Printer Friendly
The Free Library
22,719,120 articles and books

Body image and female sexual functioning and behavior: a review.

At first sight, sexuality and body image are obviously connected. There is no doubt that physical appearance is a major component of the experiences of women's sexuality (McClintock, 2011). The concept of body image is comprised of cognitive and emotional meaning about the body (Cash, 2002). Having a positive body image is associated with a pleasurable sex life (Satinsky, Reece, Dennis, Sanders, & Bardzell, 2012). Satisfaction with one's body may result in greater confidence when a woman sexually interacts with a partner.

In Western cultures, a woman's appeal as a sexual partner seems to be heavily dependent on her visual stimulus value for her partner. Many women are aware of the gaze of men (Hall, 1984). Feminist theorists have argued that women often adopt an observer's perspective on their physical selves (e.g., Bartky, 1990). This implies that physical attractiveness and body image are relevant for women. According to evolutionary theorists (e.g., Buss & Schmitt, 2011), women's physical attractiveness is important because it gives male sexual partners reliable cues to gauge their health and potential reproductive success. This may have caused women to become--in the course of evolution--increasingly aware of how they appear to others, especially to sexual partners.

Media images of women's bodies often present an unusual, slim-hipped, long-legged, large-breasted ideal. Idealized women all tend to be several inches taller and many pounds lighter than most women (Byrd-Bredbenner & Murray, 2003). Media models are often more than 20% underweight (Dittmar, 2007). Mass media, such as fashion magazines and television, promote, if not establish, a beauty ideal that leads many women to feel badly about their weight and shape (Groesz, Levine, & Murnen, 2002). Women are labeled the aesthetic sex. It is women's bodies that are gazed at and judged (Bordo, 2003; Wolf, 1991). Men's gazes and unrealistic body ideals seem to work in concert to make it difficult for women to be satisfied with their own bodies.

The main question addressed in this review was, "How is body image related to female sexual functioning and behavior?" A growing literature highlights the importance of the body image construct for various aspects of sexual functioning (Wiederman, 2002). However, most of this research has examined the relationships between body image and sexual functioning among diseased, disabled, or eating-disordered women. In this review, we summarize the empirical findings regarding the relationship between body image and sexuality in healthy women.

Literature Search and Selection

We did not include research on women suffering from cancer or other diseases. Changes in vitality and physical and social functioning that often accompany major illness, such as cancer, impair sexual functioning and, thus, can obscure the direct relationship between body image and sexual functioning (Mock, 1993). For example, in one study, women with breast cancer were more likely than healthy women to experience reduced physical function, role function, vitality, and social function (Michael, Kawachi, Berkman, Holmes, & Colditz, 2000). Young breast cancer survivors were found to be less sexually active and had more body image and sexual problems than healthy women in the same age range (e.g., Fobair et al., 2006). Therefore, the interpretation of an expected relationship between body image and sexual functioning can be complicated by the occurrence of other, related factors, such as vitality and physical functioning. Because the focus of this review was on body image and female sexual functioning, we also excluded research on male samples. Although a recent meta-analytic review on gender differences in sexuality suggested that men and women are more similar than they are different in terms of sexuality, men reported slightly more sexual experience and more permissive attitudes than women (Petersen & Hyde, 2010). Men desire more sex partners, and there is evidence for sex differences in extramarital sexual behavior (Buss & Schmitt, 2011). Female sex drive is also more plastic and malleable than that of the male, in response to social, cultural, and situational stimuli (Baumeister, 2000).

Literature was found using Psychlnfo[R], MEDLINE[R], Google[TM] Scholar, and Social SciSearch[R]. The following search terms were used: female body image, body satisfaction, body dissatisfaction, body concerns, body evaluation, body image attitudes, appearance concerns, and self-objectification, combined with sexual behavior, sexual functioning, sexual attitudes, sexual satisfaction, sexual dissatisfaction, and sexual dysfunction. Titles and abstracts were examined to see if the articles contained any measure of sexuality linked to an aspect of body image. Specific author searches in Google Scholar were also conducted of authors who seemed to have an empirical or theoretical interest in this topic. The abstracts of all studies associated with these authors were examined. Furthermore, reference sections of all included articles were carefully reviewed, and relevant journals (e.g., Journal of Sex Research, Body Image, and Archives of Sexual Behavior) were searched.

Selection criteria did not include country of origin, ethnicity, or age. However, the 57 studies included in this review (see Table 1) exclusively represented Western nations, except for two studies, one conducted in China and one in South Africa. Thirty-seven studies were carried out in the United States, six in Canada, three in Australia, three in the United Kingdom, two in Portugal, one in Finland, one in Germany, one in Norway, one in New Zealand, and one in the Netherlands. In most studies, a large percentage of the participants were Caucasian young women. Only studies published in 1990 or thereafter were included because research on body image and sexuality has, for the most part, been performed in these two decades. Unpublished data were not included. Characteristics of the studies can be found in Table 1.

Conceptualizing Body Image and Sexuality

As noted earlier, the research fields of body image and sexuality have experienced considerable growth in the last two decades. This was paralleled by an increase in the number of assessment instruments that were developed to measure several aspects of both constructs. Therefore, the ways in which body image and sexuality were conceptualized in studies varies, and different terms have been used to refer to different aspects or dimensions of body image or sexuality.

Body image is often described as how one perceives one's own body. Despite the fact that this simple definition is often used, research has shown that there is much more complexity underlying the meaning of this term. Early researchers conceptualized body image as being one-dimensional. Now it is considered to be, and is mostly measured as, a multidimensional construct. Cash (2002) provided a useful multidimensional model. He referred to body image as the experience of embodiment and incorporation of the perceptions and attitudes about one's body, especially one's physical appearance. Three specified dimensions are evaluation, investment, and affect. Body image evaluation denotes feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction with different aspects of appearance. Body image investment refers to the importance one places on physical appearance and the effort one is willing to make to reach the desired physical appearance. Finally, body image affect refers to emotional experiences that result from body-related evaluations. These three global dimensions, or specific aspects of these dimensions, can be identified in the body image literature. However, the vast majority of studies have focused on the evaluative dimension--specifically, on body dissatisfaction. Another important distinction in the body image literature is between general, dispositional body image evaluations and contextual or state body image evaluations (e.g., during sexual activity; Cash, 2002).

Like body image, female sexuality is a complex phenomenon. Women's bodies are sexual objects of male desire (Blood, 2005). Sexuality is also multidimensional and contains different components, including biologic, psychological, sociocultural, and spiritual aspects. Sexuality is dynamic; it changes with time and place, as well as with different partners. It is individually and socially constructed; that is, sexuality is individually defined and experienced, often in relation to one or more partners, but it is also a part of culture (Bernhard, 2008). Female sexuality includes many different aspects; it encompasses women's sexual knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, values, and behaviors.

Studies in the field of female sexuality have measured and described a variety of variables of this construct. Researchers have suggested that, in comparison with men, women's sexuality may be more influenced by cultural factors. Baumeister (2000) coined the term erotic plasticity for this phenomenon. Three signs of plasticity were observed. The first is that a woman's sexual feelings tend to change more than a man's as she moves through her adult life. The second sign is that particular social and cultural factors (e.g., education and religion) have a larger impact on female sexuality than on male sexuality. A third sign of erotic plasticity is the greater gap between sexual attitudes and actual behaviors among women than among men (Miracle, Miracle, & Baumeister, 2003).

Research has linked body image to various important aspects of female sexuality--specifically, to sexual functioning, sexual schemas, sexual esteem, and sexual behavior.

Body Image and Sexual Functioning

Female sexual functioning can be described in biological, psychological, and social terms. Masters and Johnson's (1966) sexual response cycle characterized sexual response as a four-phase physiological process, including excitement, plateau, orgasm, and resolution. Sexual response begins with excitement or arousal. With continued and sufficient stimulation, excitement builds to a plateau followed by the orgasm phase. During resolution, the body returns to its normal state. In later refinements of this model, a preliminary appetitive phase was added to the sexual response cycle, which refers to sexual desire. A difficulty with this sexual response cycle model is that a successful sexual response seems to be synonymous with achieving an orgasm. However, experiencing physical pleasure and well-being during sexual activity might be independent of reaching an orgasm for many women. Therefore, we used a broader definition of female sexual functioning than a purely physical one, in which the domains were sexual desire, subjective arousal, lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, and pain (Rosen et al., 2000). Research assessing these domains has successfully discriminated women with and without sexual complaints and dysfunctions (Meston, 2003; ter Kuile, Brauer, & Laan, 2006; Wiegel, Meston, & Rosen, 2005). Several studies have focused on direct relationships between body image and the different domains of sexual functioning. Other researchers have studied a mechanism that might underlie this relationship (e.g., using the objectification theory as a theoretical framework). Objectification theory places female bodies in a sociocultural context, with the aim of illuminating the lived experiences and mental health risks of girls and women who encounter sexual objectification. The common thread of sexual objectification is the experience of being treated as a body (or collection of body parts), predominantly valued for one's usefulness to others. Women can become preoccupied with their own physical appearance as a way of anticipating and controlling their treatment (i.e., "self-objectification"). Chronic attentiveness to one's own body may interfere with sexual activity and hinder women's sexual functioning (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). In one experimental study, a state of self-objectification led to a decrease in the appeal of the physical aspects of sex (Roberts & Gettman, 2004). The experience of self-objectification is also referred to as self-focus, spectatoring, or self-consciousness during sexual activity. Barlow's (1986) model of sexual functioning also suggests that inspecting, monitoring, and evaluating oneself during sexual activity interrupts sexual responses, with cognitions directed toward one's own sexual performance, rather than toward sensory aspects of the sexual experience. Although this model originally focused on the effects of concerns about erectile function in men, it has been suggested that self-focus during sexual activity may cause cognitive distraction and have a negative influence on sexual function in women as well. A study by Meana and Nunnink (2006) focused on gender differences in the content of cognitive distraction during sex. They found that women reported higher levels of overall and appearance-based distraction. In the following sections, we review the findings of studies in which the relationship of body image and the different domains of sexual functioning were investigated.

Sexual Desire

Problems with sexual desire are the most common sexual problems presented in therapy (Hock, 2007). We found few relevant studies on the topic of body image and female sexual desire. Seal, Bradford, and Meston (2009) examined the relationships between body image and self-reported sexual desire responses to erotica in a sample of college women. It was found that having positive feelings about one's body (i.e., high body esteem) was related to sexual desire in response to erotica. Similarly, having positive feelings about one's body was positively related to self-reported measures of sexual desire. Sexual attractiveness and weight concerns related to body characteristics that are most likely to be under public scrutiny, such as the face and appearance of weight, were particularly linked to sexual desire (Seal et al., 2009). Perceived attractiveness was also found to be related to sexual desire in midlife women. Although aging or menopausal status may change sexual feelings and responses, feelings of subjective attractiveness were still found to be important in the experience of sexual desire among older women. It was shown that the more a woman perceived herself as attractive, the more likely she was to experience an increase in sexual desire over the past decade. Decline in sexual desire was more likely to be reported when a woman perceived herself as less attractive than 10 years earlier (Koch, Mansfield, Thurau, & Carey, 2005). One Portuguese study found that sexual desire was predicted by various dysfunctional beliefs regarding sexual issues (i.e., failure disengagement, passivity and control, and lack of erotic thoughts), but not by body image beliefs (Carvalho & Nobre, 2010). Although there is still limited empirical data about the relationship between body image and sexual desire, the overall results indicate that positive body image experiences are associated with higher levels of sexual desire.

Subjective Sexual Arousal and Lubrication

Sexual arousal refers to the physiological response to sexual stimuli, and can follow sexual desire. The relationship between sexual interest and sexual arousal, however, is complex. According to Basson (2000), a circular model of female sexual responding may more adequately represent women for whom desire is a response to arousal, instead of a precursor of arousal. Qualitative data analysis in a sample of adult women also showed that many women did not clearly differentiate between arousal and desire (Graham, Sanders, Milhausen, & McBride, 2004). Sexual desire was reported as sometimes preceding arousal, but at other times following it. Feeling comfortable and positive about one's body was frequently mentioned by women as a factor that would facilitate sexual arousal (Graham et al., 2004). Sanchez and Kiefer (2007) found, in a sample of mainly adult women, that body shame was related to greater sexual self-consciousness during sexual activity, which, in turn, predicted lower sexual arousability. The relationship between body shame and sexual arousal was mediated by sexual self-consciousness. These results support the notion that inspecting, monitoring, and evaluating oneself during sexual activity (Barlow, 1986) interrupts sexual responses. In their laboratory study, van Lankveld and Bergh (2008) found that genital response to induction of self-focus produced lower genital response in women with high levels of dispositional sexual self-consciousness, but not in women with low sexual self-consciousness. Subjective arousal was not affected. Another laboratory study found that genital response, but not subjective arousal, was impaired in women with different levels of dispositional self-consciousness (Meston, 2006; Seal & Meston, 2007). The fact that subjective arousal was not affected in these studies may be explained by the absence of a partner in laboratory settings. It might be that women do not experience a state of anxious apprehension that they typically experience in sexual situations, and that they are less likely to experience the characteristics of narrowed attentional focus to non-erotic thoughts, including high body awareness (Wiegel, Scepkowski, & Barlow, 2006) in laboratory settings.

Orgasm

Due to continued sexual arousal, physical changes, such as relaxation of the vaginal muscles and swelling of the labia and the clitoris, can occur and result in orgasm. When reaching an orgasm, the muscles of the vagina and uterus contract and create a strong feeling of pleasure for many women. As described earlier, body image issues may negatively influence sexual arousal in women. Sanchez and Kiefer (2007) found that body shame was indirectly related to orgasm difficulty through reduced arousal. Orgasm is more frequently reported by women who are satisfied with their bodies (Ackard, Kearney-Cooke, & Peterson, 2000) and perceive themselves as attractive (Koch et al., 2005). Moreover, cognitive distraction due to body concerns during sexual activity with a partner was associated with less consistent orgasms (Dove & Wiederman, 2000).

Satisfaction

It is reasonable to expect that a woman who feels positively about her own body experiences more satisfaction during sexual activity. Indeed, several studies have found associations between body image variables and sexual satisfaction. Hoyt and Kogan (2001) found that women who were dissatisfied with their sex lives were more dissatisfied with their body appearance than those who were satisfied. Other studies have revealed that sexual satisfaction was positively related to appearance evaluation (Holt & Lyness, 2007), general body image (Meana & Nunnink, 2006; Tang, Lai, & Chung, 1997), general body esteem (Penhollow & Young, 2008), and self-perceived sexual attractiveness (Pujols, Meston, & Seal, 2010), and negatively related to body shame (Calogero & Thompson, 2009a). Self-perceived attractiveness has also been found to be positively related to sexual enjoyment (Koch et al., 2005). Although these results cannot confirm whether a causal relationship exists, there are findings suggesting that body image issues can harmfully affect sexual satisfaction. In a large online study (N = 1,736), heterosexual and lesbian women were asked if they believed that their feelings about their bodies affected their sex lives (Peplau et al., 2008). Nearly one-half of the women, including 48% of heterosexual women and 47% of lesbian women, reported that their body image had a positive effect on the enjoyment of their sex lives and feelings of acceptability as a sexual partner. Further, over one-fourth of both lesbian and heterosexual women reported that their feelings about their bodies had a negative effect on the enjoyment of their sex lives and feelings of acceptability as a sexual partner. Other studies have reported that women who were concerned about their bodily appearance during sexual activity with a partner reported relatively less sexual satisfaction (Dove & Wiederman, 2000; Meana & Nunnink, 2006; Purdon & Holdaway, 2006). How could this mechanism work?

A study exploring the role of sexual self-consciousness during physical intimacy in the relationship between body shame and sexual problems found that the relationship between body shame and sexual pleasure was mediated by sexual self-consciousness during physical intimacy (Sanchez & Kiefer, 2007). Women's body shame was related to greater sexual self-consciousness, which, in turn, predicted lower sexual pleasure. These patterns remained robust, even when controlling for relationship status and age. Another study that focused on a specific aspect of body evaluation--namely, genital satisfaction--showed that greater dissatisfaction with genital appearance was associated with greater genital image self-consciousness during physical intimacy, which, in turn, was associated with lower sexual satisfaction (Schick, Calabrese, Rima, & Zucker, 2010). Although most studies found a correlation between aspects of positive body image or a lack of self-consciousness of one's physical appearance and sexual satisfaction, some studies did not (Davison & McCabe, 2005).

