Abstract
Despite voiced concerns about sexual online risk behaviors related to mobile dating, little is known about the relation between mobile dating and sexting. The current cross-sectional study (N = 286) examined the relations between the use of geo-social dating apps and emerging adults’ willingness to sext with a dating app match. By drawing on the prototype willingness model, both a reasoned path and a social reaction path are proposed to explain this link. As for the reasoned path, a structural equation model showed that more frequent dating app usage is positively related to norm beliefs about peers’ sexting behaviors with unknown dating app matches (i.e., descriptive norms), norm beliefs about peers’ approval of sexting with matches (i.e., subjective norms), and negatively related to perceptions of danger to sext with matches (i.e., risk attitude). In turn, descriptive norms were positively and risk attitudes were negatively associated with individuals’ own willingness to sext with someone they had met through a dating app. As for the social reaction path, it was found that more frequent dating app usage was positively related to emerging adults’ favorable evaluations of a prototype person who sexts with unknown dating app matches (i.e., prototype perceptions). The analyses further revealed that such prototype perceptions positively linked with emerging adults’ own willingness to sext with a match. These results were similar among women and men and help explain why individuals may be willing to engage in sexting behavior with unknown others.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The current study uses data that were part of a larger project that examined geo-social dating app usage among emerging adults. More information about the project can be obtained by sending an e-mail to the corresponding author.
Concerning the measurement description of sexual orientation, the participants were asked about their attractions to “boys/girls” and not “men/women.” This phrasing is commonly accepted in the local translation when emerging adults are the referent group. Hence, we chose to keep this phrasing in the English translation.
Note that these scales were developed and questioned in Dutch. These scales were translated in English by the authors.
References
Ajzen, I. (2002). Constructing a TpB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Retrieved May 17, 2019 from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0574/b20bd58130dd5a961f1a2db10fd1fcbae95d.pdf.
Albury, K., & Byron, P. (2014). Queering sexting and sexualisation. Media International Australia,153, 138–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X1415300116.
Albury, K., & Byron, P. (2016). Safe on my phone? Same-sex attracted young people’s negotiations of intimacy, visibility, and risk on digital hook-up apps. Social Media + Society,2, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116672887.
Anderson, T. L. (2005). Relationships among internet attitudes, internet use, romantic beliefs, and perceptions of online romantic relationships. Cyberpsychology & Behavior,8, 521–531. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2005.8.521.
Armenta, B. E., Hautala, D. S., & Whitbeck, L. B. (2015). The utility of the prototype/willingness model in predicting alcohol use among North American indigenous adolescents. Developmental Psychology,51, 697–705. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038978.
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the early twenties. American Psychologist,55, 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469.
Baumgartner, S. E., Sumter, S. R., Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2015). Sexual self-presentation on social network sites: Who does it and how is it perceived? Computers in Human Behavior,50, 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.061.
Baumgartner, S. E., Sumter, S. R., Peter, J., Valkenburg, P. M., & Livingstone, S. (2014). Does country context matter? Investigating the predictors of teen sexting across Europe. Computers in Human Behavior,34, 157–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.041.
Baumgartner, S. E., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2010). Unwanted online sexual solicitation and risky sexual online behavior across the lifespan. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology,31, 439–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2010.07.005.
Benotsch, E. G., Snipes, D. J., Martin, A. M., & Bull, S. S. (2013). Sexting, substance use, and sexual risk behavior in young adults. Journal of Adolescent Health,52, 307–313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.06.011.
Berkowitz, A. D. (2005). An overview of the social norms approach. In L. C. Lederman & L. P. Stewart (Eds.), Challenging the culture of college drinking: A socially situated health communication campaign (pp. 193–214). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Blanton, H., VandenEijnden, R. J., Buunk, B. P., Gibbons, F. X., Gerrard, M., & Bakker, A. (2001). Accentuate the negative: Social images in the prediction and promotion of condom use. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,31, 274–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15591816.2001.tb00197.x.
Bohner, G., & Dickel, N. (2011). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology,62, 391–417. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.121208.131609.
Boot, I., Peter, J., & van Oosten, J. M. F. (2016). Liking a sexual character affects willingness to have casual sex: The moderating role of relationship status and status satisfaction. Journal of Media Psychology, Theories, Methods, and Applications,28, 51–64. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000145.
