“粗暴性爱”是一种东西吗?意义调查。

IF 2.7 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Sex Research Pub Date : 2025-01-15 DOI:10.1080/00224499.2024.2438711
Nicola Gavey, Olivia Brewster
{"title":"“粗暴性爱”是一种东西吗?意义调查。","authors":"Nicola Gavey, Olivia Brewster","doi":"10.1080/00224499.2024.2438711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The term \"rough sex\" is widely used, but it is not always clear what it means. Through exploring people's working definitions of \"rough sex,\" we asked what they revealed about the underlying phenomenon it is applied to, and whether it is actually <i>a</i> thing. Our online survey of 567 New Zealand respondents (73.7% women, 21% men, 5.3% gender diverse; mean age, 35.6 years, <i>SD</i> = 10.8) identified various behaviors that many considered to be part of \"rough sex\" - including hair pulling, holding down someone forcefully, slapping and \"choking.\" While this behavioral profile was similar to previous U.S. studies, our survey was designed with novel features that allowed us to look more closely at the variation in how people make sense of \"rough sex.\" Embedded within a critical psychology approach, our descriptive analysis highlighted areas of ambiguity and difference, including points of contradiction across people's working definitions. Critical qualitative analysis of open-ended textual data further examined categorical misalignments and the difficulties in interpreting behavioral indicators as defining of \"rough sex\" - especially without more contextual information. Overall, we found considerable variability and some contradictions in people's definitions of \"rough sex\" and the meanings they ascribed to it. Our findings led us to argue that the term \"rough sex\" does not map onto <i>a</i> coherent phenomenon, and that use of the term can be misleading, with potentially problematic implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":51361,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sex Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is \\\"Rough Sex\\\" <i>a</i> Thing? A Survey of Meaning.\",\"authors\":\"Nicola Gavey, Olivia Brewster\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00224499.2024.2438711\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The term \\\"rough sex\\\" is widely used, but it is not always clear what it means. Through exploring people's working definitions of \\\"rough sex,\\\" we asked what they revealed about the underlying phenomenon it is applied to, and whether it is actually <i>a</i> thing. Our online survey of 567 New Zealand respondents (73.7% women, 21% men, 5.3% gender diverse; mean age, 35.6 years, <i>SD</i> = 10.8) identified various behaviors that many considered to be part of \\\"rough sex\\\" - including hair pulling, holding down someone forcefully, slapping and \\\"choking.\\\" While this behavioral profile was similar to previous U.S. studies, our survey was designed with novel features that allowed us to look more closely at the variation in how people make sense of \\\"rough sex.\\\" Embedded within a critical psychology approach, our descriptive analysis highlighted areas of ambiguity and difference, including points of contradiction across people's working definitions. Critical qualitative analysis of open-ended textual data further examined categorical misalignments and the difficulties in interpreting behavioral indicators as defining of \\\"rough sex\\\" - especially without more contextual information. Overall, we found considerable variability and some contradictions in people's definitions of \\\"rough sex\\\" and the meanings they ascribed to it. Our findings led us to argue that the term \\\"rough sex\\\" does not map onto <i>a</i> coherent phenomenon, and that use of the term can be misleading, with potentially problematic implications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Sex Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Sex Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2024.2438711\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Sex Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2024.2438711","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“粗暴性行为”一词被广泛使用,但它的含义并不总是很清楚。通过探索人们对“粗暴性行为”的工作定义,我们询问他们揭示了它所适用的潜在现象,以及它是否真的是一件事。我们对567名新西兰受访者进行了在线调查(73.7%的女性,21%的男性,5.3%的性别多元化;平均年龄为35.6岁,SD = 10.8),他们发现了许多被认为属于“粗暴性行为”的行为,包括拉头发、用力按住对方、扇耳光和“窒息”。虽然这种行为特征与之前的美国研究相似,但我们的调查设计了一些新颖的特征,使我们能够更仔细地观察人们如何理解“粗暴的性行为”的变化。我们的描述性分析嵌入了批判性心理学方法,强调了歧义和差异的领域,包括人们工作定义中的矛盾点。对开放式文本数据的批判性定性分析进一步检查了分类错位和将行为指标解释为定义“粗暴性行为”的困难-特别是在没有更多上下文信息的情况下。总的来说,我们发现人们对“粗暴性行为”的定义和他们赋予它的含义存在相当大的差异和一些矛盾。我们的研究结果让我们认为,“粗暴的性行为”一词并没有映射到一个连贯的现象,而且这个词的使用可能会产生误导,可能会带来潜在的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Is "Rough Sex" a Thing? A Survey of Meaning.

The term "rough sex" is widely used, but it is not always clear what it means. Through exploring people's working definitions of "rough sex," we asked what they revealed about the underlying phenomenon it is applied to, and whether it is actually a thing. Our online survey of 567 New Zealand respondents (73.7% women, 21% men, 5.3% gender diverse; mean age, 35.6 years, SD = 10.8) identified various behaviors that many considered to be part of "rough sex" - including hair pulling, holding down someone forcefully, slapping and "choking." While this behavioral profile was similar to previous U.S. studies, our survey was designed with novel features that allowed us to look more closely at the variation in how people make sense of "rough sex." Embedded within a critical psychology approach, our descriptive analysis highlighted areas of ambiguity and difference, including points of contradiction across people's working definitions. Critical qualitative analysis of open-ended textual data further examined categorical misalignments and the difficulties in interpreting behavioral indicators as defining of "rough sex" - especially without more contextual information. Overall, we found considerable variability and some contradictions in people's definitions of "rough sex" and the meanings they ascribed to it. Our findings led us to argue that the term "rough sex" does not map onto a coherent phenomenon, and that use of the term can be misleading, with potentially problematic implications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: The Journal of Sex Research (JSR) is a scholarly journal devoted to the publication of articles relevant to the variety of disciplines involved in the scientific study of sexuality. JSR is designed to stimulate research and promote an interdisciplinary understanding of the diverse topics in contemporary sexual science. JSR publishes empirical reports, theoretical essays, literature reviews, methodological articles, historical articles, teaching papers, book reviews, and letters to the editor. JSR actively seeks submissions from researchers outside of North America.
期刊最新文献
Identifying Barriers and Facilitators of Implementing a Sexual and Relationship Health Intervention within the Child Welfare System: A Mixed Methods Study. "We Rely on Others, but Perhaps Too Much?" Assessing How College Students Use Relational and Social Contexts to Determine Consent During an Alcohol-Involved Sexual Encounter. Betting on Digital Attention: Pornography vs. Climate, Economics, Elections, Immigration, and War (Don't Take the Field). Meta-Analyzing People's Self-Disclosure of Sexual Information to Romantic Partners. Sexual Satisfaction Among Sexual Minority Men During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1