SPSP: Hi, John. Thanks for talking with us today. How did you get into this specific study?

John: I got the idea from a study I learned about at a previous SPSP convention. Matthias Mehl was presenting on audio recording methodology, and he mentioned that they always had a courtesy blackout period when the participants using the devices were home with their families. And I thought, “Why would you do that? That’s when things get interesting.” We’re also using the technology in a slightly different way – these devices are typically set to record brief intervals randomly, and we’re recording for 2-3 hours at a time when participants are with their partners.

SPSP: Why is your research important, and how does it add to the existing scientific literature?

John: I’m not aware of many other people using this technology to study close romantic relationships. With our methodological approach, we could have started with any number of questions. We started here because there are dozens of theories about human sexual vocalizations, and no observational data—only a handful of studies using self-report and retrospective methods. Using a background assessment and daily diary, we want to evaluate the existing theories regarding the psychological, relational, and sexual variables articulated elsewhere in the literature as important correlates of vocalizations. For example, a partner might vocalize more on a day with greater overall sexual satisfaction. Or if they sense that their partner is feeling down or having low self-esteem that day, maybe they’d be more vocal. Some evolutionary theories also suggest that perhaps women use vocalizations to “stake a claim” to their partner and tell other women in the vicinity to go away, this person is taken.  

SPSP: That’s really interesting. What do you think are some of the practical, real-world implications of your research?

John: I’m thinking not about this first study, but about what’s next. We’re asking participants if we can use anonymous snippets of their audio as stimuli for future studies. So we’re creating a database of audio stimuli of varied levels of sexual satisfaction. And then we can study whether people can detect the differences in satisfaction, or a real orgasm as compared to a fake orgasm. And we can study the psychological processes that help make people less biased and more accurate. In other words, whereas other studies have attempted to look at what factors might make romantic partners better communicators, ours might be able to help identify how they can become better listeners.

SPSP: How will you use the grant money, and how will that advance your research? Does the money solve a problem?

John: Yes, it does solve the problem of participant payment. We’ve had a heck of a time getting participants to sign up when we’ve been offering the same payment rate as other traditional longitudinal-dyadic research. But this isn’t just another longitudinal-dyadic study. We’re asking for unprecedented access to participants’ most intimate moments. So the money from SPSP is already earmarked to increase the payment for each couple, to increase participation numbers.

SPSP: So participation is a challenge you’ve run into. What are the other challenges you’ve encountered, and is anything easier than you expected?

John: The IRB approval process was challenging. We talked a lot about data security and encryption. We’re storing the audio files on an encrypted computer that’s disconnected from the internet unless it’s absolutely necessary to be connected. But we were pleased to receive IRB approval – we were glad about how the process went.

SPSP: Thank you so much for speaking with us. Have a great day!