Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 89–97 | Cite as

Americans’ Attitudes Toward Premarital Sex and Pornography Consumption: A National Panel Analysis

Original Paper

Abstract

National panel data gathered in 2008 (T1) and 2010 (T2) from 420 Black and White US adults aged 18–89 years (M = 45.37, SD = 15.85) were employed to assess prospective associations between pornography consumption and premarital sex attitudes. Premarital sex attitudes were indexed via a composite measure of perceptions of the appropriateness of adults and teenagers having premarital sex. Wright’s (2011) sexual script acquisition, activation, application model (3AM) of media sexual socialization was used as the guiding theoretical framework. The 3AM maintains that sexual media may be used by consumers to inform their sexual scripts but that attitude change from exposure to sexual media is less likely when media scripts are incongruent with consumers’ preexisting scripts. Consistent with these postulates, the association between pornography consumption at T1 and more positive attitudes toward premarital sex at T2 was strongest for younger adults, who are less oppositional to premarital sex than older adults. Contrary to the position that associations between pornography consumption and premarital sex attitudes are due to individuals who already have positive attitudes toward premarital sex selecting content congruent with their attitudes, premarital sex attitudes at T1 did not predict pornography consumption at T2.

Keywords

Pornography Premarital sex Sexual socialization Selective exposure 3AM 

Introduction

Spurred by the sexual revolution of the 1960s (Smith, 1990), American social scientists have devoted much effort in recent decades to identifying predictors of nontraditional or “permissive” socio-sexual norms and values (Alston & Tucker, 1973; DiMaggio, Evans, & Bryson, 1996; Elias, Fullerton, & Simpson, 2013; Thornton, 1989). Norms and values surrounding premarital sex have been of central focus, as proscriptions against premarital sex have traditionally been an important component of the socio-sexual worldview in the US (Attorney General, 1986; Elias et al., 2013; Linz & Malamuth, 1993). Adult United States residents have, in general, become more accepting of premarital sex overtime. For example, nationally representative data generated by the General Social Survey (GSS: Davis & Smith, 2010) indicate that, in the 1970s, 32.7 % of participants felt that premarital sex between adults was not wrong at all. In the 1980s, the figure increased to 40.6 %, increasing further in the 1990s to 42.6 %. Yet diversity of opinion remains. In the first 10 years of the 2000s (i.e., 2000–2010), for example, 25.3 % of participants said premarital sex between adults was always wrong, 8.4 % almost always wrong, and 19.0 % sometimes wrong.

One factor that recent studies suggest may influence norms and values about premarital sex is viewing pornography (Carroll et al., 2008; Lam & Chan, 2007; Lo, Neilan, Sun, & Chiang, 1999; Lo & Wei, 2005; Lou et al., 2012; To, Ngai, & Kan, 2012; Wright, 2013a).1 While valuable, this body of literature is limited by one or more of the following: a preponderance of cross-sectional designs, a lack of exploration of boundary conditions for associations, an emphasis on adolescent/emerging adult participants, and a reliance on localized, convenience samples. The present study addressed each of these limitations. First, the study utilized a two-wave panel design that allows for an assessment of the temporal sequencing of the pornography consumption–premarital sex attitudes association. Second, age was explored as a boundary condition of the association. Third, the age range of participants was wide (18–89 years old). Fourth, national probability data were utilized.

Pornography and Sexual Socialization: Theory

Wright (2011; Wright, Malamuth, & Donnerstein, 2012) has developed a sexual script acquisition, activation, application model (3AM) of sexual socialization that explains how consumption of sexual media can impact attitudes and behaviors. A central tenet of the 3AM is that sexual media influence occurs through the provision of scripts (Huesmann, 1986). Scripts are socially constructed guidelines for human behavior. Scripts indicate what is behaviorally normative and acceptable. Scripts also portend the outcomes of various behaviors.

According to the 3AM, sexual media can provide consumers with scripts they were unaware of (acquisition), prime scripts they were already aware of (activation), and encourage the utilization of scripts by portraying particular sexual behaviors or general patterns of sexual behavior as normative, appropriate, and rewarding (application). Weinberg, Williams, Kleiner, and Irizarry (2010) maintain that pornographic scripts indicate the normativeness and appropriateness of premarital sex. Script application can occur at the level of personal behavior (e.g., deciding to personally engage in a particular behavior or pattern of behavior) or judgement (e.g., deciding that other people should be able to engage in a particular behavior or pattern of behavior). Accordingly, in the present attitudinal study script application would occur at the level of judgment (i.e., rendering a more positive evaluation of premarital sex).

