Considering masturbation parameters other than frequency provides a more holistic view of this sexual behavior. This study aims to provide validity evidence for masturbation parameters (i.e., negative attitudes toward masturbation, solitary sexual desire, current masturbation frequency, and subjective orgasm experience) through their relationship with different measures of sexual arousal (i.e., genital response, rating of sexual arousal, and rating of genital sensations).
MethodEighty young cisgender adults (40 men and 40 women) aged 18 to 30 years, who engaged in heterosexual sexual relationships, participated in a laboratory task in which their sexual arousal was recorded in response to neutral and sexual videos. Regression models were conducted to examine the association between masturbation parameters and sexual arousal measures.
ResultsIn men, solitary sexual desire (β = .72) and current masturbation frequency (β = -0.49) were related to the rating of genital sensations. In women, current masturbation frequency was related to genital response (β = .33), the rating of sexual arousal (β = .43), and the rating of genital sensations (β = .44); this last measure of sexual arousal was also related to the rewards dimension of subjective orgasm experience (β = .37).
ConclusionsThese results provide validity evidence of masturbation parameters in individuals who engaged in heterosexual sexual relationships. The importance of considering these parameters in the induction of sexual arousal, taking gender into account, is discussed.
Masturbation refers to manual self-stimulation, or stimulation using an object, of the genitals, anal area, breasts, or other erogenous zones, with the pursuit of pleasure being one of the most common motivations for its practice (de Jong & Adams, 2024; Herbenick et al., 2023; Leistner et al., 2023). Although historically it has been a stigmatized sexual behavior (Haus & Thompson, 2020), it is now considered a practice that has benefits for sexual health (Cervilla, Álvarez-Muelas, & Sierra, 2024) and is part of the erotic experience throughout life (Ivanova et al., 2025). In fact, the World Association for Sexual Health includes masturbation in its definition of sexual pleasure (Ford et al., 2021).
Traditionally, the study of masturbation has focused primarily on the frequency of its practice (Cervilla, 2024; Kirschbaum & Peterson, 2017). Recently a series of complementary parameters have been proposed to broaden the focus of the study of this sexual practice. These parameters include negative attitudes toward masturbation, solitary sexual desire, and the subjective orgasm experience (Cervilla & Sierra, 2022). The addition of these indicators to masturbation frequency provides a more holistic view that allows for further understanding of the role of this behavior in sexual health (Cervilla, 2024; Sánchez-Pérez, Granados, & Sierra, 2025).
Building on the fact that an integrated approach to different parameters would enable a deeper analysis of the association between masturbation and sexual functioning ‒as has already been seen in the case of orgasmic ease and intensity (Sánchez-Pérez, Granados, & Sierra, 2025; Sierra, Santamaría et al., 2023) or orgasmic satisfaction (Cervilla & Sierra, 2022; Sierra, Santamaría et al., 2023) ‒, it is essential to advance their validation through psychophysiological measures of sexual response. In this context and given that the relationship between masturbation and other dimensions of sexual functioning has been little explored (Cervilla, Álvarez-Muelas, & Sierra, 2024), it is relevant to examine the associations between masturbation parameters and sexual arousal.
It has been shown that psychophysiological recordings provide validity evidence for self-reported measures of sexuality (see Sánchez-Fuentes et al., 2019; Sierra, Arcos-Romero et al., 2023) and for theoretical models of different sexual constructs (see Álvarez-Muelas et al., 2022; Cervilla, Sierra et al., 2024; Granados et al., 2021; Janssen et al., 2002; Mangas et al., 2024). In this context, masturbation parameters would be susceptible to receive evidence of validity by relating them to different measures of self-reported and psychophysiological sexual arousal in a laboratory setting.
