Human sexuality and social learning theory: challenging biological essentialism

Human sexuality is by nature a complex issue that requires in depth exploration from many different perspectives. There are many elements of human sexuality that have been explored over time. Many researchers have focused on examining human sexuality from a biological perspective. In fact, much of the research that has focused on human sexuality has focused on the notion that human sexuality is a biologically driven process. These theories have been described as "essentialist" "traditional" or "classical" in nature and explain human sexuality as the product of biologically or naturally driven and immutable processes.

Dyrne & Hogben (1999) in their work "Using Social Learning Theory to Explain Individual Differences in Human Sexuality" approach the concept of human sexuality and human sexual behavior from a social learning theory approach. This article is of interest because it presents a new model for exploring human sexuality and the reasons that humans act in a particular manner with regard to sexual behavior.

The social learning approach to exploring human sexuality adds new insight and suggest that human sexuality should be explored more from a cognitive perspective than a biological one. It goes 'against the grain' in the field of human sexuality by proposing that humans have the ability to reinforce their own experiences with regard to sexuality.

It also suggests that humans act on a rewards-based system. While it is similar to traditional and classical models of conditioning, it is also very different, because it suggests that the individual is entirely in charge of their decisions and roles with regard to sexuality. The article has broad ranging implications for future research with regard to human sexuality.

Analysis of Human Sexuality from the Social Learning Approach

The authors attempt to not simply describe human sexuality, but instead to provide a model for explaining the variation that occurs in human behavior without having to refer to 'psychodynamic models' as the authors literally state.

According to Hogben & Dyrne (1999), social learning theory incorporates elements of "operant conditioning and social conditioning" and is founded on the principles of personality theory, assuming that behavior is "goal directed" and emphasized by expectations of rewards and perceived values of rewards (Dyrne & Hogben, 1999: 58). This assumes that with regard to human sexuality, an individual will analyze the rewards for a particular behavior before deciding whether or not to model that behavior.

Social learning theory also presents the notion that certain behaviors might be chosen over others without direct reinforcement, as is the case with other learning theories including classical learning theory and operant learning theories (Dyrne & Hogben, 1999).

As the authors state quite clearly, "sexual pleasure and expectances about sexual pleasure" act as important reinforcers for any particular behavior (Dyrne & Hogben, 1999). The authors use a large body of evidence to support their assumptions with regard to social learning theory, particularly the work of early researchers including Rotter (1954) who supported the social learning model and assumed that individuals create a hierarchy of expectancies, where love and affection are often placed first and foremost in most people's pyramid of importance.

The researchers also review other theories that explain human sexuality in terms of popularity, including those of Belsky, Steinberg & Draper (1991) who support a biosocial model of human sexuality that adopts both behavioral and psychodynamic approaches.

The social learning theory is further supported by the work of Bandura & Mischel, who also proposed that people act and react based on their desire to achieve a perceived outcome, and based on their assessment of whether or not the need justified the means, or whether the reward to be gained was worthy of pursuit.

Models that go against the social learning perspective provided by the authors include the classical conditioning model, which up until this point in time has been the leading theory with regard to human sexuality and the origins of sexual behavior (Dyrne & Hogben, 1999). The researchers cite Wolpe (1958) as among the early researchers that supported the use of classical conditioning and systematic desensitization in an attempt to "replace negative responses to erotic cues with positive ones" (Dyrne & Hogben, 1999).

The researchers also point out that prior to the adoption of the social learning theory and popularity of this theory that most of sexuality research had relied primarily upon "psychodynamic conceptualization" that depicted sexuality as a biological drive or force. Supporting this premise the authors quote Gagnon (1975). However, the social learning approach as described by Dyrne & Hogben takes a very different approach to sexuality and human impulses, and treats sexuality as a cognitively oriented part of human nature rather than a biologically driven one.

The authors claim that what separates social learning theory from traditional and classical theories is "the combination of personality and environmental constructs used to make predictions about sexual behaviors" (Dyrne & Hogben, 1999:58). Social learning requires that researchers focus on varying levels of human behavior, not necessarily biological behavior. It also assumes that individuals have the ability to provide themselves with their own reinforcement, gained in the way of rewards or individuals perceived values of a particular reward once they acquire something.

As the authors point out, the social learning approach to human sexuality is not a new one, thought the social learning approach has been applied to describe human behavior from many perspectives outside of sexuality, as was the case for Rotter and other early behaviorists and researchers. In fact a majority of the early work on social learning theory focused on human behavior in general, rather than sexuality. Nonetheless Dyrne & Hogben have incorporated this research to their own and utilized it successfully to help describe a social learning approach to sexuality.

Dyrne & Hogben step outside the traditional school of thought with regard to human sexuality in order to provide adequate insight into the cognitive components of human sexuality. They do not suggest that human sexuality is only a result of cognitive function, but rather suggest the importance of examining human sexuality from both a cognitive and physiological standpoint. Certainly one cannot argue that biological factors are indeed related to sexuality as a whole. However the notion that human sexuality is influenced to a large extent by cognitive processes is also a very tangible theory, and one that is supported by other research.

Analysis of Article and Theory

Social learning theory presents a modern and insightful method of exploring human sexuality. I found the article interesting because it is based on patterns that one might observe in any culture. People do naturally seem to have a tendency to follow patterns with regard to human behavior, including sexual behavior. People by nature are more prone to seek out those things that satisfy not simply basic needs, but also the need for reward and satisfaction. No where else is the case for this more strong than perhaps with regard to human sexuality.

The hypothesis and case for social learning theory presented by Dyrne & Hogben is backed by scientific theory and the works of early researchers that examined social learning theory with regard to human behavior in general. However, the authors do fail to explore social learning theory with regard to actual cultures and patterns of human sexual behavior.

However, this gap in research is actually filled by other researchers that have explored the social learning perspective, including the work of Delemater & Hyde (1998) specifically, who discuss human sexuality and social learning theory with regard to specific practices and sexuality preferences among different cultures.

The article has opened a whole new perspective with regard to human sexuality. Whereas in the past I might have assumed that a large portion of human sexuality focused on natural and biological impulses, Dyrne & Hogben make a strong case that human sexuality is actually a combination of many different forces, including cognitive ones.

It seems natural in a world where social influence and cultural traditions influence so many aspects of ones behavior that they would also influence one's sexuality. However, there is still a strong case for classical and traditional theories of human sexuality, and one can't simply discount years of research that also links biological and genetic factors with human sexuality.

Suffice to say that the best approach to human sexuality and explaining human behaviors may be a multi-disciplinary approach, one that acknowledges the importance of the physiological components of human sexuality as much as it recognizes the cognitive and social factors that influence one's behaviors and preferences.

There is a strong body of evidence and a good case presented by Dyrne & Hogben that cognitive factors can serve as adequate reinforcement for certain sexual behaviors and preferences. One may simply conclude that there is not a 'one size fits all' approach to human sexuality, much like there is not a one size fits all approach to any aspect of human emotional or behavioral development, whether related to sexuality or some other aspect or function of human behavior.

Human sexuality is a complex process that as mentioned at the start of this analysis requires a multi-disciplinary approach. Dyrne & Hogben have further emphasized the need for a multi-disciplinary approach by presenting a new model for explaining human sexuality from a cognitive and social perspective. Based on their analysis one may assume that human sexuality is not simply a derivation of complex impulses and natural phenomena but rather the result of a combination of both biological and social processes.

Their research has expanded my own views of human sexuality and caused me to question traditional perspectives. The research also opens the door for many new ways of exploring human behavior and sexual impulses, and might even open new avenues for treating problems associated with human sexuality.

References:

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Belsky, J., Steinberg, L., & Draper, P. (1991). Childhood experience, interpersonal development, and reproductive strategy: An evolutionary theory of socialization. Child Development, 62, 647-670.

Delamater, J.D. & Hyde, J.S. (1998). "Essentialism vs. Social Constructionism in the study of human sexuality." The Journal of Sex Research, 35(1):10

Dyrne, D. & Hogben, M. (1999). "Using social learning theory to explain individual differences in human sexuality." The Journal of Sex Research: 35(1): 58

Copy referenced article:

Using social learning theory to explain individual differences in human sexuality

by Matthew Hogben, Donn Dyrne

Current social learning theory (sometimes referred to as modeling, observational learning, or vicarious learning) incorporates elements of operant conditioning (or radical behaviorism) and social cognition. The modern genesis of social learning theory is found in personality theory, specifically, Rotter's desire to explain individual variation in behavior without reference to psychodynamic models (Rotter, 1954). Rotter (1954, 1982) assumed that behavior is goal directed and emphasized expectations of reward and perceived values of rewards as the basis for modeling