Associations Between Demographic and Relationship Variables and Sexual Desire: Findings from a Large-Scale Estonian Biobank Dataset

Associations Between Demographic and Relationship Variables and Sexual Desire: Findings from a Large-Scale Estonian Biobank Dataset | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Associations Between Demographic and Relationship Variables and Sexual Desire: Findings from a Large-Scale Estonian Biobank Dataset Toivo Aavik, Karin Täht, Uku Vainik, Rene Mõttus This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6799953/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 05 Jan, 2026 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted 11 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Sexual desire plays a crucial role in human well-being and relational dynamics, yet its demographic and relational predictors remain insufficiently understood. Leveraging a uniquely large and representative sample (N = 67,334) from the Estonian Biobank, we examined how gender, age, sexual orientation, relationship status, recent childbirth, number of children, relationship satisfaction, education, and occupation relate to self-reported sexual desire. Men reported substantially higher desire than women (η² = .18), a difference that persisted across most ages and demographic groups. Sexual desire declined with age, more steeply for women, and was positively associated with bisexual and pansexual orientation, recent childbirth, and relationship satisfaction. Multivariate models explained 28.3% of the variance in sexual desire, with gender and age emerging as the strongest predictors. Notably, gender moderated several associations, including those with age, parenthood, and relationship satisfaction. These findings provide the most comprehensive account to date of how basic demographic and relational variables jointly shape sexual desire in the general population, offering a robust foundation for theory development and applied sexual health research. Biological sciences/Psychology Biological sciences/Psychology/Human behaviour Sexual desire Gender differences Relationship satisfaction Sexual orientation Demographic predictors Estonian Biobank Figures Figure 1 Introduction Sexual desire is a vital component of human relationships and well-being, shaped by demographic, relational, psychological, and cultural factors 1 – 3 . Understanding these influences is essential for advancing theoretical models and improving clinical interventions, yet previous research has often been limited by small sample sizes and inconsistent findings. For example, we do not yet have a clear answer to even the simplest question: How much of the variance in sexual desire can be explained by the basic demographic and relationship variables, and to what extent does each variable matter when the others are controlled for? It is unclear how more complex questions about desire could be properly addressed without clear answers to these most basic descriptive questions. To address this, we examined the variability of sexual desire in a large-scale Estonian Biobank cohort that covers about seven percent of Estonia’s adult population, incorporating diverse demographic and relational variables, including age, gender, marital status, sexual orientation, recent childbirth, number of children, relationship satisfaction, educational attainment, and occupation. Previous studies have addressed these variables individually, but rarely in combination and in sufficiently large and representative samples to mutually adjust for each other and reliably assess their interactions. Gender, age, and sexual orientation Gender differences in sexual desire are among the most consistent findings in sexuality research, with men reporting higher levels of desire than women 4 , 5 . Explanations for this difference highlight both biological (e.g., testosterone levels) and sociocultural factors (e.g., societal norms regulating desire expression) 1 , 6 , 7 . Relational satisfaction, emotional intimacy, and (lack of) communication are significant predictors of desire in both genders, but the underlying mechanisms differ, often reflecting cultural norms and gendered expectations 8 – 10 . This may also contribute to gender differences. Also, sexual desire tends to decline with age, likely driven by biological changes, such as reductions in testosterone and estrogen, as well as shifting relational priorities and health concerns 11 – 13 . A large-scale study with over 8,000 participants 13 found that men maintain higher levels of sexual desire into older age, while women experience a sharper decline, particularly after menopause. Another community-based study with 2,341 participants 14 confirmed that age-related declines in sexual desire are more pronounced in women, with the gap between men and women widening over time. Also, a longitudinal data from over 11,000 observations 15 found that while men’s sexual desire remains relatively stable, women’s desire shows greater variability over time. Women, particularly post-menopause, experience a steeper decline than men, whose desire may remain more stable until later in life 16 , 17 . For example, using a large U.S. probability sample of 3,990 adults aged 18–59 years, Herbenick et al 18 found that while age-related declines in sexual function were observed in both genders, diversity in sexual behaviors and partner type played significant roles in maintaining sexual pleasure and arousal, particularly in men. Erectile and lubrication difficulties increased with age, but higher behavioral diversity was linked to greater orgasm likelihood in both men and women, suggesting compensatory mechanisms that may sustain sexual desire despite biological aging. Satinsky 19 , in a smaller sample of 146 sexually active women, did not specifically examine sexual desire decline, but their findings indicated that increase body weight was not a major predictor of sexual behaviors, implying that factors beyond biological aging—such as relational and contextual influences—may moderate changes in sexual desire. Sexual orientation could also play a role in sexual desire. Bisexual and pansexual individuals often report higher levels of desire due to broader attraction patterns and relational flexibility, while asexual individuals consistently report the lowest levels, reflecting an orientation distinct from hypoactive sexual desire disorder 5 , 20 , 21 . However, because over 95% of people identify as heterosexual, large sample sizes are needed to draw reliable conclusions about sexual desire differences across orientations. A study 5 by Peixoto (2023) with 1,013 participants (552 women and 461 men, including 211 nonheterosexual individuals) found that men reported higher levels of solitary and attractive person-related sexual desire than women across all orientations. Nonheterosexual participants also had higher levels of these desires compared to heterosexuals, reinforcing the idea that sexual orientation plays a role in shaping sexual desire patterns. Gendered patterns persist across all orientations, with men generally reporting higher levels of desire than women, though the magnitude of differences varies 22 . Socioeconomic factors Addressing educational attainment and occupation could offer unique insights into how broader social roles intersect with desire. However, there is limited work yet on linking them with desire. Some studies suggest that higher education levels may be associated with greater sexual desire, particularly among middle-aged and older women 23 ( N = 210). However, other studies 24 ( N = 168), found no significant link between educational attainment and sexual desire, indicating that the relationship may be more complex. Higher education levels may be associated with greater openness and sexual assertiveness in women, enabling challenges to traditional gender norms 25 , 26 . However, some evidence supports the claim that adolescents' sexual behaviors can negatively impact academic attainment, often through indirect pathways involving emotional, behavioral, and contextual factors 26 . Occupation, however, presents a more complex picture. For example, those in high-stress professions, such as healthcare, could have either reduced desire due to work pressure or increased desire linked to burnout, particularly among men 27 , 28 . A study on healthcare professionals ( N = 150) found that higher work pressure was significantly associated with lower sexual desire 27 . Job insecurity has also been linked to declines in desire, particularly among younger workers. For example, a large-scale study ( N = 7,247) found that men experiencing job insecurity had a 53% higher risk of decreased sexual desire, while women had a 47% higher risk compared to those with job stability 29 . While these findings support the role of occupational stress in shaping sexual desire, another research presents a more nuanced picture. A study on menopausal women ( N = 210) indicated that occupation was significantly related to sexual desire, but did not specify whether specific professions had a positive or negative impact 23 . These findings underscore the importance of examining occupational roles and their psychological, relational, and contextual impacts on sexual desire. Parental roles and relationship factors Relational and normative life-course variables, such as relationship status and parenthood, also shape sexual desire. Cohabiting individuals report varying levels of desire depending on relationship additional challenges, particularly for women. However, most studies on these topics rely on moderate sample sizes, making generalizability a concern. Postpartum hormonal changes and caregiving responsibilities can contribute to declines in desire among women 30 , 31 (255 mixed-sex new parent couples), whereas men’s desire is often unrelated or even positive related to family size 30 . Larger family sizes correlate with lower desire in women due to increased caregiving demands, though this relationship is moderated by shared responsibilities and relational quality 32 (total N = 1093 woman). While these studies provide valuable insights, future research with larger and more diverse samples is needed to fully understand how relational dynamics shape sexual desire over the life course. The relationship between sexual desire and recent childbirth is complex, influenced by both biological and psychosocial factors. Longitudinal studies 33 (207 newlywed couples) show that women’s sexual desire declines more steeply over time compared to men, with childbirth exacerbating this decline. Breastfeeding is also linked to lower sexual desire and satisfaction 34 . Postpartum reductions in women’s sexual desire are further associated with declines in both partners' relationship satisfaction. However, short-term sexual difficulties may still be influenced by psychological factors, such as perceived traumatic childbirth, which is linked to lower sexual quality of life 35 ( N = 376). Additionally, greater parity was not associated with an increased risk of low sexual desire later in life 36 ( N = 1,094). Further, infant sleep patterns and maternal fatigue are critical but often overlooked contributors to decreased sexual desire. Studies have found that disrupted sleep in the postpartum period negatively impacts sexual desire and satisfaction in both partners, highlighting the need for a more holistic approach to postpartum sexual health 37 (203 first-time mothers). While the immediate postpartum period presents significant challenges to sexual function, evidence suggests that with adequate support and communication, many couples regain pre-pregnancy levels of sexual satisfaction within the first year postpartum 38 ( N = 113 women). Finally, sexual desire and relationship satisfaction are strongly linked, though findings vary by gender and relationship dynamics. Lower individual sexual desire tracks lower relationship satisfaction, particularly for women 39 ( N = 133 couples), while discrepancies between desired and actual sexual frequency reduce satisfaction and stability 40 ( N = 8,096 couples). However, matching partners' sexual desire does not uniquely predict satisfaction—individual desire levels may matter more 41 ( N = 366 couples). Longitudinal research suggests that sexual and relationship satisfaction change together rather than one causing the other 42 ( N = 87). Recent findings highlight that relationship satisfaction can mediate the effects of sexual desire on overall well-being, particularly in long-term relationships 43 ( N = 141 couples). Additionally, authors emphasize that sexual communication between partners plays a crucial role in mitigating dissatisfaction caused by discrepancies in sexual desire 44 ( N = 431 young people). Additional factors may complicate this link: sexual boredom mediates desire and satisfaction, especially in women 45 (N = 1,155 women), while for men, sexual satisfaction predicts later relationship satisfaction, whereas for women, relationship satisfaction more strongly predicts sexual satisfaction 46 , 47 ( N = 113 couples; and N = 204 couples). This Study We investigated differences in sexual desire across various demographic and relational variables using a large-scale, population-based dataset from the Estonian Biobank. Previous research on sexual desire has usually relied on smaller and often homogeneous samples and rarely addressed a broad range of demographic factors at the same time, limiting the ability to generalize findings across populations, mutually adjust the associations and robustly assess interactions among the variables. By utilizing data from over 73,000 participants, we could address these limitations, allowing us to robustly identify nuanced patterns among demographic and relational factors in relation to sexual desire, including their interactions that smaller studies cannot reliably describe. Specifically, we studied variability of sexual desire with age, gender, relationship status, sexual orientation, recent childbirth, number of children, relationship satisfaction, educational attainment, and occupational level. These variables were chosen because prior research suggests that they may be related to sexual desire, with some of them likely in interaction. We predicted that age and gender would be the strongest correlates of desire, with men and younger people reporting higher sexual desire than women and older people. Moreover, we predicted that age and gender could interact in relation to age (e.g., women’s desire declining faster) and that gender could also interact with other variables, such as sexual orientation, relationship satisfaction, and recent childbirth, number children, relationship status, educational attainment and occupational level. At its core, we sought to answer a simple yet fundamental question: to what extent can easily accessible demographic variables, such as gender and other variables examined in this research, individually, collectively and interactively explain the variance in sexual desire? Owing to the large and representative population sample, we could offer the most robust yet answer to this question. As a result, we aimed to advance theoretical models of sexual desire, offer practical insights for clinical interventions, and provide a foundation for future investigations into the sociocultural and occupational factors shaping human sexuality. Results Bivariate associations The correlation of sexual desire with two continuous variables, age and relationship satisfaction, were r = − .16 and .08 ( p < .001), respectively (i.e., η 2 = .03 and .006). We show group sizes, average standardized desire scores with standard deviations for these groups, and effect sizes (η 2 ) of the bivariate differences between the groups in the Table 1 . Men had significantly ( F (1, 67,333) = 15,202, p < 0.001) higher desire scores ( M = 0.65, SD = 0.81) compared to women ( M = -0.28, SD = 0.94), with standardized effect size of η 2 = .18. As for sexual orientation, heterosexual participants made up the largest group (94.88%) and inevitably had mean desire close to sample mean. The highest average desire score was observed in participants who identified as bisexual, while the lowest desire score was found in the asexual group, with the group differences highly significant ( F (4, 67,330) = 697.4, p < .001; η 2 = .04). Desire also differed significantly among relationship status groups ( F (1, 67,333) = 400.3, p < 0.001), albeit with tiny effect size (η 2 = .006): partnered participants had higher average sexual desire ( M = 0.05; SD = 0.98) than those who were living alone ( M = − 0.13; SD = 1.05). Next, ANOVA showed very small (η 2 = .01) but statistically significant differences in average desire scores for participants with different numbers of children ( F (5, 67,329) = 165.9, p < .001), the highest average desire score among those with no children. Likewise, those with a birth within the last year had significantly higher average desire scores ( F (1, 67,333) = 73, p < .001), albeit with a small effect size (η 2 = .001). There were statistically significant differences among educational attainment levels in average desire scores ( F (3, 67,331) = 56.5, p < 0.001), albeit with a very small effect size (η 2 = .003). Participants with an undergraduate degree had the highest sexual desire scores, while those with postgraduate degrees had the lowest. Also, occupational groups differed significantly in average desire scores ( F (9, 67,325) = 222.5, p < .001) with a small effect size (η 2 = .03). For example, professional military personnel, machine operator or vehicle driver, and senior official manager tended to score highest, while elementary workers and office or customer service workers scored lower (Table 1 ). We emphasize that since these associations were not mutually adjusted, they were likely mutually confounded. Addressing this requires assessing multivariate associations. Table 1 The characteristics of demographic groups: sizes of groups, average standardized desire scores with standard deviation, effect sizes of differences in group averages. Variables N(%) Desire M ( SD ) Effect Size Gender Female 46 879(69.62) -0.28 (0.94) .18 Male 20 456 (30.38) 0.65 (0.81) Sexual orientation Heterosexual 63889 (94.88) 0.009 (0.99) .04 Bisexual 1470 (2.18) 0.40 (0.99) Homosexual 622 (0.92) 0.34 (1.00) Pansexual 376 (0.56) 0.30 (1.04) Asexual 976 (1.45) -1.54 (0.53) Marital status Living alone 17 273 (25.65) -0.13 (1.05) .006 Living with partner 50 062 (74.35) 0.05 (0.98) Number of children 0 14 963 (22.22) 0.19 (0.98) .01 1 13 093 (19.44) -0.06 (0.99) 2 24 444 (36.30) -0.08 (1.00) 3 11 325 (16.82) -0.02 (1.00) 4 2 573 (3.82) 0.12 (1.01) 5 937 (1.39) 0.03 (1.06) Recent childbirth Yes 3 371 (5.00) 0.14 (0.96) .001 No 63 964 (95.00) -0.01 (1.00) Level of education Basic education 3638 (5.40) 0.11 (1.05) .003 Secondary education 23 233 (34.50) -0.02 (1.03) Bachelor’s degree 17 249 (25.62) 0.06 (0.98) Master’s or Doctoral degree 23 215 (34.48) -0.05 (0.97) Occupation Senior official or manager 7 416 (11.01) 0.29 (0.98) .03 Top-level specialist 14 001 (20.79) 0.06 (0.99) Mid-level specialist 22 533 (33.46) -0.04 (0.98) Office or customer service worker 8 352 (12.40) -0.25 (0.97) Sales worker 4 968 (7.38) -0.14 (1.01) Skilled worker or craftsman 5 209 (7.41) 0.09 (1.01) Machine operator or vehicle driver 1 716 (2.55) 0.42 (0.92) Elementary worker 2 533 (3.76) -0.24 (1.04) Professional military personnel 355 (0.53) 0.59 (0.89) Never worked 252 (0.37) -0.004 (1.06) Multivariate associations: main effects The main aim of this study is to determine the predictive power of basic demographic and relationship factors for sexual desire, alongside their unique contributions. Table 2 presents the results of two multiple linear regression models predicting sexual desire based on demographic variables, including gender, age, sexual orientation, relationship status, number of children, birth of child during last year, relationship satisfaction, education, and occupation. Interaction terms were included to account for all possible interactions between gender and the other variables. In one model (Model 1), we dropped relationship satisfaction, which allowed us to include those participants not currently in a relationship. The model without relationship satisfaction (Model 1) was statistically significant, F (42, 67292) = 634, p < .001,explained 28.3% of the variance in desire (adjusted R ² = .283). The all-variables model (Model 2) was also statistically significant, F (42, 49962) = 469.1, p < .001, and similarly explained 28.2% of the variance in desire (adjusted R ² = .282). Most of the independent variables in the models were statistically significantly related to sexual desire (Table 2 ), with gender and age being the key predictors in both models. The highest standardized coefficients in both models were for gender (β = .67, p < .001 (Model 1), β = .76, p < 0.001, (Model 2)), meaning that men reported significantly higher levels of desire. However, gender differences were smaller in the multivariate model compared to the univariate model, suggesting they had been confounded by other variables. Age negatively predicted desire (β = −.27 and − .21, p < .001, respectively for the two models), meaning that as people get older, their sexual desire tends to decrease, even when other demographic variables are controlled for; in fact, this association was even stronger than the univariate correlation. The quadratic effect of age was also statistically significant (β = −.05, p < .001 for both models), with declines being steeper in early adulthood. Additionally, in both models sexual orientation emerged as an important factor, with bisexual individuals reporting higher levels of desire (β = .33, p < .001, β = .36, p < .001, respectively) than heterosexual individuals, while asexual individuals reported significantly lower desire (β = −1.04 and − 1.03, p < 0.001, respectively for the two models). Pansexual individuals also reported higher desire compared to heterosexual individuals (β = .19 and .22, p < .001, respectively). Relationship status was included only in Model 1 (Model two only included partnered individuals, so there was no variation in relationship status); it was a statistically significant predictor of desire, with partnered individuals reporting lower desire compared to single individuals (β = −.10, p < .001). The number of children had a small but significant negative association with desire in Model 2, with those with one child (β = −.05, p < .001) or two children (β = −.08, p < .001) scoring higher than those having no children; having more than two children did not have a statistically significant effect on desire. Satisfaction with relationship, only included in Model 2, was positively and statistically significantly related to desire, but its association was similar to the univariate correlation (β = .09, p < .001). While education itself was not a significant predictor of sexual desire, several occupation categories were associated with lower levels of desire than the reference category (senior official or manager) in both models. For example, those who never worked (β = −.36, p < .001, β = −.24, p < .001, respectively for the two models) and elementary workers (β = −.24 and β = −.23, p < .001, respectively for the two models) had significantly lower levels of sexual desire when other variables were controlled for. Table 2 Results of two multiple linear regression models (Model 1 and Model 2) for predicting sexual desire Model 1 Model 2 Variables β p β p (Intercept) − .08 < .001 − .17 < .001 Age − .27 < .001 − .21 < .001 Age² − .05 < .001 − .05 < .001 Gender (Male) .67 < .001 .76 < .001 Child count (1) − .02 .120 − .05 .005 Child count (2) − .03 .050 − .08 < .001 Child count (3) .02 .163 − .02 .315 Child count (4) .06 .028 .02 .602 Child count (5) − .02 .562 − .04 .381 Sexual orientation (Bisexual) .33 < .001 .36 < .001 Sexual orientation (Homosexual) .10 .081 .11 .107 Sexual orientation (Pansexual) .19 < .001 .22 .001 Sexual orientation (Asexual) -1.04 < .001 -1.03 < .001 Education (Secondary) − .01 .568 − .02 .470 Education (Bachelor’s degree) .02 .381 − .00 .963 Education (Master’s or Doctoral degree) − .01 .779 − .03 .189 Relationship status (Partnered) − .10 < .001 Child birth (Yes) − .09 < .001 − .06 .002 Occupation (Top-level specialist) − .05 < .001 − .04 .003 Occupation (Mid-level specialist) − .13 < .001 − .11 < .001 Occupation (Office or customer service worker) − .15 < .001 − .13 < .001 Occupation (Sales worker) − .12 < .001 − .11 < .001 Occupation (Skilled worker or craftsman) − .14 < .001 − .12 < .001 Occupation (Machine operator or vehicle driver) − .17 < .001 − .15 < .001 Occupation (Elementary worker) − .24 < .001 − .23 < .001 Occupation (Professional military personnel) − .06 .196 − .04 .449 Occupation (Never worked) − .36 < .001 − .24 .005 Age × Gender (Male) .07 < .001 − .01 .557 Age ² × Gender (Male) − .03 < .001 − .01 .499 Gender (Male) × Education (Secondary) .00 .964 .00 .914 Gender (Male) × Education (Bachelor’s degree) − .03 .303 − .00 .902 Gender (Male) × Education (B Master’s or Doctoral degree) − .05 .153 − .02 .592 Gender (Male) × Child count (1) .15 < .001 .18 < .001 Gender (Male) × Child count (2) .22 < .001 .29 < .001 Gender (Male) × Child count (3) .22 < .001 .29 < .001 Gender (Male) × Child count (4) .28 < .001 .33 < .001 Gender (Male) × Child count (5) .38 < .001 .44 < .001 Gender (Male) × Sexual orientation (Bisexual) − .10 .066 − .05 .437 Gender (Male) × Sexual orientation (Homosexual) − .07 .305 − .08 .369 Gender (Male) × Sexual orientation (Pansexual) − .15 .184 − .02 .884 Gender (Male) × Sexual orientation ( Asexual) − .40 < .001 − .21 .190 Gender (Male) × Relationship status ( Partnered) .13 < .001 Gender (Male) × Child birth (No) − .03 .346 .02 .524 Satisfaction with relationship .09 < .001 Gender (Male) × Satisfaction with relationship − .12 < .001 Note. β = standardized regression coefficient. Reference categories: Gender = Female; Child count = 0; Sexual orientation = Heterosexual; Education = Basic; Relationship status = Not partnered; Occupation = Senior official or manager, Childbirth = No. Multivariate associations: interactions with gender Overall, the results indicate that gender and age are the strongest predictors of sexual desire, with additional associations with relationship status, sexual orientation, and occupation. But, as we expected, gender also significantly moderated the effects of several variables, such as age (in Model 1), number of children (in both models), and relationship status (in Model 1). Finally, gender also interacted with relationship satisfaction in relation to desire, with the satisfaction-desire relationship more positive for women. With all main effects and interactions with gender, both models predicted approximately 28% of the variability in sexual desire; however, had we removed the interaction effects, the percentages would have been 27.7% for both models. We illustrate the interaction effects between gender and other demographic variables graphically in Fig. 1 ; these analyses included both single and partnered individuals. For each interaction, the dependent variable was sexual desire residualized for all demographic variables not used in the interaction. For instance, residual desire for the interaction between gender and age (Fig. 1 .A) represents the residuals from a linear regression model for desire in which all other demographic variables were accounted for. For example, men reported higher sexual desire than women across most ages. Men's desire appears to peak around their late 30s to early 40s before gradually declining. Women also show a decrease in desire with age, but their levels remain consistently lower than men's. The association between relationship status and sexual desire was such that men's average desire was higher when they were in a relationship, whereas women's desire was lower when they were in a relationship (Fig. 1 .B). Likewise, women with more children tended to have lower desire, while for men, the trend was the opposite (Fig. 1 .C). This suggests that having more children may reflect time, energy, and trade-offs that impact women's, but not men’s desire levels. Alternatively, the number of children a couple has may reflect the desire differential and its relationship correlates in that couple. Education levels have a relatively small effect on desire (Fig. 1 .F). Men’s desire remains higher across all education levels, but differences between genders narrow slightly at higher education levels. Desire also shows variability across occupation categories (Fig. 1 .G), still men reporting consistently higher levels of desire than women across all categories. Discussion Sexual desire is a fundamental component of human relationships, yet its patterns and predictors vary significantly across demographic groups. This study identified robust gender differences in sexual desire, with men consistently reporting higher levels of desire than women. The observed effect size (η² = .18) exceeds the medium-to-large effect sizes documented in previous meta-analyses (g = 0.69) 59 . Current large effect size is a key finding, highlighting the substantial gender difference in this large Estonian sample and its distinction from prior meta-analyses. These findings align with longstanding evidence suggesting that men exhibit higher levels of sexual desire 4 , 5 . Biological factors, such as testosterone levels, and sociocultural norms that promote greater sexual agency in men, likely contribute to these differences 13 . Importantly, this study shows that demographic factors alone—without accounting for psychological or relational influences—explain 28.3% of the variance in sexual desire, demonstrating their substantial predictive value. This study considered the influence of several demographic factors including age, gender, sexual orientation, relationship status, number of children, recent childbirth, educational attainment, and occupation on sexual desire. A particularly striking finding is just how substantially higher men’s sexual desire is compared to women’s throughout most of life. While prior research has consistently shown that men report greater levels of sexual desire than women 2 , 5 , this study underscores the magnitude of this difference. Even at its peak, women’s sexual desire remains lower than men’s average levels across nearly all ages. It is only after the age of 60 + that men’s declining sexual desire falls below the highest levels ever reported by women. The persistent difference throughout the lifespan is a notable contribution, emphasizing the enduring nature of gender disparities in sexual desire. This pattern suggests that men’s sexual desire is not only higher on average but also far more stable across the lifespan, likely due to the continuous production of androgens such as testosterone 14 , 60 . In contrast, women’s sexual desire is more variable, influenced by reproductive cycles, hormonal fluctuations, and sociocultural factors that shape desire expression across different life stages 15 , 33 . These findings align with previous research indicating gender differences in sexual desire and the influence of biological and sociocultural factors, as discussed in the introduction 1 , 7 , 39 . This finding reinforces the robustness of gender differences in sexual motivation. At the same time, it highlights that the impact of aging on male sexual desire is delayed, with a noticeable decline only emerging in later life. The stability of men's desire and the variability of women's across the lifespan are key patterns observed in our data. Age also emerged as a significant predictor of sexual desire. As expected, sexual desire declined with age in both men and women, though the decline was more pronounced in women, particularly after the age of 50. These findings are consistent with prior research demonstrating that age-related declines in sexual desire are mediated by hormonal changes, health issues, and relational factors 12 , 13 . Men’s sexual desire tends to remain relatively stable until later in life, reflecting differences in biological and relational influences 1 . An especially noteworthy finding is that men’s sexual desire peaks around the age of 40, exceeding even early adulthood levels, and only declines to match younger men’s levels by 60+. This pattern is surprising because it does not align with the well-documented trajectory of testosterone decline, which begins gradually after the early 30s and continues throughout life 61 , 62 . This finding partially contradicts our initial hypothesis that predicted a straightforward decline in sexual desire with age, although the general trend of decline in later life was observed. The mid-life peak in men suggests that factors beyond biological aging, such as relational dynamics, may play a more significant role than initially anticipated. For example, men in their 40s are more likely to be in stable long-term relationships, which have been associated with increased sexual activity and emotional intimacy 7 , 63 . The unexpected mid-life peak in men is a novel contribution that warrants further exploration of relational and psychological influences on male sexual desire. As men age past mid-life, changes in relationship status may contribute to the eventual decline in sexual desire. The increasing prevalence of relationship dissolution in older men may partially explain their steeper decline in sexual desire after the age of 60+, as loss of a partner or reduced relationship quality could contribute to this shift 64 , 65 . Given that demographic factors alone account for 28.3% of the variance in sexual desire, future research should examine additional psychological and social variables to improve predictive models. This highlights the importance of expanding the scope of research beyond demographics. Relational context also played important roles in shaping sexual desire. Men living with a mate reported the highest levels of sexual desire. These findings align with evidence that relational satisfaction and emotional intimacy are significant predictors of sexual desire 63 . However, the observed discrepancies in sexual desire between partnered and unpartnered individuals underscore the role of daily interactions and shared emotional closeness in sustaining sexual interest 9 . At the same time, the inverse relationship between relationship duration and sexual desire, particularly for women, points to the potential for habituation and shifts in relational dynamics over time 7 . Parental responsibilities and family size were also associated with variations in sexual desire. Parenthood often leads to a decline in sexual desire due to increased stress and changes in hormonal levels 32 , 66 . This may suggest that greater parental involvement affects sexual desire differently for men and women, reflecting differences in time availability, relational investment, and stress burden. These findings highlight the importance of considering gendered dynamics in the distribution of parental responsibilities and their impact on relational and sexual well-being 30 . Educational attainment and occupational context showed smaller but notable effects on sexual desire. These findings align with studies suggesting that higher education is associated with greater openness and assertiveness in sexual expression, particularly for women 23 , 67 . Conversely, occupational stress, especially in high-pressure roles, was associated with lower sexual desire, particularly for women, who may face greater challenges in balancing work and relational demands 68 . Future research should explore whether these effects are driven by work-related stress, time constraints, or changing gender expectations in professional and family roles. Demographic factors accounted for 28.3% of the variance in sexual desire in this study, underscoring their significant role as predictors. This finding is in line with prior research, which shows that demographic variables like gender, age, and relationship dynamics explain a substantial portion of sexual desire variability. However, as previous studies suggest that psychological and relational factors can explain even greater variance (up to 40%), this highlights the need for models that integrate both demographic and psychological predictors 69 , 70 . Gender emerged as the strongest predictor of sexual desire in this study, with men reporting significantly higher levels of desire than women. This finding is supported by numerous studies, including those identifying gender as a predictor that accounts for up to 40% of sexual desire-related variance in certain populations 5 , 71 . This result strongly confirms our hypothesis that gender would be a key predictor of sexual desire, with men exhibiting higher desire than women, aligning with well-established patterns in the literature. While biological factors, such as testosterone levels, likely contribute to this disparity, gendered social norms and relationship expectations may further reinforce these patterns. Moreover, recent research suggests that personality traits and life experiences also play a role in shaping long-term patterns of sexual desire, an area that warrants further exploration 72 , 73 . This study provides a strong foundation for understanding demographic and relational predictors of sexual desire, yet several directions remain for future research. A key priority is to expand the predictive model by incorporating personality traits, which, as suggested by previous research, could improve its explanatory power beyond the current 28.3%. Specifically, traits such as openness, extraversion, and impulsivity have been linked to higher sexual desire, while neuroticism and attachment insecurity may suppress it 72 , 74 . Additionally, future studies should explore how individuals’ self-reported sexual desire aligns with assessments from significant others. Given that self-perception can be influenced by gender norms and social desirability, comparing self-ratings to partner evaluations may provide a more comprehensive understanding of sexual desire dynamics 75 . This could address potential biases in self-reporting and provide a more nuanced view of desire discrepancies within relationships. By integrating personality traits, major life events, and multiple perspectives on desire, future research could refine models of sexual motivation and offer a more comprehensive framework for understanding its variation across individuals and life stages. Methods Transparency and Openness The data cannot be publicly