(Dis)Similarities in Attitudes Between Partners About Women’s Solo Masturbation: A Dyadic Approach to Solo Masturbation and Its Associations with Sexual Satisfaction

ABSTRACT

Attitudes among couples about women’s solo masturbation are not well understood. The primary aim of this study was to assess (dis)similarities in attitudes between partners about women’s solo masturbation and associations of each partner’s attitudes with women’s and their partners’ sexual satisfaction. One hundred and four mixed-sex couples (M = 27.43 years), recruited through social networking websites and Prolific (an online research participant platform), completed an online survey about demographics, their experiences of solo masturbation, and validated measures of attitudes about women’s masturbation and sexual satisfaction. Dyadic data were analyzed using correlational methods and the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model. Women and their partners reported similar and positive attitudes about women’s solo masturbation. For women, reports of positive attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation were associated with both their own and their partner’s sexual satisfaction; there were no associations for men. The role of solo masturbation within romantic relationships is complex but our results support the idea that women’s masturbation is now less stigmatized than commonly thought. Normalizing and including masturbation in the sexual script for individuals in relationships may help maximize their, and their partners,’ sexual satisfaction.

Introduction

Sexual pleasure includes the positive feelings that arise from activities involving genital stimulation, intercourse, masturbation, oral sex, sexual arousal, and/or orgasm (Ford et al., 2021; Reis et al., 2021; Rye & Meaney, 2007). Sexual pleasure is a multifaceted construct (Ford et al., 2021; Werner et al., 2023), but in this study on masturbation, we focused on pleasure associated with sexual arousal and orgasm. Masturbation is a common sexual behavior defined as the self-stimulation of one’s genitals or other body parts, with or without a vibrator, for purposes of orgasm and/or sexual pleasure (C. Bowman, 2017; Burri & Carvalheira, 2019; Carvalheira & Leal, 2013; Gerressu et al., 2008). The term masturbation is most commonly used for solo masturbation when individuals are physically alone (C. Bowman, 2017; Kirschbaum & Peterson, 2018).

Pleasure inequality refers to the lack of opportunities for women’s sexual pleasure as compared to men’s (Laan et al., 2021). For example, one of the most well-documented examples of pleasure inequalities is the orgasm gap, the well-established difference between heterosexual men’s and women’s frequency of orgasm during heterosexual sexual activity (in particular, penile vaginal intercourse -PVI-) (Blair et al., 2018; Frederick et al., 2018; Garcia et al., 2014; Mahar et al., 2020). But women’s self-pleasure, including solo and partnered masturbation, can be a tool to break the cycle of pleasure inequalities as orgasm rates and orgasm satisfaction do not differ between men and women, and between women in same-sex and women in mixed-sex relationships, during self-stimulation (Blair et al., 2018; Wetzel & Sanchez, 2022). Masturbation can also be a useful technique in therapeutic settings to enhance sexual functioning, especially to improve women’s orgasm experience and to help manage difficulties with men’s ejaculation (J. R. Heiman & Meston, 1997; Marchand, 2021; Shirai et al., 2023; Stravynski et al., 1997).

Informed by the couple interdependence theory, sexual script theory, and the sexual double standard hypothesis, the primary aim of this study was to assess the similarities and differences between partners’ attitudes about women’s solo masturbation and associations between each partner’s attitudes and sexual satisfaction.

RQ1:

How (dis)similar are partners in their attitudes about women’s solo masturbation?

RQ2:

Are each partner’s attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation associated with sexual satisfaction among women and their partners?

The Present Research

While the number of studies involving individual-level data on women’s experiences and perception of self-pleasure has recently increased (e.g., Fahs & Frank, 2014; Thorpe et al., 2022; see Bohmer et al., 2022 for a content analysis), what we know about men’s perceptions of female solitary masturbation is mostly based on studies exploring women’s experiences, beliefs, and their ideas of their partners’ attitudes (Kılıç Onar et al., 2020; for exceptions, see Clark & Wiederman, 2000; Haus & Thompson, 2020). Although it is usually considered a private, autonomous act and an individual sexual behavior (Goldey et al., 2016; Thorpe et al., 2022), solo masturbation is influenced by one’s assumptions, perceptions of what one’s partner thinks about masturbation, and expectations about how one should behave sexually when in a relationship (Herbenick et al., 2022; Kılıç Onar et al., 2020).

Conducting research with couples provides analytic flexibility and contextual advantages (Mark & Lasslo, 2018), but there is a gap in understanding experiences of, and attitudes toward, solo masturbation and in identifying mutual partner influences related to these using dyadic data. Understanding aspects of women’s solo masturbation from a dyadic approach might contribute to enhancing women’s pleasure in romantic relationships and may be useful for clinicians working with couples to improve their sexual relationships and relationship satisfaction. Further, this might help couples navigate women’s sexual pleasure, so that female masturbation may be considered a way of improving sexual satisfaction and intimacy between partners.

Couple Interdependence Theory

The overarching framework of the current study was the couple interdependence theory (Kenny et al., 2006; Lewis et al., 2006). This theory holds that to best understand relationship- and health-related outcomes, examining individual-level data is not sufficient, as each individual’s experiences can influence the behaviors and attitudes of both themselves (actor effect) and their partner (partner effect) (Cook & Kenney, 2005). More specifically, the theory posits that “the couple’s interdependence can transform motivation from doing what is in the best interest of the self (person-centered), to doing even selfless actions that are best for the continuation of the relationship (relationship-centered)” (Lewis et al., 2006, p. 1369). Further, the model suggests that relational and interpersonal factors influence motivation and behavior change. When examining romantic and sexual relationships, it is especially important to investigate the impact that one partner’s behaviors or attitudes have on the other (interdependence) (Muise et al., 2018). A statistical model referred to as the Actor Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) is used by researchers to examine the dependency between both partners’ data to account for each partner’s effects on one another (Cook & Kenney, 2005; Kenny et al., 2006). Our analysis drew from couple interdependence theory to understand the associations between partners’ attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation and both partners’ sexual satisfaction.

