Kinsey Reports
The Kinsey Reports are two books on human sexual behaviour, ‘Sexual Behaviour in the Human Male’ (1948) by Dr Alfred Kinsey, Wardell Pomeroy & Clyde Martin and ‘Sexual Behaviour in the Human Female’ (1953) by Dr Alfred Kinsey, Wardell Pomeroy, Clyde Martin & Paul Gebhard. Kinsey was a zoologist at Indiana University and the founder of the Institute for Sex Research, more widely known as the Kinsey Institute.
The research astounded the general public and was immediately controversial and sensational. The findings caused shock and outrage, both because they challenged conventional beliefs about sexuality and because they discussed subjects that had previously been taboo.
Critics have stated that some of the data in the reports could not have been obtained without observation or participation in child sexual abuse, or through collaborations with child molesters. The Kinsey Institute denies this charge, though it acknowledges that Kinsey interviewed men who had sexual experiences with children, and some former and current directors of the Institute described those men as ‘paedophiles’.
Sexual orientation
Probably the most widely cited part of the Kinsey Reports regard the prevalence of
different sexual orientations — especially to support a claim that 10% of the population
is gay. In fact, the findings are not so straightforward, and Kinsey himself avoided
and disapproved of using terms like homosexual or heterosexual to describe individuals,
asserting that sexuality is prone to change over time, and that sexual behaviour
can be understood both as physical contact as well as purely psychological phenomena
(desire, sexual attraction, fantasy). Instead of three categories (heterosexual,
bisexual and homosexual), a seven-
The reports also state that nearly 46% of the male subjects had ‘reacted’ sexually
to persons of both sexes in the course of their adult lives, and 37% had at least
one homosexual experience. 11.6% of white males (ages 20-
7% of single females (ages 20-
Marital coitus
The average frequency of marital sex reported by women was 2.8 times a week, in late teens; 2.2 times a week, by age 30; and 1.0 times a week, by age 50.
Extra-
Kinsey estimated that approximately 50% of all married males had some extramarital experience at some time during their married lives. Among the sample, 26% of females had had extramarital sex by their forties. Between 1 in 6 and 1 in 10 females from age 26 to 50 were engaged in extramarital sex.
Methodology
Data were gathered primarily by means of interviews, which were encoded to maintain confidentiality. Other data sources included the diaries of convicted child molesters. The data were later computerized for processing. All of this material, including the original researchers' notes, remains available from the Kinsey Institute to qualified researchers who demonstrate a need to view such materials. The institute also allows researchers to use statistical software (in order to analyse the data.
The subject matter of the report led itself to sensationalism. Based on his data and findings, others claimed that 10% of the population is homosexual, and that women enhance their prospects of satisfaction in marriage by masturbating previously. Neither claim was made by Kinsey.
Objections on moral grounds
The books have been widely criticized by conservatives as promoting degeneracy. ‘Sexual Behaviour in the Human Male’ has been on two lists of the worst books of modern times. It was #3 on the Intercollegiate Studies Institute's 50 Worst Books of the Twentieth Century and #4 on Human Events' Ten Most Harmful Books of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries.
Objections to statistical approach
In addition to moral objections, academic criticisms pertain to sample selection
and sample bias. Two main problems identified were that (1) significant portions
of the samples come from prison populations and male prostitutes,and that (2) people
who volunteer to be interviewed about taboo subject are likely to suffer from the
problem of self-
In 1948, the same year as the original publication, a committee of the American Statistical
Association, including notable statisticians such as John Tukey, condemned the sampling
procedure. Tukey was perhaps the most vocal critic, saying, "A random selection of
three people would have been better than a group of 300 chosen by Mr. Kinsey." Criticism
principally revolved around the over-
A related criticism, by some of the leading psychologists of the day, notably Abraham Maslow, was that Kinsey did not consider ‘volunteer bias’. The data represented only those volunteering to participate in discussion of taboo topics. Most Americans were reluctant to discuss the intimate details of their sex lives even with their spouses or close friends. Before the publication of Kinsey's reports, Dr Maslow tested Kinsey's volunteers for bias. He concluded that Kinsey’s sample was unrepresentative of the general population.
In a response to these criticisms, Paul Gebhard, Kinsey's successor as director of
the Kinsey Institute for Sex Research, spent years ‘cleaning’ the Kinsey data of
purported contaminants, removing, for example, all material derived from prison populations
in the basic sample. In 1979, Gebhard (with Alan B Johnson) published ‘The Kinsey
Data: Marginal Tabulations of the 1938-
“Instead of Kinsey's 37% (men who had at least one homosexual experience), Gebhard
& Johnson came up with 36.4%; the 10% figure (men who were "more or less exclusively
homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55"), with prison
inmates excluded, came to 9.9% for white, college-
Masters & Johnson
The Masters & Johnson research team, made up of William Masters and Virginia E Johnson, pioneered research into the nature of human sexual response and the diagnosis and treatment of sexual disorders and dysfunctions from 1957 until the 1990s.
Their work began in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at Washington University
in St. Louis and was continued at the independent not-
In the initial phase of their studies, from 1957 until 1965, they recorded some of
the first laboratory data on the anatomy and physiology of human sexual response
based on direct observation of 382 women and 312 men in what they conservatively
estimated to be “10,000 complete cycles of sexual response”. Their findings, particularly
on the nature of female sexual arousal (for example, describing the mechanisms of
vaginal lubrication and debunking the earlier widely-
They jointly wrote two classic texts in the field, ‘Human Sexual Response’ and ‘Human
Sexual Inadequacy’, published in 1966 and 1970 respectively. Both of these books
were best-
They have been inducted into the St. Louis Walk of Fame.
Research work
Master & Johnson met in 1957 when William Masters hired Virginia Johnson as a research assistant to undertake a comprehensive study of human sexuality. (Masters divorced his first wife to marry Johnson in 1969. They divorced three decades later, largely bringing their joint research to an end.) Previously, the study of human sexuality (sexology) had been a largely neglected area of study due to the restrictive social conventions of the time, with one notable exception.
Alfred Kinsey and his colleagues at Indiana University had previously published two volumes on sexual behaviour in the human male and female in 1948 and 1953, respectively (known as the Kinsey Reports), both of which had been revolutionary and controversial in their time. Kinsey's work however, had mainly investigated the frequency with which certain behaviours occurred in the population and was based on personal interviews, not on laboratory observation. In contrast, Masters and Johnson set about to study the structure, psychology and physiology of sexual behaviour, through observing and measuring masturbation and sexual intercourse in the laboratory.
As well as recording some of the first physiological data from the human body and sex organs during sexual excitation, they also framed their findings and conclusions in language that espoused sex as a healthy and natural activity that could be enjoyed as a source of pleasure and intimacy. The era in which their research was conducted permitted the use of methods that have not been attempted before or since: "[M]en and women were designated as 'assigned partners' and arbitrarily paired with each other to create 'assigned couples'."
Four stage model of the sexual response
One of the most enduring and important aspects of their work has been the four stage model of sexual response, which they described as the human sexual response cycle. They defined the four stages of this cycle as:
- Excitement phase (initial arousal)
- Plateau phase (at full arousal, but not yet at orgasm)
- Orgasm
- Resolution phase (after orgasm)
This model shows no difference between Sigmund Freud's purported ‘vaginal orgasm’ and ‘clitoral orgasm’: the physiologic response was identical, even if the stimulation was in a different place.
Masters & Johnson's findings also revealed that men undergo a refractory period following orgasm during which they are not able to ejaculate again, whereas there is no refractory period in women: this makes women capable of multiple orgasms. They also were the first to describe the phenomenon of the rhythmic contractions of orgasm in both sexes occurring initially in 0.8 second intervals and then gradually slowing in both speed and intensity.
Sexual response in the aging person
Masters & Johnson were the first to conduct research on the sexual responsiveness of older adults, finding that given a state of reasonably good health and the availability of an interested and interesting partner, there was no absolute age at which sexual abilities disappeared. While they noted that there were specific changes to the patterns of male and female sexual responses with aging – for example, it takes older men longer to become aroused and they typically require more direct genital stimulation, and the speed and amount of vaginal lubrication tends to diminish with age as well – they noted that many older men and women are perfectly capable of excitement and orgasm well into their seventies and beyond, a finding that has been confirmed in population based epidemiological research on sexual function in the elderly.
Laboratory comparison of homosexual male versus female sex
Masters and Johnson randomly assigned gay men into couples and lesbians into couples
and then observed them having sex in the laboratory, at the Masters & Johnson Insitute.
They provided their observations in ‘Homosexuality in Perspective’:-
“Assigned male homosexual study subjects A, B, and C..., interacting in the laboratory with previously unknown male partners, did discuss procedural matters with these partners, but quite briefly. Usually, the discussion consisted of just a question or a suggestion, but often it was limited to nonverbal communicative expressions such as eye contact or hand movement, any of which usually proved sufficient to establish the protocol of partner interaction. No coaching or suggestions were made by the research team.”
According to Masters and Johnson, this pattern differed in the lesbian couples:-
“While initial stimulative activity tended to be on a mutual basis, in short order control of the specific sexual experience usually was assumed by one partner. The assumption of control was established without verbal communication and frequently with no obvious nonverbal direction, although on one occasion discussion as to procedural strategy continued even as the couple was interacting physically.”
Sexual dysfunction
Their research into the anatomy and physiology of sexual response was a springboard
to developing a clinical approach to the treatment of sexual problems in a revolutionary
manner. Prior to 1970, when they described their treatment program to the world for
the first time, sexual dysfunctions such as premature ejaculation, impotence, vaginismus,
and female frigidity had been generally treated by long-
Treatment of homosexual behaviour
From 1968 to 1977, the Masters & Johnson Institute ran a program to convert or revert
homosexuals to heterosexuality. This program reported a 71.6% success rate over a
six-
Criticisms
Some sex researchers, Shere Hite in particular, have focused on understanding how individuals regard sexual experience and the meaning it holds for them. Hite has criticised Masters & Johnson's work for uncritically incorporating cultural attitudes on sexual behaviour into their research.
Shere Hite
Shere Hite (born November 2, 1942, Saint Joseph, Missouri) is an American-
Education
Hite graduated from Seabreeze High School in Daytona Beach, Florida. She received
a masters degree in history from the University of Florida in 1967. She then moved
to New York City and enrolled at Columbia University to work toward her Ph.D. in
social history. Hite attributes the non-
Research Focus
Shere Hite has focused on understanding how individuals regard sexual experience
and the meaning it holds for them. Hite has criticised Masters & Johnson's work for
uncritically incorporating cultural attitudes on sexual behaviour into their research.
For example, Hite's work showed that 70% of women do not have orgasms through in-
Methodology
Hite uses an individualistic research method. Thousands of responses from anonymous questionnaires were used as a framework to develop a discourse on human responses to gender and sexuality. Her conclusions derived from these questionnaire data have met with methodological criticism. The fact that her data are not probability samples raises concerns about whether the sample data can be generalised to relevant populations. As is common with surveys concerning sensitive subjects, such as sexual behaviour, the proportion of nonresponse is typically large. Thus the conclusions derived from the data may not represent the views of the population under study because of bias due to nonresponse. Hite supporters defend her methodology by saying that it is more likely to get to the truth of women's sexuality than studying women engaged in prostitution as if they were exemplary of women in general, or to study in laboratory conditions women who claim to orgasm during coitus.
Hite has been praised for her theoretical fruitfulness in sociological research. The suggestion of bias in some of Hite's studies is frequently used as a talking point in university courses where sampling methods are discussed.
Developed from Wilkipedia articles under the GNU Free Documentation License