The latest UK Durex Sex Survey was launched this weekend, and it’s clearly pinned around topical media favourites of cheating, sexting and promiscuity. Among other things the study claims British people have sex four to five times a week, and paints a picture of UK residents where 1/3 would have sex with anyone for £1 million and 1/5 of us fantasise about our exes during sex.
The trouble is these findings don’t fit with the approaches or outcomes of reliable academic studies. The figure of sexual activity happening four or five times a week is massively higher than reliable studies show (around 6 times a month). While this may be an indicator of bias in the survey (and respondents trying to give impressive answers), it is problematic as it continues to equate ‘good’ sex with quantity and imply that ‘normal’ sexual behaviour is several times per week. This is a staple part of contemporary self help and media coverage on sex and makes people who’re not doing this feel inadequate.
Sex surveys conducted in independent academic research build on existing data and do not present sex in judgemental ways – so a focus on ‘promiscuity’ or ‘cheating’ as appears in the current Durex survey is a big no-no in accurate survey design. Not least because it discourages many people from answering honestly and potentially could distress participants.
The claim that 1/3 of us might sleep with a stranger for £1 million is also misleading as it asks people to say what they might do, not what they have done. The subtext of sex with a stranger in exchange for cash also taps into media prudery, so allows for coverage with a judgemental subtext. The mainstream media don’t tend to look favourably on either sex with strangers or sex for cash – and particularly despise both together.
All of which begs ethical questions about a sex survey that is designed to promote a product to encourage safer sex, but actually is suggesting sex for money or sex with strangers or thinking about someone other than your partner during intercourse is problematic.
There are limitations with the questions asked, design of the survey questions, participants included, and promotion of the survey’s outcomes; which makes it an unreliable indicator of our sexual behaviour and attitudes.
Some of the questions have been made available online (see Sun link above). Here are some of the more problematic ones:
Question 1 asks ‘How many sexual partners have you had?’ but it doesn’t give any parameters so it’s unclear if participants are being asked ever, or during past year or some other timescale. It also doesn’t define what ‘sexual’ means so some people may only include encounters that included penetrative sex, others might include experiences where oral sex was enjoyed but no penetration. From this you can’t really be sure what people are talking about. This question is used in news coverage to identify ‘promiscuous’ sexual behaviour, which does not happen in reliable sex research.
Question 3 asks the double question of ‘Where and when are you most likely to cheat on a partner?’ and gives the following breakdown:
On holiday 9.7%
Night out 12.9%
Office party 1.9%
Business trip 2.5%
If I met a hot stranger 6.2%
Do it all the time 1.7%
It says 65% would never cheat but it does not make clear how this question was phrased (so it may have been very leading and make people feel they had to answer in a socially desirable way). Strangely although this is reported as ‘where and when’ someone would cheat it actually only asks where they’re most likely to cheat, and doesn’t really capture whether this is based on people speculating where temptation might arise, or where they’ve actually cheated on a partner.
Question 4 asks ‘Could you be bought for sex and if so, for how much?’ It then lists the different price options for people to select:
No way 43.5%
A drink 3.4%
Dinner 3.1%
A pair of designer shoes 3.3%
£100 5.5%
£1000 10.8%
£25000 14.1%
£100000 14.9%
£1 million 29.7%
My mortgage paid off 13.1%
A year’s rent on my house/flat 9.1%
World cup tickets 5.4%
I’d do it for free 13.2%
You can see from the phrasing of the question that participants may well not take this seriously, but it is obviously being prepared for the media market as whatever the main choices selected this could tap into the judgemental approach the media takes towards paid for sex. PR companies often write their press releases at the same time they design their surveys, so here you can already see the ‘shocking’ finding taking shape that will slip into the press release once the data comes back.
Question 8 asks ‘Do you own or have you tried any of the following?’
Vibrator 53.2%
Pleasure-enhancing condoms 46.2%
Lubricants 67.2%
Handcuffs 38%
Sex doll 1.4%
Nipple clamps 5.3%
Whips/spanking paddles 11.7%
Visited a strip club 22.2%
Visited a sex club 7.2%
Paid for sex 5.3%
Had a sex buddy 29.6%
None of the above 7.1%
None of the above but would like to try 7.2%
Aside from being a badly worded question that is asking two questions in one, there is no breakdown of gender, age or sexuality here which might illuminate this data further. There’s no clue with the last question which of the above they want to try, and many of the positive answers regarding use of lubricant may be more indicative of respondents replying to a survey by a condom manufacturer than might be found in the general public. There’s no indication whether people responding to this question include these items as part of their sexual practices, or tried them once and won’t be bothering again. ‘Sex’ is defined here as a range of activities which many do enjoy but which do not encompass the range of sexual experiences people might share. Most of these are paid for products or activities which again favour the media’s treatment of sex, basing it around things you can buy to enhance your sex life.
