Wesche, R., Kreager, D. A., Feinberg, M. E., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2019). Peer acceptance and sexual behaviors from adolescence to young adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48, 996-1008.

Adolescents who are liked by their peers are more likely to have sex, which could place them at higher risk for negative outcomes such as STIs and unwanted pregnancy. However, less is known about whether peer acceptance in adolescence is associated to longer term sex-related outcomes in young adulthood. We used longitudinal sociometric data from the PROSPER study, which followed youth from early adolescence into young adulthood. During adolescence, well-liked individuals were more likely to have sexual intercourse by age 16. In young adulthood (age 19), well-liked individuals were more likely to have sexual intercourse (a normative behavior by this age) but less likely to be diagnosed with an STI (a risky outcome). For boys (but not girls), being well liked in adolescence was associated with having more past-year partners in young adulthood. Peer acceptance was not associated with other potentially risky outcomes like sex without a condom or casual sex. The findings suggest that well-liked adolescents experience healthy sexual development into young adulthood, even though they are more likely to be sexually active by age 16.
 
 “Being well liked in adolescence linked to healthy sexual development in young adulthood first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on June 6, 2019.”

Waterman, E. A., Wesche, R., Leavitt, C. E., & Lefkowitz, E S. (in press). Fraternity membership, traditional masculinity ideologies, and impersonal sex: Selection and socialization effects. Psychology of Men and Masculinities.
 
Rates of sexual aggression are higher among fraternity members than among other college men. Fraternity culture often engenders traditional masculine ideologies and risky sex-related attitudes that may reinforce sexual aggression. However, the process of how men internalize these ideologies is not well understood. It may be a process of selection, whereby men with more traditional masculine ideologies choose to join fraternities. Or, it may be a process of socialization, whereby being in a fraternity teaches men to adopt more traditional attitudes about gender.
 
In this paper, we used two longitudinal data sets to explore these selection and socialization effects. We found that men who more strongly endorsed male role norms about status and the sexual double standard were more likely to join fraternities, suggesting that men with more traditional attitudes about masculinity chose to join fraternities. We found little evidence to support the hypothesis that fraternities lead to more traditional ideologies about masculinity.
 
Many universities target fraternities as a context for training and intervention around sexual aggression. This intervention may be important given higher rates in these settings. However, our findings suggest that these young men may have preexisting attitudes that present risk for sexual aggression before joining fraternities. Thus, more work to target young men’s risky attitudes about masculinity and sexuality before students enter college may be particularly important in reducing rates of sexual violence on college campuses.
 
“Men with more traditional masculine ideologies choose to join fraternities first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on May 30, 2019.”

Lefkowitz, E. S., Vasilenko, S. A., Wesche, R., & Maggs, J. L. (in press). Changes in diverse sexual and contraceptive behaviors across college. Journal of Sex Research.
 
I did it – I have now blogged about all of our published and in press papers from the past three years, posting weekly about our research papers for about three months. So, this post is the last one about a specific paper until we get another paper published (and there are currently four submitted, two with R&R’s, so fingers crossed it won’t be too long).
 
In my continued efforts to be fully transparent, particularly for the benefit of junior scholars, this paper took a while to publish. I’ve written before about publishing perseverance and the time it took us 8 years and 4 rejections to get a paper published.
 
I don’t think that the paper I’m writing about today had QUITE as long a road to publication. Well, let me go look up the details. So, it looks like I proposed this paper about 7 years ago, had a draft of the intro and methods 4 years ago, added the results about 3 years ago, and had a full draft over 2 years ago. And it looks like I first submitted it only over a year ago, and that it was only rejected from one journal (somehow, my memory is of more rejections – funny). So I guess the delay was much more in my writing it, than in multiple review processes. I think I remember more rejections because I really saw this paper as a developmental paper and therefore wanted to publish it in a developmental journal, even after the first rejection from a developmental journal. But between submissions I eventually changed my mind and recognized it was a better fit for a sexuality journal, where it found its home.
 
