This article was downloaded by: [Princeton University]

On: 14 November 2014, At: 03:38

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usmt20

Key variables to understanding female

sexual satisfaction: An examination of
women in nondistressed marriages
a
David Farley Hurlbert M.S.W., BCST, CSW-ACP , Carol Apt Ph.D.,
b c
BCSE & Sarah Meyers Rabehl Ph.D.
a
Clinical Director of Marriage and Sex Therapy at Darnall Army
Community Hospital
b
Private practice
c
Department of Psychology , University of Minnesota
Published online: 14 Jan 2008.

To cite this article: David Farley Hurlbert M.S.W., BCST, CSW-ACP , Carol Apt Ph.D., BCSE & Sarah
Meyers Rabehl Ph.D. (1993) Key variables to understanding female sexual satisfaction: An examination
of women in nondistressed marriages, Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 19:2, 154-165, DOI:
10.1080/00926239308404899

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00926239308404899

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014
 Key Variables to Understanding Female
Sexual Satisfaction: An Examination of
Women in Nondistressed Marriages
DAVID FARLEY HURLBERT, CAROL APT,
and SARAH MEYERS RABEHL
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

Using a step-wise multiple regression analysis, this study examined the

role, in nondistressed marriages, of such sexual variables as frequency
of sexual activity, number of orgasms, sexual desire, and sexual excit-
ability in the prediction offemale sexual satisfaction as compared to the
role of such personality and relationship variables as sexual assert-
iveness, sexual attitudes (erotophobia-erotophilia), and relationship
closeness. The findings suggest that individual and relationship vari-
ables (sexual assertiveness, erotophilia, and relationship closeness) aid
in the prediction of female sexual satisfaction over and above what can
be learned from knowing about the frequency of sexual activity, the
number of orgasms a woman has, her level of sexual excitability, and
how much she desired the sexual activity. Findings, methodological
advances in the use of sex diaries, and limitations of the study are
explored.

A satisfying sex life is a common goal for many married couples. Al-
though the feeling of satisfaction with one's sex life is a most personal
feeling,' when one attempts to understand just what constitutes sexual
satisfaction, conflicting reports emerge. One of the most frequent contra-
dictions is that males and females differ in what they consider to be
sexually satisfying.2 Often cited is the emphasis that men place on sexual
intercourse as a key component in sexual satisfaction,?' and the impor-
tance for women of the degree of emotional involvement4and satisfaction
in their relationships5 with their partners. For women, the closer the

T h e authors would like to pay special thanks to Dr. Mark Eddleson for coding the diaries and
scoring the instruments. This report reflects the authors' pcrsonal views and in no way represents the
official views of the United States Army, Department of Defense, or the United States Government.
Captain Hurlbert, M.S.W., BCST, CSW-ACP, is the Clinical Director of Marriage and Sex Therapy
at Darnall Army Community Hospital. Carol Apt, Ph.D., BCSE, is in private practice. Sarah Meyers
Rabehl, Ph.D., is with the Department of Psychology at the University of Minnesota. Address all
correspondence to the first author at 324 North Main, Belton, T X 76513.

Journal of Sex 8c Marital Therapy, Vol. 19, No. 2, Summer 1993 0 BrunnedMazel, Inc.
154
 Female Sexual Satisfaction I55

emotional relationship with the partner, the greater the likelihood that
they will find their sex lives satisfying.68 T h e importance of such variables
have also been found for women in extramarital relationship^.^ Other
researchers have specifically identified the degree of commitment and
the quality of communication between the couple as having a significant
impact on women’s sexual satisfaction.
Although the quality of the relationship with one’s partner may be the
key to female sexual sati~faction,~,~ women tend to view sexual pleasure as
physiologically and psychologically more intricate than do men.6 Several
studies have ointed to various personality variables as contributing to
female sexua P Amon those mentioned are current ex-
pectations and long-term aspirations? sex role ideology and subsequent
behavior,* and overall purpose in life.13Still other researchers have exam-
ined the relationship between objective sexual variables, such as fre-
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

