↓ Skip to main content

A Comparison of Volume and Circumference Phallometry: Response Magnitude and Method Agreement

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Sexual Behavior, August 1999
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
A Comparison of Volume and Circumference Phallometry: Response Magnitude and Method Agreement
Published in
Archives of Sexual Behavior, August 1999
DOI 10.1023/a:1018700813140
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Kuban, Howard E. Barbaree, Ray Blanchard

Abstract

Penile circumference and penile volume phallometry are laboratory methods of assessing sexual arousal. Volume phallometry is reportedly more sensitive to responses, but comparative studies have been inconclusive and beset with methodological problems. In this study, 42 self-professed heterosexual volunteers were assessed with both methods simultaneously, employing a standard test for erotic partner preference. Pearson correlations between test outcome profiles were very high (r > .80) for subjects whose circumferential increase was > 2.5 mm [10% of a full erection (FE)]. However, among lower responders the agreement dropped precipitously (mean r = -.15). Moreover, as a group higher responders differentiated adult and pubescent age female stimuli from each other and all other categories with either method, but lower responders made this differentiation only with the volume method. We conclude that (l) at high levels of response both methods are equally good, (2) at low levels of response volumetric phallometry is a more accurate measure of arousal, and (3) 10% FE, or a 2.5-mm circumference increase, should be the minimum response criterion for the circumferential measure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Spain 1 3%
Poland 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 32 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 19%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 46%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2023.
All research outputs
#5,308,946
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Sexual Behavior
#1,785
of 3,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,197
of 34,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Sexual Behavior
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,737 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 34,665 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them