Pornography and Premarital Sex Attitudes: Research

Zillmann and Bryant (1988) published the results of an experiment involving college students and other adults. Some participants were assigned to view pornographic movies over the course of several weeks, others were not. Participants exposed to pornographic movies expressed more positive premarital sex attitudes than participants not exposed to pornography.

Corresponding to this finding, cross-sectional surveys of adolescents and emerging adults generally find that pornography consumers express more positive attitudes toward premarital sex (Carroll et al., 2008; Lam & Chan, 2007; Lo & Wei, 2005; Lou et al., 2012; To et al., 2012). One longitudinal study has been conducted with US adults of varying ages: Wright (2013b). This study employed three-wave panel data from the GSS’s first longitudinal study (T1: 2006, T2: 2008, T3: 2010). Prior pornography consumption predicted more positive subsequent attitudes toward teenage premarital sex. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H1:

T1 pornography consumption positively predicts T2 premarital sex attitudes.

Age as a Potential Moderator

Peter and Valkenburg (2011a, 2011b) recently illustrated how media sex researchers assume that the probability of mediated sexual social influence decreases with age. Contrary to this line of reasoning, Peter and Valkenburg (2011a, 2011b) found in a two-wave longitudinal study of Dutch adolescents and adults that T1 pornography consumption predicted only adults’ non-use of condoms and belief that when women say “no” to sex they really mean “yes” at T2. Regarding condom use, Peter and Valkenburg (2011a) argued that older individuals are more unaware of the risks of unprotected sex than younger individuals. Regarding women’s sexual behavior, Peter and Valkenburg (2011b) argued that older individuals are more likely than younger individuals to have encountered women who engage in token resistance to sex. In essence, Peter and Valkenburg argued that effects may be most likely among consumers whose pre-existing beliefs are in alignment with (or at least not in opposition to) the depiction of sex presented. This line of reasoning is consistent with the 3AM, which maintains that disharmony between consumers’ preexisting beliefs and media portrayals of sex decreases the probability of sexual socialization (Wright, 2011). From this perspective, age is a salient factor if it is indicative of consumers’ pre existing beliefs.

These postulates are directly translatable to the present study. Age is predictive of US adults’ premarital sex attitudes. Specifically, younger adults have less negative attitudes toward premarital sex than older adults (Elias et al., 2013). Consequently, from the perspective of Peter and Valkenburg and the 3AM, the association between T1 pornography consumption and T2 premarital sex attitudes should be stronger for younger adults. Stated formally:

H2

Age moderates the positive prospective association between T1 pornography consumption and T2 premarital sex attitudes, such that the association is stronger for younger adults.

Selective Exposure to Pornography

A selective exposure perspective on media contends that, to avoid cognitive dissonance and maintain cognitive balance, media consumers avoid content that challenges their attitudes and seek out content that affirms their attitudes (D’Alessio & Allen, 2007). From a selective exposure perspective, if pornography consumers have more positive premarital sex attitudes, it is because people who already possess such attitudes gravitate to pornography, not because such attitudes are acquired from consuming pornography. Cross-sectional studies are unable to explore the temporal sequencing of pornography consumption–premarital sex attitudes associations and prior longitudinal studies have not explored whether prior premarital sex attitudes predict subsequent pornography consumption (Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Wright, 2013b). To redress this gap in the literature the following research question is posed:

RQ1

Do T1 premarital sex attitudes positively predict T2 pornography consumption?

Method

Participants

Data for the present study were generated by the GSS (Davis & Smith, 2010). Funded by the National Science Foundation, the GSS is the only ongoing, national, personal interview survey examining social beliefs and behaviors currently carried out in the US (The National Data Program, 2012). The GSS has traditionally sampled a new group of respondents at each data collection. Recently, the GSS added a panel component. The present article reports results from the GSS’s most recent panel study: T1 (2008), T2 (2010). Participants were 420 adults aged 18–89 who provided data at both T1 and T2 on the variables of interest to the present inquiry. Weight variable WTPANNR 12 was applied in accordance with GSS directives (GSS 2008 Sample Panel Wave 2, 2012).

Participant characteristics at baseline (T1) were as follows. Participants were 45.37 years old on average (range = 18–89; SD = 15.85). Men comprised 50.8 % of the sample (coded 0); women 49.2 % (coded 1).White persons comprised 87.0 % of the sample(coded 0); Black persons 13.0 %(coded 1).Regarding marital status, 57.8 % were married, 23.7 % never married, 12.7 % divorced, 3.3 % widowed, 2.5 % separated. For parsimony and ease of analytic presentation, participants were classified as not married or married. Results were parallel when marital status was dummy coded into four categories (comparison group = married persons). Participants had completed 13.77 years of education on average (range = 6–20; SD = 2.63). Participants attended religious services several times a year on average (scale: 0 = never attend religious services, 8 = attend religious services more than once a week; range = 0–8, M = 3.35, SD = 2.76). On a political orientation scale ranging from 1 = extremely liberal to 7 = extremely conservative, participants identified as ‘moderate’ on average (range = 1–7, M = 4.15, SD = 1.35).

