Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148 DOI 10.1007/s10508-014-0277-3

ORIGINAL PAPER

Arousal, Working Memory Capacity, and Sexual Decision-Making in Men Tara Spokes • Donald W. Hine • Anthony D. G. Marks Peter Quain • Amy D. Lykins

•

Received: 4 November 2011 / Revised: 25 November 2012 / Accepted: 13 October 2013 / Published online: 3 April 2014  Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Abstract This study investigated whether working memory capacity (WMC) moderated the relationship between physiological arousal and sexual decision making. A total of 59 men viewed 20 consensual and 20 non-consensual images of heterosexual interaction while their physiological arousal levels were recorded using skin conductance response. Participants also completed an assessment of WMC and a date-rape analogue task for which they had to identify the point at which an average Australian male would cease all sexual advances in response to verbal and/or physical resistance from a female partner. Participants who were more physiologically aroused by and spent more time viewing the non-consensual sexual imagery nominated significantly later stopping points on the date-rape analogue task. Consistent with our predictions, the relationship between physiological arousal and nominated stopping point was strongest for participants with lower levels of WMC. For participants with high WMC, physiological arousal was unrelated to nominated stopping point. Thus, executive functioning ability (and WMC in particular) appears to play an important role in moderating men’s decision making with regard to sexually aggressive behavior. Keywords Sexual aggression
Sexual arousal
Working memory capacity
Sexual offending
Sexual decision-making

T. Spokes
D. W. Hine
A. D. G. Marks
P. Quain
A. D. Lykins (&) School of Behavioural Cognitive and Social Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia e-mail: [email protected] T. Spokes School of Psychology, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Introduction The decision of whether or not to pursue a sexual encounter has longintriguedresearchers.Whatmayappeartobeasimplechoice of‘‘yes’’or‘‘no’’often involves a complex balance of short- and long-term potential benefits and costs, to both self and others. The benefits may include pleasure, release, and feeling closer to a partner whereas the costs may involve diminished selfesteem or peer regard, unwanted pregnancy, sexually-transmitted infections, losing one’s partner (if engaging in infidelity), and, in extreme cases such as rape, causing emotional and physical harm to another, legal charges, and time spent in prison. These last situations, where men cross over from a consensual sexual interaction into sexual behavior that engages force, are of particular interest to the current study. In these situations, a decision is made, at some point, to continue a sexual encounter despite the presence of negative feedback, such as fear or pain in the partner. We investigated aspects of the decision-making process to better understand the interplay between arousal and executive functioning when a man decides to go‘‘too far.’’ It is often assumed that men engage in sexual offending behavior because either the erotic target or the behavior itself is highlysexually exciting. For example, manystudies have shown that men imprisoned for rape exhibit greater sexual arousal to descriptions of sexual aggression than non-sexual offenders (e.g., Abel, Barlow, Blanchard, & Guild, 1977; Earls & Proulx, 1986; Lalumiere & Quinsey, 1994; Quinsey, Chaplin, & Upfold, 1984; Quinsey, Chaplin, & Varney, 1981). These patterns have been found in non-forensic samples as well, with sexually coercive men displaying greater arousal to forced-sex cues than do non-coercive men (Malamuth, 1986; Malamuth, Check, & Briere, 1986). Thus, patterns of arousal to aggressive sexual stimuli not only can discriminate rapists from other criminals, but also candiscriminatebetweensexuallyaggressiveandnon-aggressive men in the community (for review, see Prentky & Knight, 1991).

123

1138

Individuals who experience deviant sexual preferences typically know well enough not to report them honestly, for a variety of reasons (e.g., social judgment, legal consequences). Thus, researchers have attempted to develop assessment techniques that rely less on self-report (which is easily managed to obscure true preferences) and more on covert measures such as viewing time, measures of visual attention, and responses to date-rape analogue tasks. Visual attention and viewing time measures have been shown to correspond with both non-deviant (e.g., Lykins, Meana, & Strauss, 2008) and deviant (e.g., Abel, Huffman, Warberg, & Holland, 1998) sexual preferences. Importantly, they exhibit similar levels of reliability and validity as erectile arousal responses (Abel et al., 1998; Abel, Jordan, Hand, Holland, & Phipps, 2001; Gray & Plaud, 2005). The date-rape task represents a closer approximation to real-life situations and judgments than most vignette studies (Bernat, Calhoun, & Adams, 1999a). Studies have found this measure to reliably differentiate between sexually aggressive and non-aggressive men, with later stopping points being associated with a history of sexually aggressive behavior, acceptance of interpersonal violence, and calloused sexual beliefs (Bernat, Stolp, Calhoun, & Adams, 1997; Bernat, Wilson, & Calhoun, 1999b). Further, the task has a high test– retest reliability of.87(Bernat et al., 1997).Assuch,viewing time and responses to a date-rape scenario can be considered valid proxy measures of sexual interest and propensity for sexual aggression, respectively. Measuring arousal also poses challenges. Men’s physiological arousal to sexual stimuli is typically assessed using penile tumescence (phallometry) (Hanson & Bussie`re, 1998), which is considered the most direct way to assess sexual arousal. However, high refusal rates and resulting selection bias associated with this invasive method make its use problematic. In this study, we use a non-invasive measure of general physiological arousal, the skin conductance response (SCR), as a measure of arousal to sexual stimuli. SCRs are brief, event-related fluctuations in skin conductance that occur over several seconds following exposure to a stimulus. They are generated by sympathetic nervous system (SNS) activity and can be a sensitive indicator of short-term changes in SNS arousal (Figner & Murphy, 2010). While the main psychological process related to these phasic changes in SNS discharge is the orienting response—the capture and subsequent preferential allocation ofattention tosubjectively mean¨ hman, Hamm, & Hugingful elements of the environment (O dahl, 2000)—the SCR has also been related to the male erectile response, and so to sexual arousal. Autonomic innervation of the genital skin has been shown to approximate autonomic innervation of erectile tissue (Soylu, Yilmaz, Ozcan, Sarier, & Baydinc, 2004), and SCRs measured from genital skin are related to similar responses from peripherally recorded SCRs (Opsomer, Boccasena,Traversa,& Rossini,1996).Additionally, male erectile response to mental stimulation is influenced by SNS activity through the psychogenic pathway (whereas arousal from tactile