Sexual attitudes, understood as emotionally charged beliefs that influence how people express their sexuality, have been associated with various indicators of sexual health (Sierra et al., 2021). It has been observed that negative attitudes toward masturbation are associated with lower self-reported sexual arousal in response to films showing individuals who reach orgasm through masturbation (Mosher & Abramson, 1977), as well as with a lower pelvic vasocongestion in women exposed to erotic narratives (Abramson et al., 1981). Solitary sexual desire, defined as the interest in sexual activity performed individually (Spector et al., 1996), has been associated with a greater propensity for sexual excitation and greater vaginal pulse amplitude in women when viewing films of individuals masturbating (Cervilla et al., 2023), as well as with higher intensity in the rating of sexual arousal (Sánchez-Pérez, Granados et al., 2025). On the other hand, masturbation frequency has been associated with greater subjective sexual arousal in response to sexual stimuli (Mosher & Abramson, 1977). The subjective orgasm experience ‒understood as the self-assessment of orgasm (Arcos-Romero & Sierra, 2018; Mah & Binik, 2001)‒ has been described from a multidimensional perspective, both in the context of sexual relationships (Arcos-Romero et al., 2019) and solitary masturbation (Cervilla, Sierra et al., 2024): affective dimension (i.e., related to the emotions experienced during orgasm), sensory dimension (i.e., physiological sensations perceived during orgasm), intimacy dimension (i.e., aspects linked to the intimate experience of orgasm), and rewards dimension (i.e., the gratifying aspect of orgasm). In men, the rewards dimension has been associated with a greater propensity for sexual excitation, whereas in women, the sensory dimension was positively related to the subjective rating of sexual arousal (Cervilla, Sierra et al., 2024).
For all these reasons, the present study aims to provide validity evidence for masturbation parameters (i.e., negative attitudes toward masturbation, solitary sexual desire, current masturbation frequency, and subjective orgasm experience) through their relationship with different measures of sexual arousal, both psychophysiological (i.e., penile erection and vaginal pulse amplitude) and self-reported (i.e., rating of sexual arousal and rating of genital sensations), controlling for the potential effect of individual propensity for sexual excitation (see Janssen & Bancroft, 2023).
Based on the previous literature review and the study’s objective, it is expected that masturbation parameters will be associated with different measures of sexual arousal. Specifically, it is hypothesized that negative attitudes toward masturbation (Abramson et al., 1981; Mosher & Abramson, 1977) will be negatively related to sexual arousal, whereas solitary sexual desire (Cervilla et al., 2023; Mosher & Abramson, 1977; Sánchez-Pérez, Granados et al., 2025), masturbation frequency (Mosher & Abramson, 1977), and subjective orgasm experience (Cervilla, Sierra et al., 2024; Sánchez-Pérez, Granados et al., 2025) will be positively associated with sexual arousal.
MethodParticipantsEighty cisgender Spanish young adults (40 men and 40 women), aged 18 to 30 (Mmen = 23.38, SD = 2.76; Mwomen = 21.90, SD = 3.18), who engaged in heterosexual sexual activity, participated. See Table 1. The inclusion criteria included: (a) being 18 years or older, (b) engaging in heterosexual sexual activity, and (c) having masturbated within the last 3 months before the assessment. The exclusion criteria included: (a) having medical problems, sexual dysfunctions, and/or psychological problems, (b) taking medication that may interfere with sexual response, (c) drug/alcohol abuse, and (d) having a history of sexual abuse.
Sociodemographic and sexual history characteristics of the participants.
| Men (n = 38) | Women (n = 38) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range | M (SD) | Range | M (SD) | t / χ2 | d / V | |
| Age (years) | 18–30 | 23.38 (2.76) | 18–30 | 21.90 (3.18) | 2.22* | 0.50 |
| n ( %) | n ( %) | |||||
| Education level | 0.27 | - | ||||
| Graduate degree | 29 (72.5) | 31 (77.5) | ||||
| Postgraduate degree | 11 (27.5) | 9 (22.5) | ||||
| M (SD) | M (SD) | 3.56⁎⁎ | 0.79 | |||
| Age of first sexual relationship (in years) | 17.55 (2.50) | 15.93 (1.44) | ||||
| n ( %) | n ( %) | |||||
| Current relationship | 1.35 | - | ||||
| Yes | 23 (57.5) | 17 (70.0) | ||||
| No | 17 (42.5) | 12 (30.0) | ||||
| M (SD) | M (SD) | 2.62* | 0.58 | |||
| Masturbation frequency | 3.15 (0.98) | 2.63 (0.81) | ||||
Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation.
