Teaching students how to understand and avoid abusive relationships

Attitudes Toward Interracial Dating: Effects of Age, Sex, and Race

Attitudes toward interracial dating were investigated by surveying 400 individuals from an integrated community. As predicted, men were more positive than women, the young were more positive than the old. and Caucasian Americans were somewhat more positive than African Americans in their attitudes.

The issue of interracial relationships has historically been a difficult one for America. After decades of laws prohibiting such relationships. American attitudes towards them continued to be extremely negative until the present day, when they can be said to be ambivalent at best. These attitudes are reflected in problems surrounding interracial friendships (Hallinan & Williams, 1989; Sherman. 1990), interfacial dating (Johnson & Ogasawara. 1988), and interracial marriage (Crestser & Leon. 1982: Jeter, 1982: Porterfield, 1982). Nevertheless, according to available data such relationships appear to be increasing in number (Porterfield, 1982), perhaps because greater integration as required by law has allowed people from different groups to meet. or perhaps as a sign of decreasing racial prejudice.

This study focused on attitudes toward dating between African Americans and Caucasian Americans. Although some research has studied interracial marriage, there has been little study of interracial dating, the precursor to marriage. Johnson and Ogasawara (1988) reported that among Hawaiians. attitudes toward interracial dating were generally positive, but that more positive attitudes and more frequent interracial dating were found among men than women and among lower income groups than higher. The current study investigated age, sex, and race differences in attitudes toward interracial dating. predicting comparatively more positive attitudes among the young, because of their more liberal attitudes, among men, as found previously, and among Caucasians.

In addition, possible personality differences between those who have positive attitudes towards interracial dating and those who have negative attitudes were investigated. One study reported that women who married across race rated themselves as higher in dominance, exhibitionism, autonomy, and aggression, and lower in abasement and deference than those who did not, although there was little difference between men who married across or within race (Ahern, Cole, Johnson, & Wong, 1981). Furthermore, these researchers found that the less the proportion of outmarriage of given ethnic groups, the greater the difference between those who married across race versus within race. Thus, as interracial relationships increase in number, it is possible that such personality differences will decrease. Nevertheless, because interracial relationships are still not completely accepted. it was predicted that those with more positive attitudes toward interracial dating would consider themselves as more independent and assertive than those with negative attitudes.

METHOD
Participants

A total of 400 individuals from the community surrounding California State University, Dominguez Hills, an urban university in south central Los Angeles, were surveyed. This community is ideal for the purposes of this research. because it is diverse as to the age and ethnicity, but not the socioeconomic status, of the people. Because this lower-middle- to middle-class community is relatively well integrated. people have many opportunities to interact with individuals from other groups.

In the United States, ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) are often confounded, so it is important in any study of ethnic differences to eliminate SES as an explanation. The SES of participants was determined by summing points awarded for annual family income, amount of education, and whether they owned or rented their home, as they reported on a demographic information sheet. An analysis of variance revealed no differences in SES between African Americans and Caucasian Americans or between women and men. The older participants, however. were of significantly higher SES than the younger (F = 25.84, df = 1,259. p = .001).

All of the African-American and Caucasian-American volunteers who completed questionnaires were included in the data analysis. There were a total of 270 such participants with a mean age of 34.5 years. including 92 African Americans and 178 Caucasian Americans, 167 women and 103 men, and 185 individuals under age 40 years (M = 28.8) and 85 people age 40 years and over (M = 47.6).

Procedure

After receiving an explanation of the research and signing an informed consent form, volunteers individually and in private completed a demographic information sheet, a Self-Rating Scale, and a questionnaire on interpersonal power.

Measures

The measure of a positive attitude towards interracial dating was the answer Yes to this question on the demographic information sheet: “Would you be willing to have a romantic relationship with someone who is not from your own racial or ethnic group?” A negative attitude was defined as the answer No. A third group, the undecided, answered Maybe or left this question blank.

As a measure of independence and assertiveness, a 10-item Self-Rating Scale, based on the Osgood Semantic Differential (Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum, 1957), was used. It consisted of word pairs such as dependent-independent, powerless-powerful, unpersuasive-persuasive, and volunteers rated themselves for each pair on 7-point scales.

In addition, two subscales from Bennett’s (1988) power questionnaire were used. The first, called Need for Influence, contains 9 statements such as “It pleases me when people follow through with my suggestions,” and it seems to measure a person’s motivation or desire to influence others; 7 items from this subscale were used. The second subscale, called Ability, contains 12 statements such as “I have a natural talent for influencing people,” and it appears to tap the individual’s ability to influence others; 7 items from this subscale were used. Volunteers indicated on a 5-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree whether each statement was true for them. These indications were summed so that the scores on each subscale ranged from 7 to 35.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The percentage of each group who stated they would or would not be willing to date outside their own ethnic group is shown in Table 1. As can be seen, attitudes towards interracial dating were generally positive, in that overall 61% reported that they were willing to date outside their group. The most negative group was that of the younger Black women, with only 35% of them willing to date outside their group, and fully 44% clearly stating they were not willing to do so. The only other group with less than half willing to date outside their group was the older White women.

Chi-square tests revealed significant sex and age differences in attitude. As predicted, more men expressed a positive attitude toward interracial dating than did women (c2 = 9.54, dr = 2, p = .0085). Also as predicted, more younger volunteers expressed a positive attitude than did older (c2 = 5.32, df = 2, p = .0697). The predicted racial difference, that more Whites would be positive than Blacks, only approached significance (c2 = 4.48, df = 2. p = .106).

Separate 2 x 2 x 2 x 3 analyses of variance (Age Group x Gender x Ethnicity x Date Others [yes, no, undecided]) were performed on each of the 10 Self-Rating Scales and on the two questionnaire subscales. The mean scores are presented in Table 2. As can be seen in this table, 6 of the 12 measures showed a significant main effect for the willingness to date others. Furthermore, 4 revealed a significant main effect for Ethnicity, but there were no other significant main effects or interactions, It is interesting to note that there were no sex differences and no age differences on these measures, despite such differences in attitude as measured by the willingness to date others.

Those who stated that they were willing to date people from a different ethnic group rated themselves as more Independent (F = 3.60, df = 2, 259. p = .03). Powerful (F = 2.90. df= 2, 259. p = .058). Active (F = 4.19. dr = 2,259. p = .02), Able to Get Own Way (F = 7.87, df = 2. 259, p = .001), and Persuasive (F = 4.74, df = 2,259, p = .06) than those who stated they were not, and the undecided group fell in between. Furthermore. those willing to date outside their group scored higher on Need for Influence (F = 5.65, df = 2, 259. p = .004) than those who were unwilling; however, there were no differences between groups on Ability or on the self-ratings of Calm, Confident. Strong, Direct, or Influential. Thus, the prediction that individuals with a positive attitude towards interracial dating would consider themselves more independent and assertive than others was partially supported.

Perhaps because this study was done in an integrated community where interracial relationships may be relatively common, differences between those willing to date outside their group and those not willing were small. Ahern, Cole, Johnson, and Wong (1981) reported a similar finding, that the higher the proportion of outmarriage in given ethnic groups, the smaller the difference between those who married across race versus within race.

African Americans tended to rate themselves more positively than Caucasian Americans did. They rated themselves as more Confident (F = 10.4, dr = 1,259, p = .001), Powerful (F = 9.02, df = 1,259, p = .003). Able to Get Own Way (F = 7.07, df = 1,259, p = .008), and Influential (F = 5.94. df = 1, 259, p = .016) than did Whites. Although the two ethnic groups in this sample were similar in outward socioeconomic status, the meaning of this status may be different for the two groups. In a culture still beset with racism, it may be that for African Americans, living in an integrated community is a step up in status compared to other African Americans; for Caucasian Americans it may be considered a step down in status. Thus, the self-esteem of African Americans in an integrated community would be higher than that of Caucasians.

The negative attitude of African-American women toward interracial dating was not explained by any differences in personality as reflected in the interpersonal influence scales or the self-rating scales, and thus a situational explanation may be best. African-American women may perceive a relative lack of appropriate, single Black men, and they may resent the increased competition of other ethnic groups for the few available partners. They may perceive being willing to date outside their own ethnic group as letting the side down. It is also possible that they hold traditional values, feel distrustful of the intentions of Caucasian men who want to date them, or are sensitive to the criticism they may receive for interracial dating.

The self-ratings of those individuals who hold a positive attitude toward interracial dating suggest that they have a higher need to influence others and are more assertive and active in getting their own way than are people with a negative attitude, The two groups are similar, however, in their perceived ability to get their own way and in self-ratings that may reflect self-esteem and how they go about getting their way. A higher degree of conformity and passivity may account for an unwillingness to engage in interfacial dating. The fact that the majority of people in this sample were positive toward interfacial dating may suggest that race relations are better than is often portrayed in the media, at least in some communities.

Teaching students how to understand and avoid abusive relationships, part II

PROGRAM CONTENT
Session 1: Introduction

The session begins by identifying several purposes for the group: to help girls predict dangerous dating situations, to teach them strategies to avoid these events, and to promote the development of healthy, safe relationships. The boundaries and expectations of a psychoeducational model are discussed, reinforcing the goal of acquiring skills rather than participating in therapy. This generally leads to the development of group rules that should include confidentiality and respect for others’ opinions and the right to speak without interruption. Once the purpose and format of the group have been discussed, definitions of abuse can be solicited through a brainstorming activity. Responses are then written on the blackboard and grouped into five categories of abuse (verbal, emotional, mental, sexual, and physical). For homework, the girls are asked to bring to the next group examples of male and female stereotypes from the media, for example, from movies, television, print ads, commercials, and popular songs.

Session 2: Popular Culture–The Context for Abuse

The second session begins by reviewing examples from the homework assignment. Using the method outlined in Preventing Teen Dating Violence: A Three Session Curriculum for Teaching Adolescents (Sousa, Bancroft, & German, 1987), girls are asked to respond to the descriptors “masculine” and “feminine.” Characteristics such as muscular, powerful, and tall are likely to be ascribed to a man, whereas a woman is usually seen as pretty, quiet, and thin. The definition of stereotype is then introduced and the notion of stereotypes as limiting or “boxing one in” is presented. Participants are then encouraged to explore what happens when someone attempts to step out of the box or acts in a way that contradicts cultural expectations. For example, a soft-spoken boy who enjoys cooking may be subjected to ridicule and his sexual orientation questioned. The hypothesis can be developed that women are urged to be passive and acquiescent in dating relationships, a pattern that can place them at risk for abuse. For homework, the girls are asked to observe and record incidents of interpersonal abuse, as defined in Session 1, throughout the next week.

Session 3: Warning Signs and Risk Factors

This session focuses on the precipitants of dating violence and begins by asking the group to brainstorm for warning signs, including jealousy and possessiveness, poor control of temper, demeaning attitudes toward women, alcohol and drug use, and attempts to control personal freedom (e.g., choice of clothing and friends). The influence of a family history of violence, relating to both victim and aggressor, is usually raised and can be identified as a risk factor. Participants are asked to respond to a true or false exercise concerning popular misconceptions about teen dating violence, for example, alcohol causes a man to be abusive, or victims bring on the abuse themselves (Sousa et al., 1987). At this point in the group, leaders may solicit personal examples that help to illustrate theoretical principles. For homework, the girls are asked to respond to a questionnaire designed to identify risk factors in their current dating relationships.

Session 4: Date Rape–A Definition

In the fourth session, participants are shown a videotape designed for high school students on the topic of date rape (Sunburst Communications, 1990). The tape is stopped at various points for questions and discussion. Typical concerns include the victim’s responsibility in causing the attack, the occurrence of date rape in long-term relationships, and the difference between the popularly held and legal definitions of rape. For homework, the participants are asked to review a handout detailing local and national date rape statistics.

Session 5: Date Rape Prevention

The fifth session begins with a discussion of the homework and the videotape viewed in the previous session. An activity called “The Safety Game” is then introduced. Leaders read several dating scenarios, and participants are instructed to stop the story at crucial moments when decisions around safety can be made. They then generate several options, evaluating the possible outcomes of each. This represents an opportunity to use examples from current events in which date rape was alleged, for example, Mike Tyson and William Kennedy Smith. Practical strategies for prevention are discussed, including having an alternate way home, carrying money for a phone call or a cab, and avoiding drugs and alcohol. Emphasis is placed on identifying personal expectations and communicating them clearly to dating partners. The girls are asked to outline expectations for their current or future dating relationships as a homework assignment. For example, they should decide in advance how much physical intimacy they want.

Session 6: Conflict Management

This session begins by brainstorming the characteristics (healthy vs. unhealthy) of arguments and displaying them on a blackboard. These are expanded on in a handout listing typical factors that sabotage effective dialogue. The girls frequently cite name-calling and blaming as common obstacles. Participants are then asked to listen to an audiotape of couples arguing and to identify roadblocks to communication (Bunnell & Bunnell, 1990. The coleaders then solicit suggestions for more positive interactions. Asked to observe their behavior during the week, girls are told to bring examples of both positive and negative communication to the next group as a homework assignment.

Session 7: Building Communication Skills

This session starts by reviewing the homework. Girls typically share examples of negative communication and express frustration around changing rigid patterns of interaction. Group members are then introduced to the principles of active listening, followed by the use of “I” messages (Gordon, 1970) in establishing assertive behavior. Examples of real-life conflicts are then solicited from participants, and they are encouraged to role-play new skills. Girls are asked to give an “I” message at least once during the week as a homework assignment.

Session 8: Going on–Personal and Community Resources

This session offers girls an opportunity to provide feedback for the group leaders, evaluating positive and negative aspects of each session. Suggestions for future groups can then be explored. A handout describing the Abuse Prevention Act of 1978 and its practical application (for example, restraining orders) is distributed. The value of networking and peer support is emphasized to the girls as a means of advocating for themselves and others.

EVALUATION STRATEGIES
Although no outcome studies have been completed to date on the Dating Safely group treatment model, plans are underway to conduct a pre- and posttreatment assessment of information and attitudes regarding dating violence. On intake into the group, girls will be administered a brief questionnaire (see Appendix). This same questionnaire will be re-administered at the end of the group. It is expected that girls who participate in the full 8-week course will demonstrate improved scores, indicating a greater understanding of abuse in relationships and strategies for self-awareness and protection. Retention of information over time may be examined by giving the same questionnaire 6 and 12 months after termination of the group.

A more difficult dimension to study is the change in behavior among group participants. Although items regarding dating habits and involvement in abusive relationships are included in the questionnaire, girls may be reluctant to admit to unsafe practices, thus creating a falsely positive outcome. Guaranteeing anonymity or adding a personal interview component to evaluation procedures may be helpful in obtaining reliable reports.

