| Title |
A Gender Discrepancy Analysis of Heterosexual Sexual Behaviors in Two University Samples
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Community Health, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10900-013-9728-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kristen N. Jozkowski, Sonya A. Satinsky |
| Abstract |
The current study aimed to (1) offer a large-scale enumeration of college students' lifetime sexual behaviors and sexual behaviors at last event, and (2) apply a gender discrepancy lens to college students' sexual behaviors in order to examine potential gender differences in heterosexual college students' experiences. Nine-hundred and seventy college students between the ages of 18 and 27 from two large universities in the United States participated in the current study. Participants filled out a paper-pencil questionnaire during the last 30 min of class. Measures of lifetime sexual behaviors and engagement in behaviors at last sexual event were replicated from the National Survey of Sexual Health Behavior. Most college students engaged in some form of sexual behavior (manual, oral, vaginal-penile, anal). Men more frequently reported engaging in receptive sexual behaviors (e.g., receiving oral sex) where as women were more likely to engage in performative sexual behaviors (e.g., performing oral sex). At most recent sexual event, men were more likely than women to report being the sexual initiator. Findings highlight gender differences in sexual behavior and provide a foundation for social norms interventions. Holistic sexual health promotion for young adults includes acknowledging and discouraging sites of disparity in equity and pleasure. Therefore, college-level sexual health educators should pay attention to the potential pleasure gap between men and women in heterosexual encounters, and to see pleasure as an important part of sexual health that should be included in social norms campaigns. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 20% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 9 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 10% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 June 2014.
All research outputs
#2,050,174
of 23,230,825 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#127
of 1,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,401
of 198,400 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#7
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,230,825 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,236 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 198,400 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.