In two online studies, participants reported higher sexual arousal for suggestive images they believed—or were told—to depict real people than for images they believed—or were told—to be AI-generated. The finding is about perceived authenticity and self-reported responses to a limited set of images; it does not mean AI-generated images cannot be arousing.
What the researchers tested
Marco Marini, Alessandro Ansani, Alessandro Demichelis, Giovanna Mancini, Fabio Paglieri, and Marco Viola examined whether perceived realness affects reported arousal to sexual visual stimuli. Their 2024 paper, “Real is the new sexy: the influence of perceived realness on self-reported arousal to sexual visual stimuli,” appeared in Cognition & Emotion, volume 38, issue 3, pages 348–360. The article was published online January 16, 2024; its issue publication is dated May 2024. Read the paper or see its Roma Tre University repository record.
Across two preregistered online studies, the researchers used 60 images depicting models in underwear. Participants rated how aroused they felt; they did not undergo a physiological measurement of arousal.
Study 1: participants judged images individually
In the first study, 57 participants rated their arousal for the images and how likely they thought each image was to be AI-generated. This tested the relationship between participants’ judgments of authenticity and their reported response.
Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minutePC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11#1 Best Overall
Study 2: participants saw blocks with labels
In the second study, 108 participants saw the same images presented in blocks labeled as real photographs or artificially generated, then rated their arousal. This tested responses under assigned labels, rather than relying only on each participant’s image-by-image judgment.
What happened when participants thought an image was real?
In both studies, images perceived or labeled as real received significantly higher self-reported sexual-arousal ratings than images perceived or labeled as artificially generated. The paper’s abstract summarizes the result this way: “In both cases, Realness correlated with significantly higher scores on self-reported sexual arousal.”
The distinction is important: the finding concerns what participants believed or were told about the images. It does not establish that actual AI image quality, by itself, caused lower arousal. Nor does it show that AI-generated images are incapable of producing arousal. Study authors Alessandro Demichelis and Alessandro Ansani told PsyPost that allegedly fake images could still generate arousal, particularly among men, but to a lesser degree in their findings.
What the study does—and does not—show
It offers evidence about perceived authenticity
The two study designs point to a relative difference in reported response when images are thought or labeled to be real rather than generated. That makes the paper relevant to the question of whether knowing—or believing—that an image is AI-generated can change how someone responds to it.
Recommended Free Tools
It is not a general test of AI imagery
The experiment used a restricted set of suggestive images of models in underwear, not a broad range of sexual imagery or AI-generated content. A report on the study also notes that participants were heterosexual. The results therefore should not be generalized to every orientation, preference, type of image, or viewer. The paper does not establish how large the effect is across a wider population, and its sample counts are not estimates of how people generally respond.
It measured ratings, not bodily response or behavior
Participants reported how aroused they felt. The study does not establish physiological reactions, real-world choices, or whether viewers would prefer one kind of image outside the experimental setting. Its conclusion is narrower: in these online studies, reported arousal was higher when the images were believed or labeled to depict real people.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to interpret the result
If the question is whether AI-generated suggestive images can still be arousing, the authors’ reported interpretation is yes. If the question is whether participants in these studies rated such images as highly as images they believed were real, the answer is no: the ratings were higher for the images perceived or labeled as real. Those conclusions apply to the study’s conditions, not to every person or every AI-generated image.
For a news account of the findings, see Futurism’s report.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
