Measurement of Radiation and Dosimetric Procedure.pptx
Casual sex and Well-Being - SSSS 2013
1.
2. Sexual behavior lacking emotional
attachment and/or romantic commitment
between partners:
One-night stands
Sex on the same night
Friends with Benefits
Fuck buddies
Short-term mating
Flings
3.
Up to 80% at least one CS;
~10% undergrads have CS regularly;
CS occurs early in one’s sexual history;
Replacing dating as primary method of
relationship development on campuses?
4.
Mixed cross-sectional
findings:
› Many null
› Some negative, esp. teens
and girls
› Some positive, esp. men
Mostly null longitudinal
findings:
› Teens
› Undergrads
5. MODERATORS!
Not all casual sex encounters are equally
harmful/beneficial
Not all people are equally sensitive to this
harmful/beneficial effects
6.
Acting in congruence with self, one’s true
desires, values; being ‘true’ to oneself
Higher authenticity higher well-being:
› Self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000);
› Self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987);
› Self-concordance model (Sheldon & Hauser-Marko, 2001);
› Self-authenticity (Kernis, 2003).
Two aspects of authenticity:
› Why you do it (encounter-level): CS Motivation (Study 1)
› Who does it (trait-level): Sociosexuality (Study 2)
7. Online longitudinal survey at Cornell
Email sent to all freshmen and juniors
(~6,500) in September 2009
T1 (start of semester) – 872, 59% f (13% RR)
T2 (end of semester) – 671, 63% f (77% ret)
T3 (end of year) – 560, 64% f (64% ret)
Weekly diary (12 weeks over Fall
semester) – 230 single students – 65% f
8. Behaviors vary in levels of selfdetermination, i.e. intentionality (Ryan &
Deci, 2000)
Higher intentionality higher
psychological & physical well-being
across a variety of domains (e.g.
work, relationships, education, health, ther
apy, dating sex)
Vrangalova, Z. (in press). Arch Sexual Behavior
10.
Autonomous:
› pleasure, novelty, desire
› exploring, experimenting
Nonautonomous:
› low self-esteem,
› need for self-
affirmation, peer pressure or
social status,
› relationship development
› coerced, tricked into,
› Intoxication
11. N = 562 (60% f)
Any casual sex at T1 – T3: 37%
› One-time & longer-casual
› Any genital touching
CS Motives T1-T3 for all CS experienced
› 8 reasons on a scale of 1 (none) to 7 (all of
my hookups)
› Factor analysis confirms Autonomous vs.
Nonautonomous distinction
12.
H1: Among the CS experienced:
› Autonomous CS Greater well-being
› Nonautonomous CS Lower well-being
H2: Among the whole sample:
› Self-determined CS group ≥ No CS group
› Non self-determined CS group < No CS
group
Gender differences?
13.
14.
15. › Buffering effects against distress
(depression, anxiety, & physical symptoms)
› Thriving effects in positive wellbeing (selfesteem)
16. Individual differences in people’s
willingness to engage in uncommitted
sexual relationships
Desire – motivational component; result
of testosterone and environmental
conditions
Attitude – evaluative disposition for self
and others; result of culture
Behavior – result of desires + personal
and (non)social external constraints
17.
H1: SOI will moderate between-person
effects of CS between T1-T3 on T3
wellbeing
CS: penetrative (oral, vaginal, or anal)
one-time or longer casual: 33%
N = 528
Controls: school year, race, SES, &
relationship status
18. 3.8
No CS
Had CS
Self Esteem
3.6
ns
ns
3.4
3.2
Low SOI (-1 SD)
High SOI (+1 SD)
3.2
2.8
p < .05
ns
3
p < .05
ns
2.4
Depression
Anxiety
2.6
2.8
2.6
2.2
Low SOI (-1 SD)
High SOI (+1 SD)
Low SOI (-1 SD)
High SOI (+1 SD)
19.
H: SOI will moderate within-person effects of
weekly CS on weekly wellbeing
252 of single T1 participants (65% female)
12 weeks online survey
› Weekly well-being (self-esteem, life
satisfaction, depression, and anxiety)
› Did they have partnered sex (any intimate
contact, from making out to intercourse?
› Up to 4 partners:
Types of sexual activities (kissing to intercourse)
Type of encounter – casual or not
20. 230 participants with at least 6 reports
2510 weekly reports
At least 1 penetrative sexual encounter:
On 9% (204) weekly reports
› 90% only 1 partner (range 1 to 3)
By 35% (80) participants
› 44% only 1 week (range 1 to 9)
Higher SOI higher likelihood of weekly
casual sex, OR=2.31*** [1.84, 2.89]
21.
Level 2 (between-person): T1 measures
› Moderator: SOI-R (Asendorpf & Penke, 2009)
› Controls: Gender, Race, School Year
Level 1 (within-person): Weekly measures
› Outcome: Weekly well-being
› Predictor: Had casual sex (Y/N)
› Controls: Lagged effects of well-being
Effects of interest:
› 2-way cross-level interaction CS & SOI
› 3-way cross level interaction w/ gender
22. 4.1
ALL PARTICIPANTS
No CS
Had CS
3.8
p < .05
3.9
3.6
Life Satisfaction
Self Esteem
ALL PARTICIPANTS
3.7
ns
3.5
p < .01
3.4
3.2
3.3
3
3.1
ns
2.8
Low SOI (-1 SD)
High SOI (+1 SD)
Low SOI (-1 SD)
High SOI (+1 SD)
23. 2.2
2.2
MEN
WOMEN
Anxiety
2
2
1.8
1.8
1.6
p < .01
ns
1.6
ns
1.4
p < .05
1.4
1.2
1.2
Low SOI (-1 SD)
Low SOI (-1 SD)
High SOI (+1 SD)
2.2
2.2
MEN
WOMEN
2
2
Depression
ns
1.8
High SOI (+1 SD)
p < .08
1.8
ns
1.6
ns
1.4
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.2
Low SOI (-1 SD)
High SOI (+1 SD)
Low SOI (-1 SD)
High SOI (+1 SD)
24. › Buffering effects against distress
(depression, & anxiety)
› Thriving effects in positive wellbeing (selfesteem & life satisfaction)
25. Few main effects: CS is not a stressor
uniformly affecting all people short-term
(weekly) or longer-term (9 months)
It depends on authenticity:
› Why you do it (encounter-specific): CS
motivation
› Who does it (trait-level): Sociosexuality
Authenticity in CS:
› Buffering effects against distress
(depression, anxiety, & physical symptoms)
› Thriving effects in positive wellbeing (self-esteem
& life satisfaction)
26. Research: Need to move away from
main effects, and toward a more
nuanced understanding of the CS –
wellbeing link.
Education, policy, clinical practice:
Teach youth how to recognize whether
and when it is good/bad for them, and
say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ accordingly.
27.
Funding:
› The Foundation for Scientific Study of
Sexuality
› The Society for the Psychological Study of
Social Issues
› Cornell University Human Ecology Alumni
Association
› American Institute of Bisexuality
Help with data collection/preparation:
› Rachel Mack
› Melany Bradshaw
› Vickie Liang
Hinweis der Redaktion
Means adjusted for gender, school year, socioeconomic status, relationship status, and race