Sociodemographic and Sexual History Questionnaire. Collected information on sex, gender, age, nationality, level of education, type of sexual relationships (with people of the same or different sex), current masturbation frequency, medical/psychological/sexual problems, pharmacological treatment, drug use, and sexual abuse and victimization history.
Negative attitudes toward masturbationThe Spanish version of the Negative Attitudes Toward Masturbation Inventory (Mosher, 2011b) adapted by Cervilla, Vallejo-Medina et al. (2021). It assessed negative attitudes toward masturbation through ten items (e.g., “Playing with your own genitals is disgusting”) answered on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (Not at all true) to 5 (Extremely true). Higher scores indicated more negative attitudes toward masturbation. It had adequate psychometric properties with an internal consistency of .95 and adequate validity evidence (Cervilla, Vallejo-Medina et al., 2021). In this study, the McDonald’s omega coefficient was .94.
Solitary sexual desireThe Solitary Sexual Desire subscale of the Spanish version of the Sexual Desire Inventory (Spector et al., 1996) developed by Moyano et al. (2017). It is composed of four items (e.g., “How strong is your desire to engage in sexual behavior by yourself”) that measure solitary sexual desire through different types of scales (e.g., 0 = No desire to 8 = Strong desire). Higher scores indicated greater solitary sexual desire. It had adequate internal consistency (α = .90) and optimal validity evidence (Moyano et al., 2017). In this study, the McDonald’s omega coefficient was .88.
Subjective orgasm experience in the masturbation contextThe Spanish version of the Orgasm Rating Scale (Arcos-Romero et al., 2018) validated in the masturbation context by Cervilla et al. (2022). The subjective orgasm experience in the masturbation context was assessed using 25 adjectives distributed across four scales: Affective (e.g., “elated”), Sensory (e.g., “rising”), Intimacy (e.g., “loving”), and Rewards (e.g., “peaceful”). Responses were rated on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (Does not describe it at all) to 5 (Describes it perfectly). Higher scores indicated greater intensity of subjective orgasm experience. It had adequate psychometric properties, with internal consistency reliability from .71 (Intimacy) to .95 (Sensory) and adequate validity evidence (Cervilla et al., 2022). In this study, the McDonald's omega coefficients were as follows: .92 for the Affective subscale, .93 for the Sensory subscale, .69 for the Intimacy subscale, and .89 for the Rewards subscale.
Propensity for sexual excitationExcitation subscale of the Spanish version of the Sexual Inhibition/Excitation Scales Short Form (Carpenter et al., 2011) adapted by Moyano and Sierra (2014). It assessed propensity for sexual excitation using six items (e.g., “When I think of a very attractive person, I easily become sexually aroused”). The items were answered on a 4-point Likert scale from 1 (Strongly agree) to 4 (Strongly disagree). The responses were reversed to facilitate interpretation, so that higher scores indicated greater propensity for sexual excitation. Its internal consistency reliability was above .81 (Sierra et al., 2024), and its measures had adequate validity evidence (Sierra et al., 2024; Sierra, de la Rosa Centella et al., 2019). In this study, the McDonald's omega coefficient was .77.
Ratings of sexual arousal and genital sensationsThe Spanish version of the Rating of Sexual Arousal (Mosher, 2011a) developed by Sierra et al. (2017). This scale consisted of five items that assessed sexual arousal intensity: sexual arousal, genital sensations, sexual warmth, non-genital physical sensations, and sexual absorption on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (No arousal at all) to 7 (Extremely sexually aroused). Higher scores indicated greater rating of sexual arousal. It had an internal consistency coefficient of 0.90 and adequate validity evidence (Sierra et al., 2017; Sierra, Álvarez-Muelas et al., 2019). In this study, the McDonald’s omega coefficient was 0.94.
