{"title":"Field conditioning of sexual arousal in humans.","authors":"Heather Hoffmann, Kathryn Peterson, Hana Garner","doi":"10.3402/snp.v2i0.17336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Human sexual classical conditioning effects are less robust compared with those obtained in other animals. The artificiality of the laboratory environment and/or the unconditioned stimulus (US) used (e.g. watching erotic film clips as opposed to participating in sexual activity) may contribute to this discrepancy. The present experiment used a field study design to explore the conditioning of human sexual arousal.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Seven heterosexual couples were instructed to include a novel, neutrally preferred scent as the conditioned stimulus (CS + ) during sexual interaction and another novel scent during non-sexual coupled-interaction (e.g. watching a movie, studying together). Seven control couples used both scents during non-sexual interaction. Conducted over a 2-week period, both experimental and control couples had three sexual interactions (oral sex and/or intercourse). In addition, experimental couples had three, while the controls had six, non-sexual interactions. Genital responding to and affective preference for the odors were assessed in the laboratory before and after the experience in the men.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We observed significantly increased genital responding to the CS+ in the experimental relative to the control group; however, conditioned responses were not much stronger than those obtained during laboratory conditioning. Experimental males also showed a trend for decreased preference for the CS- odor. They may have learned that this odor predicted that sexual interaction with their partner would not occur.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present study provides another demonstration of conditioned sexual arousal in men, specifically an instance of such learning that happened in a real-world setting. It also suggests that inhibitory learning may occur, at least with the affective measure.</p>","PeriodicalId":90343,"journal":{"name":"Socioaffective neuroscience & psychology","volume":"2 ","pages":"17336"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17336","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socioaffective neuroscience & psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17336","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19
Abstract
Background: Human sexual classical conditioning effects are less robust compared with those obtained in other animals. The artificiality of the laboratory environment and/or the unconditioned stimulus (US) used (e.g. watching erotic film clips as opposed to participating in sexual activity) may contribute to this discrepancy. The present experiment used a field study design to explore the conditioning of human sexual arousal.
Method: Seven heterosexual couples were instructed to include a novel, neutrally preferred scent as the conditioned stimulus (CS + ) during sexual interaction and another novel scent during non-sexual coupled-interaction (e.g. watching a movie, studying together). Seven control couples used both scents during non-sexual interaction. Conducted over a 2-week period, both experimental and control couples had three sexual interactions (oral sex and/or intercourse). In addition, experimental couples had three, while the controls had six, non-sexual interactions. Genital responding to and affective preference for the odors were assessed in the laboratory before and after the experience in the men.
Results: We observed significantly increased genital responding to the CS+ in the experimental relative to the control group; however, conditioned responses were not much stronger than those obtained during laboratory conditioning. Experimental males also showed a trend for decreased preference for the CS- odor. They may have learned that this odor predicted that sexual interaction with their partner would not occur.
Conclusion: The present study provides another demonstration of conditioned sexual arousal in men, specifically an instance of such learning that happened in a real-world setting. It also suggests that inhibitory learning may occur, at least with the affective measure.