Borsari, B., & Carey, K. B. (2001). Peer influences on college drinking: A review of the research. Journal of Substance Use,13, 391–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3289(01)00098-0.
Bosveld, W., Koomen, W., van Der Pligt, J., & Plaisier, J. W. (1995). Differential construal as an explanation for false consensus and false uniqueness effects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,31, 518–532. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1995.1023.
Burkett, M. (2015). Sex(t) talk: A qualitative analysis of young adults’ negotiations of the pleasures and perils of sexting. Sexuality and Culture,16, 835–863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-015-9295-0.
Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Claxton, S. E., & van Dulmen, M. H. M. (2013). Casual sexual relationships and experiences in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood,1, 138–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696813487181.
Crozier, A. J., & Taylor, K. L. (2019). An exploratory study examining the interactive effect of descriptive norm and image appeal messages on adults’ physical activity intentions: A test of deviation regulation theory. Journal of Health Communication,24, 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2019.1593553.
Dake, J. A., Price, J. H., Maziarz, L., & Ward, B. (2012). Prevalence and correlates of sexting behavior in adolescents. American Journal of Sexuality Education,7, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2012.650959.
Davies, E. L., Martin, J., & Foxcroft, D. R. (2015). Development and acceptability of a co-produced online intervention to prevent alcohol misuse in adolescents: A think aloud study. JMIR Human Factors,2, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.2196/humanfactors.4452.
Donn, J. E., & Sherman, R. C. (2002). Attitudes and practices regarding the formation of romantic relationships on the internet. Cyberpsychology & Behavior,5, 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493102753770499.
Döring, N. (2014). Consensual sexting among adolescents: Risk prevention through abstinence education or safer sexting? Cyberpsychology Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace. https://doi.org/10.5817/cp2014-1-9.
Fincham, F. D., & Cui, M. (2011). Romantic relationships in emerging adulthood. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W., Karney, B. R., Reis, H. T., & Sprecher, S. (2012). Online dating: A critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest,13, 3–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612436522.
Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., Dunham, R. B., & Pierce, J. L. (1998). Single-item versus multiple-item measurement scales: An empirical comparison. Educational and Psychological Measurement,58, 898–915. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164498058006003.
Gerrard, M., Gibbons, F. X., Stock, M. L., Lune, L. S. V., & Cleveland, M. J. (2005). Images of smokers and willingness to smoke among African American pre-adolescents: An application of the Prototype/Willingness Model of adolescent health risk behavior to smoking initiation. Journal of Pediatric Psychology,30, 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsi026.
Gibbons, F. X., & Gerrard, M. (1995). Predicting young adults’ health risk behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,69, 505–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.505.
Gibbons, F. X., Gerrard, M., Blanton, H., & Russell, D. W. (1998). Reasoned action and social reaction: Willingness and intention as independent predictors of health risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74, 1164–1180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1164.
Giordano, P., Longmore, M., & Manning, W. (2006). Gender and the meanings of adolescent romantic relationships: A focus on boys. American Sociological Review,71, 260–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100205.
Glasman, L. R., & Albarracín, D. (2006). Forming attitudes that predict future behavior: A meta-analysis of the attitude-behavior relation. Psychological Bulletin,132, 778–822. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.778.
Gliem, J. A., & Gliem; R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Paper presented at the Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Griffin, M., Canevello, A., & McAnulty, R. D. (2018). Motives and concerns associated with geosocial networking app usage: An exploratory study among heterosexual college students in the United States. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,21, 268–275. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2017.0309.
Hallam, L., Walrave, W., & De Backer, C. J. S. (2018). Information disclosure, trust and health risks in online dating. In M. Walrave, J. Van Ouytsel, K. Ponnet, & J. R. Temple (Eds.), Sexting: Motives and risk in online sexual self-presentation (pp. 19–38). Nottingham, UK: Palgrave.
Helsper, E. J., & Whitty, M. T. (2010). Netiquette within married couples: Agreement about acceptable online behavior and surveillance between partners. Computers in Human Behavior,26, 916–926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.006.
Hukkelberg, S. S., & Dykstra, J. L. (2009). Using the prototype/willingness model to predict smoking behaviour among Norwegian adolescents. Addictive Behaviors,34, 270–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.10.024.
