Study categorized problematic pornography use based on data from over 2,000 male consumers 

Digital technology—and especially the Internet—has revolutionized the way we work, study, socialize, and entertain ourselves. Alongside the global increase in screen time, both public and academic attention to potentially addictive digital behaviors has grown. 

One such behavior is online pornography consumption. A study published in Addictive Behaviors, conducted by researchers from Monash University (Australia), the D’Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR), and the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), investigated problematic pornography use (PPU), particularly in men. 

Defining PPU as a Disorder 

Problematic pornography use is marked by difficulty controlling consumption, even when the person recognizes negative consequences. A 2018 survey showed that over 10% of Brazil’s population reported viewing pornography, with 76% identifying as male. In the U.S., approximately 11% of men and 3% of women describe themselves as addicted to it. 

Because the issue disproportionately affects men—and psychological dynamics differ by gender—the study gathered data from over 2,000 male participants to explore behavioral intensifiers and possible pathways to addiction. 

Understanding PPU through User Behavior 

One of the major challenges in treating PPU is the lack of consensus around its classification—whether it is a form of compulsive sexual behavior or part of Internet-related behavioral addiction. 

To contribute to this debate, researchers examined various intensity indicators, including qualitative and quantitative tolerance, binge sessions (lasting at least two hours and/or involving multiple orgasms), delayed orgasm (edging), and frequent switching between content (tab-jumping). Participants had consumed online pornography at least once in the past 12 months and were recruited from online platforms in the U.S. and U.K. 

The survey assessed difficulties in reducing use, impulsivity, and use of pornography to cope with emotions. Specific questions focused on the frequency of binge sessions, edging (“How often do you delay orgasm to prolong the session?”), and tab-jumping (“How often do you switch to new content during a session?”). 

Key Findings 

The study found that increased time spent on pornography was closely associated with other intensity indicators, such as lack of control and impulsivity. This suggests that greater engagement—combined with diminished pleasure due to repeated exposure—could be a key feature of PPU. 

Notably, binge sessions, tab-jumping, and edging were strongly linked to problematic use. The researchers highlighted that PPU is more closely related to Internet addiction than to offline sex addiction, with digital novelty playing a central role in usage patterns. 

Tolerance may serve as a mediator between intensified pornography use and behavioral loss of control. The study suggests that individuals with PPU often seek novelty during sessions, reinforcing compulsive behaviors. 

Therapeutic Targets and Future Directions 

This study is the first to quantify specific behaviors such as binge sessions, edging, and tab-jumping in relation to PPU. Measuring these traits may help guide both clinical and self-help interventions. 

Tolerance to content, in particular, may be a promising therapeutic target, given its mediating role in prolonged sessions and the pursuit of increasingly intense material. 

Ultimately, the study offers new perspectives on how certain behaviors escalate problematic pornography use and opens paths for more effective treatments and future scientific research. 

Written by Maria Eduarda Ledo de Abreu. 

Funding:
CI is supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship but no other support related to research, authorship, or publication or this article. LF is supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq; grant #CNE- 302526/2018-8, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ; grant # CNE E-26/200.950/2021, Rio de Janerio, RJ, Brazil), and intramural grants from D’Or Institute for Research and Education (IDOR, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil). MY’s role on this paper was funded through a National Health and Medical Research Council Fellowship (NHMRC; #APP1117188). MY also receives funding from: government funding bodies such as the NHMRC, Australian Research Council (ARC), Australian Defence Science and Technology (DST), the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science (DIIS), the National Institutes of Health (NIH, USA); philanthropic donations from the David Winston Turner Endowment Fund, Wilson Foundation; sponsored Investigator-Initiated trials including Incannex Healthcare Ltd. These funding sources had no role in the data analysis, presentation, or interpretation and write-up of the data. MY also sits on the Advisory Boards of: Centre of The Urban Mental Health, University of Amsterdam; and Enosis Therapeutics. SRC, LF, and LA receive honoraria for editorial work at Elsevier journals but have no other interests to disclose. SRC’s research was previously funded by Wellcome.