Investigating the phenomenology and plausibility of sexual fantasies and their relationship with behavioural enactment and motivation

ABSTRACT

This study examined whether the phenomenology (vividness, absorption, sexual arousal) and plausibility of sexual fantasies are associated with behavioural motivation and enactment. An online sample (N = 254) completed a working memory capacity (WMC) questionnaire. They then envisioned an unenacted sexual fantasy and rated its phenomenological characteristics and their motivation to enact it. Next, a questionnaire measuring deliberate sexual fantasising, spontaneous sexual thoughts, behavioural enactment, and content plausibility was completed. Phenomenological characteristics were unrelated to WMC, but positively associated with motivation. Deliberate fantasising was associated with behavioural enactment for both non-paraphilic and paraphilic content. Spontaneous thoughts were associated with the plausibility of non-paraphilic and paraphilic content, while deliberate fantasising was only associated with plausible non-paraphilic content. Plausibility mediated the relationship between sexual thinking and behaviour for both types of content. The results suggest that the phenomenology and plausibility of sexual fantasises are important factors for understanding the sexual fantasy-behaviour link.

Practice impact statement

The present results suggest that, in addition to content and frequency, the phenomenological characteristics and perceived plausibility of sexual fantasies are important factors to consider when trying to understand the link between sexual fantasising and behaviour, including sexual offending behaviour. As such, bringing the imaginative element of sexual fantasising into consideration may be a useful undertaking when assessing and managing problematic sexual fantasies.

KEYWORDS:

• Sexual fantasies
• plausibility
• phenomenology
• sexual behaviour
• fantasising

Disclosure statement

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

Ethical approval

This study was granted ethical approval by the School of Psychology Research Ethics Committee (SOPREC) at the University of Lincoln on 05/03/19 (Ref number: PSY1819327).