Measures

The study’s primary measures are described below. Measurement consistency was established via test–retest reliability. Construct validity was established via convergent associational tests (DeVellis, 1991).

Pornography Consumption

Pornography consumption was assessed with the following question: “Have you seen an X-rated movie in the last year?” (no = 0, yes = 1). This item has been employed in numerous studies (Buzzell, 2005; Jaffee & Straus, 1987; McMillen & McMillen, 1977; Winick & Evans, 1994; Wright, 2012, 2013a; Wright & Randall, 2014). At T1, 26.5 % of participants indicated they had viewed a pornographic movie in the prior year, 27.6 % at T2. Regarding test–retest reliability, pornography consumption at T1 was strongly correlated with pornography consumption at T2 (r = . 56, p < .01). Regarding construct validity, theory and prior research suggest that the conservative and religious should be less likely to consume pornography (Linz & Malamuth, 1993; Wright & Randall, 2012). Correspondingly, the more conservative(r = −.13, p < .01) and the more religious (r = −.18, p < .01) were less likely to consume pornography at T1.

Premarital Sex Attitudes

The GSS employs two premarital sex attitude assessments. One asks about the appropriateness of adults having premarital sex, the other asks about the appropriateness of teenagers having premarital sex. These items have been employed in many studies (Davis, 2004; Eagly, Diekman, Johannesen-Schmidt, & Koenig, 2004; Evans, 1997; Wright, 2013a). The specific question stems are:

There’s been a lot of discussion about the way morals and attitudes about sex are changing in this country. If a man and woman have sex relations before marriage, do you think it is always wrong (1), almost always wrong (2), wrong only sometimes (3), or not wrong at all (4)? What if they are in their early teens, say 14–16 years old? In that case, do you think sex relations before marriage are always wrong (1), almost always wrong (2), wrong only sometimes (3), or not wrong at all (4)?

Descriptive statistics for attitudes toward adult premarital sex were as follows: T1 range = 1–4, M = 3.10, SD = 1.20; T2 range = 1–4, M = 3.14, SD = 1.15. Descriptive statistics for attitudes toward teenage premarital sex were as follows: T1 range = 1–4, M = 1.51, SD = 0.83; T2 range = 1–4, M = 1.51, SD = 0.81. Although the mean levels of attitudes toward adult and teenage premarital sex were relatively constant overtime, there was substantial interindividual change. Correlation analyses revealed that attitudes toward adult premarital sex at T1 left 60 % of the variance in attitudes toward adult premarital sex at T2 unexplained and attitudes toward teenage premarital sex at T1 left 80 % of the variance in attitudes toward teenage premarital sex at T2 unexplained.

Participants who expressed more positive attitudes toward adult premarital sex expressed more positive attitudes toward teenage premarital sex at T1 (r = .33, p < .01) and T2 (r = .33, p < .01). The items were averaged to obtain an overall premarital sex attitudes index at T1 (range = 1–4, M = 2.30, SD = 0.84) and T2 (range = 1–4, M = 2.32, SD = 0.81). Regarding test–retest reliability, premarital sex attitudes at T1 were strongly correlated with premarital sex attitudes at T2 (r = .65, p < .01). Regarding construct validity, theory and prior research suggest that the conservative and religious should hold less positive attitudes toward premarital sex (Linz & Malamuth, 1993; Wright, 2013a). Correspondingly, at T1 the more conservative (r = −.34, p < .01) and the more religious (r = −.44, p < .01) were less likely to express positive attitudes toward premarital sex.

Analytic Approach

Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was employed to test H1 and H2. Change in R2 was used to assess the significance of the overall association between T1 pornography consumption and T2 premarital sex attitudes (H1) and the interaction between T1 pornography consumption and T1 age on T2 premarital sex attitudes (H2) (Aiken & West, 1991). A hierarchical logistic regression analysis was carried out to test RQ1. Change in χ2 was used to assess the significance of the association between T1 premarital sex attitudes and T2 pornography consumption (Rose, Chassin, Presson, & Sherman, 2000).

