1. INTRODUCTION
There has been little empirical work focused on asexuality.
Furthermore, it is unclear what people mean when they self-identify as
‘asexual,’ but a growing internet community of asexuals suggests that
use of this label may be increasing. Researchers’ use of the term
“asexual” has varied. An asexual has been defined as a person who has
engaged in few or no sexual behaviors (Rothblum & Brehony, 1993),
has low sexual desire (Prause, Weinberg, & Graham, 2002), has both
little sexual experience and low sexual desire, or as having no
‘attraction’ to men or women (Jay, 2003; Nurius, 1983; Bogaert, 2003).
Based on pilot work, we hypothesized that asexuals would be
characterized primarily by their absence of sexual desire. The term
“asexual” also has been used to refer to sexual orientation, but it is
unclear if people who identify as asexual use it in this way. We
surveyed respondents using online questionnaires, because they appear
particularly effective at reaching small populations (Mustanski, 2001)
and increasing self-disclosure (Locke & Gilbert, 1995).
Asexuality: A preliminary investigation
Prause, Nicole 1
and Graham, C. A. 2,3
1
Department of Psychology, Indiana University, Bloomington; 2
Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex,
Gender, and Reproduction; 3
Department of Gender Studies, Indiana University, Bloomington
ABSTRACT
We examined the sexual experience, sexual arousability, and sexual
desire levels of 1,146 respondents (41 who self-identified as asexual)
using questionnaires on the Internet. Persons who identified as asexual
had lower levels of sexual desire and sexual arousability than those who
did not identify as asexual, but the sexual experiences and sexual
inhibition of asexuals did not significantly differ from those who did
not identify as asexual.
CONCLUSIONS
Asexuals appears to be better characterized by low sexual desire and
sexual excitation than by low levels of sexual behavior or high sexual
inhibition.
Asexuals may have comparable sexual behavior because of the
young age of the comparison sample or because of unwanted, but
consensual, sexual activity (O'Sullivan & Allgeier, 1998). However, this
is a convenience sample, which limits the conclusions possible about
the nature of asexuality. Future analyses will test the role of age in these
findings and integrate qualitative data collected.
WORKS CITED
Bogaert, A. F. (2003). Asexuality: Prevelance and associated
factors in national probability sample. Paper presented at the
International Academy of Sex Research, Bloomington, IN.
Jay, D. (2003). Asexual Visibility and Education Network.
Retrieved, 2003, from the World Wide Web:
http://www.asexuality.org/info.htm
Locke, S. D., & Gilbert, B. O. (1995). Method of psychological
assessment, self-disclosure, and experiential differences: A study of
computer, questionnaire, and interview assessment formats. Journal of
Social Behavior & Personality, 10(1), 255-263.
Prause, N., Weinberg, M., & Graham, C. A. (2002, March).
Rethinking low sexual desire: The desire construct and asexuality.
Presentation at the Clinical Colloquium series of the Indiana University
Department of Psychology in Bloomington, Indiana, United States.
Mustanski, B. S. (2001). Getting wired: Exploiting the Internet for
the collection of valid sexuality data. Journal of Sex Research, 38(4),
292-301.
Nurius, P. S. (1983). Mental health implications of sexual
orientation. Journal of Sex Research, 19(2), 119-136.
O'Sullivan, L. F., & Allgeier, E. R. (1998). Feigning Sexual Desire:
Consenting to Unwanted Sexual Activity in Heterosexual Dating
Relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 35(3), 234-243.
Rothblum, E. D., & Brehony, K. A. (1993). Boston marriages:
Romantic but asexual relationships among contemporary lesbians.
Supported by Kinsey Institute Student Grant-in-Aid and LE Project Grant
METHODS
Participants completed an online questionnaire described as
concerning “sexual desire and sexual orientation.” Of the 1,146
participants (Female N = 511), 730 (64.8%) were college students
enrolled in a psychology class and others were a convenience sample
from the Internet. We asked respondents to provide their sexual
orientation in the first questionnaire and later asked respondents their
sexual orientation in a forced-choice format. This method was used to
determine if asexuals spontaneously use the term “asexual” to describe
their sexual orientation (see Table).
RESULTS
Forty-one individuals identified as asexual. Asexuals (M = 25.5, SD =
6.2) were significantly older than those of other sexual orientations (M
= 21.6, SD = 6.2) in this sample (t(1144) = -3.05, p<.01), but there was
no significant difference in the proportion of men or women in the two
groups. One-half of participants who identified as asexual in the
forced-choice sexual orientation question had written-in their sexual
orientation as “asexual” in the early write-in sexual orientation question
(see Table).
Use of “Asexual” as Sexual Orientation
Original Orientation Reported Number of participants
Asexual 22 (53.7%)
Heterosexual 6 (14.7%)
Homosexual 1 (2.4%)
Bisexual 1 (2.4%)
Mixed 6 (14.6%)
Unsure/Don’t Know 0 (0.0%)
N/A/None 4 (9.8%)
Uncodable 1 (2.4%)
Sexual Excitation Scale/
Sexual Inhibition Scale
ORIENT
AsexualBisexualHomosexualHeterosexual
Score
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Subscale
Excitation
Inhibition 1
Inhibition 2
Sexual Excitation/Inhibition
Asexuals had significantly lower
Sexual Excitation (t(1144) =
9.57, p<.01) and Sexual
Inhibition due to threat of
performance failure (t(1144) =
-3.01, p<.01), but were no
different in their level of Sexual
Inhibition due to threat of
performance consequences than
other sexual orientations.
Sexual Desire and Arousability
Asexuals had significantly lower
Dyadic Sexual Desire (t(1144) =
21.71, p<.01) and Solitary Sexual
Desire (t(1144) = -2.20, p<.05) than
individuals with other sexual
orientations.
Asexuals had significantly lower
Sexual Arousability (t(1141) = 11.76,
p<.01) than others in the sample.
Differences in Sexual Desire and
Sexual Arousability by Orientation
Orientation
AsexualNot asexual
Score
80
60
40
20
0
-20
Questionnaire
Dyadic desire
Solitary desire
Arousability
1134
11401130
1128
2089651089224511567817945969861845485795865385549561065
88
625
312431
11281143
1140
12796398484699956102386100184403448962
744226699691089162454185592104
872851029404945778
764
Sexual behaviors with partners
Orientation
AsexualNot asexual
Numberofpartners
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Type of partner
Sexual activity
Sexual intercourse
Sexual Behavior
Asexuals had fewer
sexual partners than
others in the sample on
average, but this
difference did not reach
significance.
Questionnaires used
• Demographic Questionnaire
• Sexual Desire Inventory (Spector & Carey, 1996)
• Sexual Arousability Inventory (Hoon, 1976)
• Sexual Excitation Scale/Sexual Inhibition Scale (Bancroft & Janssen, 2000)
• Sexual Orientation Questionnaire