What peer-reviewed studies measure sexual satisfaction specifically in couples who practice role-reversal sexual dynamics (e.g., pegging, male submission)?

1. What the literature in these sources actually measures: sexual satisfaction as a general construct

Several rigorous reviews and empirical studies in the provided set treat sexual satisfaction as a broad outcome linked to variables like sexual communication, sexual function, desire discrepancy, and responsiveness, not as an outcome tied to specific sexual practices such as pegging or male submission; for example, a meta‑analysis synthesizing 93 studies focused on sexual communication and sexual/relationship satisfaction without indexing particular sexual behaviors ^[1], and large empirical work models sexual satisfaction as predicted by sexual communication quality, frequency, and responsivity rather than discrete acts ^{[2] [5] [6]}.

2. Role reversal is studied, but usually in social or economic roles, not sexual acts

Where “role‑reversal” appears in the provided reporting it primarily refers to shifts in socioeconomic or gender roles within relationships—women as higher status or primary providers—and examines perceived dominance, weakness, and broader relationship satisfaction rather than sexual practices like pegging; research summarized in a news piece and the underlying Sex Roles study explores public perceptions and relationship consequences of such role‑reversed heterosexual couples ^[4], which is conceptually distinct from consensual sexual role exchange in the bedroom.

3. BDSM and power exchange show up in secondary reporting but lack peer‑reviewed specificity here

One source in the dataset (a blog) asserts that participants in consensual BDSM report increased well‑being and satisfaction and mentions Archives of Sexual Behavior, but that blog is not itself a peer‑reviewed primary study and the provided sources do not include the underlying peer‑reviewed BDSM studies measuring sexual satisfaction tied specifically to acts like pegging ^[7]. Therefore, based on the supplied material, it cannot be claimed that peer‑reviewed evidence in these sources directly documents sexual satisfaction outcomes for couples practicing pegging or male‑submission dynamics.

4. What the existing peer‑reviewed work implies and where evidence would need to be added

The corpus of peer‑reviewed work available here implies plausible mediators by which any sexual practice—including role reversal—might affect satisfaction: better sexual communication, sexual responsiveness, and resolution of desire discrepancies are robust correlates of sexual satisfaction across multiple studies ^{[1] [5] [6] [3]}. However, absent peer‑reviewed studies in the provided set that operationalize “pegging” or “male submission” as independent variables, one cannot infer from these general findings that role‑reversal practices increase or decrease sexual satisfaction; doing so would leap beyond what the supplied peer‑reviewed evidence supports ^{[1] [2]}.

5. Balanced verdict and transparent limits of the reporting

In sum, the supplied reporting contains extensive peer‑reviewed research on determinants of sexual satisfaction (communication, desire, responsiveness) and peer‑reviewed work on nonsexual role reversal in relationships, but it does not contain peer‑reviewed empirical studies that explicitly measure sexual satisfaction in couples identified as practicing pegging or male submission; where claims about BDSM or role‑reversal sexual benefits appear, they are either in non‑peer‑reviewed summaries or not traceable to a specific peer‑reviewed result in these sources ^{[7] [4] [1]}. Because the provided evidence set lacks direct peer‑reviewed studies on those exact sexual practices, the only honest conclusion is that a targeted peer‑reviewed literature on sexual satisfaction in couples who practice pegging/male submission was not identified in these sources and remains an evidentiary gap.