Women’s Orgasm & Sexual Satisfaction in Committed Sex and Casual Sex: Higher sociosexuality was associated with higher orgasmic function in casual sex, lower sexual satisfaction in committed sex

Women’s Orgasm and Sexual Satisfaction in Committed Sex and Casual Sex: Relationship Between Sociosexuality and Sexual Outcomes in Different Sexual Contexts. Val Wongsomboon, Mary H. Burleson & Gregory D. Webster. The Journal of Sex Research, Oct 4 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2019.1672036

Abstract: Previous studies have found that women report more orgasm and sexual satisfaction from sex in committed relationships than from casual sex. We examined whether sociosexual orientation was associated with these differences, and explored the links between sociosexuality and sexual outcomes in these two sexual relationship contexts. Sexually active women (n = 1,084) completed an online survey measuring sociosexual orientation, orgasmic function, and sexual satisfaction. Participants reported sexual outcomes (orgasmic function and sexual satisfaction) with respect to their sexual activity over the past 12 months in a casual context (if applicable), and separately in a committed context (if applicable). Among women who had both casual and committed sex in the past year, orgasmic function and sexual satisfaction differed between these two relationship contexts only for more sexually restricted women (lower sociosexuality). In the full sample, higher sociosexuality was associated with higher orgasmic function in casual sex and with lower sexual satisfaction in committed sex. These findings underscore the importance of examining interactions between individual differences and contextual factors when studying women’s sexual outcomes.

---
Despite considerable study of female sexuality, some aspects of female orgasm and sexual satisfaction remain a mystery. Manywomenwithorwithoutsexualdysfunctionhavetrouble reaching orgasm. Their inability to orgasm, however, cannot be explained by health-related or physiological factors alone (Çayan et al., 2004; Colson, Lemaire, Pinton, Hamidi, & Klein, 2006; Dawood, Kirk, Bailey, Andrews, & Martin, 2005; Meston, Hull, Levin, & Sipski, 2004). In fact, research shows that women’s sexual function and satisfaction are associated with individual differences and interpersonal factors, as well as the relationship contexts in which sex occurs. Specifically, women tend to experience more orgasms or greater sexual satisfaction in committed sex (i.e., sex in committed relationships) versus casual sex (i.e., sex outside committed relationships; Armstrong, England, & Fogarty, 2012; Birnie-Porter & Hunt, 2015). In this study, we refer to this discrepancy in women’s sexual outcomes as the committed-versus-casual sex gap. To better understand this gap, we investigated potential differences in women’s sexual function and satisfaction between these two sexual contexts. We propose that sociosexuality—an individual differencein willingness to have uncommitted sex—is associated with context-dependent sexual outcomes, and by extension, the committed-versus-casual-sex gap in those outcomes.1 Bydefinition, women with higher sociosexuality are more inclined toward casual sexual relations and evaluate casual sex as more positive. Whether they experience a smaller context-dependent gap or greater sexual function and satisfaction in casual sex are open questions.

The current study had three aims. The first was to further explore women’s orgasm and sexual satisfaction in committed and casual sexual relationship contexts. The second was to examine whether sociosexual orientation was associated with any committed-versus-casual-sex gap in orgasmic function or sexual satisfaction. The third was to investigate context-related differences in how sociosexuality relates to orgasm and sexual satisfaction.

Sexual Outcomes in Committed and Casual Sexual Relationship Contexts

As noted above, research suggests that women have higher orgasmic function (e.g., satisfaction with their ability to orgasm), sexual satisfaction, or both, in committed (vs. casual) sexual interactions. For example, women engaged to be married reported greater sexual satisfaction than those in casual-dating and friends-with-benefits relationships (Birnie-Porter & Hunt, 2015). Similarly, using a nationwide probability sample, Waite and Joyner (2001) found that women in exclusive long-term relationships reported more emotional satisfaction and physical pleasure from sex compared to those in more casual relationships. Finally, Armstrong et al. (2012) found that college women were less likely to orgasm in hookups than in romantic relationships. Nevertheless, although women often experience more orgasms, greater sexual enjoyment, or both in relationship sex, casual sex is common (50–80% of women in past studies reported hookups or casual-sex experiences; Armstrong et al., 2012; Armstrong & Reissing, 2015; Correa, Castro, Barrada, & Ruiz-Gómez, 2017; Mark, Garcia, & Fisher, 2015; Paul & Hayes, 2002), and many women engage in casual sex specifically to seek physical pleasure (Armstrong & Reissing, 2015; Garcia & Reiber, 2008; Weaver & Herold, 2000). Moreover, not all women experience a discrepancy in orgasm or sexual enjoyment depending on relationship type (Armstrong et al., 2012). Thus, to further document the committed-versus-casual sex gap and better understand characteristics that are associated with its magnitude, we first contrasted women’s self reports of sexual outcomes in “committed, exclusiveromantic relationships” with those in “uncommitted, non-exclusive sexual relationships.” Based on previous research, we expected to find higher orgasmic function and sexual satisfaction for committed sex than for casual sex across our sample.

Sociosexuality, Orgasm, and Sexual Satisfaction in Different Contexts

Because it stands to reason that women who find casual sex more pleasurable and satisfying would be more inclined to have casual sex, we examined the association between sociosexuality and context-related differences in sexual outcomes. Individuals with lower sociosexuality (more restricted sociosexual orientation) prefer sex with love and commitment, whereas those with higher sociosexuality (more unrestricted sociosexual orientation) both desire and approve of having sex without love or commitment, and thus have more casual sex (Penke & Asendorpf, 2008; Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). Furthermore, they are more motivated to seek physical pleasure and novel experiences through sexual activity than more restricted women (Meston & Buss, 2007). We hypothesized that more unrestricted women would report a smaller gap in sexual outcomes between committed and casual sexual relationship contexts.

Relatively little research has been conducted regarding the nature of the association between sociosexuality and orgasm or sexual satisfaction in women. Results from studies in this area have suggested that lower sexual satisfaction (Birnie-Porter & Hunt, 2015; Simpson & Gangestad, 1991; Velten & Margraf, 2017) and fewer orgasms (Ellsworth & Bailey, 2013) are weakly linked with higher sociosexuality. However, none of these studies took sexual relationship context into account; two recruited only participants in exclusive or “romantic” relationships (Ellsworth & Bailey, 2013; Velten & Margraf, 2017), and one did not report relationship status (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). Because research relating sociosexuality and women’s sexual functioning is surprisingly sparse and does not specifically address sexual relationship contexts, we examined whether and how level of sociosexuality is related to sexual outcomes both within committed and within casual sexual relationship contexts. Given that in general, positive evaluations of sexual activity are associated with more sexual desire, satisfaction, and orgasm among women(e.g., Haavio-Mannila & Kontula, 1997; Morton & Gorzalka, 2013), we predicted that sexual outcomes would be positively related to sociosexuality in casual sexual contexts. However, although there is reason to believe that higher sociosexuality could pose a threat to relationship outcomes in a committed context (Simpson, 1987), there remains insufficient information to justify an a priorihypothesis regarding the association between sociosexuality and sexual outcomes in a committed context. Therefore, we did not have an a priori hypothesis regarding the relationship between sociosexuality and sexual outcomes in committed sex.

Orgasmic Function and Sexual Satisfaction

In the present study, we investigated both orgasmic function (e.g., orgasm frequency) and sexual satisfaction because the relationship between orgasmic function and sexual satisfaction in women remains unclear. Some studies of women found that orgasm frequency was positively related to sexual satisfaction (Frederick, Lever, Gillespie, & Garcia, 2017; Klapilová, Brody, Krejčová, Husárová, & Binter, 2015; Kontula & Miettinen, 2016; Young, Denny, Luquis, & Young, 1998), whereas others showed orgasm was unnecessary for sexual satisfaction or pleasure (Bancroft, Long, & McCabe, 2011; Salisbury & Fisher, 2014; Waterman & Chiauzzi, 1982). Because orgasmic function and sexual satisfaction are positively, but not perfectly, correlated in women, and because some women experience sexual satisfaction without orgasm (or vice versa), we examined both physical and psychological sexual outcomes (i.e., orgasmic function and sexual satisfaction). Further, because we sought a richer understanding of women’s orgasmic experience, we assessed orgasm difficulty, satisfaction with ability to orgasm, and confidence in ability to orgasm, in addition to orgasm frequency.