The Spanish version of the Rating of Genital Sensations (Mosher, 2011a) also adapted by Sierra et al. (2017). This scale consisted of a single item with 11 response options that assessed the level of genital sensations in response to visual stimuli, ranging from “No genital sensations” to “Multiple orgasm: Repeated orgasmic release in a single sexual episode”. Higher scores indicated greater rating of genital sensations. It had adequate validity evidence (Sierra et al., 2017; Sierra, Álvarez-Muelas et al., 2019).
PolygraphThe Biopac Model MP150 Polygrah with 16 Channels (Biopac Systems Inc., Goleta, CA, USA) with the AcqKnowledge 5.0. software for the acquisition and processing of psychophysiological data. To record genital response, two different modules were used depending on the person’s genitalia: a penile plethysmograph module (Biopac amplifier DA100C and indium/gallium sensors), and a vaginal photoplethysmography module (Biopac amplifier PPG100C and vaginal transducers). The penile plethysmograph recorded changes in penile circumference (millimeters) and the vaginal photoplethysmography recorded changes in genital pulse amplitude (volts).
The genital response was calculated based on the difference between the scores for the explicit sexual stimulus and the neutral baseline stimulus, following the procedure used in laboratory studies of this nature (Álvarez-Muelas et al., 2022; Cervilla, Sierra et al., 2024; Granados et al., 2020; Mangas et al., 2024).
Visual stimuliFour three-minute videos were used: two with neutral content (nature documentaries) and two with explicit sexual content showing a man or a woman masturbating until orgasm. The sexually explicit visual stimuli were previously validated in a pilot study, which confirmed their effectiveness in inducing sexual arousal (Cervilla, Granados et al., 2021).
ProcedureParticipants were recruited through flyers, posters, mailing lists, and social media. The study consisted of two phases. In the first phase, the interested volunteers answered an online battery of screening questionnaires created on the LimeSurvey platform®, where they had previously provided informed consent; this verified that they met the inclusion criteria for the study.
The second phase took place at the Human Sexuality Laboratory located at University of Granada. Upon arrival, participants signed a second informed consent form, which detailed the objective of the experiment and assured the anonymity and confidentiality of their data. The researcher then explained the experimental task and demonstrated how to correctly apply the genital response sensors. The experimental task consisted of viewing two blocks of videos (neutral baseline video 1 + sexual video 1, and neutral video 2 + sexual video 2), whose heterosexual sexual content was selected according to the gender of the participants (i.e., men masturbating was shown to female participants, and women masturbating were shown to male participants). The video sequences were counterbalanced in order to control for possible effects of presentation order (Saavedra-Roa & Vallejo-Medina, 2024). Participants were randomly assigned to one of two sequences: sequence A (neutral baseline video 1 + sexual video 1, and neutral video 2 + sexual video 2) or sequence B (neutral baseline video 2 + sexual video 2, and neutral video 1 + sexual video 1). The videos were presented to the subject in an isolated room on a 27′' UHD 4 K screen (resolution of 3840 × 2160 pixels). During viewing, genital responses were recorded: changes in penile circumference (in millimeters) in men using an indium-gallium ring (plethysmography), and changes in vaginal pulse amplitude (in volts) using photoplethysmography. At the end of each film, participants completed self-reported measures of sexual arousal using the Spanish versions of the Rating of Sexual Arousal and Rating of Genital Sensations scales.
All self-reports and data collected from each participant during the different phases of the study were coded using an alphanumeric identifier to guarantee the anonymity of participants at all times. This study was previously approved by the Ethics Committee on Human Research of the University of Granada (ref. 2984/CEIH/2022). For more information on the procedure, see Álvarez-Muelas et al. (2025).
Data analysisRunning a power analysis using G*Power (Faul et al., 2007), with an alpha level of .05, power = .80, mean effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.55), and eight predictors, indicated a minimum sample size of 36 participants was required for the regression models. Partial correlations were calculated, controlling propensity for sexual excitation, between masturbation parameters (i.e., negative attitudes toward masturbation, solitary sexual desire, current frequency, and subjective orgasm experience dimensions) and the different sexual arousal measures (i.e., genital response, rating of sexual arousal, and rating of genital sensations). Finally, global regression models were conducted using a stepwise method to examine the associations between masturbation parameters and sexual arousal measures. The predictor variables were divided into two blocks: (1) propensity for sexual excitation and (2) negative attitudes toward masturbation, solitary sexual desire, current frequency, and subjective orgasm experience dimensions.
ResultsPartial correlationsIn men, only solitary sexual desire was significantly related to the rating of genital sensations (r = .33, p < .05). In women, solitary sexual desire was correlated to rating of sexual arousal (r = .32, p < .05) and rating of genital sensations (r = .32, p < .05). Additionally, in women, current masturbation frequency was significantly related to genital response (r = .33, p < .05), rating of sexual arousal (r = .40, p < .05) and rating of genital sensations (r = .36, p < .05). See Table 2.
Partial correlations between masturbation parameters and sexual arousal measures.
| Men | Women | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Genital response | Rating of sexual arousal | Rating of genital sensations | Genital response | Rating of sexual arousal | Rating of genital sensations |
| Negative attitudes toward masturbation | -.15 | -.11 | -.20 | -.16 | -.04 | -.14 |
| Solitary sexual desire | .26 | .15 | .33* | .13 | .32* | .32* |
| Current masturbation frequency | .16 | -.03 | .07 | .33* | .40* | .36* |
| Affective SOE-M | -.20 | .05 | .01 | -.01 | .03 | .13 |
| Sensory SOE- M | -.26 | -.03 | -.05 | -.15 | .23 | .23 |
| Intimacy SOE-M | -.28 | -.07 | -.06 | .16 | .22 | .18 |
| Rewards SOE-M | .03 | -.18 | -.04 | -.14 | .08 | .27 |
Note. SOE-M = subjective orgasm experience in solitary masturbation context.
In men, 16 % of the variance in the rating of genital sensations (F(2, 37)= 4.75, p < .05) was significantly and positively explained by solitary sexual desire (β = .72), and negatively by current masturbation frequency (β = -.49). See Table 3.
Multiple regression models for sexual arousal measures.
Note. Models were estimated using stepwise multiple regression. B: non-standardized beta; SE: standard error; β: standardized beta; 95 % CI: 95 % confidence interval; R2: adjusted R-squared value; VIF: Variance inflation factor. SOE-M = subjective orgasm experience in solitary masturbation context.
In women, 9 % of the variance in genital response was significantly explained (F(1, 38)= 4.61, p < .05), in a positive sense, by current masturbation frequency (β = .33). 17 % of the variance in the rating of sexual arousal (F(1, 38)= 8.77, p < .01) was positively explained by current masturbation frequency (β = .43). Finally, 24 % of the variance in the rating of genital sensations (F(2, 37)= 7.13, p < .01) was significantly explained, in a positive sense, by the current masturbation frequency (β = .44) and the rewards dimension of the subjective orgasm experience in the masturbation context (β = .37). See Table 3.
DiscussionGiven that the relationship between masturbation and sexual functioning has been underexplored, the present study aimed to provide validity evidence for the masturbation parameters proposed by Cervilla and Sierra (2022)—i.e., negative attitudes toward masturbation, solitary sexual desire, current masturbation frequency, and subjective orgasm experience—through their relationships with different measures of sexual arousal, both psychophysiological (i.e., genital response) and self-reported (i.e., rating of sexual arousal and rating of genital sensations). The findings provide validity evidence for all masturbation parameters in relation to sexual functioning, except for negative attitudes. In summary, the results indicated significant associations of solitary sexual desire, current masturbation frequency, and subjective orgasm experience with different measures of sexual arousal, with differences between men and women in these associations. To provide a more detailed and comprehensive analysis of the results obtained, the discussion will be organized by the dependent variables, specifically the different measures of sexual arousal assessed (genital response, rating of sexual arousal, and rating of genital sensations).
