A recent study published in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships examined how individual, specific measures of personality were related to the people’s sexual interactions over and above a general measure of personality. Turns out that individuals may have a specific sex personality that explains sexual behavior better than the general counterpart.

What they looked at:

General Personality Traits. The study looked at two samples of college students in relationships. The students filled out a measure of personality which looked at factors such as extroversion, neuroticism, openness, conscientiousness, and agreeableness.

Personality Traits related specifically to Sexuality. Participants filled out the “Sexy Seven:” a scale using adjectives that describe individuals’ sexuality. The scale was developed by Dave Schmitt and David Buss back in 2000, stemming from a theory of personality purporting that individual differences can stem from variations in sexuality and mating behaviors above general personality. These adjectives are harnessed across seven scales concerning aspects of personality that are particularly central to sexuality. These included sexual attractiveness, relationship exclusivity, gender orientation, sexual restraint, erotophilic disposition (e.g., talking about sex, level of guilt engaging in sex, viewing sexually explicit material, etc), emotional investment, and sexual orientation. They also tracked their sexual (from kissing to intercourse) behaviors for three weeks.

What they found:

Overall, the “Sexy Seven” related more strongly to people’s sexual interactions than the general measure of personality. Here were the strongest performers in that scale:

Emotional Investment. Those that considered themselves more emotionally invested (e.g., more romantic, affectionate, passionate, and loving) had more positive sexual interactions overall. This means they felt more enjoyment, intimacy, love- as well as felt more desired, respected, and less pressured by their partners. Those that felt more emotional investment seemed more willing to give and receive affection.

Relationship Exclusivity. Contrary to the researchers expectations, those that saw themselves as more faithful, monogamous, and devoted reported significantly more negative interactions. They stated they felt less loved, respected, as well as less intimacy and control of their relationship. A major caveat here is the study sample- college students may have reported this way do to the legitimate ephemeral nature of their relationships. It would be interesting to see how married people answer these questions.

Erotophilic disposition. Those with stronger sexual attitudes and desires felt more love and respect in their interactions than those with weaker dispositions. This is an interesting finding, considering how this may interact with personal values. If someone is a more explicitly lewd, horny or obscene individual, how do these carry out in a marriage- especially when partnered with someone with a weaker disposition?

What about general personality traits? How did those compare?

As far as the general personality traits, the researchers found no significant relationship between sexual outcomes and extroversion and conscientiousness. They suggest these might be more important in public social settings as opposed to more intimate ones. Agreeableness was positively related to feeling loved, and had a weaker relationship with enjoyment, intimacy, and respect. Surprisingly, those participants who were more neurotic felt more love and desire by their partners than less neurotic comparisons. It’s possible that neuroticism can focus attention on the emotionally positive aspects of sexual situations. Of course, whether that’s actually real or a confusion of sex and love remains to be seen.

Further Reading:

Smith, C.V., Nezlek, J.B., Webster, G.D., &Paddock, E.L. (2007). Relationships between daily sexual interactions and domain-specific and general models of personality traits. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24, 497-515.

Schmitt, D.P. &Buss, D.M. (2000). Sexual dimensions of person description: Beyond or subsumed by the Big Five? Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 141-177.

Buss, D.M. (1991). Evolutionary personality psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 459-492.