Sexual Double Standard and Sexual Script Theory

Sexual behaviors are more influenced by gender role expectations than other behaviors (Fisher, 2013). The sexual double standard (SDS) refers to perceptions about appropriate sexual behaviors which are judged by different standards for men and women (Crawford & Popp, 2003; Gentry, 1998). For example, frequent sexual activity, sexual freedom and sexual exploration are expected of men, whereas women are expected to respond to the sexual requests of men (Endendijk et al., 2020; Kiefer & Sanchez, 2007; Milhausen & Herold, 2002). Many societies also view a high sex drive to be more normative for men than for women (Frankenbach et al., 2022).

Sexual scripts refer to expected sequences of sexual behaviors; however, specific behaviors within these scripts differ between men and women, e.g., sexual intercourse ends with men’s orgasm, but women’s orgasm is not always experienced (Braun et al., 2003; Gagnon & Simon, 1987; Muehlenhard & Shippee, 2010). Although masturbation is not included in the traditional sexual script (Fahs & Frank, 2014; Kirschbaum & Peterson, 2018), a traditional sexual belief that “only single people masturbate” or “you shouldn’t masturbate if you are in a relationship” seems to persist for both women and men (Kaestle & Allen, 2011; Kılıç Onar et al., 2020; Kirschbaum & Peterson, 2018; Thorpe et al., 2022). Due to restricted gendered sexual norms linked with pleasure and desire, some young girls and women perceive or receive messages about masturbation being acceptable “only for boys and men” (Hogarth & Ingham, 2009; Huong & Liamputtong, 2018; Kaestle & Allen, 2011; Thorpe et al., 2022). As such, men may be seen as permitted to pursue pleasure and having the sexual freedom to masturbate, while women are not (Clark & Wiederman, 2000; Fields, 2008; Kaestle & Allen, 2011).

With the greater recognition of women’s pleasure, it is now more acceptable for women to “take pleasure into your own hands” (Fahs, 2014; Fahs & Swank, 2013, p. 667). Women’s perceived or actual motives to enhance partnered sex with the help of masturbation might also play a role in the normalization of women’s masturbation (Haus & Thompson, 2020; Kılıç Onar et al., 2020). Perhaps masturbation might be an example of a reverse SDS, where men are judged more harshly than women for masturbating (Haus & Thompson, 2020). One study showed that men in relationships who masturbate were subject to social stigma and were viewed as less desirable partners than women who masturbate while in a relationship (Haus & Thompson, 2020). Similarly, another study reported that among young heterosexual men and women, women indicated more negative feelings about a partner’s solitary sexual behavior than men (Clark & Wiederman, 2000).

While conventional sexual scripts may lead women to envision sexuality as a means of achieving a strong relationship, rather than their own pleasure (Wiederman, 2005), reduced acceptance of a heterosexual sexual script may actually be associated with more pleasure and orgasm for women (Dienberg et al., 2022). There is evidence that traditional sexual scripts and the SDS are changing and may be less influential at the dyadic level as compared to the sociocultural level (Masters et al., 2013). This encourages us to question how women experience the complexity of their own solitary masturbation in the context of romantic relationships.

Women’s Self-Pleasure within Relationships

Self-pleasure through masturbation is often a normal, enjoyable and healthy sexual activity (C. P. Bowman, 2014; Coleman, 2002, Gianotten et al., 2021; Kaestle & Allen, 2011). However, if masturbation is seen as inconsistent with one’s own and/or one’s sexual partner’s values (or society’s standards), it might bring guilt, shame, confusion or conflict (Carvalheira & Leal, 2013; Kaestle & Allen, 2011; Thorpe et al., 2022). These feelings may be amplified further when in relationships because of the belief that only “single people masturbate” (Kaestle & Allen, 2011, Kılıç Onar, 2020; Kirschbaum & Peterson, 2018).

Compared with women, men are more likely to report partner-related reasons for not masturbating, such as being in a committed relationship, thinking their partner would be upset if they knew, and because their partner doesn’t want them to masturbate (Herbenick et al., 2022). In contrast, and in part because of heteronormative sexual norms that expect pleasure seeking from men but not from women, some women report feeling more reliant on their partner’s approval of their masturbation than men (Kaestle & Allen, 2011; Kılıç Onar et al., 2020). Some women may also believe that their masturbation or solo vibrator use might damage the relationship or create conflicts with a partner as it may imply the partner is sexually unskilled (Herbenick et al., 2011; Salisbury & Fisher, 2014; Thorpe et al., 2022).

Due to the sexual belief that men are responsible for women’s sexual pleasure during sexual intercourse, some young heterosexual women feel pressured to experience (real or fake) sexual pleasure with a male partner because of concerns about their partner’s feelings or to feel “normal” (Braun et al., 2003; Fahs, 2011; Muehlenhard & Shippee, 2010; Salisbury & Fisher, 2014). On the other hand, confirming sexual beliefs that men give sexual pleasure to women and women receive it from men, coupled with the view that a partner’s sexual pleasure demonstrates men’s masculinity, some men might feel pressured to prioritize their female partner’s pleasure (Braun et al., 2003; Chadwick & van Anders, 2017; Fahs, 2011; Salisbury & Fisher, 2014). When women’s sexual pleasure is a marker of male prowess (Chadwick & van Anders, 2017; Fahs, 2014), some women may also try to avoid masturbation or masturbate secretly to avoid reducing partners’ sexual power, sexual self-esteem and masculinity (Fahs & Frank, 2014). In fact, in one study, men perceived themselves as more masculine and reported higher sexual esteem if they believed their female partner orgasmed during intercourse (Chadwick & van Anders, 2017).

Attitudes Towards Women’s Masturbation and Couples’ Sexual Satisfaction

Masturbation is a way for women to learn about sexual pleasure and anatomy. Indeed, self-exploration was cited as the most helpful source for learning about the clitoris (Dienberg et al., 2022; Wade et al., 2005). However, very little is known about what women do with the sexual knowledge they gain from masturbation when in relationships. Some women might not want to disclose masturbation to their partner, perhaps in part as masturbation brings complete autonomy (Goldey et al., 2016; Kaestle & Allen, 2011), but some women use masturbation as a sexual communication tool to share their sexual likes and dislikes with their partner (Towne, 2019). Some women might want to share this with their partner but may experience concerns about the partner’s attitudes and how a partner will react to their masturbation and thus, may hide the behavior to avoid upsetting their partners’ feelings and/or their judgment (Kılıç Onar, 2020). Further, in some studies, women believed that men may be intimidated by female self-pleasure due to its threat to their dominance, or because of the autonomy that it brings (Fahs & Frank, 2014; Goldey et al., 2016; Waskul & Anklan, 2019). However, what we know about women’s perceptions of their partners’ (negative) attitudes and feelings mostly comes from culture/society rather than women’s own partners (Hogarth & Ingham, 2009; Kaestle & Allen, 2011; Kılıç Onar et al., 2020; Thorpe et al., 2023). Although previous research suggests that women’s assumptions about their partners’ attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation might influence their masturbation behavior and feelings about masturbation, as well as their sexual satisfaction (Kılıç Onar et al., 2020), how partnered heterosexual men’s attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation might influence couples’ sexual satisfaction, is unknown.

Considering masturbation is one of the most common sources of orgasm and pleasure among women, as well as a technique used in sex therapy for orgasm difficulties (Carvalheira & Leal, 2013; Marchand, 2021), understanding partners’ attitudes about female masturbation may help women develop more positive views about their own sexual pleasure seeking (Zimmer-Gembeck et al., 2011). On the other hand, when women’s partners’ attitudes or reactions are negative, or if women worry about what their partners think about their masturbation, this may result in women’s avoidance of pleasure-seeking and masturbation. When negative attitudes and shame related to masturbation go unchallenged, it can prevent women from connecting with their body and maximizing their own sexual pleasure and satisfaction (Bohmer et al., 2022). Because favorable views regarding (solo) masturbation have been associated with ease of orgasm and satisfaction with orgasm during partnered sex among women (Cervilla & Sierra, 2022; Cervilla et al., 2021), it is important to understand attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation to enhance sexual pleasure, and perhaps sexual satisfaction, in relationships. Consequently, we explored women’s partners’ attitudes about women’s solo masturbation in the present research. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to report data from men about their actual attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation and elucidate the associations between attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation and sexual satisfaction with data from both partners using dyadic analysis.

Method

Participants

Inclusion criteria for both partners included being 18 years of age or older, being willing to participate in the study as a couple, and being able to read and understand English. Couples from any country or region were eligible to participate.

One hundred and four mixed-sex couples ranging in age from 18 to 65 years (M = 27.43, SD = 7.55) completed the survey. Most (76.0%) were in a relationship but not married and reported a relationship length of 1–5 years (53.4%). Most (59.1%) also reported having completed a college/university or postgraduate degree and described their ethnicity as White (69.7%). Demographic characteristics of the participants (N = 208) are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the study participants (N = 208).

	Total	Women	Men
	N (%)	N (%)	N (%)
Age	n = 208	n = 104	n = 104
	M = 27.43,	M = 27.14,	M = 28.09,
	SD = 7.55	SD = 7.48	SD = 8.04
Sexual orientation
Heterosexual	176 (84.6)	78 (75.0)	98 (94.2)
Bisexual	30 (14.4)	24 (23.1)	6 (5.8)
Lesbian/gay	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)
Asexual	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)
Pansexual	1 (0.5)	1 (1.0)	0 (0.0)
Other	1 (0.5)	1 (1.0)	0 (0.0)
Education
Less than high school	2 (1.0)	1 (1.0)	1 (1.0)
High school or equivalent	62 (29.8)	31 (29.8)	31 (29.8)
Technical or vocational college	20 (9.6)	4 (3.8)	16 (15.4)
College/university	85 (40.9)	46 (44.2)	39 (37.5)
Postgraduate university (MSc/PhD)	38 (18.3)	22 (21.2)	16 (15.4)
Other (“HND”)	1 (0.5)	0 (0.0)	1 (1.0)
Ethnicity
White British	17 (8.2)	8 (7.7)	9 (8.7)
Any other White background	128 (61.5)	63 (60.6)	65 (62.5)
Black British	1 (0.5)	0 (0.0)	1 (1.0)
Any other Black background	24 (11.5)	11 (10.6)	13 (12.5)
Asian or Asian British	5 (2.4)	3 (2.9)	2 (1.9)
Any other mixed background/Multiracial	29 (13.9)	17 (16.3)	12 (11.5)
Did not state	4 (1.9)	2 (1.9)	2 (1.9)
Long-standing illness, disability or infirmity
Yes	21 (10.1)	11 (10.6)	10 (9.6)
No	187 (89.9)	93 (89.4)	94 (90.4)
Occupation (n = 227*)
Full-time employed	101 (44.5)	44 (42.3)	57 (54.8)
Part-time employed	40 (17,6)	22 (21.2)	18 (17.3)
Full-time student	49 (21.6)	28 (26.9)	21 (20.2)
Part-time student	12 (5.3)	7 (6.5)	5 (4.8)
Other	23 (10.1)	13 (12.5)	10 (9.6)
Religious participation
Once a week or more	19 (9.1)	9 (8.7)	10 (9.6)
Less often but at least once in 2 weeks	4 (1.9)	3 (2.9)	1 (0.1.0)
Less often but at least once a month	7 (3.4)	3 (2.9)	4 (3.8)
Less often but at least twice a year	12 (5.8)	6 (5.8)	6 (5.8)
Less often but at least once a year	13 (6.3)	8 (7.7)	5 (4.8)
Less often	18 (8.7)	9 (8.7)	9 (8.7)
Never/practically never	129 (62.0)	62 (59.6)	67 (64.4)
Varies	6 (2.9)	4 (3.8)	2 (1.9)
Income
Poverty level	3 (1.4)	3 (2.9)	0 (0.0)
Lower income	26 (12.5)	11 (10.6)	15 (14.4)
Lower middle income	43 (20.7)	24 (23.1)	19 (18.3)
Middle income	94 (45.2)	43 (41.3)	51 (49.0)
Upper middle income	33 (15.9)	16 (15.4)	17 (16.3)
Upper income	2 (1.0)	2 (1.9)	0 (0.0)
I choose not to answer	7 (3.4)	5 (4.8)	2 (1.9)
Relationship status
Married	50 (24.0)	25 (24.0)	25 (24.0)
In a relationship	151 (72.6)	75 (71.1)	76 (73.1)
In a relationship and seeing others	5 (2.4)	3 (2.9)	2 (1.9)
Casually dating	1 (0.5)	0 (0.0)	1 (1.0)
Other (“engaged”)	1 (0.5)	1 (1.0)	0 (0.0)
Relationship length
0 to less than 6 months	12 (5.8)	5 (4.8)	7 (6.7)
6 months to less than 1 year	9 (4.3)	6 (5.8)	3 (2.9)
1 year to less than 5 years	111 (53.4)	54 (51.9)	57 (54.8)
5 years to less than 10 years	45 (21.6)	23 (22.1)	22 (21.2)
10 years and more	31 (14.9)	16 (15.4)	15 (14.4)
Living with the partner
Yes	128 (61.5)	64 (61.5)	64 (61.5)
No	80 (38.5)	40 (38.5)	40 (38.5)
Duration of living together (When did you first start living with your current partner?, n = 130)
0 to less than 6 months	23 (18.0)	11 (17.2)	12 (18.8)
6 months to less than 1 year	10 (7.8)	6 (9.4)	4 (6.3)
1 year to less than 5 years	62 (48.4)	30 (46.9)	32 (50.0)
5 years to less than 10 years	22 (17.2)	11 (17.2)	11(17.2)
10 years and more	11 (8.6)	6 (9.4)	5 (7.8)
Children
No	174 (83.7)	87 (83.7)	87 (83.7)
No, but I am (or my partner is) pregnant	3 (1.4)	1 (1.0)	2 (1.9)
Yes	31 (14.9)	16 (15.4)	15 (14.4)
Currently live
In a city	135 (64.9)	67 (64.4)	68 (65.4)
In another metropolitan or suburban area	49 (23.6)	26 (25.0)	23 (22.1)
In a small town or rural area	24 (11.5)	11(10.6)	13 (12.5)

*Participants could tick all that apply.

Procedure

This study was a dyadic cross-sectional online survey. Convenience and snowball sampling were used to recruit a target number of 150 couples (individual N = 300) via social media (e.g., Twitter, Facebook) and Prolific. The recruitment process initially started with sharing the study advertisement on social media and callforparticipants.com and only couples who had been in a relationship for at least one year were eligible. However, we did not obtain enough couples through this method (due to slow recruitment - 12 couples in six months- and incomplete or no partner data). Thus, we revised our strategy and after six months of initial recruitment, we stopped sharing the social media advertisement and continued recruiting through Prolific with an additional screening survey. Prolific is an online research participant recruitment platform and through its global network and ethical compensation structure, the platform facilitates reliable and high-quality data collection (Prolific Team, 2024). In the screening survey, willingness to participate as a couple replaced relationship duration as an eligibility criterion. Accordingly, participants were asked whether they were in a current relationship with a romantic partner who had a Prolific account and if they would be willing to participate as a couple in a survey about sexuality. Participants who provided their partners’ Prolific ID were eligible if their partner also participated in the screening and showed interest in the survey.

Advertisements were posted inviting women and their partners to complete a 20–30 minute survey (hosted by Qualtrics) on couple’s sexual and relational satisfaction. For participants recruited via social media, the advertisement gave a brief description of the study and provided a link for more information and to complete the survey. Participants recruited via Prolific received a description of the screening survey prior to the main survey and its description; participants recruited via social media did not receive a screening survey. Following screening, Prolific participants’ eligibility was examined and identification was confirmed by comparing the data supplied from both partners and Prolific records for participants’ Prolific IDs. Concurrent invitations to the main survey were sent (via Prolific) to couples who met the inclusion criteria. All participants received the same participant information sheet in which the research aim was stated as “investigating different aspects of sex and sexual practices within romantic relationships to improve our understanding of women’s and couples’ sexual and relational satisfaction.”

Both partners in each couple completed the same self-report measures. It was suggested that they complete the survey in a private environment and answer the questions independently. All participants were shown a participant information sheet and gave informed consent by ticking a box prior to proceeding with the screening and then the survey. After providing consent, all participants created a partner ID for partners to be matched. The following information was requested to be used as a unique ID: birth month – birthday – their initials – their partner’s initials – their partner’s birth month – their partner’s birthday. Upon completing the survey, those who were recruited via social media had the opportunity to join a prize draw to win one of twenty £20 Amazon gift cards; those who were recruited via Prolific received £3.35 credited to their Prolific account. All study procedures were approved by the research ethics board at the University of Southampton (Ergo number: 62245-A3). Data collection occurred between 22 January 2021 and 28 January 2022.

Measures

Screening

The screening survey was created to improve the likelihood that both partners would complete the survey. It took 1–3 minutes to complete and included questions on basic demographics, whether participants had a romantic partner with a Prolific account who would be willing to take part as a couple, and their partner’s Prolific ID. Participants who reported “Yes, I have a romantic partner who has a Prolific account and we would be willing to take part as a couple” were sent the main survey via their Prolific ID. Only Prolific participants received the screening survey.

Sociodemographic Questions

Sociodemographic questions included gender, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, relationship status and length, whether participants lived with their partner and for how long, children (yes or pregnant vs. no), education, employment, household income, long-standing illness, religious participation, and area of residence. The response option for age was continuous (18–100); for all other response options, see Table 1.

Experiences of Self-Pleasure

Participants were asked about their lifetime (yes/no), and last time (9 response options ranging from “today” to “never”) solo masturbation experiences (The next questions focus on experiences of solo masturbation. … : ”Have you ever masturbated?,” “When did you last masturbate?”). Questions were taken from those used in previous studies (C. P. Bowman, 2014; Regnerus et al., 2017). As recommended by Regnerus et al. (2017), the frequency of masturbation was measured with one question: “When did you last masturbate?”. This “last- approach” was chosen because we believed this would lower social desirability and recall bias compared to an “‘average pattern’” question (e.g., how often do you masturbate?), which might lead to a lower mean frequency reported (Regnerus et al., 2017). However, because the question does not actually reflect the frequency of masturbation, it was operationalized as solo masturbation recency.

The Revised Attitudes Toward Women’s Solo Masturbation Inventory (R-AWMI)

The R-AWMI was adapted, by the first author of this article, from the Negative Attitudes Toward Masturbation Inventory (NAMI, 30-item) (Mosher, 2011). The R-AWMI was designed to assess beliefs and attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation. Three items regarding personally experienced negative affect (e.g., “When I masturbate, I am disgusted with myself”) were removed, leaving 27 items in the revised scale. The response options remained the same and were measured on a Likert scale from 1 (not at all true) to 5 (extremely true). The total score ranges from 27 to 135. The wording of some items was also revised: “people” in the original scale was replaced by “women” and “women’s solo masturbation” (e.g., “After masturbating, a woman feels degraded;” “Women masturbate to escape feelings of tension or anxiety”). In the original NAMI, nine items are reverse scored, with higher scores representing negative attitudes. However, for the revised version we used, items were calculated so that higher scores reflect more positive attitudes and lower scores indicate more negative attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation (i.e., 18 items were reverse scored). In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for the revised version was good: .88.

The New Sexual Satisfaction Scale – Short Form (NSSS-S; Brouillard et al., 2020)

The short form of the New Sexual Satisfaction Scale (NSSS-S, 12-item) was designed to measure sexual satisfaction (Brouillard et al., 2020), including self-related sexual satisfaction and partner/sexual activity-related sexual satisfaction. Sample items from the NSSS-S are: “My body’s sexual functioning,” and “The balance between what I give and receive in sex..” The items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all satisfied) to 5 (extremely satisfied). The total score ranges from 12 to 60, with higher scores indicating greater sexual satisfaction. In the current study, Cronbach’s alpha was excellent, α = .90.

Data Analysis

Missing Data

Among 453 participants who provided consent, those who completed less than half of the survey items were removed from the analysis (n = 80). Also, participants were removed if only one member of the couple completed the survey (n = 139). Due to the low number of same-sex participants, same-sex couples (12 couples) were also excluded. There was one case where one participant did not complete a full measure for one of the key study variables (one participant completed zero items on the R-AWMI) and this participant was also excluded with their partner. The final sample consisted of 104 matched couples (208 individuals).

One participant did not report their age and another participant did not report a response for the fourth question of the New Sexual Satisfaction Scale. Missing items were replaced with the mean.

Statistical Analysis

For the demographics and descriptive statistics, each participant was treated as a single unit, individual dataset (N = 208). For the first research question, data were organized as a matched couple (dyad) dataset such that there was one record for each couple including data from both partners, N = 104. To explore RQ1, to test how (dis)similar partners were in their attitudes about women’s solo masturbation and to compare women’s and their partners’ attitudes toward women’s masturbation, paired t-tests and bivariate Pearson correlations were used. Then, we explored how many couples could be considered as having discrepant scores. To report this, and to create groups based on the difference scores, a procedure used in previous research was followed (Fleenor et al., 1996; Shanock et al., 2010). For the analysis suggested by Shanock et al. (2010), the first step is to determine how many couples could be considered as having discrepant scores (e.g., one partner reported higher/lower scores than the other). First, each independent variable’s scores (women’s and their partner’s attitudes) were standardized. Next, the difference between the partners’ standardized scores was calculated, and any participants who had a difference greater than half a standard deviation (for attitudes, 1/2 SD_{attitudes difference} = 0.42) were classified as being discrepant. Three (dis)similarity groups were created based on these discrepant values: women’s attitudes score higher than their partner’s, lower than their partner’s, and the same as their partner’s.

For RQ2, to assess how women’s and their partners’ attitudes toward women’s masturbation (both actor effects and partner effects from both partners) were associated with women’s and their partners’ reports of sexual satisfaction, dyadic data were analyzed using the actor-partner interdependence model (APIM; Kenny et al., 2006) via multilevel modeling (APIM_MM). In research on sexual satisfaction in relationships, the APIM is widely used in dyadic data analyses (Muise et al., 2018; Pascoal et al., 2018) and the model takes nonindependence between couples into account. Dyadic nonindependence is the similarity between the two members of a dyad compared with scores from two people from a different dyad (Kenny et al., 2006). Multilevel modeling is suggested as a “more accessible framework” for research comparing indistinguishable and distinguishable dyads (Kroeger & Powers, 2019, p. 159). Dyad members are considered distinguishable when there is a significant difference in a variable and this variable can be used to order the two members of the dyad (e.g., gender in a mixed-sex couple). For the current study, the gender variable was considered as a distinguishable variable. Data were restructured as dyadic pairwise data for APIMs; there is a record for each individual and each record includes the individual’s (actor’s) scores on all variables and the partner’s scores on all variables. These were included in the analysis as actors (to examine the within-person; actor effects) and partners (to examine the between-partner; partner effects), N = 208. All APIM_MMs were analyzed using the following online application: https://davidakenny.shinyapps.io/APIM_MM/. The estimates of the fixed effects were obtained using generalized least squares fit by restricted maximum likelihood (REML) (Kroeger & Powers, 2019, p. 159). The independent variable (attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation) was grand-mean centered and gender was recoded (women as −1, men as 1). The tests of coefficients in the APIM(s) were Z tests. The tests of correlations were based on t-tests of the correlation coefficients. For all analyses, alpha was set at 0.05.

Power Analyses

To detect small-sized actor (r = .25) and partner (r = .15) effects, the minimum number of couples required to conduct analyses using the APIM (Kenny et al., 2006) with distinguishable dyads is 57 couples for the average of actor effects, and 123 couples for an actor effect. This is based on a web-based calculator designed for APIMs to detect an actor effect size of .25 (when power is at least 0.8 and alpha is set to .05) (Ackerman & Kenny, 2016). In the current research, the partial correlations between independent and outcome variables, controlling for all other predictors, were used as effect sizes for the power analysis. Values above r = .50 indicate a large effect, above r = .30 a medium effect, and above r = .10 a small effect size (Cohen, 1988).

