ArticlePDF Available

First-Date Expectations

Communication Research

February 2004
31(1):3-35

DOI:10.1177/0093650203260202

Authors:

Paul A Mongeau

Arizona State University

This study investigated the impact of three factors (sex of initiator, alcohol consumption, and relationship type) relevant to the dominant American first-date script concerning communication and sexual expectations for first dates. After reading a hypothetical scenario describing a date initiation, 218 college students indicated the expectations they would have if they were the person going on the date. Results indicated that men have higher sexual expectations than do women and that participants’ sexual expectations are heightened when alcohol is available. Alcohol availability had complex effects on expectations for communication intimacy. Participants expected more intimate communication when dating partners were close friends than when they were casual acquaintances.

Content uploaded by Paul A Mongeau

Content may be subject to copyright.

10.1177/0093650203260202ARTICLECOMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

MARY CLAIRE MORR

PAUL A. MONGEAU

First-Date Expectations

The Impact of Sex of Initiator,

Alcohol Consumption, and Relationship Type

This study investigated the impact of three factors (sex of initiator, alcohol

consumption, and relationship type) relevant to the dominant American first-

date script concerning communication and sexual expectations for first dates.

After reading a hypothetical scenario describing a date initiation, 218 college

students indicated the expectations they would have if they were the person

going on the date. Results indicated that men have higher sexual expectations

than do women and that participants’ sexual expectations are heightened

when alcohol is available. Alcohol availability had complex effects on expecta-

tions for communication intimacy. Participants expected more intimate com-

munication when dating partners were close friends than when they were

casual acquaintances.

Keywords: dating; expectancy; interpersonal; intimacy; sexuality; alcohol

The nature of heterosexual courtship at a particular time and place depends

on a number of historical and cultural factors (Cate & Lloyd, 1992). Since the

1920s, couple dating has been the primary form of premarital romantic

involvement in the United States (Bailey, 1988; Cate & Lloyd, 1992). First

dates represent an important early event in the development of dating rela

tionships and have been the focus of recent research interest (e.g., Laner &

Ventrone, 1998, 2000; Mongeau, Carey, & Williams, 1998). There are several

reasons why first dates are of theoretical interest to interpersonal and rela

tional communication scholars. For example, first dates are inherently am

biguous, as they represent a potential relational turning point (Baxter &

Bullis, 1986) where a relationship might (or might not) move from platonic to

COMMUNICATION RESEARCH, Vol. 31 No. 1, February 2004 3-35

DOI: 10.1177/0093650203260202

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

romantic. As a consequence, uncertainty about the partner and relationship

is presumed to be high on such occasions.

Recent first-date research by Mongeau and his colleagues indicates that

expectancies and their violations are likely important factors in the enact

ment of the first date and the generation of a new romantic relationship. Spe

cifically, in studies based on hypothetical date scenarios, men reported higher

sexual expectations for first dates than did women, particularly when the

woman initiated the date (Mongeau, Aselage, Ficara, & Hart, 1997; Mongeau

& Carey, 1996). Contrary to these expectancies, research on actual first dates

indicates that less sexual and communication intimacy occurs on first dates

initiated by women (Mongeau & Johnson, 1995; Mongeau, Yeazell, & Hale,

1994). The contradiction between men’s predate sexual expectations and the

amount of sexual intimacy experienced on the date has been interpreted from

an expectancy violation perspective (e.g., Mongeau & Carey, 1996; Mongeau

et al., 1998). Specifically, men likely enter female-initiated first dates with

unrealistically high sexual expectations that are violated on the date. In con-

trast, a woman’s expectations may be violated if a man acts on his higher

expectations for sexual intimacy.

Although the accumulated research suggests an expectancy violation

explanation, the nature of students’ expectations for first dates is not entirely

clear. According to expectancy violations theory (EVT) (Burgoon, 1993;

Burgoon & Hale, 1988), expectancies are formed based on information about

the communicator, relationship, and context (Burgoon, 1993). Previous re-

search on first-date expectations and expectancy violations has considered

communicator information—specifically, sex of the participant and sex of the

date initiator—as well as contextual information—specifically, alcohol con

sumption and date activities. However, research on first dates, including con

struction of scripts for dates (e.g., Laner & Ventrone, 1998, 2000; Pryor &

Merluzzi, 1985; Rose & Frieze, 1989, 1993), scenario studies (e.g., Mongeau &

Carey, 1996), and retrospective self-reports (e.g., Mongeau, Hale, Johnson, &

Hillis, 1993; Mongeau & Johnson, 1995) have not included information about

the relationship between dating partners (i.e., relationship information)

when asking participants to construct expectations or in considering vari

ation in participants’ reported expectations for dates.

By itself, relationship information may play an important role in influenc

ing expectations, thereby affecting crucial behavioral choices made by part

ners in a dating situation. For example, relationship information may influ

ence sexual behavior on a first date. Research by Paul, McManus, and Hayes

(2000) on “hookups” (sexual encounters—perhaps including intercourse—

between strangers or acquaintances) is relevant to first-date sexual expecta

tions. Although hookups differ from first dates, they share commonalities

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

with first dates between relative strangers who may or may not engage in

sexual behavior. Paul et al. found that the vast majority of participants who

had experienced a hookup that included sexual intercourse used condoms. As

one of the possible explanations for this finding, Paul et al. argued that people

may be more careful when engaging in sexual intercourse with unknown

partners but less careful with those with whom they wish to form a rela

tionship. In this way, the existing relationship between partners on a first

date—whether they are strangers or previously platonic friends—may have

profound implications for their expectations for sexual interaction and for

actions they may take to reduce the risk of pregnancy and sexually trans

mitted diseases.

A second study on hookups, conducted by Paul and Hayes (2002), found

that a common theme in students’ hookup stories was the presumption that

women engaged in hookups to form a romantic relationship. Hookups were,

however, temporary. This finding implies that it would be unlikely for first-

date partners who are relative strangers to engage in sex as a means of initi

ating a romantic relationship. However, these relational and sexual expecta-

tions (and their later confirmation or violation) may be affected by factors

such as sex (or sex-role stereotypes) and nature of the partners’ prior rela-

tionship (i.e., strangers or friends). Furthermore, complications may result if,

for instance,two previously platonic friends go on a date and engage in sexual

intercourse. One partner may see the interaction as a hookup, with no expec-

tation of a romantic relationship—not an unlikely possibility, considering

that about half of the college students in a study by Afifi and Faulkner (2000)

reported having sex with a platonic friend. On the other hand, the other part

ner may see their sexual interaction as an important step in escalating their

romantic connection.

In short, information about the existing relationship between partners on

a first date is likely to affect the expectations that people form for the commu

nicative and sexual interaction that will occur on the date. Moreover, infor

mation about the relationship may interact with information about the com

municator and the context in complex ways to change these expectations.

Understanding the development of such expectations may shed light on a

variety of important communicative phenomena, such as sex-role stereo

typing, casual sexual behavior, and sexual coercion. Accordingly, this study

will manipulate factors of sex of the date initiator (i.e., communicator infor

mation), alcohol consumption (i.e., contextual information), and relationship

with the dating partner (i.e., relationship information) to consider their effect

on expectations for a hypothetical first date, using research on first-date

scripts and sexual scripts as a basis for developing hypotheses. We offer sep

arate hypotheses for the effects of each factor on expectations for sexual

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

intimacy and for communicative intimacy. This investigation does not test

the predictions of EVT, nor does it directly address expectancy violations.

Rather, this study is grounded in the arguments that EVT makes about the

ways that people develop expectations. Specifically, we apply those argu

ments to consider the development of first-date expectations as a necessary

precursor to consideration of actual expectancy confirmation or violation on

first dates.

Dating and Sexual Scripts

Considering the amount of social and cultural change since the 1960s and the

amount of conflicting relational advice available in the media, it sometimes

appears as if there could be no predominant script guiding romantic interac

tion (Surra, Batchelder, & Hughes, 1995). However, several studies provide

consistent evidence of coherent first-date scripts (Laner & Ventrone, 1998,

2000; Pryor & Merluzzi, 1985; Rose & Frieze, 1989, 1993; Sherwin & Corbett,

1985). Using different methods, these studies clearly indicate that both men

and women are aware of a predominant first-date script. First-date scripts

consistently depict men as taking an active role and women as taking a pas-

sive one. The man is expected to initiate the date, plan the date activities,

drive, pay for the date, and initiate sexual intimacy, whereas women are

expected to wait for the man to initiate and decide to “accept/reject date’s

moves” (Rose & Frieze, 1993, p. 504). Behaviors in the first-date script are

consistent with traditional sexual script in which men are expected to be the

sexual initiators and women the sexual gatekeepers (LaPlante, McCormick,

& Brannigan, 1980; Metts & Cupach, 1989; Metts & Spitzberg, 1996;

O’Sullivan & Byers, 1992).

Variations of the First-Date Script

It is clear from previous research (e.g.,Laner & Ventrone, 1998, 2000; Pryor &

Merluzzi, 1985; Rose & Frieze, 1989, 1993) that American college students

are aware of the dating behaviors included in the dominant first-date and

sexual scripts. In studies by Laner and Ventrone (1998, 2000), Rose and

Frieze (1989, 1993), Pryor and Merluzzi (1985), and Sherwin and Corbett

(1985), college students’ responses indicate relatively high levels of agree

ment on norms for dating and sexual behavior.

The extent to which students’ behaviors actually follow these traditional

scripts is another matter. As Rose and Frieze (1993) indicated, real-life situa

tions sometimes vary from the script. Varying one element in the traditional

script may influence several behaviors in, and expectations regarding, the

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

sequence of behaviors (Abelson, 1981; Simon & Gagnon, 1986). Therefore,

important changes within the script are likely to affect expectations for the

rest of the interaction. On first dates, factors such as the availability of alco

hol, the type of relationship with the dating partner, and who initiates the

date represent variations on the basic first-date script. The presence or

absence of alcohol is likely to affect the nature of the first-date script and

one’s expectations for the date. Likewise, a first date with a friend will proba

bly lead one to develop different expectations than will a date with a stranger.

Finally, female initiation of a first date represents a clear departure from the

traditional script because asking for the date is a key component of the male

initiative prominent in the cultural first-date script. As a consequence, this

study will focus on the impact of three specific factors, the sex of the date initi

ator, alcohol availability, and relationship with the dating partner, on expec

tations for sexual and communication intimacy on first dates.

Sex of the date initiator. As dating implies some level of romantic or sexual

interest (Mongeau & Kendall, 1996), first dates are likely to be sexually

charged events. However, implications of the sexual nature of first dates are

likely to be evident in differences between men’s and women’s sexual expec-

tancies for specific situations. In general, men tend to have more permissive

attitudes toward casual sex than do women, particularly at early relational

stages (Oliver & Hyde, 1993). This sex difference may be particularly rele-

vant to one significant variation on the traditional script: female initiation of

dating.

Although female initiation of a first date represents a change to the script,

this change represents a common event. In one study involving college stu

dent participants, 83.5% of men reported that a woman had asked them out

on a first date, whereas 63.1% of women reported that they had asked a man

out on a first date (Mongeau et al., 1993). Previous research using dating

scenarios also indicates that female initiation of a first date influences expec

tations for sexual behavior. For instance, Mongeau and Carey (1996) found

that men expected more intimate contact than did women in all treatment

conditions, and men expected the man in the scenario to have greatly height

ened expectations when the woman initiated the date.Also, one of two studies

reported by Muehlenhard, Friedman, and Thomas (1985) indicated that men

found date rape to be less unjustifiable when the woman had initiated the

date than when the man had initiated. Our first hypothesis is consistent with

these findings.

Hypothesis 1: Men will report expectations of more intimate sexual

behavior than will women, particularly for female-initiated dates.

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Although many studies have investigated sexual expectations, few have

researched first-date communication expectations. The dimension of commu

nication that will be investigated in this study is communicative intimacy. I n

defining the concept of intimacy, Prager (1995) argued that it is a super

ordinate concept that may be divided into the basic concepts of intimate

interactions and intimate relationships. Intimate interactions are character

ized by verbal and nonverbal sharing and by experiences of understanding

and validation. Intimate relationships are characterized by affection, trust,

and cohesiveness. This investigation will employ multiple measures of com

municative intimacy to assess both the global intimacy of the relationship

between the dating partners and the particular communication behaviors

that contribute to intimate interactions.

In the only study to date that has investigated first-date communication

expectations, Mongeau et al. (1997) used a similar method of measuring both

intimacy of the relationship and of the interaction behaviors but reported

conflicting findings. Global ratings of intimacy of the relationship on male-

initiated dates were not significantly different for men and women, whereas

men expected a more intimate relationship than did women on female-

initiated dates. However, separate ratings of the dimensions of intimate

interaction behaviors communicated by date partners revealed that par-

ticipants expected the woman to express more immediacy/affection than the

man for all conditions. In contrast, men expected that the man would express

more receptivity/trust than the woman, but women expected the woman to

express more receptivity/trust than the man.

Global and specific ratings of intimacy produced inconsistent results

in the Mongeau et al. (1997) investigation. These inconsistencies may be

due to the differences in the two subordinate intimacy concepts (Prager,

1995). Specifically, male- and female-initiated first dates may not vary in

terms of relational intimacy, but the man or the woman may be expected to

communicate more intimacy in interaction than his or her partner. Because

there is not much existing research on which to base separate hypotheses,

measures of global relationship intimacy and of specific intimate interaction

behavior will be used to test the hypotheses relating to communication

intimacy.

Hypothesis 2: There will be no sex difference in expected communica

tion intimacy for male-initiated dates, but men will expect more inti

macy than women will on female-initiated dates.

Alcohol consumption. A second factor that may affect enactment of tradi

tional scripts is the consumption of alcohol on the date. Drinking and dating

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

appears to be a common combination. Drinking alcohol was mentioned in

both men’s and women’s actual first-date experiences but not in their hypo

thetical scripts (Rose & Frieze, 1993). In Mongeau and Johnson’s (1995)

study, 51% of participants indicated that either or both partner had con

sumed alcohol on their most recent first date and that half of those dates

involved binge drinking.

Alcohol consumption is related to sexual scripts in that it is a commonly

held belief in American society that alcohol reduces sexual inhibitions and

heightens sexual response (Leigh, 1990). In fact, the expectation of drinking

alcohol is related to greater sexual arousal, whereas actual consumption of

alcohol is not (George & Norris, 1991; Goldman & Roehrich, 1991). For exam

ple, Brown, Goldman, Inn, and Anderson (1980) found that, at least for heavy

drinkers, alcohol consumption was related to increased sexual expectations.

The impact of this belief on actual behavior is supported by research such as

that of Flanigan and Hitch (1986), who found that 43% of young women

reported that alcohol consumption was involved in their first experience with

sexual intercourse. Alcohol also played an important role in both hookups

(Paul & Hayes, 2002; Paul et al., 2000) and sex between friends (Afifi &

Faulkner, 2000). The influence of alcohol on dating and first-date sexual inti-

macy was documented by Mongeau and Johnson (1995), who found that alco-

hol consumption was the strongest predictor of both sexual expectations and

actual sexual intimacy on first dates.

Hypothesis 3: For both men and women, sexual expectations will be

higher for dates involving alcohol than for dates not involving

alcohol.

Beliefs about the effects of alcohol also extend to communication expecta

tions. George et al. (1988) examined the anticipated effects of first-date alco

hol consumption on communication-related factors. In their scenario study,

participants evaluated that the woman who drank alcohol on a first date was

perceived as less socially skillful and more aggressive than was the non

drinking woman. Participants expected, however, that the drinking woman’s

partner would perceive her as more sexually disinhibited, more socially skill

ful, and less impaired than did the study participants. This combination of

factors reflects an expectancy that the dating partner will selectively per

ceive that the woman is more receptive to sexual advances (i.e.,more sexually

disinhibited) but not drunk (i.e., more socially skilled and less impaired)

(George, Gournic, & McAfee, 1988, p. 1311). Through this selective percep

tion, he could engage in sexual intimacy with her without feeling that he is

taking advantage of a woman whose judgment is impaired by alcohol.

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Although the drinking woman in the scenario studied by George et al.

(1988) may be perceived as communicating greater intimacy because of her

reduced inhibitions, women do not necessarily expect themselves to behave

in that way. When participants in alcohol expectancy studies anticipated a

need to impress judges of the opposite sex, the belief that they had consumed

alcohol reduced anxiety and increased self-disclosure for men but had the

opposite effect for women. When asked to explain their actions, women re

ported that they were “worried that men might misinterpret their actions”

(George & Norris, 1991, p. 134). Furthermore, both male and female partici

pants in George et al.’s (1988) study evaluated the drinking woman more neg

atively than the nondrinking woman in terms of social appeal and overall

impression. In light of these findings, it seems likely that women will expect

themselves to communicate less intimacy while drinking to avoid negative

evaluation and prevent misinterpretation. The fourth hypothesis is con

sistent with the alcohol expectancy literature.

Hypothesis 4: Men will report higher communicative intimacy expecta-

tions for dates involving alcohol than for dates not involving alcohol.

Women will report higher communication intimacy expectations for

dates not involving alcohol than for dates involving alcohol.

Relationship with the dating partner. First dates sometimes occur be-

tween new acquaintances but may also occur between previously platonic

friends (Mongeau & Kendall, 1996). In the case of people who know each

other well, expectations of first-date sexual intimacy may be significantly

altered from the traditional cultural script. Although men tend to have

expectations of more intimate sexual behavior in early stages of relationships

than do women, these differences disappear as the relationship becomes

more developed (McCabe, 1987; McCabe & Collins, 1984; Oliver & Hyde,

1993).

One theoretical perspective that may be used to explain this phenomenon

is social learning theory, which argues that sex differences in attitudes and

behavior are acquired through social processes (Mischel, 1966). Oliver and

Hyde (1993) drew a connection between social learning and gender differ

ences in sexuality, explaining that “women are punished for sexual activities

such as having numerous partners or engaging in casual sex, whereas men

are not likely to be punished” (Oliver & Hyde, 1993, p. 31; see also Maccoby,

1998).

Thus, social learning theory supports the notion that women will have

lower sexual expectations than men in casual relationships (Abbey & Melby,

1986). However, for women, a close friendship implies a level of commitment

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

and intimacy that may preclude a dating partner evaluating her negatively if

she engages in sexual behavior. Her expectations may more accurately reflect

the relational information available to her (i.e., her date likes and respects

her and is committed to a relatively intimate relationship with her) than the

contextual information that she is on a conventional first date. The following

hypotheses rest on the assumption that a prior friendship with the dating

partner may increase women’s sexual expectations for the date.

Hypothesis 5: Women will report expectations of more intimate sexual

behavior when the dating partner is a friend as compared to when

the dating partner is a new acquaintance.

Hypothesis 6: Men will report expectations of more intimate sexual

behavior than will women whether the partner is a new acquain

tance or a friend, but the sex difference will be smaller when the

partner is a friend.

In addition, communication expectations should differ based on the rela-

tionship between the dating partners. Consistent with Altman and Taylor’s

(1973) social penetration theory, acquaintances are at a different relational

stage than are close friends, and communication behaviors should reflect

those varying stages. For acquaintances, the first-date interaction will proba-

bly occur at a surface level as partners attempt to get to know one another.

Communicative intimacy, as a result, should be relatively low. In contrast,

close friends have likely already engaged in significantly more intimate

levels of self-disclosure. Because they are at a more advanced relational

stage, close friends will expect greater intimacy on first dates than will new

acquaintances.

Hypothesis 7: Expectations of communicative intimacy will be higher

when the partner is a friend, as compared to when the partner is an

acquaintance.

Method

Participants

Participants in this study comprised 218 undergraduate students at a

medium-sized, midwestern university (82 males, 37.6%; 136 females, 62.4%),

for whom participation partially fulfilled the research requirement for two

introductory communication classes. Most participants (more than 98%)

were between the ages of 18 and 22 (mean age = 19.87; SD = 1.56). Nearly 94%

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

of the sample was Caucasian American, with 2.3% African American, 2.8%

Asian American, and 0.9% indicating other racial/ethnic backgrounds.

Procedures

Participants completed this study in groups of 12 to 25 people. After arriving

at a classroom that served as the laboratory, they initially read and signedan

informed consent form. Participants were then given an experimental packet

containing instructions, a scenario, communication expectancy measures,

the sexual expectancy measure, and other measures beyond the scope of this

study. On completion of the packet, participants were debriefed in writing.

Questions were solicited from participants (and answered if offered). Partici

pants were thanked for their participation and excused. Completion of the

questionnaire took between 20 and 35 minutes.

Design

The study used a 2 (sex of initiator: male or female) × 2 (alcohol availability:

alcohol or no alcohol) × 2 (relationship: friend or acquaintance) × 2 (sex of

participant: male or female) mixed groups factorial design. Both male and

female participants were nested within, and randomly assigned to, sex of

initiator, alcohol consumption, and relationship groups. Sex of initiator, al-

cohol consumption, and relationship variables were manipulated in scenar-

ios (see the appendix for examples of the manipulations). These eight scenar-

ios described two students (i.e., Dan and Jane) talking before a group project

meeting.

Sex of initiator. In the female-initiator condition, the scenario ended with

Jane asking Dan out on a date. In the male-initiator condition, the scenario

ended with Dan asking Jane out on a date.

Alcohol availability. In the availability condition, scenarios described the

date activity as going to a movie and then to a keg party. In the no availability

scenarios, the date activity was described as going to a movie and then to a

coffee shop (where alcohol was not available when the study was performed).

Alcohol consumption was not mentioned in either scenario to avoid demand

characteristics and to make the scenario seem more natural.

Relationship type. Finally, the scenarios varied the dating partners’ rela

tionship with each other. In both cases, Dan and Jane are waiting to meet

their classmates to work on a group project for their public relations class. In

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

the friend condition, the scenario described Dan and Jane as close friends

from high school who are attracted to each other but who have always, until

now, been romantically involved with other people. In the acquaintance con

dition, the scenario indicated that Dan and Jane were introduced by a mutual

friend prior to the winter break but have only talked briefly during the hectic

beginning of the new semester.

Instrumentation

Participants were asked to take the role of the same-sex individual in the sce

nario (i.e., males replied as if they were Dan and females replied as if they

were Jane).

Sexual expectations. Sexual expectations were assessed using Mongeau

and Johnson’s (1995) revision of McCabe and Collins’s (1984) Guttman scale

of sexual behaviors. McCabe and Collins’s scale lists 12 increasingly intimate

sexual behaviors, ranging from handholding to sexual intercourse. Mongeau

and Johnson added a 13th category, “none.” Participants checked each behav-

ior that they thought would occur on the date. The most intimate behavior

indicated by participants was used as their sexual expectation for the date.

McCabe and Collins found an acceptable reliability level (α = .87) and coeffi-

cient of reproducibility (.94) for their scale. In this study, data were not coded

in such a way as to allow a replication of their reliability and reproducibility

tests.

Communication expectations. Parts of two different measurement instru

ments were used to tap participants’ expectancies of communication inti

macy on the date. Intimacy items from a global intimacy scale (Mongeau

et al., 1997) and Burgoon and Hale’s (1987) Relational Message Scales (RMS)

were both used to ascertain participants’ communication expectations, with

the global intimacy scale intended to tap the intimacy of the relationship and

the RMS intended to gauge the intimacy of the interaction. The RMS are ret

rospective self-report instruments, phrasing items in the past tense. Because

this study deals with expectancies of a future interaction, all items were

rephrased in the future tense (as performed by Mongeau et al., 1997). In addi

tion, the RMS are phrased so that the participant evaluates the conversation

partner’s behavior (e.g., “He/she did not want a deeper relationship between

us.”) (Burgoon & Hale, 1987, p. 36). For this investigation, RMS items were

also rephrased to express expectations of the participant’s own behavior (e.g.,

“I would act like I did not want a deeper relationship between us”).

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

The global intimacy measure contained two items (e.g., “How intimate do

you think your date with [Dan/Jane] will be?”) with nine-interval response

scales ranging from 1 (not really intimate)to9(very intimate). The reliability

for this scale was acceptable (α = .80) (see Table 1 for reliabilities and mean

scores for all dependent variables).

In addition, five-interval, Likert-type scales measured the RMS’s three

distinct dimensions of intimacy (Burgoon & Hale, 1987). The questionnaire

used a stem (i.e., “If I were [Jane/Dan], on the date I would . . . ”), followed by

the items. Six items, which indicate interest, involvement, and warmth (e.g.,

“be intensely involved with our conversation”), measured the first dimension,

immediacy/affection. After deleting one item from this scale due to low inter-

item correlations, the scale exhibited acceptable reliability (α = .73).

The four items from the similarity/depth dimension did not exhibit ac-

ceptable reliability (α = .44) and were eliminated from the analysis. The

similarity/depth dimension was also discarded by Mongeau et al. (1997)

because of low reliability. It appears that rephrasing the similarity/depth

items to reflect expectations of one’s own future behavior, rather than recol

lections of another person’s behavior, changes the meaning of the items such

that they do not relate to one another as intended.

Finally, five items measured receptivity/trust, indicating openness and

honesty (e.g., “be interested in talking with [Dan/Jane]”). Reliability for the

receptivity/trust dimension was acceptable (α = .76).

Manipulation checks. The sex-of-initiator manipulation check was per

formed by asking participants how active a role Dan (men’s questionnaire) or

Jane (women’s questionnaire) took in making the date. Two seven-interval

semantic differential scales (e.g., “active-passive”) measured this variable

with acceptable reliability (α = .83).

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

Table 1

Mean Scores and Reliabilities for Dependent Variables

Scale MSD α Items

Sexual expectations

2.66 2.11 — 1

Intimacy (global scale)

4.67 1.37 .80 2

Immediacy/affection

4.07 0.41 .73 5

Receptivity/trust

4.39 0.39 .76 5

a. Scale ranges from 0 (no sexual expectancies) to 12 (expecting sexual intercourse).

b. Scale ranges from 1 (low) to 9 (high).

c. Scale ranges from 1 (low) to 5 (high).

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Perceived alcohol consumption was measured by two items asking how

many beers, glasses of wine, or mixed drinks participants think Dan or Jane

would consume during the date. Reliability for this measure was high (α =

.95).

Finally, perceived relationship closeness was measured with four seven-

interval semantic differential scales (e.g., “were friends-were strangers”) and

exhibited strong reliability (α = .93).

Results

Manipulation Checks

Each manipulation check was tested with a 2 (sex of initiator: male or female)

× 2 (alcohol consumption: alcohol or no alcohol) × 2 (relationship: friend or

acquaintance) × 2 (sex of participant: male or female) mixed-factors ANOVA.

In addition, Table 2 shows correlations among the three manipulation check

scales and the dependent variables.

Sex of initiator. Participants were asked how active a role Dan (for male

participants) or Jane (for female participants) took in making the date as a

test of the sex of initiator manipulation. There was a significant main effect

for sex of initiator on activity ratings, F(1, 196) = 46.22, p < .001, η

= .08.

Both Dan and Jane were rated as more active in the female-initiator con-

dition (M = 5.03, SD = 1.66) than in the male-initiator condition (M = 4.06,

SD = 1.43). There was also a significant main effect for sex of participant,

F(1, 196) = 6.68, p < .02, η

= .01. Although this effect was small, Jane was

rated as taking a more active role than Dan (M = 4.69, SD = 1.69 versus M =

4.29, SD = 1.48).

These main effects, however, must be considered in light of a significant

two-way interaction effect. As expected, there was a significant and substan

tial Sex of Participant × Sex of Initiator two-way interaction effect on these

activity ratings, F(1, 196) = 285.25, p < .001, η

= .52. Dan was rated as much

more active than Jane in the male-initiator condition (M = 5.29, SD = .91 ver

sus M = 3.31, SD = 1.14), whereas Jane was rated as much more active than

Dan in the female-initiator condition (M = 6.09, SD = .71 versus M = 3.26,

SD = 1.22). Moreover, the woman is perceived as taking a more active role

when she initiates the date than the man is when he initiates. Both of the sig

nificant main effects were due, in large part, to the particularly high activity

ratings for Jane when she initiated the date.

Finally, there was a significant, though small, three-way interaction effect

for Sex of Participant × Sex of Initiator × Relationship Type, F(1, 196) = 6.47,

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Table 2

Correlation Matrix for Manipulation Checks and Dependent Variables

Role in Alcohol Relationship Immediacy/ Receptivity/

Initiation Consumption With Partner Affection Trust Global Intimacy

Role in initiation

Alcohol consumption .04 (212)

Relationship with partner .03 (216) .08 (214)

Immediacy/affection .18** (216) –.14* (214) .41** (218)

Receptivity/trust .10 (216) –.16* (214) .27** (218) .67** (218)

Global intimacy .04 (216) .15* (214) .52** (218) .31**(218) .15* (218)

Sexual expectations .10 (213) .35** (212) .13 (215) .01 (215) –.19** (215) .29** (215)

Note. Numbers in parentheses represent n for the corresponding correlation.

*p < .05. **p < .01.

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

p < .05, η

= .01. The initiator was seen as taking a slightly more active role

when the date partners are acquaintances compared to when they are

friends. Moreover, the person being asked is evaluated as taking a more

active role when date partners are described as close friends compared to

when they are described as new acquaintances (see Table 3).

Perceived alcohol consumption. As expected, there was a significant and

substantial main effect for alcohol availability on expected alcohol consump-

tion, F(1, 197) = 236.52, p < .001, η

= .53. Expected alcohol consumption was

calculated by adding the responses to items asking how many drinks Jane

would have and how many drinks Dan would have. Participants expected

that Dan and Jane together would consume more alcoholic beverages in the

keg party condition (M = 10.06, SD = 4.11) than in the coffee shop condition

(M = 2.07, SD = 2.45).

Relationship type. As anticipated, there was a significant and substantial

main effect for the relationship manipulation in the scenario on how well par

ticipants thought Dan and Jane knew each other, F(1, 196) = 521.22, p < .001,

= .71. Dan and Jane were perceived to know each other better in the friend

condition (M = 6.02, SD = 0.78) than in the acquaintance condition (M = 3.27,

SD = 0.95).

There was also a significant Relationship Type × Sex of Initiator two-way

interaction effect, F(1, 196) = 3.90, p = .05, η

= .01. There was a smaller differ

ence in perceived partner familiarity in the female-initiator conditions(M =

5.90, SD = 0.78 in the friend condition versus M = 3.35, SD = 1.05 in the

acquaintance condition) than in the male-initiator conditions (M = 6.15, SD =

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

Table 3

Impact of Sex of Participant, Sex of Initiator, and Relationship Type on Activity

Ratings

Sex of Participant Relationship Type MSD n

Male initiator

Male Friend 5.23 0.80 20

Acquaintance 5.36 1.01 21

Female Friend 3.47 1.17 34

Acquaintance 3.15 1.10 34

Female initiator

Male Friend 3.68 1.32 20

Acquaintance 2.85 0.97 20

Female Friend 6.00 0.80 34

Acquaintance 6.18 0.61 33

Note. Means can range from 1 (low) to 7 (high).

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

0.77 in the friend condition versus M = 3.19, SD = 0.85 in the acquaintance

condition). In other words, the relationship type manipulation had slightly

less impact in the female-initiator condition.

Sexual Expectations

Hypotheses 1, 3, 5, and 6 were tested with a 2 (sex of initiator: male or female)

× 2 (alcohol consumption: alcohol or no alcohol) × 2 (relationship: friend or

acquaintance) × 2 (sex of participant: male or female) ANOVA, with sexual

expectations as the dependent variable.

Sex of participant and sex of initiator. Hypothesis 1 predicted that men

would report expectations of more intimate sexual behavior than women,

especially for female-initiated dates.This hypothesis was partially supported

by the data. There was a significant main effect for sex of participant, F(1,

199) = 5.87, p < .02, η

= .03. Men’s sexual expectations (M = 3.11, SD = 2.89)

were higher than women’s sexual expectations (M = 2.38, SD = 1.63) across

all scenarios. The hypothesized interaction effect between sex of participant

and sex of initiator was not significant.

Alcohol availability. Hypothesis 3 predicted that sexual expectations

would be higher for dates on which alcohol was available than for dates on

which alcohol was not available. This hypothesis was supported by the data.

There was a significant main effect for alcohol availability, F(1, 199) = 12.91,

p < .001, η

= .06. As predicted, sexual expectations were higher in the keg

party condition (M = 3.19, SD = 2.59) than in the coffee shop condition (M =

2.14, SD = 1.62).

Relationship type. Hypothesis 5 predicted that women would report

higher sexual expectations when the partner is a friend than when the part

ner is a casual acquaintance. Hypothesis 6 predicted that men would report

higher sexual expectations than would women whether the partner is a new

acquaintance or a friend, but the sex difference would be smaller when the

partner is a friend. The data are inconsistent with both hypotheses, as nei

ther partner knowledge nor the interaction of partner knowledge and sex of

participant influenced sexual expectations.

Communication Expectations

Hypotheses 2, 4, and 7 were tested with 2 (sex of initiator: male or female) × 2

(alcohol consumption: alcohol or no alcohol) × 2 (relationship: friend or

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

acquaintance) × 2 (sex of participant: male or female) ANOVAs, with commu

nicative expectations as the dependent variable.