123

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148

stimulation occurs through parasympathetic activity; Weiss, 1972). Therefore, it is probable that sexual arousal to visually presented sexual stimuli would be associated with increased SNS activation, and so with increases in skin conductance. However, while it is plausible to suggest that SCRs to sexually explicit stimuli could indicate orienting to sexual stimuli and associated sexual arousal (an appetitive or positive affective state), because they reflect general SNS arousal, SCRs do not discriminate between stimulus valence (i.e., between positive and negative affective responses). While SCRs are sensitive to the affective intensity of a stimulus, both positive and negative emotive stimuli produce larger SCRs than neutral stimuli (Bradley, Cuthbert, & Lang, 1990; Cook, Hawk, Davis, & Stevenson, 1991; Sa´nchez-Navarro, Martı´nez-Selva, Torrente, & Roma´n, 2008). As such, it is equally possible that occurrence of SCRs to sexual stimuli could reflect sexual arousal, embarrassment, uneasiness, disgust, or a combination of these, depending on the affective reactions of individual subjects. SCRs are also sensitive to personal significance, with stimuli that are personally significant reliably eliciting larger SCRs than those that are not (Tranel, Fowles, & Damasio, 1985). Significance is often explained in terms of the strength of affective associations related ¨ hman & Wiens,2003). Thus, significance topersonal concerns(O can determine individual differences in perceived stimulus intensity and valence, and so in both the magnitude and functional significance of SCRs (i.e., sexual vs. non-sexual arousal). The issue of significance, and thus the influence of positive versus negative valence, needs to be addressed when interpreting arousal reflected by SCRs. Although arousal to deviant stimuli may be the most parsimonious causal explanation for sexual aggression and offending, this does not appear to be the complete story. For example, only 50 % of convicted child molesters show an actual preference for the immature physique (Blanchard, Klassen, Dickey, Kuban, & Blak, 2001). Further research has shown that even non-preferred erotic targets (e.g., prepubescent girls in the case of gynephilic men) can be significantly sexually arousing, at least in comparison to neutral stimuli or erotic stimuli depicting the opposite sex to which one is attracted (Freund, Langevin, Cibiri, & Zajac, 1973; Lykins et al., 2010). Researchers have begun to focus more on cognitive explanations for these apparently inconsistent results, with a particular interest in behavioral inhibition processes. Barbaree, Marshall, and Lanthier (1979) suggested that cues of non-consent and force typically inhibit sexual response in the average man whereas, in men prone to sexual aggression, this inhibition process is ineffective. At least one other study has supported this contention (e.g., Malamuth, Heim, & Seymour, 1980). Lohr, Adams, and Davis (1997) found that sexually coercive men had a lower threshold for arousal to sexual cues, as well as a lack of inhibition of sexual arousal to cues of force and non-consent. A combination of high propensity for sexual excitation and low sexual inhibition due to threat of negative consequences

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148

(e.g., unwanted pregnancy, sexually-transmitted infection) in general has been shown to be reliably related to high risk sexual behavior (Bancroft, 1999; Janssen, Goodrich, Petrocelli, & Bancroft, 2009; Janssen, Vorst, Finn, & Bancroft, 2002a). Further, conditions of high sexual arousal have repeatedly been linked to reduced decision-making capabilities (e.g., Ariely & Loewenstein, 2006; Bancroft et al., 2004; Boldero, Moore, & Rosenthal, 1992). It has thus been argued that men who appear to have a high propensity for sexual excitation, as well as showing decreased avoidance (as demonstrated by lower physiological reactivity to cues of fear and threat), may be at particularly high risk for engaging in sexually aggressive behavior (Janssen et al., 2009; Janssen, Vorst, Finn, & Bancroft, 2002b). These findings emphasize the importance of inhibitory processes in regulating sexual activity. Despite the longstanding interest in the etiology of sexual aggression and sexual offending, to our knowledge, there are no studies that have directly assessed the cognitive aspects of these decision-making processes. Many men may be aroused by depictions of sexual aggression, but why do only some of them go on to offend? How can we characterize the neuropsychological processes associated with decision-making that leads to sexual aggression? Based on more recent neural activity findings (e.g., Redoute et al., 2005), it has been suggested that reactive inhibition, or‘‘putting the brakes on,’’may be mediated by the caudate nucleus (Bancroft, Graham, Janssen, & Sanders, 2009) and regions of the prefrontal cortex involved with action selection and behavioral control (Ward & Beech, 2008). Though these findings suggest the neurological bases by which inhibition may occur, little is known about possible cognitive processes involved in inhibiting a behavioral response related to sexual decision-making. When presented with a potentially risky situation, people often rely primarily on one of two types of decision-making processes: (1) implicit processes—referring to an individual’s instinctive and intuitive responses to danger or (2) explicit processes—using logic and reason to make decisions (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995; Hine, Marks,& O’Neil,2009; Kahneman, 2003; Rooke& Hine,2011;Slovic& Peters,2006).Researchhasshown that people who tend to rely on implicit or intuitive decisionmaking processes are more likely to engage in risky behaviors. This may be due to the perceived benefits of the moment outweighing the longer-term costs, most of which have not been processed in any meaningful way (Holland & Klaczynski, 2009; Slovic & Peters, 2006). The relative influence of explicit versus implicit processing might also depend upon the person’s level of executive functioning (e.g., Stacy, Ames, & Knowlton, 2004). Executive functions are the cognitive skills underpinning goal-directed behavior. They are the cornerstone of the capacitylimited construct of working memory, where they operate over information held active in the system in the service of current goals (Kane & Engle, 2002). Executive functions are reflected by organization of relevant information, deliberation over it (in

1139

terms of motivations, prior learning, and consequences), and a decision to emit or, importantly, inhibit a behavior (Lezak, Howieson, & Loring, 2004). Thus, working memory is believed to play a pivotal role in behavioral regulation (Baddeley, 1986; Barkley, 1997; Finn, Mazas, Justus, & Steinmetz, 2002). Individuals differ in their working memory capacity (WMC), which reflects the maximum information load under which efficient executive functioning can proceed (Baddeley, 2000; Engle, 2001, 2002). WMC deficits have been related to types of dysregulated behavior including aggression (Seguin, Pihl, Harden, Tremblay, & Boulerice, 1995), and problematic alcohol use (Finn & Hall, 2004; Finn et al., 2002). Thus, under conditions of strong impulse motivation, low WMC might compromise executive functions and consequently the deliberative processes that would lead to behavioral inhibition, making it challenging for individuals to look beyond immediate rewards and gratification to consider more appropriate decisions or potentially significant future negative outcomes. Research also has shown that high WMC can act as a protective factor for ‘‘socially deviant’’ individuals, such that these individuals are better able to consider, and be influenced by, relatively low salient, future/delayed contingencies, even when they experience the same impulses and desires as their lowWMC counterparts (Finn & Hall, 2004; Finn et al., 2002). A combination of deviant desires and poor WMC creates a greater risk for disinhibited behavior, including antisocial acts (Finn et al., 2002) and potentially aggressive or risky sexual activity. Low WMC is associated with greater implicit-type decision-making, and thus impulsive behavior, in adolescents (Thush et al., 2008). Finn and Hall (2004) tested the proposal that WMC may either mediate or moderate the influence of temperament on pathological behavior (e.g., Barkley, 1997; Eisenberg et al., 2000; Rothbart, Derryberry, & Posner, 1994). They found that WMC moderated the relationship between disinhibited traits and problematic alcohol use, such that persons with disinhibited traits and low WMC were likely to engage in problematic drinking behavior, but persons with disinhibited traits and high WMC were not. From these findings, Finn and Hall (2004) hypothesized that executive functioning moderated the relationship between implicit processes and behavior via two separate mechanisms: (1) low WMC makes it difficult to shift attention away from highly activated stimuli to those that are less immediately salient; and (2) positive associations with behavior in the short-termaremoresalientthanlong-termpotentialconsequences. Extrapolating this argument to dysregulated sexual behavior, in a situation where sexual aggression may occur, those with lower WMC would likely find the potential short-term benefits of having sex more salient than the potential long-term, less pertinent negative consequences. This puts them at higher risk for engaging in sexual aggression than men with higher WMC. Based on these findings, this study was designed to examine the relationship between physiological arousal, WMC, and pro-

123

1140

pensity for sexual aggression. Wehypothesized that WMC would moderate the relationship between physiological arousal, as measured by SCR, and propensity for sexual aggression. In particular, we expected individuals exhibiting high arousal to sexually aggressive imagery and low WMC would be most likely to indicate a higher disposition for sexually aggressive behavior on a date-rape analogue task. As this task is an indirect measure of sexual aggression, we also measured viewing time of sexual images in order to further evaluate the content validity. If a later stopping point was associated with tolerance of higher levels of aggression, and therefore an increased propensity for aggressive behavior, then a longer viewing time of the sexually aggressive images would be associated with a later stopping point in the date-rape scenario.