quency of activity,13 sexual intercourseP participation in foreplay,14 and

orgasm con~istency.~ For example, marital happiness has been found to
be associated with a higher percentage of sexual activity leading to female
orgasm,15 and sexual activity that terminates in orgasm may have a rein-
forcement value, leading respondents to engage in more sexual activity.I6
In turn, higher levels of sexual activity increase the reported level of
sexual satisfaction.”
Because a couple’s sex life is an important component of the entire
marital relationship and limited studies on marital sexuality exist in the
literature,” an understanding of just what constitutes satisfying sex in
nondistressed marriages is crucial to understanding intimate marital in-
teractions as a whole. When distressed couples present for marital ther-
apy, with or without specific sexual complaints, an informed examination
into how they relate to one another sexually can be a key feature in the
therapeutic process. Therefore, it is the purpose of this paper to compare
the role of such objective sexual variables as frequency of sexual activity,
sexual excitability, and number of orgasms in the prediction of sexual
satisfaction with the role of such personality and relationship variables
as communication, erotophilia, and relationship closeness with an eye
toward understanding not only sexuality per se, but marital sexuality as
a whole. Since women and men view sex and sexual satisfaction differ-
ently, and the process whereby females come to view their sex lives as
satisfying or dissatisfying involves more interactional or relationship vari-
ables than does the similar process for males,6 we have chosen to focus
on female sexual satisfaction in nondistressed marriages. Although the
importance of such variables for women are continuously reinforced in
the literature, female sexual satisfaction is yet to be examined in nondis-
tressed marriages. I n doing so, we hope to develo a better understand-
P
ing of some of the key variables involved in fema e sexual satisfaction.

METHOD

Subjects
A sample pool of 161 married women was obtained from a volunteer
sign-up roster soliciting participation in a confidential sexual survey. The
 156 Iournal of Sex k? Marital Therupy, Vol. 19, No. 2 , Summer 1993

roster was managed through the Reynolds House, an Army Community

Support Center for military wives at Fort Hood military installation. It
should be noted that this sample consisted of all first marriages and was
obtained from a nonclinical population, none of whom were specifically
seeking marital or sexual treatment and none of whom perceived these
state of affairs to be problematic.

Controls

Some of the subjects were eliminated from the study in order to control
for three different nuisance variables. First, as a control for marital dis-
tress, the subjects were given the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS).l9This
scale consists of 32 items that tap the four relationship dimensions of
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

consensus, satisfaction, cohesion, and affectional expression. Scores on

the DAS range from 0 to 151, with a score below 100 indicative of marital
distress. Therefore, only those women who scored above 100 were eligi-
ble to participate in this study.
Second, all subjects were screened concerning their alcohol use in an
effort to control for the negative effects alcohol abuse may have on the
sexual relationships under investigation." The Short Michigan Alcohol-
ism Screening Test (SMAST) was employed as a reliable screening tool
because of its roven validity in discriminating between alcoholics and
f)
nonalcoholics.2 Any woman who endorsed one or more items on this
test was excluded from the study.
Finally, since marriages with primary orgasmic dysfunction were also
predicted to have less sexual contact and satisfaction,22the study sample
was selected from women who were reportedly capable of experiencing
an orgasm to control for any confounding effects of primary anorgasmia.
Of the original 161 married women, five women (3.1%)were excluded
due to what they reported as never experiencing an orgasm. Sixteen
women (9.9%) were eliminated because their husbands were to be absent
from home during the three-week test period due to military training
or operations. In addition, 6 women (3.7%) were excluded via alcohol
screening, 20 (12.4%) for marital distress, 11 (6.8%)due to an incomplete
diary or unusable questionnaires returned with an excessive amount of
missing data, and 5 (3.1%) dropped out of the study.
Of the 98 women who participated in this study, 68.4% were white,
18.4% were black, 9.1% were Hispanic, and 4.1% were Asian. They
ranged in age from 24 to 31 years (X = 26.7; SD = 2.15); had been
married an average of four years; (range 2-8 years); had a mean educa-
tional level of 12.9 years (range 12-16 years); and had a median number
of 1 child (range 0-3). Religious affiliations were identified as 37.7%)
Protestant, 34.7% none, 24.5% Catholic, and 3.1% Jewish.