shared, as they are part of an extensive ongoing biobank study, Estonian Biobank (EstBB). However, researchers can apply for access to the data ( https://genomics.ut.ee/en/content/estonian-biobank ). The EstBB is regulated by the Human Genes Research Act, which was adopted in 2000 specifically for the operations of the EstBB. Individual-level data analysis in the EstBB PS21 was carried out under ethical approval 1.1–12/626 (13.04.2020) from the Estonian Committee on Bioethics and Human Research (Estonian Ministry of Social Affairs), using data according to release application 3–10/GI/11571 from the EstBB. As this study was part of a broader data collection effort 48 , parts of the data set have been previously analyzed in multiple other studies such as 49 – 51 . However, no study yet has focused on sexual desire assessments of the EstBB. Statistical analyses were carried out with R language, Version 4.3.1 52 . The following packages were used: tidyverse (Version 2.0.0) 53 , ggplot2 (Version 3.4.2) 54 , psych (Version 2.3.6) 55 , and effectsize 56 , 57 . The R code is available at https://osf.io/5gwhc . Analyses were not preregistered. Sample Participants were members (“gene donors”) of the EstBB, a population sample of approximately 200,000 adults comprising about 20% of Estonian adult residents or past residents currently living abroad 58 . Participants’ self-rated sexual desire and satisfaction with relationship flirting were collected through an online EstBB Personality Study (PS21) survey between November 2021 and April 2022, with email invitations sent to 182,405 gene donors 48 . To encourage participation, the study was advertised on national radio, television, newspapers and magazines, and on social media; participants were also offered feedback on their Big Five personality trait scores. Participants could choose to participate in either Estonian or Russian, but we only used data provided in Estonian to avoid confounding language differences with group differences. The initial sample size was N = 73,670. After excluding respondents with missing values and those older than 84, the final sample consisted of N = 67,334 participants, aged 20 to 84 years ( M = 47.15, Mdn = 47.00, SD = 14.34). The sample’s gender (sex assigned at birth) distribution was as follows: 70% (46,879) were women (their age ranged from 20 to 84; M = 47.0; Mdn = 47.0; SD = 14.3) and 30% (20,456) were men (their age ranged from 20 to 84, M = 47.5, Mdn = 47.0; SD = 14.2). Measures To assess sexual desire, we used two items: “I have strong sexual urges” and “I do not think much about sex”. As the responses to these two questions were correlated ( r = − .65), we created a new variable for sexual desire by calculating the standardized average of the first question and the reverse-coded second question. The average sexual desire (standardized) score for the entire sample was M = 0.00 ( SD = 1.00). Satisfaction with romantic relationship was measured with one question, only reported by those in a relationship: “I'm satisfied with how I get along with my partner (spouse, partner).” Participants' age was calculated as the difference between their date of birth embedded within their national ID codes and the survey time, ranging from 20 to 84; M = 47.15; Mdn = 47.0; SD = 14.34. Gender was taken from participants’ ID codes which represents sex assigned at birth or, in rare cases unknown to us, legal sex after gender change. Participants reported their sexual orientation using five categories: heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, and asexual (The distribution of the sample across groups is presented in Table 1 ). Participants reported their marital status using five categories: living alone, living with a mate, married, divorced, widowed; for our analyses, we created two categories: 1. Living alone (including those who are single, divorced, or widowed) and 2. Living with a partner (including those who are married or living with a mate). Participants reported their number of children, ranging from 0 to 5. Participants were also asked to indicate whether they had a child or children born during the last year. Educational attainment was measured as the highest level of education completed by participants, self-reported and categorized as follows: 1. Early childhood education or no formal education, 2. Primary education, 3. Basic education, 4. Vocational education based on basic education, 5. General secondary education or vocational secondary education (including secondary specialized or technical education based on basic education), 6. Vocational training based on secondary education, 7. Bachelor’s degree or equivalent (including applied higher education and diploma studies), 8. Master’s degree or equivalent, 9. Doctorate or equivalent. For analyses, the variable was coded as an ordinal variable (ranging from 1 to 4). Categories 1 to 4 were coded as 1 (Basic education), categories 5 and 6 were coded as 2 (Secondary education), category 7 was coded as 3 (Bachelor’s degree), and categories 8 and 9 were coded as 4 (Master’s or Doctoral degree). Occupation. Participants were also asked: Which of the following best describes your primary occupation (currently or before retiring from work)? They could choose one response from ten predefined occupational categories, all of which are presented in Table 1 . Statistical analysis To examine the significance and magnitude (η 2 ) of the differences in mean desire across the individual demographic groups (bivariate associations), we used analysis of variance (ANOVA). Given that both age and desire were continuous variables, we calculated their Pearson correlation ( r ). To assess the multivariate predictive power of demographic variables and their hypothesized interactions with gender for sexual desire, we conducted linear regression with desire as the dependent variable. The predictor variables included age (continuous), sexual orientation (categorical), relationship status (categorical), number of children (continuous), childbirth within the last year (categorical), educational attainment (categorical), occupation (categorical), and satisfaction with the relationship. Since only participants in a relationship answered the question about satisfaction, and to retain the full sample for the analysis of other variables, we also conducted another regression that did not include relationship satisfaction among the independent variables. To illustrate the interactions between gender and other demographic variables, we present eight interaction plots. Declarations Author Contribution All authors contributed equally Data Availability We cannot share the data publicly because it is part of an ongoing national biobank study that is subject to strict national regulations (Human Genes Research Act, 2000) to protect participant anonymity and guard public trust. Researchers can apply for remote access to the data (https://genomics.ut.ee/en/content/estonian-biobank). References DeLamater, J. D. & Sill, M. Sexual Desire in Later Life. J. Sex Res. 42 , 138–149 (2005). Regan, P. C. & Berscheid, E. Beliefs about the state, goals, and objects of sexual desire. Journal Sex Marital Therapy . 22 , 110–120 (1996). Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P. & Steinberg, L. The Sexual Desire Inventory: Development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. Journal sex marital therapy . 22 , 175–190 (1996). Dawson, S. J. & Chivers, M. L. Gender Differences and Similarities in Sexual Desire. Curr. Sex. Health Rep. 6 , 211–219 (2014). Peixoto, M. M. Differences in solitary and dyadic sexual desire and sexual satisfaction in heterosexual and nonheterosexual cisgender men and women. J. Sex. Med. 20 , 597–604 (2023). Mark, K. P. Sexual Desire Discrepancy. Curr. Sex. Health Rep. 7 , 198–202 (2015). Murray, S. H. & Milhausen, R. R. Sexual desire and relationship duration in young men and women. Journal Sex Marital Therapy . 38 , 28–40 (2012). Johansen, E., Harkin, A., Keating, F., Sanchez, A. & Buzwell, S. Fairer Sex: The Role of Relationship Equity in Female Sexual Desire. J. Sex Res. 60 , 498–507 (2023). van Lankveld, J., Jacobs, N., Thewissen, V., Dewitte, M. & Verboon, P. The associations of intimacy and sexuality in daily life: Temporal dynamics and gender effects within romantic relationships. J. Social Personal Relationships . 35 , 557–576 (2018). Park, H. G., Suk, H. W., Cheon, J. E., Kim, Y. H. & Darling Come Lay with Me or Talk with Me: Perceived Mattering and the Complementary Association between Sex and Communication within Marital Relationships. J. Sex Res. 60 , 336–348 (2023). Birnbaum, G. E. Attachment orientations, sexual functioning, and relationship satisfaction in a community sample of women. J. Social Personal Relationships . 24 , 21–35 (2007). McCabe, M. P. & Goldhammer, D. L. Demographic and Psychological Factors Related to Sexual Desire among Heterosexual Women in a Relationship. J. Sex Res. 49 , 78–87 (2012). Wieczorek, L. L., Chivers, M., Koehn, M. A., DeBruine, L. M. & Jones, B. C. Age Effects on Women’s and Men’s Dyadic and Solitary Sexual Desire. Arch. Sex Behav. 51 , 3765–3789 (2022). Beutel, M. E., Stöbel-Richter, Y. & Brähler, E. Sexual desire and sexual activity of men and women across their lifespans: results from a representative German community survey. BJU Int. 101 , 76–82 (2008). Harris, E. A. et al. Does Sexual Desire Fluctuate More Among Women than Men? Arch. Sex. Behav. 52 , 1461–1478 (2023). Pfaus, J. G. Pathways of sexual desire. J. Sex. Med. 6 , 1506–1533 (2009). Chadwick, S. B., Burke, S. M., Goldey, K. L., Bell, S. N. & Van Anders, S. M. Sexual Desire in Sexual Minority and Majority Women and Men: The Multifaceted Sexual Desire Questionnaire. Arch. Sex. Behav. 46 , 2465–2484 (2017). Herbenick, D. et al. An Event-Level Analysis of the Sexual Characteristics and Composition Among Adults Ages 18 to 59: Results from a National Probability Sample in the United States. J. Sex. Med. 7 , 346–361 (2010). Satinsky, S. Body Size and Sexual Behavior in a Community-Based Sample of Women. Int. J. Sex. Health . 26 , 129–135 (2014). Nimbi, F. M. et al. Sexual Desire and Fantasies in the LGBT + Community: Focus on Lesbian Women and Gay Men. Curr. Sex. Health Rep. 12 , 153–161 (2020). Brotto, L. A., Yule, M. A. & Gorzalka, B. B. Asexuality: An extreme variant of sexual desire disorder? J. Sex. Med. 12 , 646–660 (2015). Gewirtz-Meydan, A., Sowan, W., Estlein, R. & Winstok, Z. Rights or Obligations: The Extent to Which Sexual Desire and Gender Roles Determine Sexual Intimacy in Romantic Relationships. Journal Sex Marital Therapy . 50 , 482–497 (2024). Tabatabaeichehr, M., Mortazavi, H., Abadi, M. H. & Moayed, L. Sexual desire and related factors in middle-aged and elderly married women: a cross-sectional study in Iran. Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences 6, (2018). (1906). Barazandeh, M., Besharat, M. A. & Moghadamzadeh, A. Do education, sex, and age moderate the relationship of intelligence and creativity with sexual desire? Sex. Relatsh. Therapy . 38 , 267–276 (2023). Rye, B. J., Mashinter, C., Meaney, G. J., Wood, E. & Gentile, S. Satisfaction with previous sexual health education as a predictor of intentions to pursue further sexual health education. Sex. Educ. 15 , 93–107 (2015). Abdoly, M. & Pourmousavi, L. The relationship between sexual satisfaction and education levels in women. (2013). Shrestha, R., Doddasamiah, S. M., Tambat, R. M., Krishna, P. M. & Thapa, M. The association of work pressure with depression and sexual desire a cross-sectional study among health care professional. Age (in years) 18 , 53 . Habis, C. & Maalouf, R. G. Impact of stress and burnout on the sexual desire of trainee doctors at Hôtel-Dieu de France Hospital: A single-institution survey. L’encephale 45 , 371–375 (2019). Domenighetti, G., Tomada, A., Marazzi, A., Abazi, O. & Quaglia, J. Impact of job insecurity on sexual desire: an exploratory analysis. Swiss Med. Wkly. 139 , 486–492 (2009). Tavares, I. M., Schlagintweit, H. E., Nobre, P. J. & Rosen, N. O. Sexual well-being and perceived stress in couples transitioning to parenthood: A dyadic analysis. Int. J. Clin. Health Psychol. 19 , 198–208 (2019). O’Malley, D., Smith, V. & Higgins, A. Sexual Aspects of Problems in the Postpartum and Early Parenthood (1st Year). in Midwifery and Sexuality (eds. Geuens, S., Polona Mivšek, A. & Gianotten, Woet. L.) 163–173Springer International Publishing, Cham, (2023). 10.1007/978-3-031-18432-1_14 Harris, E. A., Gormezano, A. M. & Van Anders, S. M. Gender Inequities in Household Labor Predict Lower Sexual Desire in Women Partnered with Men. Arch. Sex. Behav. 51 , 3847–3870 (2022). McNulty, J. K., Maxwell, J. A., Meltzer, A. L. & Baumeister, R. F. Sex-Differentiated Changes in Sexual Desire Predict Marital Dissatisfaction. Arch. Sex. Behav. 48 , 2473–2489 (2019). Brtnicka, H., Weiss, P. & Zverina, J. Human sexuality during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Bratisl Lek Listy . 110 , 427–431 (2009). Calpbinici, P. The relationship between traumatic childbirth perception, desire to avoid pregnancy, and sexual quality of life in women. Intl J. Gynecology Obste . 167 , 265–272 (2024). Fehniger, J. E. et al. Childbirth and female sexual function later in life. Obstetrics Gynecology . 122 , 988–997 (2013). MacKenzie, N. E., Gordon, A. M., Impett, E. A. & Rosen, N. O. Indirect associations between infant sleep, parental sleep, and sexual well-being in new parent couples. J. Fam. Psychol. 37 , 347 (2023). Soljačić Vraneš, H., Djaković, I., Vraneš, H., Vrljičak, M. & Kraljević, Z. Changes in sex life after childbirth. Psychiatria Danubina . 31 , 847–850 (2019). Mark, K. P. The relative impact of individual sexual desire and couple desire discrepancy on satisfaction in heterosexual couples. Sex. Relatsh. Therapy . 27 , 133–146 (2012). Willoughby, B. J., Vitas, J., Sexual Desire & Discrepancy The Effect of Individual Differences in Desired and Actual Sexual Frequency on Dating Couples. Arch. Sex. Behav. 41 , 477–486 (2012). Kim, J. J. et al. Are Couples More Satisfied When They Match in Sexual Desire? New Insights From Response Surface Analyses. Social Psychol. Personality Sci. 12 , 487–496 (2021). Byers, E. S. Relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction: A longitudinal study of individuals in long-term relationships. J. Sex. Res. 42 , 113–118 (2005). Huberman, J. S., Tavares, I. M., Goruk, K. J. & Rosen, N. O. Empathic accuracy for a partner’s negative affect is associated with couples’ daily sexual well-being. Journal Family Psychology (2025). Vannier, S. A. & O’Sullivan, L. F. Who Gives and Who Gets: Why, When, and with Whom Young People Engage in Oral Sex. J. Youth Adolescence . 41 , 572–582 (2012). De Oliveira, L., Vallejo-Medina, P. & Carvalho, J. The Mediating Role of Sexual Boredom in Women’s Sexual Desire and Satisfaction. Journal Sex Marital Therapy . 51 , 96–109 (2025). Fallis, E. E., Rehman, U. S., Woody, E. Z. & Purdon, C. The longitudinal association of relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction in long-term relationships. J. Fam. Psychol. 30 , 822 (2016). Vowels, L. M. & Mark, K. P. Relationship and sexual satisfaction: a longitudinal actor–partner interdependence model approach. Sex. Relatsh. Therapy . 35 , 46–59 (2020). Vaht, M. et al. Cohort profile: Personality measurements at the Estonian Biobank of the Estonian Genome Center (University of Tartu, 2024). Mõttus, R. et al. Most people’s life satisfaction matches their personality traits: True correlations in multitrait, multirater, multisample data. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 126 , 676 (2024). Arumäe, K. et al. Self-and informant-reported personality traits and vaccination against COVID-19. Plos one . 19 , e0287413 (2024). Anni, K., Vainik, U. & Mõttus, R. Personality profiles of 263 occupations. Journal Appl. Psychology (2024). R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2023). Wickham, H. et al. Welcome to the Tidyverse. J. open. source Softw. 4 , 1686 (2019). Wickham, H. Getting Started with ggplot2. in ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis 11–31 (Springer, (2016). Revelle, W. psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research. Northwestern University (2023). Ben-Shachar, M. S., Lüdecke, D. & Makowski, D. effectsize: Estimation of effect size indices and standardized parameters. J. open. source Softw. 5 , 2815 (2020). Pedersen, T. L. & Patchwork The composer of plots. CRAN: Contributed Packages (2019). Milani, L. et al. The Estonian Biobank’s journey from biobanking to personalized medicine. Nat. Commun. 16 , 3270 (2025). Frankenbach, J., Weber, M., Loschelder, D. D., Kilger, H. & Friese, M. Sex drive: Theoretical conceptualization and meta-analytic review of gender differences. Psychol. Bull. 148 , 621 (2022). Van Anders, S. M. Testosterone and sexual desire in healthy women and men. Arch. Sex Behav. 41 , 1471–1484 (2012). Yeap, B. B. Hormones and health outcomes in aging men. Exp. Gerontol. 48 , 677–681 (2013). de Araujo, J. A. A. et al. Major clinical studies on the relationship between testosterone levels and aging in men: a systematic review. International J. Nutrology 18 , (2025). Štulhofer, A., Ferreira, L. C. & Landripet, I. Emotional intimacy, sexual desire, and sexual satisfaction among partnered heterosexual men. Sex. Relatsh. Therapy . 29 , 229–244 (2014). Carvalho, J. & Nobre, P. Gender differences in sexual desire: How do emotional and relationship factors determine sexual desire according to gender? Sexologies 20, 207–211 (2011). Kontula, O. & Haavio-Mannila, E. The impact of aging on human sexual activity and sexual desire. J. Sex Res. 46 , 46–56 (2009). Rosen, N. O., Bailey, K. & Muise, A. Degree and Direction of Sexual Desire Discrepancy are Linked to Sexual and Relationship Satisfaction in Couples Transitioning to Parenthood. J. Sex. Res. 55 , 214–225 (2018). Gimmel, L., Becker-Hebly, I. & Wieczorek, L. L. Sexual Assertiveness of University Students in Germany: The Role of Sources and Topics in Sexuality Education. Am. J. Sexuality Educ. 1–23 10.1080/15546128.2024.2435358 (2024). Kazemi, L., Mirghafourvand, M., Esmaeilpour, K. & Kamalifard, M. Effects of stress management and relationship-enrichment counseling on sexual and marital satisfaction of working women with high occupational stress. J. Educ. Health Promotion . 13 , 13 (2024). Carvalho, J. & Nobre, P. Predictors of men’s sexual desire: The role of psychological, cognitive-emotional, relational, and medical factors. J. Sex Res. 48 , 254–262 (2011). Carvalho, J. & Nobre, P. Predictors of women’s sexual desire: The role of psychopathology, cognitive-emotional determinants, relationship dimensions, and medical factors. J. Sex. Med. 7 , 928–937 (2010). Vowels, L. M., Vowels, M. J. & Mark, K. P. Uncovering the most important factors for predicting sexual desire using explainable machine learning. J. Sex. Med. 18 , 1198–1216 (2021). Dosch, A., Rochat, L., Ghisletta, P., Favez, N. & Van der Linden, M. Psychological Factors Involved in Sexual Desire, Sexual Activity, and Sexual Satisfaction: A Multi-factorial Perspective. Arch. Sex Behav. 45 , 2029–2045 (2016). Géonet, M., De Sutter, P. & Zech, E. Do stressful life events impact women’s sexual desire? Sexologies 27 , 196–202 (2018). Allen, M. S. & Walter, E. E. Linking big five personality traits to sexuality and sexual health: A meta-analytic review. Psychol. Bull. 144 , 1081–1110 (2018). Lykins, A. D., Janssen, E., Newhouse, S., Heiman, J. R. & Rafaeli, E. The effects of similarity in sexual excitation, inhibition, and mood on sexual arousal problems and sexual satisfaction in newlywed couples. J. Sex. Med. 9 , 1360–1366 (2012). Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 05 Jan, 2026 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 24 Jul, 2025 Reviews received at journal 16 Jul, 2025 Reviews received at journal 14 Jul, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 06 Jul, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 05 Jul, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 04 Jul, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 03 Jul, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 03 Jul, 2025 Editor invited by journal 04 Jun, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 03 Jun, 2025 First submitted to journal 02 Jun, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6799953","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":466371273,"identity":"9f3b64ef-b46c-4da8-898d-248718f6f2ac","order_by":0,"name":"Toivo Aavik","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Tartu","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Toivo","middleName":"","lastName":"Aavik","suffix":""},{"id":466371274,"identity":"b6cd9ed2-7883-4856-9f05-ffe46be00516","order_by":1,"name":"Karin Täht","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Tartu","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Karin","middleName":"","lastName":"Täht","suffix":""},{"id":466371275,"identity":"ba523518-f21a-4eb0-9ded-ecc742b2e4f1","order_by":2,"name":"Uku Vainik","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Tartu","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Uku","middleName":"","lastName":"Vainik","suffix":""},{"id":466371276,"identity":"b888c52a-9df1-4874-866a-a34f9fc3081d","order_by":3,"name":"Rene Mõttus","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Edinburgh","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Rene","middleName":"","lastName":"Mõttus","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-06-02 07:53:42","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6799953/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6799953/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-23483-0","type":"published","date":"2026-01-05T15:59:13+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":84205114,"identity":"79878771-cee5-49bc-bdd0-8efb9b608967","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-09 08:58:18","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":456029,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eInteraction of gender with other demographic variables for desire\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote\u003c/em\u003e. \u0026nbsp;Education: Basic = Basic education, Secondary = Secondary education, Bachelor’s = Bachelor’s degree, Master’s or PhD = Master’s or Doctoral degree; Job category: Manager = Senior official or manager, Top specialist = Top-level specialist, Mid specialist = Mid-level specialist, Office = Office or customer service worker, Sales = Sales worker, Craftsman= Skilled worker or craftsman, Machine driver = Machine operator or vehicle driver, Elementary = Elementary worker, Military = Professional military personnel.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e¹For each panel, Desire(z) represents the residualized variable desire (controlled for those demographic variables not shown in this particular panel).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6799953/v1/01fc721f47ff2351bea74e71.jpeg"},{"id":100069417,"identity":"37575cb6-6f04-48b1-bc2e-9c514096fbdd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-01-12 16:13:46","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1421975,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6799953/v1/46001071-e927-4c9a-9504-5122d00b50c6.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Associations Between Demographic and Relationship Variables and Sexual Desire: Findings from a Large-Scale Estonian Biobank Dataset","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eSexual desire is a vital component of human relationships and well-being, shaped by demographic, relational, psychological, and cultural factors\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR2\" citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Understanding these influences is essential for advancing theoretical models and improving clinical interventions, yet previous research has often been limited by small sample sizes and inconsistent findings. For example, we do not yet have a clear answer to even the simplest question: How much of the variance in sexual desire can be explained by the basic demographic and relationship variables, and to what extent does each variable matter when the others are controlled for? It is unclear how more complex questions about desire could be properly addressed without clear answers to these most basic descriptive questions. To address this, we examined the variability of sexual desire in a large-scale Estonian Biobank cohort that covers about seven percent of Estonia\u0026rsquo;s adult population, incorporating diverse demographic and relational variables, including age, gender, marital status, sexual orientation, recent childbirth, number of children, relationship satisfaction, educational attainment, and occupation. Previous studies have addressed these variables individually, but rarely in combination and in sufficiently large and representative samples to mutually adjust for each other and reliably assess their interactions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eGender, age, and sexual orientation\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGender differences in sexual desire are among the most consistent findings in sexuality research, with men reporting higher levels of desire than women\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Explanations for this difference highlight both biological (e.g., testosterone levels) and sociocultural factors (e.g., societal norms regulating desire expression)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Relational satisfaction, emotional intimacy, and (lack of) communication are significant predictors of desire in both genders, but the underlying mechanisms differ, often reflecting cultural norms and gendered expectations\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR9\" citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This may also contribute to gender differences.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlso, sexual desire tends to decline with age, likely driven by biological changes, such as reductions in testosterone and estrogen, as well as shifting relational priorities and health concerns\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR12\" citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. A large-scale study with over 8,000 participants\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that men maintain higher levels of sexual desire into older age, while women experience a sharper decline, particularly after menopause. Another community-based study with 2,341 participants\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e confirmed that age-related declines in sexual desire are more pronounced in women, with the gap between men and women widening over time. Also, a longitudinal data from over 11,000 observations\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that while men\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire remains relatively stable, women\u0026rsquo;s desire shows greater variability over time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWomen, particularly post-menopause, experience a steeper decline than men, whose desire may remain more stable until later in life\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. For example, using a large U.S. probability sample of 3,990 adults aged 18\u0026ndash;59 years, Herbenick et al\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e found that while age-related declines in sexual function were observed in both genders, diversity in sexual behaviors and partner type played significant roles in maintaining sexual pleasure and arousal, particularly in men. Erectile and lubrication difficulties increased with age, but higher behavioral diversity was linked to greater orgasm likelihood in both men and women, suggesting compensatory mechanisms that may sustain sexual desire despite biological aging. Satinsky\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, in a smaller sample of 146 sexually active women, did not specifically examine sexual desire decline, but their findings indicated that increase body weight was not a major predictor of sexual behaviors, implying that factors beyond biological aging\u0026mdash;such as relational and contextual influences\u0026mdash;may moderate changes in sexual desire.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSexual orientation could also play a role in sexual desire. Bisexual and pansexual individuals often report higher levels of desire due to broader attraction patterns and relational flexibility, while asexual individuals consistently report the lowest levels, reflecting an orientation distinct from hypoactive sexual desire disorder\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. However, because over 95% of people identify as heterosexual, large sample sizes are needed to draw reliable conclusions about sexual desire differences across orientations. A study\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e by Peixoto (2023) with 1,013 participants (552 women and 461 men, including 211 nonheterosexual individuals) found that men reported higher levels of solitary and attractive person-related sexual desire than women across all orientations. Nonheterosexual participants also had higher levels of these desires compared to heterosexuals, reinforcing the idea that sexual orientation plays a role in shaping sexual desire patterns. Gendered patterns persist across all orientations, with men generally reporting higher levels of desire than women, though the magnitude of differences varies\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSocioeconomic factors\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAddressing educational attainment and occupation could offer unique insights into how broader social roles intersect with desire. However, there is limited work yet on linking them with desire. Some studies suggest that higher education levels may be associated with greater sexual desire, particularly among middle-aged and older women\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;210). However, other studies\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;168), found no significant link between educational attainment and sexual desire, indicating that the relationship may be more complex. Higher education levels may be associated with greater openness and sexual assertiveness in women, enabling challenges to traditional gender norms\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. However, some evidence supports the claim that adolescents' sexual behaviors can negatively impact academic attainment, often through indirect pathways involving emotional, behavioral, and contextual factors\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation, however, presents a more complex picture. For example, those in high-stress professions, such as healthcare, could have either reduced desire due to work pressure or increased desire linked to burnout, particularly among men\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. A study on healthcare professionals (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;150) found that higher work pressure was significantly associated with lower sexual desire\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Job insecurity has also been linked to declines in desire, particularly among younger workers. For example, a large-scale study (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7,247) found that men experiencing job insecurity had a 53% higher risk of decreased sexual desire, while women had a 47% higher risk compared to those with job stability\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. While these findings support the role of occupational stress in shaping sexual desire, another research presents a more nuanced picture. A study on menopausal women (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;210) indicated that occupation was significantly related to sexual desire, but did not specify whether specific professions had a positive or negative impact\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. These findings underscore the importance of examining occupational roles and their psychological, relational, and contextual impacts on sexual desire.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eParental roles and relationship factors\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRelational and normative life-course variables, such as relationship status and parenthood, also shape sexual desire. Cohabiting individuals report varying levels of desire depending on relationship additional challenges, particularly for women. However, most studies on these topics rely on moderate sample sizes, making generalizability a concern. Postpartum hormonal changes and caregiving responsibilities can contribute to declines in desire among women\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (255 mixed-sex new parent couples), whereas men\u0026rsquo;s desire is often unrelated or even positive related to family size\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Larger family sizes correlate with lower desire in women due to increased caregiving demands, though this relationship is moderated by shared responsibilities and relational quality\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (total \u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1093 woman). While these studies provide valuable insights, future research with larger and more diverse samples is needed to fully understand how relational dynamics shape sexual desire over the life course.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe relationship between sexual desire and recent childbirth is complex, influenced by both biological and psychosocial factors. Longitudinal studies\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (207 newlywed couples) show that women\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire declines more steeply over time compared to men, with childbirth exacerbating this decline. Breastfeeding is also linked to lower sexual desire and satisfaction\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Postpartum reductions in women\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire are further associated with declines in both partners' relationship satisfaction. However, short-term sexual difficulties may still be influenced by psychological factors, such as perceived traumatic childbirth, which is linked to lower sexual quality of life\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;376). Additionally, greater parity was not associated with an increased risk of low sexual desire later in life\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1,094). Further, infant sleep patterns and maternal fatigue are critical but often overlooked contributors to decreased sexual desire. Studies have found that disrupted sleep in the postpartum period negatively impacts sexual desire and satisfaction in both partners, highlighting the need for a more holistic approach to postpartum sexual health\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (203 first-time mothers). While the immediate postpartum period presents significant challenges to sexual function, evidence suggests that with adequate support and communication, many couples regain pre-pregnancy levels of sexual satisfaction within the first year postpartum\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;113 women).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, sexual desire and relationship satisfaction are strongly linked, though findings vary by gender and relationship dynamics. Lower individual sexual desire tracks lower relationship satisfaction, particularly for women\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;133 couples), while discrepancies between desired and actual sexual frequency reduce satisfaction and stability\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8,096 couples). However, matching partners' sexual desire does not uniquely predict satisfaction\u0026mdash;individual desire levels may matter more\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;366 couples). Longitudinal research suggests that sexual and relationship satisfaction change together rather than one causing the other\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;87). Recent findings highlight that relationship satisfaction can mediate the effects of sexual desire on overall well-being, particularly in long-term relationships\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;141 couples). Additionally, authors emphasize that sexual communication between partners plays a crucial role in mitigating dissatisfaction caused by discrepancies in sexual desire\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;431 young people). Additional factors may complicate this link: sexual boredom mediates desire and satisfaction, especially in women\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1,155 women), while for men, sexual satisfaction predicts later relationship satisfaction, whereas for women, relationship satisfaction more strongly predicts sexual satisfaction\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;113 couples; and \u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;204 couples).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis Study\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe investigated differences in sexual desire across various demographic and relational variables using a large-scale, population-based dataset from the Estonian Biobank. Previous research on sexual desire has usually relied on smaller and often homogeneous samples and rarely addressed a broad range of demographic factors at the same time, limiting the ability to generalize findings across populations, mutually adjust the associations and robustly assess interactions among the variables. By utilizing data from over 73,000 participants, we could address these limitations, allowing us to robustly identify nuanced patterns among demographic and relational factors in relation to sexual desire, including their interactions that smaller studies cannot reliably describe.