Third variables that may confound the pornography viewing premarital sex attitudes association (age, education, ethnicity, gender, marital status, political orientation, religiosity) were assessed at T1 and entered in the first step of all analyses. These potential third variables are suggested by previous research (Braun-Courville & Rojas, 2009; Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Lo & Wei, 2005; Wright, 2012, 2013a; Wright & Randall, 2014). The T1 measure of the T2 outcome variable was also entered in the first step of all analyses, so as to assess interindividual change in the outcome variable overtime (Little, Card, Preacher, & McConnell, 2009). The combination of multiple covariate inclusion as well as inclusion of an earlier assessment of the outcome variable makes for a conservative test, as predictors must not only explain variance above and beyond that explained by the covariates, but also variance above and beyond that explained by the prior assessment of the variable. To facilitate coefficient interpretation and reduce multicollinearity, all interval variables were mean-centered and all dichotomous variables’ low value = 0 (Aiken & West, 1991).

Results

Pornography Consumption Predicting Premarital Sex Attitudes

H1 was supported (see Table 1). After controlling for T1 age, education, ethnicity, gender, marital status, political orientation, premarital sex attitudes, and religiosity (step 1), T1 pornography consumption (step 2) contributed to the prediction of T2 premarital sex attitudes (R2 Change = .01, p < .05). As predicted, T1 pornography consumption was associated with an interindividual increase in positive attitudes toward premarital sex at T2 (β = 0.09, p < .05).
Table 1

Hierarchical multiple regression analysis predicting T2 premarital sex attitudes

 

R2 Change

F Change

B

β

SE

Step 1

.51

53.19**

   

 T1 agea

  

−0.01**

−0.13

0.00

 T1 educationb

  

0.03**

0.10

0.01

 T1 ethnicityc

  

−0.29**

−0.12

0.09

 T1 genderd

  

−0.11

−0.07

0.06

 T1 marital statuse

  

−0.09

−0.05

0.06

 T1 political orientationf

  

−0.09**

−0.14

0.02

T1 premarital sex attitudesg

  

0.49**

−0.51

0.04

 T1 religiosityh

  

−0.05**

−0.15

0.01

Step 2

.01

5.54*

   

 T1 pornographyi

  

0.16*

0.09

0.07

* p < .05; ** p < .01

aHigher scores = older

bHigher scores = more education

cWhite = 0, Black = 1

dMale = 0, Female = 1

 eNot married = 0, Married = 1

 fHigher scores = more conservative

 gHigher scores = more positive premarital sex attitudes

hHigher scores = more frequent attendance at religious services

iNo pornography exposure = 0, Pornography exposure = 1

Moderating Role of Age

H2 was supported. The interaction between T1 pornography consumption and T1 age on T2 premarital sex attitudes was significant (R2 Change = .01, p < .05). To interpret the interaction, simple slope tests (Aiken & West, 1991) were carried out at 5 year increments, starting at 25 years of age. As predicted, the positive association between T1 pornography consumption and T2 premarital sex attitudes was strongest for younger adults. The magnitude of the association declined with age, ultimately becoming non-significant for 45 year olds (25 year olds: β = 0.17, p < .01; 30 year olds: β = 0.15, p < .01; 35 year olds: β = 0.12, p < .01; 40 year olds: β = 0.09, p < .05; 45 year olds: β = 0.06, p = .12). Figure 1 displays this interaction
Fig. 1

Interaction of T1 pornography consumption and T1 age on T2 premarital sex attitudes

Premarital Sex Attitudes Predicting Pornography Consumption

The selective exposure premise of RQ1 was not supported (see Table 2). After controlling for T1 age, education, ethnicity, gender, marital status, political orientation, pornography consumption, and religiosity (step 1), T1 premarital sex attitudes (step 2) did not contribute to the prediction of T2 pornography consumption (χ2 Change = 1.45, p = .23).
Table 2

Hierarchical logistic regression analysis predicting T2 pornography consumption

 

Nagelkerke R2 change

χ2 change

B(SE)

Wald

Odds ratio

95 % CI odds ratio

Step 1

.42

143.18**

    

 T1 agea

  

−0.02*(0.01)

4.93

0.98

0.96−0.99

 T1 educationb

  

−0.07(0.06)

1.47

0.94

0.84−1.04

 T1 ethnicityc

  

0.51(0.38)

1.76

1.66

0.79−3.51

 T1 genderd

  

–0.45(0.28)

2.54

0.64

0.37−1.11

 T1 marital statuse

  

−0.47(0.28)

2.70

0.63

0.36−1.09

 T1 political orientationf

  

0.06(0.11)