Sex Diary

In addition to alcohol screening and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale pre-

viously discussed, all 161 participants were given an information checklist
 Fernalp Sexual Satifaction 157

concerning sexual experience, frequency of orgasms, and sexual activity

satisfaction. These participants also received the sex diary developed by
Hurlbert and Whittaker5 and instructions individually on how to record
their sexual behavior over the next three weeks. The diary was used to
establish a three-week or 21 day record of frequency of sexual activity,
number of orgasms, and sexual desire.
Frequency of sexual activity was assessed by asking each participant to
note each time she participated in sexual activity with her spouse. The
number of orgasms was obtained by asking each woman to record the
number or orgasms she experienced during these sexual activities with
her spouse. Multiple or sequential orgasms experienced by women dur-
ing one sexual activity were also noted. Sexual desire was measured by
asking women, each time they participated in a sexual activity with their
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

spouse, to indicate how interested they were in participating in that activ-

ity on a scale of 1 (extremely low) to 10 (extremely high), with 5 being
one's usual level of interest. The overall measure of sexual desire was
established by computing the mean score for the total individual desire
ratings given each sexual activity.
This sex diar has demonstrated excellent concurrent validity for all
three measures[l1lz3 and has been shown to contain a valid measure of
sexual desire.23

Measures

When the women completed the sex diary and returned it to the primary
investigator, they were given a questionnaire battery which included de-
mographic data and the following five measures:
Relationship Closeness Inventory (RCI). This measure, developed by
Berscheid et defines and assesses relationship closeness as the combi-
nation of frequency, diversity, and strength as emphasized by Kelly et
al.25Closer relationships (those with higher scores) are thus characterized
by interacting with one's spouse frequently, in a diverse number of activi-
ties, and having a strong impact. Data on the validity and reliability of
this measure have been published.24
Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS). This scale was used to measure sexual
satisfaction,26with lower scores corresponding to greater sexual satisfac-
tion. It has been found not to be influenced by social desirabilityz3 and
has demonstrated a reliability of .90 or better, good face, discriminant,
content, and construct validity with various samples in 15 c o u n t r i e ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ '
Hurlbert Index of Sexual Assertiveness (HISA). This instrument was em-
ployed to assess sexual assertiveness, with higher scores correspond-
ing to greater sexual assertiveness. This instrument has demonstrated
good construct and discriminate validity and produced an internal relia-
bility alpha of .91 for women." In addition, this index has been shown
not to be influenced by social desirability response sets.23
Sexuality Opinion Scale (SOS), developed by Fisher et al.,29was used to
measure the extent to which individuals affectively respond to sexual
cues along a negative (erotophobic) to positive (erotophilic) dimension.
 158 Journal of Sex W Marital Therapy, Vol. 19, No. 2, Summer 1993

FIGURE 1
The Hurlbert Index of Sexual Excitability
1. I quickly become sexually excited during foreplay. (R)
2. I find sex with my partner to be exciting. (R)
3. When it comes to having sex with my partner, I experience orgasms. (R)
4. It is difficult for me to become sexually aroused.
5. During sex, I seem to lose my initial level of sexual excitement.
6. I feel I take too long to get sexually aroused.
7. It is hard for me to become sexually excited.
8. Sex is boring.
9. 1 quickly become sexually excited when my partner performs oral sex on me. (R)
10. Just thinking about sex turns me on. (R)
11. I find anal sex to be exciting. (R)
12. When it comes to sex, I am easily aroused by my partner touching me. (R)
13. I find masturbation to be sexually stimulating. (R)
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

14. I seem to lose my sexual excitement too fast.

15. Kissing is sexually arousing for me. (R)
16. Even when I am in the mood, it is difficult for me to get excited about sex,
17. Sexual foreplay is exciting for me. (R)
18. When it comes to sex, it seems to take me a long time to get sexually aroused.
19. Pleasing my partner is sexually exciting for me. (R)
20. 1 have difficulty maintaining my sexual excitement.
2 1. I find sexual intercourse to be exciting. (R)
22. When it comes to sex, I think my level of sexual excitement is low.
23. Even when I desire sex, it seems hard for me to become excited.
24. Giving my partner oral sex is sexually exciting for me. (R)
25. In general, sex is satisfying for me. (R)

Note: (K)everse scored items. Scoring system responses: all of the time = 0 points; most of the time = + 1 point;
some of the time = + 2 points; rarely = + 3 points; never = + 4 points.

