Latent Classes of Sexual Behaviors: Prevalence, Predictors, and Consequences
Scholars of adolescent and emerging adult sexuality have recently begun to study how diverse patterns of sexual behaviors contribute to development and well-being. A person-oriented approach to studying sexual behaviors provides a nuanced understanding of sexual repertoires. The goals of this paper were to document patterns of sexual behaviors ranging from kissing to penetrative sex, and to examine how latent classes of behaviors, gender, and partner type (romantic versus nonromantic) predict intra- and interpersonal consequences of sexual behaviors. Latent class analysis of a stratified random sample of US college students revealed four classes of sexual behaviors: Kissing Only, Kissing and Touching, All Behaviors, and Oral and Penetrative Only. Compared to individuals in the All Behaviors class, individuals in the Kissing Only class were less likely to experience a positive or a negative intrapersonal consequence of sexual behaviors. Men were less likely to report a negative intrapersonal consequence than women were. Partner type predicted negative interpersonal consequences for the All Behaviors class. Implications are discussed in terms of normative sexual development, prevention, and sexual and relationship education.
KeywordsSexual behaviors Sexual health Casual sex
Compliance with Ethical Standards
This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health grant R01AA016016 and the National Institute on Drug Abuse grants T32 DA017629, P50 DA10075, and P50 DA039838.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Armstrong, E. A., England, P., & Fogarty, A. C. K. (2009). Orgasm in college hookups and relationships. In B. Risman (Ed.), Families as they really are (pp. 362–377). New York: Norton.Google Scholar
- Beadnell, B., Morrison, D. M., Wilsdon, A., Wells, E. A., Murowchick, E., Hoppe, M., & Nahom, D. (2005). Condom use, frequency of sex, and number of partners: multidimensional characterization of adolescent sexual risk-taking. Journal of Sex Research, 42, 192–202. doi: 10.1080/00224490509552274.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bersamin, M. M., Zamboanga, B. L., Schwartz, S. J., Donnellan, M. B., Hudson, M., Weisskirch, R. S., & Caraway, S. J. (2014). Risky business: is there an association between casual sex and mental health among emerging adults? Journal of Sex Research, 51, 43–51. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2013.772088.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bray, B. C., Lanza, S. T., & Tan, X. (2012). An introduction to eliminating bias in classify-analyze approaches for latent class analysis. Retrieved from http://methodology.psu.edu
- Cairns, R. B. (1983). The emergence of developmental psychology. In P. H. Mussen & W. Kessen (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: history, theories and methods (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 41–101). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Collins, L. M., & Lanza, S. T. (2013). Latent class and latent transition analysis: with applications in the social, behavioral, and health sciences. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Diamond, L. M., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (2009). Adolescent sexuality. In R. M. Lerner & L. D. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 479–523). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Goins, L., Garcia, L., & Barger, J. (2013). Perceptions of heterosexual activities by heterosexual individuals. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, 16.Google Scholar
- Hipwell, A. E., Stepp, S. D., Keenan, K., Chung, T., & Loeber, R. (2011). Brief report: parsing the heterogeneity of adolescent girls’ sexual behavior: relationships to individual and interpersonal factors. Journal of Adolescence, 34, 589–592. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.03.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- McAuliffe, T. L., DiFranceisco, W., & Reed, B. R. (2007). Effects of question format and collection mode on the accuracy of retrospective surveys of health risk behavior: a comparison with daily sexual activity diaries. Health Psychology, 26, 60–67. doi: 10.1037/0278-6126.96.36.199.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Patrick, M. E., Maggs, J. L., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2015). Daily associations between drinking and sex among college students: A longitudinal measurement burst design. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 25, 377–386. doi: 10.1111/jora.12135.
- Petersen, J. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2010). A meta-analytic review of research on gender differences in sexuality, 1993–2007. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 21–38. doi: 10.1037/a0017504.
- Santelli, J. S., Lindberg, L. D., Abma, J., McNeely, C. S., & Resnick, M. (2000). Adolescent sexual behavior: Estimates and trends from four nationally representative surveys. Family Planning Perspectives, 32, 156–194. doi: 10.2307/2648232.
- Vasilenko, S. A., Maas, M. K., Lefkowitz, E. S., & Maggs, J. L. (2014). “It felt good but weird at the same time”: Emerging adults’ feelings about their first experiences of six different sexual behaviors.Google Scholar
- Vasilenko, S. A., Lefkowitz, E. S., & Welsh, D. P. (2014b). Is sexual behavior healthy for adolescents? A conceptual framework for research on adolescent sexual behavior and physical, mental, and social health. In E. S. Lefkowitz & S. A. Vasilenko (Eds.), Positive and negative outcomes of sexual behaviors. New directions for child and adolescent development (Vol. 144, pp. 3–19). doi: 10.1002/cad.Google Scholar
- Woody, J. D., Russel, R., D’Souza, H. J., & Woody, J. K. (2000). Adolescent non-coital sexual activity: comparisons of virgins and non-virgins. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 25, 261–268.Google Scholar