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpecifically, we studied variability of sexual desire with age, gender, relationship status, sexual orientation, recent childbirth, number of children, relationship satisfaction, educational attainment, and occupational level. These variables were chosen because prior research suggests that they may be related to sexual desire, with some of them likely in interaction. We predicted that age and gender would be the strongest correlates of desire, with men and younger people reporting higher sexual desire than women and older people. Moreover, we predicted that age and gender could interact in relation to age (e.g., women\u0026rsquo;s desire declining faster) and that gender could also interact with other variables, such as sexual orientation, relationship satisfaction, and recent childbirth, number children, relationship status, educational attainment and occupational level.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt its core, we sought to answer a simple yet fundamental question: to what extent can easily accessible demographic variables, such as gender and other variables examined in this research, individually, collectively and interactively explain the variance in sexual desire? Owing to the large and representative population sample, we could offer the most robust yet answer to this question. As a result, we aimed to advance theoretical models of sexual desire, offer practical insights for clinical interventions, and provide a foundation for future investigations into the sociocultural and occupational factors shaping human sexuality.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eBivariate associations\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe correlation of sexual desire with two continuous variables, age and relationship satisfaction, were \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.16 and .08 (\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), respectively (i.e., η\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.03 and .006). We show group sizes, average standardized desire scores with standard deviations for these groups, and effect sizes (η\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e) of the bivariate differences between the groups in the Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMen had significantly (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 67,333)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15,202, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) higher desire scores (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.65, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.81) compared to women (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e = -0.28, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.94), with standardized effect size of η\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.18. As for sexual orientation, heterosexual participants made up the largest group (94.88%) and inevitably had mean desire close to sample mean. The highest average desire score was observed in participants who identified as bisexual, while the lowest desire score was found in the asexual group, with the group differences highly significant (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(4, 67,330)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;697.4, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001; η\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.04). Desire also differed significantly among relationship status groups (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 67,333)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;400.3, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), albeit with tiny effect size (η\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.006): partnered participants had higher average sexual desire (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.05; \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.98) than those who were living alone (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e = \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.13; \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.05). Next, ANOVA showed very small (η\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.01) but statistically significant differences in average desire scores for participants with different numbers of children (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(5, 67,329)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;165.9, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), the highest average desire score among those with no children. Likewise, those with a birth within the last year had significantly higher average desire scores (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(1, 67,333)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;73, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001), albeit with a small effect size (η\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere were statistically significant differences among educational attainment levels in average desire scores (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(3, 67,331)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;56.5, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), albeit with a very small effect size (η\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.003). Participants with an undergraduate degree had the highest sexual desire scores, while those with postgraduate degrees had the lowest. Also, occupational groups differed significantly in average desire scores (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(9, 67,325)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;222.5, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) with a small effect size (η\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.03). For example, professional military personnel, machine operator or vehicle driver, and senior official manager tended to score highest, while elementary workers and office or customer service workers scored lower (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe emphasize that since these associations were not mutually adjusted, they were likely mutually confounded. Addressing this requires assessing multivariate associations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe characteristics of demographic groups: sizes of groups, average standardized desire scores with standard deviation, effect sizes of differences in group averages.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariables\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN(%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDesire\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e(\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffect\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSize\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46 879(69.62)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.28 (0.94)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20 456 (30.38)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.65 (0.81)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSexual orientation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHeterosexual\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e63889 (94.88)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.009 (0.99)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBisexual\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1470 (2.18)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.40 (0.99)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHomosexual\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e622 (0.92)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.34 (1.00)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePansexual\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e376 (0.56)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.30 (1.04)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAsexual\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e976 (1.45)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.54 (0.53)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarital status\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiving alone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17 273 (25.65)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.13 (1.05)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.006\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiving with partner\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50 062 (74.35)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.05 (0.98)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumber of children\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14 963 (22.22)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.19 (0.98)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13 093 (19.44)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.06 (0.99)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24 444 (36.30)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.08 (1.00)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11 325 (16.82)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.02 (1.00)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 573 (3.82)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.12 (1.01)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e937 (1.39)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.03 (1.06)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecent childbirth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 371 (5.00)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.14 (0.96)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e63 964 (95.00)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.01 (1.00)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLevel of education\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBasic education\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3638 (5.40)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.11 (1.05)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecondary education\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23 233 (34.50)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.02 (1.03)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17 249 (25.62)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06 (0.98)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaster\u0026rsquo;s or Doctoral degree\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23 215 (34.48)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.05 (0.97)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSenior official or manager\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7 416 (11.01)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.29 (0.98)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTop-level specialist\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14 001 (20.79)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.06 (0.99)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMid-level specialist\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22 533 (33.46)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.04 (0.98)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOffice or customer service worker\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 352 (12.40)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.25 (0.97)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSales worker\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 968 (7.38)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.14 (1.01)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSkilled worker or craftsman\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5 209 (7.41)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.09 (1.01)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMachine operator or vehicle driver\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1 716 (2.55)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.42 (0.92)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eElementary worker\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 533 (3.76)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.24 (1.04)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eProfessional military personnel\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e355 (0.53)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.59 (0.89)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNever worked\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e252 (0.37)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-0.004 (1.06)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eMultivariate associations: main effects\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main aim of this study is to determine the predictive power of basic demographic and relationship factors for sexual desire, alongside their unique contributions. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e presents the results of two multiple linear regression models predicting sexual desire based on demographic variables, including gender, age, sexual orientation, relationship status, number of children, birth of child during last year, relationship satisfaction, education, and occupation. Interaction terms were included to account for all possible interactions between gender and the other variables. In one model (Model 1), we dropped relationship satisfaction, which allowed us to include those participants not currently in a relationship. The model without relationship satisfaction (Model 1) was statistically significant, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(42, 67292)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;634, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001,explained 28.3% of the variance in desire (adjusted \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026sup2; = .283). The all-variables model (Model 2) was also statistically significant, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e(42, 49962)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;469.1, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, and similarly explained 28.2% of the variance in desire (adjusted \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u0026sup2; = .282).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMost of the independent variables in the models were statistically significantly related to sexual desire (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e), with gender and age being the key predictors in both models. The highest standardized coefficients in both models were for gender (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.67, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001 (Model 1), β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.76, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, (Model 2)), meaning that men reported significantly higher levels of desire. However, gender differences were smaller in the multivariate model compared to the univariate model, suggesting they had been confounded by other variables. Age negatively predicted desire (β = \u0026minus;.27 and \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.21, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, respectively for the two models), meaning that as people get older, their sexual desire tends to decrease, even when other demographic variables are controlled for; in fact, this association was even stronger than the univariate correlation. The quadratic effect of age was also statistically significant (β = \u0026minus;.05, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001 for both models), with declines being steeper in early adulthood. Additionally, in both models sexual orientation emerged as an important factor, with bisexual individuals reporting higher levels of desire (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.33, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.36, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, respectively) than heterosexual individuals, while asexual individuals reported significantly lower desire (β = \u0026minus;1.04 and \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1.03, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, respectively for the two models). Pansexual individuals also reported higher desire compared to heterosexual individuals (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.19 and .22, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, respectively). Relationship status was included only in Model 1 (Model two only included partnered individuals, so there was no variation in relationship status); it was a statistically significant predictor of desire, with partnered individuals reporting lower desire compared to single individuals (β = \u0026minus;.10, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001). The number of children had a small but significant negative association with desire in Model 2, with those with one child (β = \u0026minus;.05, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) or two children (β = \u0026minus;.08, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001) scoring higher than those having no children; having more than two children did not have a statistically significant effect on desire. Satisfaction with relationship, only included in Model 2, was positively and statistically significantly related to desire, but its association was similar to the univariate correlation (β\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.09, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile education itself was not a significant predictor of sexual desire, several occupation categories were associated with lower levels of desire than the reference category (senior official or manager) in both models. For example, those who never worked (β = \u0026minus;.36, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, β = \u0026minus;.24, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, respectively for the two models) and elementary workers (β = \u0026minus;.24 and β = \u0026minus;.23, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001, respectively for the two models) had significantly lower levels of sexual desire when other variables were controlled for.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResults of two multiple linear regression models (Model 1 and Model 2) for predicting sexual desire\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eModel 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eVariables\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eβ\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Intercept)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge\u0026sup2;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.76\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChild count (1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.120\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChild count (2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.050\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChild count (3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.163\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.315\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChild count (4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.028\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.602\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChild count (5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.562\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.381\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSexual orientation (Bisexual)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSexual orientation (Homosexual)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.081\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.107\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSexual orientation (Pansexual)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSexual orientation (Asexual)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-1.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation (Secondary)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.568\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.470\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation (Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.381\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.963\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation (Master\u0026rsquo;s or Doctoral degree)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.779\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.189\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRelationship status (Partnered)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChild birth (Yes)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.002\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Top-level specialist)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Mid-level specialist)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Office or customer service worker)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Sales worker)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Skilled worker or craftsman)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Machine operator or vehicle driver)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Elementary worker)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Professional military personnel)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.196\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.449\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation (Never worked)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.36\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge \u0026times; Gender (Male)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.557\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge \u0026sup2; \u0026times; Gender (Male)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.499\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Education (Secondary)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.964\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.914\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Education (Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.303\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.902\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Education (B Master\u0026rsquo;s or Doctoral degree)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.153\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.592\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Child count (1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Child count (2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Child count (3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Child count (4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Child count (5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Sexual orientation\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Bisexual)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.066\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.437\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Sexual orientation\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Homosexual)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.305\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.08\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.369\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Sexual orientation\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Pansexual)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.184\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.884\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Sexual orientation\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e( Asexual)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.190\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Relationship status\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e( Partnered)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Child birth (No)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.346\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.524\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSatisfaction with relationship\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender (Male) \u0026times; Satisfaction with relationship\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003cem\u003eNote. β\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;standardized regression coefficient. Reference categories: Gender\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Female; Child count\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0; Sexual orientation\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Heterosexual; Education\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Basic; Relationship status\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Not partnered; Occupation\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Senior official or manager, Childbirth\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;No.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eMultivariate associations: interactions with gender\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, the results indicate that gender and age are the strongest predictors of sexual desire, with additional associations with relationship status, sexual orientation, and occupation. But, as we expected, gender also significantly moderated the effects of several variables, such as age (in Model 1), number of children (in both models), and relationship status (in Model 1). Finally, gender also interacted with relationship satisfaction in relation to desire, with the satisfaction-desire relationship more positive for women.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWith all main effects and interactions with gender, both models predicted approximately 28% of the variability in sexual desire; however, had we removed the interaction effects, the percentages would have been 27.7% for both models.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe illustrate the interaction effects between gender and other demographic variables graphically in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e; these analyses included both single and partnered individuals. For each interaction, the dependent variable was sexual desire residualized for all demographic variables not used in the interaction. For instance, residual desire for the interaction between gender and age (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.A) represents the residuals from a linear regression model for desire in which all other demographic variables were accounted for.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor example, men reported higher sexual desire than women across most ages. Men's desire appears to peak around their late 30s to early 40s before gradually declining. Women also show a decrease in desire with age, but their levels remain consistently lower than men's.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe association between relationship status and sexual desire was such that men's average desire was higher when they were in a relationship, whereas women's desire was lower when they were in a relationship (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.B). Likewise, women with more children tended to have lower desire, while for men, the trend was the opposite (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.C). This suggests that having more children may reflect time, energy, and trade-offs that impact women's, but not men\u0026rsquo;s desire levels. Alternatively, the number of children a couple has may reflect the desire differential and its relationship correlates in that couple.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducation levels have a relatively small effect on desire (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.F). Men\u0026rsquo;s desire remains higher across all education levels, but differences between genders narrow slightly at higher education levels.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDesire also shows variability across occupation categories (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.G), still men reporting consistently higher levels of desire than women across all categories.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eSexual desire is a fundamental component of human relationships, yet its patterns and predictors vary significantly across demographic groups. This study identified robust gender differences in sexual desire, with men consistently reporting higher levels of desire than women. The observed effect size (η\u0026sup2; = .18) exceeds the medium-to-large effect sizes documented in previous meta-analyses (g\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.69)\u003csup\u003e59\u003c/sup\u003e. Current large effect size is a key finding, highlighting the substantial gender difference in this large Estonian sample and its distinction from prior meta-analyses. These findings align with longstanding evidence suggesting that men exhibit higher levels of sexual desire\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Biological factors, such as testosterone levels, and sociocultural norms that promote greater sexual agency in men, likely contribute to these differences\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Importantly, this study shows that demographic factors alone\u0026mdash;without accounting for psychological or relational influences\u0026mdash;explain 28.3% of the variance in sexual desire, demonstrating their substantial predictive value. This study considered the influence of several demographic factors including age, gender, sexual orientation, relationship status, number of children, recent childbirth, educational attainment, and occupation on sexual desire.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA particularly striking finding is just how substantially higher men\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire is compared to women\u0026rsquo;s throughout most of life. While prior research has consistently shown that men report greater levels of sexual desire than women\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, this study underscores the magnitude of this difference. Even at its peak, women\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire remains lower than men\u0026rsquo;s average levels across nearly all ages. It is only after the age of 60\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;that men\u0026rsquo;s declining sexual desire falls below the highest levels ever reported by women. The persistent difference throughout the lifespan is a notable contribution, emphasizing the enduring nature of gender disparities in sexual desire.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis pattern suggests that men\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire is not only higher on average but also far more stable across the lifespan, likely due to the continuous production of androgens such as testosterone\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In contrast, women\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire is more variable, influenced by reproductive cycles, hormonal fluctuations, and sociocultural factors that shape desire expression across different life stages\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. These findings align with previous research indicating gender differences in sexual desire and the influence of biological and sociocultural factors, as discussed in the introduction\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This finding reinforces the robustness of gender differences in sexual motivation. At the same time, it highlights that the impact of aging on male sexual desire is delayed, with a noticeable decline only emerging in later life. The stability of men's desire and the variability of women's across the lifespan are key patterns observed in our data.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge also emerged as a significant predictor of sexual desire. As expected, sexual desire declined with age in both men and women, though the decline was more pronounced in women, particularly after the age of 50. These findings are consistent with prior research demonstrating that age-related declines in sexual desire are mediated by hormonal changes, health issues, and relational factors\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Men\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire tends to remain relatively stable until later in life, reflecting differences in biological and relational influences\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn especially noteworthy finding is that men\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire peaks around the age of 40, exceeding even early adulthood levels, and only declines to match younger men\u0026rsquo;s levels by 60+. This pattern is surprising because it does not align with the well-documented trajectory of testosterone decline, which begins gradually after the early 30s and continues throughout life\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This finding partially contradicts our initial hypothesis that predicted a straightforward decline in sexual desire with age, although the general trend of decline in later life was observed. The mid-life peak in men suggests that factors beyond biological aging, such as relational dynamics, may play a more significant role than initially anticipated. For example, men in their 40s are more likely to be in stable long-term relationships, which have been associated with increased sexual activity and emotional intimacy\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The unexpected mid-life peak in men is a novel contribution that warrants further exploration of relational and psychological influences on male sexual desire. As men age past mid-life, changes in relationship status may contribute to the eventual decline in sexual desire. The increasing prevalence of relationship dissolution in older men may partially explain their steeper decline in sexual desire after the age of 60+, as loss of a partner or reduced relationship quality could contribute to this shift\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGiven that demographic factors alone account for 28.3% of the variance in sexual desire, future research should examine additional psychological and social variables to improve predictive models. This highlights the importance of expanding the scope of research beyond demographics.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRelational context also played important roles in shaping sexual desire. Men living with a mate reported the highest levels of sexual desire. These findings align with evidence that relational satisfaction and emotional intimacy are significant predictors of sexual desire\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. However, the observed discrepancies in sexual desire between partnered and unpartnered individuals underscore the role of daily interactions and shared emotional closeness in sustaining sexual interest\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. At the same time, the inverse relationship between relationship duration and sexual desire, particularly for women, points to the potential for habituation and shifts in relational dynamics over time\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eParental responsibilities and family size were also associated with variations in sexual desire. Parenthood often leads to a decline in sexual desire due to increased stress and changes in hormonal levels\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This may suggest that greater parental involvement affects sexual desire differently for men and women, reflecting differences in time availability, relational investment, and stress burden. These findings highlight the importance of considering gendered dynamics in the distribution of parental responsibilities and their impact on relational and sexual well-being\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducational attainment and occupational context showed smaller but notable effects on sexual desire. These findings align with studies suggesting that higher education is associated with greater openness and assertiveness in sexual expression, particularly for women\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Conversely, occupational stress, especially in high-pressure roles, was associated with lower sexual desire, particularly for women, who may face greater challenges in balancing work and relational demands\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Future research should explore whether these effects are driven by work-related stress, time constraints, or changing gender expectations in professional and family roles.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDemographic factors accounted for 28.3% of the variance in sexual desire in this study, underscoring their significant role as predictors. This finding is in line with prior research, which shows that demographic variables like gender, age, and relationship dynamics explain a substantial portion of sexual desire variability. However, as previous studies suggest that psychological and relational factors can explain even greater variance (up to 40%), this highlights the need for models that integrate both demographic and psychological predictors\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e69\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e70\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender emerged as the strongest predictor of sexual desire in this study, with men reporting significantly higher levels of desire than women. This finding is supported by numerous studies, including those identifying gender as a predictor that accounts for up to 40% of sexual desire-related variance in certain populations\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e71\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This result strongly confirms our hypothesis that gender would be a key predictor of sexual desire, with men exhibiting higher desire than women, aligning with well-established patterns in the literature. While biological factors, such as testosterone levels, likely contribute to this disparity, gendered social norms and relationship expectations may further reinforce these patterns.