Abstract: Prior literature has generally found either a null or positive association between sex life satisfaction and religiosity. However, different studies have used various measures of religiosity and have focused on different demographics along the dimensions of age, marital status, and gender, limiting what can be determined in terms of moderating and cross-demographic effects. This shortcoming is germane because it may explain the differing findings in the literature. This study drew on the nationally representative 2017 Baylor Religion Survey (N = 1501) to test relationships among sex life satisfaction, sexual frequency, and a variety of different religious measures while testing for demographic moderators. Results suggest that religion and spirituality have a strong and significant association with sex life satisfaction while controlling for basic sociodemographic variables, and that this relationship is consistent across marital status, age, and gender. The positive association between religion and sexual frequency appeared to be limited to more intrinsic, personal forms such as self-rated spirituality and frequency of prayer. This association did not exist for non-married individuals, however, and among non-marrieds those who attend religious services more reported lower sexual frequency. Possible explanations for these results are discussed
Discussion
Several signifcant themes in the fndings are worth noting. First, the relationship
between sexual satisfaction and religiosity/spirituality is consistent across measures and gender, age, and marital demographic categories. Unlike many of the
prior studies cited (e.g. McFarland et al. 2011; Perry 2016), these measures of
religiosity are global and widely used. In prior studies where a more generic religion variable was used, the demographic breadth of this survey may have picked
up on efects not found in the prior literature. For example, here religious service attendance is signifcantly related to sexual satisfaction, which difers from
McFarland et al.’s (2011) fnding of no efect for older adults. Similarly, the positive fnding here conficts with Morgan’s (2011) null fnding for college students.
The lack of a signifcant interaction term with marriage was surprising given
the lower sexual frequency reported by unmarried religionists, and the consistent
empirical fnding connecting sexual frequency to satisfaction (e.g. Laumann et al.
1994). However, this result may be explained by some conceptual probing of
what exactly is captured with the “sex life satisfaction” construct. If an unmarried
allosexual religionist is celibate or rarely sexual by choice, then for all intents and
purposes he may be satisfed with his sex life, such as it is, if he has internalized
institutional religious norms and expectations surrounding non-marital sex, and
unmarried religionists may be cognitively comparing their current sexuality to
their ideal sexuality given their current marital status. Of course, this explanation is speculative, but it is a plausible explanation for why unmarried religionists
do not report any less satisfaction with their sex lives despite the fact that they
(according to some measures) are having less sex. Unfortunately, the BRS did
not include any other measures of sexual functioning, and it is possible that other
aspects of sexual functioning such as orgasmic frequency and sexual desire show
difering relationships with religiosity than sex life satisfaction does; this is an
important hole in the literature that future research would do well to investigate.
(However, in one of the few studies that have investigated the religiosity/orgasmic
functioning link, Laumann et al. (1994) found that conservative protestant and
Catholic women were more likely to indicate that they “always” experience an
orgasm during partnered sex than non-religiously-afliated women.)
While sexual frequency is often intertwined both empirically and conceptually
with sex life satisfaction, sex life satisfaction may more directly tap into more
general, overall life satisfaction and other measures of SWB that religion tends
to be associated with (Dolan et al. 2008). Religious/spiritual people may report
higher sex life satisfaction simply because they tend to be more satisfed in general, without necessarily being more sexual in terms of sexual frequency.
As previously noted, sexual frequency is more complicated across both measures and demographics. Here, only the more intrinsic/personal aspects of spirituality were associated with sexual frequency (supporting McFarland’s et al. 2011
null fnding of sexual frequency and religious service attendance among older
adults), and the efects that are signifcant appeared to be reserved for married
religionists; unmarried individuals who go to services more reported lower sexual
frequency than their less religious services-going unmarried counterparts (providing related, albeit indirect support for the general mitigating efects of religion
on youth sexual activity found in the literature).
In conclusion, prior research on sex life satisfaction and sexual frequency has
often only included religion as a covariate. Recently some studies have attempted to
plumb deeper, but again they have focused on a particular demographic such as college students (Morgan 2011), or have used a very specifc measurement of sexuality
(such as physiological satisfaction of frst intercourse— Higgins et al. 2010) or religiosity (such as religious integration in daily life—McFarland et al. 2011). This study
addressed the baseline sexual satisfaction and sexual frequency/religiosity relationship using a large-N, nationally representative study with broad measures for the
concepts involved, fnding that in general religious people are more satisfed with
their sex lives. In some cases they have more sex, but this fnding is not consistent.
This study has several limitations. First, the relatively broad approach taken here,
while useful for the reasons noted above, may gloss over specifc populations and
sexual modalities for which these efects vary. Unmarried individuals are treated in
the analysis here, but there are other theoretically interesting populations such as
sexual minorities whose experiences are not captured in this broad analysis.
On a related note, the measures used here are conceptually broad, and while this
also has advantages, it limits this analysis’ ability to dive deeper than the interrelations examined here. Now that a broad–stroke relationships are established with a
large, representative sample and general measures, future research will be able to
use these broader fndings as starting points to analyze the sexual satisfaction and
frequency/religion relationships in fner detail. The prior literature cited touched on
some of these issues, but much of it was not focused on sexual satisfaction or frequency/religion per se; consequently the prior literature on this question in particular is relatively piecemeal. Future research should aim to establish a more systematic
body of literature on these particular questions.
