Added: Teodora Frerichs - Date: 05.10.2021 05:21 - Views: 45902 - Clicks: 2875
Article information. Received: Accepted: Published VoR : E-mail: elaineh hawaii. Among the most cited series of experiments in social and evolutionary psychology are those conducted Conley sex tonight Clark and Hatfield In these studies, college students served as confederates in a simple field experiment. In the following series of experiments we attempted to develop a pencil and paper method to mirror the procedure of the classic study.
We think we succeeded. The studies also explored some of the reasons men and women gave for refusing a date, apartment visit, or a sexual encounter. We close by itemizing some questions that, given this new set of research materials, may be worth asking. One of the most cited series of experiments in social and evolutionary psychology are those conducted by Clark and Hatfieldand Clark The higher thethe greater the percentage of people agreeing to the request.
Since its publication, this study has attracted a great deal of attention. In recent years, this study has sparked heated debates in Science, News in Brain and Behavioural Sciences, and Sexnet, the last two being scholarly Web-based discussion groups. In spite of the popularity or notoriety of this classic study, Hatfield acknowledged that, in and of itself, it had some severe limitations.
Theorists have spent a great deal of time and effort speculating about the factors that shape men and women's willingness to engage in casual sex. This means that a simple test of "Who is most receptive to casual sex—men or women?
Many other mechanisms of selection have been identified or elaborated. So too is the case with theories of mate selection. In fact, however, the SST is only one of the many evolutionary theories of mate selection. Most agree that while people possess the same inherited and universal information processing mechanisms, preferences vary in predictable and adaptive ways across culture. For example, cultures differ in how critical attractiveness is in mate selection.
Men and women are also known to utilize different mate selection strategies in short term versus long-term encounters Buss, ; Schmitt et al. Gangestad and Simpsonfor example point out that when looking for short-term mates, women generally look for characteristics such as masculine features and physical attractiveness; when searching for long-term mates, on the other hand, they search for men with parenting qualities i.
Who is doing the asking? Social psychologists might, for example, ask how old are the confederates? How good looking are they? What are their social class, religion, and race? Are they gay or straight? Are they drunk or sober? How many people have they approached before the participant? Do they appear menacing? Who is being asked? Scholars might consider the personality traits and social situation of the respondents. For example: Do they seem happy or depressed?
Are they popular or social outcasts? Are they in a loving relationship or on the rebound? One might, for example, expect to secure quite different if the invitation took place in a church or at a revival meeting, on a college campus, in an office, in a bar, or in a Greyhound station. What is being asked? Would men and women be more receptive if the offer were preceded by flirtation and sexy conversation, rather than coming out of the blue?
Are they worried that the confederate may be peculiar, dangerous, or making fun of them? Do cultural and historical factors shape men and willingness to engage in casual sex? There are several reasons for the relative neglect of these obvious questions: First, this type of field research is very difficult and time consuming.
Second, in this day and age, American social scientists are more sensitive to the possible pitfalls of such naturalistic experiments. They worry about public relations and the welfare of confederates and participants. Finally, even if scholars wish to stage replications, university IRBs generally refuse to approve such controversial field studies. What to do? Several other social and evolutionary psychologists have attempted to develop such prototypes, but their attempts are not appropriate for use in a diversity of cultures and ethnic groups; did not ask participants about their willingness to date, go to apartments, or have sex usually they only asked if Conley sex tonight were interested in a sexual encounter ; or failed in other ways to provide a close equivalent to the classic study.
Studies were deed to test the following hypotheses—in the hope of allowing us to see to what extent our paper and pencil measure would replicate the findings Conley sex tonight the original Clark and Hatfield studies:. Hypothesis 1: Men will be more receptive to sexual offers than will women. This was, of course, the main and most important finding in the classic study. Hypothesis 2: Participants will be differentially responsive to different Types of Requests.
Specifically, we expect that men may be increasingly positive about sexual offers as they become more sexually explicit, while women will be increasingly negative as explicitness increases. This was the pattern of secured in the original Clark and Hatfieldstudies. Studies must necessarily differ in several ways from the classic paradigm. First, in the 20 to 30 years since the original experiments were conducted, America has become a far more multi-ethnic society. It is possible that the Asian influence may make Honolulu a more traditionally conservative place than Tallahassee when it comes to sexual matters Forbes, Of course, Tallahassee is more conservative politically than is Honolulu.
Second, in the past decades, casual sex has become far more common among college students than it once was. Third, in the classic studies, respondents could only accept or reject a proffer.
In the following experiments, students were invited to give a one word answer Yes or No and to indicate how likely they would be to accept such an offer on a continuous Likert scale. Finally, they were asked to tell the researchers why they decided to accept or reject the sexual invitation.
Respondents also possessed an array of religious affiliations: Protestant On average, they rated themselves as 3. In this initial study, homosexual participants were dropped from the sample. When students reported for the session, they were given an IRB consent form and a two- packet. At the top of the first of the packet appeared a picture of a fairly attractive college man or woman see Figure 1.
The faces, which were deed to serve as a prototype of faces-in-general for college students of no particular ethnic group, were constructed using software originally developed by Bernard Tiddeman and David Perrett, in a program which is now available for scholars from Faceresearch.
A sampling of 40 male and 40 female faces, taken from a sampling of the racial and ethnic groups typical of the UH campus, were selected. Using computer imaging, the faces were superimposed one upon one another. The result was two composite faces of equal attractiveness, as judged by a team of independent raters. As a consequence, we might expect participants to be somewhat more receptive to the stimuli in Experiments than they would have been to the students in the original study.
Since in this study we are not exploring the impact of relative attractiveness on compliance with requests, the attractiveness of Conley sex tonight should not affect our hypotheses. All that is important is that the composites be equally attractive and representative of the population—which they were.
The images also controlled for factors such as differences in clothing worn, hairstyles, body type, and facial expression. I find you very attractive. Respondents were asked to indicate the reasons for their responses to each of the three questions. Participants were then asked a series of demographic questions. Finally, they were debriefed and allowed to ask any questions they might have and make any comments they wished. Since participants were asked how receptive they would be to all three types of requests, in order to test our hypotheses, we conducted an ANOVA using gender and type of request as Conley sex tonight predicting receptivity to each offer.
In Hypothesis 1, we predicted that men would be more receptive to offers of casual sex than would women. We see, then, that our prototype study does indeed replicate the critically important findings of the classic studies.
The higher thethe more certain people are that they would agree to the request. The higher the s, the more certain men and women were that they would agree with the request. Hypothesis 2 predicted that there would be a main effect for Type of Request. This hypothesis was also confirmed—although the means were not in the predicted pattern i.
Hypothesis 3 predicted that we would secure a ificant interaction between Gender x Type of Request. Here the were ambiguous. More importantly, the pattern of was entirely different than that secured in the classic study.
In this simulation, both men and women declined in receptivity as the offer became more sexually explicit. Finally, participants who accepted or declined the offer of casual sex were asked why they had done so. They rarely mentioned danger as a concern. Here is a sampling of the most common reasons men gave for refusing sexual offers:. Women were most put off by the fact that the man, who was a stranger, was too forward.
They also worried that, given the oddness of his request, they might be in danger. The most common reasons women Conley sex tonight for declining sexual offers were:. The Study 1 paradigm possessed several advantages over the classic study: 1 In the classic study, the confederates naturally varied in attractiveness, general appearance, and presentation style.
In that way, we controlled for attractiveness, general appearance, acting ability, and body language. In this study, students were allowed to indicate whether or not they would accept or reject the various offers on an point Likert scale—allowing us to assess small gradations in enthusiasm. In this prototype, respondents were asked why they accepted or rejected the offer.
This gave us some hints as to what to look for in subsequent research. Yet, Study 1 was not a perfect functional replication of the classic study; also, we did not precisely replicate the findings of the original study.Conley sex tonight
email: [email protected] - phone:(868) 900-4013 x 7589
Sexual Hookup Culture: A Review