Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gender Differences in Associations of Sexual and Romantic Stimuli: Do Young Men Really Prefer Sex over Romance?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Theory and research emphasize differences in men’s and women’s sexual and romantic attitudes, concluding that men have stronger preferences for sexual than romantic stimuli as compared to women. However, most of the research on gender differences have relied on self-reports, which are plagued by problems of social desirability bias. The current study assessed young men’s and women’s implicit attitudes toward sexual and romantic stimuli to test whether, in fact, men have a stronger preference for sexual over romantic stimuli compared to women. We also assessed associations between implicit and explicit attitudes, as well as sex role ideology and personality. College students (68 men and 114 women) completed an Implicit Association Test (IAT) that assessed strengths of associations of sexual and romantic stimuli to both pleasant and unpleasant conditions. Results revealed that both men and women more strongly associated romantic images to the pleasant condition than they associated the sexual images to the pleasant condition. However, as predicted, women had a stronger preference toward romantic versus sexual stimuli compared to men. Our study challenges a common assumption that men prefer sexual over romantic stimuli. The findings indicate that measures of implicit attitudes may tap preferences that are not apparent in studies relying on self-reported (explicit) attitudes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 242–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bedeian, A. G., & Mossholder, K. W. (1994). Simple question, not so simple answer: Interpreting interaction terms in moderated multiple regression. Journal of Management, 20, 159–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, S. M., Milkie, M. A., Sayer, L. C., & Robinson, J. P. (2000). Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor. Social Forces, 79, 19–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjorklund, D. F., & Shackelford, T. K. (1999). Differences in parental investment contribute to important individual differences between men and women. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 86–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bobko, P., & Russell, C. J. (1994). On theory, statistics, and the search for interactions in the organizational sciences. Journal of Management, 20, 193–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. P. (1998). Sexual strategies theory: Historical origins and current status. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 19–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chambliss, H. O., Finley, C. E., & Blair, S. N. (2004). Attitudes toward obese individuals among exercise science students. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 36, 468–474.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, N., & Fuqua, D. (2003). The structure of the BEM sex role inventory: A summary report of 23 validation studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 872–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 2, 39–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, L. (2004). The gendered division of labor and family outcomes in Germany. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1246–1259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality across cultures: Robust and surprising results. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322–331.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, A. P. C., & Shackelford, T. K. (2006). An evolutionary psychology perspective on gender similarities and differences. American Psychologist, 61, 640–641.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2002). Predictive validity of an Implicit Association Test for assessing anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1441–1455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eysenck, H. J., & Wilson, G. (1979). The psychology of sex. London: J. M. Dent and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, W. A., Byrne, D., White, L. A., & Kelley, K. (1988). Erotophobia-erotophilia as a dimension of personality. Journal of Sex Research, 25, 123–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagnon, J. H. (1990). The explicit and implicit use of the scripting perspective in sex research. Annual Review of Sex Research, 1, 1–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Sexual strategies and physical attraction: Implications for mating dynamics. Human Nature, 4, 205–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geer, J. H., & Robertson, G. G. (2005). Implicit attitudes in sexuality: Gender differences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 34, 671–677.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., et al. (2006). The International Personality Item Pool and the future of public domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. R., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. R., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heaven, P. C. L., Crocker, D., Edwards, B., Preston, N., Ward, R., & Woodbridge, N. (2003). Personality and sex. Personality and Individual Differences, 35, 411–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heaven, P. C. L., Fitzpatrick, J., Craig, F. L., Kelly, P., & Sebar, G. (2000). Five personality factors and sex: Preliminary findings. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 1133–1141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heesacker, M., Smith, M. B., & Lawrence, A. W. (1998). The desired loving behavior scale. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Scheer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality related measures (pp. 452–453). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, D. B. (2007). Differences and similarities in men’s and women’s sexual self-schemas. Journal of Sex Research, 44, 135–144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hummert, M. L., Garstka, T. A., O’Brien, L. T., Greenwald, A. G., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). Using the Implicit Association Test to measure age differences in implicit social cognitions. Psychology and Aging, 17, 482–495.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60, 581–592.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jay, T. (1992). Cursing in America: A psycholinguistic study of dirty language in the courts, in the movies, in the schoolyards and on the streets. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Nosek, B. A., & Gosling, S. D. (2008). Ideology: Its resurgence in social, personality, and political psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 126–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippa, R. A. (2010). Sex differences in personality traits and gender-related occupational preferences across 53 nations: Testing evolutionary and social-environmental theories. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 619–636.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mahalik, J. R., Morray, E. B., Coonerty-Femiano, A., Ludlow, L. H., Slattery, S. M., & Smiler, A. (2005). Development of the conformity to feminine norms inventory. Sex Roles, 52, 417–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maison, D., Greenwald, A. G., & Bruin, R. (2004). Predictive validity of the Implicit Association Test in studies of brands, consumer attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 405–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, K. L., Johnson, B. T., & Scott-Sheldon, L. A. (2001). Heart versus reason in condom use: Implicit versus explicit attitudinal predictors of sexual behavior. Zeitschrift fuer Experimentelle Psychologie, 48, 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Missildine, W., Feldstein, G., Punzalan, J. C., & Parsons, J. T. (2005). S/he loves me, s/he loves me not: Questioning heterosexist assumptions of gender differences and romantic attractions. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 12, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murnen, S. K., & Byrne, D. (1991). Hyperfemininity: Measurement and initial validation of the construct. Journal of Sex Research, 28, 479–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: II. Method variables and construct validity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 166–180.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 29–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ostafin, B. D., Marlatt, G. A., & Greenwald, A. G. (2008). Drinking without thinking: An implicit measure of alcohol motivation predicts failure to control alcohol use. Behavior Research & Therapy, 46, 1210–1219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, L. F. (2008). Challenging assumptions regarding the validity of self-report measures: The special case of sexual behavior. Journal of Adolescent Health, 42, 207–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 21–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pruett, S. R., & Chan, F. (2006). The development and psychometric validation of the Disability Attitude Implicit Association Test. Rehabilitation Psychology, 51, 202–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richtin, J., Richardson, D. S., & Mason, G. D. (2010). Predictive validity of IAT aggression in the context of provocation. Social Psychology, 41, 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, H., & Wallen, K. (2008). Sex differences in response to visual sexual stimuli: A review. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 206–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., Couden, A., & Baker, M. (2001). The effects of sex and temporal context on feelings of romantic desire: An experimental evaluation of sexual strategies theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 833–847.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., Realo, A., Voracek, M., & Allik, J. (2008). Why can’t a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in the Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 168–182.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schnabel, K., Asendorpf, J. B., & Greenwald, A. G. (2008). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: V. Measuring semantic aspects of trait self-concepts. European Journal of Personality, 22, 695–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1984). Sexual scripts. Society, 22, 52–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffens, M. (2005). Implicit and explicit attitudes towards lesbians and gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 49, 39–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steffens, M., & Buchner, A. (2003). Implicit Association Test: Separating transsituationally stable and variable components of attitudes toward gay men. Experimental Psychology, 50, 33–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, C. W., & Fischler, I. S. (1993). Speeded tests of implicit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1165–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuriff, G. E. (2006). Judgments of similarity are psychological: The importance of importance. American Psychologist, 61, 641.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Chris Blakely, Scott Ronis, and Sean Molloy for their help with parts of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of New Brunswick, POB 4400, Fredericton, NB, E3B 3A1, Canada

    Ashley E. Thompson & Lucia F. O’Sullivan

Authors
  1. Ashley E. Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lucia F. O’Sullivan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashley E. Thompson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thompson, A.E., O’Sullivan, L.F. Gender Differences in Associations of Sexual and Romantic Stimuli: Do Young Men Really Prefer Sex over Romance?. Arch Sex Behav 41, 949–957 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9794-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9794-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation