Thread by @YourBrainOnPorn

New study claims that NOT using porn has negative effects. Link: psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-20…
How is this possible? The study used a questionnaire (the PCES) that was designed to find that porn use is largely beneficial for most everyone.
AT LEAST 10 MORE TWEETS FOLLOW.....

I consider the study that created the PCES to be the most egregious porn study ever published (Hald & Malamuth, 2008). This page contains a critique of the PCES by YBOP and by a psychology professor: yourbrainonporn.com/pornography-co…

In my April NCOSE talk I critiqued 5 papers, saving the PCES for last as it has done the most damage.
Link to NCOSE talk: vimeo.com/272453173 The PCES is from 36:00 to 43:20.
First slide in presentation: PCES is primary tool used to attempt to "debunk" porn's negative effects

2nd slide. The study that created the PCES (Hald & Malamuth, 2008) first finding: porn use was almost always beneficial - with few, if any, drawbacks, for anyone.

Not kidding.

3rd slide. The study that created the PCES (Hald & Malamuth, 2008) second finding: the more hardcore the porn the greater its positive effects in your life. Put simply, "More porn is always better."

4th slide. The study that created the PCES (Hald & Malamuth, 2008) third finding: For both genders the more porn you use, the more you believe it represents real sex, and the more you masturbate to it, the more positive the effects it has in every area of your life.

5th slide. As I said in my presentation "If we are to believe the PCES, then not using porn produces detrimental effects". Some laughed, but it wasn't meant to be funny - as we can see from today's new study.

QUESTION: How could the PCES produce such skewed results?

6th slide. First problem: Hald & Malamuth, 2008 randomly decided what was a "positive" and "negative" effect. What was included or omitted – just completely random, like throwing darts.
Are 1-6 a positive for a 11 year old boy?
Are 1-3 a negative, in all circumstances?

7th slide. 2nd problem: PCES gives equal weight to questions that do not assess equivalent effects.
PCES makes the positive "added to your knowledge of anal sex?" equivalent to the negative "reduced quality of life" (job loss, divorce).
Learning about anal cancels out divorce.

8th slide. 3rd problem: false equivalencies combined with “self perception” leads to grossly inaccurate results.
How might the young addicted porn user with porn-induced ED, and no girlfriend, score these sample "positive" and “negative’ PCES questions?

9th slide. Google scholar search for “Self-Perceived Effects of Pornography Consumption, 2008” returns 273 articles. Many studies have used the PCES, with most finding little no problems with porn use. Studies that utilized the PCES are reporting highly questionable results.

10th slide. I’ve just scratched the surface of the problems with the PCES.
A Psychology professor said "if I had been a reviewer on this manuscript, I would have probably rejected it on the basis of inadequate statistical methodology as well as various conceptual problems."

The professor also said:
- It is impossible, given the nature of the data, to draw firm conclusions.
- The PCES is a psychometric nightmare.
Much more at this link - yourbrainonporn.com/pornography-co…

@threadreaderapp Unroll please.