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, recent research suggests that personality traits and life experiences also play a role in shaping long-term patterns of sexual desire, an area that warrants further exploration\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e73\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study provides a strong foundation for understanding demographic and relational predictors of sexual desire, yet several directions remain for future research. A key priority is to expand the predictive model by incorporating personality traits, which, as suggested by previous research, could improve its explanatory power beyond the current 28.3%. Specifically, traits such as openness, extraversion, and impulsivity have been linked to higher sexual desire, while neuroticism and attachment insecurity may suppress it\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e72\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e74\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Additionally, future studies should explore how individuals\u0026rsquo; self-reported sexual desire aligns with assessments from significant others. Given that self-perception can be influenced by gender norms and social desirability, comparing self-ratings to partner evaluations may provide a more comprehensive understanding of sexual desire dynamics\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e75\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. This could address potential biases in self-reporting and provide a more nuanced view of desire discrepancies within relationships. By integrating personality traits, major life events, and multiple perspectives on desire, future research could refine models of sexual motivation and offer a more comprehensive framework for understanding its variation across individuals and life stages.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eTransparency and Openness\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe data cannot be publicly shared, as they are part of an extensive ongoing biobank study, Estonian Biobank (EstBB). However, researchers can apply for access to the data (\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://genomics.ut.ee/en/content/estonian-biobank\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://genomics.ut.ee/en/content/estonian-biobank\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e). The EstBB is regulated by the Human Genes Research Act, which was adopted in 2000 specifically for the operations of the EstBB. Individual-level data analysis in the EstBB PS21 was carried out under ethical approval 1.1\u0026ndash;12/626 (13.04.2020) from the Estonian Committee on Bioethics and Human Research (Estonian Ministry of Social Affairs), using data according to release application 3\u0026ndash;10/GI/11571 from the EstBB. As this study was part of a broader data collection effort\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, parts of the data set have been previously analyzed in multiple other studies such as\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR50\" citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. However, no study yet has focused on sexual desire assessments of the EstBB. Statistical analyses were carried out with R language, Version 4.3.1\u003csup\u003e52\u003c/sup\u003e. The following packages were used: tidyverse (Version 2.0.0)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, ggplot2 (Version 3.4.2)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, psych (Version 2.3.6)\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, and effectsize\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. The R code is available at \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://osf.io/5gwhc\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://osf.io/5gwhc\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Analyses were not preregistered.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSample\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants were members (\u0026ldquo;gene donors\u0026rdquo;) of the EstBB, a population sample of approximately 200,000 adults comprising about 20% of Estonian adult residents or past residents currently living abroad\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Participants\u0026rsquo; self-rated sexual desire and satisfaction with relationship flirting were collected through an online EstBB Personality Study (PS21) survey between November 2021 and April 2022, with email invitations sent to 182,405 gene donors\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. To encourage participation, the study was advertised on national radio, television, newspapers and magazines, and on social media; participants were also offered feedback on their Big Five personality trait scores. Participants could choose to participate in either Estonian or Russian, but we only used data provided in Estonian to avoid confounding language differences with group differences. The initial sample size was \u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;73,670. After excluding respondents with missing values and those older than 84, the final sample consisted of \u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;67,334 participants, aged 20 to 84 years (\u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.15, \u003cem\u003eMdn\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.00, \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.34). The sample\u0026rsquo;s gender (sex assigned at birth) distribution was as follows: 70% (46,879) were women (their age ranged from 20 to 84; \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.0; \u003cem\u003eMdn\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.0; \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.3) and 30% (20,456) were men (their age ranged from 20 to 84, \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.5, \u003cem\u003eMdn\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.0; \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.2).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMeasures\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo assess sexual desire, we used two items: \u0026ldquo;I have strong sexual urges\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;I do not think much about sex\u0026rdquo;. As the responses to these two questions were correlated (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;.65), we created a new variable for sexual desire by calculating the standardized average of the first question and the reverse-coded second question. The average sexual desire (standardized) score for the entire sample was \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.00 (\u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.00). Satisfaction with romantic relationship was measured with one question, only reported by those in a relationship: \u0026ldquo;I'm satisfied with how I get along with my partner (spouse, partner).\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants' age was calculated as the difference between their date of birth embedded within their national ID codes and the survey time, ranging from 20 to 84; \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.15; \u003cem\u003eMdn\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;47.0; \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.34. Gender was taken from participants\u0026rsquo; ID codes which represents sex assigned at birth or, in rare cases unknown to us, legal sex after gender change. Participants reported their sexual orientation using five categories: heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, pansexual, and asexual (The distribution of the sample across groups is presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Participants reported their marital status using five categories: living alone, living with a mate, married, divorced, widowed; for our analyses, we created two categories: 1. Living alone (including those who are single, divorced, or widowed) and 2. Living with a partner (including those who are married or living with a mate). Participants reported their number of children, ranging from 0 to 5. Participants were also asked to indicate whether they had a child or children born during the last year.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducational attainment was measured as the highest level of education completed by participants, self-reported and categorized as follows: 1. Early childhood education or no formal education, 2. Primary education, 3. Basic education, 4. Vocational education based on basic education, 5. General secondary education or vocational secondary education (including secondary specialized or technical education based on basic education), 6. Vocational training based on secondary education, 7. Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree or equivalent (including applied higher education and diploma studies), 8. Master\u0026rsquo;s degree or equivalent, 9. Doctorate or equivalent. For analyses, the variable was coded as an ordinal variable (ranging from 1 to 4). Categories 1 to 4 were coded as 1 (Basic education), categories 5 and 6 were coded as 2 (Secondary education), category 7 was coded as 3 (Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree), and categories 8 and 9 were coded as 4 (Master\u0026rsquo;s or Doctoral degree).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOccupation. Participants were also asked: Which of the following best describes your primary occupation (currently or before retiring from work)? They could choose one response from ten predefined occupational categories, all of which are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo examine the significance and magnitude (η\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e) of the differences in mean desire across the individual demographic groups (bivariate associations), we used analysis of variance (ANOVA). Given that both age and desire were continuous variables, we calculated their Pearson correlation (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo assess the multivariate predictive power of demographic variables and their hypothesized interactions with gender for sexual desire, we conducted linear regression with desire as the dependent variable. The predictor variables included age (continuous), sexual orientation (categorical), relationship status (categorical), number of children (continuous), childbirth within the last year (categorical), educational attainment (categorical), occupation (categorical), and satisfaction with the relationship. Since only participants in a relationship answered the question about satisfaction, and to retain the full sample for the analysis of other variables, we also conducted another regression that did not include relationship satisfaction among the independent variables. To illustrate the interactions between gender and other demographic variables, we present eight interaction plots.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed equally\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe cannot share the data publicly because it is part of an ongoing national biobank study that is subject to strict national regulations (Human Genes Research Act, 2000) to protect participant anonymity and guard public trust. Researchers can apply for remote access to the data (https://genomics.ut.ee/en/content/estonian-biobank).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeLamater, J. D. \u0026amp; Sill, M. Sexual Desire in Later Life. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e42\u003c/b\u003e, 138\u0026ndash;149 (2005).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRegan, P. C. \u0026amp; Berscheid, E. Beliefs about the state, goals, and objects of sexual desire. \u003cem\u003eJournal Sex Marital Therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e22\u003c/b\u003e, 110\u0026ndash;120 (1996).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSpector, I. P., Carey, M. P. \u0026amp; Steinberg, L. The Sexual Desire Inventory: Development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. \u003cem\u003eJournal sex marital therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e22\u003c/b\u003e, 175\u0026ndash;190 (1996).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDawson, S. J. \u0026amp; Chivers, M. L. Gender Differences and Similarities in Sexual Desire. \u003cem\u003eCurr. Sex. Health Rep.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e6\u003c/b\u003e, 211\u0026ndash;219 (2014).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePeixoto, M. M. Differences in solitary and dyadic sexual desire and sexual satisfaction in heterosexual and nonheterosexual cisgender men and women. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Med.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e20\u003c/b\u003e, 597\u0026ndash;604 (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMark, K. P. Sexual Desire Discrepancy. \u003cem\u003eCurr. Sex. Health Rep.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e7\u003c/b\u003e, 198\u0026ndash;202 (2015).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMurray, S. H. \u0026amp; Milhausen, R. R. Sexual desire and relationship duration in young men and women. \u003cem\u003eJournal Sex Marital Therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e38\u003c/b\u003e, 28\u0026ndash;40 (2012).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohansen, E., Harkin, A., Keating, F., Sanchez, A. \u0026amp; Buzwell, S. Fairer Sex: The Role of Relationship Equity in Female Sexual Desire. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e60\u003c/b\u003e, 498\u0026ndash;507 (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003evan Lankveld, J., Jacobs, N., Thewissen, V., Dewitte, M. \u0026amp; Verboon, P. The associations of intimacy and sexuality in daily life: Temporal dynamics and gender effects within romantic relationships. \u003cem\u003eJ. Social Personal Relationships\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e35\u003c/b\u003e, 557\u0026ndash;576 (2018).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePark, H. G., Suk, H. W., Cheon, J. E., Kim, Y. H. \u0026amp; Darling Come Lay with Me or Talk with Me: Perceived Mattering and the Complementary Association between Sex and Communication within Marital Relationships. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e60\u003c/b\u003e, 336\u0026ndash;348 (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBirnbaum, G. E. Attachment orientations, sexual functioning, and relationship satisfaction in a community sample of women. \u003cem\u003eJ. Social Personal Relationships\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e24\u003c/b\u003e, 21\u0026ndash;35 (2007).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcCabe, M. P. \u0026amp; Goldhammer, D. L. Demographic and Psychological Factors Related to Sexual Desire among Heterosexual Women in a Relationship. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e49\u003c/b\u003e, 78\u0026ndash;87 (2012).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWieczorek, L. L., Chivers, M., Koehn, M. A., DeBruine, L. M. \u0026amp; Jones, B. C. Age Effects on Women\u0026rsquo;s and Men\u0026rsquo;s Dyadic and Solitary Sexual Desire. \u003cem\u003eArch. Sex Behav.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e51\u003c/b\u003e, 3765\u0026ndash;3789 (2022).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBeutel, M. E., St\u0026ouml;bel-Richter, Y. \u0026amp; Br\u0026auml;hler, E. Sexual desire and sexual activity of men and women across their lifespans: results from a representative German community survey. \u003cem\u003eBJU Int.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e101\u003c/b\u003e, 76\u0026ndash;82 (2008).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarris, E. A. et al. Does Sexual Desire Fluctuate More Among Women than Men? \u003cem\u003eArch. Sex. Behav.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e52\u003c/b\u003e, 1461\u0026ndash;1478 (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePfaus, J. G. Pathways of sexual desire. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Med.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e6\u003c/b\u003e, 1506\u0026ndash;1533 (2009).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChadwick, S. B., Burke, S. M., Goldey, K. L., Bell, S. N. \u0026amp; Van Anders, S. M. Sexual Desire in Sexual Minority and Majority Women and Men: The Multifaceted Sexual Desire Questionnaire. \u003cem\u003eArch. Sex. Behav.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e46\u003c/b\u003e, 2465\u0026ndash;2484 (2017).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHerbenick, D. et al. An Event-Level Analysis of the Sexual Characteristics and Composition Among Adults Ages 18 to 59: Results from a National Probability Sample in the United States. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Med.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e7\u003c/b\u003e, 346\u0026ndash;361 (2010).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSatinsky, S. Body Size and Sexual Behavior in a Community-Based Sample of Women. \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Sex. Health\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e26\u003c/b\u003e, 129\u0026ndash;135 (2014).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNimbi, F. M. et al. Sexual Desire and Fantasies in the LGBT\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Community: Focus on Lesbian Women and Gay Men. \u003cem\u003eCurr. Sex. Health Rep.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e12\u003c/b\u003e, 153\u0026ndash;161 (2020).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrotto, L. A., Yule, M. A. \u0026amp; Gorzalka, B. B. Asexuality: An extreme variant of sexual desire disorder? \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Med.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e12\u003c/b\u003e, 646\u0026ndash;660 (2015).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGewirtz-Meydan, A., Sowan, W., Estlein, R. \u0026amp; Winstok, Z. Rights or Obligations: The Extent to Which Sexual Desire and Gender Roles Determine Sexual Intimacy in Romantic Relationships. \u003cem\u003eJournal Sex Marital Therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e50\u003c/b\u003e, 482\u0026ndash;497 (2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTabatabaeichehr, M., Mortazavi, H., Abadi, M. H. \u0026amp; Moayed, L. Sexual desire and related factors in middle-aged and elderly married women: a cross-sectional study in Iran. \u003cem\u003eOpen access Macedonian journal of medical sciences\u003c/em\u003e 6, (2018). (1906).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarazandeh, M., Besharat, M. A. \u0026amp; Moghadamzadeh, A. Do education, sex, and age moderate the relationship of intelligence and creativity with sexual desire? \u003cem\u003eSex. Relatsh. Therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e38\u003c/b\u003e, 267\u0026ndash;276 (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRye, B. J., Mashinter, C., Meaney, G. J., Wood, E. \u0026amp; Gentile, S. Satisfaction with previous sexual health education as a predictor of intentions to pursue further sexual health education. \u003cem\u003eSex. Educ.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e15\u003c/b\u003e, 93\u0026ndash;107 (2015).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbdoly, M. \u0026amp; Pourmousavi, L. The relationship between sexual satisfaction and education levels in women. (2013).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShrestha, R., Doddasamiah, S. M., Tambat, R. M., Krishna, P. M. \u0026amp; Thapa, M. The association of work pressure with depression and sexual desire a cross-sectional study among health care professional. \u003cem\u003eAge (in years)\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e18\u003c/b\u003e, 53 .\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHabis, C. \u0026amp; Maalouf, R. G. Impact of stress and burnout on the sexual desire of trainee doctors at H\u0026ocirc;tel-Dieu de France Hospital: A single-institution survey. \u003cem\u003eL\u0026rsquo;encephale\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e45\u003c/b\u003e, 371\u0026ndash;375 (2019).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDomenighetti, G., Tomada, A., Marazzi, A., Abazi, O. \u0026amp; Quaglia, J. Impact of job insecurity on sexual desire: an exploratory analysis. \u003cem\u003eSwiss Med. Wkly.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e139\u003c/b\u003e, 486\u0026ndash;492 (2009).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTavares, I. M., Schlagintweit, H. E., Nobre, P. J. \u0026amp; Rosen, N. O. Sexual well-being and perceived stress in couples transitioning to parenthood: A dyadic analysis. \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Clin. Health Psychol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e19\u003c/b\u003e, 198\u0026ndash;208 (2019).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Malley, D., Smith, V. \u0026amp; Higgins, A. Sexual Aspects of Problems in the Postpartum and Early Parenthood (1st Year). in \u003cem\u003eMidwifery and Sexuality\u003c/em\u003e (eds. Geuens, S., Polona Mivšek, A. \u0026amp; Gianotten, Woet. L.) 163\u0026ndash;173Springer International Publishing, Cham, (2023). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/978-3-031-18432-1_14\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-031-18432-1_14\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarris, E. A., Gormezano, A. M. \u0026amp; Van Anders, S. M. Gender Inequities in Household Labor Predict Lower Sexual Desire in Women Partnered with Men. \u003cem\u003eArch. Sex. Behav.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e51\u003c/b\u003e, 3847\u0026ndash;3870 (2022).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcNulty, J. K., Maxwell, J. A., Meltzer, A. L. \u0026amp; Baumeister, R. F. Sex-Differentiated Changes in Sexual Desire Predict Marital Dissatisfaction. \u003cem\u003eArch. Sex. Behav.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e48\u003c/b\u003e, 2473\u0026ndash;2489 (2019).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrtnicka, H., Weiss, P. \u0026amp; Zverina, J. Human sexuality during pregnancy and the postpartum period. \u003cem\u003eBratisl Lek Listy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e110\u003c/b\u003e, 427\u0026ndash;431 (2009).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCalpbinici, P. The relationship between traumatic childbirth perception, desire to avoid pregnancy, and sexual quality of life in women. \u003cem\u003eIntl J. Gynecology Obste\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e167\u003c/b\u003e, 265\u0026ndash;272 (2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFehniger, J. E. et al. Childbirth and female sexual function later in life. \u003cem\u003eObstetrics Gynecology\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e122\u003c/b\u003e, 988\u0026ndash;997 (2013).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMacKenzie, N. E., Gordon, A. M., Impett, E. A. \u0026amp; Rosen, N. O. Indirect associations between infant sleep, parental sleep, and sexual well-being in new parent couples. \u003cem\u003eJ. Fam. Psychol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e37\u003c/b\u003e, 347 (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSoljačić Vraneš, H., Djaković, I., Vraneš, H., Vrljičak, M. \u0026amp; Kraljević, Z. Changes in sex life after childbirth. \u003cem\u003ePsychiatria Danubina\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e31\u003c/b\u003e, 847\u0026ndash;850 (2019).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMark, K. P. The relative impact of individual sexual desire and couple desire discrepancy on satisfaction in heterosexual couples. \u003cem\u003eSex. Relatsh. Therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e27\u003c/b\u003e, 133\u0026ndash;146 (2012).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWilloughby, B. J., Vitas, J., Sexual Desire \u0026amp; Discrepancy The Effect of Individual Differences in Desired and Actual Sexual Frequency on Dating Couples. \u003cem\u003eArch. Sex. Behav.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e41\u003c/b\u003e, 477\u0026ndash;486 (2012).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim, J. J. et al. Are Couples More Satisfied When They Match in Sexual Desire? New Insights From Response Surface Analyses. \u003cem\u003eSocial Psychol. Personality Sci.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e12\u003c/b\u003e, 487\u0026ndash;496 (2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eByers, E. S. Relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction: A longitudinal study of individuals in long-term relationships. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e42\u003c/b\u003e, 113\u0026ndash;118 (2005).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuberman, J. S., Tavares, I. M., Goruk, K. J. \u0026amp; Rosen, N. O. Empathic accuracy for a partner\u0026rsquo;s negative affect is associated with couples\u0026rsquo; daily sexual well-being. \u003cem\u003eJournal Family Psychology\u003c/em\u003e (2025).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVannier, S. A. \u0026amp; O\u0026rsquo;Sullivan, L. F. Who Gives and Who Gets: Why, When, and with Whom Young People Engage in Oral Sex. \u003cem\u003eJ. Youth Adolescence\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e41\u003c/b\u003e, 572\u0026ndash;582 (2012).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDe Oliveira, L., Vallejo-Medina, P. \u0026amp; Carvalho, J. The Mediating Role of Sexual Boredom in Women\u0026rsquo;s Sexual Desire and Satisfaction. \u003cem\u003eJournal Sex Marital Therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e51\u003c/b\u003e, 96\u0026ndash;109 (2025).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFallis, E. E., Rehman, U. S., Woody, E. Z. \u0026amp; Purdon, C. The longitudinal association of relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction in long-term relationships. \u003cem\u003eJ. Fam. Psychol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e30\u003c/b\u003e, 822 (2016).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVowels, L. M. \u0026amp; Mark, K. P. Relationship and sexual satisfaction: a longitudinal actor\u0026ndash;partner interdependence model approach. \u003cem\u003eSex. Relatsh. Therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e35\u003c/b\u003e, 46\u0026ndash;59 (2020).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVaht, M. et al. \u003cem\u003eCohort profile: Personality measurements at the Estonian Biobank of the Estonian Genome Center\u003c/em\u003e (University of Tartu, 2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eM\u0026otilde;ttus, R. et al. Most people\u0026rsquo;s life satisfaction matches their personality traits: True correlations in multitrait, multirater, multisample data. \u003cem\u003eJ. Personal. Soc. Psychol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e126\u003c/b\u003e, 676 (2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArum\u0026auml;e, K. et al. Self-and informant-reported personality traits and vaccination against COVID-19. \u003cem\u003ePlos one\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e19\u003c/b\u003e, e0287413 (2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAnni, K., Vainik, U. \u0026amp; M\u0026otilde;ttus, R. Personality profiles of 263 occupations. \u003cem\u003eJournal Appl. Psychology\u003c/em\u003e (2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eR Core Team. \u003cem\u003eR: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing\u003c/em\u003e (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWickham, H. et al. Welcome to the Tidyverse. \u003cem\u003eJ. open. source Softw.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e4\u003c/b\u003e, 1686 (2019).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWickham, H. Getting Started with ggplot2. in ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis 11\u0026ndash;31 (Springer, (2016).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRevelle, W. psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research. Northwestern University (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBen-Shachar, M. S., L\u0026uuml;decke, D. \u0026amp; Makowski, D. effectsize: Estimation of effect size indices and standardized parameters. \u003cem\u003eJ. open. source Softw.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e5\u003c/b\u003e, 2815 (2020).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePedersen, T. L. \u0026amp; Patchwork The composer of plots. \u003cem\u003eCRAN: Contributed Packages\u003c/em\u003e (2019).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMilani, L. et al. The Estonian Biobank\u0026rsquo;s journey from biobanking to personalized medicine. \u003cem\u003eNat. Commun.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e16\u003c/b\u003e, 3270 (2025).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFrankenbach, J., Weber, M., Loschelder, D. D., Kilger, H. \u0026amp; Friese, M. Sex drive: Theoretical conceptualization and meta-analytic review of gender differences. \u003cem\u003ePsychol. Bull.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e148\u003c/b\u003e, 621 (2022).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVan Anders, S. M. Testosterone and sexual desire in healthy women and men. \u003cem\u003eArch. Sex Behav.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e41\u003c/b\u003e, 1471\u0026ndash;1484 (2012).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYeap, B. B. Hormones and health outcomes in aging men. \u003cem\u003eExp. Gerontol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e48\u003c/b\u003e, 677\u0026ndash;681 (2013).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Araujo, J. A. A. et al. Major clinical studies on the relationship between testosterone levels and aging in men: a systematic review. \u003cem\u003eInternational J. Nutrology\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e18\u003c/b\u003e, (2025).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eŠtulhofer, A., Ferreira, L. C. \u0026amp; Landripet, I. Emotional intimacy, sexual desire, and sexual satisfaction among partnered heterosexual men. \u003cem\u003eSex. Relatsh. Therapy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e29\u003c/b\u003e, 229\u0026ndash;244 (2014).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarvalho, J. \u0026amp; Nobre, P. Gender differences in sexual desire: How do emotional and relationship factors determine sexual desire according to gender? \u003cem\u003eSexologies\u003c/em\u003e 20, 207\u0026ndash;211 (2011).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKontula, O. \u0026amp; Haavio-Mannila, E. The impact of aging on human sexual activity and sexual desire. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e46\u003c/b\u003e, 46\u0026ndash;56 (2009).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRosen, N. O., Bailey, K. \u0026amp; Muise, A. Degree and Direction of Sexual Desire Discrepancy are Linked to Sexual and Relationship Satisfaction in Couples Transitioning to Parenthood. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e55\u003c/b\u003e, 214\u0026ndash;225 (2018).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGimmel, L., Becker-Hebly, I. \u0026amp; Wieczorek, L. L. Sexual Assertiveness of University Students in Germany: The Role of Sources and Topics in Sexuality Education. \u003cem\u003eAm. J. Sexuality Educ.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e1\u0026ndash;23\u003c/b\u003e \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1080/15546128.2024.2435358\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/15546128.2024.2435358\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKazemi, L., Mirghafourvand, M., Esmaeilpour, K. \u0026amp; Kamalifard, M. Effects of stress management and relationship-enrichment counseling on sexual and marital satisfaction of working women with high occupational stress. \u003cem\u003eJ. Educ. Health Promotion\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e13\u003c/b\u003e, 13 (2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarvalho, J. \u0026amp; Nobre, P. Predictors of men\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire: The role of psychological, cognitive-emotional, relational, and medical factors. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e48\u003c/b\u003e, 254\u0026ndash;262 (2011).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarvalho, J. \u0026amp; Nobre, P. Predictors of women\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire: The role of psychopathology, cognitive-emotional determinants, relationship dimensions, and medical factors. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Med.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e7\u003c/b\u003e, 928\u0026ndash;937 (2010).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVowels, L. M., Vowels, M. J. \u0026amp; Mark, K. P. Uncovering the most important factors for predicting sexual desire using explainable machine learning. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Med.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e18\u003c/b\u003e, 1198\u0026ndash;1216 (2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDosch, A., Rochat, L., Ghisletta, P., Favez, N. \u0026amp; Van der Linden, M. Psychological Factors Involved in Sexual Desire, Sexual Activity, and Sexual Satisfaction: A Multi-factorial Perspective. \u003cem\u003eArch. Sex Behav.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e45\u003c/b\u003e, 2029\u0026ndash;2045 (2016).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eG\u0026eacute;onet, M., De Sutter, P. \u0026amp; Zech, E. Do stressful life events impact women\u0026rsquo;s sexual desire? \u003cem\u003eSexologies\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e27\u003c/b\u003e, 196\u0026ndash;202 (2018).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAllen, M. S. \u0026amp; Walter, E. E. Linking big five personality traits to sexuality and sexual health: A meta-analytic review. \u003cem\u003ePsychol. Bull.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e144\u003c/b\u003e, 1081\u0026ndash;1110 (2018).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLykins, A. D., Janssen, E., Newhouse, S., Heiman, J. R. \u0026amp; Rafaeli, E. The effects of similarity in sexual excitation, inhibition, and mood on sexual arousal problems and sexual satisfaction in newlywed couples. \u003cem\u003eJ. Sex. Med.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e9\u003c/b\u003e, 1360\u0026ndash;1366 (2012).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Sexual desire, Gender differences, Relationship satisfaction, Sexual orientation, Demographic predictors, Estonian Biobank","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6799953/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6799953/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eSexual desire plays a crucial role in human well-being and relational dynamics, yet its demographic and relational predictors remain insufficiently understood. Leveraging a uniquely large and representative sample (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;67,334) from the Estonian Biobank, we examined how gender, age, sexual orientation, relationship status, recent childbirth, number of children, relationship satisfaction, education, and occupation relate to self-reported sexual desire. Men reported substantially higher desire than women (η\u0026sup2; = .18), a difference that persisted across most ages and demographic groups. Sexual desire declined with age, more steeply for women, and was positively associated with bisexual and pansexual orientation, recent childbirth, and relationship satisfaction. Multivariate models explained 28.3% of the variance in sexual desire, with gender and age emerging as the strongest predictors. Notably, gender moderated several associations, including those with age, parenthood, and relationship satisfaction. These findings provide the most comprehensive account to date of how basic demographic and relational variables jointly shape sexual desire in the general population, offering a robust foundation for theory development and applied sexual health research.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Associations Between Demographic and Relationship Variables and Sexual Desire: Findings from a Large-Scale Estonian Biobank Dataset","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-06-09 08:50:13","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6799953/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-07-24T06:00:58+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-07-16T19:20:10+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-07-14T08:14:21+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"21329868419076839793080755679159299112","date":"2025-07-06T12:29:25+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"134162674115683354779722059105161137710","date":"2025-07-05T18:09:36+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"151504101890169621488091661487119886116","date":"2025-07-04T07:04:09+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-07-04T03:25:53+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-07-04T03:24:42+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2025-06-04T10:11:23+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-06-03T12:30:22+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Scientific Reports","date":"2025-06-02T07:52:04+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"a9ea4a68-83ce-4d31-b5f8-63ac566f8a5c","owner":[],"postedDate":"June 9th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":49512912,"name":"Biological sciences/Psychology"},{"id":49512913,"name":"Biological sciences/Psychology/Human behaviour"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-01-12T16:06:12+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-6799953","link":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-23483-0","journal":{"identity":"scientific-reports","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Scientific Reports"},"publishedOn":"2026-01-05 15:59:13","publishedOnDateReadable":"January 5th, 2026"},"versionCreatedAt":"2025-06-09 08:50:13","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1038/s41598-025-23483-0","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-23483-0","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6799953","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6799953","identity":"rs-6799953","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}