Masters And Johnson Observation

Masters and Johnson used the method of direct observation for their work. They were able to observe and record responses of participating subjects in a laboratory setting. Masters and Johnson focused their observation about learning and understanding about physiological changes during sexual arousal. The participants of their research sample came from an academic community with above-average intelligence and a higher socioeconomic background. The participants were sexually responsive volunteers and consisted of 382 women and 312 men. As a result of their sample, this research does not accurately describe the entire U.S. population as a whole. When obtaining and recording their data, Masters and Johnson used photographic equipment and instruments to assess and gauge muscular and vascular changes throughout the body. In addition to this, they used direct observation and a measuring device to record changes in sex organs. In the laboratory environment, Masters and Johnson recorded responses to masturbation, coitus with a partner, and stimulation of the breasts alone, which was then followed-up with an extensive interview for each participant. From their findings, they concluded, “there is no biological difference between clitoral and vaginal orgasms” (40). Masters and Johnson were also able to identify four phases in the sexual response patters for both men and women. These four phases were, “excitement, plateau, orgasm, and resolution” (163). Both the men and women observed had …show more content…
Masters and Johnson were able to observe and record compared to relying on subjective reports of past experiences from their participants. One disadvantage however, was that if there was an influence on the participant’s behavior by having an observer. Even if the observer was extremely discreet, the participant is still aware of being observed. Overall, this research was incredibly valuable and is still referred to