Skip to main content
Log in

Power in college students' contraceptive decisions

  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Excluding Hollerbach (1980), previous fertility researchers have paid little attention to contraceptive power bases, relationships that become the source of changes in birth control values and behavior. Eight contraceptive power bases, each evaluated as a direct or obvious strategy, were identified in a pilot study involving 25 college students as participants and 10 undergraduate raters. Two-hundred college students completed a questionnaire which included the Bem Sex Role Inventory, inquired into their sexual and contraceptive behavior, and asked about contraceptive power bases. There were highly significant main effects for both students' personal experiences with contraceptive power bases and for their opinions about the comfort and effectiveness of same. Coercion was the most popular and legitimate power was the least popular power base. Women were more likely than men to be the targets of contraceptive power bases, the majority of which were stereotyped as feminine by women in particular. Sex role identification was unrelated to students' experiences with contraceptive power bases. The implications of these findings for family-planning researchers and practioners are addressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allgeier, E. R. (1983). Reproduction, roles, and responsibilities. In E. R. Allgeier and N. B. McCormick (eds.),Changing Boundaries: Gender Roles and Sexual Behavior Mayfield, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 163–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, J. G., and Davies, D. K. (1987). Teen contraception: A Review of perspectives on compliance.Arch. Sex. Behav. 16: 337–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 42: 155–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, S. L. (1981).Bem Sex Role Inventory, Professional Manual Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falbo, T. (1977). Relationships between sex, sex role, and social influence.Psychol. Women Quart. 2: 62–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falbo, T. (1982). PAQ types and power strategies used in intimate relationships.Psychol. Women Quart. 6: 399–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falbo, T., and Peplau, L. A. (1980). Power strategies in intimate relationships.J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 38: 618–628.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, J. R. P., Jr., and Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (ed.),Studies in Social Power University of Michigan Research Center for Group Dynamics, Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor, pp. 150–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furstenberg, F. F., Jr., Herceg-Baron, R., Shea, J., and Webb, D. (1984). Family communication and teenagers' contraceptive use.Fam. Plann. Perspect. 16: 163–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herold, E. S., and McNamee, J. P. (1982). An explanatory model of contraceptive use among young single women.J. Sex Res. 18: 289–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollerbach, P. E. (1980). Power in families, communication, and fertility decision-making.Population Environ. 3: 146–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P. (1976). Women and power: Toward a theory of effectiveness.J. Soc. Issues 32: 99–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P. B., and Goodchilds, J. D. (1976, October). How women get their way.Psychol. Today, pp. 69–70.

  • Kisker, E. E. (1985). Teenagers talk about sex, pregnancy and contraception.Fam. Plann. Perspect. 17: 83–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lips, H. (1981).Women, Men, and the Psychology of Power Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, N. B. (1979). Come-ons and put-offs: Unmarried students' strategies for having and avoiding sexual intercourse.Psychol. Women Quart. 4: 94–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, N. B. (1986). Encouraging rural youth to be sexually responsible.J. Sex Educ. Ther. 12: 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, N. B., and Jesser, C. J. (1983). The courtship game: Power in the sexual encounter. In E. R. Allgeier and N. B. McCormick (eds.),Changing Boundaries: Gender Roles and Sexual Behavior Mayfield, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 64–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milan, R. J., Jr., and Kilmann, P. R. (1987). Interpersonal factors in premarital contraception.J. Sex Res. 23: 289–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcomer, S. F., and Udry, J. R. (1985). Parent-child communication and adolescent sexual behavior.Fam. Plann. Perspect. 17: 169–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raven, B. H. (1965). Social influence and power. In I. D. Steiner and M. Fishbein (eds.),Current Studies in Social Psychology Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 371–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothenberg, P. B. (1980). Communication about sex and birth control between mothers and their adolescent children.Population Eviron. 3: 35–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sack, A. R., Billingham, R. E., and Howard, R. D. (1985). Premarital contraceptive use: A discriminant analysis approach.Arch. Sex. Behav. 14: 165–182.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Data presented in this article were collected in 1983 by Patricia Soja-Perrin for a master's thesis executed under the authors' strict direction and intensive supervision.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McCormick, N.B., Gaeddert, W. Power in college students' contraceptive decisions. Arch Sex Behav 18, 35–48 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01579290

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01579290

Key words

Navigation