Question 10 asks ‘What do you count as cheating on a partner?’
Bottom pinching 20.4%
Texting 22.6%
Snogging 75.6%
Going out for a drink 23.4%
Oral sex 71%
Penetrative sex 78.1%
We have an open relationship 4.8%
This suggests those responding had very clear views that anything other than kissing someone else is cheating. This contrasts with some of the answers given in question 8, and particularly with the response to question 4. Making the survey is a curious mix of liberal and conservative views on sex, which will influence participant responses.
In a reliable sex survey questions should not lead participants but should form a comprehensive narrative so each answer compliments the next one and the survey does not contradict itself. Each question should be clear and researchers should have an awareness of how different questions will be used individually and together in analysis.
In this current survey it seems like a range of unrelated questions with potentially sensationalist outcomes are put together in no particular order and with no real sense of what is being measured or what portrait of UK sexual behaviour is being captured.
Sadly this is a standard approach to poor survey design and is a further indicator of why such findings should not inform our sexual lives.
Since this is a commercial venture and clearly not designed to truly represent our sex lives, is there any reason to get upset about it? Yes, because the Durex surveys are pretty much the main port of call to any journalist writing a sex feature. They use the data to underpin surveys with those obligatory sex statistics required by editors. This in turn influences how the public understand sex and relationships.
Durex is currently asking sex educators/researchers like me to share their ideas about sex/relationships. The company is paying £150 for an hour of a professional’s time as part of their internal product development programme. Given the potential barriers to our sex lives and our profession as educators/researchers posed by misleading promotional surveys I’d advise sexual health professionals to refuse to work with the company. That is until Durex decides to either drop their survey in its current promotional format, or agrees to revising survey so it is ethical, accurate and actually tells us something about our sex lives.
* With thanks to Ed Yong from Not Exactly Rocket Science for this clever caption for today’s blog, (in case you don’t get the joke it’s based on a previous marketing slogan for condoms ‘ribbed for her pleasure’).
‘Rigged for her displeasure’* – Problems with Durex’s UK Sex Survey 2010
The latest UK Durex Sex Survey was launched this weekend, and it’s clearly pinned around topical media favourites of cheating, sexting and promiscuity. Among other things the study claims British people have sex four to five times a week, and paints a picture of UK residents where 1/3 would have sex with anyone for £1 million and 1/5 of us fantasise about our exes during sex.
Examples of the media treatment of this story include:
Third of us would have sex with anyone for £1m (and 5% just for World Cup tickets) – The Sun
Sex survey: third of Britons ‘would sleep with a stranger for £1 million’ – The Telegraph
The trouble is these findings don’t fit with the approaches or outcomes of reliable academic studies. The figure of sexual activity happening four or five times a week is massively higher than reliable studies show (around 6 times a month). While this may be an indicator of bias in the survey (and respondents trying to give impressive answers), it is problematic as it continues to equate ‘good’ sex with quantity and imply that ‘normal’ sexual behaviour is several times per week. This is a staple part of contemporary self help and media coverage on sex and makes people who’re not doing this feel inadequate.
Sex surveys conducted in independent academic research build on existing data and do not present sex in judgemental ways – so a focus on ‘promiscuity’ or ‘cheating’ as appears in the current Durex survey is a big no-no in accurate survey design. Not least because it discourages many people from answering honestly and potentially could distress participants.
The claim that 1/3 of us might sleep with a stranger for £1 million is also misleading as it asks people to say what they might do, not what they have done. The subtext of sex with a stranger in exchange for cash also taps into media prudery, so allows for coverage with a judgemental subtext. The mainstream media don’t tend to look favourably on either sex with strangers or sex for cash – and particularly despise both together.
All of which begs ethical questions about a sex survey that is designed to promote a product to encourage safer sex, but actually is suggesting sex for money or sex with strangers or thinking about someone other than your partner during intercourse is problematic.
There are limitations with the questions asked, design of the survey questions, participants included, and promotion of the survey’s outcomes; which makes it an unreliable indicator of our sexual behaviour and attitudes.
Some of the questions have been made available online (see Sun link above). Here are some of the more problematic ones:
Question 1 asks ‘How many sexual partners have you had?’ but it doesn’t give any parameters so it’s unclear if participants are being asked ever, or during past year or some other timescale. It also doesn’t define what ‘sexual’ means so some people may only include encounters that included penetrative sex, others might include experiences where oral sex was enjoyed but no penetration. From this you can’t really be sure what people are talking about. This question is used in news coverage to identify ‘promiscuous’ sexual behaviour, which does not happen in reliable sex research.
Question 3 asks the double question of ‘Where and when are you most likely to cheat on a partner?’ and gives the following breakdown:
On holiday 9.7%
Night out 12.9%
Office party 1.9%
Business trip 2.5%
If I met a hot stranger 6.2%
Do it all the time 1.7%
It says 65% would never cheat but it does not make clear how this question was phrased (so it may have been very leading and make people feel they had to answer in a socially desirable way). Strangely although this is reported as ‘where and when’ someone would cheat it actually only asks where they’re most likely to cheat, and doesn’t really capture whether this is based on people speculating where temptation might arise, or where they’ve actually cheated on a partner.
Question 4 asks ‘Could you be bought for sex and if so, for how much?’ It then lists the different price options for people to select:
No way 43.5%
A drink 3.4%
Dinner 3.1%
A pair of designer shoes 3.3%
£100 5.5%
£1000 10.8%
£25000 14.1%
£100000 14.9%
£1 million 29.7%
My mortgage paid off 13.1%
A year’s rent on my house/flat 9.1%
World cup tickets 5.4%
I’d do it for free 13.2%
You can see from the phrasing of the question that participants may well not take this seriously, but it is obviously being prepared for the media market as whatever the main choices selected this could tap into the judgemental approach the media takes towards paid for sex. PR companies often write their press releases at the same time they design their surveys, so here you can already see the ‘shocking’ finding taking shape that will slip into the press release once the data comes back.
Question 8 asks ‘Do you own or have you tried any of the following?’
Vibrator 53.2%
Pleasure-enhancing condoms 46.2%
Lubricants 67.2%
Handcuffs 38%
Sex doll 1.4%
Nipple clamps 5.3%
Whips/spanking paddles 11.7%
Visited a strip club 22.2%
Visited a sex club 7.2%
Paid for sex 5.3%
Had a sex buddy 29.6%
None of the above 7.1%
None of the above but would like to try 7.2%
Aside from being a badly worded question that is asking two questions in one, there is no breakdown of gender, age or sexuality here which might illuminate this data further. There’s no clue with the last question which of the above they want to try, and many of the positive answers regarding use of lubricant may be more indicative of respondents replying to a survey by a condom manufacturer than might be found in the general public. There’s no indication whether people responding to this question include these items as part of their sexual practices, or tried them once and won’t be bothering again. ‘Sex’ is defined here as a range of activities which many do enjoy but which do not encompass the range of sexual experiences people might share. Most of these are paid for products or activities which again favour the media’s treatment of sex, basing it around things you can buy to enhance your sex life.
Question 10 asks ‘What do you count as cheating on a partner?’
Bottom pinching 20.4%
Texting 22.6%
Snogging 75.6%
Going out for a drink 23.4%
Oral sex 71%
Penetrative sex 78.1%
We have an open relationship 4.8%
This suggests those responding had very clear views that anything other than kissing someone else is cheating. This contrasts with some of the answers given in question 8, and particularly with the response to question 4. Making the survey is a curious mix of liberal and conservative views on sex, which will influence participant responses.
In a reliable sex survey questions should not lead participants but should form a comprehensive narrative so each answer compliments the next one and the survey does not contradict itself. Each question should be clear and researchers should have an awareness of how different questions will be used individually and together in analysis.
In this current survey it seems like a range of unrelated questions with potentially sensationalist outcomes are put together in no particular order and with no real sense of what is being measured or what portrait of UK sexual behaviour is being captured.
Sadly this is a standard approach to poor survey design and is a further indicator of why such findings should not inform our sexual lives.
You can read my previous criticisms of past Durex surveys here
Concerns about the Durex Global Sex Survey
Durex Global Sex Survey – back once again with the international sex contest
Salami Slicing Sex Survey Data
Buy our sex products. Oops, sorry, I mean check out our International Sex Survey
Since this is a commercial venture and clearly not designed to truly represent our sex lives, is there any reason to get upset about it? Yes, because the Durex surveys are pretty much the main port of call to any journalist writing a sex feature. They use the data to underpin surveys with those obligatory sex statistics required by editors. This in turn influences how the public understand sex and relationships.
Durex is currently asking sex educators/researchers like me to share their ideas about sex/relationships. The company is paying £150 for an hour of a professional’s time as part of their internal product development programme. Given the potential barriers to our sex lives and our profession as educators/researchers posed by misleading promotional surveys I’d advise sexual health professionals to refuse to work with the company. That is until Durex decides to either drop their survey in its current promotional format, or agrees to revising survey so it is ethical, accurate and actually tells us something about our sex lives.
* With thanks to Ed Yong from Not Exactly Rocket Science for this clever caption for today’s blog, (in case you don’t get the joke it’s based on a previous marketing slogan for condoms ‘ribbed for her pleasure’).
‘Rigged for her displeasure’* – Problems with Durex’s UK Sex Survey 2010Related posts