As with many of our other papers, we approached this paper from a normative developmental framework of sexuality. Our perspective is:

1. It is typical, appropriate, and healthy to express interest in and explore sexuality during adolescence and young adulthood
2. A healthy framework shifts the focus from identifying risk factors to understanding a range of sexual experiences, some of which (e.g., kissing, touching) do not confer the same physical risks as vaginal and anal sex
3. To recognize that individual and contextual factors like gender and relationship status influence and shape sexual experiences
4. To acknowledge that sexuality is a developmental phenomenon that changes across adolescence and young adulthood with both age and context
5. Despite risks of sexual behavior, sexual behavior also confers benefits to physical, mental, and relationship health

 
The unique aspects of this paper were that we:

1. Examined rates using longitudinal data with frequent assessment – assessing participants every semester for seven semesters. Most work in this area uses cross-sectional data; existing longitudinal data generally have long gaps between assessments, which may fail to capture variability during a time of rapid change
2. Considered a range of sexual and contraceptive behaviors in the same sample, rather than simply focusing on vaginal sex and/or condom use
3. Considered performing and receiving oral sex separately, given conflicting data on gender differences in rates of oral sex
4. Included both condoms and non-condom contraception, to include more female-focused contraceptive behaviors
5. Considered time-varying changes in romantic relationship status and their association with sexual and contraceptive behaviors

 
We found that:

• Likelihood of kissing, touching, performing oral sex, receiving oral sex, and engaging in penetrative sex in the past 3 months increased with time
• Men were more likely to report receiving oral sex and using condoms in the past 3 months than women were
• Students were more likely to report kissing, touching, performing oral sex, receiving oral sex, and penetrative sex in semesters they were in a serious relationship than semester they were not. They were less likely to report using condoms when they were in a serious relationship compared to when they were not.
• There was a three-way interaction for both contraceptive behaviors. Specifically, consistent use of any contraception in the past three months decreased over time more for men in semesters they were not in a relationship than for men in semesters they were, or for women. In addition, condom use decreased for men regardless of relationship status, and for women in semesters they were in a relationship, but not in semesters women were not.

In summary, rates of participation in penetrative and nonpenetrative behaviors generally increase, whether young adults are in relationships or not. Still, relationship status was an important determinant of engaging in all types of sexual behaviors, as well as consistently using any contraception. Our findings suggest the value of continued sexual health promotion across college, not limited to the first year orientation.
 
 
“ Developmental changes in diverse sexual and contraceptive behaviors across college first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on September 25, 2018.”

Wesche, R., Kreager, D. A., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (in press). Sources of social influence on adolescents’ alcohol use. Journal of Research on Adolescence.

Peer relationships contribute to adolescents’ alcohol use, but the mechanisms are not fully known. Adolescents may influence each other’s attitudes; they may model each other’s behaviors; or they may spend time in unstructured socializing settings without adult supervisors present. In this paper, we considered all three potential sources of influence: attitudes, behaviors, and unstructured socializing. We also considered three different types of peers: friends, romantic partners, and romantic partners’ friends.
 
We used data from the PROSPER study, a longitudinal study of rural adolescents followed beginning in sixth grade. Each wave, adolescents nominated friends and romantic partners, and we used these data to determine friends’, romantic partners’, and romantic partner’s friends’ alcohol attitudes and behaviors. We used participant report of unstructured socializing with friends and romantic partners, and romantic partners’ reports for unstructured socializing with romantic partners’ friends.
 
Behavior: Adolescents were drunk more frequently in waves when their friends, romantic partners, and romantic partners’ friends were drunk more frequently. However, when all in the same model, only friends’ and romantic partners’ friends’ behaviors remained significant.
 
Attitudes: adolescents were drunk more frequently in waves when their friends, romantic partners, and romantic partners’ friends had more positive alcohol related attitudes. However, when all in the same model, only romantic partners’ attitudes remained significant.
 
Unstructured socializing: Unstructured socializing was not associated with adolescents’ drunkenness.However, there was an interaction with time for unstructured socializing with friends. Older adolescents increased their drunkenness frequency when they engaged in more frequent unstructured socializing with friends, but this association was not there at earlier ages. In addition, there was an interaction with gender and time for unstructured socializing of romantic partners with friends. Older girls increased their drunkenness frequency when their romantic partners engaged in more frequent unstructured socializing with friends.
 
Finding suggest that multiple peer relationships matter for alcohol use. Findings also indicate that the mechanisms differ by type of relationship. Friends’ and partners’ friends’ behavior seem to matter more than their attitudes. In contrast, romantic partners’ attitudes matter more than their behaviors. It may be that friends and partners’ friends serve as behavioral models, whereas romantic partners’ beliefs may have more influence. This difference may be because we limited friends to same sex friends, and partners to heterosexual partners, adolescents may model peers of the same sex, but, within a romantic context, adhere to the belief system of the other sex. Findings also suggest the increasing importance of unstructured socializing as a potential setting for dangerous levels of alcohol use.
 
“Adolescents’ friends, romantic partners, and romantic partners’ friends matter for alcohol use first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on September 18, 2018.”

Lefkowitz, E. S., Wesche, R., Picci, G., & Hochgraf, A. K. (in press). Daily associations between kissing and affect during the transition from adolescence to young adulthood. Journal of Research on Adolescence.
 
A few weeks ago I wrote about our paper considering what distinguishes first year college students who have never kissed a partner from students who have. We followed up that paper by examining daily associations between kissing and affect in the same sample. Our examination of kissing and affect was motivated by a normative developmental framework, and an interest in understanding the value of kissing during adolescence and the transition to adulthood. We know that kissing is a meaningful and important experience for several reasons.  

Prior work in this area considered predominantly between person differences – do people who kiss (ever) or people who kiss more frequently differ from those who never kiss or kiss less frequently? In this paper, we used daily diary data to consider whether positive and negative affect on a given day was associated with kissing on that day. We used seven semesters of data, with students completing daily diaries for two weeks each semester.
 
We found that kissing was associated with affect at the daily level – students reported more positive and less negative affect on days they kissed compared to other days. This association existed even after controlling for a number of known correlates of affect, such as vaginal sex, weekend days, relationship status, and demographic factors. A number of control variables were also associated with affect, which we describe in detail in the paper.
 
Thus, our findings demonstrate that it is not simply that students who tend to kiss more frequently have more positive well-being. Instead, it’s that on days when students kiss a partner, they experience more positive and less negative affect. These findings inform comprehensive sex education, suggesting that such programs could incorporate an emphasis on the value of kissing as an alternative to vaginal sex if individuals do not feel emotionally ready, or do not have the means to adequately protect themselves from STI’s or unintended pregnancy. 
 
“Late Adolescents Are Happier on Days They Kiss first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on September 11, 2018.”

Waterman, E. A., Wesche, R., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (in press). Longitudinal correlates of peer sexual communication quality in young adulthood. Sexuality Research and Social Policy.

I’m excited to say that today is July 25th. But (hopefully) you are reading this post on September 4th. Which means I have succeeded this summer at getting ahead of blog posting, and getting 2 posts up a week, consistently from May 25 through at least September 4. I feel like Andrew Gelman. Okay not, because he posts daily and I think he is now something like nine months ahead (how? how?). And also for many other reasons that have nothing to do with frequency of blog posting. But still, I am going to savor this moment of feeling happy about it before I start realizing there is less than one month of summer left and I need to turn my attention elsewhere.
 
And now, turning my attention to today’s topic. In my own prior research, and more broadly, frequently in the literature, people consider how communication with friends about sex is associated with outcomes of interest, particularly sexual attitudes and/or behavior. In this paper, we wanted to understand what is associated with peer communication itself. That is, how might we be able to understand characteristics that relate to better or worse communication with friends about sex?  In addition, we were interested in within person differences. That is, not just knowing how people who feel comfortable talking about sex different from people who don’t. But, more specifically, understanding what differentiates when people feel more or less comfortable talking about sex. For instance, we didn’t just want to understand whether being sexually active was associated with better communication about sex (a between person question). We wanted to understand whether students had better sex communication quality in semesters that they were sexually active compared to semesters they were not (a within person question).
 
We considered individual characteristics (gender, sexual behavior, sexual attitudes) and peer characteristics (romantic relationship status, frequency of peer sexual communication, and perceived peer approval of sex). We followed college students across college, assessing them four times from Fall of first year to Fall of fourth year. We asked about sex communication with their closest same sex friend at university.
 