It is likely that the sex life satisfaction advantage is of a piece with the broader
infuence of religion on subjective well-being more generally (Dolan et al. 2008).
While this study did not investigate this possibility, future research should explore
the extent to which sexual satisfaction efects are simply extensions of more general
optimism efects from religion. One possible way to do so would be to incorporate
other, more physiological measures such as orgasmic frequenc
Several signifcant themes in the fndings are worth noting. First, the relationship
between sexual satisfaction and religiosity/spirituality is consistent across measures and gender, age, and marital demographic categories. Unlike many of the
prior studies cited (e.g. McFarland et al. 2011; Perry 2016), these measures of
religiosity are global and widely used. In prior studies where a more generic religion variable was used, the demographic breadth of this survey may have picked
up on efects not found in the prior literature. For example, here religious service attendance is signifcantly related to sexual satisfaction, which difers from
McFarland et al.’s (2011) fnding of no efect for older adults. Similarly, the positive fnding here conficts with Morgan’s (2011) null fnding for college students.
The lack of a signifcant interaction term with marriage was surprising given
the lower sexual frequency reported by unmarried religionists, and the consistent
empirical fnding connecting sexual frequency to satisfaction (e.g. Laumann et al.
1994). However, this result may be explained by some conceptual probing of
what exactly is captured with the “sex life satisfaction” construct. If an unmarried
allosexual religionist is celibate or rarely sexual by choice, then for all intents and
purposes he may be satisfed with his sex life, such as it is, if he has internalized
institutional religious norms and expectations surrounding non-marital sex, and
unmarried religionists may be cognitively comparing their current sexuality to
their ideal sexuality given their current marital status. Of course, this explanation is speculative, but it is a plausible explanation for why unmarried religionists
do not report any less satisfaction with their sex lives despite the fact that they
(according to some measures) are having less sex. Unfortunately, the BRS did
not include any other measures of sexual functioning, and it is possible that other
aspects of sexual functioning such as orgasmic frequency and sexual desire show
difering relationships with religiosity than sex life satisfaction does; this is an
important hole in the literature that future research would do well to investigate.
(However, in one of the few studies that have investigated the religiosity/orgasmic
functioning link, Laumann et al. (1994) found that conservative protestant and
Catholic women were more likely to indicate that they “always” experience an
orgasm during partnered sex than non-religiously-afliated women.)
While sexual frequency is often intertwined both empirically and conceptually
with sex life satisfaction, sex life satisfaction may more directly tap into more
general, overall life satisfaction and other measures of SWB that religion tends
to be associated with (Dolan et al. 2008). Religious/spiritual people may report
higher sex life satisfaction simply because they tend to be more satisfed in general, without necessarily being more sexual in terms of sexual frequency.
As previously noted, sexual frequency is more complicated across both measures and demographics. Here, only the more intrinsic/personal aspects of spirituality were associated with sexual frequency (supporting McFarland’s et al. 2011
null fnding of sexual frequency and religious service attendance among older
adults), and the efects that are signifcant appeared to be reserved for married
religionists; unmarried individuals who go to services more reported lower sexual
frequency than their less religious services-going unmarried counterparts (providing related, albeit indirect support for the general mitigating efects of religion
on youth sexual activity found in the literature).
In conclusion, prior research on sex life satisfaction and sexual frequency has
often only included religion as a covariate. Recently some studies have attempted to
plumb deeper, but again they have focused on a particular demographic such as college students (Morgan 2011), or have used a very specifc measurement of sexuality
(such as physiological satisfaction of frst intercourse— Higgins et al. 2010) or religiosity (such as religious integration in daily life—McFarland et al. 2011). This study
addressed the baseline sexual satisfaction and sexual frequency/religiosity relationship using a large-N, nationally representative study with broad measures for the
concepts involved, fnding that in general religious people are more satisfed with
their sex lives. In some cases they have more sex, but this fnding is not consistent.
This study has several limitations. First, the relatively broad approach taken here,
while useful for the reasons noted above, may gloss over specifc populations and
sexual modalities for which these efects vary. Unmarried individuals are treated in
the analysis here, but there are other theoretically interesting populations such as
sexual minorities whose experiences are not captured in this broad analysis.
On a related note, the measures used here are conceptually broad, and while this
also has advantages, it limits this analysis’ ability to dive deeper than the interrelations examined here. Now that a broad–stroke relationships are established with a
large, representative sample and general measures, future research will be able to
use these broader fndings as starting points to analyze the sexual satisfaction and
frequency/religion relationships in fner detail. The prior literature cited touched on
some of these issues, but much of it was not focused on sexual satisfaction or frequency/religion per se; consequently the prior literature on this question in particular is relatively piecemeal. Future research should aim to establish a more systematic
body of literature on these particular questions.
It is likely that the sex life satisfaction advantage is of a piece with the broader
infuence of religion on subjective well-being more generally (Dolan et al. 2008).
While this study did not investigate this possibility, future research should explore
the extent to which sexual satisfaction efects are simply extensions of more general
optimism efects from religion. One possible way to do so would be to incorporate
other, more physiological measures such as orgasmic frequenc
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment