{"title":"新型男性避孕药具的开发导致的心理问题。","authors":"A E Reading","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>I am grateful to Dr. Fielding for his comments on male sexuality, which our paper (Bulletin, October 1982) prompted. However, I fear his concerns to be as misplaced as his citation ('unpublished observations') will remain elusive. The study cited in the paper will be published in full elsewhere (Journal of Behavioral Assessment). No assumptions were made about the nature of the processes under investigation; we were merely interested in the reliability of different recording methods. Our parameters were defined by previous research carried out by the World Health Organization's Special Program of Research in Human Reproduction (1982), with the relationship of morning erections to bladder distension duly acknowledged. Dr. Fielding's remaining points are equally misleading. Although we may all speculate on the merits or demerits of retarding ejaculation, our preference would be to obtain data, particularly in view of the cross-cultural significance of such information. Similarly, that spermatozoa constitute less than 1% of the total volume of ejaculatory fluid is academic in the absence of precise methods of abolishing spermatogenesis without impairing sexuality or health status. The question as to the potential acceptability of hypothetical methods decreasing volume of ejaculate remain, especially when considering the important distinction between objective and subjective appraisals of change (Marshall, 1977).</p>","PeriodicalId":84344,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the British Psychological Society","volume":"36 ","pages":"90-1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1983-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychological issues resulting from the development of new male contraceptives.\",\"authors\":\"A E Reading\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>I am grateful to Dr. Fielding for his comments on male sexuality, which our paper (Bulletin, October 1982) prompted. However, I fear his concerns to be as misplaced as his citation ('unpublished observations') will remain elusive. The study cited in the paper will be published in full elsewhere (Journal of Behavioral Assessment). No assumptions were made about the nature of the processes under investigation; we were merely interested in the reliability of different recording methods. Our parameters were defined by previous research carried out by the World Health Organization's Special Program of Research in Human Reproduction (1982), with the relationship of morning erections to bladder distension duly acknowledged. Dr. Fielding's remaining points are equally misleading. Although we may all speculate on the merits or demerits of retarding ejaculation, our preference would be to obtain data, particularly in view of the cross-cultural significance of such information. Similarly, that spermatozoa constitute less than 1% of the total volume of ejaculatory fluid is academic in the absence of precise methods of abolishing spermatogenesis without impairing sexuality or health status. The question as to the potential acceptability of hypothetical methods decreasing volume of ejaculate remain, especially when considering the important distinction between objective and subjective appraisals of change (Marshall, 1977).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":84344,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the British Psychological Society\",\"volume\":\"36 \",\"pages\":\"90-1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1983-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the British Psychological Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the British Psychological Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
我很感谢菲尔丁博士对男性性行为的评论,这是我们的论文(公报,1982年10月)提出的。然而,我担心他的担忧是错位的,因为他的引用(“未发表的观察”)将仍然难以捉摸。论文中引用的研究将全文发表在其他地方(Journal of Behavioral Assessment)。没有对调查过程的性质作出任何假设;我们只是对不同记录方法的可靠性感兴趣。我们的参数是根据世界卫生组织人类生殖研究特别计划(1982)先前的研究确定的,并充分承认了早晨勃起与膀胱膨胀的关系。菲尔丁博士剩下的观点同样具有误导性。虽然我们都可以推测延迟射精的优点或缺点,但我们更倾向于获得数据,特别是考虑到这些信息的跨文化意义。同样,精子在射精液总量中所占的比例不到1%,这是一种学术观点,因为缺乏在不损害性行为或健康状况的情况下消除精子发生的精确方法。关于减少射精量的假设方法的潜在可接受性的问题仍然存在,特别是当考虑到客观和主观评价变化之间的重要区别时(Marshall, 1977)。
Psychological issues resulting from the development of new male contraceptives.
I am grateful to Dr. Fielding for his comments on male sexuality, which our paper (Bulletin, October 1982) prompted. However, I fear his concerns to be as misplaced as his citation ('unpublished observations') will remain elusive. The study cited in the paper will be published in full elsewhere (Journal of Behavioral Assessment). No assumptions were made about the nature of the processes under investigation; we were merely interested in the reliability of different recording methods. Our parameters were defined by previous research carried out by the World Health Organization's Special Program of Research in Human Reproduction (1982), with the relationship of morning erections to bladder distension duly acknowledged. Dr. Fielding's remaining points are equally misleading. Although we may all speculate on the merits or demerits of retarding ejaculation, our preference would be to obtain data, particularly in view of the cross-cultural significance of such information. Similarly, that spermatozoa constitute less than 1% of the total volume of ejaculatory fluid is academic in the absence of precise methods of abolishing spermatogenesis without impairing sexuality or health status. The question as to the potential acceptability of hypothetical methods decreasing volume of ejaculate remain, especially when considering the important distinction between objective and subjective appraisals of change (Marshall, 1977).