A Review of Internet Pornography Use Research: Methodology and Content from the Past 10 Years

Introduction

Nearly 78 percent of Americans have Internet access, ¹ and this technological reality has increased pornography use. ² The fledgling body of research in this area reveals contradictory findings on the impact of Internet pornography (IP). Studies report many problems associated with IP use, including impairments in interpersonal, financial, and occupational functioning, ³ emotional problems, ⁴ and sexual dissatisfaction. ⁵ However, studies also have found positive effects of IP, including relieving stress, decreasing boredom, feeling supported, and increasing sexual knowledge.^6–8

Although IP use has an adverse affect on some, cross-study comparisons are hindered by inconsistent methodology in the IP research. Given the problems associated with IP use, being able to compare findings and establish a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of IP is critical.^9,10 In a 2001 review, Fisher and Barak ⁹ outlined various issues with IP research. First, because of the subjective nature of sexually explicit material (SEM), it is difficult to achieve agreement when categorizing the material. Second, results of previous studies were conflicting and inconsistent regarding IP prevalence. Finally, they noted a paucity of research on specific content areas and antecedents and consequences of IP use.

From these findings, Fisher and Barak ⁹ suggested enhancements to future IP research, including operationally defining pornography, exploring the form and function of IP, and understanding the antecedents and consequences of IP use. A standardized definition, including a statement about the content of the material and the reason for use, may be most important. If a definition of pornography is not provided, one is left to assume that all participants have the same conceptualization of the term and any inconsistencies across studies may be due to differences in how IP is defined. Given the importance of an operation definition, the present review will examine the inconsistencies and contradictions of IP definitions in the current research.

Understanding how the form and function of IP use relate to the antecedents and consequences of use also is crucial. With over 4 million Web sites containing pornographic material, ¹¹ the form (i.e., content and presentation) varies greatly. Mode of IP viewing also varies, including pictures, videos, sexually explicit games, and chat rooms. Further, individuals engage in IP use for multiple reasons, and the assumptions of the researchers often guide the ways in which the function of use is explored. For example, Cooper and colleagues ³ found that distraction was the most commonly reported reason for IP use for both men and women. However, significantly more men (over 60 percent) than women (36 percent) endorsed distraction as the primary reason for use. Goodson, McCormick, and Evans ¹² proposed three functional categories for IP behavior: obtaining sexually related information, establishing personal connections, and sexual entertainment or arousal. Laaser and Gregorie ¹³ proposed that IP is used by individuals who have difficulty connecting with people and choose fantasy connections online over healthy relationships. This review will provide a thorough examination of the various forms and functions of IP use that have been examined in previous studies.

One way to efficiently and effectively address the issues of form and function in IP research is to use validated measures. Currently, few measures are available to examine constructs related to IP use (e.g., Pornography Consumption Effect Scale [PCES] ⁶ ), and measures of IP function are even more limited.^7,9 Examining the existence and use of such measures will provide insight into areas needing further investigation.

A reexamination of the current research is essential before moving forward. There has been at least one review that has investigated IP, ¹⁴ but this was done within the larger context of Internet sexuality and thus a more focused review of the literature is needed. Although a meta-analysis of the research would be useful, the major discrepancies in the way studies have collected and reported data prohibit such a study. Thus, the present study is a critical review of the methodology and content in the extant literature on IP in nondeviant adult populations, including how IP is defined, utilization of validated pornography measures, and variables related to the development and maintenance of IP use. Form and function of IP use and how methodological differences may impact the results also are addressed.

Method

Searches were conducted on PubMed and PsycInfo using the search terms “Internet pornography” and “sexually explicit material” to identify articles. These search terms were taken from previous literature investigating IP within a larger pornography context. Reference lists from these articles were examined to locate additional articles. Studies were included if they measured IP/SEM consumption and included “nondeviant” (i.e., nonincarcerated) subjects over 18 years of age. “Nondeviant” populations were chosen, because deviant populations often have other psychological disorders (i.e., sexual deviance, compulsive sexual behaviors) that may cause differences (outside the scope of this paper) in IP use when compared with nondeviant populations. In addition, only articles published in the past 10 years were included because of the changes in IP availability and general Internet usage. Given this change in technology, only articles that reported IP use (not offline use) were included. Overall, technology allows pornography to be accessed and viewed differently than offline pornography. For example, IP access can be done anonymously, freely, and quickly, which is different from offline pornography. It would be interesting to compare Internet to offline pornography; however, it is beyond the scope of this review. For each article, study administration, demographics, definitions of pornography, pornography measures, and specific research objectives were reviewed.

Results

Forty-six studies published in 10 countries prior to April 2010 met the initial criteria for inclusion. Two studies were excluded, because the participants were obtaining mental health services for problems related to IP consumption; therefore, the final number analyzed was 44. It should be noted that some studies were derived from the same dataset, resulting in a total number of 41 original datasets. Of the 44 studies, 41 were quantitative in nature, 2 were qualitative, and 1 employed both methods.

Discussion

Pornography use has increased in recent years, which is due in large part to the availability and anonymity provided by the Internet. ²¹ Varied methodology and measurement in IP research have made it difficult to ascertain accurate levels of IP use and quantify related problematic behaviors. Fisher and Barak ¹⁰ highlighted many needs in this field almost 10 years ago; the present review shows that many of the same issues remain.

The most prominent disparity was related to defining IP. Many studies did not report providing a definition of IP. Thus, most participants relied on subjective definitions when answering study questions. Operational definitions are used to ensure clarity about the construct being studied; their absence makes it difficult to determine differences across studies and complicates the utility of analyses. Additionally, there are fundamental differences in defining pornography based on the content of the material (e.g., genitals) and the function (e.g., arousal) of the material. Therefore, a definition of pornography needs to be included in studies and the definition needs to include both form and function, which means including type of pornography (i.e., nudity only) and the reasons for viewing it (i.e., arousal). Overall, an agreed upon definition that would be inclusive of those definitions used in previous studies would be “any sexually explicit material displaying genitalia with the aim of sexual arousal or fantasy.”

Because of varying definitions in the research, base rates of IP use differed across studies. For example, individuals in three of the studies^18,22,16 endorsed use of IP if they only read a description of sexual encounter, but would not have endorsed IP use in four studies that specified IP use must include an explicit act.^6,17,19,23 Using Lam and Chan's ²² broad definition, 93 percent of Chinese male participants endorsed ever viewing IP. Conversely, Hald ¹⁹ gave a narrow definition, and approximately 88 percent of participants endorsed ever viewing any pornography. Lo and Wei ²³ did not provide a definition of IP use, and 44 percent of male and female Taiwanese participants endorsed ever viewing IP. Some differences in endorsement levels may be due to gender or cultural differences; however, the need to control for variance due to differences in definition remains. Thus, although the studies asked similar questions and arrived at similar conclusions, the results may not be analogous because of variations in base rates.

The variety of methods used to study similar variables also hinders cross-study comparison. For example, IP use was measured by frequency of use, duration of use, or ever use. Other differences in measurement of similar variables (e.g., researcher-generated questions, validated measures, or a combination of the two) render it problematic to compare results from individual studies in a meta-analysis. Further, without established measurements it is difficult to develop population norms for IP use, a prerequisite to distinguishing between normal and deviant use.

Several issues related to studying IP use may be addressed by creating and using validated measures. Such measures will increase the effectiveness of cross-study comparisons and ease in which researchers study these areas. Additionally, these measures will help researchers develop norms and cutoff rates for problem use and guide the development of efficacious treatments. Given the growing amount of problems associated with IP use, the ensuing advent of IP interventions, and consideration of problems such as compulsive sexual behavior and Internet addiction in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), funding toward IP-related concerns will likely increase. However, without proper validated measures and operational definitions, it will be difficult to obtain funding, hampering the efficient progression of IP research.

This review determined that studies varied in the extent to which IP use was the focus of the study. Some studies primarily examined IP use, whereas others studied pornography use in general or something tangential to IP (e.g., body image, illicit Internet use, and compulsive Internet use). Studies that included IP use as an aside to larger research questions may have assessed IP use in a limited and diverse manner. Few studies reviewed aimed to identify which aspects of IP use cause problems (i.e., time spent on IP, behaviors associated with IP use, impact of use on partner). Beyond this, IP use varies from user to user, and few studies strive for a comprehensive view of the form and function of behaviors. A thorough focus of form and function will aid in understanding the variables associated with IP-related problem behaviors. Although it is not recommended that all studies be methodologically identical, a lack of cohesiveness renders it difficult to form a consensus regarding problematic behaviors associated with IP use. Further, it hinders identification of differences in IP use and other pornographic use and the associated problems with each. It remains unclear whether the function is the same for different modes of pornography.

This review has a number of limitations to be addressed. First, although the search terms were based on previous research, they may not have encompassed all literature regarding IP and thus limited the number of research articles available for review. In addition, this review only investigated peer-reviewed English language papers. Exclusion of articles published in other languages may limit the conclusions of this review, as non-English articles may present different findings and conclusions because of ethnic and regional differences. Last, as stated above, the review included only articles that addressed online pornography. Inclusion of offline pornography would change the scope of the paper, but an understanding how these two medias influence use is important. In fact, Buzzell ² compared differences in IP use across three technologies and concluded that technology has mattered. This study also noted that these technological changes “raise other question worthy of research, especially related to access and use of pornography” (p. 45).

Overall, this review reveals a lack of consistency in IP research, complicating comparisons across studies and possibly hindering future research in this area. Fisher and Barak ⁹ identified issues in IP research, and it appears that these have not been addressed in much of the current IP literature. These issues may not have been addressed for several reasons. First, the diverse forms of IP may create difficulties in developing a universal definition of IP and thus a cohesive body of literature. Further, given that this area of research is fairly new and not well studied (only 46 articles in this review), previous studies aimed at first understanding the frequency and effects of IP use. Perhaps once there is a better understanding of the issues, more consistent and standardized ways of measuring these issues can be developed.

Future research should address these limitations in order to enhance our understanding of these issues.^9,10 First, efforts should be made to develop more comprehensive measures of pornography that have psychometric properties. These questionnaires need to have standard operational definitions, measurements of positive and negative effects of pornography, and measurements of form and function of IP use. Beyond research-related issues, these questionnaires could be used in the clinical population to understand problematic use and effects on functioning. The number of people seeking help for issues related to IP consumption is rising.^23,24 Findings based on the use of valid measures and consistent operational definitions will enhance our ability to work with clients who are suffering from IP-related issues. Finally, studies investigating changes in IP content or perceptions over time, as well as studies investigating the subjective dimensions of IP, would help in the development of more comprehensive studies regarding IP consumption.