This scale has been found to have high levels of internal consistency
(alpha range 30-.go), good test-retest reliability (range 30-35 across
two months), and excellent convergent and discriminant validit in over
a decade of research with various samples and population^.^^^^ Hi h
g er
x
scores correspond to greater erotophilia.
Hurlbert Index of Sexual Excitability (HISE). This measure, shown in
Figure 1, was used to obtain a subjective measure of sexual excitability.
Although this measure has been used in a clinical setting since 1988, the
HISE is yet to be used as a research tool. Therefore, in an effort to
examine this index for research ur oses, the HISE and the Crowne-
P P
Marlowe Social Desirability Scale3 were given to 48 nurses (17 male and
3 1 females) enrolled in a hospital orientation program. The two measures
produced a nonsignificant correlational coefficient of .123, indicating
that the HISE seems not to be influenced by social desirability response
sets. Test-retest stability was excellent (r = .873, across a period of seven
days). In the final analysis, the HISE produced a Chronbach alpha coef-
ficient of .829, indicating good internal consistency."

Procedures

All the women who signed up volunteered to participate. Each individual

signed an informed consent statement and agreed to participate in this
 Female Sexual Satisfuction 159

TABLE 1
Sexual Activities Experienced and Ranked in Descending
Order by Reported Levels of Female Satisfaction
Sexual Experience Reported Satisfaction Level
Activity Endorsed NS ss S vs
N % % % % %
Cunnilingus 92 93.9 - 5.4 11.9 82.6
Coitus 98 100 2.0 11.2 19.4 68.4
Self-stimulation = 1 28 28.6 3.6 - 82.1 14.3
Self-stimulation = 2 69 70.4 - 16.0 79.7 4.3
Partner-Stimulation 31 31.6 3.2 9.8 83.8 3.2
Fellatio = 1 93 94.9 17.2 53.8 20.4 8.6
Anal lntercourse 19 19.4 10.5 73.7 10.5 5.3
Fellatio = 2 43 43.9 65.1 13.9 20.9 -
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

Nute: Ranking reported levels of satisfaction only included those women who had reportedly experienced the
sexual activity. NS = not satisfying; SS = somewhat satisfying; S = satisfying; VS = very satisfying; N = number;
dash = no cases reported in category; Self-Stimulation= 1 = masturbation to orgasm during partner related
sexual activities: Self-Stimulation= 2 = masturbation to orgasm alone; Partner-Stimulation = masturbation to
orgasm by partner; Fellatio= 1 = oral sex on male without male ejaculation; Fellatio = 2 = oral sex on male to
include male ejaculation.

research project. In an effort to insure privacy, eliminate influence, and

encourage honesty, the data in this study did not use names and consisted
of confidential written responses to the questionnaire battery and diary.
Sex diary responses were coded and questionnaires were scaled by an
unbiased third person who did not know any of the subjects.

RESULTS

For an analysis of sexual experience and satisfaction levels with various

sexual activities for the women in this study, refer to Table 1. With the
limitation of sample size, education, and age, these figures provide only
a rough normative framework for the evaluation of female sexual experi-
ence and satisfaction in nondistressed marriages. As illustrated, cunnilin-
gus was rated by the women in this study as the most satisfying sexual
activity experienced. These findings are consistent with those of other
studies re arding female sexual satisfaction in specific partner-related
activities.$33
Table 2 illustrated the means, standard deviations, and ranges for all
the measures used in this study. However, in order to understand the
degree of sexual satisfaction women experience in their relationships, we
first examined the correlations between sexual satisfaction and the scores
on the RCI, HISA, SOS, HISE and sexual desire, frequency of sexual
activity, and number of orgasms. As can be seen in Table 3, all of these
correlations are significant. That is, greater sexual satisfaction was associ-
ated with greater closeness, greater sexual assertiveness, higher erotophil-
ia, greater sexual excitability, greater sexual desire, higher frequency of
sexual activity, and more orgasms.
 160 Journal of Sex &? Marital Therapy, Vol. 19, No. 2, Summer 1993

'I'ABLE 2
Means, Standard Deviations, and Ranges for Measures
Measures M t SD Sample Ranges
Sex Diary*
Frequency of Sex 8.847 2 3.006 2 - 15
Number of Orgasms 4.429 ? 2.908 0 - 11
Sexual Desire 8.041 ? 1.421 5 - 10
Orgasm Consistency .504 2 315 0- 2
Measures
Relationship Closeness 16.633 t 6.840 14 - 21
Sexual Satisfaction 15.449 2 3.720 8 - 28
Sexual Assertiveness 68.316 +- 3.108 60 - 74
Erotophohia-Erotophilia 62.847 ? 3.759 51-71
Sexual Excitability 81.917 * 12.018 61 -93
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

*Data entries per the 21 day period coded from the sex diaries

Although all of these variables are highly intercorrelated, a step-wise

multiple regression analysis was run to determine which variables were
predictive of sexual satisfaction over and above the other variables stud-
ied. When all seven variables are entered into the equation, the total
amount of variance in sexual satisfaction that can be accounted for by
the seven variables is 56.39%, F{7,90} = 16.623, p < .0001. T h e only
three variables that add to the prediction of sexual satisfaction over and
above each of the other six variables are assertiveness, t(90} = -3.357,
p < .01, erotophilia, t{90} = -2.598, p < .05, and closeness, t{90} =
-4.268, p 4 .0001. These three variables alone account for 55.41% of
the variance, F{3,94} = 38.93, p < .0001, which is not significantly less
than that percentage accounted for by all seven variables.
One interesting finding of this analysis is that the number of orgasms
a woman had was not predictive of her sexual satisfaction. One explana-
tion for this unexpected finding is that it is not the number of orgasms
per se that is important, but orgasm consistency, that proportion of sexual

TABLE 3
Correlational Matrix for Measures
M- 1 M-2 M-3 M-4 M-5 M-6 M-7 M-8
M-2 .596' - - - - - -
M-3 .417' .625' - - - -
M-4 .335' .479' ,366' - - -
M-5 .500' .452' .383' .358' - -
M-6 -.032 .675' .456' .283b .148 -
M-7 .372' .404" .270h .344" .358' 244" -
M-8 ,221" .435' .293' .490' .403' .302" .320' -
M-9 - .442' - .508' - ,370' - 569' - .538' - .367' - ,584' .42 1

Note: Higher scores correspond to greater M - l frequency of sexual activity, M-2 nirniber of orgasms, M-9 sexual
desire, M-4 sexual assertiveness, M-5 erotophilia, M-6 orgasm consistency, M-7 relationship closeness, and M-8
sexual excitability and lower scores indicate greater M-9 sexual satisfaction.
"p <.05
"p <.Ol
'p <.0O1
 Female Sexual Satafuction 161

TABLE 4
Variety and Frequency of Partner-Related Sexual Activities
with Orgasm Consistency for Females and Males
Sexual Activities Sexual Activity Female Male
(11 = 867)* Frequency Orgasm Orgasm
Occurrence Occurrence
TYPe N % B % B %
Coitus 854 98.50 216 25.29 827 96.83
Cunnilingus 279 32.17 227 81.36 0 0
Fellatio 401 46.25 0 0 92 23.44
Anal Intercourse 11 1.26 0 0 11 100
Male Masturbating Female 46 5.30 38 82.60 0 0
Female Masturbating Male 1 0.11 0 0 1 100
Male Masturbating Self 2 0.23 0 0 2 100
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

Female Masturbating Self 151 17.41 148 98.01 0 0

*The total number of partner related sexual activities recorded by the women in the sex diaries per the 2 1 day
period.
Note: Genital stimulation and foreplay for the purpose of sexual arousal or preparation were nor assessed by the
sex diary and masturbation was operationalized as stimulation for the primary purpose of orgasm or ejaculation.

activity in which she engages and has an orgasm. All other things being
equal, one would expect that a woman who engages in sexual activity five
times and has five orgasms would be more sexually satisfied than a woman
who participates in sexual activity 20 times and has five orgasms. Thus
the above regression was repeated using orgasm consistency in place of
number of orgasms. All other variables in the analysis remained the same.
The total amount of variance in sexual satisfaction accounted for by
these seven variables (closeness, sexual assertiveness, erotophilia, sexual
excitability, sexual desire, frequency of sexual activity, and orgasm consis-
tency) was 58.93%, F{7,90} = 18.44, p < .0001. Closeness, t{90} =
-3.998, p < .0001, sexual assertiveness, t{90} = -3.350, p < .01, and
erotophilia, t{90} = -2.717, p < .01, each still aided in the prediction of
sexual satisfaction over and above the other six variables, but now orgasm
consistency was also found to aid in the prediction of sexual satisfaction,
t{90} = -2.497, p < .05.

CONCLUSION

Although sexual activity is defined in the sex diary by Hurlbert and

Whittaker5 as “any sexual engagement between spouses in which at least
one partner receives an orgasm” (p. 274), 98.5% of the sexual activities
coded from the diaries, as shown in Table 4, either led to or consisted of
coitus. Table 4 also shows those sexual activities recorded in the sex
diaries and the percentages of those activities leading to orgasm. As a
comparison, the men were also included. While Kinsey et al.34found that
40% of women to be orgasmic in 10% of their coital experiences, this
study found women to be orgasmic during sexual intercourse about 25%
of the time. These figures also appear to reinforce earlier accounts that
lack of orgasm during sexual intercourse may be a normal variation in
female
 162 Journal of Sex &? Marital Therapy, Vol. 19, No. 2, Summer 1993

TABLE 5
Reported versus Recorded Orgasm Consistency
Levels for Partner-Related Sexual Activities
Orgasm Reported frequency Recorded frequency
Frequency N % N %
> 90% of the time 35 35.7 1 7 7.14
Between 75 and 89% 46 46.93 29 29.59
Between 50 and 74% 16 16.32 47 47.95
Between 25 and 49% 1 1.02 14 14.28
Between 11 and 24% 0 1 1.02
< 10% of the time 0 0

Note: The reported frequency of orgasm came from the information checklist and the recorded frequency of
orgasm was obtained from the sex diaries.
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

Many inconsistencies are still apparent in the literature regarding fe-

male orgasm consistency. Some reports indicate women to be orgasmic
as much as 40-80% of the time, regardless of the means of stimula-
ti~n.~*'"In contrast, other studies using sex diaries to track orgasm con-
sistency over time have found women to be or asmic in partner-related
activities between 19% and 36% of the 8
This study, also em-
1923

ploying a sex diary to examine orgasm consistency, found women to be

orgasmic about 50% of the time. Since relationship problem^,^^,^^ alcohol
abuse,'" and anorgasmia22have been found to have a negative impact on
female sexual functioning, the high levels of orgasm consistency noted
in this study are likely due to the controls instituted. While problems may
be inherent in the use of sex diaries to track sexual behavior over time,
diary methods may provide researchers with a more accurate measure
of female sexual behavior in general and orgasm consistency in particu-
lar. As illustrated in Table 5, this concept seems to be further reinforced
by the discrepancies noted in this study between self-report and the sex
diary. For example, in self-report, the majority of the women reported
experiencing an orgasm in partner-related activities over 75% of the
time. Using the sex diary as an indicator, the majority of these women
recorded experiencing an orgasm less than 75% of the time.
The present findings also suggest that the role of personality and rela-
tionship variables such as sexual assertiveness, erotophilia, and relation-
ship closeness may be more important in understanding female sexual
satisfaction than sexual variables such as frequency of sexual activity,
number of orgasms, sexual excitability, and sexual desire. Knowing a
woman's sexual assertiveness, erotophilia, and relationship closeness are
highly predictive of sexual satisfaction and aid in the prediction of sexual
satisfaction over and above what can be learned knowing about the fre-
quency of sexual activity, the number of orgasms a woman has, her level
of sexual excitability, and how much she desired the sexual activity. These
findings coincide with those of other researchers who have found that
personality and relationship characteristics are important components
for female sexual s a t i s f a ~ t i o n . ~The
~ ~ ' importance
~~'~ of such variables
 Female Sexual Satisfaction 163

FIGURE 2

25.5%
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

Orgasm Orgasm
16.3% 4,1%

A B
Note: A = What aspect of partner related sexual activities do you find to be the most sexuaily satisfying? and B
= What aspect of partner related sexual activities would you like your partner to pay more attention to in your
relationship?

seem to be further reinforced by the women’s responses in Figure 2. On

the other hand, these figures also indicate the importance of such sexual
variables as adequate foreplay in female sexual satisfaction. Therefore,
the finding that personality and relationship variables are more predictive
of female sexual satisfaction than objective assessments of the sexual
activity must be interpreted cautiously. All of the objective sexual assess-
ments were significantly related to sexual satisfaction. The regression
simply indicated that given this particular set of variables, personality
and relationship variables were more predictive than the objective sexual
variables. If a different set of variables were used, different findings
would be likely to emerge.
This is well illustrated by the finding that when orgasm consistency was
used as a predictor of sexual satisfaction, it did aid in the prediction of
sexual satisfaction where the actual number of orgasms did not. This
finding is similar to findings from other studies regarding female sexual
s a t i s f a c t i ~ n . ~Interestingly,
,~~.~~ the number of orgasms is more highly
correlated with sexual satisfaction ( r = - .508, p < .001) than is orgasm
consistency ( r = - .367, p < .001). The reason orgasm consistency helps
in the prediction of sexual satisfaction in the regression and the number
of orgasms does not is that the number of orgasms is more highly corre-
lated with the other independent variables than is orgasm consistency.
The finding that relationship closeness was related to sexual satisfaction
is particularly interesting given that the measure of closeness used was a
relatively objective measure of interdependence rather than a subjective
assessment of feelings of closeness. Thus, these findings suggest that
the closer, more interdependent a couple is, the greater their sexual
 164 Journal of Sex k3 Marital Therapy, Vol. 19, No. 2, Summer 1993

satisfaction. This is less obvious, and thus more interesting, than the
finding that greater subjective closeness o r overall relationship satisfac-
tion is related to sexual satisfaction.
There are methodological limitations to this study. T h e sample was
small and nonrepresentative; therefore, all results and conclusions based
on those results should be considered with caution. Despite these limita-
tions, however, over half of the variability in the dependent variable was
explained. T h e controls employed in the study, both statistical and in the
design were important, and the success of these factors offsets, to some
extent, the limitations of the small sample.

REFERENCES
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

1. Campbell A, Converse P, Rogers W: The quality of Amerzcan life: Perceptions, eualuatiom,

and satisfaction. New York Sage, 1976.
2. Blumstein P, Schwartz P: American couples: Money, work, and sex. New York, Morrow,
1983.
3. Mann HK, Clark W, White LC: Sexual intercourse and male sexual satisfaction. Unpub-
lished manuscript, 1989.
4. Newcomb MD, Bentler PM: Dimensions of subjective female orgasmic respon-
siveness. J Personal Suc Psycho1 44:862-873, 1983.
5. Hurlbert DF, Whittaker KE: T h e role of masturbation in marital and sexual satisfac-
tion: A comparative study of female masturbators and nonmasturbators. J Sex Educ
Ther 17272-282, 1991.
6. Darling CA, Davidson JK, Sr, Cox RP: Female sexual response and the timing of
partner orgasm. J Sex Marital Ther 17:3-2 1, 1991.
7. Davidson JK, Sr, Darling CA: T h e sexually experienced woman: Multiple sex part-
ners and sexual satisfaction.] Sex Res 24:141-154, 1988.
8. Rosenzweig J M , Dailey DM: Dyadic adjustmentisexual satisfaction in women and
men as a function of psychological sex role self-perception.] Sex Marital Ther 15:42-56,
1989.
9. Hurlbert DF: Factors influencing a woman’s decision to end an extramarital sexual
relationship. J Sex Marital Ther 1992.
10. Banmen J, Vogel NA: T h e relationship between marital quality and interpersonal
sexual communication. Fum Ther 12:45-58, 1985.
11. Hurlbert DF: T h e role of assertiveness in female sexuality: A comparative study
between sexually assertive and sexually nonassertive women. J Sex Marital Ther
17: 183-1 90, 199 1.
12. Schenk J , Pfrang H , Rausche A: Personality traits versus the quality of the marital
relationship as the determinant of marital sexuality. Arch Sex Behau 12:31-42, 1983.
13. McCannJT, Biaggio MK: Sexual satisfaction in marriage as a function of life mean-
ing. Arch Sex Behau 18:59-72, 1989.
14. Snyder DK, Berg P: Determinants of sexual dissatisfaction in sexually distressed
couples. Arch Sex Behau 12:237-246, 1983.
15. Lief HI: Current thinking on the orgasm experience. Med Asp Hum Sex 14:55-62,
1980.
16. Arafat I, Cotten W: Masturbation practices of males and females. ] Sex Res
10:293-307, 1974.
17. Bentler PM, Peeler WH: Models of female orgasm. Arch Sex Behau 8:405-423, 1979.
18. Williams J: Sexuality in marriage. In B Wolman, J Money, Handbook ofhuman sexuality.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1980.
 Female Sexual Satisfactzon 165

