ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Empire of Affectivity: Qualitative Evidence of the Subjective Orgasm Experience.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cisgender men and women report different patterns of sexual arousal and orgasm during masturbation and sexual relationships.International journal of impotence research · 2025Article
- Colombian validation of the orgasm rating scale in the contexts of sexual relationships and solitary masturbation.International journal of impotence research · 2025Article
- Masturbation parameters: their relation to sexual arousal in young people who engage in same-sex relationships.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Psychometric evaluation of the abbreviated Hungarian Faking Orgasm Scale for Women.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Validation of the multidimensional model of the subjective orgasm experience in the context of same-sex relationships.International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The subjective orgasm experience (SOE) refers to its perception and/or assessment from a psychological viewpoint. Few works have approached this construct from a qualitative perspective and have never taken a consolidated theoretical model as a reference. This study aims to provide qualitative validity evidence to the Multidimensional Model of Subjective Orgasmic Experience, derived from the Orgasm Rating Scale (ORS), to qualitatively address SOE in the contexts of sexual relationships and solitary masturbation, analyzing the terms self-generated by individuals and examining the coincidence with the semantic descriptions of orgasm proposed by the ORS. Four hundred Spanish adults aged 18 to 64 years participated. The Technique of Free Association of Words was applied, and prototypical, frequency, and similitude analyses were performed. A similar description was observed concerning the terms generated in both contexts, with a higher frequency and intensity in the context of sexual relationships. In the context of solitary masturbation, negative orgasmic descriptions were evoked. Participants were able to elicit the vast majority of ORS adjectives, with Affective being the most notable dimension, followed closely by Rewards, especially in masturbation. Most of the adjectives were evoked simultaneously with those of the Affective, with "pleasurable" standing out as the most predominant one. This work provides qualitative evidence to the SOE study, ratifying the semantic composition of the ORS and thus endorsing the Multidimensional Model of Subjective Orgasmic Experience as a good theoretical model from which to continue studying the subjective orgasmic experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.