Sex of initiator. Hypothesis 2 predicted that there would be no sex differ

ence in expected communication intimacy for male-initiated dates, but men

would expect more intimacy than women on female-initiated dates. This

hypothesis was not supported by the data.

Alcohol availability. Hypothesis 4 predicted that men would report higher

communication expectations for dates involving alcohol when compared to

dates not involving alcohol, whereas women would report higher communica

tion expectations for dates not involving alcohol when compared to dates

involving alcohol. This hypothesis was not supported by the data. The pre

dicted interaction between sex of participant and alcohol availability was not

significant.

There were, however, four significant effects on communication expecta

tions involving alcohol availability. First, there was a significant main effect

for alcohol availability on the receptivity/trust measure, F(1, 196) = 4.65, p <

.04, η

= .02. Receptivity/trust was found to be slightly greater for the keg

party date (M = 4.44, SD = 0.41) than for the coffee shop date (M = 4.34, SD =

0.38).

Second, there was a significant Sex of Initiator × Alcohol Availability two-

way interaction effect on the global intimacy measure, F(1, 199) = 7.30, p <

.01, η

= .03. In the male-initiator condition, expected intimacy is higher

when alcohol is available (M = 5.03, SD = 1.52) than when alcohol is not avail

able (M = 4.40, SD = 1.60). In the female-initiator condition, the means are in

the opposite direction; expected intimacy is higher in the coffee shop condi

tion (M = 4.79, SD = 1.54) than in the keg party condition (M = 4.50, SD =

1.53).

Third, there was a significant Sex of Participant × Alcohol Availability ×

Relationship three-way interaction effect on the global intimacy measure,

F(1, 199) = 7.15; p < .01, η

= .03. In the acquaintance condition, men expect

greater intimacy when alcohol is available than when alcohol is not available.

However, when the date is a friend, men expect less intimacy when alcohol is

available than when alcohol is not available. Women did not expect a differ

ence in intimacy related to alcohol availability in the acquaintance condition.

In the friend condition, however, women reported higher global intimacy

expectations when alcohol was available than when it was not available (see

Table 4).

Fourth, there was a significant four-way interaction effect (Sex of Partici

pant × Sex of Initiator × Alcohol Availability × Relationship) on the expecta

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

tions of receptivity/trust, F(1, 196) = 11.36, p < .002, η

= .05. In general, par

ticipants expected greater receptivity/trust when the date partners were

friends than when they were acquaintances. There are two instances in

which this is not the case. Specifically, when the man initiates and there is

alcohol available and when the woman initiates and no alcohol is available,

men expect greater receptivity/trust between acquaintances than between

friends (see Table 5).

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

Table 4

Impact of Alcohol Availability, Relationship Type, and Sex of Participant on Global

Intimacy Ratings

Relationship Type Date Activity MSD n

Men

Acquaintance Keg party 4.53 1.30 20

Coffee shop 3.86 1.44 21

Friend Keg party 5.10 1.33 21

Coffee shop 5.80 1.49 20

Women

Acquaintance Keg party 3.78 1.49 34

Coffee shop 3.79 1.28 34

Friend Keg party 5.70 1.22 33

Coffee shop 5.11 1.33 35

Note. Means can range from 1 (low) to 9 (high).

Table 5

Impact of Independent Variables on Ratings of Receptivity/Trust

Men Women

Date Activity Relationship Type MSD n MSD n

Male initiator

Keg party

Acquaintance 4.46 0.40 10 4.07 0.22 17

Friend 4.16 0.35 10 4.56 0.29 16

Coffee shop

Acquaintance 4.25 0.39 11 4.29 0.43 17

Friend 4.56 0.39 10 4.53 0.39 18

Female initiator

Keg party

Acquaintance 4.28 0.41 10 4.21 0.30 17

Friend 4.58 0.37 11 4.46 0.44 17

Coffee shop

Acquaintance 4.60 0.38 10 4.48 0.38 17

Friend 4.20 0.41 10 4.60 0.39 17

Note. Means can range from 1 (low) to 5 (high).

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Relationship type. Hypothesis 7 predicted that expectations of communi

cative intimacy would be higher in the friend condition than in the acquain

tance condition. This hypothesis was supported by the data for all three com

munication intimacy measures. On the global measure, there was a

significant main effect for relationship, F(1, 199) = 62.59, p < .001, η

= .22.

Greater intimacy was expected in the friend condition (M = 5.41, SD = 1.35)

than in the acquaintance condition (M = 3.94, SD = 1.39).

Second, on the immediacy/affection measure, the main effect for rela

tionship was also significant, F(1, 196) = 44.22, p < .001, η

= .17. Immediacy/

affection was expected to be higher in the friend condition (M = 4.26, SD =

0.39) than in the acquaintance condition (M = 3.89, SD = 0.43).

Third, on the receptivity/trust measure, there was also a significant main

effect for relationship, F(1, 196) = 11.40, p < .002, η

= .05. Again, the means

were in the expected direction, with greater receptivity/trust expected in the

friend condition (M = 4.48, SD = .40) than in the acquaintance condition (M =

4.31, SD = .38).

In addition to these anticipated effects, there were also significant Re-

lationship Type × Sex of Participant two-way interaction effects on both

immediacy/affection, F(1, 196) = 3.91, p < .05, η

= .01, and receptivity/trust,

F(1, 196) = 7.48, p < .01, η

= .03. For the immediacy/affection measure,

women (M = 3.82; SD = 0.43) expected less intimacy than men (M = 4.02, SD =

0.40) in the acquaintance condition. In the friend condition, this difference

between men (M = 4.24, SD = 0.42) and women (M = 4.27, SD = 0.38) was not

apparent.

For the receptivity/trust measure, men’s intimacy expectations for the

friend condition (M = 4.38, SD = 0.42) did not differ from their expectations in

the acquaintance condition (M = 4.40, SD = 0.41). Women expected less inti

macy than men in the acquaintance condition (M = 4.26, SD = 0.36) but

expected more intimacy than men in the friend condition (M = 4.54, SD =

0.38). For both of these effects, relationship type had a greater impact on

expectations for women than for men.

Discussion

The goal of this study was to determine the effects of variations on the domi

nant first-date script on communicative and sexual expectations for a hypo

thetical first date. The main assertion of the study is that sex of initiator,

alcohol consumption, and relationship with the dating partner will influ

ence communication and sexual expectations for a first date. These aspectsof

the traditional cultural script for a first date provide the types of

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

information on which communicators base their expectancies for social

interaction (Burgoon, 1993).

In general, expectancies for communication intimacy were high, although

sexual expectations for the date were fairly low (see Table 1). Ratings on

Burgoon and Hale’s (1987) RMS were quite high. The average ratings on

these scales (which range from 1 to 5) were 4.08 for immediacy/affection and

4.39 for receptivity/trust. Ratings on the global intimacy scale were more

moderate, with an average of 4.67 on a scale from 0 to 9. Sexual expectations

averaged 2.66 on a 0 to 12 scale, between the scale points for light kissing and

necking.

Sexual Expectations

Sex of participant and sex of initiator. As anticipated, men’s sexual expec

tations for a first date were higher than women’s sexual expectations,

but, contrary to predictions, the difference was not heightened for a female-

initiated date. This finding is consistent with other research reporting that

men have higher sexual expectations at the early stages of romantic relation-

ships (McCabe & Collins, 1984; Mongeau & Carey, 1996;Mongeau & Johnson,

1995; Oliver & Hyde, 1993).

The sex difference in sexual expectations, however, was not very large;

male participants’ average expectation was at the necking level (a 3 on the

scale), whereas female participants’ average expectation was at the light

kissing level (a 2 on the scale). The size of the sex difference in expectancy lev-

els was consistent with the findings of Mongeau and Johnson (1995) but was

somewhat smaller than that reported by Mongeau and Carey (1996). In

Mongeau and Carey’s study, male participants predicted that the man in the

scenario would expect sexual intimacy at the heavy breast petting level,

whereas female participants predicted that the woman in the scenario would

expect light kissing. The results of the present study and of Mongeau and

Johnson (1995) probably describe men’s own expectations for first dates more

accurately, whereas Mongeau and Carey’s participants, who described expec

tations of a hypothetical person, reported a stereotypical prediction based on

sexual scripts.

The second part of Hypothesis 1, that men’s sexual expectations would be

heightened for female-initiated dates, was not supported. Again, this is in

consistent with the findings of Mongeau and Carey (1996) and Mongeau et al.