Kenny, P., & Hastings, G. (2011). Understanding social norms: Upstream and downstream applications for social marketers. In G. Hastings, K. Angus, & C. Bryant (Eds.), The Sage handbook of social marketing (pp. 61–79). London: Sage.
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.
Klettke, B., Hallford, D. J., & Mellor, D. J. (2014). Sexting prevalence and correlates: A systematic literature review. Clinical Psychology Review,34, 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.10.007.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
Litt, D. M., & Lewis, M. A. (2016). Examining a social reaction model in the prediction of adolescent alcohol use. Addictive Behaviors,60, 160–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.04.009.
Lutz, C., & Ranzini, G. (2017). Where dating meets data: Investigating social and institutional privacy concerns on Tinder. Social Media + Society,3, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117697735.
Mitchell, K. J., Finkelhor, D., Jones, L. M., & Wolak, J. (2012). Prevalence and characteristics of youth sexting: A national study. Pediatrics,129, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-1730.
Morgan, E. M. (2013). Contemporary issues in sexual orientation and identity development in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood,1, 52–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696812469187.
Mori, C., Cooke, J. E., Temple, J. R., Ly, A., Lu, Y., Anderson, N., … Madigan, S. (2020). The prevalence of sexting behaviors among emerging adults: A meta-analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01656-4.
Netting, N. S., & Burnett, M. L. (2004). Twenty years of student sexual behavior: Subcultural adaptions to a changing health environment. Adolescence, 39, 19–38. Retrieved May 2, 2019 from https://search.proquest.com/.
Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2011). The use of sexually explicit internet material and its antecedents: A longitudinal comparison of adolescents and adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior,40, 1015–1025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9644-x.
Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality: 1993 to 2007. Psychological Bulletin,36, 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017504.
Pool, G. J., & Schwegler, A. F. (2007). Differentiating among motives for norm conformity. Basic and Applied Social Psychology,29, 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973530701330983.
Poulsen, F. O., Holman, T. B., Busby, D. M., & Carroll, J. S. (2013). Physical attraction, attachment styles, and dating development. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,30, 301–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512456673.
Ranzini, G., & Lutz, C. (2017). Love at first swipe? Explaining Tinder self-presentation and motives. Mobile Media & Communication,5, 80–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157916664559.
Sawyer, A. N., Smith, E. R., & Benotsch, E. G. (2018). Dating application use and sexual risk behavior among young adults. Sexuality Research and Social Policy,15, 183–191.
Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2016). 5 facts about online dating. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
Stephenson, K. R., & Sullivan, K. T. (2009). Social norms and general sexual satisfaction: The cost of misperceived descriptive norms. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 18, 89–105. Retrieved April 12, 2019 from http://www.researchgate.net.
Sumter, S. R., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2013). Perceptions of love across the lifespan: Differences in passion, intimacy, and commitment. International Journal of Behavioral Development,37, 417–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025413492486.
Sumter, S. R., & Vandenbosch, L. (2018). Dating gone mobile: Demographic and personality-based correlates of using smartphone-based dating applications among emerging adults. New Media & Society,21, 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818804773.
Sumter, S. R., Vandenbosch, L., & Ligtenberg, L. (2017). Love me Tinder: Untangling emerging adults’ motivations for using the dating application Tinder. Telematics and Informatics,34, 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.04.009.
van Lettow, B., de Vries, H., Burdorf, A., Boon, B., & Van Empelen, P. (2015). Drinker prototype alteration and cue reminders as strategies in a tailored web-based intervention reducing adults’ alcohol consumption: Randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research,17, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.3551.
van Oosten, J. M. F., Peter, J., & Boot, I. (2015). Exploring associations between exposure to sexy online self-presentations and adolescents’ sexual attitudes and behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,44, 1078–1091. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0194-8.
van Oosten, J. M. F., Peter, J., & Vandenbosch, L. (2017). Adolescents’ sexual media use and willingness to engage in casual sex: Differential relations and underlying processes. Human Communication Research,43, 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12098.
van Oosten, J. M. F., & Vandenbosch, L. (2017). Sexy online self-presentation on social network sites and the willingness to engage in sexting: A comparison of gender and age. Journal of Adolescence,54, 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.11.006.