CONCLUSION
The topic of dating violence can raise anxiety in those who have experienced such trauma, either first-hand or as a witness. Because of this potential, it seems advisable to address the subject within the safe structure of a psychoeducational model. Providing students with an outline of topics, handouts of didactic material, and homework assignments reassures them that there are limits to the group and that they need not recall their private pain to participate. In fact, if students are allowed to relax their boundaries and reveal highly personal material in a school-based group, they may find it difficult to compose themselves before returning to class. Moreover, in some cases, agitated students may later act out their feelings inappropriately. Those who become overwhelmed, even within the framework of the group, can be referred for therapy outside of school.

Although this group model seems to be successful in raising awareness of dating violence among young women, it deals with only half of the problem. According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice (as reported in Sousa et al., 1987), 95% of reported dating assaults are committed by men. Many young men need to be taught nonviolent methods of handling anger, as well as how to behave respectfully within a relationship. It seems as if current popular concepts of manhood, locked in media stereotypes, leave little room for the notion of compromise and shared power. At an early age, perhaps as first graders, boys can be exposed to an ideal of manhood that encourages them to develop empathy.

The Dating Safely model has been replicated in settings throughout the Quincy Public School System. The psychoeducational format is easy to follow, even for inexperienced practitioners and is a safe, contained vehicle for addressing a potentially explosive topic.

Teaching students how to understand and avoid abusive relationships, part I

Domestic violence has become the focus of growing national concern. In Massachusetts alone, statistics indicate an 80% increase in domestic violence between 1986 and 1990 (Grossfeld, 1991). Research suggests that interpersonal violence is not limited to adults (Makepeace, 1981). Slapping, pushing, emotionally threatening language, and intense possessiveness are common among teens, and it is estimated that 12% to 25% of teenagers experience some form of violence in their dating relationships (Edwards & Moscaritolo, 1989). In a survey of three midwestern high schools, 15.7% of students reported being physically abused in their relationships, with a similar number reporting sexual abuse (Roscoe & Callahan, 1985).

According to Bethke and DeJoy (1993), dating violence seems to begin at age 15 or 16, and teens tend to minimize the severity of abuse as their relationships grow more serious. Teens themselves are aware of this pattern and, when surveyed, recommended intervention before dating occurs (Jaffe & Reitzel, 1990). Jaffe, Suderman, Reitzel, and Killop (1992) provided further justification for early preventive education, citing the costliness of treatment for domestic violence victims as well as the lack of appropriate resources.

Recognizing the need for early intervention, high school guidance departments in many communities are developing school-based strategies. Several early studies (Roscoe & Callahan, 1985; Rosenbaum & O’Leary, 1981) suggested that education is most effective in changing abusive behavior when it emphasizes that violence is not a normal or necessary part of interpersonal relationships. Group treatments based on this theory focus on teaching anger control, assertiveness, and responsible communication. School provides an ideal setting for this type of education, because a large number of young people can be reached at one time. Furthermore, school is perceived as a more socially acceptable venue for counseling services than either mental health centers or shelters for battered women. Bergman (1992) postulated that teenagers are most likely to respond in psychoeducational settings that offer them information about violence, an environment for processing their experiences, and support for making decisions about their relationships. Although there is little data published on the outcome of such interventions in the United States, Canadian researchers report changes in attitude, knowledge, and behavioral interactions in high school students who are exposed to information and discussion of interpersonal violence (Tontodonato & Crew, 1992).

The following is a psychoeducational group model for teenage girls, designed and implemented over 3 years by school psychologists at Quincy High School, a large institution (approximately 1200 students) located in a predominantly working-class city bordering Boston. The goals of the group are to help students define and avoid abusive relationships, as well as to understand long-term effects on self-esteem and decision making. We believe participants will be able to recognize behaviors that constitute abuse, identify risk factors for involvement in abusive relationships, distinguish between myths and facts of dating violence, generate specific strategies to protect themselves in dating situations, increase awareness of effective communication tools, and reflect on dating values.

GROUP COMPOSITION AND FORMATION
Referrals were solicited from various sources, including teachers, administrators, and security guards, as well as from the caseloads of counseling staff members. Given the possibility of a link between violence in the family of origin and involvement in abusive relationships, girls with a positive history for family violence were given priority (Makepeace, 1981; Roscoe & Callahan, 1985; Smith & Williams, 1992; Tontodonato & Crew, 1992). Girls with a personal history of complaints against dating partners were also afforded special consideration. Once a list was compiled, potential participants were interviewed individually. During this interview, counselors briefly described the group and assessed the students’ interest and readiness to participate. Among the guidelines to be considered were the following: (a) ability to tolerate a group setting, (b) willingness to verbalize thoughts and feelings, (c) emotional stability, and (d) parental permission. If a girl admitted to current involvement in an abusive dating relationship, she was referred to community agencies for immediate assistance.

A group comprising 6 to 8 girls is considered optimal in establishing a comfortable and safe environment for discussion. Although the Quincy High School groups used two female coleaders, the use of a male/female team creates opportunities for modeling respect and equality between the two sexes. Groups included girls from grades 9 through 12, providing a forum for sharing diverse experiences and knowledge. Older students tend to be less inhibited, and their example may encourage younger members to participate. To ensure maximum attendance, it is advisable to hold the group during the middle of the week and alternate meeting times across class periods. This avoids Monday and Friday holiday schedules and reduces the amount of time missed in a single class.

Changing a partner’s behavior: some college student data

One-hundred-and-twenty-seven undergraduates at a large southeastern university completed a confidential anonymous 33 item questionnaire designed to assess the degree to which undergraduate college students expect to change the behavior of their dating partners. The data revealed that changing a partner’s behavior is normative and had been learned by observing their parents and friends attempting to change behavior in their respective relationships. The data also revealed that females, particularly those who had been involved in a previous meaningful relationship, were significantly more interested in changing their partner’s gender role attitudes than vice versa. Implications of the data are suggested.

“I’ll change my partner after we get married” is a common thought among persons contemplating marriage. The thought carries three assumptions- that a deliberate attempt to induce the partner to change behavior is in the future for the relationship, that the partner will actually make behavioral changes, and that the partner will benefit/enjoy such changes.

Previous research on changing behavior has focused on conflict management styles (Greeff and DeBruyne, 2000), factors involved in behavior change (Franklin, 2000), and adaptation in long term relationships (Mackey and O’Brien, 1998). This study sought to identify the degree to which undergraduate college students expect and/or experience behavioral and attitudinal change to be operative in a dating relationship.

Sample
The sample consisted of 127 undergraduates at a large southeastern university who responded to an anonymous 33 item questionnaire designed to assess the prevalence, attitudes and behavior toward changing one’s partner in a current or past relationship. Fifty-eight percent of the respondents were female; forty-two percent were male. Most (88%) were White, 8% were Black, 3% Hispanic, and 1% Asian. The median age of the respondents was 18 with a range of 17 to 41 (only one respondent was 41). In regard to classification, most (69%) were first year students with 18% sophomores, 10% juniors and 5% seniors. About half (54%) were either not involved or casually dating, 40% were emotionally involved, and 6% were living together, engaged, or married.

Findings
Analysis of the data revealed that changing one’s partner is part of one’s socialization and is viewed as normative and pervasive.

Parents and Change.
In regard to the family in which the respondents grew up, half the women and one fourth of the men reported having observed their mother attempting to change their father. In addition, 30.4% of female students and 25% of male students reported that they observed their fathers trying to change their mothers’ behavior. The data also indicated that the respondents felt that their parents were trying to change their (the student’s) behavior with female students feeling greater pressure for behavior change (75.3% compared to 66% for males). However, males felt greater pressure from parents to change their (the student’s) attitudes than females (75.4% compared to 64.4%).
Partner, Friends and Change. Eight in ten respondents reported that their partner (in their most enduring relationship) had tried to change some aspect of their (the respondent’s) behavior. They also observed behavior change attempts in the relationships of their friends, as over three fourths (77%) had observed their friends trying to change their respective partners. Everywhere the respondents looked…parents, partner, friends- attempts at change were common.
Importance of Change. These undergraduates felt that it was important to change a partner’s behavior, particularly if the behavior was considered serious. For example, over 90 percent (93%) of the respondents reported that if their partner abused drugs they would try to change his or her behavior. On the other hand, only 39% reported that they would try to change their partner’s religious values.

Significant findings. Aside from the percentages just identified, analysis of the data revealed two significant findings.

a. Gender Role Attitudes. Females evidenced greater interest in changing their partner’s gender role attitudes (86% vs. 72%); the significant level of P<.02

b. Need for Change. Women who have been involved in a previous meaningful relationship were significantly (P < .004) more likely to report (72.9% versus 49% or men) that they wanted to change their current partner's attitudes.

Discussion
In regard to the finding that these respondents observed their parents and friends attempting to change their partner’s and friend’s behavior respectively, it is not surprising that these respondents also reported trying to change their partner’s behavior. Social learning theory emphasizes that interpersonal norms, values, and behaviors are learned (White and Klein, 2002). To have parental and peer models for behavior change is to create the context to learn that attempting to change one’s partner is normative. Shumway and Wampler (2002) also emphasized the link between positive behavior in a relationship and relationship satisfaction.

The finding that women were significantly more likely than men to be interested in changing the gender role attitudes of their partners reflects the preference women have for such egalitarian relationships. While traditional gender role relationships are entrenched (Laner and Ventrone, 2000) women sometimes assume they can change their partner if need be. Indeed, women who had been in a serious relationship revealed that they would not settle for less. Almost three-fourths reported that they wanted to change their partner’s current attitudes.

Implications
Implications of these data suggest that both women and men have been socialized that attempting to change the behavior of someone in a family, peer, or intimate relationship is normative. Women may be particularly attuned to attempt to change the behavior of a male partner to help ensure that she is treated as an equal. Males might be aware that, increasingly, women might expect an egalitarian relationship and to expect her to attempt to change him if he does not treat her as an equal.

Intercouple dating on a college campus

Four-hundred-eighty-six university students completed a confidential questionnaire designed to assess a multitude of aspects of their current and past dating relationships. The 24-item questionnaire was designed to highlight the prevalence and rate that individuals were involved in InterCouple relationships; these being interfaith, intercultural, and/or interracial romantic relationships. 66% of the participants reported being involved at some time in an InterCouple relationship. The overall results of the survey and the importance to college personnel and students are given.

The issue of interracial (and other types of cross-cultural) dating has been an increasing topic on college campuses. Rates of inter-dating are increasing, leading some institutions to examine their policies and services for their students. Recently, Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian University just dropped its controversial ban of interracial dating of its students. Russo (2001) reported that interracial couples occur most frequently in university towns, cities, and large states with diverse populations.

This paper will explore the issue of interracial, interfaith, and intercultural dating on college campuses. Further the results of a university-wide questionnaire exploring the dating practices of undergraduate students will be given.

College Student Dating

Meeting potential dates and mates occurs quite readily on college campuses (DeGenova & Rice, 2002). There has been a change on college campuses from that of segregation of the sexes to one of increased contacts in classrooms, residences, and social centers. Dating is also done more informally today than it once was. However, the college romance frequently leads to engagement and marriage. Moore (1999) suggests that “college dating should be taken seriously as potentially leading to marriage” (p. 120).

In a study done at East Carolina University, ¼ of the students surveyed reported having dated interracially (Knox, Zusman, Buffington, & Hemphill, 2000). Of the students answering the questionnaire, almost half of them expressed an openness to become involved in an inter-racial relationship. These authors suggest that one of the reasons for the increase in interracial dating is that there has been a greater minority enrollment in colleges and universities. This then engages people from different races into more frequent contact with each other leading to more approving behaviors among college students regarding the topic of interracial relationships.

Prevalence of InterCouple Relationships

For the purposes of this study, InterCouple relationships will be defined as those that have any or all of the following types of relationships: interfaith; intercultural; interracial.

Black-White interracial marriage has not been readily accepted by mainstream American society. Until recently, many states prohibited through legal means this type of relationship. On June 12, 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court, in the Loving v. Virginia decision, ruled that laws which prohibited interracial marriage were unconstitutional. At that time, there were 16 states which had these miscegenation laws (Davidson, 1992; Foeman & Nance, 1999).

The Black-White couple is usually the most visually identifiable, yet there are other types of interracial relationships (i.e., Hispanic-Asian; Asian-Caucasian; etc.). Before 1980 the U.S. Census Bureau did not distinguish between interracial relationships other than Black-White (Mok, 1999). In the last thirty years there has been an increasing trend toward interracial relationships. Orbe (1999) reported that 60% of Japanese who marry in the United States married someone from a different racial background. Asians and Hispanics tend to marry different races more than African Americans. As of 1998, there was more than 1 million Hispanic-non-Hispanic marriages in the U.S. (Crohn, 1998).

In 1988, approximately 218,00 Black-White couples had married each other (Davidson, 1992). In 1990, Japanese-Americans intermarried at 40.6% and Native Americans at 53.7% (Foeman & Nance, 1999). Winn and Priest (1993) stated that the statistics from the 1990 Census suggested that at least 900,000 interracial married couples existed in the U.S.

Couples of different faiths are also getting married in exceeding proportions. In 1995, approximately thirty-three million Americans lived in an interfaith household (Crohn, 1995). For various religious groups, these proportions are different. Crohn (1995) reported that before 1960, Jews intermarried at a rate less than 10%. As of 1995, Jews intermarried at a rate of over 52%.

This push for multiculturalism in couple relationships is occurring with people at various age ranges. Many younger individuals, especially adolescents, are beginning to engage in cross-cultural relationships. There is an increased prevalence of teenagers in America interracially dating (Peterson, 2000). In this USA Today survey, 57% of teenagers had dated someone outside their race, 30% had indicated that they would consider dating outside of their race, 43% of teens had not dated interracially, and 13% said they never would. This was quite a rise from a previous Gallup poll in 1980 where only 17% of teens said they had dated interracially (although Hispanics were not included in this original survey).

In a study done by Joyner and reported by Wilensky (2002), nearly 1/5 of all the adolescents surveyed had been in an interracial romantic relationship. With immigration and rising birth rates for minorities, many adolescents who would not get the opportunity to interact with people from other races and ethnicities are coming into contact with them at school, work, and other locations.

