- What is my age:
- Color of my hair:
- I know:
- What is my figure features:
- My body type is quite slender
- What is my hobbies:
And maybe, just maybe, you'd like them to value education, be polished enough to at least look good in black-and-white photos or be adorably awkward on a 3-minute video date and have a strong enough command of grammar that they know not to end sentences with a preposition. While your mother may call you picky, we call you self-aware. The League, a community deed for the overly ambitious. Read our mission statement. We do our very best to only show you to people who meet your preferences, AND where you meet theirs, prioritized by people you actually have a decent shot at conversing with. We don't believe in wasting anyone's time here.
Data were assumed to be missing at random but not missing completely at random. Of the 2, students who completed the screening survey, 1, participants were excluded from the analyses because they did not report hooking up in the past year or they did not engage in a heavy episode drinking i. Participants were asked about the of partners they had hooked up with in the past three months. Reponses to each item were averaged to create subscales for each hookup motive dimension. General demographic information and questions pertaining to the current study e.
Although the from Kenney et al. Superscript 1 coefficients represent the likelihood of experiencing negative hookup consequences in the full sample. Participants were provided with a list of reasons college students give for hooking up and told to report how often they had hooked up for a particular reason. Self-report data were collected from heavy drinking college students from three mid-size universities.
Free hookup sites macapsing. notorious new york city brothels, it is critical to see if there
All variables had a VIF less than 3 suggesting that mulitcollinearity was within an acceptable range. Participants who provided informed consent were immediately directed to an online survey. Of the participants whose data were examined in mediation model, descriptive statistics pertaining to key study variables can be found in Table 1. In terms of outliers, variables with extreme scores e. All paths control for sex, age, ethnicity, school year, and data collection site.
Try out PMC Labs and tell us what you think. In the current study, it was hypothesized that the five distinct hookup motives measured in the hooking motives questionnaire would be differentially predictive of the of partners college students hook up with in the past three months. Moreover, Zero-order correlations of study variables for women below the diagonal and men above the diagonal.
The examination of standardized residuals revealed that ificantly more males than expected, and ificantly fewer females than expected, were in the current study. Sex, age, ethnicity, school year, and data collection site were controlled for in the analyses but are not in included in the figure. The majority of the sample identified as White In terms of ethnicity, Participants were predominately juniors in college The current study was conducted across three university sites which included a large public university in the Northwest, a private university on the West Coast, and a large public university in the South.
To better understand the conditions under which negative hookup outcomes are experienced, researchers have examined predictors and moderators of negative hookup consequences, including attitudes, motives, negative affect, and attachment style e.
Of the remaining participants, 23 were excluded due to missing data 20 participants did not report hooking up with a partner in the past three months and 3 participants did not provide demographic information resulting in a final sample size of participants. Participants were asked to enter the of hookup New York NY ks with whom they had hooked up in the past three months. Moreover, there is empirical support that hookup behavior e. In the current study, it was hypothesized that the of partners with who college students hook up with in the past three months would be positively associated with the experiencing of negative hookup consequences.
Elevated social-sexual motivation to hook up was positively associated with hooking up with multiple partners, with hooking up with multiple partners positively associated with negative hookup consequences.
The relationship between perceived hookup attitudes and negative hookup consequences: do perceived attitudes of close friends matter?
In a study that developed and validated the hookup motives questionnaire, a positive association was reported between specific hookup motives and hookup outcomes Kenney et al. Moreover, data collection site was dummy coded. The five dimensions of motives assessed in the questionnaire include: social-sexual e. The assumption of linearity appeared to not be violated through visual inspection of residual plots.
Outside the domain of the hooking up literature, research suggests that the perceived attitudes of others may be associated with, and predictive of, negative consequences. In another study, hookup frequency was found to be positively correlated with of hookup partners Napper et al.
The item Hookup Motives Questionnaire Kenney et al. The hypothesized bivariate relationship between most variables in the path model were statistically ificant, providing preliminary evidence that the hypothesized path model would fit the data. Final path model with standardized path coefficients. Multicollinearity and singularity were assessed by examining the variance inflation factors VIF for each independent variable. Moreover, college students have been found to misperceive the attitudes of proximal referents e. Thus, available fit indices e.
The two hookup motives were differentially predictive of negative hookup consequences, with enhancement found to be negatively associated with the likelihood and frequency of experiencing negative hookup consequences whereas coping was found to be positively associated with the frequency of experiencing negative hookup consequences. As a result of high positive skew, near equi-dispersion, and excessive zeros in the dependent variable i. Traditional statistics to assess model fit e.
For example, in a study on the negative impacts of hooking among undergraduate students, Some of the consequences that students experienced as a result of hooking up included: regret, embarrassment, disappointment, sexual dissatisfaction, and the contracting of a sexually transmitted infection STI; Bachtel, ; Napper et al. Moreover, data collection site was dummy coded and controlled for in the model.
As past research suggests, future studies should incorporate both attitudes and motives in models of behavior, particularly with regards to hookup behavior, in order to determine the extent to which external e. After model assumptions were evaluated, the path model was estimated using Mplus Version 7.
Findings from research in the other domains suggest that specific motives may be differentially related to behavior and consequences e. Higher scores within each motive subscale indicate a higher frequency in which a participant has hooked up for that reason. Thus, there is strong theoretical support that the perceived hookup attitudes of others should have an influence on hookup behavior.
Gender stratified bivariate statistics are presented in Table 2. These students were sent an invitation to participate in the study and a link to an online informed consent. Data reported in the current study were collected prior to any alcohol intervention.
The five dimension of the hookup motives questionnaire included: a social-sexual motives e. A better understanding of the predictors and mediators of negative hookup consequences has the potential to inform prevention and intervention efforts. The NBH model is a two-part process which simultaneously models the likelihood of experiencing negative hookup consequences e.
Responses to all items were summed to create a single composite score which ranged from 0— Univariate normality was assessed using histograms and z -scores, with all independent variables found to be non-normally distributed. Although the relationship between hookup motives and of hookup partners has received little research attention, hookup motives may be associated with the of partners with whom students hook up.
However, research also suggests that the perceived hookup attitudes of others are a poor predictor of hookup behavior e. In terms of school year, differences were observed largely among participants who were in school for longer than four years, with there being ificantly fewer fifth-year students and ificantly more seventh-year students than expected who were not excluded from the current study.
In addition, there were no statistically ificant site differences on key study variables e.
In addition, the of hookup partners participants hooked up with in the past three months was associated with both the likelihood negatively associated and frequency positively associated of experiencing negative hookup consequences see Table 3. The temporal order with respect to whether hookup attitudes precede or follow hookup motives is another contentious issue. The predictive fit indices for this alternative model e. Only social-sexual hookup motives were found to be positively associated with the of partners participants hooked up with in the past three months.
An important predictor which has received scant research attention in the hookup literature is injunctive norms.
In another study which examined whether the perceived attitudes of more proximal referents e. Learn More. A better understanding of how the perceived attitudes of proximal referents are associated with hookup behavior and negative hookup consequences, and the mechanisms associated with these relationship, will provide new knowledge and opportunities for targeted prevention and intervention efforts.
Thus, the current study did reflect the range of school year standing among participants in there 1 st — 4 th year of college across all three sites. Moreover, it was hypothesized that hookup motives would be positively associated with the of partners college students hook up with in the past three months, and that of hookup partners would be positively associated with negative hookup consequences.
A key distinction between attitudes and motives is that attitudes place value statements regarding the acceptability of a behavior whereas motives do not make such statements. Estimates are unstandardized path coefficents. The NIHI captures a broad range of negative outcomes that participants may have experienced as a result of a hookup.
Subscript 2 coefficients represent the frequency of negative hookup consequences among those who reported experiencing negative hookup consequences. Conversely, decreased partner familiarity during a hookup and other sexual encounters has been found to be associated with psychological problems and abuse Fielder et al.
In terms of the relationship between the of partners students hook up with while attending college and negative hookup consequences, a recent investigation reported that the of hookup partners students hooked up was positively correlated with negative hookup consequences Napper et al. of hookup partners may serve as a proxy for partner familiarity in that as the of hookup partners increases, partner familiarity may decrease.
Research suggests that the perceived hookup attitudes of close referents is generally a poor predictor of hookup behavior and likely a poor direct predictor of negative hookup consequences. Moreover, a maximum likelihood estimator with bootstrapped confidence intervals 1, samples was selected.