Covariates of Masturbation and Sexual Satisfaction

Because previous research showed associations between some sociodemographic characteristics and sexual satisfaction and frequency of and/or attitudes toward masturbation (Gerressu et al., 2008; Kılıç et al., 2023; Sierra et al., 2022), the APIM_MM analysis was conducted including these control variables. Specifically, we tested whether significant associations between women’s attitudes toward solo masturbation and both women’s and their partners’ sexual satisfaction were affected by age, relationship duration, illness/disability, and having children.

Results

Regarding self-pleasure experiences, among the whole sample, 97.1% reported lifetime solo masturbation. Among women, 94.2% reported lifetime solo masturbation and among men, all reported lifetime solo masturbation. Men were significantly more likely than women to report lifetime solo masturbation (X² (1, N = 208) = 6.18, p = .013) and were also more likely to report more recent solo masturbation (t (206) = −4.98, p < .001, Table 2). Reported last time solo masturbation experience is reported in Table 3.

Table 2. Descriptive and bivariate statistics for key variables and corresponding gender differences.

Variable	Total	Women	Men	Bivariate	analysis
	M/SD	M/SD	M/SD	t	p
Sexual satisfaction	47.03/8.83	46.61/9.25	47.46/8.40	t = −0.70	.486
Attitudes toward women’s masturbation	108.18/14.65	108.68/14.47	107.68/14.88	t = 0.49	.624
Solo masturbation recency	5.07/2.15	4.36/2.25	5.78/1.80	t = −4.98	<.001
Lifetime solo masturbation	202/97.1%	98/94.2%	104/100%	χ2 = 6.18	< .013

Data were kept as an individual dataset (N = 208). Independent samples t-tests between women’s and men’s scores were reported for continuous variables (the NSSS-S, R-AWMI, and solo masturbation recency,) and χ² analyses were reported for categorical variables (lifetime solo masturbation).

Statistically significant results are bolded.

Table 3. Reported lifetime solo masturbation experience and solo masturbation recency (N = 208).

		Women n = 104(50.0)	Men n = 104(50.0)	Total N = 208	χ^2
Lifetime solo masturbation	Yes	98 (94.2)	104 (100.0)	202 (97.1)	6.18,
	No	6 (5.8)	0	6 (2.9)	p = .013
	Total (N)	104 (100.0)	104 (100.0)	208 (100.0)
Solo masturbation recency	Today	2 (1.9)	14 (13.5)	16 (7.7)
	Yesterday	15 (14.4)	27 (26.0)	42 (20.2)	31.84,
	Several days ago	29 (27.9)	31 (29.8)	60 (28.8)	p <.001
	One week ago	14 (13.5)	10 (9.6)	24 (11.5)
	Two weeks ago	4 (3.8)	9 (8.7)	13 (6.3)
	Almost a month ago	15 (14.4)	5 (4.8)	20 (9.6)
	Couple of months ago	9 (8.7)	4 (3.8)	13 (6.3)
	Over a year ago	10 (9.6)	4 (3.8)	14 (6.7)
	Never	6 (5.8)	0 (0)	6 (2.9)
	Total (N)	104 (100.0)	104 (100.0)	208 (100.0)

(Dis)similarities Between Partners in Attitudes About Women’s Solo Masturbation

The mean scores (uncentered) and SDs for the key variables are presented in Table 2. Scores for women’s attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation (R-AWMI scores; M = 108.68, SD = 14.47) were compared with their partners’ scores (M = 107.68, SD = 14.88) with a paired t-test; the difference was not statistically significant, t(103) = 0.74, p = .460. Based on bivariate Pearson correlations, attitude scores between partners were positively correlated and the strength of the relationship was large (r = .63, p = <.001; see Table 4). These results demonstrate similarities between partners in their attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation.

Table 4. Bivariate correlations for key variables among women and their partners (N = 104 Couples).

Variables	Sexual satisfaction	Attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation	Solo masturbation recency
Sexual satisfaction	.43**	.29**	.15
Attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation	.23*	.63**	.24*
Solo masturbation recency	.09	.15	.20*

Correlations above the diagonal are for women; correlations below the diagonal are for their partners; bold correlations on the diagonal are between women and their partners.

* = p < .05, ** = p < .01.

Descriptive information about the (dis)similarity groups for the R-AWMI (women’s attitudes higher, lower, or similar to their partner) is presented in Table 5. In more than half of all couples (55.8%), partners’ scores differed from each other in one direction or the other.

Table 5. The (Dis)similarity Groups for the R-AWMI (n = 104 couples).

(Dis)similarity groups		R-AWMI
	n (%)	Women’s means of R-AWMI M (SD)	Partners’ means of R-AWMI M (SD)
Women scored lower than their partners	29 (27.88)	98.69 (16.50)	111.90 (14.58)
Women and their partners scored similar	46 (44.23)	111.24 (11.67)	111.00 (11.81)
Women scored higher than their partners	29 (27.88)	114.31 (11.39)	98.21 (15.77)

R-AWMI: The Revised Attitudes Toward Women’s Solo Masturbation Inventory.

Attitudes Toward Women’s Solo Masturbation and Sexual Satisfaction

The Measurement of Nonindependence

As recommended by Kenny et al. (2006), Pearson’s correlation coefficients were analyzed for outcome variables to determine the degree of nonindependence in the dataset for the APIM. The partial correlations between the dyad members’ scores, controlling for actor and partner variables, revealed moderate degrees of nonindependence for couples’ reports of sexual satisfaction (r = .37, p < .001) when the predictor was partners’ attitudes. Pearson’s correlations suggested a significant degree of similarity (nonindependence) between partners, indicating that when a woman scored high in sexual satisfaction, their partner also scored high. In other words, couples could be treated as the unit of analysis in the subsequent APIM analysis.

An APIM_MM analysis with distinguishable dyads was conducted and the amount of variance explained by the full model for women was R² = .19 and R² = .11 for men. The actor effect for women (b = .26) (p < .001; r = .32, a medium effect size) was statistically significant but the actor effect for men (b = −.004) (p = .953; r = −0.03, less than small effect size) was not. The partner effect for women to men (b = .22) was also statistically significant (p = .004; r = 0.31, a medium effect size), but the partner effect for men to women (b =-.01) (p = .902; r = −.05, less than a small effect size) was not (Figure 1). For women, attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation were positively associated with both their own and their partner’s sexual satisfaction even after controlling for age, relationship duration, illness/disability, and having children: women who reported more positive attitudes toward masturbation reported greater sexual satisfaction, and women’s positive attitudes were also associated with their partner’s greater sexual satisfaction. For men, reporting positive attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation was not associated with either their own or their partners’ sexual satisfaction. Results from these analyses are presented in Table 6.

Figure 1. Actor-partner interdependence model with distinguishable dyads for sexual satisfaction.

Data were organized as dyadic pairwise data (N = 208). Paths labeled with “b_a” indicate actor effects; paths labeled with “b_p” indicate partner effects. E₁ and E₂ indicate the residual error of sexual satisfaction for women and their partners, respectively.

* = p < .05

Table 6. Actor-Partner interdependence model with distinguishable dyads, attitudes toward woman’s masturbation as independent variables and sexual satisfaction as the outcome variables, controlling for age, illness/disability, relationship duration and having children.

Variable	Role	Effect	Estimate (b)	Lower	95 CI	Upper	p value	Beta (o)	Beta (s)	r
Sexual satisfaction	Women	Intercept	46.74	45.12	to	<.001	<.001
	Men		47.07	45.53	to	48.62	<.001
R-AWMI	Women	Actor	0.26	.11	to	.42	<.001	.43	.41	.32
		Partner	−0.01	−.16	to	.14	.902	−.01	−.01	−.05
		k	−0.04	−.47	to	1.01
	Men	Actor	−0.004	−.15	to	.14	.953	−.007	−.008	−.03
		Partner	0.22	.07	to	.37	.004	.37	.39	.31
		k	−52.03	−51.68	to	46.29
Covariates:
	Women age		.10	−.14	to	.34	.407	.09		.05
	Men age		−.38	−.62	to	−.15	.002	−.33		−.20
	Women- illness/disability		2.76	−.93	to	6.45	.144	.09		.11
	Men-illness/disability		−1.28	−4.96	to	2.39	.495	−.04		−.05
	Relationship duration		−1.29	−2.92	to	.33	.119	−.14		−.11
	Having children		3.12	−1.19	to	7.43	.158	.13		.11

Data were organized as dyadic pairwise data (N = 208).

R-AWMI: The Revised Attitudes Toward Women’s Solo Masturbation Inventory.

Discussion

(Dis)Similarities Between Partners in Attitudes About Women’s Solo Masturbation

To the best of our knowledge, the current study is the first to report data on men’s attitudes and partners’ similarities (and differences) in attitudes about women’s solo masturbation. A previous systematic review exploring women’s self-pleasure in the relationship context identified gaps in the literature about women’s partners’ actual attitudes, feelings, and reactions about women’s masturbation rather than women’s perceptions of their partners’ attitudes (Kılıç Onar et al., 2020). The review also highlighted some changes in women’s masturbation habits due to partner-related concerns when in relationships, as discussed in the Introduction. Some women report shame and/or concerns regarding their partners’ reactions to, or perceptions of, women’s masturbation and a tendency to hide their solo self-pleasure experiences from their partner (Fahs & Swank, 2013; Goldey et al., 2016; Huong & Liamputtong, 2018; Marcus, 2011). However, women and their partners in our study reported similar and positive attitudes about women’s solo masturbation. This is in line with a previous U.S. study by Herbenick et al. (2011) who reported positive beliefs about women’s vibrator use among both women and men. However, neither the current study nor Herbenick et al. evaluated men’s attitudes or beliefs about their own partners’ self-pleasure but rather general attitudes and beliefs about women’s self-pleasure. Future research should investigate men’s attitudes toward their own partner’s masturbation and its role within their relationships.

In line with Haus and Thompson’s (2020) research, our results demonstrate that women’s solo masturbation is acceptable for most women and men in mixed-sex relationships. While some men report negative attitudes toward masturbation in general (Sierra et al., 2022), in the current study, most men reported positive attitudes toward women’s masturbation (M_men = 107.68/135). Although our results might support a shift toward egalitarian views for women’s masturbation, this may not be the case for men’s masturbation (C. P. Bowman, 2014; Dekker & Schmidt, 2003; Haus & Thompson, 2020). As we did not assess attitudes or beliefs about men’s solo masturbation, to better understand a possible reverse SDS regarding masturbation, future research exploring couples’ attitudes toward men’s masturbation should be conducted.

Attitudes Towards Women’s Solo Masturbation and Sexual Satisfaction

One of the most noteworthy findings of the current study was that women’s positive attitudes toward masturbation were associated with both women’s own, and their partner’s, greater sexual satisfaction. Interestingly, however, for men, reporting positive attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation was not associated with either their own or their partners’ sexual satisfaction. These findings are important as they highlight the greater importance of women’s own attitudes rather than their partners’ attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation in terms of couple’s sexual satisfaction.

We could not locate a previous study exploring the relationship between attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation and sexual satisfaction. But our results are similar to previous research highlighting the link between favorable views regarding (solo) masturbation and ease of orgasm and satisfaction with orgasm during partnered sex among women (Cervilla & Sierra, 2022; Cervilla et al., 2021). Future research with larger and more diverse samples can shed more light on the possible relationship between attitudes toward women’s solo masturbation and sexual satisfaction, how these are associated with the use of different aids during solo masturbation (e.g., pornography, sexual fantasy, reading erotica, or vibrator use), and whether attitudes differ depending on the type of erotic aid. This may help to identify useful techniques to enhance women’s and couples’ sexual satisfaction.

