Contexts in source publication

Context 1

... results on class standing are not presented but are available from authors. In line with our fifth hypothesis, we found that reliance on Internet sources increased (see Figure 4) and meeting partners in dormitories decreased as students advanced in class standing, which we theorize is a result of increased interest in dates instead of hookups. Nearly one-fifth of graduate student men met dates through Internet sources. ...

Context 2

... that the college courses in which our sample was collected were over- whelmingly female, with an average rate of 69.4% female per school sample, and women outnumbering men in every university sample. One university sample was 56% female, 11 were between 62% and 70% female, and the remaining ten university samples ranged from 70% to 79.5% female. Correlations between partnering rates and sex ratios at these universities are further discussed in the next section. The uneven sex ratios in the partnering markets of students in this study are reflected in gender differences in partner meeting places (see Table 3). In line with our second hypothesis, men were significantly more likely to meet both hookup and dating female partners in institutional settings and in dorms compared to women. Female students were significantly more likely to find hookup and dating partners in non-campus-specific locales, including through personal recommendations, common interest groups = shared histories, and more likely than men to meet hookups in public places, and dates in bars = parties = nightclubs. There were no gender differences in meeting hookups or dates online or through personals, but both men and women were more likely to date than hook up with partners met in those contexts, and were more likely to date instead of hook up when they met in institutions and through personal recommendation. Confirming expectations, men were less likely than women to report no physical activity during dates and more likely to report sex during both types of encounters. Table 4 and Figure 2 demonstrate distinctions in encounter meeting place during encounters by gender and partner’s gender. In line with expectations in our third hypothesis, men who partnered with men were less likely than men who partnered with women to meet in institutional settings or dormitories and were significantly more likely to meet through Internet sources; in fact, around one-quarter of male same-sex dates and almost one-fifth of male same-sex hookup partners were met through Internet sources compared to just 2% of men dating women and 1% of men hooking up with women. Women who partnered with women were more likely than those partnering with men to meet in institutional settings but, like men with same-sex partners, also significantly more likely to use Internet sources to find partners; 10% of women who dated women and 6.5% of women who hooked up with women met partners through Internet sources compared to rates of 3.5% and 2%, respectively, among women partnering with men. Unexpectedly, we found that women who partnered with women were significantly less likely to meet partners through bars and parties compared to women who partnered with men; 18% of women met female date partners and 16% of women met female hookup partners through bars or parties, compared to 28% of women who met male date partners and 30% who met male hookups through bars. In line with expectations in hypothesis four, men hooking up with men were significantly more likely than men hooking up with women to have sex during hookup encounters (see Figure 3). However, men who dated men were no more likely than men who dated women to have sex during dates, suggesting that men who partner with men behave more sexually conservatively, at rates similar to men who partner with women, when on a date instead of a hookup. To further examine rates of partnering by campus and classroom sex composition, we examined correlations between sex ratios and partnering rates in each university in our sample by gender and partner’s gender, presented in Table 5. We found that women were significantly less likely to partner with men when they were in universities that had more women in our sample (and therefore more women in the courses in which surveys were administered) and were marginally more likely to date women on campuses with more women. The other coefficients, while not significant likely due to our small sample size ( N 1⁄4 22), demonstrated interest- ing patterns that were logically sound according to our theory, once the nature of our sample was accounted for. Among women, percent female on campus and in classrooms was positively correlated with same-sex partnering and negatively correlated with opposite-sex partnering. We also found a positive correlation with hookups but a negative correlation with dates among men who partnered with women on campuses with more women, likely related to previously discussed gender differences in interest in casual sex. The positive correlation of men partnering with men and negative correlation of men partnering with women in courses with more women suggests selection into courses with many women by gay men, which is perhaps correlated with surveys collected in courses related to gender or sexuality. Full results on class standing are not presented but are available from authors. In line with our fifth hypothesis, we found that reliance on Internet sources increased (see Figure 4) and meeting partners in dormitories decreased as students advanced in class standing, which we theorize is a result of increased interest in dates instead of hookups. Nearly one-fifth of graduate student men met dates through Internet sources. Contrary to expectations, how- ever, with the exception of men seeking hookup partners, we found all other groups increased in likelihood of meeting through personal recommendation as they advanced in class standing (results available from authors). Further, as shown in Figure 5, few differences existed in sexual activity on dates by age for women, but men showed a U-shaped relationship to sex during dates, and during hookups less advanced students were actually significantly less likely to engage in sex during encounters. This suggests that engagement in sex increases among both men and women during hookups as they age, and for men during dates, but that women do not increase engagement in sex during dates as they advance in age, a factor which is strongly correlated with class standing. As discussed, our sample included an over represen- tation of freshmen and sophomores; therefore, rates of meeting places presented in Table 2 likely overestimate rates at which students meet partners in dorms and under- estimate rates at which students meet through Internet = personals and personal recommendation, or engage in casual sex during hookups. Men’s sex rate during dates should not be heavily biased, judging from patterns found. In Table 6 we present results of regression models, separated by gender, predicting whether an encounter was reported to have been a hookup rather than a date by the respondent. Meeting a partner at a bar = party = nightclub increased the likelihood that an encounter would be reported as a hookup by 14% for women and 18% for men, and meeting in dormitories increased the likelihood that an encounter would be reported as a hookup by 38% for men and 53% for women compared with partners met through institutions, although findings related to partner’s gender indicate the association of bars = parties = nightclubs with hookup culture was pri- marily related to opposite-sex and not same-sex partnering. Dormitories seemed to be positively related to same-sex hookups, but coefficients did not reach sig- nificance, perhaps due to the relatively small sample sizes of same-sex encounters. Once again confirming expectations in the first hypothesis, when partners met through institutions, personal recommendation, common interest groups = shared history, or public places, students were equally likely to engage in a date or hookup. Partners met through Internet settings were more likely to become dates compared to partners met in institutional settings; those met through Internet settings were 72% among men and 67% among women as likely as partners met through institutional settings to be reported as a hookup. Higher-order sexual activity during an encounter was associated with the encounter being described as a hookup instead of a date. Encounters that included genital stimulation were more likely to be considered a hookup than a date compared to encounters that did not include any form of sex, among those partnering with both opposite- and same-sex partners. For men and women partnering with opposite-sex partners, vaginal sex and, for women, oral sex, was associated with hookups. Anal sex was more closely associated with dates for both men and women partnering with opposite-sex partners. Among students partnering with same-sex partners, oral, vaginal, and anal sex were all equally likely to occur in hookups and dates. Students meet hookup and dating partners mostly in similar contexts, indicating that students do not engage in vastly different partner search patterns to look for hookup or date partners, but whether an encounter is reported to be a hookup or date depends on the activity during the encounter or other factors prior to the encounter. Some differences by meeting context, sexual activity, and participation in hookups and dates did emerge, and considerable differences were found by gender, gender of partner, and class standing. We developed a theoretical framework extending prior work by Mahay and Laumann (2004) by introducing trust, gender differences in trust, and differences in sexual scripts by encounter type to explain this variation. We also drew on the unique nature of our sample to examine partnering in a market in which women outnumbered men to some extent, at least in the classes in which surveys were distributed. Our findings for the most part confirmed our five hypotheses, providing evidence for our postulates. Selection into dates versus hookups was related to the extent to which meeting places were correlated with trust, a risk-taking personality, and hookup culture, with students more likely to meet partners for hookups in dormitories and bars = parties = nightclubs and for dates through Internet sources. In line with prior ...