Sometimes – especially when it comes to analysing female desire – scientists appear to be looking down the wrong end of the telescope. Take the findings of Dr Thomas Pollet and Professor Daniel Nettle, reported in the Sunday Times.

According to their research, or more precisely their interpretation of their research, the bigger the size of the man's wallet, the more orgasms his (female) partner is likely to have.

This is supposedly part of evolutionary psychology that suggests both men and women are genetically predisposed to ruthlessly exploit each other to achieve the best chances of survival for their genes. That explanation might be a piece of the jigsaw, but is it really the whole picture?

Pollet and Nettle have drawn on a Chinese longitudinal study of 5,000 people. Among the women, 121 always had orgasms during sex (take that with a large pinch of Beijing salt); 408 had them "often" and 243 rarely or never had an orgasm.

Several factors were involved in the difference, but money was apparently one of the main reasons. Research in Germany and America also indicate that a man's income leads to a more satisfied woman in his bed. Perhaps, however, instead of looking at the man's financial assets (wasn't Casanova frequently broke?), the scientists might have done better examining more of the female psyche of those satisfactorily bedded.

David Buss, professor of psychology at the University of Texas, in his book The Evolution of Desire tries to unravel the mystery of the female orgasm. He is apparently perplexed because it has nothing to do with reproduction and appears to have no other function except to give a woman pleasure – hence the existence of the clitoris, "useful" only for female sensory delight. (Clearly a piece of anatomy unknown to Dr William Acton, who pontificated in 1857: "I would say that the majority of women, happily for society, are not much troubled with sexual feelings of any kind.")

Professor Buss suggests, in the Sunday Times:

[Orgasms] could promote emotional bonding with a high-quality male or they could serve as a signal that women are highly sexually satisfied and hence unlikely to seek sex with other men. What these orgasms are saying is, 'I'm extremely loyal, so you should invest in me and my children'.

Alternatively what these orgasms might be saying is a great deal more rooted in culture and conditioning than evolutionary science and the neural hardwiring that helps to prompt desire. While we appear to be in the female lust frontier with sexual promiscuity allegedly rampant, many women still feel guilty about their sexual feelings. Unless, of course, they are confident, attractive and self-assured enough (and, heaven forbid, may even be hanging on to their own substantial bank balance) to attract the attention of a man who seeks an alpha match (and may work extra hard in bed to prove that he really is the best).

In 2002, Professor Paula Nicolson presented her research to the British Psychological Society's annual conference. She had interviewed females between the ages of 18 to 60 about desire and sexual activity. She discovered that even those whose parents had grown up in the so-called swinging 60s had been told very little about sex. It was considered to be mysterious, embarrassing and taboo. For many, that crippling menage a trios – guilt, inhibition and shame, still lingered in the bedroom.

Of course, one piece of research isn't the story of every woman. Some are very much at ease with their libido. They are self-confident, 21st century shame-free (as opposed to 19th century shameless) and light years away from the traditional view that only bad girls "like it". A few, to my knowledge, even have partners younger, less educated and definitely poorer: so much for Darwin.

While never has so much been written, filmed, downloaded, read and discussed about sex, porn and perversion, it remains the case that sex is in the head; it's not what or how you do it but, for women, how they feel about themselves that impacts on what they genuinely get out of the boudoir. And that's whether the man is a pauper or a well-endowed prince.