Van Ouytsel, J., Walrave, M., & Ponnet, K. (2018). Adolescent sexting research: The challenges ahead. JAMA Pediatrics,172, 405–406. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.0013.
Van Ouytsel, J., Walrave, M., Ponnet, K., & Heirman, W. (2015). The association between adolescent sexting, psychosocial difficulties, and risk behavior: Integrative review. Journal of School Nursing,31, 54–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059840514541964.
Vandenbosch, L. (2015). Antecedents of adolescents’ exposure to different types of sexually explicit Internet material: A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior,50, 439–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.032.
Walrave, M., Ponnet, K., Van Ouytsel, J., Van Gool, E., Heirman, W., & Verbeek, A. (2015). Whether or not to engage in sexting: Explaining adolescent sexting behaviour by applying the prototype willingness model. Telematics and Informatics,32, 796–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.03.008.
Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E., & Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: How good are single-item measures? Journal of Applied Psychology,82, 247–252. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.247.
Ward, J. (2016). What are you doing on Tinder? Impression management on a matchmaking mobile app. Information, Communication & Society,20, 1644–1659. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1252412.
Wiederhold, B. K. (2015). Does sexting improve adult sexual relationships? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,18, 627. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.29014.bkw.
Willoughby, B. J., & Carroll, J. S. (2010). Sexual experience and couple formation attitudes among emerging adults. Journal of Adult Development,17, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-009-9073-z.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Standards
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.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Measures of Dating App Use
The questions below are newly developed measures to assess dating app use, and all items (Q) and answer categories (A) are provided.Footnote 3
Q1. Do you use Tinder or have you ever used Tinder?
A: Yes, I use Tinder; Yes, I have used Tinder but not anymore; No, I don’t use Tinder but I have once downloaded a different dating app; No, I don’t use Tinder and I have never downloaded a different dating app.
Q2. Have you ever downloaded a dating app which was not Tinder? [question displayed when the respondent indicated (1) Yes, I use Tinder or (2) Yes, I have used Tinder but not any more]
A: Yes; No.
Q3. Which dating app have you downloaded (multiple answers are possible)? [question displayed when the respondent indicated “Yes” on the question if she/he has ever downloaded a dating app which was not Tinder]
A: Happn; Grindr; Badoo; Blendr; Bumble, Clover; FlirtSmart; GuySpy; Her; Hornet; Hot or Not; Inner Circle; Jack’d; Jaumo; Lexa; Mint; OKCupid; Pepper; Pure; Scruff; Skout; Twoo; A different one, namely…
Q4. Do you still use one of these apps?
A: Yes; not any longer.
Q5. Which dating app do you use the most often? [question displayed when they indicated at the previous question to be current users]
A: Tinder; Happen; Grindr; Badoo; Blendr; Bumble; Clover; FlirtSmart; GuySpy; Her; Hornet; Hot or Not; Inner Circle; Jack’d; Jaumo; Lexa; Mint; OKCupid; Pepper; Pure; Scruff; Skout; Twoo; A different one, namely…
Q6. Which dating app did you use the most often? [question displayed when they indicated at the previous question to be former users]
A: Tinder; Happen; Grindr; Badoo; Blendr; Bumble; Clover; FlirtSmart; GuySpy; Her; Hornet; Hot or Not; Inner Circle; Jack’d; Jaumo; Lexa; Mint; OKCupid; Pepper; Pure; Scruff; Skout; Twoo; A different one, namely…
Q7. How often have you used Tinder on average in the past six months? [question displayed for current Tinder users who use Tinder the most often of all dating apps]
A: Never; almost never; about once a month; multiple times a month; about once a week; multiple times a week; once a day; multiple times a day; I check Tinder during the whole day.
Q8. When you think about the last six months of usage, how often did you use Tinder on average? [question displayed for former Tinder users who used Tinder the most often of all dating apps]
A: Never; almost never; about once a month; multiple times a month; about once a week; multiple times a week; once a day; multiple times a day; I checked Tinder during the whole day.
Q9. How often have you used X [the app they indicated to use the most often which is not Tinder] on average in the past six months? [question displayed for current dating app users]
A: Never; almost never; about once a month; multiple times a month; about once a week; multiple times a week; once a day; multiple times a day; I check the app during the whole day.
