the previ-
ous 6 months (the lowest response option was less than monthly). This was corrected in the second study. Accordingly, mastur-
bation frequency scores cannot be directly compared across studies.
ORCID
Dan J. Miller https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3230-2631
Kerry A. McBain https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3277-2887
Wendy W. Li https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0056-6130
REFERENCES
Blais-Lecours, S., Vaillancourt-Morel, M. P., Sabourin, S., & Godbout, N. (2016). Cyberpornography: Time use, perceived addiction,
sexual functioning, and sexual satisfaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking,19, 649–655. https://doi.org/10.
1089/cyber.2016.0364
Böhm, M., Franz, P., Dekker, A., & Matthiesen, S. (2014). Desire and dilemma: Gender differences in German students' consumption
of pornography. Porn Studies,2,76–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/23268743.2014.984923
Braithwaite, S. R., Coulson, G., Keddington, K., & Fincham, F. D. (2015). The influence of pornography on sexual scripts and hooking
up among emerging adults in college. Archives of Sexual Behavior,44, 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0351-x
Bridges, A. J., & Morokoff, P. J. (2011). Sexual media use and relational satisfaction in heterosexual couples. Personal Relationships,
18, 562–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01328.x
Brody, S., & Krüger, T. H. (2006). The post-orgasmic prolactin increase following intercourse is greater than following masturbation
and suggests greater satiety. Biological Psychology,71, 312–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2005.06.008
Byers, E. S. (2005). Relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction: A longitudinal study of individuals in long-term relationships.
Journal of Sex Research,42, 113–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490509552264
Campbell, L., & Kohut, T. (2017). The use and effects of pornography in romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology,13,
6–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.004
Carroll, J. S., Busby, D. M., Willoughby, B. J., & Brown, C. C. (2017). The porn gap: Differences in men's and women's pornography
patterns in couple relationships. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy,16, 146–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332691.2016.
1238796
Carvalheira, A., Træen, B., & Štulhofer, A. (2015). Masturbation and pornography use among coupled heterosexual men with
decreased sexual desire: How many roles of masturbation? Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy,41, 626–635. https://doi.org/10.
1080/0092623X.2014.958790
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin,112, 155–159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
Daneback, K., Træen, B., & Månsson, S. A. (2009). Use of pornography in a random sample of Norwegian heterosexual couples.
Archives of Sexual Behavior,38, 746–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9314-4
Daspe, M., Vaillancourt-Morel, M., Lussier, Y., Sabourin, S., & Ferron, A. (2018). When pornography use feels out of control: The
moderation effect of relationship and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy,44, 343–353. https://doi.org/10.
1080/0092623X.2017.1405301
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. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-0592
MILLER ET AL.111
Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology,60, 549–576. https://doi.
org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530
Hald, G. M. (2006). Gender differences in pornography consumption among young heterosexual Danish adults. Archives of Sexual
Behavior,35, 577–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9064-0
Hald, G. M. (2015). Comment on: Is pornography use associated with sexual difficulties and dysfunctions among younger heterosexual
men? The Journal of Sexual Medicine,12, 1140–1141. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12877
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Guilford.
Hayes, A. F., & Montoya, A. K. (2017). A tutorial on testing, visualizing, and probing an interaction involving a multicategorical vari-
able in linear regression analysis. Communication Methods and Measures,11,1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2016.
1271116
Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable [supplemental mate-
rial]. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology,67, 451–470. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12028
Kohut, T., Balzarini, R. N., Fisher, W. A., & Campbell, L. (2018). Pornography's associations with open sexual communication and
relationship closeness vary as a function of dyadic patterns of pornography use within heterosexual relationships. Journal of Social
and Personal Relationships,35, 655–676. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407517743096
Kohut, T., Fisher, W. A., & Campbell, L. (2017). Perceived effects of pornography on the couple relationship: Initial findings of open-
ended, participant-informed, “bottom-up”research. Archives of Sexual Behavior,46, 585–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10508-016-0783-6
Krüger, T. H., Haake, P., Hartmann, U., Schedlowski, M., & Exton, M. S. (2002). Orgasm-induced prolactin secretion: Feedback con-
trol of sexual drive? Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews,26,31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7634(01)00036-7
Krüger, T. H., Haake, P., Haverkamp, J., Kramer, M., Exton, M. S., Saller, B., …Schedlowski, M. (2003). Effects of acute prolactin
manipulation on sexual drive and function in males. Journal of Endocrinology,179, 357–365. 0022–0795/03/0179–357.
Lambert, N. M., Negash, S., Stillman, T. F., Olmstead, S. B., & Fincham, F. D. (2012). A love that doesn't last: Pornography consump-
tion and weakened commitment to one's romantic partner. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,31, 410–438. https://doi.
org/10.1521/jscp.2012.31.4.410
Landripet, I., & Štulhofer, A. (2015). Is pornography use associated with sexual difficulties and dysfunctions among younger hetero-
sexual men? The Journal of Sexual Medicine,12, 1136–1139. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12853
Lawrance, K., & Byers, E. S. (1998). Interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction questionnaire. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber,
R. Baureman, G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Sexuality related measures: A compendium (2nd ed., pp. 514–519). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Gage.
Levin, R. J. (2003). Is prolactin the biological 'off switch' for human sexual arousal? Sexual and Relationship Therapy,18, 237–243.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1468199031000099488
Levin, R. J. (2009). Revisiting post-ejaculation refractory time: What we know and what we do not know in males and in females. The
Journal of Sexual Medicine,6, 2376–2389. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2009.01350.x
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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9585-4
Miller, D. J., Hald, G. M., & Kidd, G. (2018). Self-perceived effects of pornography consumption among heterosexual men. Psychol-
ogy of Men & Masculinity,19, 469–476. https://doi.org/10.1037/men00 00112
Miller, D. J., McBain, K. A., & Raggatt, P. T. F. (2018). An experimental investigation into pornography's effect on men's perceptions
of the likelihood of women engaging in porn-like sex. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000202
Montgomery, D. C., Peck, E. A., & Vining, G. G. (2012). Introduction to linear regression analysis (5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2010.543960
Muusses, L. D., Kerkhof, P., & Finkenauer, C. (2015). Internet pornography and relationship quality: A longitudinal study of within
and between partner effects of adjustment, sexual satisfaction and sexually explicit internet material among newly-weds. Com-
puters in Human Behavior,45,77–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.077
Park, B. Y., Wilson, G., Berger, J., Christman, M., Reina, B., Bishop, F., …Doan, A. P. (2016). Is internet pornography causing sexual
dysfunctions? A review with clinical reports. Behavioral Science,6(3), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/10.3390/bs6030017
Perry, S. L. (2016). Does viewing pornography reduce marital quality over time? Evidence from longitudinal data. Archives of Sexual
Behavior,46, 549–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0770-y
Perry, S. L. (2018). Pornography use and marital quality: Testing the moral incongruence hypothesis. Personal Relationships,25,
233–248. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12234
Perry, S. L., & Whitehead, A. L. (2018). Only bad for believers? Religion, pornography use, and sexual satisfaction among American
men. The Journal of Sex Research.56,50–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2017.1423017
Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2009). Adolescents' exposure to sexually explicit internet material and sexual satisfaction: A longitudi-
nal study. Human Communication Research,35, 171–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01343.x
Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological
Bulletin,136,21–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017504
112 MILLER ET AL.
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. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2011.648027
Prause, N., & Pfaus, J. (2015). Viewing sexual stimuli associated with greater sexual responsiveness, not erectile dysfunction. Sexual
Medicine,3,90–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/sm2.58
Price, J., Patterson, R., Regnerus, M., & Walley, J. (2016). How much more XXX is generation X consuming? Evidence of changing
attitudes and behaviors related to pornography since 1973. The Journal of Sex Research,53,12–20. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00224499.2014.1003773
Rosenthal, R. (1986). Media violence, antisocial behavior, and the social consequences of small effects. Journal of Social Issues,42,
141–154. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1986.tb00247.x
Rosnow, R. L., & Rosenthal, R. (2003). Effect sizes for experimenting psychologists. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,
57, 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087427
Schmiedeberg, C., & Schröder, J. (2016). Does sexual satisfaction change with relationship duration? Archives of Sexual Behavior,45,
99–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0587-0
Štulhofer, A., Buško, V., & Landripet, I. (2010). Pornography, sexual socialization, and satisfaction among young men. Archives of
Sexual Behavior,39, 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9387-0
Štulhofer, A., Buško, V., & Schmidt, G. (2012). Adolescent exposure to pornography and relationship intimacy in young adulthood.
Psychology & Sexuality,3,95–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2010.537367
Sun, C., Bridges, A., Johnson, J. A., & Ezzell, M. B. (2016). Pornography and the male sexual script: An analysis of consumption and
sexual relations. Archives of Sexual Behavior,45, 983–994. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0391-2
Szymanski, D. M., & Stewart-Richardson, D. N. (2014). Psychological, relational, and sexual correlates of pornography use on young
adult heterosexual men in romantic relationships. The Journal of Men's Studies,22,64–82. https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.2201.64
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fiddel, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Træen, B., & Daneback, K. (2013). The use of pornography and sexual behaviour among Norwegian men and women of differing sex-
ual orientation. Sexologies,22, e41–e48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sexol.2012.03.002
Turley, K. R., & Rowland, D. L. (2013). Evolving ideas about the male refractory period. BJU International,112, 442–452. https://
doi.org/10.1111/bju.12011
Veit, M., Štulhofer, A., & Hald, G. M. (2017). Sexually explicit media use and relationship satisfaction: A moderating role of emo-
tional intimacy? Sexual and Relationship Therapy,32,58–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2016.1193134
Widaman, K. F., Little, T. D., Preacher, K. J., & Sawalani, G. M. (2011). On creating and using short form scales in secondary
research. In K. H. Trzesniewski, M. Donnellan, & R. E. Lucas (Eds.), Secondary data analysis: An introduction for psychologists
(pp. 39–61). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12350-003
Willoughby, B. J., Carroll, J. S., Busby, D. M., & Brown, C. C. (2016). Differences in pornography use among couples: Associations
with satisfaction, stability, and relationship processes. Archives of Sexual Behavior,45, 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10508-015-0562-9
Wright, P. J. (2013). A three-wave longitudinal analysis of preexisting beliefs, exposure to pornography, and attitude change. Commu-
nication Reports,26,13–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2013.773053
Wright, P. J., & Bae, S. (2016). Pornography and male socialization. In Y. J. Wong & S. R. Wester (Eds.), APA handbook of men and
masculinities (pp. 551–568). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14594-025
Wright, P. J., Bridges, A. J., Sun, C., Ezzell, M. B., & Johnson, J. A. (2018). Personal pornography viewing and sexual satisfaction: A
quadratic analysis. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy,44, 308–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2017.1377131
Wright, P. J., Sun, C., Steffen, N. J., & Tokunaga, R. S. (2017). Associative pathways between pornography consumption and reduced
sexual satisfaction. Sexual and Relationship Therapy. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2017.1323076
Wright, P. J., Tokunaga, R. S., Kraus, A., & Klann, E. (2017). Pornography consumption and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Human
Communication Research,43, 315–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12108
Yucel, D., & Gassanov, M. A. (2010). Exploring actor and partner correlates of sexual satisfaction among married couples. Social Sci-
ence Research,39, 725–738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.09.002
Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1988). Pornography's impact on sexual satisfaction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,18, 438–453.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb00027.x
How to cite this article: Miller DJ, McBain KA, Li WW, Raggatt PTF. Pornography,
preference for porn-like sex, masturbation, and men's sexual and relationship satisfaction. Pers
Relationship. 2019;26:93–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12267
MILLER ET AL.113
