Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 58, Issue 3–4, pp 149–164 | Cite as

First-Date Scripts: Gender Roles, Context, and Relationship

  • Mary Claire Morr SerewiczEmail author
  • Elaine Gale
Original Article

Abstract

This study sought to discover whether variations in relevant features of a first date would produce differences in young adults’ first-date scripts. In responding to scenarios that manipulated gender of the date initiator, alcohol availability, and relationship type, 209 college students in the Midwestern United States generated lists including an average of 21 actions they expected to occur on the date. Findings showed a trend toward traditional gender roles for male and female date partners, though some complexity related to sexual behavior and the gender of the date initiator was found. In addition, the context of the date influenced the date script to a great extent, whereas the type of relationship between the date partners had little effect.

Keywords

Dating Romantic relationships Gender Alcohol 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Suzanna Rose and Irene H. Frieze for helpful advice regarding data analysis and Paul Mongeau for helpful comments on a previous draft.

References

  1. Abbey, A. (1987). Misperceptions of friendly behavior as sexual interest: A survey of naturally occurring incidents. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11, 173–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger, C. R. (1997). Planning strategic interaction: Attaining goals through strategic interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  3. Burgoon, J. K. (1994). Nonverbal signals. In M. L. Knapp & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (2nd ed., pp. 229–284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1987). Validation and measurement of the fundamental themes of relational communication. Communication Monographs, 54, 19–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clark, C. L., Shaver, P. R., & Abrahams, M. F. (1999). Strategic behaviors in romantic relationship initiation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 707–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ganong, L. H., & Coleman, M. (1992). Gender differences in expectations of self and future partner. Journal of Family Issues, 13, 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ganong, L. H., Coleman, M., Thompson, A., & Goodwin-Watkins, C. (1996). African American and European American college students’ expectations for self and for future partners. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 758–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. George, W. H., & Norris, J. (1991). Alcohol, disinhibition, sexual arousal, and deviant sexual behavior. Alcohol Health and Research World, 15, 133–138.Google Scholar
  9. Gottman, J. M. (1994). What predicts divorce? The relationship between marital processes and marital outcomes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Honeycutt, J. M., & Cantrill, J. G. (2001). Cognition, communication, and romantic relationships. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  11. Honeycutt, J. M., Cantrill, J. G., & Greene, R. W. (1989). Memory structures for relational escalation: A cognitive test of sequencing of relational actions and stages. Human Communication Research, 16, 62–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Laner, M. R., & Ventrone, N. A. (1998). Egalitarian daters/traditionalist dates. Journal of Family Issues, 19, 468–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McNamara, J. R., & Grossman, K. (1991). Initiation of dates and anxiety among college men and women. Psychological Reports, 69, 252–254.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mongeau, P. A., & Carey, C. M. (1996). Who’s wooing whom II: An experimental investigation of date-initiation and expectancy violation. Western Journal of Communication, 60, 195–13.Google Scholar
  15. Mongeau, P. A., Hale, J. L., Johnson, K. L., & Hillis, J. D. (1993). Who’s wooing whom? An investigation of female-initiated dating. In P. J. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Interpersonal communication: Evolving interpersonal relationships (pp. 51–68). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  16. Mongeau, P. A., & Johnson, K. L. (1995). Predicting cross-sex first-date sexual expectations and involvement: Contextual and individual difference factors. Personal Relationships, 2, 301–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mongeau, P. A., Morr Serewicz, M. C., & Therrien, L. F. (2004). Goals for cross-sex first dates: Identification, measurement, and the impact of contextual factors. Communication Monographs, 61, 121–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mongeau, P. A., & Teubner, G. (2002, November). Romantic relationship transitions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  19. Morr, M. C., & Mongeau, P. A. (2004). First date expectations: The role of sex of initiator, alcohol consumption, and relationship type. Communication Research, 31, 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morr Serewicz, M. C., & Stow, C. A. H. (2005, November). Brief report: Stages of romantic relationships at the University of Denver. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  21. Muehlenhard, C. L., Friedman, D. E., & Thomas, C. M. (1985). Is date rape justifiable? The effects of dating activity, who initiated, who paid, and men’s attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 297–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Muehlenhard, C. L., & Miller, E. N. (1988). Traditional and nontraditional men’s responses to women’s dating initiation. Behavior Modification, 12, 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pryor, J. B., & Merluzzi, T. V. (1985). The role of expertise in processing social interaction scripts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 362–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rose, S., & Frieze, I. H. (1989). Young singles’ scripts for a first date. Gender and Society, 3, 258–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rose, S., & Frieze, I. H. (1993). Young singles’ contemporary dating scripts. Sex Roles, 28, 499–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schank, R. C. (1982). Dynamic memory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  28. Weschler, H., Davenport, A., Dowdall, G., Moeykens, B., & Castillo, S. (1994). Health and behavioral consequences of binge drinking in college. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 1672–1677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Human Communication StudiesUniversity of DenverDenverUSA
  2. 2.Department of Communication StudiesCalifornia State University, SacramentoSacramentoUSA

Personalised recommendations