Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 41, Issue 4, pp 849–860 | Cite as

Risk, Individual Differences, and Environment: An Agent-Based Modeling Approach to Sexual Risk-Taking

  • Emily Nagoski
  • Erick Janssen
  • David Lohrmann
  • Eric Nichols
Original Paper

Abstract

Risky sexual behaviors, including the decision to have unprotected sex, result from interactions between individuals and their environment. The current study explored the use of Agent-Based Modeling (ABM)—a methodological approach in which computer-generated artificial societies simulate human sexual networks—to assess the influence of heterogeneity of sexual motivation on the risk of contracting HIV. The models successfully simulated some characteristics of human sexual systems, such as the relationship between individual differences in sexual motivation (sexual excitation and inhibition) and sexual risk, but failed to reproduce the scale-free distribution of number of partners observed in the real world. ABM has the potential to inform intervention strategies that target the interaction between an individual and his or her social environment.

Keywords

Sexual risk taking Sexual motivation Sexual inhibition Agent-based modeling 

References

  1. Alam, S. J., Meyer, R., Ziervogel, G., & Moss, S. (2007). The impact of HIV/AIDS in the context of socioeconomic stressors: An evidence-driven approach. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 10(47). Retrieved from http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/JASSS.html
  2. Åmgo, A. (1999). Sexual motivation: An inquiry into events determining the occurrence of sexual behavior. Behavioural Brain Research, 105, 129–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Axelrod, R. (1997). The complexity of cooperation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bagni, R., Berchi, R., & Cariello, P. (2002). A comparison of simulation models applied to epidemics. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 5(3). Retrieved from http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/JASSS.html
  5. Bancroft, J. (2000). Individual differences in sexual risk-taking: A biopsychosocial theoretical approach. In J. Bancroft (Ed.), The role of theory in sex research (pp. 177–212). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bancroft, J., Graham, C., Janssen, E., & Sanders, S. (2009). The dual control model: Current status and future directions. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 121–142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bancroft, J., & Janssen, E. (2000). The dual control model of male sexual response: A theoretical approach to centrally mediated erectile dysfunction. Neuroscience and Behavioral Reviews, 24, 571–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bar-Yam, Y. (1997). Dynamics of complex systems. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bonabeau, E. (2002). Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99, 7280–7287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  11. Carpenter, D., Janssen, E., Graham, C., Vorst, H., & Wicherts, J. (2008). Women’s scores on the Sexual Excitation/Sexual Inhibition Scales (SIS/SES): Gender similarities and differences. Journal of Sex Research, 45, 36–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2001). STDs in adolescents and young adults. Homepage of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/STD/stats00/2000sfadol&yadults.htm
  13. Clark, A. (2001). Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dezső, Z., & Barabási, A. L. (2002). Halting viruses in scale-free networks. Physical Review E, 65, 055103. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.65.055103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doherty, I., Padian, N., Marlow, C., & Aral, S. (2005). Determinants and consequences of sexual networks as they affect the spread of sexually transmitted infections. Journal of Infectious Disease, 191(Suppl. 1), S42–S54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eliasmith, C. (2003). Moving beyond metaphors: Understanding the mind for what it is. Journal of Philosophy, 100, 493–520.Google Scholar
  17. Fausto-Sterling, A. (2003). Thinking systematically about the emergence of gender. Opening Plenary at the Women’s Sexualities: Historical, Interdisciplinary, and International Perspectives Conference, Bloomington, IN.Google Scholar
  18. Gilbert, N., & Troitzsch, K. (1999). Simulation for the social scientist. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Lewis, F. M. (2002). Theory, research, and practice in health behavior and education. In K. Glanz, R. Bimer, & F. Lewis (Eds.), Health behavior and education: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 22–39). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  20. Goldstone, R. L., & Janssen, M. (2005). Computational models of collective behavior. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9, 1364–1366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Graham, C., Janssen, E., & Sanders, S. A. (2000). Effects of fragrance on female sexual arousal and mood across the menstrual cycle. Psychophysiology, 37, 76–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Graham, C. A., Sanders, S. A., & Milhausen, R. (2006). The Sexual Excitation/Sexual Inhibition Inventory for Women: Psychometric properties. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 397–409.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Graham, C. A., Sanders, S. A., Milhausen, R., & McBride, K. (2004). Turning on and turning off: A focus group study of the factors that affect women’s sexual arousal. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33, 527–538.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Janssen, E., & Bancroft, J. (2007). The dual-control model: The role of sexual inhibition and excitation in sexual arousal and behavior. In E. Janssen (Ed.), The psychophysiology of sex (pp. 197–222). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002a). The Sexual Inhibition (SIS) and Sexual Excitation (SES) Scales: I. Measuring sexual inhibition and excitation proneness in men. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 114–126.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Janssen, E., Vorst, H., Finn, P., & Bancroft, J. (2002b). The Sexual Inhibition (SIS) and Sexual Excitation (SES) Scales: II. Predicting psychophysiological response patterns. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 127–132.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kopp, M. E. (1934). Birth control in practice: Analysis of ten thousand case histories of the Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau. New York: Robert M. McBride.Google Scholar
  28. Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. Liljeros, F., Edling, C. R., Amaral, L., Stanley, H., & Aberg, Y. (2001). The web of human sexual contacts. Nature, 411, 907–908.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Macy, M., & Willer, R. (2002). From factors to actors: Computational sociology and agent based modeling. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 143–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Newman, P., Duan, N., Rudy, E., & Anton, P. (2004). Challenges for HIV vaccine dissemination and clinical trial recruitment: If we build it, will they come? AIDS Patient Care and STDs, 18, 691–701.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Olsen, J., & Jepsen, A. R. (2010). Human papillomavirus transmission and cost-effectiveness of introducing quadrivalent HPV vaccination in Denmark. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 26, 183–191.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Orra, M., & Evansa, C. R. (2011). Understanding long-term diffusion dynamics in the prevalence of adolescent sexual initiation: A first investigation using agent-based modeling. Research in Human Development, 8, 48–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pietromonaco, R., & Feldman-Barret, L. (1997). Working models of attachment and daily social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1409–1423.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Reynolds, C. (2001). Boids: Background and update. Retrieved from http://www.red3d.com/cwr/boids/
  36. Rodgers, J., Rowe, D., & Buster, M. (1998). Social contagion, adolescent sexual behavior, and pregnancy: A nonlinear dynamic EMOSA model. Developmental Psychology, 34, 1096–1113.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rothenberg, R. B., Potterat, J. J., Woodhouse, D. E., Muth, S. Q., Darrow, W. W., & Klovdahl, A. S. (1998). Social network dynamics and HIV transmission. AIDS, 12, 1529–1536.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Royce, R. A., Seña, A., Cates, W. J., & Cohen, M. S. (1997). Sexual transmission of HIV. New England Journal Medicine, 336, 1072–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sachs, B. (2007). A contextual definition of male sexual arousal. Hormones and Behavior, 51, 569–578.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Savage, T. (2000). Artificial motives: A review of motivation in artificial creatures. Connection Science, 12, 212–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schroeder, K., & Rojas, F. (2002). A game theoretical analysis of sexually transmitted disease epidemics. Rationality and Society, 14, 353–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shalizi, C. (2003). Methods and techniques of complex systems science: An overview. In T. S. Deisboeck & J. Y. Kresh (Eds.), Complex systems science in biomedicine (pp. 33–114). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  43. Singer, B., & Toates, F. M. (1987). Sexual motivation. Journal of Sex Research, 23, 481–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Slob, A. K., Bax, C. M., Hop, W. C., Rowland, D. L., & ten Bosch, J. J. (1996). Sexual arousability and the menstrual cycle. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 21, 545–558.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wallen, K. (1990). Desire and ability: Hormones and the regulation of female sexual behavior. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 14, 233–241.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wallen, K., & Zehr, J. (2004). Hormones and history: The evolution and development of primate female sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 101–112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emily Nagoski
    • 1
  • Erick Janssen
    • 2
  • David Lohrmann
    • 3
  • Eric Nichols
    • 4
  1. 1.Student Affairs, Smith CollegeNorthamptonUSA
  2. 2.Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction, Indiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  3. 3.Department of Applied Health ScienceIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations