Incorporating Emotions Specific to the Sexual Response into Theories of Emotion Using the Indiana Sexual and Affective Word Set

Abstract

The sexual response includes an emotional component, but it is not clear whether this component is specific to sex and whether it is best explained by dimensional or discrete emotion theories. To determine whether the emotional component of the sexual response is distinct from other emotions, participants (n = 1099) rated 1450 sexual and non-sexual words according to dimensional theories of emotion (using scales of valence, arousal, and dominance) and according to theories of basic emotion (using scales of happiness, anger, sadness, fear, and disgust). In addition, ratings were provided for newly developed scales of sexual valence, arousal, and energy. A factor analysis produced four factors, together accounting for 91.5% of the variance in participant ratings. Using logistic regression analysis, we found that one word category or factor, labeled "sexual," was predicted only by the new sexual arousal and energy scales. The remaining three factors, labeled "disgusting," "happy," and "basic aversive" were best predicted by basic (or discrete) emotion ratings. Dimensional ratings of valence, sexual valence, and arousal were not predictive of any of the four categories. These results suggest that the addition of sexually specific emotions to basic emotion theories is justified and needed to account fully for emotional responses to sexual stimuli. In addition, the findings provide initial validation for the Indiana Sexual and Affective Words Set (ISAWS), supporting its use in future studies.