Neural Representation of Subjective Sexual Arousal in Men and Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Studies investigating brain indices of sexual arousal have begun to elucidate the brain's role in processing subjective arousal; however, most research has focused on men, used discrete ratings of subjective arousal, and used stimuli too short to induce significant arousal in women. AIM: To examine brain regions modulated by changes in subjective sexual arousal (SSA) rating intensity in men and women. METHODS: Two groups (20 men, 20 women) viewed movie clips (erotic or humorous) while continuously evaluating changes in their SSA using a Likert-like scale (0 = not aroused, 10 = most aroused) and answering discrete questions about liking the movies and wanting sexual stimulation. Brain activity was measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Blood oxygen level-dependent responses and continuous and discrete measurements of sexual arousal. RESULTS: Erotic movies induced significant SSA in men and women. No sex difference in mean SSA was found in response to the erotic movies on continuous or discrete measurements. Several brain regions were correlated with changes in SSA. Parametric modulation with rating intensity showed a specific group of regions within the parietal lobe that showed significant differences in activity among low, medium, and high SSA. CONCLUSION: Multiple regions were concordant with changes in SSA; however, a subset of regions in men and women was modulated by SSA intensity, a subset previously linked to attentional processes, monitoring of internal body representation, and processing of sensory information from the genitals. This study highlights that similar brain regions are activated during subjective assessment of sexual arousal in men and women. The data further highlight the fact that SSA is a complex phenomenon made up of multiple interoceptive and attentional processes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".