An Exploratory Study of Factors Associated With Sexual Inhibition and Excitation: Findings From a Representative Survey in Flanders

Abstract

The dual control model of sexual response was developed to account for individual differences in sexual excitation and inhibition. According to this model, the balance between excitation and inhibition is of crucial importance in determining an individual's sexual response to a stimulus. In this study, we aimed to contribute to the existing literature on sexual excitation and inhibition in two ways. First, we investigated the distribution of excitation and inhibition scores in a representative population sample. Second, we conducted an exploratory study of the factors associated with variation in excitation and inhibition. We used data from a representative survey on the sexual health of men and women in Flanders (N = 1,825; mean age = 43.77; SD = 17.98). The results indicated that excitation and inhibition had a near normal distribution among men and women. However, the scores for sexual inhibition due to threat of performance failure (SIS1) among men, and for sexual inhibition due to the threat of performance consequences (SIS2) among women, were somewhat skewed. Furthermore, age, gender, physical and mental health, education level, and attitudes toward sex were all to some extent associated with differences in inhibition, excitation, or both.

Psychometric properties of the Sexual Excitation/Sexual Inhibition Inventory for Women and Men (SESII-W/M) and the Sexual Excitation Scales/Sexual Inhibition Scales short form (SIS/SES-SF) in a population-based sample in Germany

“…As the likelihood for sexual dysfunctions such as erectile problems or low desire increases with age [ 67 ], concerns or worries about sexual performance may become more salient. The age-related pattern is in line with the one other study that used the SIS/SES-SF in a population-based representative sample [ 14 , 21 ]. Their analysis, however, revealed an interaction between the effect of age and gender on SIS1, with men showing a linear increase in SIS1 with age, and women showing a u-shaped pattern with highest values reported between 40 and 50 years of age.…”

“…Educational level—operationalized as having vs. not having a university degree—was associated with higher SE concerning SES1 ( d = 0.22), partner characteristics and behaviors ( d = .16), arousability ( d = 0.13), and SES2 ( d = 0.13). Increased levels of SE for highly educated people have also been reported in a previous representative study using the SIS/SES-SF [ 14 ]. Future studies might clarify, whether differences in socialization (i.e., a more liberal upbringing) or mediating variables such as religiosity or (mental) health might explain these group differences.…”

“…Investigating between-group differences in SE and SI (i.e., between men and women, heterosexual or homosexual individuals, younger or older persons) may help to explain group differences in sexual dysfunctions or sexual behaviors [ 13 , 14 ]. Gender comparisons using the SIS/SES indicated that men in general report significantly higher levels of SE, while women report higher SI [ 12 ].…”

“…None of the scales were significantly correlated with a measure of social desirability [ 20 ]. Using the SIS/SES-SF in a representative survey of the general population in Flanders, Belgium, SE and SI showed a close to normal distribution and, additionally, the proposed gender differences were replicated [ 14 , 21 ]. As measurement invariance of the Belgian version was not reported, it remains unclear if the requirements for such gender comparisons were met and whether the gender differences can be validly interpreted.…”

“…Even though the need for more diverse and representative samples has been acknowledged [ 29 ], most studies still report findings based on highly educated, young student samples. This may be especially problematic, as a population-based study suggested that both SE and SI are increased in more highly educated individuals [ 14 ]. Also, it can be hypothesized that some items or scales measuring SE and SI may work differently for single and partnered individuals.…”