Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Perception of orgasmic intensity changes between clitorally and vaginally activated orgasm: a psychometric analysis using the Orgasmometer scale

International Journal of Impotence Research volume 37, pages 550–557 (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Female orgasmic experience and intensity depend on several biological, anatomical, cultural, psychological and relational factors, yet studies have not explored how receptiveness to different stimulations (clitoral, vaginal, or both) affects subjectively perceived orgasmic intensity. Using data from sexually active, heterosexual women in two Italian nationwide surveys from 2021 and 2023, we evaluated orgasmic experience, sexual and psychological well-being using validated psychometric tools (FSFI, Orgasmometer, GAD-7, PHQ-9), also considering several socio-demographic factors, aiming to identify changes in terms of subjectively perceived orgasmic intensity according to different stimulations. The two surveys (Sex@COVID study, from April 7th to May 4th, 2020, n = 6821; and the FATHER Study, from May 12th to June 12th, 2023, n = 1845) were hosted on a dedicated website and were advertised through social media, radio broadcast, and interviews on national newspapers. Among 1,799 women meeting inclusion criteria, 40.7% primarily experienced clitorally activated orgasms (CAO, n = 733), 18% vaginally activated orgasms (VAO, n = 324), and 41.2% both types (Clitorally and Vaginally Activated Orgasms, CaVAO, n = 742). Significant psycho-sexological differences between the two studies were observed, with additional evidence suggesting the impact of lockdown and social distancing on sexual outcomes. Women experiencing CaVAO attained the highest FSFI and Orgasmometer scores, followed by those with VAO, and lastly, those with CAO (p < 0.001 for both). Regression analysis confirmed the same trend for Orgasmometer scores (R2 = 0.247, p < 0.001), also highlighting the relevance of sexual dysfunction (according to FSFI, β = −1.34 ± 0.08, p < 0.001) for orgasmic intensity. Lastly, women preferring masturbation to partnered sexual activity had lower orgasmic intensity (β = −0.41 ± 0.07, p < 0.001). Age, psychological status and relationship status had no significant effect on the model. Despite some limitations, this is the first study addressing the association between receptiveness to different stimulations and orgasmic intensity on a large sample using validated psychometric instruments.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Orgasmometer scores according to the different preferred way of reaching orgasm.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Jannini EA, Whipple B, Kingsberg SA, Buisson O, Foldès P, Vardi Y. Who’s afraid of the G-spot? J Sex Med. 2010;7:25–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Masters HW, Johnson EV, Reproductive Biology Research Foundation (U.S.). Human sexual response. Boston: Little, Brown; 1966.

  3. Jannini EA, Rubio-Casillas A, Whipple B, Buisson O, Komisaruk BR, Brody S. Female orgasm(s): one, two, several. J Sex Med. 2012;9:956–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Singer J, Singer I. Types of female orgasm. J Sex Res. 1972;8:255–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gruenwald I, Lowenstein L, Gartman I, Vardi Y. Physiological changes in female genital sensation during sexual stimulation. J Sex Med. 2007;4:390–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gravina GL, Brandetti F, Martini P, Carosa E, Di Stasi SM, Morano S, et al. Measurement of the thickness of the urethrovaginal space in women with or without vaginal orgasm. J Sex Med. 2008;5:610–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Levin R. The physiology and pathophysiology of the female orgasm. In: Women’s Sexual Function and Dysfunction. CRC Press; 2005, Boca Raton, FL, pp 228–35.