Pain

Lack of a physical sexual response (i.e., incomplete or absent lubrication) can lead to discomfort and pain, and may contribute to the etiology of sexual pain in women (e.g., van Lunsen & Laan, 2004). To our knowledge, pain has mostly been included as part of general sexual functioning, and has not been separately studied and discussed in relation to body image in healthy women. Some studies have specifically focused on genital satisfaction. Among large samples of adult women, it has been found that higher levels of genital satisfaction were associated with less pain (Algars et al., 2011; Herbenick-et al., 2011). Another study, which included only 31 female health center patients, found that women's feelings about their genitals were unrelated to pain (Berman, Berman, Miles, Pollets, & Powell, 2003).

Sexual Functioning in General

As described earlier, most aspects of sexual functioning were separately studied in relation to body image. Sexual dysfunction in any of the domains may occur due to body image issues. Problems related to any of the stages of sexual response may interfere with sexual pleasure and satisfaction, or may lead to painful experiences. The sexual response cycle may not be linear for women (Basson, 2000). Several studies in this field have assessed overall sexual functioning instead of differentiating between dimensions or stages of sexual functioning. General sexual functioning has been found to be related to aspects of body image, such as body esteem (Wenniger & Heiman, 1998). In a large sample of 3,800 adult women, Herbenick et al. (2011) found that positive feelings and beliefs about their own genitals were related to better sexual functioning (higher arousal, desire, lubricant, orgasm, satisfaction, and less pain in women). With regard to general body image, qualitative research in adult women has indicated that experiencing a sense of bodily acceptance is critical to healthy sexual functioning (Daniluk, 1993). Recent quantitative research has confirmed a relationship between body image and sexual functioning. Weaver and Byers (2006) found that women who experienced negative feelings about their physical appearance and body dissatisfaction were more likely to have problems with regard to their sexual functioning. A study that investigated sexual beliefs in women with and without a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) diagnosis of a sexual dysfunction showed that women with sexual dysfunction also presented more negative body image beliefs (Nobre & Pinto-Gouveia, 2009). On the other hand, positive body image was significantly associated with better sexual functioning, even after controlling for body mass index. Although related to body image, body mass index did not predict sexual functioning. This demonstrates, as many studies have done, that it is women's perceptions of their bodies, rather than any objective measures of their bodies, that predict their feelings and behaviors.

With regard to sexual functioning, associations with contextual body image (i.e., body image during sexual activity) are stronger than those with general body image. In a sample of female students, Cash, Maikkula, & Yamamiya (2004) found that higher sexual functioning was more strongly related to less anxious/avoidant body focus during sexual activity than to global body satisfaction, overweight preoccupation, and appearance investment. Other studies have confirmed that contextual body image is a better predictor of women's sexuality than general body image (Steer & Tiggemann, 2008; Yamamiya, Cash, & Thompson, 2006). Contextual body image during sex was also associated with reduced sexual assertiveness, lower sexual self-efficacy, and more emotional disengagement during partnered sex in young adult women (Yamamiya et al., 2006).

Specific situations, like weight changes during the lifespan of women (e.g., pregnancy), may impact the relationship between experiences of body image and sexual functioning. Pauls, Occhino, and Dryfhout (2008) assessed body image and sexual functioning during pregnancy and postpartum. They found that body image during sexual activity did not significantly change during pregnancy, although it worsened in the postpartum period. Especially in early pregnancy, poorer sexual functioning was associated with impaired body image. Research has also been carried out with obese women. One study assessed body image and sexual functioning in women enrolled in a weight management program. These women perceived significant improvements in their body image and sexual functioning after weight loss. Most of the women attributed the improvements to changes in body image that occurred along with weight loss (Werlinger, King, Clark, Pera, & Wincze, 1997).

The Role of Sexual Schemas, Self-Objectification, and Sexual Self-Esteem

Women's sexual responses depend heavily on what sex means to them: what it signifies about their relationship, what the context is, and which norms and expectations are applied. There are specific examples of erotic plasticity among women. Several studies have shown that body image is related to women's personal values and attitudes regarding sexuality. These may inhibit sexual functioning and interfere with the quality of sexual experiences. For example, positive general body image is associated with accurate knowledge regarding sexual matters, higher sex drives, liberal (instead of conservative) sexual attitudes, and more frequent sexual fantasies (Tang et al., 1997). Furthermore, body dissatisfaction is associated with women's sexual self-schemas. The concept of sexual self-schemas refers to the extent to which women see themselves as possessing a range of personal characteristics that are associated with participation in intimate sexual relationships and behavioral openness to sexual experiences and encounters. The three identified dimensions of women's sexual self-schemas are the "passionate/romantic" dimension (i.e., the propensity to experience positive emotions in the context of romantic and sexual relationships), the "open/direct" dimension (i.e., the extent to which one sees oneself as being broadminded and open to new experiences), and the "embarrassed/conservative" dimension (i.e., negative feelings about the self in relationships and a lack of confidence and experience; Andersen & Cyranowski, 1994). Women who were satisfied with their bodies were more likely to view themselves as romantic/passionate and open/direct persons (Donaghue, 2009). Women with more positive sexual self-schemas believed their bodies and faces to be more attractive, and were judged by others to be more attractive (Wiederman & Hurst, 1998). In turn, women who viewed themselves as romantic/passionate, open/direct, and not embarrassed/conservative experienced less anxious self-consciousness, and were less likely to avoid body exposure during sex. More positive sexual self-schemas were related to better sexual functioning (Cash et al., 2004), more arousal, longer-lasting sexual and affective relationships, and more positive attitudes regarding sex in general (Andersen & Cyranowski, 1994).

In addition to associations with women's sexual self-schemas, body image has also been found to be associated with sexual self-esteem. La Rocque and Cioe (2010) and Weaver and Byers (2006) found that young women with a more positive body image were more likely to be sexually confident. General self-objectification and body shame have also been found to be directly linked to sexual self-esteem (Calogero & Thompson, 2009b). Dove and Wiederman (2000) showed that concerns about sexual performance and body appearance cause cognitive distraction, which predicts low sexual self-esteem. Genital image self-consciousness during physical intimacy has also been associated with lower sexual esteem (Schick et al., 2010). Low levels of sexual self-esteem have been related to lower sexual functioning (Dove & Wiederman, 2000). In one study, an association between higher sexual self-esteem and higher sexual satisfaction was found (Calogero & Thompson, 2009a). The overall conclusion is that positive sexual self-schemas and sexual self-esteem are important for feeling comfortable during sex. Body evaluations and cognitions may interfere not only with responses and experiences during sexual activity, but also with sexual behavior.

Body Image and Sexual Behavior

Sexual behaviors include a variety of activities that include kissing and hugging, penile-vaginal intercourse, oral sex, anal sex, and masturbation. Women may engage in sexual behaviors alone or with one or more partners. Several studies have found associations between different dimensions of body image and sexual behaviors.

Women who were more satisfied with their body reported more frequent sexual activity, and were more likely to initiate sex and to try new sexual behaviors than those who were less satisfied (Ackard et al., 2000; Trapnell, Meston, & Gorzalka, 1997). Greater body comfort and low body image self-consciousness were associated with a higher level of sexual experience (Schooler, Ward, Merriwether, & Caruthers, 2005). In addition, self-rated attractiveness was found to be positively correlated with several sexual behaviors (i.e., the number of lifetime intercourse partners, age at first intercourse, and the number of non-intercourse sexual partners in the past three years; Weeden & Sabini, 2007). With respect to solo sex, there was a positive relationship between body satisfaction and masturbation frequency in European American women (Shulman & Horne, 2003). Other studies have reported that adolescent girls without coital experience were significantly more satisfied with their bodies, compared to girls who had coital experience. Body dissatisfaction increased the probability for coital onset (Kvalem, von Soest, Traeen, & Singsaas, 2011; Satinsky et al., 2012). A negative conceptualization of their body was associated with a lower frequency of sexual behavior in female students. However, frequency of sexual behavior was best predicted by sexual attitudes. Women with liberal and accepting attitudes toward their bodies reported greater frequencies of sexual behavior, whereas women ascribing to more conservative views of sexuality reported having fewer sexual experiences (Faith & Share, 1993).

Other studies have focused on body image in relation to fear and avoidance of sexual activities with a partner. Reissing, Laliberte, and Davis (2005) found that a more negative body attitude was related to higher levels of sexual aversion in a sample of young adult women. La Rocque and Cioe (2010) studied the relationship between body image and sexual avoidance. They found that female students with a more negative body image (i.e., negative body image evaluations, high body image investment, and high body self-consciousness during sexual activity) displayed a greater tendency to avoid sexual activity. Sexual esteem, sexual satisfaction, and sexual desire appeared to mediate this relationship (La Rocque & Cioe, 2010). Furthermore, women with a more positive body image were more likely to be sexually confident, desire sexual activity, and gain satisfaction from sexual experiences. Although support for a direct relationship between body image and sexual avoidance was found, lower levels of sexual esteem, sexual satisfaction, and sexual desire appeared to mediate this relationship. Wiederman (2000) also found that women who experienced higher levels of body image self-consciousness were more likely to avoid sexual activity because of fear and anxiety.

Besides avoidance of sex and lower frequency of sexual activities, body image issues could also impact risky sexual behaviors, such as less frequent or inconsistent condom use among women. Sexual risk behaviors have been examined more extensively in adolescent girls than in adult women. Pinquart (2009) found that German adolescents with body dissatisfaction showed higher levels of ambivalence during their sexual decisions. Ambivalence, in turn, was associated with a lower probability of using contraceptives during first intercourse. These findings are in line with other research in young women. Adolescent women who were more dissatisfied with their body image were more likely to fear abandonment as a result of negotiating condom use, more likely to perceive that they had fewer options for sexual partners, more likely to perceive themselves as having limited control in their sexual relationships, and more likely to worry about acquiring HIV. Having higher dissatisfaction with one's body image was associated with never using condoms during sexual intercourse and being more likely to engage in unprotected vaginal sex (Eisenberg, Neumark-Sztainer, & Lust, 2005; Gillen, Lefkowitz, & Shearer, 2006; Wingood, DiClemente, Harrington, & Davies, 2002). Lower body comfort and greater body image self-consciousness were also related to lower levels of sexual assertiveness and condom use self-efficacy in an ethically diverse, but mainly White, sample of American female students (Schooler et al., 2005). In addition, genital image self-consciousness during physical intimacy was associated with lower motivation to avoid unprotected sexual behavior (Schick et al., 2010). In a descriptive study by Akers et al. (2009), the relationship between (perceived) weight and sexual behavior among adolescents of various racial/ethnic groups was assessed. The results indicated that sexually active girls, who were or who perceived themselves to be at the weight extremes, as well as those with weight misperceptions, were more likely to report engagement in sexual risk behaviors, compared with normal weight peers or those who perceived their weight to be "about right." Sexual intercourse before the age of 13, having four or more partners, and not using condoms during the last sexual contact were the most consistently observed associations. In another study, satisfaction with weight was associated with regular contraception use and discussion of sexually transmitted infection prevention with partners in adolescent girls (Larson, Clark, Robinson, & Utter, 2011). Instead of the clear association between body and weight satisfaction and sexual risk behaviors, sexual self-esteem was found to be unrelated to risky sexual behavior in a sample of South African students (Wild, Flisher, Bhana, & Lombard, 2004). To our knowledge, only one study has assessed associations between aspects of body image and sexual behavior among both adolescents and adult women in a sample of women ranging in age from 12 to 56. In that study, high levels of appearance shame and appearance investment were significant predictors of inconsistent condom use, having multiple sex partners in the past year, and having sex after drinking alcohol or using drugs (Littleton, Radecki-Breitkof, & Berenson, 2005).

A large Internet survey performed in the United States (Albright, 2008) showed that women's perceptions of their own bodies can be negatively affected as a result of viewing pornography, with less frequent sexual activity as one outcome. Watching pornography was associated with negative feelings about their own bodies, increased pressure to perform acts seen in pornographic films, and the feeling that their partners were more critical of their bodies. It is noteworthy that men were more critical of their partners' bodies as a result of accessing erotic images and films online. In 12% of the women, the frequency of sexual activity decreased as the result of watching pornography.

Summary and Conclusion

The research fields of body image and sexuality have experienced considerable expansion in the last decade. The ways in which body image and sexuality have been conceptualized and measured, however, has varied greatly. The studies have shown great diversity in the ages of the participants, but are quite homogenous for other demographic variables (e.g., education). Also, most studies have relied on correlational analyses. Furthermore, most studies of associations between body image and female sexuality have focused on the evaluative dimension of body image, mostly referred to as body dissatisfaction. For these reasons, it is difficult to draw general conclusions across studies.

The commonsense notion of a simple relationship between body image and sexuality cannot be easily confirmed based on the scientific literature. However, in this review, we found support from both quantitative and qualitative research that negative body evaluations are likely to have a direct relationship with several aspects of female sexual functioning and behavior. There are indications that women low in body satisfaction report concerns about the appearance of their bodies during sexual interactions with their partners. Women who felt more negative about their bodies reported lower levels of desire and arousal (e.g., Ackard et al., 2000; Koch et al., 2005; Seal et al., 2009), increased avoidance (e.g., Reissing et al., 2005; La Rocque & Cioe, 2010), and decreased pleasure, orgasm, and sexual satisfaction (e.g., Sanchez & Kiefer, 2007; Yamamiya et al., 2006). Furthermore, in studies of young women, associations were found between negative body image and engagement in sexual risk behaviors, such as sexual activity with casual partners and inconsistent condom or contraceptive use (e.g., Akers et al., 2009; Eisenberg et al., 2005; Gillen et al., 2006; Kvalem et al., 2011). Cognitions and self-consciousness seem to be key factors in understanding the complex relationships between a woman's body image and her sexuality. Negative cognitions about one's physical appearance and monitoring oneself during sexual activity interact with sexual responses and experiences to a greater degree than general body image issues. In several studies, women reported higher levels of appearance distraction during sexual activity (e.g., Dove & Wiederman 2000; Meana & Nunnink, 2006; Seal et al., 2009). A self-conscious focus on one's appearance and avoidance of bodily exposure during sex undermines one's sexual functioning more than general feelings of body dissatisfaction (Cash et al., 2004). Body evaluations and cognitions not only interfere with responses and experiences during sexual activity, but also with general sexual behavior, sexual avoidance, and risky sexual behaviors.

There are also studies in which only modest or no relationships between body image and aspects of female sexuality were found (e.g., Davison & McCabe, 2005). In our opinion, one of the major explanations for inconsistent findings in the literature (see Table 1) is a great diversity of body image measures. There are body image measures assessing a trait dimension and measures that index a more immediate, state-like variable (Cash, 2002).

Female body image is extensively entwined with social ideals and norms of beauty that are always tied to a particular time and place. Women's bodies are socially constructed as objects to be watched and evaluated (Grogan, 2008). In fact, there is no objective, "ideal" body shape, size, or look; there is no "right" way a body should move or smell. Body image is inseparable from a particular society's understanding of race, gender, and class, to mention just a few social constructs that intersect with body image. The impact of body image is experienced by most of us in deeply personal ways; it is something that is socially constructed. None of us are born hating our bodies; it is something we seem to learn. As with body image, female sexuality is also heavily dependent on meanings, social norms, and expectations, rather than on physiological responses alone. As suggested by Baumeister (2000), women's sexuality may be more influenced by cultural factors than men's.

There are parallels between the self-surveillance practiced by many women in their daily lives and the self-surveillance reenacted in research situations. Both the researchers and the female participants see their bodies as objects (Blood, 2005). Also, experiences and responses during sexual activity have often been the focus of investigation. The stage of the sexual response cycle appears to be relatively unimportant for understanding the impact of body image. Although body image issues may affect all domains of sexual functioning separately, the result is likely to be quite consistent across domains. Body image issues may interfere with sexual pleasure and satisfaction, or may lead to painful experiences during sexual activity with partners. Research on body image suggests a connection between the ways a woman views her body and her sexuality (Seal et al., 2009). Relationships between body image variables and sexuality have been demonstrated beyond actual body size (Peplau et al., 2008; Seal et al., 2009; Weaver & Byers, 2006; Wiederman & Hurst, 1998), suggesting that a women's perceptions and cognitions about her body size, rather than her actual body, have an influence on her sexuality.

Researchers often study body image outside of a partner or romantic context. Women's prospects for relationships and intimacy are deemed largely dependent on their physical attractiveness to men (Bordo, 1993; Wolf, 1991). However, in the domain of body image and sexuality, we found some studies that incorporated the partner. Berman et al. (2003) reported more distress and depression among those women with more negative genital self-image. Peplau et al. (2008) questioned whether the negative impact of body attitudes is widespread or limited to a small group of women. They found that 48% of the heterosexual women and 47% of the lesbian women in their sample reported that a positive body image had a positive effect on their sex lives. However, 27% of the lesbians and 30% of the heterosexual women reported a negative effect of body image on their sex lives. Finally, they examined women's concern about exposing their bodies to partners during sex. More heterosexual women than lesbian women reported hiding at least one aspect of their bodies during sex (52% vs. 44%).

Many feminists have argued that women are often defined by their bodies, and their bodies are treated as objects that exist for the sexual pleasure of men (Murnen & Smolak, 2009). In the first explicit investigation of objectification theory as an explanatory framework for women's sexual functioning, Steer and Tiggemann (2008) found that self-objectification processes predicted higher self-consciousness during sex, which, in turn, predicted lower sexual functioning.

In a recent article, Bancroft and Graham (2011) suggested that a man's experience is dominated by the pursuit of sexual pleasure, whereas a woman's is dominated by a powerful sense of being desired and a sense of emotional intimacy. This notion could be tested in future research on female body image and sexual functioning and behavior. Furthermore, it is clear that there has been too little attention in research to positive aspects of body image and female sexuality. We expect that differences among women are much larger than the study results so far have suggested. For that reason, it would be interesting to focus more on positive body image with regard to sexual functioning in future research. An interesting example is the recent study by Satinsky et al. (2012), who explored positive body image and sexual functioning. Satinsky et al. found that body appreciation predicted arousal, satisfaction, and orgasm in women, but not sexual desire.

References

Ackard, D. M., Kearney-Cooke, A., & Peterson, C. B. (2000). Effects of body image and self-image on women's sexual behaviors. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 28, 422-429.

Akers, A. Y., Lynch, C. P., Gold, M. A., Chang, J. C.-C., Doswell, W., Wiesenfeld, H. C., et al (2009). Exploring the relationship among weight, race, and sexual behaviors among girls. Pediatrics, 124, 913-920.

Albright, J. M. (2008). Sex in America online: An exploration of sex, marital status, and sexual identity in Internet sex seeking and its impacts. Journal of Sex Research, 45, 175-186.

Alfonso, V. C., Allison, D. B., Rader, D. E., & Gorman, B. S. (1996). The Extended Satisfaction with Life Scale: Development and psychometric properties. Social Indicators Research, 38, 275-301.

Algars, M., Santtila, P., Jern, P., Johansson, A., Westerlund, M., & Sandnabba, N. (2011). Sexual body image and its correlates: A population-based study of Finnish women and men. International Journal of Sexual Health, 23, 26-34.

American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Andersen, B. L., Broffitt, B., Karlsson, J. A., & Turnquist, D. C. (1989). A psychometric analysis of the Sexual Arousability Index. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 123-130.

Andersen, B. L., & Cyranowski, J. M. (1994). Women's sexual self-schema. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1079-1100.

Avalos, L., Tylka, T. L., & Wood-Barcalow, N. (2005). The Body Appreciation Scale: Development and psychometric evaluation. Body Image, 2, 285 297.

Bailes, S., Creti, L., Fichten, C. S., Libman, E., Brender, W., & Amsel, R. (1998). Sexual Self-Efficacy Scale for Female Functioning. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 531-534). London: Sage.

Bancroft, J., & Graham, C. A. (2011). The varied nature of women's sexuality: Unresolved issues and a theoretical approach. Hormones and Behavior, 59, 717-729.

Barkley, T. W., & Burns, J. L. (2000). Factor analysis of the Condom Use Self-Efficacy Scale among multicultural college students. Health Education Research, 15, 485-486.

Barlow, D. H. (1986). Causes of sexual dysfunction: The role of anxiety and cognitive interference. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 140-148.

Bartky, S. L. (1990). Femininity and domination. Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New York: Routledge.

Basen-Engquist, K., Masse, L., Coyle, K., Parcel, G. S., Banspach, S., Kirby, D., et al (1996). Validity of scales measuring the psychosocial determinants of HIV/STD-related risk behavior in adolescents. Unpublished manuscript.

Basson, R. (2000). The female sexual response: A different model. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 26, 51-65.

Baumeister, R. F. (2000). Gender differences in erotic plasticity: The female sex drive as socially flexible and responsive. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 347-374.

Ben-Tovim, D. I., & Walker, M. K. (1991). The development of the Ben-Tovim Walker Body Attitudes Questionnaire (BAQ), a new measure of women's attitudes towards their own bodies. Psychological Medicine, 21, 775-784.

Berman, L., Berman, J., Miles, M., Pollets, D., & Powell, J. A. (2003). Relationship between genital self-image, female sexual function, and quality of life measures. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 29, 11-21.

Bernhard, L. A. (2008). Sexuality and sexual health care for women. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology, 45, 1089-1098.

Berscheid, E., Walster, E., & Bohrnstedt, G. (1973). The happy American body: A survey report. Psychology Today, 7, 119-131.

Blood, S. K. (2005). Body work. The social construction of women's body image. New York: Routledge.

Bordo, S. (1993). Unbearable weight: Feminism, Western culture, and the body. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Brown, T. A., Cash, T. F., & Lewis, R. J. (1989). Body-image disturbances in adolescent female binge-purgers: A brief report of the results of a national survey in the U.S.A. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 30, 605-613.

Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2011). Evolutionary psychology and feminism. Sex Roles, 64, 768-787.

Byrd-Bredbenner, C., & Murray, J. (2003). A comparison of the anthropometric measurements of idealized female body images in media directed to men, women, and mixed gender audiences. Topics in Clinical Nutrition, 18, 117-129.

Calogero, R. M., & Thompson, J. K. (2009a). Potential implications of the objectification of women's bodies for women's sexual satisfaction. Body Image, 6, 145-148.

Calogero, R. M., & Thompson, J. K. (2009b). Sexual self-esteem in American and British college women: Relations with self-objectification and eating problems. Sex Roles, 60, 160-173.

Carvalho, J., & Nobre, P. (2010). Predictors of women's sexual desire: The role of psychopathology, cognitive-emotional determinants, relationship dimensions, and medical factors. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 928-937.

Cash, T. F. (1994a). The Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (MBRSQ user's manual). Norfolk, VA: Old Dominion University.

Cash, T. F. (1994b). The Situational Inventory of Body-Image Dysphoria: Contextual assessment of a negative body image. Behavior Therapist, 17, 133-134.

Cash, T. F. (2000). The Multidimensional Body Self Relations Questionnaire users' manual (3rd ed.). Norfolk, VA: Old Dominion University. Retrieved from http://www.body-images.com/assessments

Cash, T. F. (2002). Beyond traits: Assessing body image states. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzinsky (Eds.), Body image: A handbook of theory, research, and clinical practice (pp. 163-170). New York: Guilford.

Cash, T. F. (2004). Body-image assessments: Manuals and questionnaires. Norfolk, VA: Old Dominion University. Retrieved from http://www.body-images.com

Cash, T. F., & Fleming, E. C. (2002). The impact of body image experiences: Development of the Body Image Quality of Life Inventory. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 455-460.

Cash, T. F., & Labarge, A. S. (1996). Development of the Appearance Schemas Inventory: A new cognitive body-image assessment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 20, 37-50.

Cash, T. F., Maikkula, C. L., & Yamamiya, Y. (2004). Baring the body in the bedroom: Body image, sexual self-schemas, and sexual functioning among college women and men. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, 7.

Clayton, A. H., McGarvey, E. L., & Clavet, G. J. (1997). Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (CSFQ)--Development, reliability, and validity. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 33, 731-745.

Creti, L., Fichten, C. S., & Brender, W. (1998). Functioning. In C. M. Davis, W. H. Yaber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (2nd ed., pp. 261-267). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Daniluk, J. C. (1993). The meaning and experience of female sexuality: A phenomenological analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17, 53-69.

Davison, T. E., & McCabe, M. P. (2005). Relationships between men's and women's body image and their psychological, social, and sexual functioning. Sex Roles, 52, 463-475.

Derogatis, L. R. (1975). Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (DSFI). Towson, MD: Clinical Psychometrics Research, Inc.

Derogatis, L. R. (2001, October). Development and continuing validation of the Female Sexual Distress Scale (FSDS). Poster session presented at the annual meeting of the Female Sexual Function Forum, Boston, MA.

Derogatis, L. R., & Melisaratos, N. (1979). The DSFI: A multidimensional measure of sexual functioning. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 5, 244-281.

Dion, K. L., Dion, K. K., & Keelan, J. P. (1990). Appearance anxiety as a dimension of social-evaluative anxiety: Exploring the ugly duckling syndrome. Contemporary Social Psychology, 14, 220-224.

Dittmar, H. (2007). The costs of consumer culture and the "cage within": The impact of the material "good life" and "body perfect" ideals on individuals' identity and well-being. Psychological Inquiry, 18, 23-59.

Donaghue, N. (2009). Body satisfaction, sexual self schemas and subjective well-being in women. Body Image, 6, 37-42.

Dove, N., & Wiederman, M. W. (2000). Cognitive distraction and women's sexual functioning. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 26, 67-78.

DuBois, D., Felner, R. D., Brand, S., Phillips, R. S. C., & Lease, A. M. (1996). Early adolescent self-esteem: A developmental-ecological framework and assessment strategy. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 6, 543-579.

Eisenberg, M. E., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & Lust, K. D. (2005). Weight-related issues and high-risk sexual behaviors among college students. Journal of American College Health, 54, 95-101.

Faith, M. S., & Share, M. L. (1993). The role of body image in sexually avoidant behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 22, 345-356.

Fisher, W. A., Byrne, D., White, L. A., & Kelley, K. (1988). Erotophobia-erotophilia as a dimension of personality. Journal of Sex Research, 25, 123-151.

Fobair, P., Stewart, S. L., Chang, S., D'Onofrio, C., Banks, P. J., & Bloom, J. R. (2006). Body image and sexual problems in young women with breast cancer. Psycho-Oncology, 15, 579-594.

Franzoi, S. L., & Shields, S. A. (1984). The Body Esteem Scale: Multidimensional structure and sex differences in a college population. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 173-178.

Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. (1997). Objectification theory. Towards understanding of women's lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173-206.

Garner, D. M. (1991). EDI-2 : Eating Disorder Inventory professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Gillen, M. M., Lefkowitz, E. S., & Shearer, C. L. (2006). Does body image play a role in risky sexual behavior and attitudes? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 243-255.

Graham, C. A., Sanders, S. A., Milhausen, R. R., & McBride, K. R. (2004). Turning on and turning off: A focus group study of the factors that affect women's sexual arousal. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33, 527-538.

Groesz, L. M., Levine, M. P., & Murnen, S. K. (2002). The effect of experimental presentation of thin media images on body dissatisfaction: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 1-16.

Grogan, S. (2008). Body image. Understanding body dissatisfaction in men, women, and children. New York: Routledge.

Hall, J. A. (1984). Nonverbal sex differences: Accuracy of communication and expressive style. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hart, E. A., Leary, M. R., & Rejeski, W. J. (1989). The measurement of social physique anxiety. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 11, 94-104.

Heiman, J. R., & Rowland, D. L. (1983). Affective and physiological sexual response patterns: The effects of instructions on sexually functional and dysfunctional men. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 27, 105-116.

Herbenick, D., Schick, V., Reece, M., Sanders, S., Dodge, B., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2011). The Female Genital Self-Image Scale (FGSIS): Results from a nationally representative probability sample of women in the United States. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 8, 158-166.

Hock, R. R. (2007). Sexual problems and solutions. In R. R. Hock (Ed.), Human sexuality (pp. 226-269). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Holt, A., & Lyness, K. P. (2007). Body image and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 6, 45-68.

Hoon, E. F., Hoon, P. W., & Wincze, J. P. (1976). An inventory for the measurement of female sexual arousability: The SAI. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 5, 291-300.

Hoyt, W. D., & Kogan, L. R. (2001). Satisfaction with body image and peer relationships for males and females in a college environment. Sex Roles, 45, 199-215.

Hurlbert, D. F. (1991). The role of assertiveness in female sexuality: A comparative study between sexually assertive and sexually nonassertive women. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 17, 183-190.

Janda, L. H., & O'Grady, K. E. (1980). Development of a Sex Anxiety Inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48, 169-175.

Jemmott, L. S., & Jemmott, J. B. (1992). Increasing condom-use intentions among sexually active Black adolescent women. Nursing Research, 41, 273-279.

Katz, R. C., Gipson, M., Kearl, A., & Kriskovich, M. (1989). Assessing sexual aversion in college students. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 15, 135-140.

Koch, P. B., Mansfield, P. K., Thurau, D., & Carey, M. (2005). "Feeling frumpy": The relationships between body image and sexual response changes in midlife women. Journal of Sex Research, 42, 215-223.

Kvalem, I. L., von Soest, T., Traeen, B., & Singsaas, K. (2011). Body evaluation and coital onset: A population-based longitudinal study. Body Image, 8, 110-118.

La Rocque, C. I., & Cioe, J. (2010). An evaluation of the relationship between body image and sexual avoidance. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 1-12.

Larson, B. K., Clark, T. C., Robinson, E. M., & Utter, J. (2011). Body satisfaction and sexual health behaviors among New Zealand secondary school students. Sex Education, 1-12. doi: 10.1080/ 14691811.2011.609050

Lawrance, K., & Byers, E. S. (1992, May). Sexual satisfaction: A social exchange perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Psychological Association, Quebec, Canada.

Lawrance, K., & Byers, E. S. (1995). Sexual satisfaction in long-term heterosexual relationships: The interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 2, 267-285.

Littleton, H., Radecki Breitkof, C., & Berenson, A. (2005). Body image and risky sexual behaviors: An investigation in a tri-ethnic sample. Body Image, 2, 193-198.

Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1966). Human sexual response. New York: Bantam.

McClintock, E. A. (2011). Handsome wants as handsome does: Physical attractiveness and gender differences in revealed sexual preferences. Biodemography and Social Biology, 57, 221-257.

McKinley, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (1996). The Objectified Body Consciousness Scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 181-215.

Meana, M., & Nunnink, S. E. (2006). Gender differences in the content of cognitive distraction during sex. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 59-67.

Merriwether, A., & Ward, L. M. (2002, August). Comfort in our skin: The impact of women's reproductive attitudes. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.

Meston, C. M. (2003). Validation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in women with female orgasmic disorder and in women with hypoactive sexual desire disorder. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 29, 39-46.

Meston, C. M. (2006). The effects of state and trait self-focused attention on sexual arousal in sexually functional and dysfunctional women. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 515-532.

Meston, C. M., & Trapnell, P. D. (2005). Development and validation of a five factor sexual satisfaction and distress scale: The Sexual Satisfaction Scale for Women (SSS-W). Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2, 66-81.

Michael, Y. L., Kawachi, I., Berkman, L. F., Holmes, M. D., & Colditz, G. A. (2000). The persistent impact of breast carcinoma on functional health status: Prospective evidence from the Nurses' Health Study. Cancer, 89, 2176-2186.

Miracle, T. S., Miracle, A. W., & Baumeister, R. F. (2003). Human sexuality. Meeting your basic needs. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Mock, V. (1993). Body image in women treated for breast cancer. Nursing Research, 42, 153-157.

Muehlenhard, C. L., & Quackenbush, D. M. (1996). The social meaning of women's condom use: The sexual double standard and beliefs about the meaning ascribed to condom use. Unpublished manuscript.

Murnen, S. K., & Smolak, L. (2009). Are feminist women protected from body image problems? A meta-analytic review of relevant research. Sex Roles, 60, 186-197.

Nobre, P. J., & Pinto-Gouveia, J. (2003). Sexual Modes Questionnaire: Measure to assess the interaction among cognitions, emotions and sexual response. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 368-382.

Nobre, P. J., & Pinto-Gouveia, J. (2006). Dysfunctional sexual beliefs as vulnerability factors for sexual dysfunction. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 68-75.

Nobre, P. J., & Pinto-Gouveia, J. (2009). Dysfunctional sexual beliefs as vulnerability factors for sexual dysfunction. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 68-75.

Nobre, P. J., Pinto-Gouveia, J., & Gomes, F. A. (2003). Sexual Dysfunctional Beliefs Questionnaire: An instrument to assess sexual dysfunctional beliefs as vulnerability factors to sexual problems. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 18, 101-135.

Noll, S. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). A mediational model linking self-objectification, body shame and disordered eating. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 623-636.

Pauls, R. N., Occhino, J. A., & Dryfhout, V. L. (2008). Effects of pregnancy on female sexual function and body image: A prospective study. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5, 1915-1922.

Penhollow, T. M., & Young, M. (2008). Predictors of sexual satisfaction: The role of body image and fitness. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, 11. Retrieved from http://www.ejhs.org/volumell/Penhollow.htm

Peplau, L. A., Frederick, D. A., Yee, C., Maisel, N., Level, J., & Ghavami, N. (2008). Body image satisfaction in heterosexual, gay, and lesbian adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 713-725.

Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993-2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 21-38.

Pinney, E., Gerrard, M., & Denney, N. (1987). The Pinney Sexual Satisfaction Inventory. Journal of Sex Research, 23, 233-251.

Pinquart, M. (2009). Ambivalence in adolescents' decision making about having their first sexual intercourse. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 1-11.

Probst, M., Vandereycken, W., Van Coppenolle, H., & Vanderlinden, J. (1995). The Body Attitude Test for patients with an eating disorder: Psychometric properties of a new questionnaire. Eating Disorders, 3, 133-144.

Pujols, Y., Meston, C. M., & Seal, B. N. (2010). The association between sexual satisfaction and body image in women. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 905-916.

Purdon, C., & Holdaway, L. (2006). Non-erotic thoughts: Content and relation to sexual functioning and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 154-162.

Rapport, L., Clark, M., & Wardle, J. (2000). Evaluation of a modified cognitive-behavioural programme for weight management. International Journal of Obesity, 24, 1726-1737.

Reissing, E. D., Laliberte, M., & Davis, J. (2005). Young women's sexual adjustment: The role of sexual self-schema, sexual self-efficacy, sexual aversion and body attitudes. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 14, 77-85.

Ricciardelli, L. A., & McCabe, M. P. (2001). Self-esteem and negative affect as moderators of sociocultural influences on body dissatisfaction, strategies to decrease weight, and strategies to increase muscles among adolescent boys and girls. Sex Roles, 44, 189-207.

Roberts, T., & Gettman, J. Y. (2004). Mere exposure: Gender differences in the negative effects of priming a state of self-objectification. Sex Roles, 51, 17-27.

Rosen, J. C., Srebnik, D., Saltzberg, E., & Wendt, S. (1991). Development of a Body Image Avoidance Questionnaire. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3, 32-37.

Rosen, R., Brown, C., Heiman, J., Leiblum, S., Meston, C. M., Shabsigh, R., et al (2000). The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): A multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 26, 191-208.

Rosenthal, D., Moore, S., & Flynn, I. (1991). Adolescent self-efficacy, self-esteem and sexual risk-taking. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 1, 77-88.

Sanchez, D. T., & Kiefer, A. K. (2007). Body concerns in and out of the bedroom: Implications for sexual pleasure and problems. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 808-820.

Satinsky, S., Reece, M., Dennis, B., Sanders, S., & Bardzell, S. (2012). An assessment of body appreciation and its relationship to sexual function in women. Body Image, 9, 137-144.

Schick, V. R., Calabrese, S. K., Rima, B. N., & Zucker, A. N. (2010). Genital appearance dissatisfaction: Implications for women's genital image self-consciousness, sexual esteem, sexual satisfaction, and sexual risk. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 394-404.

Schooler, D., Ward, L. M., Merriwether, A., & Caruthers, A. (2005). Cycles of shame: Menstrual shame, body shame, and sexual decision-making. Journal of Sex Research, 42, 324-334.

Seal, B. N., Bradford, A., & Meston, C. M. (2009). The association between body esteem and sexual desire among college women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 866-772.

Seal, B. N., & Meston C. M. (2007). The impact of body awareness on sexual arousal in women with sexual dysfunction. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 990-1000.

Shulman, J. L., &Horne, S. G. (2003). The use of self-pleasure: Masturbation and body image among African American and European American women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 262-269.

Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870-883.

Snell, W. E., Jr. (1995). The Multidimensional Sexual Self-Concept Questionnaire. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 521-524). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Snell, W. E., Jr., Fisher, T. D., & Miller, R. S. (1991). Development of the Sexual Awareness Questionnaire: Components, reliability, and validity. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 4, 65-92.

Snell, W. E., Jr., & Papini, D. R. (1989). The Sexuality Scale: An instrument to measure sexual-esteem, sexual-depression, and sexual-preoccupation. Journal of Sex Research, 26, 256-263.

Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P., & Steinberg, L. (1996). The Sexual Desire Inventory: Development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 22, 175-190.

Steer, A., & Tiggemann, M. (2008). The role of self-objectification in women's sexual functioning. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27, 205-225.

Story, M. D. (1998). Body Attitudes Questionnaire. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 118-121). London: Sage.

Strauss, B., & Richter-Appelt, H. (1996). Fragebogen zur Beurteilung des Eigenen Korpers [Questionnaire for the evaluation of one's own body]. Gottingen, Germany: Hogrefe.

Szymanski, M. L., & Cash, T. F. (1995). Body-image disturbances and self-discrepancy theory: Expansion of the Body Image Ideals Questionnaire. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14, 134-146.

Tang, C. S., Lai, F. D., & Chung, T. K. H. (1997). Assessment of sexual functioning for Chinese college students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 26, 79-90.

Ter Kuile, M. M., Brauer, M., & Laan, E. (2006). The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and the Female Sexual Distress Scale (FSDS): Psychometric properties within a Dutch population. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 32, 289-304.

Thompson, J. K., Heinberg, L., & Tantleff, S. (1991). The Physical Appearance Comparison Scale (PACS). Behavior Therapy, 14, 174.

Thompson, J. K., van den Berg, P., Roehrig, M., Guarda, A. S., & Heinberg, L. J. (2004). The Sociocultural Attitudes Towards Appearance Scale-3 (SATAQ-3): Development and validation. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 35, 293-304.

Thompson, M. A., & Gray, J. J. (1995). Development and validation of a new body-image assessment scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 64, 258-269.

Trapnell, P. D., Meston, C. M., & Gorzalka, B. B. (1997). Spectatoring and the relationship between body image and sexual experience: Self-focus or self-valence? Journal of Sex Research, 34, 267-278.

Van Lankveld, J., & Bergh, S. (2008). The interaction of state and trait aspects of self-focused attention affects genital, but not subjective, sexual arousal in sexually functional women. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46, 514-528.

Van Lankveld, J., Geijen, W. E. H., & Sykora, H. (2008). The Sexual Self-Consciousness Scale: Psychometric properties. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 925-933.

Van Lunsen, R. H., & Laan, E. (2004). Genital vascular responsiveness and sexual feelings in midlife women: Psychophysiologic, brain, and genital imaging studies. Menopause, 11, 741-748.

Vasilenko, S. A., Ram, N., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2011). Body image and first sexual intercourse in late adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 34, 327-335.

Weaver, A. D., & Byers, E. S. (2006). The relationships among body image, body mass index, exercise, and sexual functioning in heterosexual women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 333-339.

Weeden, J., & Sabini, J. (2007). Subjective and objective measures of attractiveness and their relation to sexual behavior and sexual attitudes in university students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 79-88.

Wenniger, K., & Heiman, J. R. (1998). Relating body image to psychological and sexual functioning in child abuse survivors. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 11, 543-562.

Werlinger, K., King, T., Clark, M., Pera, V., & Wincze, J. (1997). Perceived changes in sexual functioning and body image following weight loss in an obese female population: A pilot study. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 23, 74-78.

Wiederman, M. W. (2000). Women's body image self-consciousness during physical intimacy with a partner. Journal of Sex Research, 37, 60-68.

Wiederman, M. W. (2002). Body image and sexual functioning. In T. F. Cash & T. Pruzinsky (Eds.), Body image: A handbook of theory, research, and clinical practice (pp. 287-294). New York: Guilford.

Wiederman, M. W., & Hurst, S. R. (1998). Body size, physical attractiveness, and body image among young adult women: Relationships to sexual experience and sexual esteem. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 272-281.

Wiegel, M., Meston, C., & Rosen, R. (2005). The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): Cross-validation and development of clinical cutoff scores. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 31, 1-20.

Wiegel, M., Scepkowski, L. A., & Barlow, D. H. (2006). Cognitive and affective processes in female sexual dysfunctions. In I. Goldstein, C. M. Meston, S. R. Davis & A. M. Traish (Eds.), Women's sexual function and dysfunction: Study, diagnosis and treatment (pp. 100-106). New York: Taylor & Francis.

Wild, L., Flisher, A. J., Bhana, A., & Lombard, C. (2004). Associations among adolescent risk behaviours and self-esteem in six domains. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 1454-1467.

Williamson, D., Davis, C., Bennett, S., Goreczny, A., & Gleaves, D. (1989). Development of a simple procedure for assessing body image disturbances. Behavioral Assessment, 11, 433-446.

Wingood, G. M., DiClemente, R. J., Harrington, K., & Davies, S. L. (2002). Body image and African American females' sexual health. Journal of Women's Health & Gender-Based Medicine, 11, 433-439.

Wolf, N. (1991). The beauty myth: How images of beauty are used against women. New York: Morrow.

Yamamiya, Y., Cash, T. F., & Thompson, J. K. (2006). Sexual experiences among college women: The differential effects of general versus contextual body images on sexuality. Sex Roles, 55, 421-427.

Young, M., Denny, G., Luquis, R., & Young, T. (1998). Correlates of sexual satisfaction in marriage. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 7, 115-127.

Liesbeth Woertman and Femke van den Brink

Department of Psychology, Division of Clinical and Health Psychology, Utrec ht University

Correspondence should be addressed to Liesbeth Woertman, Department of Psychology, Division of Clinical and Health Psychology, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80140, 3508 TC Utrecht, Netherlands. E-mail: e.m.woertman@uu.nl

DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2012.658586

Table 1. Overview of the Literature

                                                    Body Image
       Author              Study Design             Measure(s)

Ackard,                Survey;                 Degree of
Kearney-Cooke, &         cross-sectional,        satisfaction with
Peterson (2000)          correlational           the body when
                         design                  looking in the
                                                 mirror,
                                                 self-consciousness
                                                 about appearance,
                                                 importance of
                                                 physical
                                                 attractiveness

Akers et al. (2009)    Survey;                 Perceived weight,
                         cross-sectional,        weight perception
                         correlational           accuracy (comparing
                         design                  BMI with perceived
                                                 weight)

Albright (2008)        Survey;                 Impact of sexual
                         cross-sectional,        activities online
                         correlational           on sexual
                         design                  self-image (e.g.,
                                                 partner more
                                                 critical of me)

Algars et al.          Survey;                 Sexual body image
(2011)                   cross-sectional,        (items: "I have
                         correlational           attractive
                         design                  breasts," "I am
                                                 pleased with the
                                                 way my vagina
                                                 looks), BI-DSFI,
                                                 wish to have larger
                                                 or smaller breasts

Berman, Berman,        Survey;                 GSIS
Miles, Pollets, &        cross-sectional,
Powell (2003)            correlational
                         design

Calogero &             Survey;                 IG-SATAQ-3,
Thompson (2009a)         cross-sectional,        BSh-OBCS, BSu-OBCS
                         correlational
                         design

Calogero &             Survey:                 Study 1: BD-EDI-2,
Thompson (2009b)         cross-sectional,        DT-EDI-2, BS-OBCS
                         correlational           Study 2: BD-EDI-2,
                         design                  DT-EDI-2, BS-OBCS

Carvalho & Nobre       Survey;                 BIB-SDBQ, LSBIT-SMQ
(2010)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Cash, Maikkula, &      Survey;                 BASS-MBSRQ, OP-MBSRQ,
Yamamiya (2004)          cross-sectional,        ASI, BESAQ, PSCSQ
                         correlational
                         design

Daniluk (1993)         Qualitative focus       Subjective
                         group study             experiences of body
                                                 image
Davison & McCabe       Survey;                 BIS-BIBCQ,
(2005)                   cross-sectional,        BII--BIBCQ, PAS,
                         correlational           BCS-BIBS, BIS-BIBS,
                         design                  SPAS, PACS

Donaghue (2009)        Survey;                 Overall
                         cross-sectional,        satisfaction with
                         correlational           body and weight
                         design

Dove & Wiederman       Survey;                 GBDS, ABDs
(2000)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Eisenberg,             Survey;                 Satisfaction with
Neumark-Sztainer,        cross-sectional,        body image/size
& Lust (2005)            correlational           during the past 30
                         design                  days

Faith & Share          Survey;                 BI-DSFI
(1993)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Gillen, Lefkowitz,     Survey;                 CDRS, AE-MBSRQ,
& Shearer (2006)         cross-sectional,        AO-MBSRQ
                         correlational
                         design

Graham, Sanders,       Qualitative focus       Subjective feelings
Milhausen, &             group study             about one's body
McBride (2004)

Herbenick et al.       Survey;                 FGSIS
(2011)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Holt & Lyness          Survey;                 AE MBSRQ, AO MBSRQ,
(2007)                   cross-sectional,        FE-MBSRQ,
                         correlational           FO-MBSRQ, HE MBSRQ,
                         design                  HO MBSRQ, 10-MBSRQ,
                                                 BASS MBSRQ,
                                                 SW-MBSRQ

Hoyt & Kogan           Survey;                 Satisfaction with
(2001)                   cross-sectional,        body parts and
                         correlational           global appearance
                         design                  items of the BRSS

Koch, Mansfield,       Survey;                 Self-attractiveness
Thurau, & Carey          cross-sectional,        in comparison to 10
(2005)                   correlational           years ago
                         design

Kvalem, von Soest,     Survey;                 BASS
Trwen, & Singsaas        prospective,
(2011)                   correlational
                         design

van Lankveld &         Laboratory study;       SSF-SSCS, SE-SSCS,
Bergh (2008)             cross-sectional,        self-focus on
                         experimental design     physical appearance
                                                 (experimental
                                                 condition)

Larson, Clark,         Survey;                 Weight
Robinson, & Utter        cross-sectional,        satisfaction,
(2011)                   correlational           trying to lose
                         design                  weight

Littleton,             Survey;                 BC-OBCS, BSh-OBCS,
Radecki-Breitkof,        cross-sectional,        BSu-OBCS
& Berenson (2005)        correlational
                         design

Meana & Nunnink        Survey;                 BI-DSFI, ABDs
(2006)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Meston (2006)          Laboratory study;       BI-DSFI
                         cross-sectional,
                         experimental design

Nobre &                Survey;                 BIB-SDBQ
Pinto-Gouveia            cross-sectional,
(2006)                   correlational
                         design

Pauls, Occhino, &      Survey; prospective,    BESAQ
Drythout (2008)          correlational
                         design

Peplau et al. (2008)   Survey;                 AE-MBSRQ, OP-MBSRQ,
                         cross-sectional,        BIQLI
                         correlational
                         design

Penhollow & Young      Survey;                 BISC, BES
(2008)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Pinquart (2009)        Survey;                 AS-BIQ
                         cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Pujols, Meston, &      Survey;                 Weight concern,
Seal (2010)              cross-sectional,        physical condition
                         correlational           and sexual
                         design                  attractiveness
                                                 subscales of the
                                                 BES, ABDs

Purdon & Holdaway      Survey;                 NETCQ
(2006)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Reissing,              Survey;                 BAQ
Laliberte, & Davis       cross-sectional,
(2005)                   correlational
                         design

Roberts & Gettman      Laboratory study;       AAS, self-
(2004)                   cross-sectional,        objectification or
                         experimental design     body competence
                                                 condition (priming
                                                 condition)

La Rocque & Cioe       Survey;                 AE-MBSRQ, AO-MBSRQ,
(2010)                   cross-sectional,        BASS-MBSRQ, BESAQ
                         correlational
                         design

Sanchez & Kiefer       Survey;                 BSh-OBCS, BISC
(2007)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Satinsky, Reece,       Survey;                 BAS
Dennis, Sanders,         cross-sectional,
& Bardzell (2012)        correlational
                         design

Schick, Calabrese,     Survey;                 VAS, GISC
Rima, & Zucker           cross-sectional,
(2010)                   correlational
                         design

Schooler, Ward,        Survey;                 BCBM, BISC
Merriwether, &           cross-sectional,
Caruthers (2005)         correlational
                         design

Seal, Bradford, &      Laboratory study;       BES
Meston (2009)            cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Seal & Meston          Laboratory study;       Body awareness
(2007)                   cross-sectional,        (experimental
                         experimental design     condition), BES

Shulman & Horne        Survey;                 BIA, BASS-MBSRQ
(2003)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Steer & Tiggemann      Survey;                 SOQ, BSu-OBCS,
(2008)                   cross-sectional,        BSh-OBCS, AAS, BISQ
                         correlational
                         design

Tang, Lai, & Chung     Survey;                 BI-DSFI
(1997)                   cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Trapnell, Meston, &    Survey;                 BI-DSFI
Gorzalka (1997)          cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Vasilenko, Ram, &      Survey;                 AE-MBSRQ
Lefkowitz (2011)         cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

Weaver & Byers         Survey;                   BD-EDI-2, BIAQ,
(2006)                   cross-sectional,        SIBID
                         correlational
                         design

Weeden & Sabini        Survey;                 Self-ratings of
(2007)                   cross-sectional,        overall physical
                         correlational           attractiveness
                         design

Wenniger & Heiman      Survey;                 AE-MBSRQ, AO-MBSRQ,
(1998)                   cross-sectional,        FE-MBSRQ, FO-MBSRQ,
                         correlational           HE-MBSRQ, HO-MBSRQ,
                         design                  10-MBSRQ

Werlinger, King,       Survey;                 AE-MBSRQ, BASS
Clark, Pera, &           cross-sectional,        MBSRQ
Wineze (1997)            correlational
                         design

Wiederman (2000)       Survey;                 Study 1: BD-EDI-2,
                         cross-sectional,        self-rated bodily
                         correlational           attractiveness,
                         design                  BISQ Study 2:
                                                 BD-EDI-2, self-rate
                                                 bodily
                                                 attractiveness,
                                                 BISQ

Wiederman & Hurst      Survey;                 BD-EDI-2,
(1998)                   cross-sectional,        self-rated bodily
                         correlational           attractiveness,
                         design                  AO-MBSRQ

Wild, Flisher,         Survey;                 BI-SEQ
Bhana, &                 cross-sectional,
Lombard (2004)           correlational
                         design

Wingood,               Survey;                 A modified version
DiClemente,              cross-sectional,        of the BAQ
Harrington, &            correlational
Davies (2002)            design

Yamamiya, Cash, &      Survey;                 BIQ, BESAQ
Thompson (2006)          cross-sectional,
                         correlational
                         design

                             Sexuality           Sample: N, Age, M
       Author               Measure(s)                 (SD)

Ackard,                Frequency of sex,       3,627 Northern
Kearney-Cooke, &         frequency of            American women
Peterson (2000)          initiating sex,         (81%, Caucasian),
                         comfort undressing,     14-74, 28.50 (7.37)
                         sex with lights on,
                         new things in bed,
                         partner pleasure,
                         orgasm frequency

Akers et al. (2009)    Having ever had         7,173 Northern
                         vaginal sex; age at     American female
                         coitarche; number       high school girls
                         of lifetime sexual      (62%, White, 15%,
                         partners; alcohol,      Black, 10%, Latina,
                         condom, and oral        13%, "other"),
                         contraceptive use       [+ or -] 12-18, --
                         at last sex

Albright (2008)        Sexual activities       15,246 Northern
                         online (e.g.,           American adults
                         intentionally           (3,859 women), --,
                         viewing or              35.15 (10.78)
                         downloading erotic
                         pictures or films)

Algars et al.          FSFI, modified          9,532 (n-6,201
(2011)                   version of Section      women) Finnish
                         3 of the DSFI           twins and their
                                                 siblings, --, 26.11
                                                 (5.01)

Berman, Berman,        FSFI, FSDS              31 Northern
Miles, Pollets, &                                American female
Powell (2003)                                    health center
                                                 patients (ethnic
                                                 composition
                                                 unknown), --, 38
                                                 (--)

Calogero &             SSE, SSS                101 English female
Thompson (2009a)                                 students (65%
                                                 self-identified as
                                                 British), --, 22.13
                                                 (3.94)

Calogero &             Study 1: SSE Study      Study 1: 104
Thompson (2009b)         2: SSE, SSE-SS          Northern American
                                                 female students
                                                 (87% European
                                                 American, 10%,
                                                 African American,
                                                 3% Asian American),
                                                 --, 18.63 -1.14

                                                 Study 2: 111
                                                 English female
                                                 students (64.9%
                                                 White, 4.5%, Black,
                                                 14.4% Asian, 12.6%
                                                 Southern European,
                                                 3.6%, American),
                                                 --, 22.00 -3.81

Carvalho & Nobre       Sexual desire           237 Portuguese
(2010)                   dimension of the        women, --, 35.30
                         FSFI                    (10.80)

Cash, Maikkula, &      CSFQ, SSSS              263 Northern
Yamamiya (2004)                                  American students
                                                 (59%, White, 26%
                                                 African American;
                                                 n=145 women),
                                                 18-50 (Mdn=21), --

Daniluk (1993)         Subjective              10 Canadian women
                         experience and          (primarily White),
                         expression of           --, 42.20 (--)
                         sexuality

Davison & McCabe       SOS-MSSCQ,              437 Australian
(2005)                   SSES-MSSCQ,             participants (80%
                         SSS-MSSCQ               originally from
                                                 Australia; n=226
                                                 women); --, 42.26
                                                 (17.11)

Donaghue (2009)        SSSS                    91 Australian
                                                 female students,
                                                 --, 30.16 (11.11)

Dove & Wiederman       SOS, DSD-SDI, short     120 Northern
(2000)                   form of the SES,        American women
                         OC, PO, percentage      (93%) Caucasian),
                         of orgasms              --, 18.85 (0.85)
                         pretended, SSE-SS

Eisenberg,             Casual partners,        1,168 Northern
Neumark-Sztainer,        condom use,             American students
& Lust (2005)            contraceptive use,      (n=593 women; 86%)
                         number of sex           White), 18-22 (for
                         partners,               7%), --
                         intoxication

Faith & Share          SI-DSFI, AS-DSFI,       248 undergraduate
(1993)                   SES-DSFI                and graduate
                                                 Northern American
                                                 psychology students
                                                 (n = 140 women),
                                                 --, --

Gillen, Lefkowitz,     Risky sexual            434 Northern
& Shearer (2006)         behavior (e.g.,         American students
                         lifetime frequency      (52%. female, 39%,
                         of condom use),         European American,
                         SDSS, use and           32%, African
                         buying and barrier      American, 29%,,
                         subscales of the        Latino American),
                         SRBBS, CCS              --, 18.50 (0.40)

Graham, Sanders,       Cues for sexual         80 Northern
Milhausen, &             arousal,                American women
McBride (2004)           relationship            (mixed ethnic
                         between arousal and     composition), --,
                         sexual interest,        34.30 -16.1
                         enhancers/
                         inhibitors of
                         arousal

Herbenick et al.       FSFI                    2,056 Northern
(2011)                                           American women
                                                 (66.2% White,
                                                 13.1%, Black,
                                                 13.7%, Hispanic),
                                                 18-60,  --

Holt & Lyness          GSS-PSS1, SP-PSS1       44 English college
(2007)                                           students (n= 130
                                                 women), 21.50 (ages
                                                 18-21)

Hoyt & Kogan           Sex life item of        288 Northern
(2001)                   the BRSS                American college
                                                 students (95.1%
                                                 Caucasian; n = 187
                                                 women), --, 20.71
                                                 (3.30)

Koch, Mansfield,       Changes in sexual       307 Northern
Thurau, & Carey          response in the         American women
(2005)                   past 10 years           (99.2%) Caucasian),
                         (e.g., higher/          --, 50, (ages 39-
                         lower frequency of      56)
                         sexual activity)

Kvalem, von Soest,     Coital onset            Time 1: 5,055
Trwen, & Singsaas                                Norwegian
(2011)                                           adolescents (n =
                                                 2,535 girls), --,
                                                 14.00 (0.85) Time
                                                 4: 1,449, --, 26.80
                                                 -0.75

van Lankveld &         FSFI, genital           40 Dutch women,
Bergh (2008)             measure of sexual       --, 28.70 -10.5
                         responding (vaginal
                         photoplethysmo-
                         graph), subjective
                         sexual responding
                         (potentiometer)

Larson, Clark,         Sexual activity,        9,107 New Zealand
Robinson, & Utter        STI prevention          students (n=4,187
(2011)                   communication,          females; 55.3%
                         condom use,             European, 24.7% New
                         contraception use       Zealand Maori, 8.2%
                                                 Pacific, 7.2%
                                                 Asian), 12-18, --

Littleton,             Condom use, sex         1,547 Northern
Radecki-Breitkof,        after alcohol or        American women (37%
& Berenson (2005)        drug use, binge,        Caucasian, 34%
                         number of sexual        Hispanic, 29%,
                         partners                African American),
                                                 --, 25.00 (7.50)

Meana & Nunnink        Global Sexual           457 Northern
(2006)                   Functioning Score       American college
                         of the SHF,             students (56.5%,
                         SI-DSFI, SES-DSFI,      Caucasian, 14%,
                         AS-DSFI, PD-DSFI,       Asian American,
                         AfS-DSFI, FS-DSFI,      11%, African
                         SSS-DSFI                American, 9%
                                                 Hispanic American),
                                                 18-20 (for 78%); n
                                                 = 237 women), --

Meston (2006)          FSFI, SSSW,             32 Northern
                         self-report sexual      American women: n =
                         responses to the        16 sexually
                         erotic film,            functional women,
                         physiological           --, 28.90 (8.40);
                         sexual responses to     n= 16 sexually
                         erotic film             dysfunctional
                         (vaginal                women, --, 32.30
                         photoplethysmograh)     (10.20)

Nobre &                FSFI, other SDBQ        488 Portuguese
Pinto-Gouveia            domains                 women: n= 160
(2006)                                           without sexual
                                                 problems, --, 30.40
                                                 (11.40); n=47 with
                                                 diagnosis of sexual
                                                 dysfunction, --,
                                                 28.70 -6.7

Pauls, Occhino, &      Frequency of            107 pregnant,
Drythout (2008)          various sexual          Northern American
                         practices (e.g.,        women (51%, African
                         vaginal                 American, 48%)
                         intercourse), FSFI      Caucasian, 1%
                                                 Hispanic), --,
                                                 24.00 (5.00)

Peplau et al. (2008)   Sex life items of       Study 1: 2,512
                         the BIQLI               Northern American
                                                 adults: n= 1,619
                                                 heterosexual women,
                                                 --, 27.05 (8.85);
                                                 n=117 lesbian
                                                 women, -29.59
                                                 (9.62)

Penhollow & Young      Modified DSFI           408 Northern
(2008)                                           American students
                                                 (84% White, 11%
                                                 Black; n=290
                                                 women), --, --

Pinquart (2009)        AS, love attitude,      687 German
                         initiative to have      adolescents (n=405
                         intercourse,            women), --, 15.80
                         postponing the          (1.19)
                         decision

Pujols, Meston, &      FSFI, SSSW              154 Northern
Seal (2010)                                      American women (79%
                                                 Caucasian, 4%
                                                 African Americans,
                                                 7% Asians, 6%,
                                                 Hispanics-
                                                 Latinas), --, 26.03
                                                 (6.60)

Purdon & Holdaway      SFQ, GMSEX, SOS         97 Canadian
(2006)                                           psychology students
                                                 (almost exclusively
                                                 Caucasian; n = 50
                                                 females), --, 20.00
                                                 -1.5

Reissing,              SAS, SSSS, SSES-F,      107 Canadian women
Laliberte, & Davis       FSFI                    (94% identified
(2005)                                           themselves as
                                                 Canadian), 18-29,
                                                 --

Roberts & Gettman      Appeal of Sex Scale     160 Northern
(2004)                                           American
                                                 undergraduate
                                                 students (82%
                                                 European American,
                                                 15% Hispanic, 3%,
                                                 African American; n
                                                 = 90 women),
                                                 17-30, 19.00(--)

La Rocque & Cioe       Sexual avoidance        362 Canadian
(2010)                   dimension of the        students (n=264
                         SAS, SSE-SS,            women; 86.5%
                         SS-ESLS, DSD-SDI        White), --, 19.41
                                                 (1.42)

Sanchez & Kiefer       OG-SAI, SI-SAI,         320 Northern
(2007)                   difficulty with         American
                         reaching orgasm,        participants (85%,
                         sexual pleasure         Caucasian, 4%
                                                 Asian, 4% Hispanic,
                                                 1%, African
                                                 American; n = 198
                                                 women), --, 31.01
                                                 (12.96)

Satinsky, Reece,       FSFI                    247 Northern
Dennis, Sanders,                                 American women
& Bardzell (2012)                                (66.8%, White), --,
                                                 29.90 (7.77)

Schick, Calabrese,     MRS-MSSCQ,              188 Northern
Rima, & Zucker           SE-MSSCQ, SSS-MSSCQ     American female
(2010)                                           undergraduate
                                                 students (80%
                                                 White), --, 19.39
                                                 (1.41)

Schooler, Ward,        HISA, SE, PS-SSE,       199 Northern
Merriwether, &           actual condom and       American female
Caruthers (2005)         contraceptive use       undergraduate
                         during vaginal          psychology students
                         intercourse             (67%, White, 19%,
                                                 Asian, 7%,
                                                 multiracial, 5%,
                                                 Black, 3%, Latina),
                                                 17-23, 19.70 (-)

Seal, Bradford, &      Desire, arousal,        85 Northern
Meston (2009)            and lubrication         American female
                         dimensions of the       students (54%
                         FSFI, SSAS              White, 21%,
                                                 Hispanic-Latina,
                                                 12% African
                                                 American, 11%
                                                 Asian), --, 18.90
                                                 (0.90)

Seal & Meston          Self-reported           21 Northern
(2007)                   mental arousal,         American sexually
                         perceptions of          dysfunctional women
                         physical arousal,       (71.4X, White, 9.5%
                         autonomic arousal,      Asian, 4.8% Black,
                         physiological           14.3% Hispanic),
                         sexual arousal (VPA     --, 24.40 (7.10)
                         responses),
                         cognitive
                         distraction, FSFI

Shulman & Horne        Presence and            96 Northern
(2003)                   frequency of            American women
                         masturbation            (n=51 African
                                                 American, n=45
                                                 European American),
                                                 18-49, --

Steer & Tiggemann      Desire, arousal,        116 Australian
(2008)                   orgasm, and             female students
                         satisfaction            (>90% Caucasian),
                         dimensions of the       --, 22.74 -8.44
                         FSFI

Tang, Lai, & Chung     SES-DSFI, SI-DSFI,      305 Chinese college
(1997)                   AS-DSFI, FS-DSFI,       students (n= 145
                         SSS-DSFI, DS-DSFI       females), --, 20.50
                                                 (1.40)

Trapnell, Meston, &    SES-DSFI, SI-DSFI,      722 Canadian
Gorzalka (1997)          AS-DSFI                 psychology students
                                                 (51% East or
                                                 Southeast Asian
                                                 ancestry; n=437
                                                 women), 17-55 (Mdn
                                                 =19), --

Vasilenko, Ram, &      Age of first            Time 4: 100
Lefkowitz (2011)         intercourse             Northern American
                                                 college students
                                                 (49% European
                                                 American, 26%
                                                 Latino American,
                                                 25% African
                                                 American; 45%
                                                 female), --, 23.00
                                                 (5.40)

Weaver & Byers         HISA, SAISAI, SSE-SS,   241 Canadian female
(2006)                   SFQ, GMSEX              university
                                                 students, --, 20.64
                                                 (5.37)

Weeden & Sabini        Sexual behaviors        456 Northern
(2007)                   (e.g., number of        American students
                         lifetime                (71% non-Hispanic
                         intercourse             European descent,
                         partners) and           15%, Asian descent,
                         attitudes (e.g.,        3%, African
                         number of               descent; n=238
                         intercourse             women), --, 19.02
                         partners expected       (1.14)
                         over the next 5
                         years)

Wenniger & Heiman      BSFQ                    104 Northern
(1998)                                           American women
                                                 (n=57 CSA
                                                 survivors: 79%,
                                                 White, 5%, African
                                                 American, 2%, Asian
                                                 American, 4%,
                                                 Hispanic, 5%,
                                                 American Indian;
                                                 n=47 women without
                                                 a history of CSA;
                                                 75% White, 15%,
                                                 Asian American),
                                                 --, 31.00 -9.8

Werlinger, King,       DS-DSFI, SSS-DSFI,      32 Northern
Clark, Pera, &           GSSI-DSFI,              American obese
Wineze (1997)            importance of the       women (91%, White),
                         various factors in      --, 47.00 (--)
                         perceived changes
                         in sexual
                         functioning (e.g.,
                         being more
                         attractive to
                         others)

Wiederman (2000)       Study 1: SSE-SS,        Study 1: 232
                         heterosexual            Northern American
                         experiences Study       heterosexual female
                         2: SSE-SS, SAI,         psychology students
                         HISA, SAS, extent       (89.9%) White, 7,6%
                         and frequency of        Black, 2.5%
                         heterosexual            Latina), --, 18.89
                         experiences             (0.09) Study 2: 227
                                                 Northern American
                                                 heterosexual female
                                                 psychology students
                                                 (90.9% White, 7,7%
                                                 Black, 1.5%
                                                 "other"), --, 18.36
                                                 (0.65)

Wiederman & Hurst      Sexual experience       192 Northern
(1998)                   (e.g., experience       American female
                         of sexual               psychology students
                         intercourse with a      (89.6 White, 7.8%
                         male), short form       Black, 2.6%
                         of the SSE-SS,          Latina), --, 18.91
                         brief form of the       (0.90)
                         SOS, three items
                         from the SOI

Wild, Flisher,         SR-RB                   939 South African
Bhana, &                                         students (56%
Lombard (2004)                                   female)-Grade 8:
                                                 n=480 (51%), --,
                                                 14.10 (1.22); Grade
                                                 11: n=457, --,
                                                 17.40 (1.70)

Wingood,               Personal interview      522 Northern
DiClemente,              assessed sexual         American females
Harrington, &            behaviors (e.g.,        (100% African
Davies (2002)            age of adolescent's     American), 14-18,
                         initial sexual          16.00 (--)
                         intercourse),
                         HIV-A, POS, CRUS

Yamamiya, Cash, &        Self-efficacy in      384 Northern
Thompson (2006)          refusing sex            American female
                         subscale from the       students (58.1%,
                         SRBBS; SSES-F,          European American,
                         SA-SAQ, FTSEQ           18.2%, African
                                                 American, 10.9%,
                                                 Hispanic Latina,
                                                 5.5% Asian), --,
                                                 20.00 -1.96

                                     Results (for Female
       Author                           Participants)

Ackard,                Women more satisfied with body image
Kearney-Cooke, &         reported more sexual activity, orgasm, and
Peterson (2000)          initiating sex; greater comfort undressing
                         in front of their partners, having sex with
                         the lights on; trying new sexual behaviors;
                         and pleasing their partners sexually than
                         those dissatisfied with body image. Body
                         image was predictive of one's comfort
                         undressing in front of partner ([beta]=.50),
                         having sex with lights on ([beta]=.44),
                         frequency of initiating sex (([beta]=-.11),
                         frequency of achieving orgasm during sex
                         [beta]=.15), comfort trying new sexual
                         activities ([beta]=.21), and partner
                         pleasure ([beta]=.13).

Akers et al. (2009)    Among White girls, there were no significant
                         associations between perceived weight and
                         sexual risk behaviors. Compared with girls
                         with accurate weight perceptions, those with
                         underweight misperceptions had 1.3 times the
                         odds of reporting ever having sex; for
                         sexually active girls, those with
                         underweight misperceptions had 1.9 times the
                         odds of reporting [greater than or equal to]
                         4 lifetime partners, whereas those with
                         overweight misperceptions were one-half as
                         likely to report condom use at last sex.

                       Among Black girls, there were significant
                         associations between perceived weight and
                         sexual risk behaviors. Compared with girls
                         who perceived their weight as "about right,"
                         those who perceived themselves as overweight
                         had 1.5 times the odds of reporting [greater
                         than or equal to] 4 lifetime partners.

                       Sexually active Latina girls who perceived
                         themselves as overweight had more than twice
                         the odds of reporting alcohol use at last
                         sex compared with those who perceived their
                         weight as "about right." Girls with
                         underweight misperceptions had >3 times the
                         odds of reporting coitarche before age 13,
                         but were only one-third as likely to report
                         [greater than or equal to] 4 lifetime
                         partners compared with those who accurately
                         estimated their weight.

Albright (2008)        9% of the women reported that watching
                         pornography was likely to make their
                         partners more critical of them.

Algars et al.          Better sexual function was significantly
(2011)                   associated with higher levels of
                         satisfaction with one's vagina (desire, r =
                         .09; arousal, r=.10; lubrication, r=.12;
                         orgasm, r=.12; satisfaction, r=.12; pain,
                         r=-.09), as well as satisfaction with one's
                         breasts (desire, r=.11; arousal, r=.08;
                         lubrication, r=.10; orgasm, r=.09;
                         satisfaction, r=.10; pain, r=-.06). Genital
                         satisfaction was significantly associated
                         with the frequency of sexual fantasies
                         (r=.05), kissing and petting (r=.09), oral
                         sex (r= 10), vaginal intercourse (r=.09),
                         and anal intercourse (r=.04).

Berman, Berman,        Positive genital self-image negatively
Miles, Pollets, &        correlated with amount of sexual distress
Powell (2003)            (r=-.50), but not with overall sexual
                         function. However, within the FSFI
                         categories of sexual function, a positive
                         genital self-image was associated with
                         higher desire (r=.39), but not with arousal,
                         lubrication, orgasm, satisfaction, or
                         absence of pain.

Calogero &             Internalization of appearance ideals from
Thompson (2009a)         media sources negatively correlated with
                         sexual self-esteem (r=-.41) and sexual
                         satisfaction (r=-.33). Body surveillance and
                         body shame negatively correlated with sexual
                         self-esteem (r=-.48 and r=-.50,
                         respectively) and sexual satisfaction
                         (r=-.46 and r=-.42, respectively).

                       Path analysis indicated that greater
                         internalization led to more body
                         surveillance ([beta]=.42), which led to
                         higher body shame ([beta]=.34) and lower
                         sexual self-esteem ([beta]=-.38), which, in
                         turn, predicted less sexual satisfaction
                         (body shame [beta]=-.29). In addition, more
                         body shame led to lower sexual self-esteem
                         directly (fl=-.21), and body surveillance
                         led to less sexual satisfaction directly
                         ([beta]=-.28).

Calogero &             Study l: Sexual self-esteem was negatively
Thompson (2009b)         correlated with self-objectification (r=-
                         .56). Self-objectification predicted sexual
                         self-esteem ([beta] = -.56).

                       Study 2: Self-objectification was negatively
                         correlated with sexual self-esteem and
                         sexual self-competence (r =-.38 and r = -
                         .36, respectively), and body shame was
                         negatively correlated with sexual self-
                         esteem (r=-.35).

                       Self-objectification and body shame were
                         directly linked to sexual self-esteem
                         ([beta]=-.36 and [beta]=-.21, respectively).
                         Self-objectification directly predicted
                         sexual self-competence ([beta]=-.35), and
                         body shame did not.

Carvalho & Nobre       Body image beliefs and self body image
(2010)                   thoughts did not predict sexual desire.

Cash, Maikkula, &      All three SSSS schema subscales were
Yamamiya (2004)          significantly (p < .01) related to women's
                         anxious-avoidant body focus scores (i.e.,
                         romantic-passionate, r=-.24; open-direct,
                         r=-.23; embarrassed -conservative, r=.26).
                         Women experiencing more anxious-avoidant
                         body focus during sex had significantly
                         poorer sexual functioning in their current
                         relationship (sexual pleasure, r=-.39;
                         frequency of sexual desire, r=-.33; arousal,
                         r=-.27; orgasmic experiences, r=.26).

                       An anxious-avoidant body focus during sex
                         was more strongly correlated with sexual
                         functioning (r=-.26) than were the trait
                         body image measures (body satisfaction,
                         r=.18; appearance investment, r=.17;
                         overweight preoccupation, r=ns). More
                         positive functioning was related to less
                         anxious-avoidant body focus ([beta]=-.25).

Daniluk (1993)         The participants struggled with the
                         perception that they were somehow to blame
                         for the excessive "femaleness" of their
                         bodies or for their bodies' lack of socially
                         valued attributes. It was only later in life
                         when they perceived society as disqualifying
                         the bodies of women as being of worth, or,
                         at times, they were involved in mutually
                         enabling relationships that some of the
                         women in the study began to experience a
                         sense of bodily acceptance. This "experience
                         of integration and wholeness" was viewed by
                         the women as being critical to their healthy
                         sexual functioning. Self-acceptance and
                         self-love were viewed as the road to such
                         integration.

Davison & McCabe       The body image variables were unrelated to
(2005)                   aspects of sexual functioning. Body
                         satisfaction was positively correlated with
                         the passionate/romantic (r=.33) and open/
                         direct dimensions (r=.36) of sexual
                         self-schemas, but not significantly related
                         to the embarrassed-conservative dimension
                         (r=-.18, ns).

Donaghue (2009)

Dove & Wiederman       For sexual esteem, sexual satisfaction, orgasm
(2000)                   consistency, and frequency of pretending
                         orgasm, cognitive distraction explained
                         additional, statistically significant
                         variance above and beyond general affect,
                         sexual desire, general self-focus, sexual
                         attitudes, and body dissatisfaction
                         (change in [R.sup.2]=.05, .10, .07, and
                         .08, respectively).

Eisenberg,             Satisfaction with body image had an inverse
Neumark-Sztainer,        association with having a casual partner and
& Lust (2005)            a marginal inverse relationship to using no
                         or unreliable contraception during last
                         intercourse. No associations between body
                         image satisfaction and any of the high-risk
                         sexual behaviors were found in multivariate
                         analysis.

Faith & Share          Worse body image conceptualizations
(1993)                   significantly predicted lower frequency of
                         sexual behaviors ([beta]=-.22), whereas
                         general sexual knowledge and psychological
                         adjustment did not predict sexual behaviors.
                         Sexual attitude scores were the best
                         predictors of sexual approach /avoidance
                         behaviors ([beta] = .36).

Gillen, Lefkowitz,     Sexually active individuals had more
& Shearer (2006)         positive views of their appearance and were
                         less dissatisfied with their bodies, but
                         were also more oriented toward their
                         appearance than were sexually abstinent
                         individuals. More positive evaluation of
                         appearance was associated with less risky
                         sexual behavior (lifetime unprotected sex,
                         r=-.20; using and buying condoms, r=.16;
                         barriers to condom use, r=-.21; less self-
                         confidence in communicating with a partner
                         about condom use, r=-.29). Body
                         dissatisfaction (i.e., discrepancy between
                         current and ideal body figure) was also
                         related to less risky sexual behavior
                         (lifetime alcohol use before-during sex, r =
                         .20; less self-confidence in communicating
                         with a partner about condom use, r=.22).
                         Females who evaluated their appearance in a
                         more positive way had less unprotected
                         sex in their lifetime and perceived fewer
                         barriers to condom use.
                         Those who were more oriented toward their
                         appearance endorsed the sexual double
                         standard to a greater extent.

Graham, Sanders,       Feeling comfortable and positive about one's
Milhausen, &             body was frequently mentioned as a factor
McBride (2004)           that would facilitate sexual arousal.

Herbenick et al.       Positive genital perceptions were associated
(2011)                   with more sexual desire (r=.20), arousal
                         (r=.12), lubrication (r-.16), orgasm
                         (r=.14), satisfaction (r=.15), and pain
                         (indicating less pain, r=.15).

Holt & Lyness          There was a significant, positive, linear
(2007)                   relationship between both body image (whole
                         MBSRQ, r=.35) and reflected appraisal (BASS/
                         MBSRQ, r=.34) and sexual satisfaction.
                         Regression analysis showed that appearance
                         evaluation (AE/MBSRQ) and overweight
                         preoccupation (OP/MBSRQ) were significant in
                         predicting sexual satisfaction ([beta]=.29
                         and [beta]=.26, respectively). Appearance
                         evaluation was the only significant
                         predictor of sexual satisfaction, in general
                         ([beta]=.31), and overweight preoccupation
                         was the only significant predictor of sexual
                         satisfaction with a partner ([beta]=.25).

Hoyt & Kogan           Women who were dissatisfied with their sex
(2001)                   lives were more dissatisfied with their body
                         appearance than those who were satisfied
                         with their body appearance.

Koch, Mansfield,       The more a woman perceived herself as less
Thurau, & Carey          attractive than before, the more likely she
(2005)                   was to report a decline in sexual desire or
                         frequency of sexual activity. The more she
                         perceived herself as attractive, the more
                         likely she was to experience an increase in
                         sexual desire, orgasm, enjoyment, or
                         frequency of sexual activity. There were no
                         significant statistical relationships
                         between a woman's perception of her own
                         attractiveness as she aged and her current
                         sexual satisfaction.

Kvalem, von Soest,     Girls between 14 and 17 years of age (Time
Trwen, & Singsaas        2) without coital experience were
(2011)                   significantly more satisfied with their
                         bodies, compared with girls who lacked
                         coital experience. There were no cross-
                         sectional differences in body evaluation in
                         relation to coital experience among girls at
                         the other time periods. For early adolescent
                         girls body evaluation did not influence the
                         probability of coital onset during the first
                         2-year period. In the subsequent 5-year
                         period, body dissatisfaction increased the
                         probability for coital onset (OR = 0.64).

van Lankveld &         Induction of state self-focus per se did not
Bergh (2008)             affect genital responses, but an interaction
                         effect of self-focus and participants' level
                         of trait sexual self-focus was revealed.
                         Compared with women with low scores on this
                         trait, women with high scores exhibited
                         smaller genital responses when state
                         self-focus was induced. Both groups did not
                         differ when no self-focus was induced.
                         Increase of state self-focus did not affect
                         subjective sexual arousal, but participants
                         with a high level of trait sexual
                         self-focus reported stronger subjective
                         arousal compared with those with a low trait
                         level.

Larson, Clark,         Weight satisfaction was found to be
Robinson, & Utter        associated with regular contraception use
(2011)                   (OR=2.06) and discussion of STI prevention
                         with partners (OR= 1.41). Weight-loss
                         attempts were found to be positively
                         associated with female sexual activity (OR=
                         1.58).

Littleton,             Appearance shame was a predictor both of
Radecki-Breitkof,        more inconsistent condom use (AOR =1.28) and
& Berenson (2005)        having more sexual partners in the past year
                         (AOR =1.22). Appearance investment was a
                         predictor of more frequent drinking (AOR =
                         1.21) and substance use (AOR = 1.12) before
                         sex. In addition, the interaction term was
                         associated with more inconsistent condom use
                         (AOR=0.94). Finally, binge drinking was
                         predicted by surveillance (AOR =1.47), shame
                         (AOR = 1.68), and the interaction term (AOR
                         = 0.90).

Meana & Nunnink        Appearance distraction was negatively
(2006)                   related to sexual satisfaction (r=-.32), but
                         not related to global sexual functioning,
                         sexual knowledge, sexual attitudes, sexual
                         information, experiences, psychological
                         distress, affect, and fantasy. Negative body
                         image was related to psychological distress
                         (r = .31) and positive affect (r = -.42).

                       Appearance-based distraction was predicted
                         by psychological distress ([beta]=.21) and
                         negative body image ([beta]=.50).

Meston (2006)          Sexually dysfunctional women showed a trend
                         toward lower body image than did sexually
                         functional women (p=.07).

Nobre &                The discriminant function showed that body
Pinto-Gouveia            image beliefs distinguished sexually
(2006)                   dysfunctional from functional women (r=.58).

Pauls, Occhino, &      In early pregnancy, low sexual function was
Drythout (2008)          associated with impaired body image
                         (r=-.38).

Peplau et al. (2008)   Nearly one-half of the women, including 48%
                         of heterosexual women and 47% of lesbian
                         women, reported that their body image had
                         positive effects on their sex lives. Over
                         one-fourth of both lesbian women (27%) and
                         heterosexual women (30%) reported that their
                         feelings about their bodies had negative
                         effects on the quality of their sex lives.
                         No significant mean difference was found
                         between lesbian and heterosexual women.

Penhollow & Young      Sexual satisfaction was significantly
(2008)                   correlated with concerns about being nude
                         (r=-.50), concerns about partners making
                         negative judgments about their body (r=-
                         .38), fitness (r=.19), problem areas
                         (r=.19), strength and build (r=.14),
                         appearance of eyes and face (r=.14), and
                         weight (r=.16). Body image and fitness
                         variables were significant predictors of
                         sexual satisfaction. The overall regression
                         explained 46% of the variance in sexual
                         satisfaction. Three predictor variables were
                         identified in the best-fit model for women:
                         concerns about being nude, fitness, and
                         exercise frequency.

Pinquart (2009)        Lower body satisfaction was associated with
                         higher decisional ambivalence ([beta] =
                         -.13), and not associated with delayed first
                         sexual intercourse.

Pujols, Meston, &      Body esteem and appearance-based thoughts
Seal (2010)              during sexual activity were significantly
                         correlated with sexual satisfaction (r=.44
                         and r=39, respectively). Sexual satisfaction
                         was predicted by high body esteem
                         ([beta]=.20) and low frequency of
                         appearance-based distracting thoughts during
                         sexual activity (#=.15), after controlling
                         for sexual functioning status. Post hoc
                         testing revealed that the sexual
                         attractiveness subscale of the BES was the
                         only significant predictor of sexual
                         satisfaction.

Purdon & Holdaway      Greater frequency of and anxiety evoked by
(2006)                   thoughts (e.g., body image thoughts) were
                         associated with lower sexual satisfaction;
                         13 of 41 women reported body image concerns
                         as the first or second most frequent type of
                         non-erotic thought experienced during
                         typical sexual activities with a partner.

Reissing,              Body attitudes were significantly associated
Laliberte, & Davis       with sexual aversion (r=-.33), but not
(2005)                   associated with low sexual self-efficacy,
                         negative sexual adjustment, and negative
                         sexual self-schema. Negative body attitudes
                         were not predictive of lower sexual
                         self-efficacy ([beta]=.15). A more negative
                         body attitude was associated with an
                         increase in sexual aversion ([beta]=-.33),
                         which, in turn, was associated with negative
                         sexual adjustment ([beta]=.38).

Roberts & Gettman      Women's ratings of the appeal of physical
(2004)                   sex were significantly higher in the body
                         competence condition than in the
                         self-objectification condition.

La Rocque & Cioe       A relationship between negative body image
(2010)                   and a greater tendency to avoid sexual
                         activity was found ([beta]=-.35). Sexual
                         esteem, sexual satisfaction, and sexual
                         desire appeared to mediate this relationship
                         (body image significantly predicted these
                         mediators, 13=.62, [beta]=.48, and
                         [beta]=.17, respectively). In turn, these
                         variables were associated with greater
                         sexual avoidance ([beta]=-.42, [beta]=-.12,
                         and [beta] =-.18, respectively). The direct
                         relationship between body image and sexual
                         avoidance was not significant in the
                         mediation model.

Sanchez & Kiefer       Body shame was related to arousability (r =
(2007)                   -.14) and sexual pleasure (r=-.31), but not
                         related to orgasm difficulty. Sexual
                         self-consciousness was associated with
                         arousability (r=-.34), sexual pleasure (r=
                         -.46), and orgasm difficulty (r = .27). The
                         relationship between body shame and sexual
                         pleasure and problems was mediated by sexual
                         self-consciousness during physical intimacy.
                         Body shame was related to greater sexual
                         self-consciousness ([beta]=.53), which, in
                         turn, predicted lower sexual pleasure
                         ([beta]=.28) and sexual arousability
                         ([beta]=-.29). Results persisted,
                         controlling for relationship status and age.
                         Being in a relationship was associated with
                         less sexual self-consciousness (l=.27) and
                         less orgasm difficulty (l=.29).

Satinsky, Reece,       Body appreciation was associated with sexual
Dennis, Sanders,         arousal (r=.19), sexual satisfaction
& Bardzell (2012)        (r=.35), and general sexual functioning
                         (full FSFI; r=.28). Body appreciation was
                         not associated with desire, lubrication,
                         orgasm, and pain. After controlling for
                         sexual orientation, partner status, and age,
                         body appreciation predicted the arousal
                         ([beta]=.27), orgasm ([beta]=.24), and
                         satisfaction aspects (fl=.37) of sexual
                         function.

Schick, Calabrese,     Vulva appearance dissatisfaction and genital
Rima, & Zucker           image self-consciousness were associated with
(2010)                   sexual esteem (r=-.21 and r=-.28,
                         respectively) and sexual satisfaction (r=-.22
                         and r=-.34, respectively), but not associated
                         with motivation to avoid risky sex. Path
                         analyses indicated that dissatisfaction with
                         genital appearance was associated with higher
                         genital image self-consciousness during
                         physical intimacy, which, in turn, was
                         associated with lower sexual esteem, sexual
                         satisfaction, and motivation to avoid risky
                         sexual behavior.

Schooler, Ward,        Greater body comfort was associated with
Merriwether, &           higher levels of sexual assertiveness
Caruthers (2005)         (r=.55), higher levels of sexual experience
                         (r=.20), lower levels of risky sexual
                         behavior (r=-.19), and greater condom use
                         self-efficacy (r=.51). Greater body image
                         self-consciousness was associated with lower
                         levels of sexual assertiveness, (r=-.55),
                         lower levels of sexual experience, (r=
                         -.18), and lower condom use self-efficacy
                         (r=-.48). Sexual assertiveness and sexual
                         risk were each directly predicted by body
                         shame (BCBM and BISQ; [beta]=-.67 and r=.42,
                         respectively). There was a significant
                         mediating role of sexual assertiveness in
                         the relation between body shame and sexual
                         experience, and the relation between body
                         shame and sexual risk.

Seal, Bradford, &      There was a significant correlation between
Meston (2009)            body esteem and sexual desire post erotica
                         (r=.35). Mental sexual arousal and physical
                         sexual arousal did not correlate with body
                         esteem. The FSFI desire domain score was
                         correlated with the weight concern (r=.27)
                         and sexual attractiveness (r=-.25) subscales
                         of the BES, but not with the physical
                         condition subscale. Similarly, the composite
                         score of items assessing sexual desire
                         responses to the erotic story was
                         significantly correlated with the BES weight
                         concern (r=.31) and sexual attractiveness
                         (r=.33) subscales, but not with the BES
                         physical condition subscale.

Seal & Meston          Women's self-reported mental sexual arousal
(2007)                   to the erotic audiotapes significantly
                         increased in both the No Body Awareness
                         condition and the Body Awareness condition,
                         as did perception of physical sexual arousal
                         and autonomic arousal. Self-reported mental
                         sexual arousal, perceptions of physical
                         sexual arousal, and autonomic arousal were
                         all significantly higher in the Body
                         Awareness condition than in the No Body
                         Awareness condition. There was no difference
                         in VPA difference scores between the
                         conditions. Women with low and average body
                         esteem (BES) scores responded equally in
                         both the Body Awareness and the No Body
                         Awareness conditions. There were positive
                         relationships between the sexual
                         attractiveness subscale of the BES and FSFI
                         total score (r=.62), sexual arousal,
                         (r=.67), orgasm (r=.44), and satisfaction
                         (r=.51). There was also a trend for the BES
                         sexual attractiveness subscale to be
                         positively related to FSFI lubrication
                         (r=.31, p=.07). The weight concern subscale
                         of the BES was positively related to the
                         FSFI total score (r=.50) and lubrication
                         (r=.47), and marginally related to arousal
                         (r=.44, p=.06). The BES total score was
                         significantly and positively correlated with
                         the FSFI total score (r=.53), arousal
                         (r=.56), and orgasm (r = .48).

Shulman & Horne        No differences in body image, as measured
(2003)                   either by the BIA or the BASS, were found
                         across four different levels of masturbation
                         frequency. For African American women, no
                         relationship was found between both the BIA
                         and the BASS and masturbation frequency.
                         Among the European American women, no
                         relationship was found between the BIA and
                         masturbation frequency. However, there was a
                         significant, positive relationship between
                         the BASS and masturbation frequency, with
                         women who reported masturbating 7-10 times
                         per month having significantly higher rates
                         of body satisfaction on the BASS than those
                         women who reported masturbating 1-3 times
                         and 4-6 times per month.

Steer & Tiggemann      Self-objectification and self-surveillance
(2008)                   were not related to sexual functioning, both
                         general and current. For sexual functioning,
                         body shame and appearance anxiety (AAS) were
                         negatively correlated with the general
                         measure (r = -.26 and r=-.32, respectively),
                         but were not related to current sexual
                         functioning among the sexually active
                         participants. Self-consciousness (BISQ)
                         during sexual activity was negatively
                         correlated with sexual functioning, both
                         among the broader group of participants (r=
                         -.44) and among the smaller group of
                         currently sexually active participants (r=
                         -.32). Self-consciousness during sexual
                         activity fully mediated the relationships
                         between body shame and appearance anxiety,
                         on the one hand, and general sexual
                         functioning, on the other hand. Path
                         analysis showed that self-objectification
                         led to self-surveillance ([beta]=.69), which
                         led to body shame (f=.41) and appearance
                         anxiety ([beta]=.42), which, in turn, led to
                         self-consciousness during sex (P=.21 and
                         [beta]=.47, respectively) and, finally, to
                         sexual dysfunction (l=-.41). There was just
                         one additional, direct pathway from
                         self-surveillance to self-consciousness
                         during sex ([beta]=.21). There were no
                         direct pathways from self-objectification,
                         self-surveillance, body shame, or appearance
                         anxiety to sexual functioning. Relationship
                         satisfaction was a unique predictor of
                         general sexual functioning (f = .41) and
                         current sexual activity ([beta]= .44).

Tang, Lai, & Chung     Positive body image was associated with a
(1997)                   higher score on the sex-related variables
                         experience (r=-.24), drive (r=-.25), liberal
                         attitudes (r=-.22), affects (r=-.29),
                         satisfaction (r=.30), and a feminine gender
                         role definition (r=.37). Sexually active
                         students had a more positive, better body
                         image compared to students who had no sexual
                         intercourse experiences.

Trapnell, Meston, &    Poor body image was associated with less
Gorzalka (1997)          sexual experience (r=-.31), more
                         conservative sexual attitudes (r=-.31), and
                         less sexual knowledge (r=-.17). Body image
                         was a unique predictor of sexual experience.

Vasilenko, Ram, &      Transitioning to first intercourse was
Lefkowitz (2011)         associated with an average 0.57-point
                         decrease in satisfaction with appearance. On
                         average, female students became more
                         satisfied with their appearance over time,
                         but were somewhat less satisfied after first
                         intercourse.

Weaver & Byers         Situational body image dysphoria was
(2006)                   associated with all four sexuality variables
                         (sexual anxiety, r=.28; sexual
                         assertiveness, r=-.22; sexual esteem, r=
                         -.32; and sexual problems, r=.28). Body
                         dissatisfaction was associated with sexual
                         assertiveness (r=-.16) and sexual esteem
                         (r=-.18). Only situational body image
                         dysphoria was uniquely associated with
                         sexual assertiveness (sr=-.15), sexual
                         problems, and sexual esteem (sr=-.27). Both
                         body dissatisfaction and situational body
                         image dysphoria were uniquely associated
                         with sexual anxiety (sr=-.17 and sr=.32,
                         respectively). Women with higher situational
                         body image dysphoria reported lower sexual
                         assertiveness, more sexual problems, lower
                         sexual esteem, and higher sexual anxiety
                         than those with lower situational body image
                         dysphoria.

Weeden & Sabini        Higher self-rated attractiveness was
(2007)                   associated with sex prior to age 18 (r=.23),
                         a higher number of intercourse partners
                         (r=.31), a higher number of non-intercourse
                         sexual partners (r=.45), and sociosexuality
                         (r=.21).

Wenniger & Heiman      CSA survivors evaluated their health more
(1998)                   negatively than comparison individuals,
                         indicating that they were feeling less
                         healthy or experienced more bodily symptoms
                         of illness or vulnerability to illness.
                         Childhood physical abuse did not
                         significantly predict sexual functioning. A
                         more positive evaluation of physical fitness
                         or being "in shape" ([beta] =-.37), less
                         investment in being physically fit
                         ([beta]=.31), and lower body esteem
                         regarding sexual attractiveness were
                         associated with a lower level of sexual
                         functioning ([beta]=.43).

Werlinger, King,       53%, of the women felt that their sexual
Clark, Pera, &           behaviors had changed since they had lost
Wineze (1997)            weight. The most frequently endorsed
                         explanations for sexual changes were
                         "because I feel better about my body" (72%)
                         and "because I feel less depressed/down
                         about my weight" (74%).

Wiederman (2000)       Study 1: Higher body image self-
                         consciousness during sexual activity was
                         associated with less sexual esteem (r=-.45).
                         Body image self-consciousness during
                         sexual activity significantly added to the
                         prediction of the experience of vaginal
                         intercourse, fellatio, and cunnilingus.
                         Study 2: Higher body image self-consciousness
                         during sexual activity is associated with
                         less sexual esteem (r=-.52), frequency of
                         heterosexual experience (r =-.56), higher
                         sexual anxiety (r=.48), lower sexual
                         assertiveness (r=-.56), and higher sexual
                         avoidance (r=.46), and significantly added
                         to the prediction of the experience of
                         vaginal intercourse, fellatio, and
                         cunnilingus.

Wiederman & Hurst      There were no differences in self-rated
(1998)                   facial attractiveness, self-rated bodily
                         attractiveness, body dissatisfaction, and
                         appearance orientation between women who had
                         experienced sexual intercourse and those who
                         had not and between women who had performed
                         oral sex and those who had not. Women who
                         had ever received oral sex perceived their
                         bodies as more attractive compared to women
                         without such experience. Sexual attitudes
                         were unrelated to any of the attractiveness
                         or body image variables. For lifetime number
                         of sexual partners among non-virgins, only
                         the relationship with self-rated facial
                         attractiveness was significant (r=.27).
                         Sexual esteem scores were positively related
                         to self-rated facial (r=.47) and bodily
                         attractiveness (r=.35). Affective
                         orientation toward erotic stimuli and
                         attitudinal acceptance of casual sex were
                         unrelated to self-rated facial and bodily
                         attractiveness.

Wild, Flisher,         Low self-esteem with respect to body image
Bhana, &                 was significantly associated with risky
Lombard (2004)           sexual behavior, after controlling for the
                         clustering according to school, grade, and
                         race (OR= 1.82). After controlling for the
                         other self-esteem scales, the association
                         between sexual self-esteem and risky sexual
                         behavior was no longer significant.

Wingood,               Women who were more dissatisfied with their
DiClemente,              body image were more likely to fear
Harrington, &            abandonment as a result of negotiating
Davies (2002)            condom use (AOR=3.30), perceive that they
                         had fewer options for sexual partners
                         (AOR=2.40), perceive themselves as having
                         limited control in their sexual
                         relationships (AOR = 2.00), and to worry
                         about acquiring HIV (AOR=1.50). There was an
                         association between body dissatisfaction and
                         never using condoms during sexual
                         intercourse in the past 30 days (AOR =1.60)
                         and engaging in unprotected vaginal sex in
                         the prior 6 months (AOR =1.60).

Yamamiya, Cash, &      Higher physical self-ideal discrepancies
Thompson (2006)          (BIQ) were significantly and negatively
                         correlated with self-efficacy to refuse sex
                         (r =-.20), confidence in sexual functioning
                         (r = -.28), sexual assertiveness (r =-.20),
                         ambivalence in sexual decision-making
                         (r=.11), and higher emotional engagement
                         during sex (r=.13). Higher body
                         consciousness and exposure avoidance in
                         sexual contexts (i.e., BESAQ) was
                         significantly correlated with confidence in
                         sexual functioning (r = -.54), sexual
                         assertiveness (r=-.37), ambivalence in
                         sexual decision-making (r=.34), and higher
                         emotional engagement during sex (r=.41), but
                         not with sexual self-efficacy to refuse sex.
                         Only BIQ scores significantly accounted for
                         general self-efficacy to refuse sex
                         ([beta]=-.19). BESAQ scores accounted for
                         initial ambivalence about having sex with a
                         partner ([beta]=.26) and degree of emotional
                         disengagement during sex ([beta]=.29).
                         Associations between dispositional body
                         image and sexual assertiveness, as well as
                         dispositional body image and confidence
                         level in sexual functioning, were fully
                         mediated by body consciousness during sexual
                         activity.

Note. For both the modified version of Section 3 of the Derogatis
Sexual Functioning Inventory (DSFI) and the modified version of
the DSFI (Column 4), see Derogatis and Melisaratos (1979).
AOR=Adjusted Odds Ratio; BISQ=Body Image Self-consciousness
Questionnaire; BMI=body mass index; CSA=childhood sexual abuse;
OR =odds ratio; STI=sexually transmitted infection; VPA= vaginal
pulse amplitude. Body image measures: AAS=Appearance Anxiety
Scale (Dion, Dion, & Keelan, 1990); ABDs=Appearance-Based
Distraction subscale of the Cognitive Distraction During Sexual
Activity Scale (Dove & Wiederman, 2000); AE-MBSRQ=Appearance
Evaluation subscale of the Multidimensional Body-Self Relations
Questionnaire (Cash, 1994x, 2000); AO-MBSRQ=Appearance
Orientation subscale of the Multidimensional Body-Self Relations
Questionnaire (Cash, 1994x, 2000); AS] -Appearance Schemas
Inventory (Cash & Labarge, 1996); AS-BIQ=Attractiveness Scale of
the Body Image Questionnaire (Strauss & Richter-Appelt, 1996);
BWBAQ=Ben-Tovim Walker Body Attitudes Questionnaire (Ben-Tovim &
Walker, 1991); BAQ=Body Attitude Questionnaire (Story, 1998);
BAS=Body Appreciation Scale (Avalos, Tylka, & Wood-Barcalow,
2005); BASS =Body Areas Satisfaction Scale (Brown, Cash, & Lewis,
1989); BASS-MBSRQ=Body Areas Satisfaction Scale of the
Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 1994x,
2000); BAQ=Body Attitude Questionnaire (Story, 1998); BCBM=Body
Comfort-Body Modesty Measure (Merriwether & Ward, 2002);
BCS-BIBS=Body Concealment Scale of the Body Image Behavior Scales
(Davison & McCabe, 2005); BC-0BCS=Body Control subscale of the
Objectified Body Consciousness Scale (McKinley & Hyde, 1996);
BD-EDI-2=Body Dissatisfaction subscale of the Eating Disorder
Inventory-Second Edition (Garner, 1991); BES=Body Esteem Scale
(weight concern, physical condition, and sexual attractiveness
dimensions; Franzoi & Shields, 1984); BESAQ=Body Exposure during
Sexual Activities Questionnaire (Cash, 2004); BIA=Body Image
Assessment (Williamson, Davis, Bennett, Goreczny, & Gleaves,
1989); BIAQ=Body Image Avoidance Questionnaire (Rosen, Srebnik,
Saltzberg, & Wendt, 1991); BIB-SDBQ=Body Image Beliefs Dimension
of the Sexual Dysfunctional Beliefs Questionnaire (Nobre,
Pinto-Gouveia, & Gomes, 2003); BI-DSFI=Body Image subscale of the
Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (Derogatis, 1975);
BIQ=Body Image Ideals Questionnaire (Szymanski & Cash, 1995);
BII-BIBCQ=Body Image Importance subscale of the Body Image and
Body Change Questionnaire (Ricciardelli & McCabe, 2001);
BIQLI=Body Image Quality of Life Inventory (Cash & Fleming,
2002); BIS--BIBCQ=Body Image Satisfaction subscale of the Body
Image and Body Change Questionnaire (Ricciardelli & McCabe,
2001); BISC=Body Image Self-Consciousness scale (Wiederman,
2000); BI-SEQ=Body Image subscale of the Self-Esteem
Questionnaire (DuBois, Feiner, Brand, Phillips, & Lease, 1996);
BIS-BIBS=Body Improvement Scale of the Body Image Behavior Scales
(Davison & McCabe, 2005); BRSS = Body and Relationship
Satisfaction Survey (Hoyt & Kogan, 2001; based on the Body
Satisfaction Scale: Berscheid, Walster, & Bohrnstedt, 1973);
BSh-0BCS=Body Shame subscale of the Objectified Body Consciousness
Scale (McKinley & Hyde, 1996); BSu-0BCS=Body Surveillance
subscale of the Objectified Body Consciousness Scale (McKinley &
Hyde, 1996); CDRS=Contour Drawing Rating Scale (Thompson & Gray,
1995); DT-EDI-2=Drive for Thinness subscale of the Eating
Disorder Inventory--Second Edition (Garner, 1991); FGSIS-Female
Genital Self-Image Scale (Herbenick et al., 2011);
FE-MBSRQ=Fitness Evaluation subscale of the Multidimensional
Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 1994x, 2000);
FO-MBSRQ=Fitness Orientation subscale of the Mul tidimensional
Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 1994x, 2000); GBDS =General
Body Dissatisfaction subscale of the Body Attitude Test (Probst,
Vandereycken, Van Coppenolle, & Vanderlinden, 1995);
GSS-PSSI-General Sexual Satisfaction and Satisfaction with Partner
subscales of the Pinney Sexual Satisfaction Inventory (Pinney,
Gerrard, & Denney, 1987); GISC=Genital Image Self-Consciousness
scale (Schick et al., 2010; modified version of the BISC scale:
Wiederman, 2000); GSIS=Genital Self-Image Scale (Berman et al.,
2003); HE-MBSRQ=Health Evaluation subscale of the
Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 1994a,
2000); HO-MBSRQ= Health Orientation Subscale of the
Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 1994a,
2000); 10-MBSRQ = Illness Orientation Subscale of the
Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 1994a,
2000); IG-SATAQ-3 = Internalization-General Subscale of the
Social Attitudes Toward Appearance Questionnaire-Third Edition
(Thompson, van den Berg, Roehrig, Guarda, & Heinberg, 2004);
LSBIT-SMQ=Low Self Body Image Thoughts Dimension of the Sexual
Modes Questionnaire (Nobre & Pinto-Gouveia, 2003); NETCQ=
Non-Erotic Thought Content Questionnaire (Purdon & Holdaway, 2006);
OP-MBSRQ=Overweight Preoccupation Subscale of the
Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 1994a,
2000); PACS=Physical Appearance Comparison Scale (Thompson,
Heinberg, & Tantleff, 1991); PAS -Physical Attractiveness Scale
(Davison & McCabe, 2005); PSCSQ=Physical Self-Consciousness
during Sex Questionnaire (Cash et al., 2004); SP-PSSI=
Satisfaction with Partner Subscale of the Pinney Sexual
Satisfaction Inventory (Pinney et al., 1987); SW MBSRQ=
Self-classified Weight Subscale of the Multidimensional Body-Self
Relations Questionnaire (Cash, 1994a, 2000); SE-SSCS=Sexual
Embarrassment Dimension of the Sexual Self-Consciousness Scale
(van Lankveld, Geijen, & Sykora, 2007); SR-RB=sexual risk
behavior items of a self-report risk questionnaire (Wild et al.,
2004); SSF-SSCS=sexual self-focus dimension of the Sexual
Self-Consciousness Scale (van Lankveld et al., 2007);
SIBID=Situational Inventory of Body Image Dysphoria (Cash,
1994b); SPAS =Social Physique Anxiety Scale (Hart, Leary, &
Rejeski, 1989); VAS = Vulva Appearance Satisfaction Scale (Schick
et al., 2010; modified version of the Body Satisfaction Scale:
Rapport, Clark, & Wardle, 2000). Sexuality measures: AfS-DSFI
=Affect Scale of the Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory
(Derogates, 1975); AS=Ambivalence Scale (Pinquart, 2009);
AS-DSFI=Attitude Scale of the Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory
(Derogates, 1975); BIQLI; BRSS; BSFQ=Brief Sexual Functioning
Questionnaire (Wenniger & Heiman, 1998); CSFQ=Changes in Sexual
Functioning Questionnaire (Clayton, McGarvey, & Clavet, 1997);
CCS=Communication about Condoms Scale (Barkley & Burns, 2000);
CRUS =Confidence in Refusing an Unsafe Sexual Encounter (Wingood
et al., 2002); DS-DSFI = Drive Scale of the Derogatis Sexual
Functioning Inventory (Dero gatis, 1975); DSD-SDI=Dyadic Sexual
Desire Factor of the Sexual Desire Inventory-Second Edition
(Spector, Carey, & Steinberg, 1996); FS-DSFI=Fantasy Scale of the
Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (Derogates, 1975); FSDS =
Female Sexual Distress Scale (Derogates, 2001); FSFI = Female
Sexual Functioning Index (desire, arousal, lubrication, orgasm,
satisfaction, and pain dimensions; Rosen et al., 2000);
FTSEQ=First-Time Sexual Experience Questionnaire (Yamamiya et
al., 2006); GMSEX=Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction-Revised
(Lawrance & Byers, 1995); GSSI-DSFI=Global Sexual Satisfaction
Index of the Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (Derogates,
1975); HISA=Hurlbert Index of Sexual Assertiveness (Hurlbert,
1991); HIV-A=HIV Anxiety (Wingood et al., 2002); MRS-MSSCQ=
Motivation to Avoid Risky Sex Subscale of the Multi
Dimensional Sexual Self-Concept Questionnaire (Snell, 1995);
OC=Orgasm Consistency (Dove & Wiederman, 2000); OG-SAI =
Oral-Genital subscale of the Sexual Arousability Index (Andersen,
Broffitt, Karlsson, & Tumquist, 1989); PD-DSFI =Psychological
Distress Scale of the Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory
(Derogates, 1975); POS=Perceived control Over Sexuality (Wingood
et al., 2002); SSE=Precautions subscale of the Sexual
Self-Efficacy scale (Rosenthal, Moore, & Flynn, 1991); SAI=Sex
Anxiety Inventory (Janda & O'Grady, 1980); SAISAI=Sexual
Arousability Inventory and Sexual Anxiety Inventory (Hoon, Hoon,
& Wincze, 1976); SA-SAQ=Sexual Assertiveness subscale of the
Sexual Awareness Questionnaire (Snell, Fisher, & Miller, 1991);
SAS=Sexual Aversion Scale (sexual avoidance, sexual anxiety,
self-consciousness, sexual inadequacy, fear of sexually
transmitted infections, and childhood sexual trauma dimensions;
Katz, Gipson, Kearl, & Kriskovich, 1989); SDBQ=Sexual
Dysfunctional Beliefs Questionnaire (sexual conservatism, sexual
desire and pleasure as a sin, age-related beliefs, body image
beliefs, motherhood primacy, and denying affection primacy
domains; Nobre et al., 2003); SDSS=Sexual Double Standard Scale
(Muehlenhard & Quackenbush, 1996); SE =Sexual Experience
(Kissing and Petting experience, Oral Sex experience, and Vaginal
Intercourse Experience subscales; Schooler et al., 2005);
SE-MSSCQ=Sexual Esteem Scale of the Multidimensional Sexual
Self-Concept Questionnaire (Snell, 1995); SES-DSFI =Sexual Experience
Scale of the Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (Derogates,
1975); SFQ=Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (Lawrance & Byers,
1992); SI DSFI = Sexual Information subscale of the Derogatis
Sexual Functioning Inventory (Derogates, 1975); SI-SAI = Sexual
Intercourse subscale of the Sexual Arousability Index (Andersen
et al., 1989); SHF=Sexual History Form (Crete et al., 1998); SOS
=Sexual Opinion Survey (Fisher, Byrne, White, & Kelley, 1988);
SOS-MSSCQ=Sexual Optimism Scale of the Multidimensional Sexual
Self-Concept Questionnaire (Snell, 1995); SOQ=Self-
Objectification Questionnaire (Noll & Fredrickson, 1998);
SRBBS=Sexual Risk Behavior Beliefs and Self-efficacy scales
(Basen-Engquist et al., 1996); SSES F=Sexual Self-Efficacy Scale
for Female functioning (Bailes et al., 1998); SSS=Sexual
Satisfaction Scale (Dove & Wiederman, 2000); SS-ESLS=Sexual
Satisfaction subscale of the Extended Satisfaction with Life
Scale (Alfonso, Allison, Rader, & Gorman, 1996); SSSW =Sexual
Satisfaction Scale for Women (contentment, communication,
compatibility, interpersonal concern, and personal concern
dimensions; Meston & Trapnell, 2005); SSS-DSFI=Sexual Satisfaction
Scale of the Derogatis Sexual Functioning Inventory (Derogates,
1975); SSS-MSSCQ=Sexual Satisfaction Scale of the
Multidimensional Sexual Self-Concept Questionnaire (Snell, 1995);
SSSS=Sexual Self-Schema Scale (Andersen & Cyranowski, 1994);
SSES-MSSCQ=Sexual Self-Efficacy Scale of the Multidimensional
Sexual Self-Concept Questionnaire (Snell, 1995); SSe=sexual
self-esteem (measured by a modified version of Rosenberg's Global
Self-Esteem Scale; Calogero & Thompson, 2009a); SSE-SS=sexual
Self-Esteem subscale of the Sexuality Scale (Snell & Papini,
1989); SOI=Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (Simpson &
Gangestad, 1991); SSAS=Subjective Sexual Arousal Scale (mental
sexual arousal, physical sexual arousal, and sexual desire
dimensions; Heiman & Rowland, 1983).
COPYRIGHT 2012 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2012 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Woertman, Liesbeth; van den Brink, Femke
Publication:The Journal of Sex Research
Article Type:Survey
Geographic Code:1U2NY
Date:Mar 1, 2012
Words:18794
Previous Article:Eroticizing inequality in the United States: the consequences and determinants of traditional gender role adherence in intimate relationships.
Next Article:Investigating the impact of inquiry mode on self-reported sexual behavior: theoretical considerations and review of the literature.
Topics:

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters