This article was downloaded by: [University of Cambridge] On: 03 January 2015, At: 09:51 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usmt20
Sexual Enhancement Groups for Dysfunctional Women: An Evaluation a
Sandra R. Leiblum PhD & Robin Ersner-hershfield MS
a b
a
Codirector of the Sexual Counseling Service at Rutgers Medical , School – College of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry b
Doctoral candidate at the Graduate , School of Applied and Professional Psychology utgers University , Piscataway, New Jersey Published online: 14 Jan 2008.
To cite this article: Sandra R. Leiblum PhD & Robin Ersner-hershfield MS (1977) Sexual Enhancement Groups for Dysfunctional Women: An Evaluation, Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 3:2, 139-152, DOI: 10.1080/00926237708402979 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00926237708402979
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy Vol. 3, No. 2, Summer 1977
Sexual Enhancement Groups for Dysfunctional Women: An Evaluation
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
Sandra R . Leiblum, PhD, and Robin Ersner-Hershfield, MS
ABSTRACT: Three groups of women with sexual dysfunction were evaluated pretreatment and posttreatment. Two of the groups (mixed sexual dysfunctions and primary orgasmic dysfunction) did not involve partner participation, while the third group (mixed sexual dysfunctions) included partners on two occasions. Results for all groups were similar. Of the 16 women involved, 14 became reliably orgasmic through self-stimulation. Generalization of orgasm to partner stimulation or coitus was less reliable. Although partner presence did not enhance behavioral outcome measures, highly significant findings were achieved in terms of enhanced marital and sexual satisfaction. The question of whether orgasm through coitus alone is a reasonable goal is raised and challenged.
WOMEN’S SEXUAL ENHANCEMENT GROUPS: AN EVALUATION With the advent and development of direct therapeutic procedures for treating sexual dysfunction, particularly women experiencing orgasmic difficulties, a number of studies have documented the efficacy of selfstimulation or masturbation training, for example LoPiccolo and Lobitz,’ and Barbachq2Moreover, the effectiveness of short-term group treatment of women experiencing primary orgasmic dysfunction has been d e m o n ~ t r a t e dGroup .~ treatment as the primary mode of therapy for orgasmically dysfunctional women has been justified on several grounds. Not only do such groups help the woman achieve her first orgasm through masturbation, but also they reduce sexual andety and inhibition, enhance body image and self-acceptance, and develop confidence in the body’s capabilities in transmitting pleasurable, sensual feelings.2 Further, group treatment reduces the cost of therapy and therapist Dr. Leiblum is codirector of the Sexual Counseling Service at Rutgers Medical School-College of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry. Ms. ErsnerHershfield is a doctoral candidate at the Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey. Reprint requests should be directed to Dr. Sandra R. Leiblum, Rutgers Medical School, University Heights, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854. 139
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
140
Journal .J Sex and Marital Therapy
time, enhances motivation as women relate to and identify with peers having similar difficulties, and provides a treatment option for women without partners or with uncooperative partners. Nevertheless, these groups challenge several basic tenets of the “new sexual the rap^."^ There are, for example, theoretical objections to treating an individual without hidher partner, if one exists. Both Masters and Johnson5 and Kaplan4 view sexual dysfunction as a reflection of a problematic partner relationship and maintain that the destructive sexual communicative aspects of the couple relationship must be treated for successful outcome. Masters and Johnson point to the stigma in labeling only one of a partner dyad as dysfunctional. More pragmatically, reliable orgasmic attainment for women experiencing secondary orgasmic dysfunction is often difficult to achieve, even when the couple is treated conj~intly.~ Research by McGovern, Stewart, and LoPiccolo6 and Fordney-Settlage? indicates that the problematic marital or partner conflicts must be resolved if successful outcome of the sexual problem is to occur. While seeing women without their partners in groups for sexual dysfunction appears to violate the basic premise of treating the sexual “relationship,” such groups do attempt to provide generalization of treatment gains to the partner. In LoPiccolo and Lobitz’s 9-step masturbation program’ steps 7 through 9 involve the partner. I n Barbach’s preorgasmic groups2 instruction is provided in involving partners in sexual communication, sensate focus, and masturbation exercises. T h e absent or future partner is discussed, and interventions with partners are suggested, but the woman, is encouraged to take responsibility for initiating more satisfactory sexual patterns. Although women’s sexual dysfunction groups have been received with enthusiasm, and even regarded as the treatment of choice for preorgasmic women,2 several questions remained unanswered: 1. Does orgasmic attainment via self-stimulation transfer to orgasmic capability with a partner? Does it make a difference whether the partner is directly involved in the ongoing treatment process or not? 2. Do groups consisting of women with a variety of sexual complaintsi.e., low sex drive, arousal inhibitions, secondary orgasmic dysfunction-work as well as groups consisting solely of women with complaints of primary orgasmic dysfunction? 3. Are there enhanced behavioral outcomes (in terms of objective increases in sexual frequency, reduced dropout rates during treatment, greater orgasmic transfer) or attitudinal improvements (subjective feelings relating to greater acceptance of partner, more positive attitudes toward the marital relationship) if male partners are seen during the treatment process?
