Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34816358›Full record

ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2022

Theoretically Suggested Divergent Predictions for Pornography Use, Religiosity, and Permissive Sexual Attitudes.

Paul J Wright

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Pornography, White Men, and Relational Satisfaction.Archives of sexual behavior · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Paul J WrightThe Media School At Indiana University, 601 East Kirkwood Avenue, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA. paulwrig@indiana.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pornography and attitude change studies most often adopt a sexual scripting (SS) perspective. The moral incongruence (MI) perspective on pornography has gained prominence in recent years, however, and may lead to differential predictions from the SS approach. Specifically, a detailed reading of MI and SS papers reveals the potential for discrepant predictions about the effect of pornography on sexual permissiveness, one of the most studied outcomes in pornography research. From an SS perspective, pornography use increases sexual permissiveness, but the preexisting traditional sexual scripts of the religious lessen the magnitude of this effect. Alternatively, the MI perspective implies the possibility that religious persons become more opposed to permissive sexuality as a result of their pornography use, as a way to mitigate the cognitive dissonance they feel for engaging in a sexual behavior proscribed by their faith tradition. The present study explored these divergent possibilities using nationally representative U.S. data. Across four meta-samples and four indicators of sexual permissiveness, religious nonviewers of pornography were the least sexually permissive, followed by religious viewers, nonreligious nonviewers, and nonreligious viewers. These results were robust over time and maintained after adjusting for demographics. For theorizing about pornography, religiosity, and sexual permissiveness, these results suggest that an SS approach may be preferable to an MI approach. The importance of continued research using both the SS and MI perspectives is discussed, however, emphasizing that the present study extrapolated a potential prediction from MI rather than a formal postulate put forth by the model's creators.

Indexed as

EroticaReligionAttitudeHumansMoralsSexual BehaviorMoral incongruencePornographyReligiositySexual permissivenessSexual scripts

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.