Sex Differences in Visual Attention to Erotic and Non-Erotic Stimuli

Abstract

It has been suggested that sex differences in the processing of erotic material (e.g., memory, genital arousal, brain activation patterns) may also be reflected by differential attention to visual cues in erotic material. To test this hypothesis, we presented 20 heterosexual men and 20 heterosexual women with erotic and non-erotic images of heterosexual couples and tracked their eye movements during scene presentation. Results supported previous findings that erotic and non-erotic information was visually processed in a different manner by both men and women. Men looked at opposite sex figures significantly longer than did women, and women looked at same sex figures significantly longer than did men. Within-sex analyses suggested that men had a strong visual attention preference for opposite sex figures as compared to same sex figures, whereas women appeared to disperse their attention evenly between opposite and same sex figures. These differences, however, were not limited to erotic images but evidenced in non-erotic images as well. No significant sex differences were found for attention to the contextual region of the scenes. Results were interpreted as potentially supportive of recent studies showing a greater non-specificity of sexual arousal in women. This interpretation assumes there is an erotic valence to images of the sex to which one orients, even when the image is not explicitly erotic. It also assumes a relationship between visual attention and erotic valence.

Gender-Specificity in Viewing Time Among Heterosexual Women

“…Men viewed female pictures significantly longer than they did male pictures, whereas women tended to split their attention more evenly between pictures of the two genders. This finding supports those of previous studies but also extends those findings to a Chinese sample for the first time, and provides much needed cross-cultural replication (e.g., Ebsworth & Lalumiere, 2012;Israel & Strassberg, 2009;Lykins et al, 2008).…”

“…Studies using eye-tracking techniques also show that heterosexual men are more gender-specific in sexual interest than heterosexual women in measures of fixation duration and count (Lykins, Meana, & Strauss, 2008). One recent study using eye tracking reported that heterosexual men oriented more rapidly to female than male targets, while heterosexual women oriented at similar speeds to male and female targets.…”

Attentional bias for positive emotional stimuli: A meta-analytic investigation.

“…First, if identifiable stimuli from the IAPS or the Affective Norms for English Words (ANEW; Bradley & Lang, 1999) databases were used, we retrieved their normative valence and arousal ratings from their original databases. Second, for studies using smiling faces expressing happiness from the NimStim (Tottenham et al, 2009), the Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces (KDEF; Lundqvist, Flykt, & Öhman, 1997) and the Picture of Facial Affect (PFA; Ekman & Friesen, 1976) databases we coded their valence and arousal based on their respective studies investigating the arousal and valence dimensions of these stimuli (Adolph & Alpers, 2010;Johnsen, Thayer, & Hugdahl, 1995).…”

Women gaze behaviour in assessing female bodies: the effects of clothing, body size, own body composition and body satisfaction

“…This view has been further supported by women's preference for viewing other female bodies. For instance, when presented with erotic and non-erotic images of heterosexual couples, men looked at female bodies significantly longer than male bodies in the picture, whereas women tended to distribute their attention evenly between female and male bodies (Lykins, Meana, & Strauss, 2008). Similarly, when inspecting sexually explicit photos, the amount of viewing time directed at female bodies was indistinguishable between male and female viewers (Rupp & Wallen, 2007).…”