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
Sandra R . Leiblum, PhD, and Robin Ersner-Hershfield, MS
141
Three groups of women with sexual dysfunction were conducted in order to obtain preliminary answers to the questions posed. Group 1 consisted of six women with mixed sexual dysfunction who were seen without partner involvement during treatment. Group 2 consisted of five women with primary orgasmic dysfunction as the chief sexual complaint. Partners were not seen. Group 3, like group 1, consisted of women with mixed sexual dysfunctions, but partners were invited to two treatment sessions. There were five women in this group. The material covered during the sessions was identical in all three groups, though in the mixed sexual dysfunction groups intervention suggestions were individualized to deal with specialized problems. T h e three groups will be described separately to clarify subsequent discussion and implication of results.
PROCEDURE FOR GROUP I-MIXED
SEXUAL DYSFUNCTION
Subjects The subjects (Ss) ranged in age from 24 to 41. Four women were married, one was divorced and living alone, and one was single and living with a platonic male friend. The women were referred for sexual counseling by their gynecologist or therapist because of sexual dissatisfaction. Three of the six women displayed primary anorgasmia, one woman experienced secondary orgasmic dysfunction, and two women showed general sexual dysfunction defined by Kaplan' as lack of erotic feelings, physiological difficulties in lubrication, and orgasmic inadequacy. (See Table 1 for a summary description of the six women.)
TABLE 1 SUBJl!CT DESCRIPTION: CROUP 1
Subject
1
Presenting Problem*
4-
Marit.1 St.t"S
Religious Preference
Education
Previous or Current Ihhcrapy
Primary Orgsmmic Dysfunction
24
Divorced
Catholic
High School
Yes
General Sexual Dysfunction
37
College
NO
NO
General Sexual Dyafunction
32
Single
Catholic
College Graduate
Yes
NO
Primary Orgsamic Dy.funetion
30
mrried
Protestant
College Graduate
NO
Primary Orgasmic Dysfunction
26
Married
Catholic
Maatern Level
Yea
Secondary Organ-
41
Uarried
Catholic (Formerly a Nun)
College Graduate
laic Dyafunetion
Married
Jewish
Partner Problem
Ye.
Situational Erectile Dysfunction
Graduate
*The presenting problem are categorized according to Kaplan's (1974) noaology: physiological General Sexual Dyafunction refer. t o the lack of erotic feeling.. difficulties in lubrication or vasocongcstion. and problem with orgasm. Orgaamic Dyy.function refers to either primary or secondary o r g a m i c dyafunctions.
Yell
Situational erectile Dyafunction NO
142
Journul
of Sex and Marital
Therapy
Assessment
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
Prior to entry into the group all women were screened individually by one of the two group therapists. A problem-oriented sexual history was taken as well as information regarding the women's current life situation and problems. All Ss completed several self-report questionnaires before and after treatment. These included the Life History Questionnaire,s Sexual Knowledge and Attitude Test Scale (SKAT),BGeneral Information Questionnaire (GIQ),'O the Body Attitude Scale (BAS),'O and an Expectancy Questionnaire.'O
Treatment Ss were seen for 8 weekly 1 ?4hour sessions in a group led by two female cotherapists (the Present authors). Female genital anatomy and physiology, sexual myths and misconceptions, masturbation training (as described by the 9-step program of Lopiccolo and Lobitz'), Kegel's pubococcygeus muscle training,' and sensate focus exercises5 were described and assigned for homework. Sexually explicit movies were shown to illustrate masturbation techniques. Weekly homework assignments were presented, and Ss were asked to document their experiences on data sheets, which were discussed at the start of each session. For sessions 6 to 8 assignments included suggestions for partner involvement in masturbation exercises, sensate focus exercises, and intercourse.
RESULTS FOR GROUP I General Information Questionnaire
T h e General Information Questionnaire (GIQ) assessed current sexual behaviors ranging from solo activities to activities shared with a partner. T h e pretest responses indicated that those Ss who had partners were having intercourse once to twice weekly. In these cases the males typically initiated, foreplay lasted from 7 to 14 minutes, and partners were reported to have little difficulty achieving an erection. No significant changes were evident on the postquestionnaire for these behaviors. However, all Ss displayed a significant increase in the incidence and frequency of masturbation (see Table 2, t = 2.18, df = 5 , p < .05) and in the percentage of time that they were able to achieve orgasm through masturbation (t = 4.17, df = 5, p < .005). All of group 1 were orgasmic via selfstimulation by group termination, with four of the six women orgasmic 50% or more of the time. At group termination three women were still unable to reach orgasm through genital stimulation by a partner. However, the remaining three women were orgasmic through partner stimulation. And, finally, while none of the six women were orgasmic during intercourse prior to the group, two women, Ss 2 and 4,who had begun to experience orgasm through genital stimulation by a partner, reported experiencing orgasm 25% of the time during intercourse. A t the 8-month follow-up readministration of the G I Q revealed some backsliding. T h e frequency of masturbation dropped from a mean of 2.5
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
Sandra R . Leiblum, PhD, and Robin Ersner-Hershfield, M S
143
times weekly at the end of the group sessions to less than once a week. T h e two women who were masturbating less than once a month failed to maintain orgasmic attainment, although the remaining four improved and were orgasmic nearly 100% of the time. Four of the six Ss did not become orgasmic through partner stimulation or coitus, despite the fact that one of these women had, in fact, achieved orgasm with a partner at the end of the group. It should be noted, however, that two‘women did not have regular partners (one lived platonically with a male who was her only male acquaintance while the other woman was separated). To summarize follow-up findings, one woman became orgasmic 25% of the time via coitus and maintained this gain following the group’s termination. The remaining five were not orgasmic through partner stimulation or coitus, although four of the six continued to be orgasmic nearly 100% of the time during self-stimulation.
Body Attitude Scale Four different areas of the subjects’ feelings about their bodies were evaluated by the Body Attitude Scale (BAS). The first part assessed general feelings about body appearance and shape. T h e remaining three areas evaluated five degrees of feelings ranging from “feel terrific about” to “dislike” for 13 individual body parts, which included face, ears, mouth, neck, breasts, stomach, hips, buttocks, clitoris, vagina, thighs, feet, and arms. The three areas were the following: like-dislike this area of my body; like-dislike touching this area; and like-dislike having my partner touch this area. TABLE 2
GEHERM. INFOWTION QUESTIONNAIRE mixed
scxusl Dysfunction Group
PRE, POST, FOLLOW-W DATA
How often do you
masturbate per week?
Post
Can you reach orgasm through masrurbation?
Pre
P O ~ C Follow-
Sublect
Pre
__
--up
1 2+
0
2
.5*
-
0 252
25% 75%
P
.5* 1
90%
0
.5 2
.25**
4
c.25
0
Follow
Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/usmt20
Sexual Enhancement Groups for Dysfunctional Women: An Evaluation a
Sandra R. Leiblum PhD & Robin Ersner-hershfield MS
a b
a
Codirector of the Sexual Counseling Service at Rutgers Medical , School – College of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry b
Doctoral candidate at the Graduate , School of Applied and Professional Psychology utgers University , Piscataway, New Jersey Published online: 14 Jan 2008.
To cite this article: Sandra R. Leiblum PhD & Robin Ersner-hershfield MS (1977) Sexual Enhancement Groups for Dysfunctional Women: An Evaluation, Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 3:2, 139-152, DOI: 10.1080/00926237708402979 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00926237708402979
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions
Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy Vol. 3, No. 2, Summer 1977
Sexual Enhancement Groups for Dysfunctional Women: An Evaluation
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
Sandra R . Leiblum, PhD, and Robin Ersner-Hershfield, MS
ABSTRACT: Three groups of women with sexual dysfunction were evaluated pretreatment and posttreatment. Two of the groups (mixed sexual dysfunctions and primary orgasmic dysfunction) did not involve partner participation, while the third group (mixed sexual dysfunctions) included partners on two occasions. Results for all groups were similar. Of the 16 women involved, 14 became reliably orgasmic through self-stimulation. Generalization of orgasm to partner stimulation or coitus was less reliable. Although partner presence did not enhance behavioral outcome measures, highly significant findings were achieved in terms of enhanced marital and sexual satisfaction. The question of whether orgasm through coitus alone is a reasonable goal is raised and challenged.
WOMEN’S SEXUAL ENHANCEMENT GROUPS: AN EVALUATION With the advent and development of direct therapeutic procedures for treating sexual dysfunction, particularly women experiencing orgasmic difficulties, a number of studies have documented the efficacy of selfstimulation or masturbation training, for example LoPiccolo and Lobitz,’ and Barbachq2Moreover, the effectiveness of short-term group treatment of women experiencing primary orgasmic dysfunction has been d e m o n ~ t r a t e dGroup .~ treatment as the primary mode of therapy for orgasmically dysfunctional women has been justified on several grounds. Not only do such groups help the woman achieve her first orgasm through masturbation, but also they reduce sexual andety and inhibition, enhance body image and self-acceptance, and develop confidence in the body’s capabilities in transmitting pleasurable, sensual feelings.2 Further, group treatment reduces the cost of therapy and therapist Dr. Leiblum is codirector of the Sexual Counseling Service at Rutgers Medical School-College of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry. Ms. ErsnerHershfield is a doctoral candidate at the Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey. Reprint requests should be directed to Dr. Sandra R. Leiblum, Rutgers Medical School, University Heights, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854. 139
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
140
Journal .J Sex and Marital Therapy
time, enhances motivation as women relate to and identify with peers having similar difficulties, and provides a treatment option for women without partners or with uncooperative partners. Nevertheless, these groups challenge several basic tenets of the “new sexual the rap^."^ There are, for example, theoretical objections to treating an individual without hidher partner, if one exists. Both Masters and Johnson5 and Kaplan4 view sexual dysfunction as a reflection of a problematic partner relationship and maintain that the destructive sexual communicative aspects of the couple relationship must be treated for successful outcome. Masters and Johnson point to the stigma in labeling only one of a partner dyad as dysfunctional. More pragmatically, reliable orgasmic attainment for women experiencing secondary orgasmic dysfunction is often difficult to achieve, even when the couple is treated conj~intly.~ Research by McGovern, Stewart, and LoPiccolo6 and Fordney-Settlage? indicates that the problematic marital or partner conflicts must be resolved if successful outcome of the sexual problem is to occur. While seeing women without their partners in groups for sexual dysfunction appears to violate the basic premise of treating the sexual “relationship,” such groups do attempt to provide generalization of treatment gains to the partner. In LoPiccolo and Lobitz’s 9-step masturbation program’ steps 7 through 9 involve the partner. I n Barbach’s preorgasmic groups2 instruction is provided in involving partners in sexual communication, sensate focus, and masturbation exercises. T h e absent or future partner is discussed, and interventions with partners are suggested, but the woman, is encouraged to take responsibility for initiating more satisfactory sexual patterns. Although women’s sexual dysfunction groups have been received with enthusiasm, and even regarded as the treatment of choice for preorgasmic women,2 several questions remained unanswered: 1. Does orgasmic attainment via self-stimulation transfer to orgasmic capability with a partner? Does it make a difference whether the partner is directly involved in the ongoing treatment process or not? 2. Do groups consisting of women with a variety of sexual complaintsi.e., low sex drive, arousal inhibitions, secondary orgasmic dysfunction-work as well as groups consisting solely of women with complaints of primary orgasmic dysfunction? 3. Are there enhanced behavioral outcomes (in terms of objective increases in sexual frequency, reduced dropout rates during treatment, greater orgasmic transfer) or attitudinal improvements (subjective feelings relating to greater acceptance of partner, more positive attitudes toward the marital relationship) if male partners are seen during the treatment process?
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
Sandra R . Leiblum, PhD, and Robin Ersner-Hershfield, MS
141
Three groups of women with sexual dysfunction were conducted in order to obtain preliminary answers to the questions posed. Group 1 consisted of six women with mixed sexual dysfunction who were seen without partner involvement during treatment. Group 2 consisted of five women with primary orgasmic dysfunction as the chief sexual complaint. Partners were not seen. Group 3, like group 1, consisted of women with mixed sexual dysfunctions, but partners were invited to two treatment sessions. There were five women in this group. The material covered during the sessions was identical in all three groups, though in the mixed sexual dysfunction groups intervention suggestions were individualized to deal with specialized problems. T h e three groups will be described separately to clarify subsequent discussion and implication of results.
PROCEDURE FOR GROUP I-MIXED
SEXUAL DYSFUNCTION
Subjects The subjects (Ss) ranged in age from 24 to 41. Four women were married, one was divorced and living alone, and one was single and living with a platonic male friend. The women were referred for sexual counseling by their gynecologist or therapist because of sexual dissatisfaction. Three of the six women displayed primary anorgasmia, one woman experienced secondary orgasmic dysfunction, and two women showed general sexual dysfunction defined by Kaplan' as lack of erotic feelings, physiological difficulties in lubrication, and orgasmic inadequacy. (See Table 1 for a summary description of the six women.)
TABLE 1 SUBJl!CT DESCRIPTION: CROUP 1
Subject
1
Presenting Problem*
4-
Marit.1 St.t"S
Religious Preference
Education
Previous or Current Ihhcrapy
Primary Orgsmmic Dysfunction
24
Divorced
Catholic
High School
Yes
General Sexual Dysfunction
37
College
NO
NO
General Sexual Dyafunction
32
Single
Catholic
College Graduate
Yes
NO
Primary Orgsamic Dy.funetion
30
mrried
Protestant
College Graduate
NO
Primary Orgasmic Dysfunction
26
Married
Catholic
Maatern Level
Yea
Secondary Organ-
41
Uarried
Catholic (Formerly a Nun)
College Graduate
laic Dyafunetion
Married
Jewish
Partner Problem
Ye.
Situational Erectile Dysfunction
Graduate
*The presenting problem are categorized according to Kaplan's (1974) noaology: physiological General Sexual Dyafunction refer. t o the lack of erotic feeling.. difficulties in lubrication or vasocongcstion. and problem with orgasm. Orgaamic Dyy.function refers to either primary or secondary o r g a m i c dyafunctions.
