Post #9: Close Reading
Paragraph 1: Jones intends to interpret the orgasm according to Darwinian Theory; meaning that she will use the idea that the trait is a product of evolution.
Paragraph 2: Her ideas will consider only heterosexual sex, and will not consider assumptions about orgasm in the argument.
Paragraph 3: She suggests that certain traits are inherited through genetics, and that sex may be one of those traits due to the differences in refractory period difference between females and males.
Paragraph 4: She also suggests that due to sexual selection, multiple orgasms may have been a product.
Paragraph 5: The sexual response cycle (excitement phase, plateau phase, and an orgasm resolution phase) could have been a result of humans displaying their physical strengths.
Paragraph 6: The only argument against this theory is the fact that orgasm is energetically costly for humans. Therefore, more research needs to be done to disprove this idea.
Paragraph 7: In this research, faking orgasms was explained. Jones suggests that the reason that woman fake orgasm has to do with men needing woman to be satisfied to experience a full orgasm.
Paragraph 8: In order for Jones’ theory to be correct, more studies need to be done on what makes up a female orgasm. Information and statistics for men support the theory, but the data is lacking on the female aspects.
(Jones, 2007)
Paragraph 1: The first paragraph relates to modern studies over-emphasis and biased framework in the female orgasm. It suggests that more evidence needs to be done on male orgasm as well as different aspects of female orgasm.
Paragraph 2: The second paragraph seeks to disprove what is known about the female psychology associated with orgasm.
Paragraph 3: This paragraph points out a lack of studies done about the subjective experiences of orgasm, and the adjectives related with it.
Paragraph 4: In this paragraph, the writers seek to justify why a multi-dimensional analysis of orgasm may be more beneficial to the research world.
Paragraph 5: The next paragraph explains what the study will consist of: a three step research examination of orgasm using adjective scales and participant feedback.
Paragraph 6: A subject pool was put together and an adjective rating scale was created to attest participants’ subjective experience with orgasm.
Paragraph 7: The next paragraphs included the characteristics and requirements of male and female participants in the study.
Paragraph 8: This paragraph gave a short summary the adjective-survey/questionnaire given to the participants.
Paragraph 9: The questionnaire was issued to a group, and none of them had to give names for the study. All of the present participants completed the given study.
Paragraph 10: This paragraph described why certain information and feedback was eliminated from the study.
Paragraph 11: This next paragraph deals with the reliability of the data, and how the study made the data more reliable and consistent.
Paragraph 12: The writer discussed how they grouped the data and the components. They also gave some ratios and equations that they used.
Paragraph 13: They displayed the grouping that the data went into.
Paragraph 14: They used 1 and 2 for different components of orgasm, to display masturbation or sex with a partner for each adjective rating.
Paragraph 15: If adjectives were extremely similar, the less responsive adjective was dropped.
Paragraph 16: Adjectives were grouped according to similarities and responses. The writers gave general grouping examples.
Paragraph 17: The next section discussed how different models come up with different data. According to the paragraph, multi-dimensional models seemed to be best.
Paragraph 18: This included the results according to the pleasurable satisfaction and emotional intimacy category of adjectives.
Paragraph 19: Women were discovered to have higher scores in emotional intimacy for sex with a partner.
Paragraph 20: There were also slight differences in men and woman for partner satisfaction in a sexual partner situation.
Paragraph 21: They gave a few adjectives used and gave the gender results for each.
Paragraph 22: Flushing as an adjective was held to be higher in results for woman.
Paragraph 23: The writers deduced that the adjective rating scale was a good way to obtain reliable results. They also suggested that future studies should obtain more components to make it more multi-dimensional.
Paragraph 24: There is much needed clinical assessment of this research.
( Mah, & Binik, 2002)
The introduction basically proves what the point is going to be of the paper. It contains a lot of valid information, but it is to catch the reader’s attention. The literature review tells us what has already been done in the scope of the field in which the paper is written in. In both papers, the author hooked our attention by adding in facts that may stun us, or by discussing what they themselves found interesting about the topic. In a paper A, B, and C are in the introduction, then the methods, results, and conclusion in that order.
