Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 40, Issue 2, pp 331–341 | Cite as

Short-Term Prospective Study of Hooking Up Among College Students

Original Paper

Abstract

Hook ups are casual sexual encounters (ranging from kissing to intercourse) between two people with no clear mutual expectation of further interactions or a committed relationship. This study utilized a short-term prospective design to examine predictors of hooking up in a sample of young adults (N = 394). Hooking up over the past year, positive reactions to prior hook ups, alcohol use, and loneliness were associated with hooking up over a 4-month period. Alcohol use was a stronger predictor for women than men. Thoughtfulness about relationship transitions and religiosity were significant predictors of hooking up in univariate analyses, but were not significant in multivariate analyses. Young adults who reported more depressive symptoms and feelings of loneliness at Time 1 and subsequently engaged in penetrative hook ups reported fewer depressive symptoms and lower feelings of loneliness at Time 2 as compared to young adults who did not hook up. However, young adults who reported fewer depressive symptoms and were less lonely at Time 1 and engaged in penetrative hook ups over the 4 month period reported more depressive symptoms and greater feelings of loneliness at Time 2 as compared to young adults who did not hook up. Implications for relationship education programs are offered.

Keywords

Casual sex Hooking up Depression Loneliness 

References

  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Bisson, M. A., & Levine, T. R. (2007). Negotiating a friends with benefits relationship. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 66–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cole, J. C., Rabin, A. S., Smith, T. L., & Kaufman, A. S. (2004). Development and validation of a Rasch-derived CES-D Short Form. Psychological Assessment, 16, 360–372.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Feldman Barrett, L., & Russell, J. A. (1999). The structure of current affect: Controversies and emerging consensus. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fielder, R. L., & Carey, M. P. (2010). Predictors and consequences of sexual “hookups” among college students: A short-term prospective study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 346–359.Google Scholar
  7. Fincham, F. D., Stanley, S. M., & Rhoades, G. (2011). Relationship education in emerging adulthood: Problems and prospects. In F. D. Fincham & M. Cui (Eds.), Romantic relationships in emerging adulthood (pp. 293–316). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Glenn, N., & Marquardt, E. (2001). Hooking up, hanging out, and hoping for Mr. Right: College women on dating and mating today. New York: Institute for American Values.Google Scholar
  9. Grello, C. M., Welsh, D. P., & Harper, M. S. (2006). No strings attached: The nature of casual sex in college students. Journal of Sex Research, 43, 255–267.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grello, C. M., Welsh, D. P., Harper, M. S., & Dickson, J. W. (2003). Dating and sexual relationship trajectories and adolescent functioning. Adolescent & Family Health, 3, 103–112.Google Scholar
  11. Hofer, J., Busch, H., Bond, M. H., Campos, D., Li, M., & Law, R. (2010). The implicit power motive and sociosexuality in men and women: Pancultural effects of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 380–394.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lambert, T. A., Kahn, A. S., & Apple, K. J. (2003). Pluralistic ignorance and hooking up. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 129–133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Longmore, M. A., Manning, W. D., Giordano, P. C., & Rudolph, J. L. (2004). Self-esteem, depressive symptoms, and adolescents’ sexual onset. Social Psychological Quarterly, 67, 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mahalik, J. R., Good, G. E., & Englar-Carlson, M. (2003). Masculinity scripts, presenting concerns and help-seeking: Implications for practice and training. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 34, 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ouellette, J. A., & Wood, W. (1998). Habit and intention in everyday life: The multiple processes by which past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 54–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Owen, J., & Fincham, F. D. (2010a). Effects of gender and psychosocial factors on “friends with benefits” relationships among young adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-010-9611-6.
  17. Owen, J., & Fincham, F. D. (2010b). Young adults’ emotional reactions after hooking up. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-010-9652-x.
  18. Owen, J. J., Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., & Fincham, F. (2010). “Hooking up” among college students: Demographic and psychosocial correlates. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 653–663.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Owen, J., & Rodolfa, E. (2009). Prevention through connection: Creating a campus climate of care. Planning in Higher Education, 37, 26–33.Google Scholar
  20. Paul, E. L. (2006). Beer goggles, catching feelings, and the walk of shame: The myths and realities of the hookup experience. In D. C. Kirkpatrick, S. Duck, & M. K. Foley (Eds.), Relating difficulty: The process of constructing and managing difficult interaction (pp. 141–160). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  21. Paul, E. L., McManus, B., & Hayes, A. (2000). ‘‘Hookups’’: Characteristics and correlates of college students’ spontaneous and anonymous sexual experiences. Journal of Sex Research, 37, 76–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pearson, M., Stanley, S. M., & Kline, G. H. (2005). Within my reach. Greenwood, CO: PREP for Individuals, Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Penhollow, T., Young, M., & Bailey, W. (2007). Relationship between religiosity and ‘‘hooking up’’ behavior. American Journal of Health Education, 38, 338–345.Google Scholar
  24. Penke, L., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113–1135.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Peterson, Z. D., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (2007). What is sex and why does it matter? A motivational approach to exploring individuals’ definitions of sex. Journal of Sex Research, 44, 256–268.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Russell, D. (1996). The UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): Reliability, validity and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 20–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Saunders, J. B., Aasland, O. G., Babor, T. F., de la Fuente, J. R., & Grant, M. (1993). Development of the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT): WHO collaborative project on early detection of persons with harmful alcohol consumption-II. Addiction, 88, 791–804.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Scott-Sheldon, L. A. J., Carey, M. P., Vanable, P. A., Senn, T. E., Coury-Doniger, P., & Urban, M. A. (2009). Alcohol consumption, drug use, and condom use among STD clinic patients. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 70, 762–770.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Stanley, S. M., Rhoades, G. K., & Markman, H. J. (2006). Sliding versus deciding: Inertia and the premarital cohabitation effect. Family Relations, 55, 499–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Stepp, L. S. (2007). Unhooked: How young women pursue sex, delay love, and lose at both. New York: Riverhead Books.Google Scholar
  32. Townsend, J. M. (1995). Sex without emotional involvement: An evolutionary interpretation of sex differences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24, 173–206.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vassar, M., & Crosby, J. W. (2008). The reliability generalization study of coefficient alpha for the UCLA Loneliness Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 601–607.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Education and Counseling Psychology DepartmentCollege of Education University of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  2. 2.Family InstituteFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations