![[Adobe Stock]](https://sp-ao.shortpixel.ai/client/to_webp,q_glossy,ret_img,w_750,h_375/https://www.psypost.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/older-couple-in-bed-750x375.jpg)
Married couples in South Korea report higher rates of sexual inactivity compared to those in the United States, though couples in both nations share similarities in how age and personal motivations relate to intimacy. The findings show how different cultural environments, work habits, and communication styles correspond with physical connection in romantic relationships. The research was published in The Journal of Sexual Medicine.
Physical intimacy is widely recognized as a central component of marital well-being. Regular sexual activity is typically associated with greater relationship satisfaction and better overall health outcomes for adults. Conversely, a lack of sexual activity is often linked to emotional distance and reduced life satisfaction.
Despite the known benefits of physical intimacy, marital sexual inactivity is rising globally. Previous estimates suggest that about 15.6 percent of married couples in the United States report having no sexual activity, while rates in East Asian countries range from 42 to 55 percent.
However, cross-national comparative research on this topic has been scarce. Past studies often used varying timeframes to define sexual inactivity, making it difficult to compare results directly. Researchers have also frequently combined married and unmarried individuals in their data, blurring the unique dynamics of marital relationships.
Don’t miss the next big psychology finding
Every morning, PsyPost sends a short briefing on the most interesting new peer-reviewed research in psychology and neuroscience.
To address these gaps, researchers Hyoungbin Moon and Young-Hoon Kim from Yonsei University in South Korea designed a comparative study. They wanted to evaluate married individuals in South Korea and the United States using identical survey methods and a consistent definition of sexual inactivity.
The two countries offer a useful contrast because they differ notably in working hours, gender role expectations, and social norms. The United States generally features more egalitarian sexual norms and flexible work arrangements. South Korea is known for longer average working hours and more traditional, restrictive norms regarding gender and sexuality.
The researchers hypothesized that these cultural and structural differences might influence couples’ available time and relationship dynamics. They focused on several demographic factors, including age, gender, education, and family income. They also evaluated psychological variables that could influence intimacy, such as daily communication time and emotion suppression, which refers to the habit of hiding one’s feelings.
Additionally, the survey measured two types of personal motivation frameworks known in psychology as regulatory orientations. The first, promotion focus, describes a mindset oriented toward growth, achieving goals, and seeking positive outcomes. The second, prevention focus, describes a mindset oriented toward avoiding losses, maintaining safety, and fulfilling obligations.
To conduct the large study, the researchers analyzed data from independent online surveys administered anonymously in both countries between 2021 and 2022. They restricted their final analysis to married adults, excluding unmarried participants, those under the age of 19, and individuals who failed attention checks. The final analytic samples included between 3,364 and 5,270 participants, depending on the specific variables being tested.
The researchers measured sexual inactivity using a single, direct question about how many times per month, on average, the respondent had sexual intercourse with their spouse. Data was collected from individuals rather than couples, meaning the responses reflect one partner’s perspective on the marriage. The researchers then used statistical models to see how the demographic and psychological variables predicted the likelihood of a person reporting zero sexual activity.
When analyzing the results, the researchers found that the prevalence of sexual inactivity increased with age in both countries. However, Korean participants reported higher rates of sexual inactivity across all age groups compared to their American counterparts.
Certain psychological traits showed consistent patterns regardless of nationality. A promotion focus, or a growth-oriented mindset, was associated with lower rates of sexual inactivity in both the United States and South Korea. This aligns with prior psychological theories suggesting that a motivation to seek positive experiences encourages sexual engagement.
On the other hand, a prevention focus, which prioritizes avoiding negative outcomes, was not statistically significant in predicting sexual inactivity in either nation. Communication time was linked to lower sexual inactivity in both countries, meaning couples who talked more frequently were more likely to be sexually active.
While communication time mattered in both contexts, the association was noticeably stronger in South Korea. The researchers noted this supports the idea that long working hours in South Korea may constrain opportunities for couples to connect, making any shared time highly impactful for maintaining physical intimacy.
Family income also showed differing associations depending on the country. Income had a stronger negative association with sexual inactivity in the United States than in South Korea. This suggests that in America, higher economic resources may be more closely tied to the kind of relational well-being that fosters intimacy.
A few associations were unique to the South Korean sample. In South Korea, women, individuals with postgraduate degrees, and those who frequently suppressed their emotions reported higher rates of sexual inactivity. However, the statistical interaction comparing emotion suppression between the two countries was not statistically significant, meaning the apparent difference between nations on this specific trait should be viewed cautiously.
The researchers outlined several caveats regarding how the data should be interpreted. Because the research relied on a cross-sectional design, meaning data was collected at a single point in time, the results cannot prove cause and effect. It is impossible to say whether reduced communication causes sexual inactivity or if a lack of intimacy leads to reduced communication.
Additionally, the reliance on self-reported surveys introduces the potential for memory errors or bias, as participants might provide answers they believe are socially acceptable. The findings are also limited to only two countries, so they may not apply to marriages in other parts of the world.
The way sexual inactivity was defined in the survey also presents limitations. The questionnaire asked specifically about the frequency of sexual intercourse, which does not account for non-coital forms of sexual intimacy. As a result, couples who engage in other physical behaviors but not traditional intercourse would be incorrectly categorized as sexually inactive.
Finally, by asking for an average monthly frequency, the survey struggles to differentiate between temporary interruptions in intimacy and chronic sexual disengagement. Brief dry spells due to illness, stress, or travel might be recorded the same way as long-term marital distress. Future research tracking couples over extended periods could help distinguish passing fluctuations from stable patterns of inactivity.
The study, “Prevalence and correlates of sexual inactivity among married couples,” was authored by Hyoungbin Moon and Young-Hoon Kim.