Method Participants Participants were 59 men aged 19–60 years (M = 34.75 years, SD = 11.01) who were recruited from the undergraduate student population at a regional university in New South Wales, as well as from various retail, commercial, and industrial organizations in Southeast Queensland, Australia. We considered a combined university and community sample to be the ideal populations with which to conduct this study, as sexual aggression on university campuses continues to be a significant problem (Hingson, Heeren, Winter, & Wechsler, 2005) and we were primarily interested in persons from the general population who might engage in sexual aggression but were not, to our knowledge, sexual offenders. Participation was voluntary and was not associated with any compensation. All participants had completed at least year 10 of high school and 29 % had begun or completed a university degree. Approximately half the sample (51 %) indicated that they were currently in a committed relationship and 32 % reported having children. Measures Stimulus Ratings In the first part of the study, participants viewed 40 sexually explicit static digital images and were asked to provide affective valence ratings, on a scale from 0 (very negative) to 6 (very positive). The selected stimulus set was comprised of 20 consensual and 20 non-consensual, sexually aggressive images. Within the consensual category, 11 images were obtained from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) (Lang,Bradley, & Cuthbert, 1999) (IAPS numbers 4651, 4632, 4658, 4659, 4664, 4670, 4672, 4680, 4681, 4800, 4681, 4800, 4810), and 9 were obtained from free internet resources. Of the non-consensual image set, one was obtained from the IAPS (4464.2)

123

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148

and the other 19 were sourced from free Internet websites. The allocation of images to consensual/non-consensual categories was based on the apparent presence or absence of female consent to sexual activity. In the non-consensual images, the women typically had facial expressions indicating fear or distress (including crying in many cases) and were often being forced into sexual activity by physical force (e.g., being held down and smothered) or by use of weapons (e.g., held at knifepoint).1 Images in each category were matched for content based on number of color versus black and white images, as well as general sexual positions depicted. Participants rated images in the non-consensual, aggressive category as significantly more negative than those in the consensual category (M = .80, SD = .81 vs. M = 4.50, SD = .93, respectively), paired t(58) = 23.44, p\.001. For this analysis, we computed two average rating scores for each participant: an average rating for the consensual images and average score for the non-consensual images. The t test compared the mean of these average ratings across participants for consensual images with the mean of the average ratings for the non-consensual images. Images were presented on a 15-inch notebook computer so as to increase portability of data collection and to maximize recruitment of community volunteers. The presentation of the two categories was in a fixed random order (i.e., no more than three images from either category occurred consecutively) and skin conductance (SCR) was measured throughout the presentation of all images. The duration of presentation of each image was designed to allow for the prototypical SCR pattern (e.g., Dawson, Schell, & Filion, 2000). The inter-stimulus interval (ISI) commenced with a small fixation cross with a variable presentation time of 0.5–2.5 s in order to minimize anticipatory skin conductance measures (SCRs) (see below for more detail). Each image was then presented for a forced viewing time of 6 s to allow SCRs to develop, peak, and begin to subside. Following the pre-set forced 6 s viewing time, participants had an optional free viewing time, which ended only when they clicked an icon on the screen. Once the participant had elected to move on, they were prompted to provide their rating of affective valence for the most recently shown image. To allow for each SCR to return to half-peak amplitude following image presentation and rating, a neutral image (IAPS number 5731) was presented for 6 s before the next stimulus interval began. Skin Conductance Response During the presentation of the non-consensual and consensual sexual images, SCR measurements were collected to measure general physiological arousal. As a manipulation check and to investigate the extent to which other emotions, particularly disgust or discomfort, may have contributed to SCRs, we com1

More detailed information about the images used in this study can be obtained by contacting the corresponding author.

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148

putedcorrelationsbetweenSCR andtheaffectivevalenceratings of the images. Analyses demonstrated that there were no significant correlations between participants’ average SCR to the nonconsensual images and their average rating of the non-consensual images, r(57) = -.07. There was also no correlation between theaverage SCRs and average ratings for the consensual images, r(57) = .02. This finding suggests that the SCR measure was assessing arousal independently of self-reported positive or negative affect. Skin conductance response measurements were collected using a BIOPAC MP100 data acquisition unit and SCR 100B amplifiermodule(BIOPACSystemsInc.,CA).The100B amplifier uses the constant current method to measure skin conductance in micromho units. Following recommendations of Cutmore and James (2007), SCR was transduced using 9 mm Ag/ AgCl electrodes attached to the distal phalanges of the third and fourth fingers of the non-dominant hand with conductive gel. Data were conditioned and stored using AcqKnowledge software (BIOPAC Systems Inc., CA). Responses were baselinecorrected, with the baseline taken from 0 to 500 ms from the onset of stimulus presentation. SCR data were taken from 501 to 6,000 ms. Raw SCR data were filtered (low pass 8 Hz, 50 taps) and scaled up by 100. These scaled readings were then standardized in order to control for individual baseline and lability, and again scaled up by 10 (e.g., Ben-Shakhar, 1985; Lykken, Rose, Luther, & Maley, 1966). As such, the final SCR scores were in SD (by 10) and indicate change in each individual’s conductance with respect to their own magnitude of oscillation. We considered this standardization approach necessary to address the possibility that subjects who showed most interest in the coercive stimuli might possess antisocial personality characteristics (see Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2005; Janssen et al., 2002b), a profile associated with physiological hyporeactivity, notably in terms of autonomic arousal to stimuli generally considered as aversive (Benning, Patrick, & Iacono, 2005). Hyporeactivity to aversive stimuli in aggressive or antisocial individuals has been demonstrated by attenuation in absolute magnitude of both tonic (changes in skin conductance level across time) (Babcock, Green, Webb, & Yerington, 2005) and phasic (SCRs) (Hare, 1982; Hare & Quinn, 1971) skin conductance. Thus, the use of absolute skin conductance could mask the true degree of SNS arousal exhibited by the type of individual most likely to find coercive sexual stimuli arousing. Date Rape Analogue Task To assess the relationship between arousal and WMC on sexual decision-making, we utilized a date-rape analogue task based on Bernat et al.’s (1999a) modification of the original task created by Marx and Gross (1995) (see Appendix). In this task, participants listen to an audio-recorded scenario comprised of a scripted dialogue between a man and a woman that progressed in discrete stages from a casual dinner date to date rape. For this

