Partner Type, Sexual Double Standard Endorsement, and Ambivalence Predict Abdication and Unprotected Sex Intentions in a Community Sample of Young Women

Cinnamon L. Danube, Jeanette Norris, Cynthia A. Stappenbeck, Kelly Davis, William H. George, Tina Zawacki, Diane M. Morrison, Devon Alisa Abdallah

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In-the-moment ambivalence about having sex may influence sexual decisions but has rarely been examined. We investigated how ambivalence about sex might be related to intentions to abdicate sexual decisions to a male partner and to engage in unprotected sex in a community sample of young women. Predictors of abdication and unprotected sex intentions included partner type (new casual versus previous relationship), sexual double standard (SDS) endorsement, and two types of ambivalence. After completing a SDS endorsement measure, women (N = 360) projected themselves into a hypothetical sexual situation and completed dependent measures. In the new casual partner condition, SDS endorsement indirectly negatively predicted unprotected sex intentions through its associations with ambivalence and abdication. In both partner conditions SDS endorsement positively predicted abdication, which then positively predicted unprotected sex intentions. Ambivalence indirectly predicted unprotected sex intentions through its negative association with abdication intentions. Results suggest the importance of ambivalence for sexual decisions and the complexity of understanding the sexual decision making processes for women who endorse the SDS.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)601-613
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Sex Research
Volume53
Issue number4-5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 3 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Unsafe Sex
Sexual Partners
ambivalence
community
decision making process
Sexual
Ambivalence
Intentions
Decision Making

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gender Studies
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Psychology(all)
  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cite this

Partner Type, Sexual Double Standard Endorsement, and Ambivalence Predict Abdication and Unprotected Sex Intentions in a Community Sample of Young Women. / Danube, Cinnamon L.; Norris, Jeanette; Stappenbeck, Cynthia A.; Davis, Kelly; George, William H.; Zawacki, Tina; Morrison, Diane M.; Abdallah, Devon Alisa.

In: Journal of Sex Research, Vol. 53, No. 4-5, 03.05.2016, p. 601-613.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Danube, Cinnamon L. ; Norris, Jeanette ; Stappenbeck, Cynthia A. ; Davis, Kelly ; George, William H. ; Zawacki, Tina ; Morrison, Diane M. ; Abdallah, Devon Alisa. / Partner Type, Sexual Double Standard Endorsement, and Ambivalence Predict Abdication and Unprotected Sex Intentions in a Community Sample of Young Women. In: Journal of Sex Research. 2016 ; Vol. 53, No. 4-5. pp. 601-613.
@article{eca746e100ce4441bd222e17254447d7,
title = "Partner Type, Sexual Double Standard Endorsement, and Ambivalence Predict Abdication and Unprotected Sex Intentions in a Community Sample of Young Women",
abstract = "In-the-moment ambivalence about having sex may influence sexual decisions but has rarely been examined. We investigated how ambivalence about sex might be related to intentions to abdicate sexual decisions to a male partner and to engage in unprotected sex in a community sample of young women. Predictors of abdication and unprotected sex intentions included partner type (new casual versus previous relationship), sexual double standard (SDS) endorsement, and two types of ambivalence. After completing a SDS endorsement measure, women (N = 360) projected themselves into a hypothetical sexual situation and completed dependent measures. In the new casual partner condition, SDS endorsement indirectly negatively predicted unprotected sex intentions through its associations with ambivalence and abdication. In both partner conditions SDS endorsement positively predicted abdication, which then positively predicted unprotected sex intentions. Ambivalence indirectly predicted unprotected sex intentions through its negative association with abdication intentions. Results suggest the importance of ambivalence for sexual decisions and the complexity of understanding the sexual decision making processes for women who endorse the SDS.",
author = "Danube, {Cinnamon L.} and Jeanette Norris and Stappenbeck, {Cynthia A.} and Kelly Davis and George, {William H.} and Tina Zawacki and Morrison, {Diane M.} and Abdallah, {Devon Alisa}",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/00224499.2015.1061631",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "53",
pages = "601--613",
journal = "Journal of Sex Research",
issn = "0022-4499",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4-5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Partner Type, Sexual Double Standard Endorsement, and Ambivalence Predict Abdication and Unprotected Sex Intentions in a Community Sample of Young Women

AU - Danube, Cinnamon L.

AU - Norris, Jeanette

AU - Stappenbeck, Cynthia A.

AU - Davis, Kelly

AU - George, William H.

AU - Zawacki, Tina

AU - Morrison, Diane M.

AU - Abdallah, Devon Alisa

PY - 2016/5/3

Y1 - 2016/5/3

N2 - In-the-moment ambivalence about having sex may influence sexual decisions but has rarely been examined. We investigated how ambivalence about sex might be related to intentions to abdicate sexual decisions to a male partner and to engage in unprotected sex in a community sample of young women. Predictors of abdication and unprotected sex intentions included partner type (new casual versus previous relationship), sexual double standard (SDS) endorsement, and two types of ambivalence. After completing a SDS endorsement measure, women (N = 360) projected themselves into a hypothetical sexual situation and completed dependent measures. In the new casual partner condition, SDS endorsement indirectly negatively predicted unprotected sex intentions through its associations with ambivalence and abdication. In both partner conditions SDS endorsement positively predicted abdication, which then positively predicted unprotected sex intentions. Ambivalence indirectly predicted unprotected sex intentions through its negative association with abdication intentions. Results suggest the importance of ambivalence for sexual decisions and the complexity of understanding the sexual decision making processes for women who endorse the SDS.

AB - In-the-moment ambivalence about having sex may influence sexual decisions but has rarely been examined. We investigated how ambivalence about sex might be related to intentions to abdicate sexual decisions to a male partner and to engage in unprotected sex in a community sample of young women. Predictors of abdication and unprotected sex intentions included partner type (new casual versus previous relationship), sexual double standard (SDS) endorsement, and two types of ambivalence. After completing a SDS endorsement measure, women (N = 360) projected themselves into a hypothetical sexual situation and completed dependent measures. In the new casual partner condition, SDS endorsement indirectly negatively predicted unprotected sex intentions through its associations with ambivalence and abdication. In both partner conditions SDS endorsement positively predicted abdication, which then positively predicted unprotected sex intentions. Ambivalence indirectly predicted unprotected sex intentions through its negative association with abdication intentions. Results suggest the importance of ambivalence for sexual decisions and the complexity of understanding the sexual decision making processes for women who endorse the SDS.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945217254&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84945217254&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00224499.2015.1061631

DO - 10.1080/00224499.2015.1061631

M3 - Article

C2 - 26421647

AN - SCOPUS:84945217254

VL - 53

SP - 601

EP - 613

JO - Journal of Sex Research

JF - Journal of Sex Research

SN - 0022-4499

IS - 4-5

ER -