BDSM practitioners exhibit higher secure attachment and lower neuroticism

A new study published in the Journal of Homosexuality has found that individuals who practice BDSM tend to have healthier psychological profiles than those who do not. Compared to non-practitioners, BDSM participants were more likely to have secure attachment styles, lower rejection sensitivity, and higher levels of well-being. These findings challenge the persistent social stigma that often links BDSM with emotional dysfunction or psychopathology.

The study was designed to replicate and extend the work of a 2013 study by Wismeijer and Van Assen, which reported that BDSM practitioners showed more functional psychological traits than non-practitioners. Despite the social stigma surrounding BDSM—an umbrella term encompassing practices involving consensual power exchange, sensation play, and role-play—the original study found no evidence of psychological harm associated with these sexual interests.

However, the field lacked high-powered replication studies, especially outside of Western European countries. To address this gap, the researchers set out to test whether the original findings held true in a large, diverse Spanish sample and to explore additional factors such as sexual orientation, gender identity, and depth of BDSM experience.

To conduct this study, the researchers recruited 1,884 Spanish adults through social media, online networks, and a sex toy retailer’s newsletter. About 60% of participants identified as BDSM practitioners, while the remaining 40% did not. The sample was diverse in terms of gender and sexual orientation: 58% were cisgender women, 35% cisgender men, and 6% identified as transgender or gender non-conforming. Over half identified as part of the LGBTQIA+ community. Participants were between the ages of 18 and 68, with a median age of 28.

Participants completed a series of validated self-report questionnaires that assessed their personality traits (based on the Big Five model), attachment styles, rejection sensitivity, and subjective well-being. They were also asked about their BDSM practices, including their roles (dominant, submissive, switch), experiences related to power or pain dynamics (top, bottom, switch), and the frequency of their engagement in BDSM activities.

The researchers conducted a series of statistical analyses to compare BDSM practitioners with non-practitioners. They controlled for demographic factors such as age, gender, and education. They also explored whether specific roles within BDSM (e.g., dominant vs. submissive) were associated with unique psychological patterns.

Overall, the results strongly supported the original 2013 findings. BDSM practitioners were more likely than non-practitioners to report secure attachment styles, particularly among those who identified as dominants. These individuals also had higher scores on conscientiousness and openness to experience, and lower scores on neuroticism and rejection sensitivity—traits often linked to emotional stability and interpersonal effectiveness.

While the differences were not uniform across all roles, dominants consistently showed the most functional psychological profiles. They reported higher extraversion and well-being, and lower neuroticism and rejection sensitivity, especially among women. Submissives and switches generally fell in between dominants and non-practitioners on most measures.

Notably, BDSM practitioners also reported higher levels of well-being, with dominants again standing out as the most satisfied group. This supports prior research suggesting that BDSM, for many, is not simply a set of sexual practices but also a source of empowerment, connection, and self-expression. Practitioners with more experience in BDSM reported even greater psychological benefits.

Another important finding was that the psychological structure—how attachment styles, personality traits, and well-being relate to one another—was consistent across both BDSM practitioners and non-practitioners. This suggests that while BDSM practitioners may differ in levels of certain traits, the basic architecture of their psychological functioning is no different from the general population.

The study also found that sexual orientation and gender identity played a role in shaping psychological characteristics. For example, bi/pansexual individuals tended to report lower discomfort with emotional closeness compared to other groups, and transgender and gender non-conforming individuals scored higher on openness and rejection sensitivity. These intersections point to the importance of considering broader social contexts and minority stress when interpreting psychological data.

Importantly, the researchers emphasized that their findings contradict the outdated notion that BDSM is a sign of psychological damage or deviance. While BDSM has historically been pathologized—often viewed as the result of childhood trauma or emotional dysfunction—the data did not support this view. Instead, BDSM appears to be a variation of healthy sexual expression, often associated with traits that promote personal and relational well-being.

But the study was not without its limitations. Its cross-sectional design means that causal relationships cannot be determined. For instance, it remains unclear whether engaging in BDSM leads to greater well-being or whether individuals with certain psychological traits are more drawn to BDSM. The researchers also used self-reported data, which can be subject to bias. Additionally, the sample was not representative of the broader population, given its reliance on self-selection and social networks for recruitment.

Despite these limitations, the study offers compelling evidence that BDSM practitioners are psychologically well-adjusted individuals. It reinforces the need for healthcare professionals, educators, and the public to reconsider harmful stereotypes and assumptions about kink communities. The researchers call for more replication studies, particularly those that use longitudinal designs and more representative samples, to deepen our understanding of how BDSM fits into the broader landscape of human sexuality and mental health.

The study, “Not Twisted, Just Kinky: Replication and Structural Invariance of Attachment, Personality, and Well-Being Among BDSM Practitioners,” was authored by Oscar Lecuona, Olga Martínez-Barajas, Alejandro Gimeno-Martín, Alejandra Hernansaiz, Carla Carrillo-Molina, Rodrigo Alcolea-Cantero, Raquel Rodríguez-Carvajal, and Sara de Rivas.