0.30

1.06

0.86−1.32

 T1 pornographyg

  

2.55**(0.29)

78.62

12.79

7.28−22.46

 T1 religiosityh

  

−0.00(0.05)

0.00

1.00

0.90−1.11

Step 2

.00

1.45

    

 T1 premarital sex attitudesi

  

0.23(0.19)

1.45

1.26

0.87−1.83

* p < .05; ** p < .01

aHigher scores = older

bHigher scores = more education

cWhite = 0, Black = 1

dMale = 0, Female = 1

eNot married = 0, Married = 1

fHigher scores = more conservative

gNo pornography exposure = 0, Pornography exposure = 1

hHigher scores = more frequent attendance at religious services

iHigher scores = more positive premarital sex attitudes

Supplementary Analyses

As Americans are less accepting of teenage premarital sex than adult premarital sex, the association between T1 pornography consumption and T2 attitudes toward teenage premarital sex was explored separately. Additionally, since the binary nature of the pornography consumption measure limits its variability, a composite T1+T2 pornography consumption index was employed to predict T2 premarital sex attitudes (range = 0–2 M = 0.54, SD = 0.79). As the premarital sex questions are present-based and the pornography consumption questions are retrospective (i.e., pornography consumption in the prior year), such analysis is at least quasi-longitudinal.

Consistent with the main analyses, in hierarchical regression models inclusive of the covariates, both the T1 measure of pornography consumption (β = 0.15, p < .01) and the T1 +T2 measure of pornography consumption (β = 0.19, p < .01) were associated with an interindividual increase in positive attitudes toward teenage premarital sex at T2. Likewise, the T1 measure of pornography consumption marginally interacted (R2 Change = .01, p = .07) and the T1+T2 measure of pornography consumption significantly interacted (R2 Change = .01, p < .05) with T1 age to predict attitudes toward teenage premarital sex at T2.

Also consistent with the main analyses, in a hierarchical regression model inclusive of the covariates, the T1+T2 measure of pornography consumption was associated with an interindividual increase in scores on the composite premarital sex attitudes index at T2 (β = .12, p < .01) and interacted with T1 age to predict scores on the composite premarital sex attitudes index at T2 (R2 Change = .01, p < .05).

Discussion

Implications of the present study are as follows. First, the present study appears to be the first panel exploration of pornography consumption and premarital sex attitudes to analyze both the possibility of sexual socialization and selective exposure. Supporting a sexual socialization perspective, prior pornography consumption predicted interindividual overtime change in premarital sex attitudes. Contrary to a selective exposure perspective, prior premarital sex attitudes did not predict interindividual overtime change in pornography consumption. This result is consistent with recent panel studies exploring alternative attitudes and behaviors (Peter & Valkenburg, 2008, 2010, 2011b; Wright, 2012; Wright & Randall, 2014). The lack of selective exposure in this communication context may be because motives such as stress reduction, boredom relief, masturbatory stimulation, fantasy, sexual arousal, loneliness alleviation, and curiosity are more powerful drivers of pornography consumption than the desire for attitudinal corroboration or avoidance of attitudinal threat (Wright, 2012).

Second, the results align with experimental research carried out by Zillmann and Bryant (1988), who found that showing college students and other adults pornographic movies increased their positive attitudes toward premarital sex. Congruity between the more internally valid experimental design and the more ecologically valid longitudinal survey design increases confidence that a particular consumption–attitude association is causal (Hald, Malamuth, & Yuen, 2010).

Third, following Peter and Valkenburg (2011a, 2011b) and calls for exploration of individual differences that moderate pornography consumption–attitudes associations (Hald et al., 2010; Malamuth, Hald, & Koss, 2012), the present study explored the moderating impact of age. Consistent with the 3AM premise that lack of discrepancy between consumers’ preexisting beliefs and sexual depictions enhances the likelihood of effects, the association between T1 pornography consumption and more positive T2 premarital sex attitudes was strongest for the youngest adults. In their explorations of pornography consumption, condom use, and women’s sexual behavior, Peter and Valkenburg (2011a, 2011b) found that associations were strongest for older participants. Thus, the moderating effect of age may depend on the outcome in question.

Fourth, the results suggest that associations between pornography consumption and attitudes toward premarital sex may be more cross-culturally consistent than previously thought. For example, it has been suggested that the effects of pornography are different for Americans and Asians. While this may be the case for attitudes toward sexual aggression (Abramson & Hayashi, 1984), the results of this and other studies suggest correspondence for premarital sex attitudes (Lam & Chan, 2007; Lo et al., 1999; Lo & Wei, 2005; Wright, 2013a; Wright, Bae, & Funk, 2013).

