Abstract
To date, there is limited knowledge about how parents make decisions about adolescents’ participation in sexuality research. This gap was addressed in the present study, which explored parents’ reasons for providing or denying consent and their suggestions for improving the likelihood of consent. 151 parents responded through anonymous internet surveys (85.3 % mothers; 87 % European American). Those who would likely consent were largely motivated by potential benefits and limited risks of participating in the study. Those unlikely to consent expressed discomfort with sexual content, which they viewed as inappropriate for sexually-naïve adolescents. Most were somewhat more likely to consent if researchers engaged in ethical research practices (e.g., protecting confidentiality). As in other adolescent life domains, parents’ decisions strongly reflected their desire to protect their teenagers’ wellbeing, though respondents’ means of pursuing this goal varied. The discussion centers on the findings’ implications for theory development and recruitment efforts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albaum, G. S., Evangelista, F., & Medina, N. (1998). Role of response behavior theory in survey research: A cross-national study. Journal of Business Research, 42, 115–125. doi:10.1016/S0148-2963(97)00108-2.
Biggar, R. J., & Melbye, M. (1992). Responses to anonymous questionnaires concerning sexual behavior: A method to examine potential biases. American Journal of Public Health, 82, 1506–1512. doi:10.2105/AJPH.82.11.1506.
Boccia, M. L., Campbell, F. A., Goldman, B. D., & Skinner, M. (2009). Differential recall of consent information and parental decisions about enrolling children in research studies. The Journal of General Psychology, 136, 91–108. doi:10.3200/GENP.136.1.91-108.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Brody, J. L., Scherer, D. G., Annett, R. D., & Pearson-Bish, M. (2003). Voluntary assent in biomedical research with adolescents: A comparison of parent and adolescent views. Ethics and Behavior, 13, 79–95. doi:10.1207/S15327019EB1301_10.
Brody, J. L., Turner, C. W., Annett, R. D., Scherer, D. G., & Dalen, J. (2012). Predicting adolescent asthma research participation decisions from a structural equations model of protocol factors. Journal of Adolescent Health, 51, 252–258. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.12.015.
Brooks-Gunn, J. (1990). Overcoming barriers to adolescent research on pubertal and reproductive development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 19, 425–440. doi:10.1007/BF01537472.
Brüggen, E. C., Wetzels, M. G. M., de Ruyter, J. C., & Schillewaert, N. (2011). Individual differences in motivation to participate in online panels: The effect on response rate and response quality perceptions. International Journal of Market Research, 53, 36–390. doi:10.2501/UMR-53-3-369-390.
Catania, J. A. (1999). A framework for conceptualizing reporting bias and its antecedents in interviews assessing human sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 25–38. doi:10.1080/00224499909551964.
Copas, A. J., Johnson, A. M., & Wadsworth, J. (1997). Assessing participation bias in a sexual behavior survey: Implications for measuring HIV risk. AIDS, 11, 783–790. doi:10.1097/00002030-199706000-00011.
DiClemente, R. J., Ruiz, M. S., & Sales, J. M. (2010). Barriers to adolescents’ participation in HIV biomedical prevention research. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, 54, S12–S17. doi:10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181e1e2c0.
Dillman, D. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York, NY: Wiley.
Dore, R. A., Stone, E. R., & Buchanan, C. M. (2014). A social values analysis of parental decision making. Journal of Psychology, 148, 477–504. doi:10.1080/00223980.2013.808603.
Dunne, M. P., Martin, N. G., Bailey, J. M., Heath, A. C., Bucholz, K. K., Madden, P. A. F., & Statham, D. J. (1997). Participation bias in a sexuality survey: Psychological and behavioural characteristics of responders and non-responders. International Journal of Epidemiology, 26, 844–854. doi:10.1093/ije/26.4.844.
Evangelista, F., Albaum, G., & Poon, P. (1999). An empirical test of alternative theories of survey response behavior. Journal of the Market Research Society, 41, 227–244. doi:10.2190/61B3-KTKC-WCRE-RH1N.
Fields, J., & Tolman, D. L. (2006). Risky business: Sexuality education and research in U.S. schools. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 3, 63–76. doi:10.1525/srsp.2006.3.4.63.
Geasler, M. J., Dannison, L. L., & Edlund, C. J. (1995). Sexuality education of young children: Parental concerns. Family Relations, 44, 184–188. doi:10.2307/584807.
Groves, R. M., Cialdini, R. B., & Couper, M. P. (1992). Understanding the decision to participate in a survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56, 475–495. doi:10.1086/269338.
Groves, R. M., Singer, E., & Corning, A. (2000). Leverage-saliency theory of survey participation: Description and an illustration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64, 299–308. doi:10.1086/317990.
Halpern, C. T., Udry, J. R., & Suchindran, C. (1994). Effects of repeated questionnaire administration in longitudinal studies of adolescent males’ sexual behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23, 41–57. doi:10.1007/BF01541617.
Keusch, F. (2013). The role of topic interest and topic salience in online panel web surveys. International Journal of Market Research, 55, 59–80. doi:10.2501/IJMR-2013-007.
Keusch, F. (2015). Why do people participate in web surveys? Applying survey participation theory to internet survey data collection. Management Review Quarterly, 65, 183–216. doi:10.1007/s11301-014-0111-y.
Kuyper, L., de Wit, J., Adam, P., & Woertman, L. (2012). Doing more good than harm? The effects of participation in sex research on young people in the Netherlands. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 497–506. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9780-y.
Moilanen, K. L. (2015). Predictors of parental consent for adolescent participation in sexual health-related research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 10, 157–168. doi:10.1177/1556264615575510.
Niehues, A. N., Bundy, A., Broom, A., & Tranter, P. (2015). Parents’ perception of risk and the influence on children’s everyday activities. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24, 809–820. doi:10.1007/s10826-013-9891-2.
Ott, M. A., Rosenberger, J. G., & Fortenberry, J. D. (2010). Parental permission and perceived research benefits in adolescent STI research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 5, 57–64. doi:10.1525/jer.2010.5.2.57.
Peel, E., Parry, O., Douglas, M., & Lawton, J. (2006). “It’s no skin off my nose”: Why people take part in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 1335–1349. doi:10.1177/1049732306294511.
Szollos, A. A., & McCabe, M. P. (1995). The sexuality of people with mild intellectual disabilities: Perceptions of clients and caregivers. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 20, 205–222. doi:10.1080/07263869500035561.
Thomas, G., & Kroese, B. S. (2005). An investigation of students’ with mild learning disabilities reactions to participating in sexuality research. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 113–119. doi:10.1111/j.1468-3156.2005.00336.x.
Wallander, L., Tikkanen, R. H., Mannheimer, L. N., Östergren, P.-O., & Plantin, L. (2014). The problem of non-response in population surveys on the topic of HIV and sexuality: A comparative study. European Journal of Public Health, 25, 172–177. doi:10.1093/eurpub/cku154.
Wilson, E. K., Dalberth, B. T., Koo, H. P., & Gard, J. C. (2010). Parents’ perspectives on talking to preteenage children about sex. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 42, 56–63. doi:10.1363/4205610.
Acknowledgments
This research was partially funded by internal grants from West Virginia University. Debra Blaacker and Rebecca Norman coded the data reported in this manuscript. General research assistance was provided by Arielle Deutsch, Xin Liu, Mary Lynn Manuel, Stephanie Satanek, and Jessica Troilo.
Funding
This study was funded through internal grants to the author from West Virginia University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author reports no conflict of interests.
Ethical Approval
This research was approved by the West Virginia University Institutional Review Board. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. APA ethical standards were followed in this study’s conduction.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. All parents acknowledged providing informed consent for their voluntary participation in the anonymous study by selecting a radio button indicating agreement at the start of the survey; those who did not consent or did not select this button were unable to access the online survey.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moilanen, K.L. Why Do Parents Grant or Deny Consent for Adolescent Participation in Sexuality Research?. J Youth Adolescence 45, 1020–1036 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0445-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0445-y