1141

study, the original script was recorded by two drama students at the university so that participants heard the scenario in an Australian accent and with very minor modifications related to terminology (e.g., using the word‘‘footy’’[i.e., rugby] rather than ‘‘football’’). The total script included 77 lines of text, beginning with consensual foreplay, clear verbal resistance on the part of the female beginning at line 22, escalating verbal pressure from the male from line 32 to 56, and the commencement of physically forced unwanted sexual activity on line 59. In an attempt to mirror Bernat et al.’s experimental procedures, participants were presented with a static image of a semi-clothed woman while listening to the recording. After listening to the recording, participants then viewed a hardcopy of the script with line numbers. Pilot testing was initially performed on 18 male participants (aged 18–30) who did not take part in the final study. The pilot study participants were asked to indicate at what point they themselves would cease all advances as suggested in Bernat et al. However, all participants in the pilot study indicated that they would stop the sexual encounter very early in the scenario—at the point where the man suggests they lay down on the floor to get comfortable and the woman replies,‘‘I think we better stay sitting up’’(line 12). In order to counteract what we interpreted to be socially desirable rather than truthful responding, we asked participants in the actual study to indicate the point at which‘‘the typical Australian male’’would stop all advances. Research has shown that people tend to overestimate the harsh judgments of others on their own actions and are less concerned by the judgments passed on the actions of another, such as a ‘‘typical’’ group member (Epley, Savitsky, & Gilovich, 2002). Therefore, posing questions in the third person can reduce demand characteristics that encourage socially desirable responding (Paulhus, 1991). Studies on selfanchoring have shown that individuals generalize from their own attitudes and behaviors to draw conclusions about typical characteristics of groups to which they belong (Otten & Epstude, 2006). Thus, we asked participants to estimate the point at which atypical Australianmalewould ceasesexual advancestocounter response bias while at the same time provide an accurate assessment of participants’ own intent.

Working Memory Capacity Working memory capacitywas assessed using Towse’sSentence Completion Task (Towse, Hitch, & Hutton, 2000b). Towse, Hamilton, Hitch, and Hutton (2000a) developed a corpus of 288 incomplete sentences and reported their most common completion responses. As per typical procedures of this measure, we selected 59 medium length sentences from Appendix 1 of Towse et al. (2000a) that exhibited the highest consistency in the completion words generated by participants. In this portion of the study, the researcher read a sentence fragment out loud (e.g., ‘‘Mary got home and unlocked the…’’) and participants were

123

1142

required to generate a word to complete the sentence (e.g., ‘‘door’’). After generating words to complete a block of sentences (with blocks ranging from 2 to 6 sentences), participants were asked to recall the words they had generated. If participants successfully completed a block twice, they progressed to a new block with an additional sentence. A working memory score was computed based on the number of words participants correctly recalled in two successive blocks. Thus, the maximum possible score on the measure was 6. Procedure The order of the three main tasks (e.g., stimulus ratings and SCR measurements, the WMC task, the date rape analogue task) was counterbalanced across all participants to minimize possible order effects. At the beginning of the study, the researcher explained that the purpose of the study was to examine how men respond physiologically to sexual images they liked or disliked and to assess how these responses related to the participants’ self-reported attitudes toward variations in sexual behavior. The researcher gave verbal instructions for the stimulus ratings/SCR measurementsandthedaterapeanaloguetaskandthenanswered any questions the participant had. Given the sensitive nature of these tasks, the researcher left the experimental area while participants completed these two portions of the study. The WMC task required face-to-face task completion. At the completion of all tasks, participants were debriefed and then thanked for their participation. Approval for the study was obtained from the University’s Human Research Ethics Committee prior to commencement.

Results Descriptive Statistics Descriptive statistics for the variables used in the study are shown in Table 1. Participants spent very similar amounts of time viewing the consensual (M = 7.95 s, SD = .74) and nonconsensual sexual images, (M = 7.99 s, SD = .81), t(58)\1, and also did not significantly differ with respect to their SCRs to the consensual (M = -.67, SD = 2.65) and non-consensual sexual images (M = -.88, SD = 2.77), t(58)\1. Scores on the WMC measure ranged from 2 to 6; the mean score was just under the midpoint of 4 on the scale (M = 3.63, SD = 1.03). For ease of interpretation, participants were placed into categories of ‘‘low,’’‘‘average,’’ and ‘‘high’’ WMC based on the following criteria: participants with ‘‘low’’ WMC scored one or more SDs below the mean, participants with ‘‘average’’ WMC scored within one SD of the mean, and participants with ‘‘high’’ WMC scored one or more SDs above the mean. On average, participants indicated that a typical male would stop all sexual advances by half way through line 43 of the date rape

123

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148 Table 1 Descriptive statistics for variables used in the study Measure

M

SD

Observed Minimum Maximum

Optional viewing time consensual images (in seconds)

1.95

.74

.87

4.18

Optional viewing time nonconsensual images (in seconds)

1.99

.81

.95

4.30

Skin conductance consensual images

-.67

2.65 -7.24

5.59

Skin conductance nonconsensual images

-.88

2.77 -6.56

5.20

3.63

1.03

Working memory capacity Stopping point date rape analogue task

2.00

6.00

42.68 14.25 11.00

77.00

scenario, approximately 16 lines prior to the commencement of physically forced, non-consensual sexual activity. Sequential Regression Analysis Sequential multiple regression was used to test the hypotheses that (1) increased SCR and viewing time of images portraying non-consensual sexual activity (relative to baseline SCR and viewing time of consensual stimuli) would be associated with later selected stopping points on the date rape analogue task and (2) these effects would be attenuated in participants with higher levels of WMC. Predictors were entered into the analysis in three blocks. Age, SCR, and viewing time for consensual images were entered as control variables in the first block of the analysis. SCR and viewing time for non-consensual images were entered in Block 2 and the interactions between (1) SCR for the non-consensual images and WMC and (2) viewing time for the non-consensual images and WMC were entered in Block 3. As recommended by Cohen, Cohen, West, and Aiken (2003), the predictors used in interaction effects were centered at the mean prior to computing the interaction term. Including age and SCR/viewing time for consensual images in the initial step of the analysis enabled us to control for possible age effects on the stopping point dependent variable and isolate the effects associated with non-consensual sex from participants’ more general responses to images of sexual activity. Results of the sequential regression analysis are shown in Table 2. In Block 1, none of the control variables explained significant unique variance in the stopping point on the analogue measure. In Block 2, SCR and viewing time for nonconsensual sexual images both significantly predicted later stopping points in the date rape analogue task. In Block 3, there was a significant interaction between WMC and skin

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148

1143

Table 2 Summary of sequential regression analysis predicting stopping point on Date Rape Analogue Task Predictors