Overall, quality of communication with friends about sex improved across college.
 
Individual factors: Women had better quality communication than men. Although individuals who were sexually active during more semesters generally reported better communication quality, there were no within person associations with behavior. However, both the between and within person levels were significant for sexual attitudes. That is, overall, students who had more conservative attitudes about sex had worse communication about sex. And, during semesters when students had more conservative attitudes, they had worse communication about sex.
 
Peer characteristics: Peer communication quality did not differ by romantic relationship status. Frequency of communication mattered at both the between and within person levels. That is, students who overall talked about sex more had better communication, and students had better communication in semesters when they talked about sex more. Perceived peer approval was not associated with quality of communication.
 
In summary, findings demonstrate that both individual and peer characteristics matter for communication quality. Findings also have important implications for peer led health promotion programs, which often rely on trained peers to lead sex-related discussions.
 
“Peer Sexual Communication Across College first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on September 4, 2018.”

Wesche, R., Claxton, S. E., Lefkowitz, E. S., & van Dulmen, M. H. M. (in press). Evaluations and future plans after casual sexual experiences: Differences across partner type. Journal of Sex Research.
 
In this paper we considered multiple types of casual sexual relationships and experiences, including casual dating, friends with benefits, and booty calls/one night stands, and whether they are associated with short-term outcomes.
 
In recent years there has been growing public concern that young adults prioritize casual sex over romantic relationships. In contrast, some scholars consider casual sexual relationships as normative and an opportunity for exploration. Prior research evidence is conflicted, with some suggesting negative outcomes of casual sex, and others suggesting no outcomes or positive outcomes. In this paper, we considered a range of casual relationships in order to tease apart associations based on the type of sexual relationship.
 
Data came from two sources: a Midwestern college sample psychology pool, and Amazon’s MTurk. We considered a range of sexual behaviors: kissing, touching oral sex, sexual intercourse, and anal sex. 
 
Young adults who had sexual experiences with a friends with benefits partner tended to have more negative evaluations of the experience, and to be less oriented toward romantic relationship plans, than young adults who had sexual experiences with casual partners. Young adults who engaged in booty calls/one night stands had less positive evaluations, more negative evaluations, and were less oriented toward romantic relationship plans than young adults who had casual partners.  Plans for future casual sexual experiences did not differ by type of partner.

There was some evidence of gender differences. Specifically, the difference in positive and negative evaluations of booty calls/one night stands compared to casual sexual partners was greater for women than for men. In addition, there were differences by type of behavior, with oral/penetrative sex associated with bigger differences by type of partner than kissing/touching.
 
Overall, findings suggest that there are differences in the short-term outcomes of varied types of casual sexual experiences. That is, it is not simply that casual sex outcomes are worse than relationship sex outcomes, but that there is variation in outcomes within different types of casual sexual partners.
 
“Type of Casual Sex Partner Matters for Short-term Outcomes first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on August 28, 2018.”

Vasilenko, S. A., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2018). Sexual behavior and daily affect in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 6, 191-199.

As I’ve mentioned recently in other posts, we’ve been trying to consider the benefits of sexual behavior to general wellbeing. In this paper, we examined daily associations between vaginal sex and positive and negative affect.
 
In general, having sex was linked to better daily wellbeing. Specifically, college students reported more positive affect on days they had sex than on days they did not have sex. Negative affect didn’t differ.
 
However, there were situational differences. Specifically, students reported more negative affect on days they had sex with a nondating partner than on other days.
 
In addition, affect was associated with perceived consequences of sex. Specifically, students reported more positive affect on days they had more positive consequences of sex, and more negative affect on days they had more negative consequences of sex.
 
Overall, the study suggests that sexual behavior by young adulthood is linked to better short-term wellbeing. Does go against some of the rhetoric of “sex is bad/harmful,” including this post that I found had recently cited my work.
 
“College Students Are Happier on Days They Have Sex first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on August 21, 2018.”

Lefkowitz, E. S., Wesche, R., & Leavitt, C. E. (2018). Never been kissed: Correlates of lifetime kissing status in U. S. university students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47, 1283-1293.
 
