About Porn Study Critiques

We are a group of academics, therapists, authors and bloggers who have a deep interest in today’s pornography (and masturbation) research and reviews. Other contributors include behavioral biologists with expertise in addiction who want to help, but don’t want to be associated with sex research or controversy.

On this site, we highlight the merits of various research, examine methodology, and evaluate whether conclusions appear adequately supported and titles and terminology are accurate given actual results.

If you search for research by name (upper-right menu), and there is analysis of it on the site, you will find an abstract of the research, accompanied by a list of commentaries. Some are by site members; others have merely been recommended by site members. To make it easier we created a list of all the articles on this site.

Unless comments underneath a particular post are closed, you are welcome to share your views. Please stay focused on the substance of the commentary, and avoid personal attacks and impugning anyone’s motives lest your comment be deleted. Membership at this site is by invitation.

In the real world, science sometimes works more like a fashion show. Researchers clothe plausible explanations of experimental findings in glittery statistical suits and gowns. These gussied-up hypotheses charm journal editors and attract media coverage with carefully orchestrated runway struts, never having to battle competitors. —Bruce Bower, “Closed Thinking: Without scientific competition and open debate, much psychology research goes nowhere

Our hope is that Porn Study Critiques serves as a place to air ideas that might normally be suppressed or attacked by the science establishment. No doubt the academic science will eventually sort out the effects of overconsumption of Internet porn. But it could take decades. In the meantime, there could be countless causalities, victims of misinformation. The wheels of science—especially the print journal portion of the system—grind in exceedingly slow fashion, which is why we need Internet sites where ideas can be exchanged quickly without interference from the kinds of curmudgeonly censors one finds among print journal editors and reviewers.

Criticism is helpful to get at the truth. The trouble with the current journal review system is that only certain kinds of criticisms are allowed. Namely, criticisms that align with editors’ and reviewers’ prejudices. Also, exotic methodological and statistical techniques are overvalued. Porn Study Critiques is an effort to help visitors obtain a more complete understanding of today’s porn research as well as gain a multi-disciplinary perspective (medicine and psychology) often missing elsewhere in the literature.

Critiques of Questionable & Misleading Studies. Debunking Propaganda Pieces

Articles Containing Lists of Relevant Studies

Commentaries Published in Academic Journals

Critiques of CPUI-9 Studies and “Perceived Pornography Addiction”:

Critiques of Steele et al., 2013:

Critiques of Prause et al., 2015:

Porn Related Sexual Dysfunctions

Taylor Kohut Studies

Assorted Academic Papers

Debunking Lay Articles Related to Porn-Induced Sexual Dysfunctions

Debunking Often-Cited Lay Articles or Talking Points

Debunking two Nicole Prause Op-ed’s targeting Fight The New Drug

NCOSE 2018 Presentations