Date post: | 16-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | geoffrey-armstrong |
View: | 223 times |
Download: | 0 times |
The Effects of Gender and Sociosexual
Orientation on Perceptions of Casual Sex
Ashley Adams & Whitley HoltHanover College
Casual SexCasual sex is defined as a sexual encounter that
may or may not involve intercourse between two people without the expectation of developing a relationship (Paul et al., 2000)
Rates of casual sex are thought to be increasing among both males and females, but the increase seems to be especially strong among females (Oliver & Hyde, 1993)
Double StandardWomen are permitted to engage in sexual
relations only within a committed love relationship, whereas men are permitted to have as many sexual partners as they want without condition (Milhausen & Herold, 1999)
Sex is encouraged for males, and discouraged for females (Levesque, et al., 2007; O’Sullivan & Byers, 1992)
Mixed EvidenceDespite an increase in permissiveness in sexual
attitudes and behaviors among women, the sexual double standard continues to thrive (Leigh, Aramburu, & Norris, 1992; Oliver & Hyde, 1993; Paul & Hayes, 2002)
Other research suggests that the double standard has diminished due to an increase in female liberation (Fraley, 2005; Sprecher, et al., 1987; Levesque, et al., 2007)
Past ResearchMain focus on perceptions of the initiators of
casual sex
Other important factors:Gender of the participantSexual attitudes and behaviors of the participant
Gender of the ParticipantGender differences in receptivity to sexual offers
(Clark & Hatfield, 1989)Participants were university students questioned
by male and female confederates“Would you go to bed with me?”
Majority of men agreed to the sexual encounter, while all women refused
Concluded men are much more likely to engage in casual sex than females Suggests that males may judge casual sex less
harshly than females
Sociosexual OrientationRefers to one’s tendency to prefer sexual
engagement with or without commitment
One explanation for the decline in the double standard could stem from the shift of sociosexual orientationsFrom restricted to unrestricted
Women are more likely to engage in casual sex than they have been in the past
Research QuestionWhat are the factors that influence how one
evaluates individuals who initiate casual sex?Gender of the initiator of the sexual actGender of the participantSociosexual orientation of the participant
MethodParticipants
262 ParticipantsAge range: 18-24 years old
18-19: 42%20-21: 28%22-24: 30%
Female: 68%Heterosexual orientation: 85%Currently attending college: 79%Currently in a relationship: 50%
MethodProcedure
Online Survey Informed Consent
After consenting, participants were randomly assigned to two conditions
ScenariosIn each condition, participants were asked to read
three scenarios, each describing a situation in which an individual initiated casual sex
The gender of the initiator was manipulatedRevised Sociosexual Orientation InventoryDemographicsDebriefing
Scenario Example“Matt and Jane were both students at a university.
They had seen each other around campus, and became acquainted when they enrolled in the same class. Matt asked Jane if she would like to hang out and study for the upcoming exam. Jane suggested that they could go to her apartment since she lived alone. That night Matt arrived at Jane’s apartment and they began studying. After an hour they decided to take a break. Jane put her hand on Matt’s thigh and offered to give him a back rub. Then she leaned over to Matt and began to passionately kiss him. They began to remove their clothing and had sexual intercourse” (Kowalski - Revised, 1992).
MethodEvaluation of Initiator
After each scenario, participants were asked four questions in which they evaluated the initiator of the sexual encounterExample: “How positively do you perceive Jane?”
Evaluations were made on 5-point Likert scales
Combined all scenarios α=.91Since the participants responded similarly to the
questions and scenarios we were able to average their answers
MethodRevised Sociosexual Orientation Inventory
“Assesses one’s willingness to engage in uncommitted sexual relations” (Penke, 2011)
Uses a 5-point Likert ScaleAll 9-items α= .87
SOI-R example questions“How many different partners have you had sex with
in the past 12 months?”“With how many different partners have you had
sexual intercourse without having an interest in a long-term committed relationship with this person?”
Data AnalysisBetween-subjects design
3-way ANOVAFactors:
Gender of the scenario initiator (male, female)Gender of the participant (male, female)SOI-R category placement (unrestricted, restricted)
Results
No significant effect for gender of initiator
Significant main effect for gender of the participant
Significant main effect for SOI-R
No significant interactions
Gender of Initiator
F (1, 252) = 2.072, p = 0.151
Female Male1
1.5
2
2.5
3
2.72.8
Gender of the Initiator
Posit
ive E
valu
ati
on o
f In
itia
tor
Gender of Participant
F (1, 252) = 13.75, p < 0.001
Female Male1
1.5
2
2.5
3
2.6
2.9
Gender of the Participant
Posit
ive E
valu
ati
on o
f In
itia
tor
Participant SOI-R Score
F (1, 252) = 52.11, p < 0.001
Restricted Unrestricted1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
2.4
3.1
SOI-R Score
Posit
ive E
valu
ati
on o
f In
itia
tor
ConclusionNo double standard was found
Male initiators were not judged more positively than female initiators
Male participants evaluated the initiators more positively than women This was consistent with the results from Clark &
Hatfield’s study, that men have a more positive view on casual sex
People who have more positive attitudes towards casual sex viewed the initiators more positively
LimitationsAge range of sample
Use of hypothetical scenarios
Future DirectionsWould perceptions be different if the initiators’
past sexual behavior was stated at the beginning of the scenario?
Milhausen & Herold (1999)Studied the attitudes and sexual behaviors of
university women “The number of partners a woman has had is a
strong predictor of their acceptance of men with many partners”
Questions