I just realized I am finally writing about papers published in 2018.  That was a lot of catch up.
 
Do you remember your first kiss? How old were you? 12? 14? Sweet sixteen and finally been kissed? For many, the first kiss experience is very positive and generally linked to wellbeing. I recently became interested in studying kissing because of my interest in normative sexuality development. Most adolescents spend a lot more time kissing than having penetrative sex, yet almost all of our research is on penetrative sex.
 
While writing this paper we informally called it the “Kissing Virgins” paper. In this paper we considered college students who had never kissed a partner by the first semester of college, and the personal, contextual, and adjustment/health predictors of this delayed onset of kissing. Although by the start of college it is normative to either have or have not ever engaged in vaginal sex, students who have never kissed a partner at the start of college are off-time from their peers.
 
We found that by Fall of first year of university, about 14% of students had never kissed a partner – most (95%) of these students had never engaged in any other sexual behaviors (touching, oral sex, vaginal sex) either.
 
Demographic factors: Asian American students were less likely to have kissed partners than other students (28% of Asian Americans never kissed a partner compared to 7-11% of students from other ethnic/racial backgrounds). Only 1% of students in current romantic relationships, compared to 22% of students not in relationships, had never kissed a partner.
 
Personal characteristics: More extraverted students were more likely to have kissed a partner than less extraverted students. Although in the bivariate model, more neurotic students were less likely to have kissed a partner than less neurotic students, this result did not hold when all of the predictors were in one model.
 
Contextual characteristics: 32% of students in the honors college, vs. 13% of other students, had never kissed a partner. In the bivariate model, having a mother more facilitative of independence was associated with a higher likelihood of kissing a partner, although this result did not hold when all of the predictors were in one model.
 
Adjustment/health correlates: Students who drank more were more likely to have kissed a partner than students who drank less. In the bivariate model, students with better self-esteem were more likely to have kissed a partner than students with worse self-esteem, although this result did not hold when all of the predictors were in one model.
 
Religiosity was not associated with likelihood of kissing, suggesting that internalization of religious motives against sexual behavior does not transfer to a prohibition against kissing.
 
Overall, findings suggest that never having kissed a partner is associated with characteristics indicative of a lack of exploration – both in terms of having a non-exploratory personality, and less exploration in other domains like alcohol use. It is possible that this decreased experimentation provides fewer opportunities for identity exploration. Overall, findings suggest that not kissing a partner provides some possibly protective factors, and some indicators of worse adjustment.
 
“What Predicts Never Having Kissed by the Start of College? first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on August 14, 2018.”

Waterman, E., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2017). Are mothers’ and fathers’ parenting characteristics associated with emerging adults’ academic engagement? Journal of Family Issues, 38, 1239-1261.
 
Occasionally, we have a paper that is about neither sex or romantic relationships.
 
In this paper, we considered how students’ perceptions of their mothers’ and fathers’ parenting characteristics when they were growing up, and now, were associated with their academic engagement. We considered authoritative, permissive, and authoritarian parenting style when growing up, as well as current relationship quality, and measured multiple aspects of academic engagement: attitudes (importance of grades), behaviors (attendance), and performance (GPA). We found that students with more permissive mothers viewed grades as less important than other students. Men with more authoritarian mothers tended to view grades as more important, and this association was weaker for women. Women with more authoritarian mothers tended to attend class less frequently and have worse GPAs, and this association was weaker for men. Finally, men with better relationships with their fathers tended to view grades as more important, and this association was weaker for women.
 
Findings provide some support for Bronfenbrenner’s (1986) ecological systems theory, in that mothers’ parenting style and fathers’ relationship quality were associated with emerging adults’ academic engagement. Earlier parenting style and current parent–offspring relationship quality may be important not only in adolescence, when individuals live in closer proximity to their parents, but effects may continue to matter in emerging adulthood. This phenomenon appears to be stronger for academic attitudes than for academic behavior or performance. Additionally, results suggest that individuals’
characteristics, specifically gender, interact with the microsystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1986), with parenting characteristics associated in different ways for young men and young women.  
 
“How Parentings Characteristics Are Associated With College Students’ Academic Engagement first appeared on Eva Lefkowitz’s blog on July 31, 2018.”