  8. Jannini EA, Buisson O, Rubio-Casillas A. Beyond the G-spot: clitourethrovaginal complex anatomy in female orgasm. Nat Rev Urol. 2014;11:531–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Komisaruk BR, Wise N, Frangos E, Liu W-C, Allen K, Brody S. Women’s clitoris, vagina, and cervix mapped on the sensory cortex: fMRI evidence. J Sex Med. 2011;8:2822–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Fugl-Meyer KS, Oberg K, Lundberg PO, Lewin B, Fugl-Meyer A. On orgasm, sexual techniques, and erotic perceptions in 18- to 74-year-old Swedish women. J Sex Med. 2006;3:56–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pfaus JG, Quintana GR, Mac Cionnaith C, Parada M. The whole versus the sum of some of the parts: toward resolving the apparent controversy of clitoral versus vaginal orgasms. Socioaffect Neurosci Psychol. 2016;6:32578.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Herbenick D, Fu T-C, jane, Arter J, Sanders SA, Dodge B. Women’s experiences with genital touching, sexual pleasure, and orgasm: Results from a U.s. probability sample of women ages 18 to 94. J Sex Marital Ther. 2018;44:201–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Vieira-Baptista P, Lima-Silva J, Preti M, Xavier J, Vendeira P, Stockdale CK. G-spot: Fact or fiction?: A systematic Review. Sex Med. 2021;9:1–1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Mollaioli D, Sansone A, Colonnello E, Limoncin E, Ciocca G, Vignozzi L, et al. Do We Still Believe There Is a G-spot? Current Sexual Health Rep. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11930-021-00311-w.

  15. Mollaioli D, Sansone A, Ciocca G, Limoncin E, Colonnello E, Di Lorenzo G, et al. Benefits of Sexual Activity on Psychological, Relational, and Sexual Health During the COVID-19 Breakout. J Sex Med. 2021;18:35–49.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Suschinsky KD, Chivers ML. The relationship between sexual concordance and orgasm consistency in women. J Sex Res. 2018;55:704–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tavares IM, Laan ETM, Nobre PJ. Cognitive-affective dimensions of female orgasm: The role of automatic thoughts and affect during sexual activity. J Sex Med. 2017;14:818–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Moura CV, Tavares IM, Nobre PJ. Cognitive-affective factors and female orgasm: A comparative study on women with and without orgasm difficulties. J Sex Med. 2020;17:2220–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Leeners B, Hengartner MP, Rössler W, Ajdacic-Gross V, Angst J. The role of psychopathological and personality covariates in orgasmic difficulties: A prospective longitudinal evaluation in a cohort of women from age 30 to 50. J Sex Med. 2014;11:2928–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mariano A, Di Lorenzo G, Jannini TB, Santini R, Bertinelli E, Siracusano A, et al. Medical comorbidities in 181 patients with bipolar disorder vs. Schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders: Findings from a single-center, retrospective study from an acute inpatients psychiatric unit. Front Psychiatry. 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.702789.

  21. Jannini TB, Rossi R, Sconci V, Bonanni RL, De Michele F, Cavallo G, et al. Italian validation of Arizona Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX) on patients suffering from psychotic spectrum disorders. Riv Psichiatr. 2022;57:18–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Alarcon-Rodriguez R, García-Álvarez R, Fadul-Calderon R, Romero-Del Rey R, Requena-Mullor M, Read Tejada M, et al. The relationship between female orgasmic disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and depression in Dominican women. J Sex Med. 2024;21:614–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rosen R, Brown C, Heiman J, Leiblum S, Meston C, Shabsigh R, et al. The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): a multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2000;26:191–208.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Nappi RE, Albani F, Vaccaro P, Gardella B, Salonia A, Chiovato L, et al. Use of the Italian translation of the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) in routine gynecological practice. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2008;24:214–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. American Psychiatric Association Publishing; 2022.

  26. Mollaioli D, Di Sante S, Limoncin E, Ciocca G, Gravina GL, Maseroli E, et al. Validation of a Visual Analogue Scale to measure the subjective perception of orgasmic intensity in females: The Orgasmometer-F. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0202076.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The PHQ-9. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:606–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Löwe B, Decker O, Müller S, Brähler E, Schellberg D, Herzog W, et al. Validation and standardization of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7) in the general population. Med Care. 2008;46:266–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bolgeo T, Di Matteo R, Simonelli N, Dal Molin A, Lusignani M, Bassola B, et al. Psychometric properties and measurement invariance of the 7-item General Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) in an Italian coronary heart disease population. J Affect Disord. 2023;334:213–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mazzotti E, Fassone G, Picardi A, Sagoni E, Ramieri L, Lega, I et al. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) for the screening of psychiatric disorders: a validation study versus the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV axis I (SCID-I). Official J Italian Soc Psychopathol. 2003. https://old.jpsychopathol.it/article/il-patient-health-questionnaire-phq-per-lo-screening-dei-disturbi-psichiatrici-uno-studio-di-validazione-nei-confronti-della-intervista-clinica-strutturata-per-il-dsm-iv-asse-i-scid-i/. Accessed 2 Aug 2024.

  31. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang A-G. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41:1149–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lavie-Ajayi M, Joffe H. Social representations of female orgasm. J Health Psychol. 2009;14:98–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Shaeer O, Skakke D, Giraldi A, Shaeer E, Shaeer K. Female orgasm and overall sexual function and habits: A descriptive study of a cohort of U.s. women. J Sex Med. 2020;17:1133–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Arias-Castillo L, García L, García-Perdomo HA. The complexity of female orgasm and ejaculation. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022;308:427–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Buisson O, Jannini EA. Pilot echographic study of the differences in clitoral involvement following clitoral or vaginal sexual stimulation. J Sex Med. 2013;10:2734–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Nimbi FM, Galizia R, Rossi R, Limoncin E, Ciocca G, Fontanesi L, et al. The biopsychosocial model and the sex-positive approach: An integrative perspective for sexology and general health care. Sex Res Social Policy. 2022;19:894–908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Basson R. Human sex-response cycles. J Sex Marital Ther. 2001;27:33–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Maunder L, Micanovic N, Huberman JS, Chivers ML. Orgasm consistency and its relationship to women’s self-reported and genital sexual response. Can J Hum Sex. 2022;31:32–45.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Costa RM, Brody S. Sexual satisfaction, relationship satisfaction, and health are associated with greater frequency of penile-vaginal intercourse. Arch. Sex. Behav. 2012;41:9–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Brody S, Weiss P. Simultaneous penile-vaginal intercourse orgasm is associated with satisfaction (sexual, life, partnership, and mental health). J Sex Med. 2011;8:734–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Berenguer C, Rebôlo C, Costa RM. Interoceptive awareness, alexithymia, and sexual function. J Sex Marital Ther. 2019;45:729–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Brody S. Alexithymia is inversely associated with women’s frequency of vaginal intercourse. Arch Sex Behav. 2003;32:73–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Pascoal PM, Byers ES, Alvarez M-J, Santos-Iglesias P, Nobre PJ, Pereira CR, et al. A dyadic approach to understanding the link between sexual functioning and sexual satisfaction in heterosexual couples. J Sex Res. 2018;55:1155–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Costa RM, Brody S. Women’s relationship quality is associated with specifically penile-vaginal intercourse orgasm and frequency. J Sex Marital Ther. 2007;33:319–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Rowland DL, Sullivan SL, Hevesi K, Hevesi B. Orgasmic latency and Related Parameters in Women During Partnered and Masturbatory Sex. J Sex Med. 2018;15:1463–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Brody S, Klapilova K, Krejčová L. More frequent vaginal orgasm is associated with experiencing greater excitement from deep vaginal stimulation. J Sex Med. 2013;10:1730–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Tavares IM, Laan ETM, Nobre PJ. Sexual Inhibition is a vulnerability factor for orgasm problems in women. J Sex Med. 2018;15:361–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Santomauro DF, Mantilla Herrera AM, Shadid J, Zheng P, Ashbaugh C, Pigott DM, et al. Global prevalence and burden of depressive and anxiety disorders in 204 countries and territories in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet. 2021;398:1700–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rossi R, Socci V, Jannini TB, D’Aurizio G, Mensi S, Pacitti F, et al. Changes in mental health outcomes in the general population 14 months into the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy. J Affect Disord. 2023;325:35–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Pacitti F, Socci V, D’Aurizio G, Jannini TB, Rossi A, Siracusano A, et al. Obsessive-compulsive symptoms among the general population during the first COVID-19 epidemic wave in Italy. J Psychiatr Res. 2022;153:18–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Fotinos K, Sansone A, Greifenberger A, Katzman MA, Jannini TB, Reisman Y, et al. Pornography and sexual function in the post-pandemic period: a narrative review from psychological, psychiatric, and sexological perspectives. Int J Impot Res. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-023-00812-3.

  52. Pennanen-Iire C, Prereira-Lourenço M, Padoa A, Ribeirinho A, Samico A, Gressler M, et al. Sexual health implications of COVID-19 pandemic. Sex Med Rev. 2021;9:3–14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Brotto LA, Jabs F, Brown N, Milani S, Zdaniuk B. Impact of COVID-19 related stress on sexual desire and behavior in a Canadian sample. Int J Sex Health. 2022;34:1–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Sansone A, Mollaioli D, Ciocca G, Limoncin E, Colonnello E, Vena W, et al. Addressing male sexual and reproductive health in the wake of COVID-19 outbreak. J Endocrinol Invest. 2021;44:223–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Sansone A, Mollaioli D, Cignarelli A, Ciocca G, Limoncin E, Colonnello E, et al. Male Sexual Health and Sexual Behaviors during the First National COVID-19 Lockdown in a Western Country: A Real-Life, Web-Based Study. Sexes. 2021;2:293–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Sansone A, Mollaioli D, Limoncin E, Ciocca G, Bắc NH, Cao TN, et al. The Sexual Long COVID (SLC): Erectile dysfunction as a biomarker of Systemic Complications for COVID-19 Long Haulers. Sex Med Rev. 2022;10:271–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Toldam NE, Graugaard C, Meyer R, Thomsen L, Dreier S, Jannini EA, et al. Sexual Health During COVID-19: A scoping review. Sex Med Rev. 2022;10:714–53.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Seehuus M, Fertig M, Handy AB, Clifton J, Stanton AM. The impact of COVID-19 and long COVID on sexual function in cisgender women. J Sex Med. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/jsxmed/qdad155.

Download references

Funding

For the present research, AS and EAJ have been partially supported for this work by the Italian Ministry of University PRIN grant # 2017S9KTNE_002. This work is also supported by #NEXTGENERATIONEU (NGEU) and funded by the Ministry of University and Research (MUR), National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP), project MNESYS (PE0000006) – A Multiscale integrated approach to the study of the nervous system in health and disease (DN. 1553 11.10.2022) (Recipient: EAJ).

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Andrea Sansone, Daniele Mollaioli

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Rome Tor Vergata, Chair of Endocrinology and Medical Sexology (ENDOSEX), Department of Systems Medicine, Rome, Italy

    Andrea Sansone, Elena Colonnello, Fiorenza Pesce & Emmanuele A. Jannini

  2. University of Messina, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Messina, Italy

    Daniele Mollaioli

  3. Sapienza University of Rome, Department of Experimental Medicine, Section of Medical Pathophysiology, Food Science and Endocrinology, Rome, Italy

    Elena Colonnello

  4. Sapienza University of Rome, Section of Sexual Psychopathology, Department of Dynamic and Clinical Psychology, and Health Studies, Rome, Italy

    Giacomo Ciocca & Erika Limoncin

  5. University of Rome Tor Vergata, Section of Psychiatry, Dept. of Systems Medicine, Rome, Italy

    Tommaso B. Jannini

Authors
  1. Andrea Sansone
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniele Mollaioli
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elena Colonnello
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Giacomo Ciocca
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Erika Limoncin
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tommaso B. Jannini
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Fiorenza Pesce
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Emmanuele A. Jannini
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, AS and DM; methodology, AS and DM; software, AS and DM; validation, DM and EAJ; formal analysis, AS; investigation, AS and DM; resources, DM and EAJ; data curation, AS and DM; writing—original draft preparation, AS, DM, EC, GC, EL, TBJ, FP; writing—review and editing, AS, DM, EC, GC, EL, FP, TBJ, EAJ; visualization, AS; supervision, EAJ; project administration, EAJ; funding acquisition, EAJ. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanuele A. Jannini.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of Sapienza – University of Rome (protocol n. 0000593, July 10, 2020).

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sansone, A., Mollaioli, D., Colonnello, E. et al. Perception of orgasmic intensity changes between clitorally and vaginally activated orgasm: a psychometric analysis using the Orgasmometer scale. Int J Impot Res 37, 550–557 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00999-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41443-024-00999-z

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links