This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Psychology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Pornography Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Sexology and sexuality High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. Anthropology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Sociology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Conservatism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

1. The section about higher STD rates for sex workers is not contextualized within the article which seems to be mainly about the consumption of pornography and not the impact on producers (sex workers). Challenges faced by sex workers should be more clearly be delineated in the intro if the article is going to discuss it, sex workers are also impacted by societal views on sex workers and pornography and not only the pornography itself.

2. The intro has this sentence: "Consumption of pornographic material is associated with negative and positive impacts"

Where does the article mention the positive effects? If we don't delve into positive effects in the article then we should just remove that sentence.

3. The intro briefly states "some people may become addicted to it" but no context is provided. Some studies suggest that a small percentage of individuals may experience problematic or compulsive patterns of porn consumption that could be classified as an addiction. However, it's important to note that not everyone who consumes porn will develop an addiction, and people can engage in such behavior without negative consequences. Drocj (talk) 08:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I realized that we had to outline the changes we made for the wiki instead of putting it just in the edit review/version history

So here is the comprehensive list of changes that I made to reach the most recent version of this Effects of Pornography article: (FROM TOP TO BOTTOM)

1. Finalized the Lead to encompass the definition of pornography, along with a breakdown of different effects that are going to be discussed in the article
2. Next to "associations of addiction", i added the fact that theories are going to be discussed in the article also (last little section was kept)
3. Added " A Few Key Theories" heading, Sexuality Theory umbrella heading, SEXUAL STRATEGIES THEORY, REWARD AND CONDITIONING THEORY, SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY.
4. Social Exchange Theory Model (Picture) was added to break up reading pace.
5. some words are changed in Sexual Scripting section to improve flow and clarity ( Last small section of Sexual Scripting was untouched)
6. Added Scripting Framework Section
7. METHODOLOGY LIMITATIONS HEADING and its contents were removed, did not make sense as methodologies were not mentioned exclusively
8. " Added a Psychological Effects and its Studies" Section (FIRST PARAGRAPH THAT MENTIONS ADDICTIONS UNTOUCHED) , might need future revision
9. Added a specific "studies" heading ( second paragraph was untouched and last paragraph of this section was broken up for clarity)
10. Added a "Psychological Effects" Image
11. Added Cognitive Effects heading and a few paragraphs to expand the concept
12. Split the previous paragraph into its own section of Contradicting Views
13. added a few meanings to the abbreviations ( Withdrawal Symptoms Untouched)
14. Added a "pornographic control proposals" section title ( contents untouched)
15. MENTAL BLOCKS heading added and provided a lead paragraph to introduce the specific section topic
16. added a man and "masculinity" section heading and provided word clarity in its first paragraph ( second paragraph of this section is untouched, this section might need a little bit more sources, did not have time, added citation 39)
17. added a "women and self-consciousness" section heading, provided clarity to the second paragraph of the section ( FIRST AND THIRD PARAGRAPH UNTOUCHED)
18. changed a few words around in the last tiny section of the Women's section
19. EXPANDED both the Delay Discounting and Dehumanization section
20. Public health section was NOT my addition ( but did improve wording)
21. changed up the words and improved the flow of the Sexual desires section (first and last paragraph of section was untouched)
22. Pamela Anderson Line was removed as I felt it didn't fit with the section at all.
23. Improved wording in Sexual Function section ( also added citation 49 to back claims)
24. Improved wording in Sexual Satisfaction section ( last paragraph is untouched, welcome to re-check)
25. removed redundant wording of the first paragraph in sexual preferences section
26. improved wording and flow for the other parts of this section, although it is split into two fue to it being a little too long
27. Added Sexual Preferences Image
28. Added Aggression and Extreme content section (content basically unchanged aside from simplification of wording)
29. Sexual violence controlled studies section 1st paragraph rewritten for maximum clarity
30. Meta analysis paragraph and Emily F Rothman paragraph simplified
31. The DIAGRAM was NOT my addition, might have to be checked for accuracy.
32. changed a few words in the Ferguson and Hartley paragraph, 5th paragraph UNTOUCHED
33. tiny sentence in the 6th Paragraph condensed with the Emily F Rothman Paragraph
34. Epidemiological studies section only simplified but generally untouched
35. added a Teen Dating Violence study and expanded into a paragraph
36. added the white ribbon imagery
37. "pornography is not the cause of Rape" statement removed , it was a stand alone and did not make sense.
38. improved wording on First paragraph of Effects of reltionships Heading
39. also improved wording on the first paragraph of Relationship Satisfaction (Second Paragraph Untouched)
40. improved flow for the other parts of this section
41. removed redundant wording in the communications section
42. added a "pornography mirroring and Consent" Section
43. added citations 115-119 for the consent section
44. added the symbol of consent image
45. Changed the Heading of Occupational safety to " Pornographic effects to adult film performers"
46. added a famous cases section detailing the adult stars that have exited the industry ( citation 121-123)
47. added the Pornhub image because it is mentioned in the section.
48. First paragraph and Block quote of Effects on Adolescence Heading Untouched (further research might be needed in the future)
49. rest of the section have edited words to improve flow

I have been tackling this article for about 2 months for my Wiki Project, I have done all I could in the course of the semester and will probably have some mistakes. I've updated the article with the sources I could find so that they're all backed with some kind of proof. I added pictures as well to break off the text walls for an easier read. I am still a student and will not have perfect judgment as to what is best for the article, but I have done my best to improve it

Thankyou

( should any changes need to be made, please feel free to edit after :) ) Raiyaka (talk) 08:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken a look at the large number of additions you made to the article. Unfortunately, most of them are primary source studies. Wikipedia is based upon secondary independent sources, namely books and academic reviews. Primary source studies are problematic because they have not been assessed in the context of the broader scientific literature and are prone to failing replication.

In addition, most of the content you have added is based upon associational studies. Correlation is not causation. An association between poor relationship satisfaction and porn use does not prove that porn reduces relationship satisfaction. It could be that those in unsatisfying relationships are more likely to watch porn.

A lot of this is going to need trimming back. Zenomonoz (talk) 22:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, a WP:RS is WP:CITED that the association between poor relationship satisfaction and porn use only holds for white men (that is: not for women, and not for men of other races). At the Dutch Wikipedia such edit was reverted together with deleting the association claim, because the recorded effect was too small.

Being statistically significant and explaining much of the variation are two very different matters. You could have a result which is thoroughly significant, but only explains a few percents of the variation. I didn't do the math, but my two cents are that the Dutchies aren't far off.

That's the problem with porn research in general: causality cannot be shown, and most of the variation simply does not get explained (measured correlations are from small to modest). tgeorgescu (talk) 02:28, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think most of this primary source stuff should be trimmed out, we need to replace it with reviews/books. There have been quite a few recently. Zenomonoz (talk) 03:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IP because of revert: while porn could incite some mentally unstable men to commit rape, it has the opposite effect upon the vast majority of men. That's why I reverted you. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:01, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]