Theoretical Implications

For some women, masturbation can also mean “me time” and “sexual freedom” (C. P. Bowman, 2014; Goldey et al., 2016); however, when in relationships, women’s attitudes toward solo masturbation might influence both their own and their partner’s sexuality, partly because women’s pleasure, sex, and bodies are often situated in a partnered sex context (Kaestle & Allen, 2011). While women’s attitudes were found to be of greater importance for both partners’ sexual satisfaction compared to their partners’ attitudes, without collecting data from both partners, the question of how partners in relationships influence each other’s sexuality can not be answered (Muise et al., 2018). Consequently, we suggest researchers consider partner-related factors and dyadic aspects of masturbation in research on women’s masturbation.

The current findings can improve understanding of how much of the sexual script about masturbation persists at a dyadic level by focusing on women’s solo masturbation among couples. Although solo masturbation is usually not included in the traditional sexual script (Kirschbaum & Peterson, 2018), our results show that it is a common sexual behavior even when individuals are in a relationship. A shared but vague script for masturbation may include the absence of a sexual partner; however, we perhaps need to develop new sexual scripts for solo sexuality when in relationships (Fahs & Frank, 2014; Foust et al., 2022; Kirschbaum & Peterson, 2018). When both members of a couple follow complementary sexual scripts, the sense of predictability may put partners at ease (Wiederman, 2005).

Clinical Implications

Masturbation is a validated technique used in sex therapies for women with orgasm problems (J. R. Heiman, 2002; Marchand, 2021) and men with ejaculation difficulties (Shirai et al., 2023), but attitudes toward masturbation can influence the effectiveness of these therapies (J. Heiman & LoPiccolo, 2009; Herbenick et al., 2011; LoPiccolo & Lobitz, 1972). Partnered and solo sex fulfill different needs, but women’s solo masturbation can also improve partnered sex via greater sexual pleasure and satisfaction. Clinicians could tailor their recommendations to use women’s masturbation as a therapeutic tool to enhance sexual pleasure and satisfaction based on partners’ attitudes. In clinical settings when women’s solo masturbation is recommended, couples might also be encouraged to discuss their attitudes toward women’s masturbation and this can help to debunk perceived negative reactions from a partner (Kılıç Onar et al., 2020). Alternatively, psychoeducation regarding solo masturbation could be integrated into therapy if dissimilarities between partners’ attitudes are noted. If the negativity surrounding masturbation is challenged, solo masturbation can also fulfill women’s sexual desire when there is sexual desire discrepancy. To better understand the role of solo masturbation in relationships, future studies can assess the mediating role of attitudes toward masturbation in the possible association between masturbation experience and partnered sexual pleasure, and sexual desire discrepancies between partners.

Strengths and Limitations

To the best of our knowledge, the current study is the first dyadic study with a focus on attitudes toward women’s masturbation that recruited both women and their partners. Strengths include the use of an anonymous online survey, which is useful in studies on sensitive topics such as masturbation (Carvalheira & Leal, 2013), and the use of scales with good psychometric properties.

However, there were also limitations. First, due to the cross-sectional study design and correlational findings, the causal direction of the associations cannot be determined. We used convenience sampling and thus, the sample was not representative and results cannot be generalized. Second, all participants were in mixed-sex relationships and most reported being White (69.7%), having university education (59.1%), and not attending religious services (62.0%). Most participants were recruited via Prolific, which meant they had to have a Prolific account. Couples who are sexually distressed or experiencing relational problems might be less likely to participate in dyadic research on sexual satisfaction (Corsini-Munt et al., 2017). Also, possible volunteer bias should be considered as more positive sexual attitudes have been associated with willingness to volunteer in sex research (Dawson et al., 2019; Wiederman, 1999).

Third, to maintain anonymity as convenience snowball sampling was used through researchers’ social media accounts, and participant initials and birthdays were used to create a couple ID and match couples, we did not ask about country of residency; thus, we could not explore possible cultural differences. Fourth, it is important to note that data collection occurred when COVID-19 restrictions were in place. Previous studies have reported inconsistent findings (e.g., increase, decrease or no change in solo masturbation) related to changes in solitary and partnered sexual behaviors during the initial stages of the pandemic (Gleason et al., 2023; Lehmiller et al., 2021; Luetke et al., 2020; Mercer et al., 2022). However, we did not evaluate COVID-related issues (e.g., lack of privacy) and we do not know how this might have influenced the recruitment process and the data collected.

Fifth, participants’ potential misrepresentation should also be considered. We did not conduct screening calls to verify identity during our initial recruitment strategy via social media, (as we did later for participants recruited via Prolific). Thus, for the 11 couples recruited via social media, participants may have pretended to be their own partners and completed the online survey twice.

Lastly, although most men in this study reported positive attitudes about women’s solo masturbation, we could not establish how men actually reacted to their own partner’s solo masturbation. Partners’ actual reactions should be explored, ideally in a prospective study. Studying how partners share and discuss their solo sexuality with their partner might help facilitate understanding of which communication strategies are useful (or not).

Conclusions

The similarity in positive attitudes between partners regarding women’s masturbation in the current study challenges traditional sexual beliefs and the SDS regarding masturbation and supports the idea that women’s masturbation is considered less stigmatized now than it has been previously.

The role of solo masturbation within romantic relationships is complex but many individuals in relationships do engage in masturbation. Self-pleasure can increase sexual self-knowledge for individuals across the lifespan, but in particular, it can improve women’s sexual pleasure during partnered sex (Hite, 2003; Rowland, Hevesi, et al., 2020) and couples’ satisfaction. Normalizing women’s types of self-pleasure (e.g., solo masturbation, solo vibrator use, mutual masturbation) and including masturbation in the sexual script for those in relationships can maximize individuals,’ and their partners,’ sexual pleasure and satisfaction.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Research procedures were approved by the University of Southampton Research Ethics Committee (Ergo number: 62245-A3). This study complied with the University’s Policy on the Ethical Conduct of Studies Involving Human Participants. Consent to participate: Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Marieke Dewitte, Prof. Dr. Erick Janssen and Dr. Taylor Kohut for helpful discussions about the analyses for this study.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data Availability Statement

The anonymized data used in this study are available at the University of Southampton Institutional Research Repository

Additional information

Funding

The first author’s PhD studentship funding was provided by the Republic of Turkey-Ministry of National Education.