R2

adjR2 DR2

Block 1

.07

.02

b

.07

Age

-.10

Skin conductance consensual images

-.07

Optional viewing time consensual images Block 2

-.21 .25* .16

.18*

Age

-.21

Skin conductance consensual images Optional viewing time consensual images

-.37* -.47**

Skin conductance non-consensual images

.47**

Optional viewing time non-consensual images

.35*

Working memory capacity Block 3

-.08 .34* .23

.09*

Age

-.26

Skin conductance consensual images

-.50*

Optional viewing time consensual images

-.42**

Skin conductance non-consensual images

.60**

Optional viewing time non-consensual images

.34*

Working memory capacity

-.07

WMC 9 skin conductance nonconsensual images

-.28*

WMC 9 optional viewing time nonconsensual images

.19

Beta coefficients are standardized. N = 59 * p\.05; ** p\.01

conductance for the non-consensual sexual images, but not between WMC and viewing time. To interpret the significant interaction, we computed the conditional effects of SCRnon-consensual on stopping point in the date rape analogue test using the SPSS MODPROBE macro developed by Hayes and Matthes (2009). The conditional effects analysis involved computing simple slopes describing the SCRstopping point relationship at three levels of WMC: low (1 SD below the mean, 2.59), moderate (at the mean, 3.63), and high (1 SD above the mean, 4.66). The analysis indicated that SCR significantly predicted stopping point when WMC was low (b = 4.22, SE = 1.29, p = .002) and moderate (b = 3.63, SE = .93, p = .003), but not when WMC was high (b = 1.56, SE = .97, p = .11). A plot of the interaction is shown in Fig. 1.

Discussion The current study examined the relationship between physiological arousal (using SCR) to sexual images, WMC, and propensity for sexual aggression. The data were consistent with interpreting the SCR measure as reflecting SNS arousal related

Fig. 1 Interaction plot summarizing relationship between SCR in responses to non-consensual sexual images and stopping point in date rape analogue task

to sexual (i.e., approach related, positive) arousal rather than avoidance related (i.e., disgust, negative) arousal. We found that increased SCR to aggressive sexual images wasasignificant predictor of a later stopping point on the date-rape scenario. If the SNS arousal indicated by greater SCR was reflecting negative affective appraisal of the coercive material, it is likely that it would have been associated with earlier stopping points. Thus, thesignificanceofthesestimuli tothosedisplayinggreaterarousal canbeseenintermsofapproachbehaviorrelatedtosexualinterest and arousal. Importantly, WMC was found to moderate the relationship between SCR and stopping point, with arousal predicting stopping point for low and moderate, but not high, levels of WMC. Although previous research has often supported a link betweenarousaltodeviant stimuli andsexuallyaggressivebehavior (Looman & Marshall, 2005; Quinsey et al., 1984), little research has explored the role of cognitive processes such as WMC on this relationship. The current study provides important support for the role of executive functioning in the progression from sexual impulse to sexual aggression. Ourresultswere both consistent with and extend the literature on sexual decision-making and its relationship to physiological arousal. The importance of WMC in moderating the results of the decision-making task used in this study supports the role of executivefunctioning insexual decision-making(Kane& Engle, 2002), as has been theorized by previous researchers (Stoleru & Mouras, 2007; Ward & Beech, 2008). WMC may provide an explanatory mechanism for individual differences in dysregulated sexual behavior, including sexual risk-taking (e.g., Ariely & Loewenstein, 2006; Bancroft et al., 2003, 2004; Bancroft &

123

1144

Vukadinovic, 2004; Janssen et al., 2009) and sexual offending (e.g., Looman & Marshall, 2005; Quinsey et al., 1984). The current results may also suggest a potential cognitive component to sexual inhibitory processes as theorized by Bancroft and Janssen’s dual control model of sexual excitation and sexual inhibition (Bancroft, 1999; Janssen et al., 2002a, 2002b). The relationship between arousal, viewing time of the nonconsensual images, and decision-making warrants further discussion.StrongerSCRandlongerviewingtimeofimagesdepicting non-consensual sexual activity were found to predict later stoppingpointsonthedaterapeanaloguetask.Viewingtimeisan often-used indirect measure of sexual preferences, found to be associated with sexual attraction and orientation (Hall, Hogue, & Guo, 2011; Lykins et al., 2008; Rullo, Strassberg, & Israel, 2010; Rupp & Wallen, 2007) and underpinning Abel’s assessments of deviant sexual preferences (e.g., Abel et al., 1998). The current relationship between longer viewing time and a later stopping point suggests that these individuals found the non-consensual images arousing, even though this was not reflected in their ratings of these images. This study thus provides further support for the use of indirect measures in the assessment of sexual preferences, particularly those that are deviant. The results of the present study were also interesting in light of those reported recently by Macapagal, Janssen, Fridberg, Finn, and Heiman (2011). Macapagal et al. assessed the relationship between measures of impulsivity, sexual excitation, sexual inhibition, abstract intellectual ability, sexual arousal, and response patterns on two sets of Go/No-Go tasks (presented with either sexual or neutral stimuli). Higher impulsivity, higher sexual arousability, and lower abstract intellectual ability were associated with poorer performance on the Go/NoGo task, particularly when sexual content was present. It was concluded that sexually arousing stimuli may interfere with sexual decision-making processes, increasing the salience of rewards associated with sexual activity and decreasing the potential negative consequences, particularly for those individuals higher on trait impulsivity, sexual arousability, or lower intellectual ability. Our study provides additional support of this general thesis by showing that arousal and WMC may be an important risk factor underlying sexual decision making. An important strength of the current study was that it was conducted on a ‘‘normal’’ (i.e., non-forensic) population. Understandably, most research exploring sexual offending behavior has focused on sexual offenders—individuals who have both engaged in offending behavior and been charged. The sampling of community and university populations in this study provided the opportunity to investigate these relationships in a more general sample, thus providing data on possible routes by which men of the general community might continue to pursue a sexual encounter even when, on some level, they probably know they should not. These data may provide some explanation for why otherwise non-deviant people may engage in deviant or risky sexual behavior.