Relationship Formation

Young adulthood is a time where individuals try to find out who they are, what they want to do in life, and begin to find a partner to do these things with. One of the first developmental theorists, Erik Erikson, discussed this period as intimacy versus isolation (Burger, 2000). During this timeframe, beginning just as the teen years are ending, the development of intimate relationships is key. One of the tasks of young adults is to seek out and find someone who they can feel close to and learn how to be intimate and emotional in an adult-to-adult relationship. By being intimate, both individuals are allowed to grow, emotionally and psychologically. As Burger (2000) states, “Although the development of intimacy within these special relationships typically results in marriage or a romantic commitment to one person, this need not always be the case” (p. 120). If a young adult does not find relationships in which to be intimate with someone else, they will then potentially develop feelings of isolation. The isolated person is characterized by having many superficial relationships and may avoid emotional commitment.

There are many theories of why individuals choose a partner. These theories allow us to understand the process of mate selection and view it in a maturational perspective. One such theory is the filter theory. In this process, mates are cognitively put through a series of steps (filters) which at any time can stop the process. Murstein (1986) suggested that perhaps the first filter is the amount of match on external characteristics (i.e., appearance, manners). If the person was not filtered out, the next step is to check on how closely the two people’s beliefs and attitudes are (i.e., religion, sex). The last filter suggested is that of role fit; how much does the other person fit with your needs. Filter theories have some substantiation, yet, it is thought that all the filters occur simultaneously, instead of in steps. These filters are also socially created as to how much fit or match people have to us. With the increased globalization through travel, media, and the internet, people are coming into contact with a wider array of cultures, races, and faiths.

A second theory of why and how people form intimate relationships is that of exchange theory. In this process each person brings unique attributes to the relationship. We then try to find someone where we have the best exchange of assets. It is thought that, in general, women exchange attractiveness for perceived stability in men. Gaines, Rios, Granrose, and Bledsoe (1999) found that in interracial relationships, the individuals in these relationships exchanged affections and respect at significant levels. Pope (1986) discussed the exchange theory in interracial relationships and concluded that the exchange hypothesis that Black men exchange their higher economic or professional status to White women for their higher caste status was unsubstantiated. This idea that Blacks marry Whites for status, hypergamy, has also been refuted by Foeman and Nance (1999) who stated that, “These factors indicate that other variables are more important than simple social-economic exchange, and that greater equity rather than disparity increases the likelihood of interracial coupling” (p. 543).

The issue of couples from different backgrounds coming together is gaining newfound popularity in the literature. The current study is an attempt to attain the prevalence of InterCouple relationships on an urban college campus. Various aspects of these relationships are explored and some general conclusions are made.

Method
A questionnaire was developed to assess the frequency, types, satisfaction, and other various components of dating, particularly InterCouple dating. This 24-item questionnaire involved several different types of questions including demographics, Likert-type items; and preference questions. The questionnaire was given to 486 undergraduate students at Nova Southeastern University. This University is located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida and is a very multicultural university. It is also quite untraditional, as it has day students (traditional college students) and career students (older adults).

Participant Demographics

Out of the 486 students who filled out the questionnaire, 118 were males (24%) and 368 were females (76%). The mean age was 22.33 with a standard deviation of 7.36. The range was 17-62 while the mode was 19. Their year in school was 150 freshmen (31%), 125 sophomores (26%), 124 juniors (26%), and 87 seniors (18%).

45.9% of the participants were Caucasian, 20% were Hispanic; 18.1% were African-American, while the other 14% were of various ethnic backgrounds (predominantly Asian and Indian). In terms of religion, 31.9% of the participants were Catholic, 22% Christian, 8% Jewish, and a variety of other religions filled out the remaining 38%.

Results
171 of the participants (35.2%) were not currently in a relationship; 32.3% were in an intracouple relationship; 19.8% in an intercultural relationship; 12.1% in an interfaith relationship and 12.1% in an interracial relationship. There was some overlap of people being in more than one type of relationship. The mean length of months in a relationship was 24.9. For those students 25 and under, their mean length of relationship was 20.3. The number of past and current romantic relationships per person was an average of 3.1. The participants averaged 1.32 InterCouple relationships per person.

As to which types of InterCouple relationships they engaged in, the breakdown was as follows: 41 interracial; 68 interfaith;88 intercultural; 12 interracial /interfaith; 80 interracial/interfaith/intercultural; 32 interracial/intercultural; and 54 interfaith/intercultural. Of the sample, 191 individuals (39.3) reported that their parents had or are in an InterCouple relationship. There was a mean of 2.06 of their friends who were in InterCouple relationships.

The participants were also asked how they though their parents would feel if they were involved in an InterCouple relationship. They were given a 5-choice scale including Very upset, somewhat upset, neutral, somewhat happy, and very happy. Their scores averaged between somewhat upset and neutral. They were also asked the likelihood that they would marry into any of these three types of relationships. They averaged between somewhat likely and don’t know. This shows a move toward individuality that overall they think their family would be somewhat upset yet still believe that they would be somewhat likely to marry into a different culture, race, or faith.

Discussion
Over half of the sample reported that they are in or had been in some form of an InterCouple relationship. This seems to be the trend for many of today’s institutes of higher learning. Nova Southeastern University is a very diverse campus. Other universities are moving to multiculturalism and are finding that students on their campus are engaging in cross-cultural relationships.

Many universities have student centers which help aid the life of students on the campus. These centers can utilize this information to help develop workshops and trainings for faculty, staff, and students. The more that individuals are educated about this growing type of couple, the more prepared all will be in dealing with some of the unique issues that these couples deal with.

Different universities will have different percentages of their students engaging in InterCouple relationships, depending on location, religiosity, and other factors. However, these results seem to fit the trend toward more diverse and unique relationships occurring in the college-aged student.

The Joy of No Sex By: Wasley, Paula, Chronicle of Higher Education

Justin F. Murray and Sarah M. Kinsella can barely keep their hands off each other. On a recent sunny afternoon, the two newly minted Harvard University graduates greet with a lingering embrace. They share a lemonade. She nuzzles his arm, rubs his back, and boasts about his dance moves. He massages her shoulders and coos, “Look how cute she is!”

One thing these lovebirds won’t do, however, is go to bed until they’re wed. Last year the pair founded a Harvard student group called True Love Revolution, which promotes sexual abstinence. While other abstinence advocates have used the threat of fire and brimstone to discourage co-educational hanky-panky, these “true love” revolutionaries cast chastity in secular terms, as a practical choice with physical and emotional rewards.

On a campus they describe as saturated with casual sex, Justin and Sarah have helped put abstinence on the map. As they prepare to take their commitment to chastity - and each other - off campus, they leave behind a handful of devotees of a countercultural movement that says abstinence is sexy.

True Love Revolution, or TLR, is hardly the only group pushing self-restraint among young adults. Religious organizations on college campuses have long advised students to harness their hormones. At Princeton University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, students have founded chapters of the secular Anscombe Society (named for Elizabeth Anscombe, a British Catholic philosopher) to advance moral and ethical reasons for keeping one’s clothes on. And there are high-school-focused groups, including the religiously affiliated Silver Ring Thing, a social club whose members wear silver rings to signify their pledge of chastity.

TLR’s approach is more practical. The group’s founders say abstinence is not only a foolproof means of avoiding sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies, but also the ticket to a better romantic life.

Both Sarah and Justin say that abstinence has strengthened their own bond, helping them savor the intimacies of kissing, holding hands, and long late-night talks. Their relationship has impressed some of their fellow students. “They say, ‘There might actually be something to this because you guys seem really happy and you’re not even having sex,’” says Ms. Kinsella.

‘Everything I Am’
The two arrived at abstinence by different paths. Ms. Kinsella, a practicing Catholic, came to Harvard knowing she wanted to save sex for marriage. Her conviction grew after more than one suitor broke up with her because she wouldn’t sleep with him. “I felt like I had been objectified,” she says, “that this guy is not interested in me for everything I am.”

Mr. Murray, who is also Catholic, was once “vaguely committed” to abstinence. During his freshman year, he observed his classmates’ relationships. “I saw a lot of people looking for sex on a Friday night as a stress relief from a difficult week,” he says. “I started asking, Is that really what sex is all about?”

Although Mr. Murray says he had sex in previous relationships, he had recommitted himself to chastity by the time he and Ms. Kinsella began dating, a year and a half ago. The two agreed that they would not even sleep in the same room with each other, a relationship rule they have broken only a few times, such as when they shared a hotel room during a ski trip to New Hampshire, to save money.

Last summer, as they strolled along the Charles River, they decided to start a club that might attract other students like them. They obtained university sponsorship and established True Love Revolution in November.

True Love Revolution now has more than 150 members, according to its Facebook page, and an equal following of men and women. Ms. Kinsella and Mr. Murray spend several hours a week answering e-mail messages from the curious, including students from other college campuses.

True Love Revolution has become part activist group, part support network. It challenges a campus culture that, its founders say, promotes sex through university-sponsored how-to seminars on female orgasm. The group has advertised the benefits of abstinence through flyers and ice-cream socials. In April they held an open dinner discussion called “Living in a Hookup Culture,” which attracted supporters and critics alike. The founders hope their successors will bring speakers to the campus, and perhaps approach the university’s health center about incorporating information on abstinence into its sex-education programs.

When she and Mr. Murray founded the group, says Ms. Kinsella, their friends called them brave. Still, she was not prepared for the strong reactions TLR has generated. “People take this more personally than just a discussion of ideas,” she says.

True Love Revolution has attracted members of various religions, as well as agnostic students. The group has avoided taking stances on same-sex unions or abortion. Many of its members are virgins; some who are not have recommitted to abstinence. The group even has couples who have managed to “turn things around” midrelationship, says Ms. Kinsella.

“The reason to save sex for marriage is not because sex is bad, but because it’s so great that you want to share it with someone who means something extremely special,” says Mr. Murray. “Part of the fun is the anticipation of how important it’s going to be.”

Stirring Controversy
The organization caused some controversy at Harvard. On Valentine’s Day, for instance, the group mailed chocolate hearts to all freshman women, along with cards that said, “Why Wait? Because You’re Worth It.” That raised the ire of some campus feminists who said the organization was promoting a patriarchal view of female sexuality. The Harvard Crimson published a few editorials mocking the group. And Mr. Murray has friends who enjoy taunting him with explicit details of their sex lives.

But most of their fellow students have been understanding, the couple says. “I have friends who say, I like the idea but I could never do that,” says Ms. Kinsella.

Plenty of college students are abstaining from sex. A 2006 survey by the American College Health Association found that 29 percent of college students reported not having had sex in the past school year. The same study showed that students often overestimate the extent of their peers’ sexual activities.

“People tend to perceive that other people are more sexually active and wilder than they themselves are,” says Kathleen A. Bogle, an assistant professor of sociology and criminal justice at La Salle University and author of a forthcoming book, Hooking Up: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus (New York University Press, 2008). “When you interview people who are virgins, they think they are the only ones. But it’s not anywhere as rare as they think it is.”

Abstinence groups like True Love Revolution, she says, are a reaction to a campus hookup culture.

Leo J. Keliher, a freshman at Harvard, credits True Love Revolution with keeping him on the straight and narrow during the tempting first weeks of his freshman year, when opportunities to hook up were all around him. He says the group appealed to him because in high school he experienced some unsatisfying romantic relationships that had more to do with physical attraction than mutual respect.

During freshman orientation, he passed out the group’s list of “Top 10 Reasons to Wait.” “It helped put out a public image right away that this is what I want to be known for,” he says.

Next fall Mr. Keliher and Janie M. Fredell, a sophomore, will take over as co-presidents of the organization. Ms. Fredell is from Colorado Springs, where she says many teenagers proudly identified themselves as virgins. At Harvard, she says, abstinence carries the stigma of prudery. She and Mr. Keliher hope to give abstinence an image makeover by organizing dances and other social events for the chaste.

Katharina Cieplak-von Baldegg, a recent Harvard graduate and co-founder of the university’s much-hyped sex magazine, H Bomb, first encountered True Love Revolution when she was handed a hot-pink flyer that said “Sex. Why Wait?” Reading further, she was surprised to see a list of reasons why she should.

“I thought it was kind of funny that someone would take so much time out of their day to try to stop other people from having sex,” she says. But she has been impressed by what she describes as the group’s open-mindedness. “They just want to have a group and a place where people can feel that they’re not alone in their opinions,” she says, “like any other student group.”

She finds it strange that True Love Revolution is often viewed in opposition to H Bomb, since both, she says, formed to start conversations about sexuality. “The two groups might be reflected in each other more than you would expect,” she says.

Now that they have left Harvard behind, Mr. Murray and Ms. Kinsella say taking abstinence into the real world will be a cinch.

The couple plans to move to Washington soon. He will attend Georgetown University’s law school; she will enroll at Georgetown’s medical school. They say they will continue to set aside at least one evening a week for a proper date. In a few years, they hope to marry.

For now, though, they will live in separate apartments.

Matchmaker, Matchmaker, Find Me a Roommate

Blind dates can go awry, but a roommate mismatch can spoil a semester. Nasty habits. Bitter grudges. Epic stand-offs over square inches.

Luckily, most pairings don’t get that ugly, whether campuses make them randomly or by running survey responses through a computer. These days many students even control their own fates: More and more colleges let them post profiles, online-dating style, and pick one another.

Yet a handful of institutions insist on hand-matching freshmen, one by one. The goal is for roommates, even if they don’t become best friends forever, to at least get along, says Carolyn S. Bigler, assistant director of housing at the University of Richmond and a hand-matcher. She hopes that students come away from their first anxious chat thinking, “Well, maybe this is going to be OK.”

Tiffannie Williams did. The freshman from Florida hit it off last month with the roommate Richmond had chosen for her: Faith Lewandowski, a Long Islander. Both like to swim and mock their mothers’ devotion to Amway. After moving in, they went to Wal-Mart to stock up on snacks, each picking out Fruit Gushers and white cheddar Cheez-Its.

“Everything is kind of compatible,” says Ms. Lewandowski.

Richmond used to rely on Scantron forms to match roommates. In 2002, Ms. Bigler added an extra page — an open-ended question that asked, basically, What are you looking for? — to the housing application. Soon after, she eliminated the fill-in bubbles, asking each freshman to write out the whole form and mail it in. Students get more invested in the process, she says, when they know a human is behind it.

Housing officers on hand-matching campuses toil for weeks, steeped in human drama: passions, pet peeves, allergies. There’s no substitute, they say, for personal attention. Campus tour guides parrot that point, selling all but a satisfaction guarantee. And parents pay particular attention, lest their kid wind up with a wacko.

Richmond’s ever-evolving form now asks 15 questions about habits and preferences, like daily naps and reality TV. Its last page, still the open-ended question, tries to loosen up the admissions-weary: “This is not an essay! Be casual.” Some students draw pictures.