Fifth, the correspondence between the present study’s national sample results and the results of localized, convenience sample studies of pornography consumption and premarital sex attitudes increases the confidence that can be placed in these studies (e.g., Lam & Chan, 2007; To et al., 2012).

Last, the results support the argument that pornography consumption engenders attitudes antithetical to traditional sexual values (Attorney General, 1986). However, it should be noted that not all would consider such influence untoward. Malamuth and Impett (2001)point out that some people may see such an effect “as a positive step to a generally relaxed approach to sexuality” (p. 283). In sum, evaluating pornography’s influence on premarital sex attitudes “negatively or positively will probably depend on certain personal values” (p. 283).

Limitations and Future Directions

Future studies can expand or improve upon the present study in several ways. First, multi-item, continuous assessments of pornography consumption should be utilized (e.g., Lo & Wei, 2005; Peter & Valkenburg, 2006). The GSS measure of pornography consumption has been employed in studies across decades and has been found to predict a variety of sexual attitudes and behaviors in both cross-sectional and longitudinal research (Buzzell, 2005; Jaffee & Straus, 1987; McMillen & McMillen, 1977; Winick & Evans, 1994; Wright, 2012, 2013a; Wright & Randall, 2014). Additionally, a number of pornography studies have classified participants into dichotomous nonconsumer/consumer categories (e.g., Kjellgren, Priebe, Svedin, & Langstrom, 2010; Wingood et al., 2001; Ybarra, Mitchell, Hamburger, Diener-West, & Leaf, 2011). However, the pornography–premarital sex attitude associations in the present study were modest, and theory (Wright, 2011) and research (Zillmann & Bryant, 1982) suggest that multi-item, continuous assessments may find larger associations.

Second, additional experimental and longitudinal studies of pornography consumption and premarital sex attitudes are needed. For most social scientists, the three criteria necessary to establish causality are covariation (fluctuations in the independent variable are associated with fluctuations in the dependent variable), temporal sequencing (fluctuations in the independent variable temporally precede fluctuations in the dependent variable), and non spuriousness (the association between the variables of interest is not due to a third variable) (Wright, 2011). The consistency and size of the cross-sectional survey literature leaves little doubt that pornography consumption and premarital sex attitudes covary. This and other longitudinal surveys (Brown & L’Engle, 2009; Wright, 2013b) have addressed the question of temporal sequencing and Zillmann and Bryant’s (1988) experiment addressed the question of confounds. Confidence in casual claims increases with replication, however, so additional longitudinal and experimental studies are desirable. Given that these studies were carried out in the US, longitudinal and experimental studies conducted in other cultures and cross-culturally comparative studies would be especially valuable. Future US studies should sample American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, and Pacific Islanders, as these groups were not represented in the present data.

Finally, additional moderation analyses are needed. The 3AM suggests a number of potential moderators, including consumers’ perception of whether pornography is more a reflection of reality or more mediated fantasy, motivations for viewing pornography (e.g., for entertainment, for information), degree of identification with actors and actresses in pornography, and level of dependence on pornography for sexual information. Analysts employing primary data should consider exploring these variables.

Footnotes

  1. 1.

    Purposes for scientific sex research can be theoretical, applied, or some combination of the two. At the theoretical level, the purpose of the scientific study of sexuality is to understand humans’ sexual beliefs or behaviors. Understanding in and of itself is seen as an end. At the applied level, the purpose of the scientific study of sexuality is to understand humans’ sexual beliefs or behaviors so as to enhance sexual health (broadly defined). The goals of this paper were theoretical. Attitudes toward premarital sex have been and continue to be an important indicator of sociosexual norms and values in the US and there remains much variability in Americans’ premarital sex attitudes. The purpose of this study was to enhance understanding of how consuming pornography may affect this sociologically important attitude. Following Thornton and Young-DeMarco (2001), discussion of the sexual health implications of premarital sex was considered outside the scope of this study. But it is acknowledged that some researchers who study premarital sex attitudes list pragmatic motivations (e.g., Elias et al., 2013).