Yell
Situational erectile Dyafunction NO
142
Journul
of Sex and Marital
Therapy
Assessment
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
Prior to entry into the group all women were screened individually by one of the two group therapists. A problem-oriented sexual history was taken as well as information regarding the women's current life situation and problems. All Ss completed several self-report questionnaires before and after treatment. These included the Life History Questionnaire,s Sexual Knowledge and Attitude Test Scale (SKAT),BGeneral Information Questionnaire (GIQ),'O the Body Attitude Scale (BAS),'O and an Expectancy Questionnaire.'O
Treatment Ss were seen for 8 weekly 1 ?4hour sessions in a group led by two female cotherapists (the Present authors). Female genital anatomy and physiology, sexual myths and misconceptions, masturbation training (as described by the 9-step program of Lopiccolo and Lobitz'), Kegel's pubococcygeus muscle training,' and sensate focus exercises5 were described and assigned for homework. Sexually explicit movies were shown to illustrate masturbation techniques. Weekly homework assignments were presented, and Ss were asked to document their experiences on data sheets, which were discussed at the start of each session. For sessions 6 to 8 assignments included suggestions for partner involvement in masturbation exercises, sensate focus exercises, and intercourse.
RESULTS FOR GROUP I General Information Questionnaire
T h e General Information Questionnaire (GIQ) assessed current sexual behaviors ranging from solo activities to activities shared with a partner. T h e pretest responses indicated that those Ss who had partners were having intercourse once to twice weekly. In these cases the males typically initiated, foreplay lasted from 7 to 14 minutes, and partners were reported to have little difficulty achieving an erection. No significant changes were evident on the postquestionnaire for these behaviors. However, all Ss displayed a significant increase in the incidence and frequency of masturbation (see Table 2, t = 2.18, df = 5 , p < .05) and in the percentage of time that they were able to achieve orgasm through masturbation (t = 4.17, df = 5, p < .005). All of group 1 were orgasmic via selfstimulation by group termination, with four of the six women orgasmic 50% or more of the time. At group termination three women were still unable to reach orgasm through genital stimulation by a partner. However, the remaining three women were orgasmic through partner stimulation. And, finally, while none of the six women were orgasmic during intercourse prior to the group, two women, Ss 2 and 4,who had begun to experience orgasm through genital stimulation by a partner, reported experiencing orgasm 25% of the time during intercourse. A t the 8-month follow-up readministration of the G I Q revealed some backsliding. T h e frequency of masturbation dropped from a mean of 2.5
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 09:51 03 January 2015
Sandra R . Leiblum, PhD, and Robin Ersner-Hershfield, M S
143
times weekly at the end of the group sessions to less than once a week. T h e two women who were masturbating less than once a month failed to maintain orgasmic attainment, although the remaining four improved and were orgasmic nearly 100% of the time. Four of the six Ss did not become orgasmic through partner stimulation or coitus, despite the fact that one of these women had, in fact, achieved orgasm with a partner at the end of the group. It should be noted, however, that two‘women did not have regular partners (one lived platonically with a male who was her only male acquaintance while the other woman was separated). To summarize follow-up findings, one woman became orgasmic 25% of the time via coitus and maintained this gain following the group’s termination. The remaining five were not orgasmic through partner stimulation or coitus, although four of the six continued to be orgasmic nearly 100% of the time during self-stimulation.
Body Attitude Scale Four different areas of the subjects’ feelings about their bodies were evaluated by the Body Attitude Scale (BAS). The first part assessed general feelings about body appearance and shape. T h e remaining three areas evaluated five degrees of feelings ranging from “feel terrific about” to “dislike” for 13 individual body parts, which included face, ears, mouth, neck, breasts, stomach, hips, buttocks, clitoris, vagina, thighs, feet, and arms. The three areas were the following: like-dislike this area of my body; like-dislike touching this area; and like-dislike having my partner touch this area. TABLE 2
GEHERM. INFOWTION QUESTIONNAIRE mixed
scxusl Dysfunction Group
PRE, POST, FOLLOW-W DATA
How often do you
masturbate per week?
Post
Can you reach orgasm through masrurbation?
Pre
P O ~ C Follow-
Sublect
Pre
__
--up
1 2+
0
2
.5*
-
0 252
25% 75%
P
.5* 1
90%
0
.5 2
.25**
4
c.25
0
Follow
