Do thinking styles play a role in whether people pathologise their pornography use?

ABSTRACT

The concept of pornography addiction remains controversial and as such there are no diagnostic criteria. Despite this, individuals present to services with self-perceived problematic pornography use. Current treatment generally focuses on the pornography use, yet people's relationship with pornography is complex, and other factors may be relevant for therapy. Drawing on cognitive theory literature, this study explored whether thinking styles, influenced how people evaluate their pornography use. Self-reported (n = 265) “pornography addicts”, “somewhat pornography addicts”, and “non-addicts” were compared on their perceived effects of their pornography use, cognitive distortions, impact of religious beliefs, social desirability, and shame, within the values theory framework. Findings showed that groups differed significantly in their propensity for cognitive distortions, reported effects of their pornography use, the impact of their religious beliefs, and time spent viewing pornography. Significant differences were not found for the shame scales or social desirability. Regression analysis demonstrated that thinking styles mediated the relationship between time spent viewing pornography and the overall perceived negative impact of pornography. In light of this study's findings, thinking styles should be a focus in future research and treatment as it may help to reduce cognitive dissonance and engender agency.

KEYWORDS:

• Pornography
• addiction
• self-perceived problematic pornography
• thinking styles
• shame
• values

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. As we aimed to explore differences in how people perceived their own behaviours, for the purpose of this study, terms relating to “self-perceived problematic/addictive pornography use” will be used.

2. For ease of reference, participants may be referred to as addicts, somewhat-addicts, and non-addicts in the body of text. This is not to suggest that we subscribe to the notion of an addiction model and refers to the participant's self-identified addiction status.

3. However, we acknowledge that some individuals may not restrict their viewing to only legal or illegal material. At the end of the online survey, participants were presented with the option of participating in a qualitative study (reported in Duffy, Dawson, & das Nair, in prep.).

4. Traditionally, Bonferroni corrections are advised to counteract the Type I error rates that result from carrying out multiple tests, however, many researchers argue that doing so is unnecessary and potentially deleterious to analysis; its interpretation is arbitrary and its performance can reduce power and increase the likelihood of Type II errors (Perneger, 1998). Therefore, we did not perform Bonferroni corrections.

5. Sensitivity analyses were performed with different contrast groups to ensure that overall findings were robust.

6. When using the term “treatment” we are not suggesting that individuals who perceive their pornography use to be problematic are “ill”. Instead, this term refers to the support that clinicians can offer individuals in helping them to understand that they are not ill, and to help them deal with their distress.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Athena Duffy

Athena Duffy is a Clinical Psychologist for Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust, UK.

David L Dawson

David L Dawson is a Research Clinical Psychologist at the University of Lincoln, UK.

Nima G Moghaddam

Nima G Moghaddam is a Research Clinical Psychologist at the University of Lincoln, UK.

Roshan das Nair

Roshan dasNair is Professor of Clinical Psychology & Neuropsychology at the University of Nottingham, UK.