Online Sexual Activity Experience of Heterosexual Students: Gender Similarities and Differences
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
This study compared male and female university students’ experiences with online sexual activity (OSA) and tested a model explaining gender differences in OSA. OSAs were categorized as non-arousal (e.g., seeking sexuality information), solitary-arousal (e.g., viewing sexually explicit materials), or partnered-arousal (e.g., sharing sexual fantasies). Participants (N = 217) completed measures of OSA experience, sexual attitudes, and sexual experience. Significantly more men than women reported engaging in solitary-arousal and partnered-arousal OSA and doing so more often. However, the men and women who reported having engaged in partnered-arousal activities reported equal frequencies of experience. There were no significant gender differences for engaging in non-arousal OSA experience. These results support the importance of grouping OSAs in terms of the proposed non-arousal, solitary-arousal, and partnered-arousal categories. Attitude toward OSA but not general attitudes toward or experiences with sexuality partially mediated the relationship between gender and frequency of engaging in arousal-oriented OSA (solitary and partnered OSA). This suggests that attitude toward OSA specifically and not gender socialization more generally account for gender differences in OSA experience.
- Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918. CrossRef
- Albarracin, D., Johnson, B. T., Fishbein, M., & Muellerleile, P. A. (2001). Theories of reasoned action and planned behavior as models of condom use: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 142–161. CrossRef
- Alexander, M. G., & Fisher, T. D. (2003). Truth and consequences: Using the bogus pipeline to examine sex differences in self-reported sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 27–35. CrossRef
- Allen, M., Emmers-Sommer, T. M., D’Alessio, D., Timmerman, L., Hanzal, A., & Korus, J. (2007). The connection between the physiological and psychological reactions to sexually explicit materials: A literature summary using meta-analysis. Communications Monographs, 74, 541–560. CrossRef
- Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vols, K. D. (2001). Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 242–273. CrossRef
- Boies, S. C. (2002). University students’ uses of and reactions to online sexual information and entertainment: Links to online and offline sexual behavior. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 11, 77–89.
- Byers, E. S. (1996). How well does the traditional sexual script explain sexual coercion? Review of a program of research. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 8, 7–25. CrossRef
- Byers, E. S., Henderson, J., & Hobson, K. M. (2009). University students’ definitions of sexual abstinence and having sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 665–674. CrossRef
- Byers, L. J., Menzies, K. S., & O’Grady, W. L. (2004). The impact of computer variables on the viewing and sending of sexually explicit material on the Internet: Testing Cooper’s “Triple-A Engine”. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 13, 157–169.
- Cha, E. S., Doswell, W. M., Kim, K. H., Charron-Prochownik, D., & Patrick, T. E. (2007). Evaluating the theory of planned behavior to explain intention to engage in premarital sex amongst Korean college students: A questionnaire survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44, 1147–1157. CrossRef
- Cooper, A., & Griffin-Shelley, E. (2002). Introduction. The Internet: The next sexual revolution. In A. Cooper (Ed.), Sex and the Internet: A guidebook for clinicians (pp. 1–15). New York: Brunner-Routledge.
- Cooper, A., Morahan-Martin, J., Mathy, R. M., & Maheu, M. (2002). Toward an increased understanding of user demographics in online sexual activities. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 28, 105–129. CrossRef
- Daneback, K., Cooper, A., & Månsson, S.-A. (2005). An Internet study of cybersex participants. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 34, 321–328. CrossRef
- Field, G. (2009, January 5). Houston, we have a porn problem. Glamour Magazine. Retrieved February 19, 2008, from http://www.glamour.com/sex-love-life/2009/01/houston-we-have-a-porn-problem?currentPage=4.
- Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
- Ganesalingam, K., Sanson, A., Anderson, V., & Yeates, K. O. (2007). Self-regulation as a mediator of the effects of childhood traumatic brain injury on social and behavioral functioning. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 298–311. CrossRef
- Goodson, P., McCormick, D., & Evans, A. (2001). Searching for sexually explicit materials on the internet: An exploratory study of college students’ behavior and attitudes. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 30, 101–118. CrossRef
- Heinz, B., Gu, L., Inuzuka, A., & Zender, R. (2002). Under the rainbow flag: Webbing global gay identities. International Journal of Sexuality and Gender Studies, 7, 107–123. CrossRef
- Hudson, W. W., Murphy, G. J., & Nurius, P. S. (1983). A short-form scale to measure liberal vs. conservative orientation toward human sexual expression. Journal of Sex Research, 19, 258–272. CrossRef
- Jackson, L. A., Ervin, K. S., Gardner, P. D., & Schmitt, N. (2001). Gender and the Internet: Women communicating and men searching. Sex Roles, 44, 363–379. CrossRef
- Ku, L., Sonenstein, F. L., Lindberg, L. D., Bradner, C. H., Boggess, S., & Pleck, J. H. (1998). Understanding changes in sexual activity among young metropolitan men: 1979–1995. Family Planning Perspectives, 30, 256–262. CrossRef
- Lopez, P. A., & George, W. H. (1995). Men’s enjoyment of explicit erotica: Effects of person-specific attitudes and gender-specific norms. Journal of Sex Research, 32, 275–288. CrossRef
- O’Reilly, S., Knox, D., & Zusman, M. E. (2007). College student attitudes toward pornography use. College Student Journal, 41, 402–406.
- O’Sullivan, L. F., & Byers, E. S. (1992). College students’ incorporation of initiator and restrictor roles in sexual dating interactions. Journal of Sex Research, 29, 435–446. CrossRef
- Peterson, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 21–38. CrossRef
- PEW Internet and American Life Project. (2009, December 4). Trend data. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Trend-Data/Online-Activities-Daily.aspx.
- PEW Internet and American Life Project (2010, January 6). Demographics of internet users. Retrieved March 23, 2010, from http://pewinternet.org/Static-Pages/Trend-Data/Whos-Online.aspx.
- Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. CrossRef
- Rye, B. J., & Meaney, G. J. (2007). The pursuit of sexual pleasure. Sexuality and Culture, 11, 28–51. CrossRef
- Schwartz, P., & Rutter, V. (2000). The gender of sexuality: Sexual possibilities (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
- Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883. CrossRef
- Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P., & Steinberg, L. (1996). The Sexual Desire Inventory: Development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 22, 175–190.
- Traeen, B., Nilsen, T. S., & Stigum, H. (2006). Use of pornography in traditional media and on the Internet in Norway. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 245–254. CrossRef
- Wiederman, M. W. (1999). Volunteer bias in sexuality research using college student samples. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 59–66. CrossRef
- Wiederman, M. W. (2005). The gendered nature of sexual scripts. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 13, 496–502.
- Yost, M. R., & Zurbriggen, E. L. (2006). Gender differences in the enactment of sociosexuality: An examination of implicit social motives, sexual fantasies, coercive sexual attitudes, aggressive sexual behavior. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 163–173. CrossRef
- Online Sexual Activity Experience of Heterosexual Students: Gender Similarities and Differences
Archives of Sexual Behavior
Volume 40, Issue 2 , pp 419-427
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Online sexual activity
- Gender difference
- Sexual attitudes
- Sexual socialization
- Sexually explicit material
- Industry Sectors