Center for Psychology at University of Porto, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Center for Psychology at University of Porto, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
J Sex Med. 2021 Mar;18(3):565-581. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2020.12.019. Epub 2021 Feb 23.
Empirical data on sexual boredom are scarce and unsystematized, contrasting with the literature on general boredom.
The aim of this review of literature is to verify how sexual boredom is defined in previous research and which relationships were found with sexual functioning, relationship dynamics, or gender.
A systematic search was conducted in EBSCO, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed databases for papers published until August 2020. Search terms used were "sexual boredom" or "sexual tedium" or "sexual indifference" or "sexual monotony" or a combination of "boredom" and "sexual activity" or "intercourse". This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines.
Articles were grouped in general boredom and sexuality research and in sexual boredom research.
This review consists of 43 articles, of which 31 are quantitative studies, 8 are qualitative studies, and 4 are mixed-method studies. Studies concerning general boredom and sexuality include research on diverse aspects of sexual behavior, namely solitary sexual behavior, extra-dyadic sex, compulsive sexual behavior, and risky sexual behavior. Sexual boredom research included papers regarding personality, sexual response, and varied aspects of sexual behavior.
Findings suggest sexual boredom is related with sexual response, sexual satisfaction, and hypersexuality, which renders clinical relevance. Sexual boredom impacts well-being, and further research should focus on exploring potential mechanisms underpinning this sexual problem.
To the authors' knowledge, this is the only existing systematic review of sexual boredom and allowed identifying key features of sexual boredom and related aspects. However, because most studies are correlational, and several do not use comprehensive measures of sexual boredom, no causal relationships were identified.
This review indicates the construct of sexual boredom includes individual, relationship, and societal aspects. However, no definition of sexual boredom includes these, and current knowledge does not allow formulating a model or a theory of sexual boredom. de Oliveira L, Carvalho J, Nobre P. A Systematic Review on Sexual Boredom. J Sex Med 2021;18:565-581.
与一般无聊的文献相比，关于性厌倦的经验数据很少且没有系统。
本次文献回顾的目的是验证以前的研究中如何定义性厌倦，以及与性功能、关系动态或性别发现了哪些关系。
在 EBSCO、Scopus、Web of Science 和 PubMed 数据库中对截至 2020 年 8 月发表的论文进行了系统检索。使用的搜索词是“性厌倦”或“性单调”或“性冷漠”或“性单调”或“无聊”和“性活动”或“性交”的组合。本系统评价遵循 PRISMA 指南。
文章分为一般无聊和性研究以及性无聊研究。
本综述包括 43 篇文章，其中 31 篇为定量研究，8 篇为定性研究，4 篇为混合方法研究。关于一般无聊和性的研究包括对性行为的不同方面的研究，即孤独性行为、婚外性行为、强迫性行为和危险性行为。性厌倦研究包括关于个性、性反应和各种性行为方面的论文。
研究结果表明，性厌倦与性反应、性满足和性亢进有关，这具有临床意义。性厌倦会影响幸福感，进一步的研究应侧重于探索这种性问题的潜在机制。
据作者所知，这是唯一一项关于性厌倦的系统综述，它确定了性厌倦的关键特征及其相关方面。然而，由于大多数研究都是相关性的，而且有几个研究没有使用全面的性厌倦测量方法，因此没有确定因果关系。
据作者所知，这是唯一一项关于性厌倦的系统综述，它确定了性厌倦的关键特征及其相关方面。然而，由于大多数研究都是相关性的，而且有几个研究没有使用全面的性厌倦测量方法，因此没有确定因果关系。
这项综述表明，性厌倦的结构包括个人、关系和社会方面。然而，没有一个关于性厌倦的定义包括这些，目前的知识还不允许形成性厌倦的模型或理论。