123

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148

One limitation of the study was that we did not measure sexual arousal directly, as SCR is a measure of general physiological arousal. No doubt further research into the interaction between cognitive functioning and arousal in sexually aggressive behavior would benefit from using traditional phallometric measures, as well as testing the theory on extreme sexual offending groups from a prison population. However, the more general representation of community volunteers made possible by using this less obtrusive measure provides a significant contribution to this field. Physiological arousal is an important component of sexual arousal (Weiss, 1972) and our results mirrored those found when measuring sexual arousal directly, such that increased arousal (sexual or physiological) to deviant stimuli is associated with greater deviant behavior. Thus, although our arousal measure assessed more general physiological arousal as opposed to sexual arousal specifically, it is reasonable to posit that the two were related in a meaningful way in this study. We also recognize that we had no measure of general intelligence in the current study, and that because intelligence and WMC are often highly positively correlated, perhaps we were simply measuring the role of intelligence in sexual decision-making. While this may be true, previous research examining similarprocesses has shown WMC and intelligence to independently moderate the relationship between an impulse experienced and subsequent behavior (Finn & Hall, 2004). While both appear to play important roles in moderating this relationship, the mechanisms by which they do so appear to differ. Finn and Hall suggestedthatperhapslowWMCisassociatedwithdifficultiesin retaining low salient information whereas low IQ may be associated with difficulties in problem-solving or understanding possible consequences of disinhibited behavior. The relationships between low IQ and risky sexual behavior (e.g., Shearer, Mulvihill, Klerman, Hovinga, & Redden, 2002), as well as between IQ and sexual offending behavior (Cantor et al., 2004), have been demonstrated previously and are deserving offutureresearch to explore the differential roles of IQ and WMC in contributing to risky or aggressive/deviant behavior. In sum, results of the current study supported the role of WMC as a moderator of the relationship between arousal and sexual decision-making. Our results provide a useful foundation for further investigation. Future research could target the limitations of this study by including direct assessments of sexual arousal alongside general physiological arousal to advance the use of this minimally obtrusive measure. Such a development would enable this field of research to investigate a wider and more general population. It would be useful to conduct a similar study on a forensic sexology population to ascertain if WMC appears to be significantly lower in offenders than in the average population, and to investigate how it may be related to recidivism. Finally, future research could also explore how other situational risk factors, such as drugs and alcohol consumption, interact with physiological arousal and WMC to influence sexual decision-making.

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148

1145

Appendix

Table 3 continued

See Table 3.

Line number

Dialogue

37

W: Well, I mean that’s probably true.

38

M: So?

Table 3 Date Rape Analogue Task: Script from Bernat et al. (1999a)

39

W: So, I don’t know. I’m just not sure right now.

Line number

Dialogue

40

M: You know it feels good. I’m really falling for you.

41

W: I know…and I’m really attracted to you. But…

1

M: Don’t mind my flat, it’s a total mess. It’s been a long week, if you know what I mean?

42

M: You know you’re hot. Look, this is special.

43

(Kissing) M: Oh, that feels great.

2

W: Oh, gosh, don’t worry, you should see my place, too.

3 4

M: Do you want something to drink? W: Yeah, a drink would be great.

44 45

W: (giggle) You take off your shirt, too. (pause) M: Oh… man, you look good. (pause)

5

M: Yeah cool.

46

W: (sexually aroused) I’m really getting turned on.

6

W: Is this your brother with you in this picture?

47

M: Me, too. I mean, I know you like this, too, right?

7

M: Yeah, like, that was last year at his birthday, I think.

W: Wait, I don’t want you to take off my skirt.

(Kissing, heavy breathing)

8

W: You guys look alike. You’re both really cute!

48

9

M: (sarcastic and lusty) Oh, you think so, do ya?

49

M: I have to. I’m so turned on.

W: (giggle) Yeah.

50

W: (firm) No. I told you I don’t want to have sex!

(Kissing sounds)

51

M: If we can’t have sex, I don’t know what I’ll do.

M: How about if we lie down on the floor?

52

W: I just don’t want to have sex.

12

W: (half playful) Ah, I don’t know. I think we better stay sitting up.

53

M: Do you want me to stop seeing you? I know you don’t want that to happen. C’mon, let’s just do it!

13 14

M: Oh c’mon, I have to lie down. Got an old footy injury. W: Wait! (laughing) You just said you played soccer.

54 55

15

M: (as if he’s caught) Did I say footy? I meant to say soccer.

W: No! I told you I don’t want to sleep with you! M: Then why don’t we just take off this skirt. It’ll make things a hell of a lot easier.

16

W: (laughing) Oh, that’s cute. Real cute.

56

W: Please don’t do this. I don’t think you understand, but I don’t want to have sex with you!

17

M: Think so? Why don’t you lie down with me.

57

M: (angry) You’re nothing but a prick tease!

18

W: (sighs) Okay.

58

W: You know, I think I better just go now.

10 11

(Sounds of movement as they lie on the floor)

(Pause… he grabs her forcefully)

19

M: There. Comfortable?

59

W: Ouch… get your fucking hands off of me!

20

W: Uh-huh.

60

21

M: Good. Me, too.

M: You know you want it. Don’t push it, Carrie! If you don’t sleep with me, I’m going to have to hurt you!

61

W: Let go of me! Don’t you dare touch me like that!

62

M: Oh, c’mon, I wanna fuck you, babe, I wanna fuck you bad.

(Kissing and caressing—a little heavier) 22

W: (a little tentative) Hey, what are you doing?

23

M: Helping you loosen up.

24

W: Well, your roommate—what about…

63

W: (more forcefully) NO! We’re not going to do that.

25

M: (interrupts) My roommate won’t be home for hours.

64

M: One way or the other you’re going to give it to me!

26 27

W: He could surprise you, you know. M: He won’t. Don’t worry, (pause) I promise, (pause)

65

W: (protesting, crying) No, stop it. Get off of me. Stop!

66

M: This skirt is coming off and you’re gonna fuck me!

28

W: Well, okay then, just a few buttons.

29

M: Okay. Just a few buttons.

67 68

W: (more crying) No! Stop it! Stop it! M: C’mon, babe, you know you want it, too.

69

W: (crying) No! Let go, don’t do that.

30

M: That feels great.

70

M: I just want to fuck you a little, and then I’ll stop.

31

W: No, wait maybe we should leave my bra on.

71

W: (crying) No! No! No! You’re hurting me. Stop!

M: But you’re so hot. I’ve just got to.

72

M: Oh, yes, that’s more like it.

33

W: You know, wait. Maybe we should slow down.

73

W: (crying and screaming) No! Stop it! No. Take it out!

34

M: Oh c’mon. You can’t leave me like this. I’m so hard.

74

M: Oh, it feels so good, you know it feels good, too.

35

W: (stammering) I know, but…

75

W: No, stop! Let go of my arms! No, stop!

36

M: C’mon, babe. You know we’re gonna do more sooner or later.

76

M: Oh, yeah, fuck yeah… I’m coming… I’m coming.

77

W: No, stop. Please stop. (she is crying and pleading)

(Kissing, breathing, petting, mild moaning)

