Methodological Issues in Defining Aggression for Content Analyses of Sexually Explicit Material

McKee, A

Methodological Issues in Defining Aggression for Content Analyses of Sexually Explicit Material

McKee, A

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2015, 44 (1), pp. 81 - 87
Issue Date:: 2015-01-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Aggression in SEM 2013_04_25.doc	Accepted Manuscript Version	210.5 kB	Microsoft Word	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	McKee, A https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0577-2061	en_US
dc.date.available	2013-05-12	en_US
dc.date.issued	2015-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2015, 44 (1), pp. 81 - 87	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	0004-0002	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/37975
dc.description.abstract	© 2014, Springer Science+Business Media New York. There exists an important tradition of content analyses of aggression in sexually explicit material. The majority of these analyses use a definition of aggression that excludes consent. This article identifies three problems with this approach. First, it does not distinguish between aggression and some positive acts. Second, it excludes a key element of healthy sexuality. Third, it can lead to heteronormative definitions of healthy sexuality. It would be better to use a definition of aggression such as Baron and Richardson's (1994) in our content analyses, that includes a consideration of consent. A number of difficulties have been identified with attending to consent but this article offers solutions to each of these.	en_US
dc.relation	http://purl.org/au-research/grants/arc/DP120102594
dc.relation.ispartof	Archives of Sexual Behavior	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1007/s10508-013-0253-3	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Clinical Psychology	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Humans	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Aggression	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Sexual Behavior	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Communications Media	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Erotica	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Female	en_US
dc.title	Methodological Issues in Defining Aggression for Content Analyses of Sexually Explicit Material	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	1	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	44	en_US
utslib.for	1117 Public Health and Health Services	en_US
utslib.for	2001 Communication and Media Studies	en_US
utslib.for	1699 Other Studies in Human Society	en_US
utslib.for	1701 Psychology	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/FASS Faculty Administration
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.declined	1970-01-01T00:00:00.0+1000
pubs.deleted	1970-01-01T00:00:00.0+1000
pubs.issue	1	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	44	en_US

Abstract:

© 2014, Springer Science+Business Media New York. There exists an important tradition of content analyses of aggression in sexually explicit material. The majority of these analyses use a definition of aggression that excludes consent. This article identifies three problems with this approach. First, it does not distinguish between aggression and some positive acts. Second, it excludes a key element of healthy sexuality. Third, it can lead to heteronormative definitions of healthy sexuality. It would be better to use a definition of aggression such as Baron and Richardson's (1994) in our content analyses, that includes a consideration of consent. A number of difficulties have been identified with attending to consent but this article offers solutions to each of these.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/37975