In women, solitary sexual desire and current masturbation frequency—once the effect of the propensity for sexual arousal was controlled for—were positively associated with both self-reported measures of sexual arousal (i.e., rating of sexual arousal and rating of genital sensations). Regression analyses confirmed that masturbation frequency can explain a significant portion of the variance in these self-reported measures. Specifically, current masturbation frequency explained 17 % of the rating of sexual arousal and, together with the rewards dimension of the subjective orgasm experience, explained 24 % of the rating of genital sensations.
The fact that solitary sexual desire is positively correlated with self-reported measures of sexual arousal, yet is not included as a predictor variable in the regression models, may be due to the overlap between desire and sexual arousal in the female sexual response (Brotto et al., 2009; Moyano & Sierra, 2015). In this regard, the results of the present study may reflect this commonality, suggesting that although solitary sexual desire is associated with measures of sexual arousal, its predictive capacity may be attenuated.
The rewards dimension of the subjective orgasm experience in masturbation becomes particularly relevant in women, unlike in men, when explaining the rating of genital sensations. This finding may be related to the progressive destigmatization of female masturbation (Carvalheira & Leal, 2013). Moreover, as a result of the female empowerment observed in recent years (Kettrey, 2016), it seems reasonable to assume that women, aware of the gender inequalities they have historically experienced, now wish to reclaim their own pleasure and integrate it into their sexual repertoire, seeking also to benefit from the rewarding aspects of masturbation (e.g., sensations of relaxation or peace). In contrast, in men, the absence of this association could be explained by how orgasm is valued within their sexuality. Chadwick and van Anders (2017) pointed out that men may view a woman’s orgasm in sexual relationships as an achievement of their masculinity. If orgasm is understood as a form of external validation, then when this dimension of “achievement” disappears in masturbation, its rewarding nature could lose strength and cease to influence male sexual arousal.
In men, solitary sexual desire was positively correlated with the rating of sexual arousal, remaining a predictor in the regression models and explaining 16 % of the variance, together with current masturbation frequency, which is negatively associated with the rating of sexual arousal. The inclusion of solitary sexual desire in the male model — unlike in women — may be because men generally report higher levels of solitary sexual desire (Cervilla et al., 2023; de Oliveira et al., 2022; Peixoto, 2023). On the other hand, it seems consistent that the rating of genital sensations is the measure that acquires relevance, unlike the rating of sexual arousal, since male sexual functioning (vs. female) is generally more related to physical aspects (Salisbury & Fisher, 2014), in contrast to women.
The current masturbation frequency was positively associated with both self-reported measures of sexual arousal in women, whereas in men, it is negatively related to the rating of genital sensations. The fact that higher masturbation frequency in women corresponds to greater self-reported sexual arousal, while the opposite occurs in men, may be related to the different implications of masturbation for both genders, with higher frequency being associated with better female sexual response (Carvalheira & Leal, 2013; Marchand, 2021) and greater difficulties in male sexual response (Cervilla, Álvarez-Muelas, & Sierra, 2024; Niu et al., 2023; Sierra, Santamaría et al., 2023). In men, a compensatory pattern of masturbation is more common (Fischer & Traen, 2022; Gerressu et al., 2008), that is, masturbation tends to be observed as a behavior that compensates for dyadic sexual dissatisfaction or with a partner (Regnerus et al., 2017), while in women a complementary pattern predominates (Fischer & Traen, 2022; Gerressu et al., 2008), in which masturbation is integrated as a practice complementary to shared sexual relationships (Cervilla et al., 2025; Regnerus et al., 2017). Beyond these models, alternative explanations such as habituation effects should be considered. Most men consume pornography to masturbate (Miller et al., 2019), which involves regular exposure to sexually explicit stimuli. This habituation may reduce sexual arousal in response to sexual visual stimuli, so that when men are exposed in a laboratory setting to standard or less personalized visual stimuli, their arousal responses are lower. This could explain the negative association observed between masturbation frequency and the rating of genital sensations. These findings support the hypothesis that masturbation frequency does not have the same functional meaning in men and women, so its impact on sexual arousal should be interpreted considering these differential motivational patterns and contextual factors.
