Predicting Sexual Desire in Daily Life from an Attachment Perspective: An Experience Sampling study

Abstract

In the present study we investigated the temporal associations between emotional intimacy, daily hassles, and sexual desire of individuals in longterm relationships, and examined the direct and moderating effects of attachment orientation. We investigated these variables by reanalyzing an existing data set. Experience sampling methodology was used to collect data 10 times per day, across seven days. Attachment orientation was assessed with the Experiences in Close Relationships questionnaire. Age, gender, and relationship duration were added as predictors. Data of 134 participants (N female ¼ 87) were analyzed. Only one of the partners of a couple participated. Men overall reported higher sexual desire than women. Longer relationship duration was associated with lower sexual desire, but age was not associated with sexual desire. Increased level of intimacy predicted sexual desire across measurements with an average time interval of 90 min, but this effect was no longer significant when assessment points were 180 min apart. Daily hassles did not predict sexual desire at subsequent assessments. Avoidant and anxious attachment were not associated with sexual desire level. No interaction effects of gender, stress, intimacy and attachment orientation on sexual desire were found. Speculative explanations are offered for the absence of stress effects.

Hooked on a feeling: Downregulation of negative emotion during sexual conflict is associated with sexual well-being among long-term couples.

“…Indeed, when sexual relationships involve partners with intimacy-interfering qualities (e.g., poorer communication and higher levels of anxiety or anger), functional theories of sexual desire posit that desire rises because it serves, in part, to maintain relationship bonds and fulfill attachment-related needs (Birnbaum, 2018). Thus, although sexual desire declined overall from baseline to follow-up in our sample, which replicates prior research (van Lankveld et al, 2021), our findings suggest that the opposite pattern emerges for couples who are slower to downregulate negative emotion during sexual conflict. This pattern emerged for both emotional experience and behavior and is consistent with the view that some level of negative emotion (e.g., anger and aggression) fuels sexual desire within couples (Kernberg, 1991; Perel, 2007).…”

“…Because difficulties regulating negative emotion undermine moment-to-moment intimacy (i.e., the degree to which intimate partners feel close, connected, and bonded to each other; Fávero et al, 2021; Tani et al, 2015), individuals who struggle more to manage their negative feelings and behaviors during sexual conflict may feel less emotionally close with their partner: concurrently, they may report lower dyadic sexual desire. Indeed, the positive associations between intimacy and sexual desire appear to be stronger when these constructs are measured in closer proximity to each other (Shrier & Blood, 2016; van Lankveld et al, 2021). Over time, however, the association between emotion regulation and sexual desire may shift.…”

Attachment Orientations, Sexual Behavior, and Relationship Satisfaction in Young, Mixed-Sex Couples: A Dyadic Approach

“…As some of the described associations could be bidirectional, with relationship satisfaction also predicting sexual frequency (Call et al, 1995), the application of longitudinal designs in the study of attachment, sexuality, and romantic relationships holds a promising future (G. E. Birnbaum & Reis, 2018;Brassard et al, 2012;Mikulincer et al, 2010;van Lankveld et al, 2021). Also, although the distinction between sexual and intimate behaviors constitutes a novel aspect of our research, our analyses were based on composite measures, and our intimate behavior factor was only based on two items, making it less reliable.…”

“…Although progress has been made in elucidating the role of attachment in sexual and romantic relationships (Bogaert & Sadava, 2002;Brassard et al, 2012;Brassard et al, 2007;Butzer & Campbell, 2008;Conradi et al, 2017;Tracy et al, 2003), the current study, to our knowledge, is the first to utilize both a dyadic and a differentiated approach to the study of attachment and sexual behavior in the early stages of romantic relationships. In contrast to prior studies on attachment and couple sexuality that either did not assess sexual frequency (Butzer & Campbell, 2008), did not include attachment orientations of both partners (Little et al, 2010;van Lankveld et al, 2021), or did not assess relationship satisfaction (Brassard et al, 2012), the current study includes all of these variables, while differentiating between intimate and sexual behaviors. To date, only a few studies have included different types of intimate behaviors (e.g., Busby et al, 2020;Fisher et al, 2015;Heiman et al, 2011), yet not one of them examined intimate and sexual behaviors in the context of attachment theory.…”

Desire on lockdown? Sexual desire and COVID-19 stress among LGBTQ+ and cisgender, heterosexual college students.

“…In line with the above predictions, past research generally suggests negative links between perceived stress and dyadic sexual desire (Abedi et al, 2015; Bodenmann et al, 2006; Tavares et al, 2019; cf. van Lankveld et al, 2021), or between perceived stress and related variables such as sexual satisfaction or arousal (Bodenmann et al, 2010; Hamilton & Julian, 2014; Hamilton & Meston, 2013). However, findings are nuanced: for example, Raisanen and colleagues (2018) found that higher perceived stress predicted lower dyadic desire for women but higher dyadic desire for men.…”