Ms. Bigler splits applicants by attitudes toward alcohol and overnight guests. Opposite answers to those questions are deal breakers, she says. From there she divides the stacks into smaller and smaller piles, perusing their back pages.

This year, among 750 freshmen, one woman described her passion for Japanese anime comics, says Michael J. Gaynor, a junior who helped with the process. The reference rang a bell, and he riffled through the piles — anime, anime — to find the other fan. At another point, he says, “I had a stack of about 10 people who put, ‘Has to like Obama.’”

The puzzle pieces change throughout the summer. Students withdraw, enroll from the wait list, and elect living-and-learning programs. But Richmond keeps trying to pair — not push — them together.

“We really want the room to be a place that students are comfortable to go back to,” says Ms. Bigler. “Then the other things that they’re faced with in coming to college they’re able to handle much better.”

Several small campuses boast a similar brand of social engineering. Davidson College bases its matches on personality tests and admissions files, considering nuances like the extent of a family’s travel abroad. Housing staffers at Wisconsin Lutheran College consult with admissions officers. At D’Youville College they involve upperclassmen who have led freshmen through an early orientation.

The personal touch still rules even at one much bigger place: Ohio State University. Each year Toni L. Greenslade-Smith, director of housing assignments there, spreads 7,000 roommate forms across the floor and sorts them by hand. Among students’ many other characteristics, she says, “we also look at whether they snore.”

Different colleges’ forms feature multiple-choice questions, fill-in-the-blanks, and 10-point, self-rated scales of modesty and humor. Housing officers regularly fine-tune their questionnaires, often with students’ input, but worry that asking too much will heighten expectations of a perfect match.

In the end, pairing happens by hunch and whim. Once or twice Ms. Bigler has matched two roommates whose forms seemed to have been filled out by their parents. “When you’ve read enough,” she says, “you know.” This year Mr. Gaynor weighed not only what students wrote, but also how. “I found the scribblers would work well together most of the time,” he says.

Staff members at Houghton College, a small, Christian institution, studied three years’ worth of forms and outcomes, concluding that shared taste in music best predicted success for women. For men, it was “spiritual sensitivity.” Also: “People who listed themselves as artistic had roommate problems no matter where we put them,” says Dennis J. Stack, housing director at Houghton.

Everyone’s heard horror stories: the roommate who sliced off the top of her finger and saved it in a drawer, the young woman who chewed tobacco and kept several spittoons around the room.

Catastrophe is clear; gauging success is trickier. Some colleges track room transfers — Richmond’s rate hovers around 1 percent — but figures don’t always account for dropouts, circumstantial splits, and roommates who coexist in steely silence.

Staying power, though — that’s something. By tradition, Richmond’s women’s college serves a steak dinner to roommates who live together till they graduate. Last year 50 women joined in Newlywed Game activities at the wine-and-sundress affair.

Among them were Christa Queen-Sutherland and Katie Donovan, who shared a room except during Ms. Donovan’s semester in Argentina. They both recall a smooth transition to college and a happy four years.

They also remember filling out their housing forms, hoping to be neat and pretending (for their parents) that they didn’t drink. “We both,” says Ms. Queen-Sutherland, “kind of tweaked our applications from the total truth.”

How to love yourself

Why is it so difficult for many people to find a way to love each other? In the birth every baby has a sort of dear barrel and has expected that this barrel is filled chock-full with unreserved love of the parents.

Only very much few people find out this love without expectation in the childhood. The foundation-stone is mostly laid for selfdoubt in the infancy: “As well as he looks, he becomes certainly sometimes a successful lawyer”, or “As well as she smiles, she could become an actress”, not only only these expectations prevent the development of selflove. Children come sometime to the point in which they must decide whether they should make her parents happily or unfold her own character. This is an unaware process and is not decided with the mind.

The expectations of the parents with the wishes and needs of the children often do not coincide. Who gives way now, however, will not will learn to love each other, but learns to make it the other right. The knowledge that it is not possible to develop freely but that certain expectations of us are put whom we cannot fulfil or would want hits hard and this situation causes the feeling in us that we may not love each other ourselves.

We have maybe become a bank clerk, but artist just not, as our parents wanted this. Because we simply did not like ballet because we have chosen a life form which our parents have not wished for us.

It is difficult to love each other with this past, but it goes for many in such a way. And we can learn to love each other. We can recognise that we as well as we are are exactly right, all the same what we do.

Score, for example what you like particularly in your character, find time for it.

Ask your people what those like particularly in you. Look in the reflexion and say to yourselves “I love and respect myself, just as I am”. This requires patience and is no light however very actual practise. And learn to accept compliments. Simply say: “thanks” and take pleasure in the nice words.

Understand that in you nothing is wrong that you are charming, as well as you are. Everybody has small quirks, but there are always people in our life who love us with exactly these quirks.

Demographic, Biological, Psychological, and Social Dating Study

This study applied a biopsychosocial approach to examine the predictors of the initiation of sexual intercourse during adolescence. The sample included 157 boys and 268 girls, of whom 85.4% reported having had sexual intercourse by age 21 to 22. Participants were surveyed at 3 time points; once when they were 13 to 14 years old, again at ages 16 to 17 years, and again 6 years later. Proportional hazards regression was used to examine the relation of demographic, biological, psychological, and social predictors to the timing of first intercourse. In the biopsychosocial model, different factors significantly predicted timing of first intercourse for girls and boys. For girls, always-married parents and less dating alone predicted later timing of first intercourse. Earlier timing of first intercourse for boys was related to associating with peers with lower achievement orientation and greater importance of popularity.

Adolescence is a key time to study the development of sexuality and sexual behavior patterns because this is when most individuals first experience sexual intercourse. In 1992, for example, over 60% of never-married youth, ages 14 to 21, reported having had sexual intercourse (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1995). However, despite being a normative event during adolescence, the exact timing of first intercourse raises a variety of issues for individuals. For example, girls who have first intercourse earlier than average (between the ages of 10 and 14) tend to have more sex partners, a higher likelihood of having sex with high-risk men (e.g., HIV positive), and a greater risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs; Greenberg, Magder, & Aral, 1992). In contrast, girls who have first intercourse later than average tend to have lower self-esteem and poorer social relationships than their peers (Crockett, Bingham, Chopak, & Vicary, 1996). Thus, the timing of first sexual intercourse warrants particular attention when examining sexual development.

Sexual behavior, like any other behavior, is a result of multiple domains of influence, including biological, psychological, and social influences. The idea that behavior is a result of multiple domains of influence has been discussed by many scholars who examine how these domains relate to one another and to individual behaviors (Ford & Lerner, 1992; Magnusson, 1988; Petersen, 1987). Individuals exist in a social context with which they interact in a reciprocal process, both influencing and being influenced by social factors. Social processes often interact with biological and psychological factors to produce subsequent behavior of individuals (see review by Susman, 1997). Thus, incorporating biological, social, and psychological domains in a single model of development should provide a more comprehensive explanation of a particular behavior.

In her influential discussion of sexuality and adolescence, Chilman (1983) argued that the development of sexual behavior needs to be understood from a holistic perspective including physical, psychological, and social influences. Although many factors are being studied in current research on adolescent sexuality (e.g., demographic factors, Heaton & Jacobson, 1994; biological factors, Rowe, Rodgers, & Meseck-Bushey, 1989; and social factors, DiBlasio & Benda, 1992), few studies are comprehensive and include factors from each domain of influence. Researchers of sexual behavior have often focused on one or two domains of influence at one time (e.g., demographic factors, Miller & Bingham, 1989; or biological and social factors, Smith, 1989). The few studies using comprehensive, multidimensional models (Bingham, Miller, & Adams, 1990; Crockett et al., 1996) have demonstrated the importance of incorporating each domain of influence into models predicting sexual behavior. Thus, in this article we use a biopsychosocial perspective to examine the timing of first sexual intercourse during adolescence, in addition to biosocial and biopsychological models.

The models are tested using proportional hazards regression. This method addresses two limitations that exist for much of the body of research on timing of first intercourse. With only a few exceptions (Capaldi, Crosby, & Stoolmiller, 1996; Costa, Jessor, Donovan, & Fortenberry, 1995; Heaton & Jacobson, 1994; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997), most researchers examining the timing of adolescents’ sexual behavior have used undifferentiated categories based on the relative timing of first intercourse as the dependent variable, that is, early versus late (e.g., Crockett et al., 1996; Tubman, Windle, & Windle, 1996). This approach has two major problems: (a) It artificially reduces the variance available to be explained, and (b) it makes it difficult to include those adolescents who are sexually inexperienced. Proportional hazards regression allows for both the use of the actual age of first intercourse as the dependent variable and the inclusion of persons who have not yet experienced intercourse (Allison, 1984). To allow readers to compare the two approaches, both are presented in this article; however, the primary focus is on the results of the proportional hazards regression. The following discussion highlights important predictors of sexual behavior from within the biological, psychological, and social domains.

PREDICTORS OF FIRST SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
Biological Influences

Biological maturation, or pubertal change, initiates the adolescent phase of life (Petersen, 1987). Pubertal development begins with the production of hormones that have a direct influence on sexual motivation by increasing libido (Smith, 1989; Udry & Billy, 1987) and also an indirect influence on sexual involvement by initiating change in physical appearance through the development of secondary sex characteristics (Brooks-Gunn & Graber, 1994; Smith 1989). Given both of these types of influence, one would expect individuals who reach puberty at younger ages to also participate in sexual behavior (including intercourse) at younger ages.

The influence of pubertal changes on sexual behavior have been found to vary by gender, with pubertal development emerging as a better predictor of sexual behavior for boys than girls (Crockett et al., 1996; Udry & Billy, 1987). Social factors, such as parental control and gender role expectations, could explain these differences. For example, although adult physical appearance, such as breast or beard growth, may indicate to potential partners that an individual is sexually mature despite his or her chronological age, greater social constraints on female sexual behavior may decrease the predictive power of such biological development for girls (Petersen, 1987). Social mores regarding the appropriate age to participate in sexual activity and an individual’s value system may limit sexual behavior regardless of the person’s physical maturation. Thus, pubertal timing precedes psychological and social factors in the models. When the social measures are significant predictors of first intercourse, the moderation of the relation between pubertal timing and first intercourse by social factors is also considered.

Psychological Influences

Psychological factors have been included in models predicting the timing of first intercourse via a variety of ways, including attitudes, values, and emotional adjustment (Miller, Norton, Fan, & Christopherson, 1998; Tubman et al., 1996). Stack (1994) implied that premarital sexual behavior may be used as an aid when developing friendships, particularly when adolescents move repeatedly, as sex may serve as a way to combat loneliness. Evidence also suggests that both girls and boys have sex even when they do not want to in response to peer pressure or desires to be popular (Erickson & Rapkin, 1991; Muehlenhard & Cook, 1988). Thus, values placed on popularity appear to encourage decisions to participate in sexual behavior. If adolescents hold these values and perceive sexual behavior as an important way to become popular, they may participate in sexual activity earlier than adolescents who hold alternative values.

Emotional adjustment may also influence whether or not an individual participates in sexual activity. For example, higher levels of depression have been found to predict earlier initiation of sexual intercourse (Tubman et al., 1996). Sexual activity may serve as a coping mechanism, or a way for adolescents to temporarily “feel better” about themselves or situations. Thus, the importance of popularity to the adolescent and depressed mood are included as psychological factors in the models.

Social Influences

Social factors have also been emphasized in studies of the timing of first intercourse. Several researchers (Petersen, 1987; Smith, 1989; Udry, 1990) have suggested that sexual behavior may be influenced more by social constraints than biological influences. A person may experience an increase in libido, but not act on it due to established norms of sexual behavior. Of particular interest are the social realms of family and peers.

The nature of family processes during adolescence may increase or decrease an adolescent’s likelihood of participating in sexual activity. Parental control and regulation has been quite consistently related to adolescent sexual behavior (see review by Miller, 1998). Higher levels of parental supervision and control have been associated with a later age of first intercourse for both boys and girls (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Ku, Sonenstein, & Pleck, 1993). In addition to adolescents’ perceptions of overall parental control in their lives, curfews provide a more specific avenue by which parents may attempt to better supervise their adolescent’s dating behavior. Although having a curfew in and of itself will not prevent sexual activity, it may limit the opportunity adolescents have for sexual activity.

Peers are another source of information and influence particularly regarding sexual behavior. Zelnik (1983) found that most 15- to 17-year-old sexually experienced girls (68.7%) had their first intercourse in an engaged or steady relationship. As expected, having a boyfriend or girlfriend is a significant predictor of adolescent sexual activity (Scott-Jones & White, 1990). Indeed, persons who date at an earlier age also have steady relationships at an earlier age and report being more sexually active during their late teen years (Thornton, 1990). With these findings in mind, the frequency with which an adolescent is dating alone in 7th grade (unchaperoned and without other peers) may also be related to an earlier age of first intercourse.

Peer groups also furnish information about sexual attitudes, act as role models of sexual behavior, and provide opportunities for adolescents to participate in sexual activity (Smith, 1989). Peers have been shown to be more influential than parents in predicting earlier initiation of sexual intercourse (Costa et al., 1995; Wyatt, 1989). School is a context in which adolescents develop and maintain friendships and peer groups. When students are tracked at a certain academic level, they spend a great deal of time in classes with the same students during a particular school day. Peer group associations may develop during classes as a result of this.

Fuligni, Eccles, and Barber (1995), examining the data used in this article, reported that ability groupings were significantly related to an individual’s association with achievement-oriented peers. Persons in higher ability tracks reported having higher achievement-oriented peers. This was true despite the fact that neither the individual’s ability level alone nor the interaction between ability and ability tracks had a significant effect on peer achievement orientation. In other words, school track, independent of one’s ability, was strongly associated with the characteristics of one’s peers, particularly achievement orientation, which, in turn, has been shown to influence adolescent sexual behavior (Grunbaum & Basen-Engquist, 1993; Scott-Jones & White, 1990). Therefore, school educational track reflects the extent to which one affiliates with achievement-oriented peers. The social measures in the models include parental control, having a weekend curfew, dating alone (vs. group dating), and peer achievement.

Demographic Variables

Additionally, we are interested in the predictive power of a biopsychosocial model above and beyond the contribution of those demographic factors shown to predict the onset of adolescent sexual behavior (DiBlasio & Benda, 1992). Therefore, demographic factors (married parents and maternal education) were included in all models. Adolescents growing up in intact families (Newcomer & Udry, 1987) and having highly educated mothers (Heaton & Jacobson, 1994) have reported later timing of first sexual activity. Finally, in recognition of gender differences and influences on behavior, such as the association between pubertal development and timing of first intercourse, each model is examined separately by gender.

