Sexual Arousal Increases Risky and Immoral Sexual Behavior

Often, in movies or books, two characters are swept away in “the heat of the moment” and commit sexual acts they might not have otherwise. With so many societal warnings against “heat of the moment” activities, Dan Ariely and George Loewenstein found it odd that little research has been conducted on the impact of sexual arousal on judgment. Through research, the authors find that aroused participants’ interest in procuring sex increased, willingness to use morally questionable methods to obtain the sex increased and probability of using protection decreased. The authors believe the participants were unable to predict how much of an effect a state of arousal will have on their decision-making.

The study consists of 35 college males using a laptop computer to answer questions during a state of non-arousal or arousal. The participants answered the questions on scale, with the responses then converted into points. Questions looked at three themes: attractiveness of sexual activity, how far a participant would go to receive sexual gratification and probability of sexually risky behavior. The authors used three different patterns of questions: (1) non-aroused, (2) aroused and (3) non aroused, aroused, non aroused. Each male participated in only one of the patterns. Used as the control, non-arousal state was to show answers to the question while in a natural state. In the aroused state, the participants were asked to masturbate and then answer the questions. The computer screen in the aroused state had two additions to the questions: a level of arousal scale and a scrollable screen of erotic pictures. Only after stating a 75% or above level of arousal were participants allowed to answer the questions and no participants accidentally ejaculated.

With the answers tallied, the authors analyze each group of questions separately. The responses to 16 out of the 20 questions on potential sexual activities attractiveness to the participant were statistically different between the aroused and non-aroused states. Because the aroused state responses indicated increased interest in the presented scenarios, Ariely and Loewenstein conclude that as sexual arousal increases so does the attractiveness of a sexual scenario. These scenarios included attractiveness to women’s shoes, different aged women (12, 40, 50, 60), animals, an obese person, s and m and anal sex. Only four questions did not change significantly. Those questions were on spanking, sex with a man and having the light turned on during sex.

Along with increased predicted enjoyment of sex, Ariely and Loewenstein also find that all responses to morally questionable behavior to acquire increased in the aroused state. When aroused, participants were more likely to take a women to a fancy restaurant, say he loves her when he does not, get his date drunk, keep trying after she says no and use a drug in order to procure sex.

The third group of questions pertains to safety during sex. Aroused participants acknowledged a general understanding of the risks associated with unprotected sex, but were more likely to do it anyways. On question about general knowledge of risks such as friends can have STDs and “pulling out” is a good prevention of pregnancy, did not change when participants were aroused. However, questions that asked about using protection showed that knowing the risks didn’t matter. The authors found a significant drop in interest in using a condom when the participants were aroused.

As the responses to the questions showed, a state of arousal decreases safety and morals. Interestingly, the third group of participants that completed the questionnaire three times (non-aroused, aroused, non-aroused) didn’t change their responses in the second non-aroused state. It appears people have limited knowledge of their own arousal decisions and are unable to predict how much arousal will impact them.