32

123

1146

References Abel, G. G., Barlow, D. H., Blanchard, E. B., & Guild, D. (1977). The components of rapists’ sexual arousal. Archives of General Psychiatry, 34, 895–903. Abel, G. G., Huffman, J., Warberg, B., & Holland, C. L. (1998). Visual reaction time and plethysmography as measures of sexual interest in child molesters. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 10, 81–95. Abel, G. G., Jordan, A., Hand, C. G., Holland, L. A., & Phipps, A. (2001). Classification models of child molesters utilizing the Abel Assessment for sexual interest. Child Abuse and Neglect, 25, 703–718. Ariely, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2006). The heat of the moment: The effect of sexual arousal on sexual decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19, 87–98. Babcock, J. C., Green, C. E., Webb, S. A., & Yerington, T. P. (2005). Psychophysiological profiles of batterers: Autonomic emotional reactivity as it predicts the antisocial spectrum of behavior among intimate partner abusers. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 114, 444–455. Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon. Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417–423. Bancroft, J. (1999). Central inhibition of sexual response in the male: A theoretical perspective. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 23, 763–784. Bancroft, J., Graham, C. A., Janssen, E., & Sanders, S. A. (2009). The dual control model: Current status and future directions. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 121–142. Bancroft, J., Janssen, E., Carnes, L., Goodrich, D., Strong, D., & Long, J. S. (2004). Sexual activity and risk-taking in young heterosexual men: The relevance of sexual arousability, mood, and sensation seeking. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 181–192. Bancroft, J., Janssen, E., Strong, D., Carnes, L., Vukadinovic, Z., & Long, J. S. (2003). Sexual risk-taking in gay men: The relevance of sexual arousability, mood,and sensation seeking. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 555–572. Bancroft, J., & Vukadinovic, Z. (2004). Sexual addiction, sexual compulsivity, sexual impulsivity, or what? Toward a theoretical model. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 225–234. Barbaree, H. E., Marshall, W. L., & Lanthier, R. D. (1979). Deviant sexual arousal in rapists. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 17, 215–222. Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 65–94. Benning, S. D., Patrick, C. J., & Iacono, W. G. (2005). Psychopathy, startle blink modulation, and electrodermal reactivity in twin men. Psychophysiology, 42, 753–762. Ben-Shakhar, G. (1985). Standardization within individuals: A simple method to neutralize individual differences in skin conductance. Psychophysiology, 22, 292–299. Bernat, J. A., Calhoun, K. S., & Adams, H. E. (1999a). Sexually aggressive and nonaggressive men: Sexual arousal and judgments in response to acquaintance rape and consensual analogues. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108, 662–673. Bernat, J. A., Stolp, S., Calhoun, K. S., & Adams, H. F. (1997). Construct validity and test–retest reliability of a date rape decision-latency measure. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 19, 315–330. Bernat, J. A., Wilson, A. E., & Calhoun, K. S. (1999b). Sexual coercion history, calloused sexual beliefs and judgments of sexual coercion in a date rape analogue. Violence and Victims, 14, 147–160. Blanchard, R., Klassen, P., Dickey, R., Kuban, M. E., & Blak, T. (2001). Sensitivity and specificity for phallometric tests for pedophilia in

123

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148 nonadmitting sex offenders. Psychological Assessment, 13, 118– 126. Boldero, J., Moore, S., & Rosenthal, D. (1992). Intention, context, and safe sex: Australian adolescents’ responses to AIDS. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1374–1396. Bradley, M. M., Cuthbert, B. N., & Lang, P. J. (1990). Startle reflex modification: Emotion or attention? Psychophysiology, 27, 513–522. Cantor, J. M., Blanchard, R., Christensen, B. K., Dickey, R., Klassen, P. E., Beckstead, A. L., et al. (2004). Intelligence, memory, and handedness in pedophilia. Neuropsychology, 18, 3–14. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cook, E. W., Hawk, L. W., Davis, T. L., & Stevenson, V. E. (1991). Affective individual differences and startle reflex modulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 5–13. Cutmore, T. R. H., & James, D. A. (2007). Sensors and sensor systems for psychophysiological monitoring: A review of current trends. Journal of Psychophysiology, 21, 51–71. Dawson, M. E., Schell, A. M., & Filion, D. L. (2000). The electrodermal system. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Bernston (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (2nd ed., pp. 200–223). New York: Cambridge University Press. Earls, C. M., & Proulx, J. (1986). The differentiation of francophone rapists and nonrapists using penile circumferential measures.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 13, 419–429. Eisenberg, N., Guthrie, I. K., Fabes, R. A., Shepard, S. A., Losoya, S. H., Murphy, B. C., et al. (2000). Prediction of elementary school children’s externalizing problem behaviors from attentional and behavioral regulation and negative emotionality. Child Development, 71, 1367–1382. Engle, R. W. (2001). What is working memory capacity? In H. L. Roediger, III & J. S. Nairne (Eds.), The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 297–314). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Engle, R. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 19–23. Epley, N., Savitsky, K., & Gilovich, T. (2002). Empathy neglect: Reconciling the spotlight effect and the correspondence bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 300–312. Figner,B.,&Murphy,R.O.(2010).Usingskinconductanceinjudgmentand decision making research. In M. Schulte-Mecklenbeck, A. Kuehberger, & R. Ranyard (Eds.), A handbook of process tracing methods for decision research (pp. 163–184). New York: Psychology Press. Finn, P. R., & Hall, J. (2004). Cognitive ability and risk for alcoholism: Short-term memory capacity and intelligence moderate personality risk for alcohol problems. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113, 569– 581. Finn, P. R., Mazas, C. A., Justus, A. N., & Steinmetz, J. (2002). Earlyonset alcoholism with conduct disorder: Go/no go learning deficits, working memory capacity, and personality. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 26, 186–206. Freund, K., Langevin, R., Cibiri, S., & Zajac, Y. (1973). Heterosexual aversion in homosexual males. British Journal of Psychiatry, 122, 163–169. Gray, S. R., & Plaud, J. J. (2005). A comparison of the Abel Assessment for Sexual Interest and penile plethysmography in an outpatient sample of sexual offenders. Journal of Sexual Offender Civil Commitment: Science and the Law, 1, 1–10. Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27. Hall, C., Hogue, T., & Guo, K. (2011). Differential gaze behavior towards sexually preferred and non-preferred human figures. Journal of Sex Research, 48, 461–469.

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148 Hanson, R. K., & Bussie`re, M. T. (1998). Predicting relapse: A metaanalysis of sexual offender recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 348–362. Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. E. (2005). The characteristics of persistent sexual offenders: A meta-analysis of recidivism studies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 1154–1163. Hare, R. D. (1982). Psychopathy and physiological activity during anticipation of an aversive stimulus in a distraction paradigm. Psychophysiology, 19, 266–271. Hare, R. D., & Quinn, M. J. (1971). Psychopathy and autonomic conditioning. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 77, 223–235. Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 924–936. Hine, D. W., Marks, A. D. G., & O’Neil, G. (2009). Smoking cessation in adults: A dual process perspective. Addiction Research & Theory, 17, 220–229. Hingson, R., Heeren, T., Winter, M., & Wechsler, H. (2005). Magnitude of alcohol-related mortality and morbidity among U.S. college students ages 18–24: Changes from 1998 to 2001. Annual Review of Public Health, 26, 259–279. Holland, J. D., & Klaczynski, P. A. (2009). Intuitive risk taking during adolescence. The Prevention Researcher, 16, 8–11. Janssen, E., Goodrich, D., Petrocelli, J. V., & Bancroft, J. (2009). Psychophysiological response patterns and risky sexual behavior in heterosexual and homosexual men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 538–550. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002a). The Sexual Inhibition (SIS) and Sexual Excitation (SES) Scales: I. Measuring sexual inhibition and excitation proneness in men. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 114–126. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002b). The Sexual Inhibition (SIS) and Sexual Excitation (SES) Scales: II. Predicting psychophysiological response patterns. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 127–132. Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice. American Psychologist, 58, 697–720. Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2002). The role of prefrontal cortex in working-memory capacity, executive attention, and general fluid intelligence: An individual differences perspective. Psychological Bulletin Review, 9, 637–671. Lalumiere, M. L., & Quinsey, V. L. (1994). The discriminability of rapists from non-sex offenders using phallometric measures: A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 21, 150–175. Lang, P. J., Bradley, M., & Cuthbert, B. (1999). International affective picture system (IAPS): Technical manual and affective ratings. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Center for Research in Psychophysiology. Lezak, M. D., Howieson, D. B., & Loring, D. W. (2004). Neuropsychological assessment (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Lohr, B. A., Adams, H. E., & Davis, J. M. (1997). Sexual arousal to erotic and aggressive stimuli in sexually coercive and non-coercive men. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 106, 230–242. Looman, J., & Marshall, W. L. (2005). Sexual arousal in rapists. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 367–389. Lykins, A. D., Cantor, J. M., Kuban, M. E., Blak, T., Dickey, R., Klassen, P. E., et al. (2010). Sexual arousal to female children in gynephilic men. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 22, 279– 289. Lykins, A. D., Meana, M., & Strauss, G. P. (2008). Sex differences in visual attention to erotic and non-erotic visual stimuli. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 219–228. Lykken, D. T., Rose, R., Luther, B., & Maley, M. (1966). Correcting psychophysiological measures for individual differences in range. Psychological Bulletin, 66, 481–484.

1147 Macapagal, K. R., Janssen, E., Fridberg, D. J., Finn, P. R., & Heiman, J. R. (2011). The effects of impulsivity, sexual arousability, and abstract intellectual ability on men’s and women’s go/no-go task performance. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 995–1006. Malamuth, N. M. (1986). Predictors of naturalistic sexual aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 953–962. Malamuth, N. M., Check, J. V., & Briere, J. (1986). Sexual arousal in response to aggression: Ideological, aggressive, and sexual correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 330–340. Malamuth, N. M., Heim, M., & Seymour, F. (1980). Sexual responsiveness of college students to rape depictions: Inhibitory and disinhibitory effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 399–408. Marx, B. P., & Gross, A. M. (1995). Date rape: An analysis of two contextual variables. Behavior Modification, 19, 451–463. ¨ hman, A., Hamm, A., & Hugdahl, K. (2000). Cognition and the O autonomic nervous system: Orienting, anticipation, and conditioning. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, & G. G. Bernston (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (2nd ed., pp. 533–575). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ¨ hman, A., & Wiens, S. (2003). On the automaticity of autonomic O responses in emotion: An evolutionary perspective. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 256–275). New York: Oxford University Press. Opsomer, R. J., Boccasena, P., Traversa, R., & Rossini, P. M. (1996). Sympathetic skin responses from the limbs and the genitalia: Normative study and contribution to the evaluation of neurological disorders. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Electromyography and Motor Control, 101, 25–31. Otten, S., & Epstude, K. (2006). Overlapping mental representations of self, ingroup, and outgroup: Unraveling self-stereotyping and selfanchoring. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 957– 969. Paulhus, D. I. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & I. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Prentky, R. A., & Knight, R. A. (1991). Identifying critical dimensions for discriminating among rapists. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 643–661. Quinsey, V. L., Chaplin, T. C., & Upfold, D. (1984). Sexual arousal to nonsexual violence and sadomasochistic themes among rapists and non-sex-offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 52, 651–657. Quinsey, V. L., Chaplin, T. C., & Varney, G. (1981). A comparison of rapists’ and non-sex offenders’ sexual preferences for mutually consenting sex, rape, and physical abuse of women. Behavioral Assessment, 3, 127–135. Redoute, J., Stoleru, S., Pugeat, M., Costes, N., Lavenne, F., Le Bars, D., et al. (2005). Brain processing of visual sexual stimuli in treated and untreated hypogonadal patients. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 30, 461–482. Rooke, S. E., & Hine, D. W. (2011). A dual process account of adolescent and adult binge drinking. Addictive Behaviors, 36, 341–346. Rothbart, M. K., Derryberry, D., & Posner, M. I. (1994). A psychobiological approach to the development of temperament. In J. E. Bates & T. D. Wachs (Eds.), Temperament: Individual differences at the interface between biology and behavior (pp. 83–116). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Rullo, J. E., Strassberg, D. S., & Israel, E. (2010). Category-specificity in sexual interest in gay men and lesbians. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 874–879. Rupp, H. A., & Wallen, K. (2007). Sex differences in viewing sexual stimuli: An eye-tracking study of men and women. Hormones and Behavior, 51, 524–533. Sa´nchez-Navarro, J. P., Martı´nez-Selva, J. M., Torrente, G., & Roma´n, F. (2008). Psychophysiological, behavioral, and cognitive indices

123

1148 of the emotional response: A factor-analytic study. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11, 16–25. Seguin, J. R., Pihl, R. O., Harden, P. W., Tremblay, R. E., & Boulerice, B. (1995). Cognitive and neuropsychological characteristics of physically aggressive boys. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104, 614–624. Shearer, D. L., Mulvihill, B. A., Klerman, L. V., Hovinga, M. E., & Redden, D. T. (2002). Association of early chilidbearing and low cognitive ability. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 34, 226–243. Slovic, P., & Peters, E. (2006). Risk perception and affect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 322–325. Soylu, A., Yilmaz, U., Ozcan, C., Sarier, M., & Baydinc, C. (2004). Role of penile electrodermal activity in the evaluation of autonomic innervationofcorpuscavernosum.InternationalJournalofImpotenceResearch, 16, 535–539. Stacy, A. W., Ames, S. L., & Knowlton, B. J. (2004). Neurologically plausible distinctions in cognition relevant to drug use etiology and prevention. Substance Use and Misuse, 39, 1571–1623. Stoleru, S., & Mouras, H. (2007). Brain functional imaging studies of sexual desire and arousal in human males. In E. Janssen (Ed.), The

123

Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:1137–1148 psychophysiology of sex (pp. 3–32). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Thush, C., Wiers, R. W., Ames, S. L., Grenard, J. L., Sussman, S., & Stacy, A. W. (2008). Interactions between implicit and explicit cognition and working memory capacity in the prediction of alcohol use in at-risk adolescents. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 94, 116–124. Towse, J. N., Hamilton, Z., Hitch, G. J., & Hutton, U. (2000a). Sentence completion norms among adults: A corpus of sentences differing in length [Technical report CDRG7]. Royal Holloway, University of London. Towse, J. N., Hitch, G. J., & Hutton, U. (2000b). On the interpretation of working memory span in adults. Memory & Cognition, 28, 341–348. Tranel, D., Fowles, D. C., & Damasio, A. R. (1985). Electrodermal discrimination of familiar and unfamiliar faces: A methodology. Psychophysiology, 22, 403–408. Ward, T., & Beech, A. R. (2008). An integrated theory of sexual offending. In D. R. Laws & W. T. O’Donohue (Eds.), Sexual deviance: Theory, assessment, and treatment (pp. 21–36). New York: Guilford Press. Weiss, H. D. (1972). The physiology of human penile erection. Annals of Internal Medicine, 76, 793–799.