1 We use the term “sexual outcomes” to refer to sexual satisfaction and orgasmic function, as defined in the Method section.

References

Armstrong, E. A., England, P., & Fogarty, A. C. (2012). Accounting for women’s orgasm and sexual enjoyment in college hookups and relationships. American Sociological Review, 77, 435 –462. doi:10.1177/ 0003122412445802
Armstrong, H. L., & Reissing, E. D. (2015). Women’s motivations to have sex in casual and committed relationships with male and female partners. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 921–934. doi:10.1007/ s10508-014-0462-4
Bancroft,J.,Long,J.S.,&McCabe,J.(2011).Sexualwell-being:Acomparison of US Black and White women in heterosexual relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 725 –740. doi:10.1007/s10508-010-9679-z
Basson, R. (2000). The female sexual response: A different model. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 26, 51 –65. doi:10.1080/009262300278641
Birnie-Porter,C.,&Hunt,M.(2015).Doesrelationshipstatusmatterforsexual satisfaction? The roles of intimacy and attachment avoidance in sexual satisfaction across five types of ongoing sexual relationships. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 24, 174–183. doi:10.3138/cjhs.242-A5 Brunell, A. B., & Webster, G. D. (2013). Self-determination and sexual experience in dating relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 970–987. doi:10.1177/0146167213485442
Çayan, S., Akbay, E., Bozlu, M., Canpolat, B., Acar, D., & Ulusoy, E. (2004). The prevalence of female sexual dysfunction and potential risk factors that may impair sexual function in Turkish women. Urologia Internationalis, 72, 52 –57. doi:10.1159/000075273
Colson, M. H., Lemaire, A., Pinton, P., Hamidi, K., & Klein, P. (2006). Couple’s sexual dysfunction: Sexual behaviors and mental perception, satisfaction and expectations of sex life in men and women in France. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 3, 121–131. doi:10.1111/j.17436109.2005.00166.x
Correa, A. B., Castro, Á., Barrada, J. R., & Ruiz-Gómez, P. (2017). Sociodemographic and psychosexual characteristics of students from a Spanish university who engage in casual sex. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 14, 445–453. doi:10.1007/s13178-017-0274-0
Dawood, K., Kirk, K. M., Bailey, J. M., Andrews, P. W., & Martin, N. G. (2005). Genetic and environmental influences on the frequency of orgasm in women. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 8, 27 –33. doi:10.1375/twin.8.1.27
Ellsworth, R. M., & Bailey, D. H. (2013). Human female orgasm as evolved signal: A test of two hypotheses. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1545–1554. doi:10.1007/s10508-013-0152-7
Frederick, D. A., Lever, J., Gillespie, B. J., & Garcia, J. R. (2017). What keeps passion alive? Sexual satisfaction is associated with sexual communication, mood setting, sexual variety, oral sex, orgasm, and sex frequency in a national US study. Journal of Sex Research, 54, 186–201. doi:10.1080/00224499.2015.1137854
Garcia, J. R., & Reiber, C. (2008). Hook-up behavior: A biopsychosocial perspective. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2, 192. doi:http://doi.h00993/h0099345
Gossmann, I., Mathieu,M., Julien, D., & Chartrand,E.(2003).Determinants of sex initiation frequencies and sexual satisfaction in long-term couples’ relationships. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 12, 169. Graham, C. A., Catania, J. A., Brand, R., Duong, T., & Canchola, J. A. (2003). Recalling sexual behavior: A methodological analysis of memory recall bias via interview using the diary as the gold standard. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 325–332. doi:10.1080/ 00224490209552198
Haavio-Mannila, E., & Kontula, O. (1997). Correlates of increased sexual satisfaction. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 26, 399–419. doi:10.1023/ A:1024591318836 Judd, C. M., McClelland, G. H., & Ryan, C. S. (2017). Data analysis: A model comparison approach to regression, ANOVA, and beyond. New York: Routledge.
Klapilová, K., Brody, S., Krejčová, L., Husárová, B., & Binter, J. (2015). Sexual satisfaction, sexual compatibility, and relationship adjustment in couples: The role of sexual behaviors, orgasm, and men’s discernment of women’s intercourse orgasm. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 12, 667–675. doi:10.1111/jsm.12766
Kontula, O., & Miettinen, A. (2016). Determinants of female sexual orgasms. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 6,1 –21. doi:10.3402/snp.v6.31624
Laan, E., & Rellini, A. H. (2011). Can we treat anorgasmia in women? The challenge to experiencing pleasure. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 26, 329–341. doi:10.1080/14681994.2011.649691
Mark, K. P., Garcia, J. R., & Fisher, H. E. (2015). Perceived emotional and sexual satisfaction across sexual relationship contexts: Gender and sexual orientation differences and similarities. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 24, 120–130. doi:10.3138/cjhs.242-A8
Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2007). Why humans have sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 477–507. doi:10.1007/s10508-007-9175-2
Meston, C. M., Hull, E., Levin, R. J., & Sipski, M. (2004). Disorders of orgasm in women. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 1, 66 –68. doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2004.10110.x Meston, C. M., & Trapnell, P. (2005). Development and validation of a five–Factor sexual satisfaction and distress scale for women: The Sexual Satisfaction Scale for Women (SSS-W). The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2, 66 –81. doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2005.20107.x Morton, H., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2013). Cognitive aspects of sexual functioning: Differences between East Asian-Canadian and Euro-Canadian women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1615–1625. doi:10.1007/s10508-013-0180-3 Paul, E. L., & Hayes, K. A. (2002). The casualties of ‘casual’ sex: A qualitative exploration of the phenomenology of college students’ hookups. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 639–661. doi:10.1177/0265407502195006 Paulhus, D. L., & Vazire, S. (2007). The self-report method. In R. W. Robins, R. C. Fraley, & R. F. Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 224–239). New York, NY: Guilford. Penke, L., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113. doi: h00993/0022-3514.95.5.1113 Rosen, R., Brown, C., Heiman, J., Leiblum, S., Meston, C., Shabsigh, R., … D’Agostino, R. (2000). The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): A multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 26, 191–208. doi:10.1080/009262300278597 Salisbury, C. M., & Fisher, W. A. (2014). “Did you come?” A qualitative exploration of gender differences in beliefs, experiences, and concerns
regarding female orgasm occurrence during heterosexual sexual interactions. Journal of Sex Research, 51, 616–631. doi:10.1080/ 00224499.2013.838934 Schmiedeberg, C., & Schroder, J. (2016). Does sexual satisfaction change with relationship duration? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 99 –107. doi:10.1007/s10508-015-0587-0 Simpson, J. A. (1987). The dissolution of romantic relationships: Factors involved in relationship stability and emotional distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 683 –692. doi:10.1037/00223514.53.4.683 Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870. doi:10.1037/ 0022-3514.60.6.870 Velten, J., & Margraf, J. (2017). Satisfaction guaranteed? How individual, partner, and relationship factors impact sexual satisfaction within partnerships.PloSOne,12,e0172855.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0172855
Waite, L. J., & Joyner, K. (2001). Emotional satisfaction and physical pleasure in sexual unions: Time horizon, sexual behavior, and sexual exclusivity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 247–264. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00247.x
Waterman, C. K., & Chiauzzi, E. J. (1982). The role of orgasm in male and female sexual enjoyment. Journal of Sex Research, 18, 146–159. doi:10.1080/00224498209551145 Weaver, S. J., & Herold, E. S. (2000). Casual sex and women: Measurement and motivational issues. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 12, 23 –41. doi:10.1300/J056v12n03_02
Young, M., Denny, G., Luquis, R., & Young, T. (1998). Correlates of sexual satisfaction in marriage. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 7, 115.