19. Spanier G: Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of
marriage and similar dyads. J M a n Family 38:15-30, 1976.
20. Fagan PJ, Schmidt CW, Jr, Wise T N , Derogatis LK: Alcoholism in patients with
sexual disorders. J Sex Marital Ther 14:245-252, 1988.
21. Selzer ML, Vinokur A, Van Rooijen L: A self-administered short Michigan alcoholism
screening test (SMAST).] Stud Alcohol 36: 117-126, 1975.
22. Cotten-Huston AL, Wheeler KA: Preorgasmic group treatment: Assertiveness, mari-
tal adjustment and sexual function in women..] Sex Marital Ther 93296-502, 1983.
23. Apt C, Hurlbert DF: Motherhood and female sexuality beyond one year postpartum:
A study of military wives, J Sex Educ Ther 18:104-114, 1992.
24. Berscheid E, Snyder M, Omoto AM: T h e relationship closeness inventory: Assessing
the closeness of interpersonal relationships. J Personal Soc Psycho1 573792-807, 1989.
25. Kelly HH, Berscheid E, Christensen A, Harvey J H , Houston TL, Levinger G, McClin-
tock E, Peplau LA, Perterson DR: Close relationships. New York, Freeman, 1983.
26. Hudson WW: The clinical measurement package. Homewood, IL, Dorsey, 1982.
Downloaded by [Princeton University] at 03:38 14 November 2014

27. Hudson WW: Development and use of indexes and scales. In RM Grinnell (ed),
Social work research and evaluation. Itasca, IL, Peacock, 1981.
28. Hurlbert DF: ‘Teaching women with sexual desire disorder how to self-stimulate:
Issues of assertiveness, self esteem, and sexual scripts. Paper presented at the United
States Army Annual Social Work Practice Conference, Brooke Army Medical Centcr,
San Antonio, T X , 1988.
29. Fisher WA, Byrne D, White LA: Emotional barriers to contraception. In D Byrne,
WA Fisher (eds), Adolescents, sex, and contraception. Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum, 1983.
30. Fisher WA, Byrne D, White LA, Kelly K: Erotophobia-erotophilia as a dimension of
persona1ity.J Sex Res 25:123-151, 1988.
3 1. Crowne DP, Marlowe D: T h e approval motive: Students in evaluation dependence. New
York, Wiley, 1964.
32. Cronbach LJ: Essentials of psychological testing. New York, Harper 8c Row, 1970.
33. Gagnon, J H , Simon W: T h e sexual scripting of oral genital contacts. Arch Sex Behav
15:1-25, 1987.
34. Kinsey AC, Porneroy WB, Martin CE, Gebhard PH: Sexual behavior in the human
female. New York, Simon & Schuster, 1953.
35. Hite S: The Hite report. N e w York, Marmillan, 1976.
36. Kaplan H S : Disorders of sexual desire. New York, Brunner-Mazel, 1979.
37. LoPiccolo J , Stock WE: Treatment of sexual dysfunction. J Consult Clin Psycho1
54~158-167, 1986.
38. Crenshaw TL: Bedside manners: Your guide to better sex. New York, Pinnacle, 1983.
39. Jobes PG: ‘The relationship between traditional and innovative sex-role adaptation
and sexual satisfaction among a homogeneous sample of middle-aged Caucasian
w0men.J Sex Marital Ther 12:146156, 1986.
40. Kaplan HS: The illustrated manual of sex therapy. New York, Brunner-Mazel, 1987.
41. Klassen AD, Wilsnack SC: Sexual experience and drinking among women in a US
national survey. Arch Sex Behav 15:363-392, 1986.
42. Stuart FM, Hammon DC, Pett MA: Inhibited sexual desire in women. Arch Sex Behav
16:91-106, 1987.
43. VerhulstJ, HeimanJR: An interactional approach to sexual dysfunction. Amer J Farn
Ther 7:19-36, 1988.
44. Fisher S: The female orga,sm. N e w York, Basic Books, 1973.