Goals of this study. This study has two goals. First, differences in biological, psychological, and social factors are examined by groups based on the timing of first intercourse. Second, the timing of first sexual intercourse is examined by applying a variety of models. Specifically, four different models were tested: biological, biopsychological, biosocial, and biopsychosocial. It was expected that the full biopsychosocial model would significantly predict the timing of first intercourse above and beyond the prediction of the other three models.

METHOD
Sample

The data used in this study come from Waves 4, 5, and 7 of the Michigan Study of Adolescent Life Transitions (MSALT; for full sample details, see Eccles et al., 1989). MSALT began in 1983 when the respondents were in 6th grade in 10 school districts in southeastern Michigan. Wave 4 data were collected in 1985 when the respondents were in Grade 7, ages 13 to 14. Wave 5 data were collected in 1988 when the respondents were approximately 16 and 17 years old. Wave 7 data were collected in 1992 and 1993 when the respondents were about 21 and 22 years old.

Data from Waves 4 and 5 were used to examine the proximal correlates of first sexual intercourse. In this sample, one person (less than 1% of the sample) reported having sexual intercourse prior to Wave 4 and approximately 11.5% of the respondents reported having first intercourse prior to Wave 5. Retrospective reports from Wave 7 data were used to estimate the age at which first sexual intercourse occurred. Requiring that respondents participated in Waves 4, 5, and 7 yielded a subsample of 170 boys and 299 girls. The sample is primarily middle or working class, from small urban or suburban communities, and White (over 90%). Race has been found to be a significant correlate of the timing of first intercourse (The Alan Guttmacher Institute [AGI], 1994); however, the unequal distribution of the respondents by race does not allow comparisons by race to be made.[1] Thus, only White respondents were included in the analyses. This restriction limited the sample to 157 boys and 268 girls. Of this subsample, 85.4% reported having had voluntary sexual intercourse at Wave 7.

Analyses of Sample Bias

Two issues are likely to have contributed to a biased study sample: (a) Respondents were required to have data for each of the measures for three waves of data collection, and (b) sample bias often occurs in longitudinal samples. Specifically, there was a concern that those persons included in this study may have differed from the excluded (nonstudy) respondents on factors associated with this study. A base sample was created to determine whether there was a difference between the participants who had responded to the surveys at Waves 4, 5, and 7 (study sample) and those persons who reported about pubertal timing at Wave 5 but were missing data from Waves 4, 7, or both. Wave 5 was chosen as the base sample because the funding for MSALT was restricted during this wave of data collection, making it impossible to collect data for all original school districts. Thus, some earlier respondents were excluded without any choice on their part. The Wave 5 base sample included 1,124 persons (628 girls and 496 boys), of which 37.8% (425) were in the study sample. From the nonstudy portion of the base sample, 178 persons (92 girls and 86 boys) were missing at Wave 4. An additional 467 (230 girls and 237 boys) were missing data at Wave 7. Ten of the respondents were excluded from the study sample, as they did not report the educational status of their mother and 44 were excluded due to the race variable. Specifically, 17 girls and 7 boys were not White and 20 respondents did not report their race.

The analyses were divided into two parts, depending on whether the variables examined were categorical or continuous. The measures included in the analyses reflect those used in the study. These measures are described in the “Measures” section. The categorical variables included gender, maternal education, and married parents. The continuous variables included pubertal timing (grade), importance of popularity, depressed mood, alone on a date, curfew on weekend, parental control, peer achievement, and age of first intercourse (if experienced).

In examining the categorical set of variables, the study sample was comprised of a higher percentage of girls, 63.1%, X2(1,N = 1, 124) = 14.32, p < .001 than the attrition sample (51.5% female). No significant differences were found in the distribution of college-educated mothers or married parents by sample membership. T tests were used to examine potential differences in the mean levels of continuous measures by sample. The study sample had significantly higher levels of depressed mood (M = 2.80), t = -2.46, p < .05, and peer achievement (M = 2.75), t = -5.96, p < .001, than the nonstudy sample (M = 2.66 and M = 2.37, respectively). The study sample also reported less dating alone (M = 1.66), t = 4.36, p < .001, than the nonstudy sample (M = 1.90). No differences between the groups were found for pubertal timing, parental control, importance of popularity, weekend curfew, or age of first intercourse.

In sum, 4 of the 10 variables of interest differed significantly between the attrition and the study samples. It appears that the study sample may have had advantages over the attrition sample that would delay their timing of intercourse: higher percentage of girls, more association with high-achieving peers, and less dating alone. Yet the study sample also reported higher levels of depressed mood, which has been associated with earlier initiation. However, despite the differences for these predictors, it is important to note that no mean differences were found for the critical variable of interest: the age of first intercourse.

Measures

The dependent variable was age of first voluntary sexual intercourse. This construct was measured by the question, "Have you ever voluntarily had sexual intercourse? If yes, how old were you the first time (in years)?" Mixed findings exist about using retrospective reports of the timing of first intercourse. Newcomer and Udry (1988) found that only 7% gave a false report of first intercourse when they were asked initially. Alexander, Somerfield, Ensminger, Johnson, and Kim (1993) found that 67% of their respondents were inconsistent in reports of first sexual intercourse. Both studies focused on junior high and early high school reports. Further MSALT data are not available to test the reliability of the dependent measure.

Two versions of the timing of first intercourse were used in the analyses. The first, Sex Group (a three-level categorical variable) was used for descriptive analyses: Earlier (intercourse before age 16), Later (intercourse at or after age 16), and Inexperienced. The second was designed for proportional hazards regression: If the person had had voluntary intercourse, then the variable value was the age at which first intercourse occurred; if the person was sexually inexperienced, then the variable was the respondent's age at the time he or she filled out the Wave 7 questionnaire. Of the persons who reported being sexually experienced at Wave 7 (n = 371), no difference was found in the age of first voluntary intercourse between boys (M = 16.27, SD = 1.96) and girls (M = 16.24, SD = 1.75), t(363) = -.15, p > .10.

The predictors, taken primarily from the Wave 4 data, represent four categories: demographic, biological, psychological, and social predictors. The two demographic predictors were parental marital status and maternal education. Parental marital status from Wave 7 was based on the question, “Are your parents currently married and living together?” (1 = yes, 0 = no). Of the 285 respondents stating “yes,” over 95% reported that this status was true for 15 years or longer. Thus, a value of 1 refers to currently married parents and 0 is other. Maternal education (Wave 5) was the educational level reported by the adolescent for his or her mother. The education measure was restructured into three levels: 1 (less than high school), 2 (high school graduate), and 3 (some college). Over 55% of the sample reported that their mothers had some college education at Wave 5. No difference emerged by gender: girls (M = 2.38, SD = .72); boys (M = 2.51, SD = .72), t(425) = -1.73, p < .10.

The biological predictor, measured at Wave 5, was a retrospective report of pubertal status. Boys responded to the question, “Kids your age grow at different rates, but usually everyone has a time when they grew faster than at other ages. Has this happened to you yet? If yes, what grade were you in when this happened?” and girls answered, “Have you had your first period yet? If yes, when did you get it?” The answers ranged from Grades 5 to 10, with a mean response value of 6.82 (n = 268) for girls and 7.64 (n = 157) for boys. Two of the girls had not experienced menarche by Wave 5 and were dropped from the analyses.

Given the retrospective nature of this measure, steps were taken to support its reliability. Respondents had reported on identical measures of pubertal timing in both Waves 5 (10th grade) and 6 (12th grade). Correlation analyses confirmed that a significant correlation between the two waves of data occurred for both boys (alpha =.72; r = .56; p < .001; n = 62) and girls (alpha = .57; r = .42; p < .001; n = 119). Furthermore, almost half of the respondents (48.6%) reported the same grade of pubertal development for both years, and an additional 32.0% were within 1 year when comparing the measures from Waves 5 and 6.

Two predictors were included as psychological measures. Alpha levels reported refer to the subsample of MSALT participants used in this study. The scale score for each respondent was the unit-weight mean value of all the items included in the scale. Each item was commonly answered on a 7-point Likert-type scale.

Importance of Popularity, Wave 4 (alpha =.72), included two items: “For me, being popular is …” and “How important is it to you to be popular with girls (boys)?”; 1 (not at all important) to 7 (very important).

Depressed Mood, Wave 4 (alpha = .75), was measured with three items: “How often do you lose your appetite or eat a lot when upset?” “How often do you feel unhappy, sad, or depressed?” and “How often do you feel lonely?”; 1 (never) to 5 (very often).

Four social context predictors were examined. Again, the respondent’s scale score was the mean value for the variables comprising each scale and each item was answered on a 4- or 7-point Likert-type scale.

Alone on a Date, Wave 4, was based on one question: “How often do you go out with a boy (girl) alone?”; 1 (never) to 4 (very often).

Curfew on Weekend, Wave 4, was also based on one question: “When you’re out with your friends on a weekend night do your parents set a time you have to be home?”; 1 (never) to 7 (always).

Parental Control, Wave 4 (alpha = .73), included seven items: “My parents want me to follow their directions even if I disagree with their reasons,” “My parents worry that I am up to something they won’t like,” “I have to ask my parents for permission to do most things,” “My parents get upset if I disagree with them when their friends are around,” “I do not know why I am supposed to do what my parents tell me to do,” “I have a lot of fights with my parents about their rules and decisions for me,” and “My parents treat me more like a little kid than like an adult”; 1 (never true) to 4 (always true).

Peer Achievement, Wave 5, was based on ninth-grade school records of enrollment in 4 levels of mathematics courses: 1 (low), 2 (regular), 3 (college prep), and 4 (honors track). (For further explanation of this measure, see Updegraff, Eccles, Barber, & O’Brien, 1996.)

RESULTS
Descriptive Analyses

All analyses were conducted using the SPSS statistical package. Prior to conducting the primary analyses, correlation matrices of the predictors and dependent variable (whether or not the person had had sex) by gender were analyzed. In examining the correlation matrix, particular attention was given to the correlation values between the various predictors. A high correlation value between the predictors increases the likelihood of multicollinearity. The correlation coefficients ranged from -.33 to .37, thus issues of multicollinearity were dismissed (Affifi & Clark, 1990).

An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine whether the mean level of the demographic, biological, psychological, and social predictors differed depending on if and when the persons reported first intercourse. The three-level variable, Sex Group (Inexperienced; Later, 16 or older; and Earlier, before age 16) was used in these analyses. If significant, follow-up Tukey tests were used to determine which of the Sex Groups differed on the various characteristics. The ANOVAs were analyzed separately by gender.

Table 1 summarizes the differences between the female sex groups in mean levels of the demographic, biological, psychological, and sociological predictors: multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), A = .75; F = 4.49, p < .001. Regarding the demographic variables, the inexperienced group reported a higher mean level of living with married parents than the earlier group. In other words, a greater proportion of the inexperienced group had married parents compared to their earlier timing peers. The later initiating and inexperienced groups also reported higher levels of maternal education than the earlier timing group. Female early initiators reported earlier menarche than the later initiating and inexperienced groups.

The earlier experienced group placed greater value on popularity than the inexperienced group. The level of depressed mood was found to be significantly higher for the early initiators than the later initiators. In reference to the social context variables, the early initiators reported higher frequencies of being alone on a date than the later initiators, who in turn reported more frequent dating alone than the sexually inexperienced group. The sexually inexperienced group reported more association with high-achieving peers than the early and late initiators. No significant contrasts for the girls were found for curfew or parental control.

The overall model was significant for boys: MANOVA, A =.76, F = 2.41, p < .01. Compared to the girls, fewer significant contrasts emerged for the boys (see Table 2). The model for growth spurt was significant, but the contrast between the early initiators and the inexperienced groups was only approaching significance, p <10. Regarding the importance of popularity, both sexually experienced groups reported greater importance than the sexually inexperienced group. The early initiators reported dating alone significantly more than the later initiators and the inexperienced group. Finally, the inexperienced group reported greater association with high-achieving peers than did the early initiators. No significant contrast emerged for parental marital status, maternal education, depressed mood, weekend curfew, or parental control for boys.

Analysis of Age at First Voluntary Intercourse

Event history analysis was utilized to examine the timing of intercourse and its association with the demographic, biological, psychological, and social predictors. Specifically, Cox’s (1972) proportional hazards regression, which allows the inclusion of categorical and continuous predictors, was used to address this issue.

A hazard rate, or the instantaneous risk that the event (first intercourse) will occur at a given moment if the event has not occurred before this time (Yamaguchi, 1991), is calculated in event history analysis. The results of proportional hazards regression are interpreted using risk ratios based on the parameter estimates. A risk ratio exceeding 1.0 means that as the unit value of the predictor increases, the hazard rate also increases, that is, earlier timing of the event. If the risk ratio is less than 1.0, then an increase in the predictor value would be related to later timing of the event, or a decrease in the hazard rate (SAS Institute, 1990). For example, if the importance of friends has a risk ratio of 1.75 regarding the timing of intercourse, for each unit of increase in the importance of friends, persons who have not yet experienced sexual intercourse would increase their hazard rate, or likelihood of having sex, by 75%.

Using proportional hazards regression, four models predicting the timing of first sexual intercourse were analyzed. All four models were examined separately for boys and girls. The first model included two demographic predictors (parental marital status and maternal education) and the biological predictor (pubertal timing). In comparing this model to the subsequent models, we determined if the inclusion of the biological, psychological, and social predictors resulted in a decrease in the effect of the demographic predictors on the timing of first intercourse and whether an increase in the prediction power of the model occurred. The latter was detected by calculating whether there was a significant increase in the chi-squared value of the expanded model.

The second model included psychological predictors (popularity and depressed mood), in addition to the demographic and biological predictors. The third model considered the effects of demographic, biological, and social predictors (e.g., curfew and dating) on timing of first intercourse. The final model included demographic, biological, psychological, and social predictors of first intercourse. All of these models are summarized in Table 3.

The first regression model included demographic and biological predictors and was significant only for girls. Having married parents, a more educated mother, and later pubertal timing delayed the girls’ first intercourse.

The second model included demographic, biological, and psychological predictors. The overall model was significant for boys and girls. Compared to the first model, a significant increase in the chi-squared value for this model emerged for the girls, x2(2,N = 268) = 6.5, p < .05, and the boys, X2(2,N = 157) = 8.49, p < .01. Married parents and pubertal timing remained significant predictors for the girls. More importance placed on popularity predicted earlier intercourse for both girls and boys. Later pubertal timing also predicted a delay in first intercourse for the boys.

The third model (biosocial) was significant for boys and girls. Compared to the first model, a significant increase in this model’s chi-squared value was found for girls X2(4,N = 268) = 25.50, p< .001, and was approaching significance for the boys, X2(4,N = 157) = 9.36, p < .10. In this model, having married parents remained a significant demographic predictor for the girls. Pubertal timing approached significance for the boys. Higher frequency of dating alone predicted earlier timing of intercourse for girls. For the boys, associating with higher achieving peers predicted later timing.

Social factors included in the model may be working in conjunction with biological factors to produce sexual behavior (Katchadourian, 1990). To test this idea, the moderating effects of social characteristics on the relation between pubertal development and the timing of first intercourse were tested using interaction terms in the regression. None of the social predictors were found to moderate the relation between pubertal timing and first intercourse.

The final model included demographic, biological, psychological, and social contextual factors. Compared to the biopsychological model, the biopsychosocial model resulted in a significant increase in the model’s chi-squared value for girls, X2(4,N = 268) = 23.54, p < .001, and approached significance for the boys, X2(4,N = 157) = 8.46, p < .10. For boys, a significant increase in the chi-squared value was found in comparing the biosocial and the biopsychosocial models, X2(2,N = 157) = 7.59, p < .05. No significant differences between the chi-squared values of the biosocial and biopsychosocial models emerged for girls. A comparison was also made between the biopsychosocial model and the initial biological model. Here, the model chi-squared value increased significantly for both boys, X2(7,N = 157) = 16.95, p < .01, and girls, X2(7,N = 268) = 30.04, p < .001.

In the biopsychosocial model, girls with always-married parents reported later timing of intercourse. Dating alone remained a significant predictor for the girls. For the boys, less importance placed on popularity with peers and having higher achieving peers continued to be significantly related to a delay of first intercourse.

DISCUSSION
This study has examined the association of demographic, biological, psychological, and social predictors with the timing of initiation of sexual intercourse. Varying patterns of predictors emerged for boys and girls across the different models. For example, although the biopsychosocial model of first intercourse was significant for both boys and girls, pubertal timing and dating alone were significant predictors for the girls, whereas for the boys, the importance of popularity and achievement level of peers were significant. This study also examined biological, biopsychological, and biosocial models. This discussion focuses on the varying impact of demographic, biological, psychological, and social predictors across models and offers possible explanations for these contrasts.

The demographic measures emerged as an important set of predictors for the girls. In the biological model, having married parents and more highly educated mothers were related to later first intercourse for girls. The effect of having married parents on adolescent female sexual behavior is similar to that found by Newcomer and Udry (1987), who also reported this effect only for girls. Having fewer than two parents has been associated with different levels of various family processes (Barber & Eccles, 1992). However, despite the inclusion of parental control in the later models, having married parents remained a significant predictor for the girls. It would appear that the relevant family processes (like communication or monitoring) that might moderate or mediate the relation between parental marital status and first intercourse are not represented in the selected predictors.

Regarding the other demographic predictor, having a highly educated mother also has been associated with a delay in adolescent sexual behavior (Heaton & Jacobson, 1994; Leigh Weddle, & Loewen, 1988). Mothers who have prioritized education for themselves could be particularly salient role models for daughters. This form of support could lead these daughters to prioritize education and delay intercourse. However, this predictor was no longer significant with the addition of the psychological and social factors.

Similar to previous studies (Flannery, Rowe, & Gully, 1993; Udry, 1979; Westney, Jenkins, & Benjamin, 1983), the biological predictor, pubertal timing, was influential for both boys and girls. Earlier research (Udry & Billy, 1987) has concluded that for girls but not boys, social controls play a more important role than biological factors in the initiation of sexual activity. In this study, however, the addition of social predictors (biosocial and biopsychosocial models) decreased the contribution of pubertal timing in predicting first coitus for both boys and girls. Analyses were conducted to examine the possible moderating effects of the social factors on the relation between pubertal timing and first intercourse. No significant moderating effects were found. However, this does not preclude the possibility that together the social predictors might buffer the effect of pubertal timing on first intercourse. Alternately, it is also possible that this study is only partially addressing influential social factors. Future studies could examine social predictors other than those included in this article. The fact that pubertal timing was measured differently by gender might also be affecting the results. Given the data limitations, potential differences could not be tested.

The psychological predictors emerged as a strong set of predictors. Compared to the biological model, the biopsychological model produced a significant increase in the model’s chi-square value for boys and girls. As predicted, placing greater importance on popularity was related to earlier timing. Sexual behavior was hypothesized to serve as a potential tool to increase popularity. However, in the biopsychosocial model, although the importance of popularity was approaching significance as a predictor of earlier intercourse for the boys, it was no longer significant for the girls. This difference in the significance of popularity as a predictor by gender could be due to the social perceptions of sex that vary by gender. One female adolescent in Orenstein’s book, School Girls (1994), stated, “If a girl does it with a guy just because she thinks he’s cute, she’s a ho’, but if men do it with young women ’cause they think the girl is cute, then they’re cool” (p. 220). In other words, compared to girls, social stigmas allow sex to serve boys as a more viable and effective method by which to gain social status.

Social predictors appeared to be especially relevant for girls, whose models resulted in a significant increase in the chi-squared value between the biological and the biosocial model. Dating alone predicted earlier first intercourse for girls; however, this measure only approached significance for the boys. This lack of a significant effect for boys was possibly due to the smaller sample size for the boys, resulting in a model with less power.

With potentially lower statistical power, it is quite striking that only boys associating with high achieving peers reported a delay in intercourse and that this predictor remained significant even after the psychological predictors were added to the biosocial model to form the biopsychosocial model. Three post hoc explanations may aid in clarifying this finding. First, the respondents’ associations with high-achieving peers are likely to reflect their values of achievement. Placing a higher value on education has been shown to deter timing of first intercourse (Miller & Sneesby, 1988; Moore, Peterson, & Furstenburg, 1985; Scott-Jones & White, 1990). Second, being in a group of higher achieving peers may buffer one from the problems of declining self-esteem associated with school transition (Lord, Eccles, & McCarthy, 1994). Low levels of self-esteem, in turn, have been associated with earlier timing of first intercourse (Miller & Fox, 1987). Focusing on academic achievement may serve as a distraction from the many changes associated with a school transition, thus decreasing the risk of a decline in self-esteem and delaying first intercourse. Third, association with achievement-oriented peers could reinforce a focus on educational goals rather than hetero-social goals. This could lead students with higher achieving peers to initiate intercourse later than their peers with less achievement-oriented classmates. All three are likely to occur and may actually serve to reinforce one another.

The lack of significance of the relation between peer achievement and timing of first intercourse for girls may be related to gender differences reported in previous studies. Specifically, girls are found to develop larger social networks than those formed by boys (Coates, 1987; Pollard, 1993). Perhaps girls are more likely than boys to have peers and other support providers beyond the students found in their academic circle determined via tracking. Such an extended network would decrease the importance of the peer group acquired through school tracking programs.

Despite the contributions of this study, four precautions must be brought to the readers’ attention. First, the data used in this article were not collected with the express purpose of predicting sexual experience, thus the measures were not exclusively tailored for this article. Although we argue for the inclusion of certain measures in our model, this does not mean that these measures are optimal.

The second issue is related to the timing of first intercourse measure. Retrospective reports of age of first intercourse were used. We relied on young adults’ reports of first intercourse, assuming that their memories were accurate and truthful. Also, some respondents were already sexually experienced prior to age 13 (1% of girls and 4% of boys).[2] Therefore, some persons had sex prior to when the predictors were measured. Future studies should attempt to describe biological, psychological, and social characteristics of individuals and their sexual behavior prospectively, and then follow these individuals across the adolescent and young adult years. By doing this, we could begin to describe the development of sexual behavior across time and examine potential variability of influences across the life span. Predictors may differ in influence across adolescence, as individuals develop into young adults. Additionally, asking persons directly about their reasons for participating in sexual activity may shed some light on potential sources of influence.

Third, the study sample represented less than 40% of the overall MSALT sample. The attrition sample and the study sample differed considerably. Four of the nine predictors used in the models varied significantly between the samples. Two of these four measures, association with high-achieving peers and dating alone, were significant predictors of first intercourse. On this count, great care must be applied to the generalizability of these findings. Although the study sample appears to have had an edge in delaying intercourse compared to the larger attrition sample, no mean differences were found for the age of first intercourse when comparing the study sample to the attrition sample. Limiting the sample to White adolescents also reduces the generalizability of the study. The final precaution relates to the fact that the early initiating group may include individuals who experienced early coercive sexual situations. According to the AGI (1994), 74% of women who had sex before the age of 14 did so due to coercion. In addition, in the National Health and Social Life Survey (Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994), about 25% of the female respondents reported they had not wanted their first sexual experience to occur. Despite our focus on “voluntary sexual intercourse,” some participants in this study may have had coercive experiences their first time. The early initiators are the most likely to have had a sexually coercive experience prior to their first voluntary intercourse (Miller, Monson, & Norton, 1995). In this sample, 4.4% of the girls and 5.3% of the boys reported first intercourse before age 14.

In spite of these precautions, this study provides a great deal of information regarding the predictors of timing of first intercourse. Sexual behavior can be influenced by biological, social, and psychological factors, depending on the model of focus. This multidimensional set of factors has implications for program and policy intervention, particularly given that the predictors are primarily from data collected when the respondents were in the seventh grade. The significance of these early predictors encourages creating developmentally appropriate prevention programs that target early adolescents (Bogenschneider, 1996). Indeed, the majority of adolescent sexuality programs available at the national level target early adolescents (Meschke, Bartholomae, & Zentall, 2000).

Based on the significant predictors that emerged from this study, potential programs to delay the timing of first intercourse need not be overtly associated with sexual behaviors. The final model in which all three types of predictors were considered supports intervention efforts in both the psychological and the social area of the adolescent’s life. For example, early adolescent prevention programs that serve to delay dating alone for girls or to enhance the expansion of social networks of boys may delay the timing of first intercourse. Attempts to intervene on the significant predictors would be an excellent test of the models put forth in this article (Bronfenbrenner, 1979).

Differences in the patterns of significant predictors by gender indicate that programs targeting particular issues by gender in early adolescence may be more effective. The normative nature of adolescent sexual behavior, current rates of adolescent pregnancy, and contraction of STIs, including HIV, warrant that the factors of adolescent sexuality be further examined. Currently, very few adolescent sexuality programs are tailored specifically for boys or girls (Meschke, et al., 2000).

More basic research is also needed regarding the prediction of the timing of first intercourse. The relation between additional biological and social predictors of first intercourse requires further examination, including the interactional effects. In addition to better understanding the precursors associated with early intercourse, it is equally beneficial to further examine those individuals who are sexually inexperienced as young adults. In general, the latter group has received very little attention from researchers.

In sum, each of the models, except the biological model for the boys, were predictive of the timing of first intercourse. It was hypothesized that the biopsychosocial model would prove to be the most effective model. The biopsychosocial model was a stronger model than the biological models, the girls’ biopsychological model, and the boys’ biosocial model. Although no significant increase in the biopsychosocial model’s prediction was found when compared to the girls’ biosocial model and the boys’ biopsychological model, a psychological predictor (importance of popularity) did remain significant in the biopsychosocial model for the girls and a social factor (peer achievement) remained significant in the boys’ biopsychosocial model. Thus, the importance of incorporating measures from the biological, psychological, and social arenas in predicting the timing of first intercourse has been demonstrated.

Adolescent Romantic Behaviors and Perceptions: With Family and Peer Relationships

This study examined the role of age, gender, and dating experience in adolescent romantic behaviors and perceptions. In addition, the linkage between the quality of relationships with parents and peers, and affective intensity with a romantic partner was investigated. Interviews were held with 168 Israeli adolescents, who also completed questionnaires assessing romantic behaviors, romantic perceptions, and quality of relationships with their romantic partner, parents, and a same-gender close friend. Older adolescents were more likely than younger adolescents to have a romantic partner. Romantic perceptions pertaining to companionship and excitement were less frequent among older adolescents. However, aspects such as intimacy and level of emotional involvement were similar across adolescence. Girls emphasized more attachment and care in their romantic relationships than boys. In addition, adolescents who were currently dating perceived romantic relationships more in terms of emotional involvement than adolescents who were not dating. The affective intensity with same-gender close friend but not with parents was linked to the affective intensity with the romantic partner.

Although adolescent romantic experiences are believed to play an important role in the development of later significant romantic relationships, little is known about their nature. The literature on adolescent romantic relationships focuses on patterns of dating and sexual behavior. Early relationships with romantic partners are casual, less intense, and short-lived (Feiring, 1996). Young adolescents focus more on who they are, how attractive they are, how they should interact with the other gender, and how this interaction will be accepted by their peers (Brown, 1997). Gradually, interest and interaction with the other gender increases, and at 15 years of age the majority of adolescents have had some dating experience (Blyth, Hill, & Thiel, 1982). Sexual activity takes place in dating, and adolescents perceive having some sexual experience by the age of 15 as normative (Feldman, Turner, & Araujo, 1999). Conceptually, relationships with the other gender were more understood within the framework of friendship or companionship (Blyth & Foster-Clark, 1987; Feiring & Lewis, 1991). The classic work of Dunphy (1963) described a gradual change in the nature of cross-gender interactions. This starts with a preference to be in places where other gender peers are likely to be present, then advances to participation in mixed-gender group activities, group dating in which couples meet in the context of the “crowd,” and individual dyads going out on their own.

Other studies investigated adolescent romantic relationships within the framework of the network of relationships with significant others such as parents, same-gender friends, and siblings (Blyth et al., 1982; Connolly & Johnson, 1996; Furman & Buhrmester, 1992; Lempers & Clark-Lempers, 1993). In these studies, adolescents were asked to rate the support that they received in a particular relationship, and its functional importance, or to indicate the range of activities that they engaged in with the various figures (Laursen & Williams, 1997). Results consistently showed that with age the importance of romantic relationships as providers of support and targets of intimacy increases, although friends and family members remain important figures in the life of teenagers throughout adolescence.

Studies that focus on the romantic experience and its qualitative nature have been conducted mainly among college students or adults. Sternberg’s (1986) approach focused on the functions of romantic relations, and outlined three major components–intimacy, passion, and commitment. Hazan and Shaver (1987) conceptualized love relationships in terms of attachment. According to this view, a romantic partner is thought to become an attachment figure, replacing the parental attachment figures as uppermost in the attachment hierarchy. Hazan and Shaver described romantic love as an adaptive biological process, which facilitates attachment between sexual partners. The attachment between romantic partners differs to some extent from the parent-child bond as it involves the integration of attachment, caregiving, and sexual behavior between two adults.

This study was designed to address age-related differences in adolescent romantic experience and perceptions, especially identifying the qualitative differences in the nature of adolescent romance during the different stages of adolescence. Furman and Wehner’s (1994) theory on adolescent romantic relationships is a pioneering attempt to explain how cross-gender encounters initiated in a group context develop and change into attachments. Based on their integration of the theoretical works of Bowlby and Sullivan, Furman and Wehner suggested that younger adolescent romantic partners serve more as companions and friends, thus providing experiences of cooperation and reciprocity. In addition, these relationships are also based on self-disclosure and consensual validation of self-worth. At a later stage, a partner is sought out in times of distress, and is expected to provide support, comfort, and caregiving. In conjunction with the emergent sexual interest the individual turns to the romantic partner for sexual fulfillment as well. By fulfilling the different needs, the romantic partner becomes part of the hierarchy of important figures and its importance for the adolescent in comparison with other important figures moves up with age (Furman & Buhrmester, 1992).

In a more recent article, Furman and Wehner (1997) elaborated on the evolution of a romantic partner into an attachment figure, placing extra emphasis on the importance of the interaction experience for the quality of a romantic relationship: “As individuals grow older and acquire more experience in various romantic relationships, they may be more likely to turn to a partner to fulfill these functions than when they were younger and less experienced” (p. 23). Studies in social exchange theory suggest that mutually beneficial exchanges promote future cooperation as participants learn to rely on one another for rewards (Kelly et al., 1983). Thus, gaining more experience with romantic relationships, in addition to chronological age, may also contribute to changes in romantic behaviors and in how romantic love is understood.

In line with these conceptualizations, clear changes with age can be expected. Affiliative behaviors and motives can be found among romantic partners during the earlier stages of adolescence, reflecting the companionship quality of the interaction with members of the other gender. The caregiving and attachment components are expected to become more significant in romantic relationships in later stages of adolescence and in young adulthood, when the need for a new attachment figure increases. In addition, experience and acquisition of some competencies in interacting with the other gender may also facilitate the coordination of affiliative, attachment, and sexual needs, and their becoming central to the relationship (Furman & Wehner, 1997).

Evidence to date suggests that there are gender differences in friendship intimacy. Adolescent female friends are reportedly closer, and more inclined to self-disclosure, than are boys (Camerena, Sargiani, & Petersen, 1990; Jones & Dembo, 1989; Sharabany, Gershoni, & Hofman, 1981; Shulman, Laursen, Kalman, & Karpovsky, 1997). However, in adolescent and young adult cross-gender friendships (Reisman, 1990), adolescent romantic partnerships (Shulman, Levy-Shift, Kedem, & Alon, 1997), and married couples (Merves-Okin, Amidon, & Berndt, 1991) no significant differences were found between boys and girls on self-disclosure and expression of emotions. Intimacy, measured in terms of commitment and communication, also showed no significant differences within couples (White, Speisman, Jackson, Bartis, & Costos, 1986).

Nevertheless, girls spend more time with and thinking about boys (Richards, Crowe, Larson, & Swarr, 1998), and more perceive their romantic relationships as supportive (Connolly & Johnson, 1996). Male adolescents reported a lower level of respect for their romantic partner than did female adolescents (Shulman et al., 1997), and men are more likely than women to interrupt their partners (Leaper & Anderson, 1997). Girls are thus more attentive to their partners and more perceive relationships as supportive. This is in line with Gilligan’s (1982) contention that women are more at ease being close in their relationships and their life is organized around being able to maintain affiliations. In addition, women were traditionally expected to stay connected in meaningful ways and care about their partners and families (Papp, 1989). Previous research shows that women report more frequent and positive caregiving behaviors than men, probably reflecting societal expectations that reward female nurturant behavior (Kunce & Shaver, 1994). Overall, we may expect that female adolescents will emphasize more commitment and care in their romantic relationships than male adolescents.

The growing interest and investment in a romantic partner cannot be detached from the two other central relationships in an adolescent’s life, namely family and close friends. It is well documented that throughout adolescence frequency of interactions and diversity of activities shift from parents to peers (Laursen & Williams, 1997). Nevertheless, one cannot overlook the fact that parents remain a major source of support for their adolescent children even as the salience of peers increases (Youniss & Smollar, 1985), and often maintain this status throughout the college years as well (Furman & Wehner, 1997). Moreover, understanding romantic relationships from a developmental perspective and within an attachment framework (Furman & Wehner, 1994) may suggest that the quality of the romantic relationship is related not only to the experiences with the romantic partner, but also to the quality of relationship with parents and peers. Thus, relational patterns such as the sense of closeness experienced in the relationship with parents and peers are linked to the sense of closeness experienced with a romantic partner. This assumption is in line with attachment theory. Models of self and others, and relationships that develop from experiences in close relationships, influence the nature of interaction with the environment, expectations concerning availability, responsiveness, and attitudes of others, as well as expectations about the self in future relationships (Sroufe & Fleeson, 1986).

In sum, three major questions are addressed in this study:

Do romantic behaviors and perceptions differ across adolescence? We hypothesized that older adolescents will be more likely to report having a romantic partner, will report on romantic relationships that last longer, will meet frequently with, and will be more likely to be sexually intimate with their romantic partner than younger adolescents. In addition, it was hypothesized that younger adolescents will be more likely to perceive romantic relationships in terms of friendships, whereas older adolescents will be more likely to perceive romantic relationships in terms of care and attachment. It was also expected that more experience in romantic relationships will be related to higher competence in interacting with the other gender and will be reflected in higher levels of involvement with and care for the romantic partner.
Do romantic behaviors and perceptions differ across gender? We expected that girls will be more likely to perceive romantic relationships in terms of caregiving and support, whereas boys will be more likely to perceive romantic relationships in terms of companionship.
To what extent do relationships with parents and close same-gender friends relate to the quality of the romantic relationship during adolescence? We explored the extent to which the positive dimension of relationships with parents and peers, namely the level of experienced closeness in these relationships, is related to the sense of closeness experienced in an adolescent’s romantic relationship.
METHOD
Participants

A total of 168 adolescents (91 boys and 77 girls) participated in the investigation. Participants were drawn from four high schools in medium-sized towns in the center and south of Israel, and represented a lower-middle-class to an upper-middle class spectrum. Participants were included after they gave consent. Ninth-grade participants were included in the study only after parental consent was given as well, whereas 11th and 13th graders were included in the study after they consented. When our study was conducted, personal consent for participating in psychological study was approved for 11th graders. The 168 adolescents represented a participation rate of 87%. All the participants lived with their families. The sample consisted of 54 ninth graders, 30 girls and 24 boys (mean age = 14.11 years, SD = 0.37); 53 eleventh graders, 30 girls and 23 boys (mean age = 16.26 years, SD = 0.52); and 61 thirteenth graders, 31 girls and 30 boys (mean age = 19.18 years, SD = 0.59). The 13th graders attended two senior high schools where studies continue for 4 years, instead of the more common 3 years. These schools are not academically or socially different from schools that offer 3 years of senior high school besides offering an additional year of schooling that mainly focuses on science education. The decision for an additional year of schooling is made by students themselves and not dictated by the school system. No academic, socioeconomic, or family background differences between those who continue to study an extra year and those who graduate from school after the 12th grade were reported by the schools’ principals. These 13th graders form a unique comparison group as they represented a group of older adolescents who are not away from home and who study in a high school setting and not a college.

Measures and Procedure

Participants were interviewed, and were asked to complete questionnaires assessing the nature of their romantic behaviors, their romantic perceptions, and their relationships with a romantic partner, parents, and a same-gender close friend. Participants were individually interviewed and completed questionnaires in groups of 20 students at their schools. Participants randomly were interviewed first or completed questionnaires first.

Romantic Behaviors

Participants were asked to indicate in open-ended responses the following information:

Occurrence of dating (currently dating, have dated, have never dated).
Length of current or most recent significant romantic relationship, in weeks.
Interaction frequency, in minutes, of contact with the romantic partner during a morning, an afternoon, and an evening in the preceding week. The total time of contacts represented the interaction frequency with the romantic partner on an ordinary day in the preceding week.
Participants were asked to rate on a scale ranging from 1 (never touched each other) to 9 (had sexual intercourse) how sexually intimate they were with their current romantic partner or with their previous partner.
These open-ended questions were patterned according to Berscheid, Snyder, and Omoto’s (1989) revised version of the Relationship Closeness Inventory. Berscheid and her colleagues found reports of frequency of interaction to possess acceptable test-retest reliability over a period of 3 to 5 weeks (.81).

In addition, to measure the extent of perceived closeness with the romantic partner, participants were asked to rate the affective intensity with their current or most recent romantic partner. The Index of Affective Relationships (Takahashi & Nagima, 1994) was used to measure intensity of affective relationships. In its original form this is a self-report instrument consisting of 18 statements describing affective desires to rely on or to be with a significant figure in the life of the adolescent. In this study, an adapted and shortened version of the instrument was used, comprising 13 items. For each item respondents were required to rate on a scale ranging from 1 (never correct) to 5 (always correct) the extent to which a statement characterized their relationship with a certain figure. Examples of statements are “When I receive bad news I want to be with X;” “I want to share pleasant feelings with X.” In this study, respondents were asked to complete the instrument with regard to their romantic partner as well as with regard to their mother, father, and same-gender close friend. Mean score for affective intensity with each figure was computed. Mean scores ranged from 1 to 5. Cronbach alphas for the four figures in this shortened version were satisfactory and ranged from .88 to .95.

Romantic Perceptions

1. Romantic relationship experiences were measured by Hendrick and Hendrick’s (1986) measure of love styles. The 36-item measure indexes six love styles. A respondent is asked to indicate the extent to which a certain statement characterizes the relationship with the romantic partner on a scale ranging from 1 (does not characterize the relationship at all) to 5 (very much characterizes the relationship). The six love styles, and examples of items, are listed next.

Eros (physical love): “We were attracted to each other immediately when we first met.”

Ludus (game-playing love): “I try to keep her uncertain about my commitment to her.”

Storge (friendship, companionate love): “The best kind of love grows out of a long friendship.”

Pragma (practical, objective love): “An important factor in choosing a boyfriend is how he will be as a father.”

Mania (preoccupation with the romantic relationship): “When I am in love, I have trouble concentrating on anything else.”

Agape (caregiving, self-sacrificing love): “I try to always help her through difficult times.”

For each love style a mean score was computed, hence scores ranged from 1 to .5. Cronbach alphas for the six styles in this study were as follows: Eros, alpha = .76; Ludus, alpha = .71; Storge, alpha = .73; Pragma, alpha = 65; Mania, alpha = .74; Agape, alpha = .76. Removal of one item from the Pragma scale resulted in an alpha of .69. The mean for the Pragma love style was thus computed based on five items. Intercorrelations among love styles revealed the Eros, Mania, and Agape love styles to be interrelated (correlations ranged from .43 to .67). Therefore these three styles were collapsed into one love style reflecting attraction, involvement, and care, and was termed Emotional Involvement love style.

2. Perceived advantages of having a romantic partner were examined by Feiring’s (1996) semistructured interview about dating in which adolescents are requested to talk about the advantages of having a boyfriend or girlfriend. Content analysis was conducted on adolescents’ transcribed comments to determine categories that are most frequent and best describe the data. The following advantage categories were derived:

Companionship: “You have somebody to go out with, to study together with before exams.”

Intimacy: “To share my personal matters with someone.”

Attachment: “I feel that somebody, who is not a family member, really loves me, and I can count on him.”

Care: “Somebody who spoils you and you spoil her.”

Status: “In my class, it makes me a MAN.”

Sex: “You can kiss him and do things you do not do with a friend.”

Excitement: “It is just great to think that you are involved and to wait for the next time you meet.”

Each participant’s answers were coded according to whether they mentioned or did not mention a given category. Categories are not mutually exclusive, and a participant could mention a number of advantages. To establish interrater reliability on these categories, transcripts were coded independently by two raters. Cohen’s Kappas were in the range of .87 to .91. The interview data used in this study are thus highly reliable and provide adolescents’ perceptions of their romantic relationships. The categories derived in this study are quite similar to those derived by Feiring. In sum, responses fell into one of two possibilities: A respondent has mentioned or has not mentioned a category.

RESULTS
Plan of Analysis

In this section, we first describe age, gender, and dating experience differences in romantic behaviors and perceptions. Then we examine the linkages between affective intensity with parents and peers, and affective intensity with a romantic partner during adolescence.

Age, Gender, and Dating Status Differences in Romantic Behaviors

Frequencies and percentages of three categories of dating status (currently dating, have dated, have never dated) were tabulated across three age groups and are presented in Table 1. Sixteen and 19-year-olds reported a higher frequency of dating currently than 14-year-olds. In addition, 19-year-olds reported the highest frequency of having never dated. However, 14-year-olds reported the highest frequently of having dated in the past, whereas 16-year-olds in comparison with them reported less that they had dated in the past, X2(4,N = 168) = 28.70, p < .0001.

To assess age, gender, and dating status differences in romantic behaviors the following analyses were conducted on the cohort of adolescents who reported currently dating and those who had dated in the recent past. A 3 (age) x 2 (gender) x 2 (dating status: currently dating and have dated in the past) analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to assess the mean duration of romantic relationships across three age groups and gender among those who were currently dating and those who had dated in the recent past. Results revealed two significant main effects: for age, F(2,114) = 7.05, p < .001; and for gender, F(1,114) = 3.54 p < .05. A Scheffe follow-up contrast (p <.05) revealed that 14-year-olds compared with 16- and 19-year-olds were engaged in relationships that last longer, M = 52.29 weeks (SD = 40.48) versus M = 26.88 weeks (SD = 42.35) and M = 20.81 weeks (SD = 24.02), respectively. Girls in comparison with boys reported engaging in relationships that lasted longer, M = 38.57 weeks (SD = 39.62) versus M = 28 weeks and M = 27.90 weeks (SD = 37.32), respectively.

A 3 (age) x 2 (gender) x 2 (dating status) ANOVA was conducted to assess the mean length of time, in minutes, during which adolescents were engaged with their romantic partners in the preceding week (or were engaged in their most recent romantic relationship). Results revealed one significant main effect for dating status, F(1,114) = 5.74, p < .02. Those who were currently dating reported spending more time with their romantic partners than adolescents reporting on time spent in the past with a romantic partner in a relationship that had terminated, M = 152.57 min (SD = 109.95) versus M = 86.92 min (SD = 173.61), respectively.

An additional 3 (age) x 2 (gender) x 2 (dating status) ANOVA was conducted to assess the level of sexual intimacy with the romantic partner. Results revealed one significant main effect for dating status, F(1,114) = 10.09, p < .01. Those who were currently dating reported being more sexually intimate with their partner than those who reported on the sexual intimacy in a relationship that had ended, M = 7.44 (SD = 2.08) versus M = 5.69 (SD = 2.27), respectively.

Finally, a 3 (age) x 2 (gender) x 2 (dating status) ANOVA was conducted to assess the mean level of affective intensity with the romantic partner across three age groups and gender among those who were currently dating and those who had dated in the recent past. Results revealed two significant main effects: for gender, F(1,114) = 5.28, p < .05; and for dating status, F(1,114) = 4.78, p < .05. Girls reported a higher level of affective intensity in their romantic relationships than boys, M = 4.42 (SD = 0.46) and M = 4.10 (SD = 0.74), respectively. Adolescents who were currently dating reported higher affective intensity with their partner than adolescents reporting on a relationship that had ended, M = 4.46 (SD = 0.53) and M = 4.10 (SD = 0.66), respectively.

To summarize, among older adolescents there was a higher chance that they were currently engaged in a romantic relationship; however, 14-year-olds reported more than 16-year-olds that they had dated in the past. Romantic relationships of 19-year-olds lasted longer than those of younger adolescents. Girls across all age groups were engaged in relationships of longer duration and reported a higher level of affective intensity with their romantic partner. Finally, currently dating adolescents reported a higher frequency of interaction and higher levels of sexual intimacy and affective intensity in their relationships than adolescents reporting on relationships that had ended.

Age, Gender, and Dating Status Differences in Romantic Perceptions

The following analyses were conducted on the whole sample. The three dating status categories, currently dating, have dated, and have never dated, represent the independent variable of dating experience.

Love styles. A 3 (age) x 2 (gender) x 3 (dating status: currently dating, have dated, and have never dated) multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to assess the mean level of the love styles across age, gender, and dating status. Three main effects emerged: for age, F(2,159) = 2.79, p < .01; for gender, F(1,159) = 3.59, p < .001; and for dating status, F(2,159) = 3.00, p < .001. No significant interactions among age, gender, or dating status were found. Follow-up ANOVAs and Scheffe contrasts (p < .05) specified age, gender, and dating status differences on each love style.

Univariate ANOVAs revealed a significant age difference for the Storge love style, F(2,159) = 4.81, p < .001. A Scheffe follow-up contrast showed that perception of romantic love as friendship was higher among 14- and 16-year-olds, M = 3.74 (SD = 0.55) and M = 3.65 (SD = 0.75), than among 19-year-olds, M = 3.41 (SD = 0.68). An additional set of univariate ANOVAs revealed a significant gender difference on the Ludus (game-playing love) style, F(1,159) = 11.03, p < .001. Boys across the three age groups described a higher level of Ludus-style love than did girls, M = 2.86 (SD = 0.71) and M = 2.39 (SD = 0.62), respectively.

A third set of univariate ANOVAs revealed a significant difference in the Emotional Involvement love style, F(2,159) = 9.13, p < .001. A Scheffe follow-up contrast showed that adolescents who were currently dating reported a higher level of the Emotional Involvement love style than adolescents who had dated, M = 3.85 (SD = 0.63), and M = 3.36 (SD = 0.67), respectively. Adolescents who had never dated reported an intermediate level of the Emotional Involvement love style, M = 3.59 (SD = 0.43).

Advantages of having a romantic partner. A series of 3 (age) x 2 (gender) x 3 (dating status: currently dating, have dated, and have never dated) x 2 (advantage category: was mentioned or was not mentioned) log-linear analyses were conducted. Results revealed several significant two-way interactions between independent variables and advantage categories. Two log-linear analyses revealed interactions between age and the companionship advantage category, X2(2,N = 168) = 6.65, p < .05, as well as between age and the excitement advantage category, X2(2,N = 168) = 10.26, p < .01. As can be seen in Table 2, 14- and 16-year-olds mentioned more companionship as an advantage of romantic relationship than 19-year-olds. In addition, 19-year-olds mentioned excitement as an advantage of romantic relationships less than did younger adolescents.

In addition, two log-linear analyses revealed interactions between gender and the attachment advantage category, X2(1,N = 168) = 30.36, p < .0001, as well as between gender and the care advantage category, X2(1,N = 168) = 33.84, p < .0001. Attachment and care were more perceived by girls across all age groups and dating statuses as an advantage of having a romantic partner than by boys (See Table 2). An additional log-linear analysis revealed a significant interaction between dating status and sex as an advantage category, X2(2,N = 168) = 7.88, p < .01. Adolescents who were currently dating or had dated in the past were more likely to mention sex as an advantage of romantic relationships than were adolescents who have never dated (see Table 2).

To summarize, older adolescents (19-year-olds) perceived romantic relationships less in terms of friendship, and considered companionship less to be an advantage of having a romantic partner, than did younger adolescents (14- and 16-year-olds). In addition, 19-year-olds mentioned excitement as an advantage less than did younger adolescents. No age differences were found in perceptions of romantic relationships in terms of intimacy, caregiving, or attachment. Attachment and care were more perceived by girls across all age groups as an advantage of having a romantic partner than by boys. In contrast, the perception of romantic relationships in terms of game-playing love was more emphasized by boys than by girls. Adolescents who were currently dating perceived romantic relationships more in terms of emotional involvement than did adolescents who currently did not have a romantic partner. In addition, sex was more frequently mentioned as an advantage for dating among adolescents who were currently involved in a romantic relationship or had dated in the past than it was among adolescents who had never dated.

Intensity of the Affective Relationship With a Romantic Partner Versus the Role of the Quality of Relationships With Parents and Peers

A multiple regression was conducted to determine the linkages between the quality of relationships with parents and peers and the intensity of the affective relationship with a romantic partner. (This analysis was conducted with 120 adolescents who reported currently having a romantic partner and who had a partner in the past.) Results of the multiple regression are presented in Table 3. As can be seen, the affective intensity with parents did not explain affective intensity with a romantic partner, whereas closeness to a same-gender friend explained 43% of affective intensity with a romantic partner.

To control the possible contribution of other variables to the affective intensity with the romantic partner, a hierarchical regression was performed in which demographic variables (gender and age) as well as variables related to the romantic experience and perceptions (the status of dating, the frequency of contact with the romantic partner, the sexual intimacy with the romantic partner, and romantic perceptions in terms of love styles) were inserted prior to the insertion of the indexes of affective intensity with mother, father, and close same-gender friend. Results showed that even after controlling those variables, affective intensity with a same-gender close friend explained 27% of the sense of closeness with the romantic partner, whereas affective intensity with either of the parents did not explain affective intensity with a romantic partner.

DISCUSSION
Results of this study show that almost one half of the 16- and 19-year-olds reported being currently engaged in a romantic relationship. Among 14-year-olds, only 15% reported being currently involved in a romantic relationship. These findings extend results from previous studies reporting that the proportion of individuals who state that they have a boyfriend or a girlfriend increases with age (Furman & Buhrmester, 1992), and that by the age of 15 most teenagers have had some experience of dating (Blyth et al., 1982; Feiring, 1996). Report of previous dating, however, showed a different age-related trend. The majority of 14-year-olds (65%) reported having had some previous experience with dating, whereas only 22% of 16-year-olds reported this. This unexpected trend may indicate a previously unnoticed aspect in the study of adolescent romance.

In the majority of studies, adolescents are asked to indicate whether they are currently dating, have dated in the past, or have never dated. However, to the best of our knowledge, no criteria were ever formulated to define the terms boyfriend or girlfriend. Previous studies showed that adolescent romantic relationships are part of the adolescent social context and experience (Connolly & Johnson, 1996; Dunphy, 1963). Our results showed that conceptions of companionship and friendship are an integral part of adolescents’ understanding of romance. It is reasonable to question whether adolescents, especially younger adolescents, differentiate between a romantic relationship and a cross-gender friendship. We know that children and adolescents are involved in cross-gender interactions or friendships (Leaper & Anderson, 1997), but we do not know when and how a friendship tums into a romantic relationship or is considered as such. In a recent article, LaVoie, Johnson, Mahoney, Ramet, and Anderson (1998) described a continuum of dating status, starting from “close friends” via “casual dating” to “exclusive dating.” We speculate that 14-year-olds may regard a close cross-gender friendship or casual dating as an exclusive romantic relationship. Going out in mixed-gender groups at this age might be considered dating and this might be the reason why many 14-year-olds compared to 16-year-olds tend to report they have experience in dating. Sixteen-year-olds probably have a stricter idea of what it means to have a boyfriend or a girlfriend or to be in love. A recently published study gives rise to this possibility. Montgomery and Sorrel (1998) reported a trend suggesting a decrease in the number of adolescents reporting on having been in love among 11th graders.

This possible changing dialectic of friendship and romance is further evinced in the age-related differences in romantic perceptions found in this study. Some perceptions of romantic relationships are similar across adolescence, although others differ. Experience of romance as a caregiving relationship, as well as the value placed on intimacy and attachment is predominant across the various stages of adolescence. In these aspects adolescent romantic relationships, even among younger adolescents, resemble those of adults (Levesque, 1993). Yet despite these consistencies, there are aspects that differ with age. In this study, younger adolescents emphasized aspects of friendship or companionship in their romantic relationships, whereas this tendency was lower only among the 19-year-olds. In addition, there was a decrease in the perception of excitement related to the romantic relationship. The age differences in perception of a romantic partner as a companion are in line with Furman and Wehner’s (1994) theory that at an earlier age romantic partners serve more as companions and friends, providing experiences of cooperation and reciprocity. At a later stage when a partner is more expected to provide support, comfort, and caregiving, and turning into more of an attachment figure, the aspects of companionship and friendship in the romantic relationship are less pronounced.

The age-related decrease in excitement points to an additional aspect of romance in adolescence. Phenomenological studies, as well as lay intuition, have described components such as uniqueness, absolutes, and idealism as characterizing adolescent romance (Fischer & Alapack, 1987). Fascination has been used to differentiate romantic from friendship relations (Hatfield & Rapson, 1987). However, as Feiring (1996) suggested, fascination “captures the brief but intense nature of adolescent romance. Given the amount of attention focused on the dating partner, short-term fascination might best describe the initial stage of romance in adolescence” (p. 192).

Whereas age is related to a decrease in characterization of romantic relationships in terms of companionship and fascination, current experience of dating was found to be related to an increase in aspects characterizing closeness and mutual commitment. This can be understood because the romantic relationship provides rich opportunities for cooperation, mutualism, and reciprocal altruism (Laursen & Williams, 1997). As relationships develop, individuals may become more confident in partners’ availability and support, and this further affects romantic perceptions. Furman and Wehner (1997) found that college women in exclusive relationships were more secure and less preoccupied in their romantic styles than those dating more casually. Kirkpatrick and Hazan (1994) found that some individuals with insecure avoidant styles switched to a secure style when they become involved in a new relationship. However, some caution is warranted. It is possible that adolescents reporting on a relationship that had ended describe a less successful relationship, or tend to reconstruct a previous relationship in a less favorable manner.

Despite the importance of romantic experience, age differences in romantic behaviors and perceptions were found independent of dating experience. It is possible that age and dating experience are related to different aspects of adolescent romantic relationships. Experience is probably more related to the quality of the relationship whereas age-related trends are possibly bound to the meaning of love and its functions during the different stages of adolescence. However, this finding must be interpreted in light of the following limitation. Some cells, like 19-year-olds who had never dated or 14-year-olds who were currently dating, contained few participants, and in fact may raise questions whether interaction effects between age and experience exist but were not detected in this study. This must be tested in future studies.

Consistent gender differences across the three age groups emerged with regard to romantic behaviors and perceptions. Girls reported a higher level of affective intensity with their romantic partners. In addition, girls more than boys reported valuing attachment and care in their relationships. Boys, by contrast, perceived romantic relationships more as game-playing love. These findings recall the well-documented gender differences in adolescent close relationships. Adolescent female friends are reportedly closer, and more inclined to self-disclosure, than are beys (Camerena et al., 1990; Jones & Dembo, 1989; Shulman, Levy-Shift, Kedem, & Alon, 1997). Boys tend to express themselves through separateness, characterizing friendship in terms of shared activities, whereas girls perceive relatedness, emphasizing mutual closeness and reciprocity in friendship (Smollar & Youniss, 1982). Similarly, this finding recalls the higher tendency of women to report higher level of commitment, caregiving, and security than men (Gilligan, 1982; Kunce & Shaver, 1994; Pines, 1998).

The affective intensity with the romantic partner was related to the quality of the relationship with a same-gender close friend, whereas the relationship with parents was not related to affective intensity with a romantic partner. Our results consistently demonstrate that although adolescent romantic relationships contain components found in adult love experiences, components of friendship and companionship are also dominant in romantic relationships during earlier stages of adolescence. The friendship quality of adolescent romantic relationships can also be attributed to the fact that many of the interactions with the romantic partner take place within the peer arena. Adolescents meet in mixed-gender group activities, and date in a group context (Blyth & Padgham, 1987; Dunphy, 1963). Furman and Wehner (1993) also found that romantic relational styles of high school girls were related to relational styles with friends but not with parents. Among college women, however, romantic relational styles were related to those with friends as well as to relational styles with parents. Future studies on late adolescent and young adult romantic relationships could illuminate to what extent friendships moderate relationships with romantic partners, and if and when the role of relationships with parents becomes more prominent in explaining late adolescent and early adult romantic relationships (as found by Owens et al., 1995).

Some additional limitations of this study should be addressed. Our resuits demonstrated differences as a function of age, yet the study was cross-sectional in nature. A longitudinal study is needed to rule out alternative explanations. In addition, this study dealt with the reported behaviors and perceptions of adolescents with regard to romantic relationship in which they are or were involved. A relationship consists of two partners. As we have shown (Shulman et al., 1997), more can be learned about a relationship when both partners are examined rather than one partner alone.

In closing, our results show that adolescent romantic relationships consist of components found in adult romantic relationships, such as the mutual caregiving quality, but they are also an arena for joint activities and companionship, as is friendship. However, the nature and quality of adolescent romance was found to be different in early and late adolescence. In line with Furman and Wehner’s (1997) suggestions, future longitudinal studies of the development of adolescent romantic relationships could help us better understand the transformations in affiliative, attachment, caregiving, and sexual features.

Next Page »