'High desire', or 'merely' an addiction? A response to Steele et al.

Abstract

The validity of an argument depends on the soundness of its premises. In the recent paper by Steele et al., conclusions are based on the initial construction of definitions relating to ‘desire’ and ‘addiction’. These definitions are based on a series of assumptions and qualifications, the limitations of which are acknowledged by the authors initially, but inexplicably ignored in reaching the firm conclusions the authors make. Yet, the firmness of these conclusions is unwarranted, not only as a result of conceptually problematic initial premises but also due to problematic methodology. (Published: 21 February 2014) Citation: Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology 2014, 4 : 23833 - http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v4.23833 This is a Commentary on ‘’ Sexual desire, not hypersexuality, is related to neurophysiological responses elicited by sexual images ‘’ by Vaughn R. Steele, Cameron Staley and Timothy Fong, Nicole Prause, published in Volume 3, 2013 .