References

  1. Abramson, P. R., & Hayashi, H. (1984). Pornography in Japan: Cross-cultural and theoretical considerations. In N. M. Malamuth & E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and sexual aggression (pp. 173–183). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Alston, J. P., & Tucker, F. (1973). The myth of sexual permissiveness. Journal of Sex Research, 9, 34–40. doi:10.1080/00224497309550776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography. Final Report (1986, July). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
  5. Braun-Courville, D. K., & Rojas, M. (2009). Exposure to sexually explicit web sites and adolescent sexual attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45, 156–162. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.12.004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, J. D., & L'Engle, K. L. (2009). X-Rated: Sexual attitudes and behaviors associated with US early adolescents exposure to sexually explicit media. Communication Research, 36, 129–151. doi:10.1177/0093650208326465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buzzell, T. (2005). Demographic characteristics of persons using pornography in three technological contexts. Sexuality and Culture, 9, 28–48. doi:10.1007/BF02908761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carroll, J. S., Padilla-Walker, L. M., Nelson, L. J., Olson, C. D., McNamara Barry, C., & Madsen, S. D. (2008). Generation XXX: Pornography acceptance and use among emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 23, 6–30. doi:10.1177/0743558407306348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Alessio, D., & Allen, M. (2007). The selective exposure hypothesis and media choice processes. In R.W. Preiss, B. M. Gayle, N. Burrell, M. Allen, &J. Bryant (Eds.), Mass media effects research (pp. 103–118). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Davis, J. A. (2004). Did growing up in the 1960s leave a permanent mark on attitudes and values? Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 161–183. doi:10.1093/poq/nfh010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis, J. A., & Smith, T. W. (2010). General social surveys, 1972–2010. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center.Google Scholar
  12. DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  13. DiMaggio, P., Evans, J., & Bryson, B. (1996). Have American’s social attitudes become more polarized? American Journal of Sociology, 102, 690–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eagly, A. H., Diekman, A. B., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Koenig, A. M. (2004). Gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes: A social psychological analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 796–816. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.6.796.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Elias, V. L., Fullerton, A. S., & Simpson, J. M. (2013). Long-term changes in attitudes toward premarital sex in the United States: Reexamining the role of cohort replacement. Journal of Sex Research. 10.1080/00224499.2013.798610.
  16. Evans, J. H. (1997). Worldviews or social groups as the source of moral value attitudes. Sociological Forum, 12, 371–404. doi:10.1023/A:1024625210910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. GSS2008 Sample Panel Wave 2. (2012). Retrieved from http://www3.norc.org/GSS+Website/Download/SPSS+Format/.
  18. Hald, G. M., Malamuth, N., & Yuen, C. (2010). Pornography and attitudes supporting violence against women: Revisiting the relationship in nonexperimental studies. Aggressive Behavior, 36, 14–20. doi:10.1002/ab.20328.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Huesmann, L. R. (1986). Psychological processes promoting the relation between exposure to media violence and aggressive behavior by the viewer. Journal of Social Issues, 42, 125–139. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1986.tb00246.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jaffee, D., & Straus, M. A. (1987). Sexual climate and reported rape: A state-level analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16, 107–123. doi:10.1007/BF01542065.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kjellgren, C., Priebe, G., Svedin, C., & Langstrom, N. (2010). Sexually coercive behavior in male youth: Population survey of general and specific risk factors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 1161–1169. doi:10.1007/s10508-009-9572-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lam, C. B., & Chan, D. (2007). The use of cyber pornography by young men in Hong Kong: Some psychosocial correlates. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 588–598.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Linz, D., & Malamuth, N. (1993). Pornography. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Little, T. D., Card, N. A., Preacher, K. J., & McConnell, E. (2009). Modeling longitudinal data from research on adolescence. In R. M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (3rd ed.) (pp. 15–54). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. Lo, V. H., Neilan, E., Sun, M., & Chiang, S. (1999). Exposure of Taiwanese adolescents to pornographic media and its impact on sexual attitudes and behavior. Asian Journal of Communication, 9, 50–71.Google Scholar
  26. Lo, V. H., & Wei, R. (2005). Exposure to internet pornography and Taiwanese adolescents sexual attitudes and behavior. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 49, 221–237. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4902_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lou, C., Cheng, Y., Gao, E., Zuo, X., Emerson, M. R., & Zabin, L. S. (2012). Media’s contribution to sexual knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors for adolescents and young adults in three Asian cities. Journal of Adolescent Health, 50, S26–S36.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Malamuth, N., Hald, G., & Koss, M. (2012). Pornography, individual differences in risk and mens acceptance of violence against women in are presentative sample. Sex Roles, 66, 427–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Malamuth, N., & Impett, E. A. (2001). Research on sex in the media. What do we know about effects on children and adolescents? In D. G. Singer & J .L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (pp. 269–287). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. McMillen, D. B., & McMillen, M. M. (1977). The analysis of popular culture through social indicators. Journal of Popular Culture, 11, 506–526. doi:10.1111/j.0022-3840.1977.00506.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2006). Adolescents exposure to sexually explicit online material and recreational attitudes toward sex. Journal of Communication, 56, 639–660. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9176-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2008). Adolescents exposure to sexually explicit internet material and sexual preoccupancy: A three-wave panel study. Media Psychology, 11, 207–234. doi:10.1080/15213260801994238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2010). Processes underlying the effects of adolescents use of sexually explicit internet material: The role of perceived realism. Communication Research, 37, 375–399. doi:10.1177/0093650210362464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2011a). The influence of sexually explicit internet material on sexual risk behavior: A comparison of adolescents and adults. Journal of Health Communication, 16, 750–765. doi:10.1080/10810730.2011.551996.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2011b). The influence of sexually explicit internet material and peers on stereotypical beliefs about womens sexual roles: Similarities and differences between adolescents and adults. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 511–517. doi:10.1080/10810730.2011.551996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rose, J. S., Chassin, L., Presson, C.C., &Sherman, S. J. (2000). Prospective predictors of smoking cessation: A logistic regression application. In J. S. Rose, L. Chassin, C.C. Presson, & S.J. Sherman (Eds.), Multivariate applications in substance use research: New methods for new questions (pp. 289–317). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  37. Smith, T. W. (1990). A report: The sexual revolution? Public Opinion Quarterly, 54, 415–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. The National Data Program for the Social Sciences. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.norc.uchicago.edu/GSS+Website/About+GSS/National+Data+Program+for+Social+Sciences/.
  39. Thornton, A. (1989). Changing attitudes toward family issues in the United States. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 873–893. doi:10.2307/353202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Thornton, A., & Young-DeMarco, L. (2001). Four decades of trends in attitudes toward family issues in the United States: The 1960s through the 1990s. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 1009–1037. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.01009.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. To, S., Ngai, S. S., & Kan, S. L. (2012). Direct and mediating effects of accessing sexually explicit online materials on Hong Kong adolescents attitude, knowledge, and behavior relating to sex. Children and Youth Service Review, 34, 2156–2163. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.07.019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Weinberg, M. S., Williams, C. J., Kleiner, S., & Irizarry, Y. (2010). Pornography, normalization, and empowerment. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 1389–1401. doi:10.1007/s10508-009-9592-5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Wingood, G. M., DiClemente, R. J., Harrington, K., Davies, S., Hook, E. W., & Oh, M. K. (2001). Exposure to X-rated movies and adolescents sexual and contraceptive-related attitudes and behaviors. Pediatrics, 107, 1116–1119. doi:10.1542/peds.107.5.1116.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Winick, C., & Evans, J. T. (1994). Is there a national standard with respect to attitudes toward sexually explicit media material? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23, 405–419. doi: 10.1007/BF01541406.
  45. Wright, P. J. (2011). Mass media effects on youth sexual behavior: Assessing the claim for causality. Communication Yearbook, 35, 343–386.Google Scholar
  46. Wright, P. J. (2012). A longitudinal analysis of US adults pornography exposure: Sexual socialization, selective exposure, and the moderating role of unhappiness. Journal of Media Psychology, 24, 67–76. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wright, P. J. (2013a). US males and pornography 1973–2010: Consumption, predictors, correlates. Journal of Sex Research, 50, 60–71. doi:10.1080/00224499.2011.628132.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Wright, P. J. (2013b). A three-wave longitudinal analysis of preexisting beliefs, exposure to pornography, and attitude change. Communication Reports, 26, 13–25. doi:10.1080/08934215.2013.773053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wright, P. J., Bae, S., & Funk, M. (2013). United States women and pornography through four decades: Exposure, attitudes, behaviors, individual differences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1131–1144.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Wright, P. J., Malamuth, N., & Donnerstein, E. (2012). Research on sex in the media: What do we know about effects on children and adolescents? In D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (pp. 273–302). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  51. Wright, P. J., & Randall, A. K. (2012). Internet pornography exposure and risky sexual behavior among adult males in the United States. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1410–1416. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wright, P. J., & Randall, A. K. (2014). Pornography consumption, education, and support for same-sex marriage among adult US males. Communication Research, 41, 665–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K., Hamburger, M., Diener-West, M., & Leaf, P. (2011). X-rated material and perpetration of sexually aggressive behavior among children and adolescents. Aggressive Behavior, 37, 1–18. doi:10.1002/ab.20367.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1982). Pornography, sexual callousness, and the trivialization of rape. Journal of Communication, 32, 10–21. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1982.tb02514.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1988). Effects of prolonged consumption of pornography on family values. Journal of Family Issues, 9, 518–544. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1982.tb02514.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Media SchoolIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations