Understanding the Complex Factors Affecting Libido
The topic of libido is intricate, as it involves numerous influencing factors. Among them, **low libido** is the most frequently reported issue in clinical settings. Various aspects such as reproductive endocrine states, gender, age, overall health, nutritional status, emotional connections with partners, dietary habits, smoking and drinking preferences, educational background, religious beliefs, cultural influences, upbringing, workplace stress, interpersonal relationships, and medication use can all play significant roles in shaping one’s libido.
Defining Libido: A Comprehensive Approach
Currently, there is no universally accepted definition for libido. The CCMD-3 emphasizes a reduction in sexual interest and activity, requiring these symptoms to persist for at least three months for a diagnosis of reduced libido. In contrast, the ICD-10 focuses on libido deficiency, which is independent of sexual pleasure or arousal during sexual activities. Furthermore, the DSM-IV categorizes sexual desire disorders into various forms, including low libido, sexual aversion, hypersexuality, and sexual addiction. However, it does not explicitly define low libido in DSM-III and DSM-IV.
To accurately assess libido, it is essential to have a clear definition. **Libido can be seen as the desire for intimate interactions, whether active or passive, that aim to achieve sexual satisfaction through related activities**. This concept includes not only the motivation for sexual engagement but also incorporates the capacity for passive acceptance of sexual behaviors resulting in satisfaction.
Characteristics of Libido
Based on this understanding, libido can be characterized by several key aspects:
- The desire for sexual satisfaction.
- Means of pursuit include sexual activities or related interactions, such as intimacy, hugging, kissing, sexual fantasies, masturbation, and sexual dreams.
- Libido may be driven by active pursuit or passive acceptance.
- Stimuli are necessary, which may arise from changes in hormone levels or external factors such as visual or auditory cues.
Categories and Measurement of Libido
Given these definitions, libido can initially be categorized into four distinct types, leading to the creation of a measurement scale. Changes in libido can occur over time; thus, if the assessment period is too short, the results might be unreliable due to variability. Conversely, an excessively long period can hinder accurate recollection, leading to inaccuracies in results.
According to the CCMD-3's definition of reduced libido (F52.0), symptoms must persist for a minimum of three months for a diagnosis of low libido. Therefore, the measurement scale assesses libido over the past three months.
Reliability and Validity of the Measurement Scale
The reliability of this scale was evaluated through methods like test-retest reliability and homogeneity reliability. By repeating tests on the same subjects and analyzing the results over different timeframes, we measure the **stability of the results**. Generally, a reliability coefficient above 0.70 is acceptable, while a score exceeding 0.80 is considered ideal. In this study, 50 participants were randomly selected for retesting two weeks after their initial assessment, adhering to methodological requirements of having a significant sample size.
The test-retest reliability coefficient obtained was 0.931, indicating that the scale demonstrates excellent reproducibility. Moreover, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was found to be 0.8274, reflecting good internal consistency within the scale.
Exploratory Factor Analysis of the Scale
Structure validity is a robust indicator of the scale's effectiveness. The exploratory factor analysis revealed that the 13-item self-assessment scale for male libido encompasses four factors: F1 (latent libido), F2 (seductive libido), F3 (situational libido), and F4 (general desire). The cumulative variance contribution rate for these four factors was found to be 61.464%, which meets statistical requirements, confirming the classification of libido during the scale's development.
Empirical Validity Assessment
This research included a discriminative analysis comparing groups of patients with hypersexuality (HS), erectile dysfunction (ED), and premature ejaculation (PE) to validate the empirical effectiveness of the scale. A comprehensive diagnosis for HS, ED, and PE requires considering clinical complaints, medical history, physical examinations, hormonal assessments, erectile function evaluations, and IIEF-5 results. Diagnosis must ultimately be confirmed through departmental consultations.
Conclusion: Implications for Clinical Practice
In sum, the 13-item self-assessment scale for male libido has proven to be scientifically sound, featuring a minimal number of items, well-structured options, and a brief testing duration. The scale’s reliability and validity meet measurement standards, demonstrating significant potential for use in evaluating an individual's libido strength. However, further research in community settings is recommended to enhance its applicability and effectiveness in broader populations.