Regarding genital response, in women, unlike in men, current masturbation frequency accounted for 9 % of its variance. These findings could be interpreted in line with the above, in terms of the functional differences in the meaning of masturbation between men and women (see Cervilla, Álvarez-Muelas, & Sierra, 2024), as well as the growing destigmatization of female masturbation (Carvalheira & Leal, 2013). In this sense, considering masturbation as a regular facet of their sexual repertoire, together with such the reduction of stigma, may promote, in women, a greater connection with their own sensations and greater awareness of their genital response.
It should be noted that, although the present study observed that masturbation frequency plays a key role in sexual arousal in heterosexual individuals, these findings may not be generalizable to other populations. For example, Sánchez-Pérez, Granados et al. (2025) recently found no association between current masturbation frequency and sexual arousal in LGB individuals in a laboratory context.
It is also important to note that negative attitudes toward masturbation are not related to any measure of sexual arousal. In this regard, the psychosexual characteristics of volunteers who report less traditional sexual attitudes (Wiederman, 1999) should be considered. Those who decide to participate in laboratory studies may have more positive attitudes toward masturbation, which could explain the absence of the observed relationship by generating restricted variability within the sample.
This study has some limitations that may affect the generalizability of the results. First, the sample consisted of young, cisgender, healthy university students who engaged in heterosexual sexual activity. In addition, information regarding sexual or relational agreements (e.g., monogamy versus non-monogamy) and relationship configurations was not collected. Moreover, the artificial nature of the experimental setting may affect ecological validity. Additionally, sexual stimuli were restricted to heterosexual content. Another limitation is the relatively small sample size. Although the number of participants per group meets the minimum statistical power requirements, this relatively small sample may limit the robustness and generalizability of the findings.
To address these limitations, future studies should include more diverse and representative samples, incorporating individuals of different ages, gender identities, and sexual orientations, as well as people with sexual dysfunctions or psychological problems such as anxiety or depression. The use of more inclusive sampling strategies, such as stratified random sampling, could help ensure adequate representation of these subgroups. Additionally, future research should include more varied and diverse sexual stimuli, allowing participants to choose those that best align with their personal preferences, regardless of sexual orientation. Finally, we propose the incorporation of other masturbation parameters, such as the examination of motives leading to masturbation, masturbation techniques, and the duration of masturbation, as well as conducting the experiment through Virtual Reality (VR), as it can generate a more immersive environment that may contribute to ecological validity.
ConclusionsAn association was observed between masturbation parameters and sexual arousal in a laboratory context. The results of this study provide validity evidence for practically all masturbation parameters in individuals engaged in heterosexual sexual relationships, specifically for solitary sexual desire, current masturbation frequency, and the rewards dimension of the subjective orgasm experience in the masturbation context. These findings should be analyzed by gender.
In light of the World Association for Sexual Health (2019) defending the right to sexual health and pleasure—including individual sexual experiences such as masturbation—and given that masturbation has been recognized as a means of achieving sexual health (Burri & Carvalheira, 2019), as well as a common technique in the treatment of sexual dysfunctions (Mata-Muñoz et al., 2024; Nobre, 2017), the importance of considering the different masturbation parameters proposed for the induction of sexual arousal is highlighted. This involves attending to both gender differences and sexual orientation, and it is essential to conduct an individualized assessment of masturbation behavior before considering it in sex therapy.
Data availabilityThe datasets generated by the survey research are available in https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30177820.
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
The authors express their gratitude to all the participants who contributed to this experimental study. They also extend their thanks to the collaborating companies (Amantis®, Fleshlight®, Lelo®, Platanomelón®, and Vive Sex Shop®) for donating sexual health materials to distribute to the participants who attended the experiment.
This study was made possible by the Grant Ref. PREDOC_00289 funded by Consejería de Transformación Económica, Industria, Conocimiento y Universidades (Junta de Andalucía) and the grant CEX2023–001312-M funded by MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and UCE-PP2023-11/UGR. It is part of the first author’s thesis (Psychological Doctoral ProgrammeB13 56 1; RD 99/2011).