Q10. How often have you used X [the app they indicated to use the most often which is not Tinder] on average in the past six months? [question displayed for current dating app users]
A: Never; almost never; about once a month; multiple times a month; about once a week; multiple times a week; once a day; multiple times a day; I checked the app during the whole day.
Measures of Descriptive Norms
Q1. We would like to know more about your male friends’ experiences with dating apps such as Tinder. How many of your friends have exchanged sexy photos with a dating app match (e.g., a Tinder match)? [question displayed for men]
A: Nobody; less than half; more or less the half; more than half; all of them.
Q2. We would like to know more about your female friends’ experiences with dating apps such as Tinder. How many of your friends have exchanged sexy photos with a dating app match (e.g., a Tinder match)? [question displayed for women]
A: Nobody; less than half; more or less the half; more than half; all of them.
Measures of Subjective Norms
Q1. According to you, what do your male friends think of exchanging sexy photos with someone you have met through a dating app (e.g., a Tinder match)? [question displayed for men]
A: They fully disapprove this; they disapprove this; they disapprove this a little bit; they neither approve, neither disapprove it; they approve this a little bit; they approve this; they fully approve this.
Q2. According to you, what do your female friends think of exchanging sexy photos with someone you have met through a dating app (e.g., a Tinder match)? [question displayed for women]
A: They fully disapprove this; they disapprove this; they disapprove this a little bit; they neither approve, neither disapprove it; they approve this a little bit; they approve this; they fully approve this.
Measures of Attitudes
Q1. Dating apps like Tinder: dangerous or not for men? Attention please. These questions are about men of your age who use a dating app. How dangerous is it for a man to exchange sexy photos with a woman through a dating app, e.g., with a Tinder match? [question displayed for men]
A: Not dangerous at all; not dangerous; neither dangerous, neither not dangerous; dangerous; very dangerous.
Q2. Dating apps like Tinder: dangerous or not for women? Attention please. These questions are about women of your age who use a dating app. How dangerous is it for a woman to exchange sexy photos with a man through a dating app, e.g., with a Tinder match? [question displayed for women]
A: Not dangerous at all; not dangerous; neither dangerous; neither not dangerous; dangerous; very dangerous.
Measures of Prototype Perceptions
Q1. Imagine a man of your age who sends sexy photos to a match on a dating app, like Tinder. We would like to know which characteristics do you think are indicative for this man. A man who sends sexy photos through a dating app like Tinder is (1) attractive; (2) interesting; (3) desired [question displayed for men]
A: Totally not true; not true; a little bit not true; neither true; neither not true; a little bit true; true; totally true.
Q2. Imagine a woman of your age who sends sexy photos to a match on a dating app, like Tinder. We would like to know which characteristics do you think are indicative for this woman. A woman who sends sexy photos through a dating app like Tinder is… (1) attractive; (2) interesting; (3) desired [question displayed for women]
A: Totally not true; not true; a little bit not true; neither true, neither not true; a little bit true; true; totally true.
Measure of Willingness to Sext
Q1. Imagine that you meet someone on a dating app like Tinder with whom you exchange flirtatious messages; this person is highly sexually attractive. How likely is it that you would send the following photos of yourself to this Tinder match? (1) photos of yourself in a sexy pose but without naked body parts; (2) photos of yourself in underwear or swimwear; (3) nude photos.
A: Highly unlikely; unlikely; a bit unlikely; neither likely, neither unlikely; a bit likely; highly likely.
Measures for Sociodemographics
Q1. [For gender] What is your gender?
A: Woman; man.
Q2. [For age] How old are you in years? (Please write a number)
Q3. [For sexual orientation] Are you attracted to boys or girls?
A: Only to boys; mainly to boys, but also to girls; equally to boys and girls; mainly to girls, but also to boys; only to girls; I don’t want to indicate the answer.
Q4. [For relationship status] Do you currently have a committed relationship, or a romantic, serious relationship with someone?
A: Yes, I have a committed relationship, but we did not meet each other through a dating app or the internet; yes, I have a committed relationship, and we have met each other through a dating app or the Internet; No, I don’t have a committed relationship.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schreurs, L., Sumter, S.R. & Vandenbosch, L. A Prototype Willingness Approach to the Relation Between Geo-social Dating Apps and Willingness to Sext with Dating App Matches. Arch Sex Behav 49, 1133–1145 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01671-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01671-5