(1997; another scenario study) but consistent with the findings of Mongeau

and Johnson (1995), perhaps for the same reasons described above.

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Alcohol consumption. Alcohol consumption was not manipulated directly

in the scenarios to avoid a demand effect. The perceived alcohol consumption

manipulation check showed that the increased availability of alcohol in the

keg party scenario resulted in an expectation of considerably more alcohol

consumption than the coffee shop scenario. The difference, however, was be

tween more and less drinking, not between drinking and no drinking. Even in

the coffee shop scenario (at the time of the data collection, local coffee shops

did not serve alcohol), approximately one third of participants (39 of 110)

assumed that some drinking would take place. In the keg party scenario, on

the other hand, all participants reported that either they, their date, or both

would consume alcohol.

Many participants assumed that the keg party scenario involved binge

drinking. Binge drinking may be defined as five drinks in one sitting for men

and four drinks in one sitting for women (Weschler, Davenport, Dowdall,

Moeykens, & Castillo, 1994). In the keg party condition, participants as

sumed that Dan and Jane would consume an average of 10.06 drinks, with

Dan having an average of 6.30 drinks and Jane having an average of 3.75

drinks. Because behavior that is considered alcohol abuse by the wider soci-

ety is perceived as less dangerous, and perhaps even socially desirable, ina

college setting (Weschler et al., 1994), students likely do not perceive that this

level of alcohol consumption has the potential for dangerous results. None-

theless, as the frequency of binge drinking by college students has been

linked to such problematic outcomes as injuries, drunk driving, and un-

planned sexual activity, this finding is important (Weschler et al., 1994).

As anticipated, the availability of alcohol in the scenario was related to

sexual expectations. Participants expected greater sexual intimacy on a keg

party date when compared to a coffee shop date. In addition to the findings

from the hypothesis tests, there was a moderate, positive correlation between

participants’ expectations regarding the number of drinks they expect to be

consumed on the date (i.e., the alcohol consumption manipulation check) and

their sexual expectations for the date (see Table 2). These findings are consis

tent with the alcohol expectancy perspective. Expectations about alcohol’s

reduction of inhibitions and enhancement of sexual response have greater

impact than the actual physiological effects of alcohol (Goldman & Roehrich,

1991). There is danger, however, in this expectancy effect. George and

Norris (1991) state that “men have learned to view men and women drinking

together as a potential sexual situation in which men have an exploitable

advantage” (p. 134). When coupled with the knowledge that alcohol expectan

cies can also be used to excuse deviant sexual behavior, especially by those

with high levels of guilt about sexuality, the potential for exploitation

increases (George & Norris, 1991).

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Relationship type. In this study, women were predicted to report expecta

tions of more intimate sexual behavior for a date with a friend when com

pared to a date with a new acquaintance. Also, although men were antici

pated to expect greater sexual intimacy than women across conditions, this

difference was expected to be smaller in the friend condition. Quite surpris

ingly, the relationship between the dating partners was unrelated to sexual

expectations for first dates.

One possible explanation for the lack of significant effects is that greater

risk is involved in dating a friend. If the relational transition from a platonic

to a romantic relationship should fail, the friendship may be lost as well. In

comparison, less is at stake on a first date with an acquaintance because

there is no prior relationship to spoil. In addition, typical date activities such

as those specified in this study (going to the movies, to a coffee shop, or to a

party) are also activities often shared by platonic friends, so few markers

exist to differentiate the date from spending time with a friend. The higher

stakes involved, combined with uncertainty about the state of the relation

ship, probably inhibit sexual intimacy on a first date between friends. The

point at which romantic commitment reaches an adequate level for women to

escalate intimacy may come sooner when the partner is a close friend. How-

ever, that point may not necessarily coincide with the first date. This is

consistent with Mongeau et al. (1998), who argue that the assumption that

first dates mark a relationship’s transition from platonic to romantic maybe

untenable.

Close friends likely have replaced the cultural script with their own idio-

syncratic interpersonal script specific to their relationship. With this script in

place, partners may chart a relational trajectory that has little to do with the

traditional cultural script, so that the point at which, and how, the relation

ship makes the transition from close friendship to romantic entanglement

may vary widely depending on individual and relational characteristics.

Communication Expectations

Sex of participant and sex of initiator. Contrary to hypotheses, these data did

not indicate a difference in communication expectations related to sex of par

ticipant and sex of initiator. Although prior research (Mongeau et al., 1997)

indicated that men would expect more intimacy than women on female-initi

ated dates, that pattern was not evident in this study. Mongeau et al. (1997)

found this effect to be significant for the global intimacy ratings. In their

study, however, there were four different initiation types. The exclusion of the

“female hints” and “male hints” initiation types (which imply that the dating

partners have a mutual interest because both participated in the date

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

initiation) may be the cause of the nonsignificant effect found in this study. In

many of the significant effects involving initiation type in the Mongeau et al.

(1997) study, one or both of the “hinting” initiations differed from the other

initiation types. In fact, in evaluating expectations of communication equal

ity, the significant effect that Mongeau et al. (1997) found appeared to be due

to a difference between the hinting initiations and the initiations that did not

involve hints (i.e., the equivalent of the female initiation and male initiation

types used in the present study). This may also be the reason that significant

effects on the RMS found by Mongeau et al. (1997) were not apparent in this

study.

Alcohol consumption. The impact of alcohol on expectations of communi

cation intimacy is mixed and somewhat confusing. Participants expected

that partners would exhibit more receptivity/trust on a date where alcohol

was available than on a date where alcohol was not available. This result is

consistent with the alcohol expectancy explanation that men experience

reduced anxiety and increased disclosure when they believe they have con-

sumed alcohol (George & Norris, 1991). Finding this relationship for women

is puzzling, because women have been found to self-disclose less when they

believe they have consumed alcohol to avoid negative evaluation by men

(George & Norris, 1991). However, in the studies described by George and

Norris (1991), participants were told they would have to impress judges of the

opposite sex whose task it was to evaluate participants’ attractiveness.

Women’s fear of negative evaluation may have been alleviated by the knowl-

edge that going on a date with someone implies some level of attraction

(Mongeau & Kendall, 1996). Moreover, college students’ goals for first dates

differ from the goal of impressing a judge (Mongeau, Morr, & Ficara, 2003),

and, as many researchers argue, self-disclosure is not synonymous with the

communication of intimacy (e.g., Petronio, 2002). The differences in goals for

the interaction and in outcome behaviors likely result in inconsistency of this

study’s results with George and Norris’ findings.

Second, the data for a significant three-way interaction effect (Sex of

Participant × Alcohol Availability × Relationship Type) on global intimacy

ratings indicate that for a date with a new acquaintance, men expect greater

intimacy when alcohol is available than when alcohol is not available. How

ever, when the date is a friend, men expect less intimacy when alcohol is

available than when alcohol is not available. The way that the global inti

macy items are phrased may also imply a sexual element in the goals for the

date.If participants are interpreting the word “intimacy”to mean sexual inti

macy (as suggested by Mongeau et al., 1997, and corroborated by the positive

correlation between global intimacy and sexual expectations [see Table 2]in

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

this study), the relationship of alcohol and intimacy in the acquaintance con

dition may be explained by alcohol expectancy research. That is, the expecta

tion of drinking alcohol is related to greater sexual arousal (George & Norris,

1991; Goldman & Roehrich, 1991) and the perception that a woman will be

more sexually available (George et al., 1988).

The alcohol-intimacy relationship in the friend condition requires addi

tional explanation. The reason that men’s global intimacy expectations in the

friend condition are lower with alcohol is probably an effect of the date activ

ity. For two friends on a first date, a coffee shop setting may be more conducive

to communicating closeness than a (presumably) noisy and crowded keg

party. In addition, these date activities may imply different goals (Mongeau

et al., 2003), which in turn have different implications for communication

intimacy. A coffee shop date may imply a goal of getting to know the partner

and/or relational escalation, which may suggest greater communication inti

macy than a keg party date (which may imply a goal of having fun and/or

increasing the probability of sexual interaction). Considering the likely sex

ual implications of the global intimacy scale, men might be reluctant to

engage in sexual intimacy with a close friend who has been drinking. Men

may be more sensitive to the possibility for exploitation and for the repercus-

sions that exploitation might have on the relationship when the date is a

friend than when she is a new acquaintance.

The data for the interaction effect on global intimacy ratings indicate a dif-

ferent relationship between alcohol and intimacy for women than for men.

Contrary to predictions, women did not expect a difference in intimacy re-

lated to alcohol availability in the acquaintance condition. Perhaps women

simply do not expect a very intimate date/relationship with a new acquain

tance on a first date, regardless of alcohol availability.

In the friend condition, however, women reported higher global intimacy

expectations when alcohol was available than when it was not available.

Women may feel that they can let down their guard more around a man who

is a friend. If a sexual interpretation of the global intimacy items is a factor in

this instance, it may be that women would like to engage in higher levels of

sexual intimacy on a first date with a friend than with a new acquaintance. In

this case, perhaps, the woman might be using alcohol to give her friendship a

romantic nudge.In this case, the excuse of alcohol consumption may facilitate

increased sexual intimacy for women.

Third, there was a significant effect on global intimacy ratings due to Alco

hol Availability × Sex of Initiator. On male-initiated dates, intimacy is ex

pected to be greater with alcohol. On female-initiated dates, intimacy is

expected to be greater without alcohol. In one study investigating female ini

tiation of sexual intimacy, O’Sullivan and Byers (1993) suggested that people

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

are less comfortable with sex-role-reversed behavior in sexual situations

than they are with behavior consistent with sex roles. Because female initia

tion of a date runs counter to the sex roles prescribed by the traditional date

script, partners on a female-initiated date might be less comfortable with

each other. Their discomfort may result in less communication of intimacy on

the date, especially for dates when alcohol is available, because the potential

negative evaluation of the woman due to alcohol consumption may be com

pounded by her sex-role-reversed behavior in initiating the date.

Finally, there was a significant four-way interaction effect on ratings of

receptivity/trust. This effect likely is due to the low ratings of receptivity/

trust expectations in two cells: men in the male initiator, friend, keg party

condition, and men in the female initiator, acquaintance, coffee shop condi

tion. The cause of this finding is difficult to determine. For now, it remains a

puzzle.

Relationship type. For all measurement scales, participants indicated that

they expected greater communication intimacy with a friend than with an

acquaintance. The effects on immediacy/affection (η

= .17) and global inti-

macy (η

= .22) were the strongest effects in the study aside from manipula-

tion checks. No other effect explained more than 6% of the variance in a

dependent variable. This finding is consistent with a number of theoretical

positions including Altman and Taylor’s (1973) social penetration theory.

Relational development is marked in several ways but importantly by

increasing breadth and depth (i.e., intimacy) of self-disclosures. Uncertainty

reduction theory (Berger & Calabrese, 1975) and Sunnafrank (1986) both

argued that as partners get to know each other better, the intimacy level of

communication contact will increase (although in the latter theory, this effect

should only occur if the partner is evaluated in positive terms). Together,

these theories, as well as models of relational development (e.g., Knapp &

Vangelisti, 2000), would all predict that close friends likely will communicate

at a more intimate level (and will have done so before the date) than will

acquaintances.

In addition to the expected main effects, there were also significant two-

way interaction effects for Sex of Participant × Relationship Type on ratings

of immediacy/affection and receptivity/trust. On both measures, women

expected less intimacy than men in the acquaintance condition. In the friend

condition, women expected greater receptivity/trust than men, but there was

no sex difference in immediacy/affection. Although the effect sizes were

small, relationship type apparently is more significant for women than for

men. In fact, the receptivity/trust finding must be considered in light of the

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

significant four-way interaction effect on ratings of this variable discussed

earlier.

Conclusion

This study differed from previous investigations of first-date expectations in

that the manipulated variables included all three categories of information

that EVT argues are relevant to the development of expectancies: communi

cator, relationship, and contextual information. Relationship information,

which had not been included as a variable in previous studies, was the inde

pendent variable that resulted in the largest effect sizes in this investigation.

These results indicate that the prior relationship between dating partners is

of relevance to the initiation of a dating relationship and that just knowing

that two individuals are going on a first date does not provide complete infor

mation about the nature of their relationship. Moreover, these results pro

vide corroboration of previous research indicating that sex differences and

expected alcohol consumption affect dating expectations. However, this

study’s findings that the sex of the date initiator does not influence expecta-

tions contradicts previous investigations of the hypothetical expectations of

a generalized other—perhaps indicating that, although sex-role stereotypes

persist, people’s expectations of their own behavior may run counter to the

stereotype. Furthermore, in this investigation, sex, alcohol, and relationship

interacted in subtle and complex ways to influence expectations, demonstrat-

ing that individuals attend to many factors simultaneously in forming their

expectations.

Findings relative to sexual expectations in this study also have practi

cal implications for understanding sexual coercion in dating relationships.

Spitzberg’s (1998) delineation of the interactional approach establishes that

“the stage of the dating relationship may influence the occurrence of sexual

coercion” (p. 207). This perspective connects the greater prevalence of sexual

coercion early in dating relationships with findings that men expect greater

sexual involvement than women (Spitzberg, 1998). This study provides fur

ther support for the sex difference in sexual expectations. Furthermore, the

unique contribution of this study is to demonstrate that these differences are

robust across different types of relationships between the dating partners.

Individuals may expect less discrepancy in expectations when they begin a

romantic relationship with a close friend; however, our findings indicate that

the sex difference persists, perhaps increasing the chances for misunder

standing, which has been argued to be a possible cause of sexual coercion in

dating relationships (Spitzberg, 1998).

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Limitations

The present study has three main limitations. First, the manipulation of the

alcohol consumption variable is somewhat problematic. Alcohol consumption

was not manipulated explicitly in the scenarios to avoid demand characteris

tics and to make the scenario as natural as possible. (“Would you like to con

sume mass quantities of alcohol with me?” does not seem like a natural date

initiation.) In addition, alcohol availability may have been confounded with

other factors. The two date activities included in the scenarios (i.e., going to a

coffee shop and going to a keg party) likely differ in more than just the

differential availability of alcohol.

A second concern with variable manipulation is in the manipulation of

relationship type. The friend scenarios described Dan and Jane as close

friends who are attracted to each other but have never acted on their feelings

because one or the other has always been involved with someone else. The

acquaintance scenario does not include any information about liking or

attraction between Dan and Jane. As a result, relationship type may be con-

founded with liking and romantic attraction in this study. However, the lack

of a main effect for relationship type on sexual expectations indicates that the

sexual attraction implication may not have been highly problematic.

Finally, the generalizability of these results is limited by characteristics of

the sample and the method. The vast majority of the participants were White

undergraduate college students between the ages of 18 and 22. The lack of

racial, ethnic, and age diversity are important concerns, as these factors are

likely to influence norms and expectations for relational events like first

dates. In addition, this particular campus population is unusual in its pre

dominance of relatively conservative and affluent students. These character

istics are also likely to impact expectations for dates. Furthermore, the hypo

thetical scenario method was chosen for the control that it allows over the

independent variables. However, generalizability of results gained through

this method is questionable.

Directions for Future Research

Future research in this area should focus on addressing the limitations of

this investigation and on furthering our knowledge of dating expectations

and their consequences for relational communication. Using populations

other than college students is important. Because cultural influences change

over time, it is likely that there are generational differences in dating norms

and expectations. An older population of adults who may be dating again fol

lowing divorce or death of a spouse would probably have different

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

expectations for dates than a 19-year-old college sophomore. In particular,

the influence of alcohol may be different for a nonstudent population because

of the party culture on many college campuses. As mentioned previously, fur

ther research should include populations that are more diverse with regard

to racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic characteristics. Furthermore, this study

was limited to expectations for cross-sex first dates. Expectations for the ini

tiation of same-sex romantic relationships require further investigation.

Expanding the population included in this research is important for expand

ing the generalizability of our knowledge of the expectations people bringto

dates—and the confirmation or violation of those expectations may have

important effects on their later relationships and sexual behavior.

Second, the application of expectancy violations principles to the first-date

context should be expanded. This study manipulated the information sources

that EVT argues should contribute to expectations for interaction: communi

cator, contextual, and relationship information (Burgoon, 1993). Obvious and

inherent difficulties (both pragmatic and ethical) exist in conducting obser

vational research in this context. However, collecting information about

expectations prior to actual dates would increase ecological validity of re-

sults. Furthermore, collecting information about the consequences of per-

ceived violations or confirmations of expectations following dates would

allow testing of predictions based on EVT.

Finally, the nature of first dates themselves should be further investi-

gated. The lack of support for our hypotheses implies that the first date may

not function as the turning point marking a relationship’s transition from

platonic to romantic. Additional research should be undertaken to determine

when and how this transition takes place to increase our understanding of

the ways that people achieve successful relational development.

Appendix

Examples of Experimental Scenarios Manipulating

Sex of Date Initiator, Alcohol Availability, and Relationship Type

Example 1: Scenario with male initiator,

no alcohol availability, and acquaintance condition

Dan and Jane are sitting together at the Food Court in Shriver Center waiting for

the rest of their communication group to show up for a meeting. They are working to

gether with four other people on a group project for their public relations class. Because

the semester has just begun, this is their group’s first meeting.

Dan and Jane first met just before winter break when a mutual friend introduced

them. They didn’t see each [sic] over the break and because of the hectic nature of the

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

new semester, they have only talked briefly since classes began. On this particular day,

they have both arrived early for the group meeting. As they wait for the other group

members, they talk about current events on and off campus and end up talking about

movies. After discussing a particular new movie, Dan says, “That movie is uptown at

the Princess. If you’re not busy this weekend, would you like to go see it with me and

then go to the coffee shop afterward?”

Example 2: Scenario with female initiator,

alcohol availability, and friend condition

Dan and Jane are sitting together at the Food Court in Shriver Center waiting for

the rest of their communication group to show up for a meeting. They are working to

gether with four other people on a group project for their public relations class. Because

the semester has just begun, this is their group’s first meeting.

Dan and Jane know each other very well and have remained close friends since they

first met during their freshman year in high school. They are attracted to each other

but have never had the opportunity to act on those feelings because one or the other has

always been involved with someone else. For the first time since they met, neither Dan

nor Jane is involved with another person. On this particular day,they have both arrived

early for the group meeting. As they wait for the other group members, they talk about

current events on and off campus and end up talking about movies. After discussing a

particular new movie, Jane says, “That movie is uptown at the Princess. If you’re not

busy this weekend, would you like to go see it with me and then go to a keg party at my

friends’ house afterward?”

Note

This article is based on Mary Claire Morr’s master’s thesis, directed by Paul

Mongeau at Miami University. Previous versions of this article were presented at the

1999 National Communication Association Convention in Chicago and the 2000

National Communication Association Doctoral Honors Seminar in Evanston, Illinois.

The authors would like to thank Sandra Metts and thesis committee members Larry

Nadler and Debra Hughes for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this article.

References

Abbey, A., & Melby, C. (1986). The effects of nonverbal cues on gender differ

ences in perceptions of sexual intent. Sex Roles, 15, 283-398.

Abelson, R. P. (1981). Psychological status of the script concept. American

Psychologist, 36, 715-729.

Afifi, W. A., & Faulkner, S. L. (2000). On being “just friends”: The frequency

and impact of sexual activity in cross-sex friendships. Journal of Social

and Personal Relationships, 17, 205-222.

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of

interpersonal relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Bailey, B. (1988). From front porch to back seat: Courtship in twentieth-

century America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Baxter, L. A., & Bullis, C. (1986). Turning points in developing romantic rela

tionships. Human Communication Research, 12, 469-493.

Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interac

tion and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal commu

nication. Human Communication Research, 1, 99-112.

Brown, S. A., Goldman, M. S., Inn, A., & Anderson, L. R. (1980). Expectations

of reinforcement from alcohol: Their domain and relation to drinking part

ners. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48, 419-426.

Burgoon, J. K. (1993). Interpersonal expectancies, expectancy violations, and

emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology,

12, 30-48.

Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1987). Validation and measurement of the funda

mental themes of relational communication. Communication Mono

graphs, 54, 19-41.

Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1988). Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model

elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communication

Monographs, 55, 55-79.

Cate, R. M., & Lloyd, S. A. (1992). Courtship. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Flanigan, B. J., & Hitch, M. A. (1986). Alcohol use, sexual intercourse, and

contraception: An exploratory study. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Educa-

tion, 31, 6-40.

George, W. H., Gournic, S. J., & McAfee, M. P. (1988). Perceptions of post-

drinking female sexuality: Effects of gender, beverage choice, and drink

payment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 1295-1317.

George, W. H., & Norris, J. (1991). Alcohol, disinhibition, sexual arousal, and

deviant sexual behavior. Alcohol Health and Research World, 15, 133-138.

Goldman, M. S., & Roehrich, L. (1991). Alcohol expectancies and sexuality.

Alcohol Health and Research World, 15, 126-132.

Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2000). Interpersonal communication and

human relationships (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Laner, M. R., & Ventrone, N. A. (1998). Egalitarian daters/traditionalist

dates. Journal of Family Issues, 19, 468-477.

Laner, M. R., & Ventrone, N. A. (2000). Dating scripts revisited. Journal of

Family Issues, 21, 488-500.

LaPlante, M. N., McCormick, N., & Brannigan, G. G. (1980). Living the sexual

script: College students’ views of influence in sexual encounters.The Jour

nal of Sex Research, 16, 338-355.

Leigh, B. C. (1990). The relationship of sex-related alcohol expectanciesto

alcohol consumption and sexual behavior. British Journal of Addiction,

85, 919-928.

Maccoby, E. E. (1998).The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Cam

bridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

McCabe, M. P. (1987). Desired and experienced levels of premarital affec

tion and sexual intercourse during dating. The Journal of Sex Research,

23, 23-33.

McCabe, M. P., & Collins, J. K. (1984). Measurement of depth of desired and

experienced sexual involvement at different stages of dating. The Journal

of Sex Research, 20, 377-390

Metts, S., & Cupach, W. R. (1989). The role of communication in human sexu

ality. In K. McKinney & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Human sexuality: The societal

and interpersonal context (pp. 139-161). New York: Ablex.

Metts, S., & Spitzberg, B. H. (1996). Sexual communication in interpersonal

contexts: A script-based approach. In B. R. Burleson (Ed.), Communica

tion yearbook 19 (pp. 49-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mischel, W. (1966). A social-learning view of sex differences in behavior.In

E. E. Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences (pp. 56-81). Palo

Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

Mongeau, P. A., Aselage, C., Ficara, L., & Hart, M. (1997, November). Commu

nication and sexual expectancies for first dates. Paper presented to the

National Communication Association, Chicago, IL.

Mongeau, P. A., & Carey, C. M. (1996). Who’s wooing whom II: An experi

mental investigation of date-initiation and expectancy violation. Western

Journal of Communication, 60, 195-213.

Mongeau, P. A., Carey, C. M., & Williams, M. L. M. (1998). First date initiation

and enactment: An expectancy violation perspective. In D. J. Canary &

K. Dindia (Eds.), Sex differences and similarities in communication

(pp. 413-426). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Mongeau, P. A., Hale, J. L., Johnson, K. L., & Hillis, J. D. (1993). Who’s wooing

whom? An investigation of female-initiated dating. In P. J. Kalbfleisch

(Ed.), Interpersonal communication: Evolving interpersonal relationships

(pp. 51-68). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Mongeau, P. A., & Johnson, K. L. (1995). Predicting cross-sex first-date sexual

expectations and involvement: Contextual and individual difference fac

tors. Personal Relationships, 2, 301-312.

Mongeau, P. A., & Kendall, J. A. (1996, June). “What do you mean this is a

date?” Differentiating a date from going out with friends. Paper presented

to the International Network on Personal Relationships, Seattle, WA.

Mongeau, P. A., Morr, M. C., & Ficara, L. (2003). Goals for heterosexual first

dates: Identification, measurement, and the influence of contextual factors.

Manuscript under review.

Mongeau, P. A., Yeazell, M., & Hale, J. L. (1994). Sex differences in relational

message attributions on male- and female-initiated first dates: A research

note. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 731-742.

Muehlenhard, C.L., Friedman, D. E., & Thomas, C. M. (1985). Is date rape jus

tifiable? The effects of dating activity, who initiated, who paid, and men’s

attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 297-310.

Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-

analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 29-51.

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

O’Sullivan, L. F., & Byers, E. S.(1992).College students’ incorporation of initi

ator and restrictor roles in sexual dating interactions. The Journal of Sex

Research, 29, 435-446.

O’Sullivan, L. F., & Byers, E. S. (1993). Eroding stereotypes: College women’s

attempts to influence reluctant male sexual partners. The Journal of Sex

Research, 30, 270-282.

Paul, E. L., & Hayes, K. A. (2002). The casualties of “casual” sex: A qualitative

exploration of the phenomenology of college students’ hookups. Journal of

Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 639-661.

Paul, E. L., McManus, B., & Hayes, A. (2000). “Hookups”: Characteristics and

correlates of college students’ spontaneous and anonymous sexual experi

ences. The Journal of Sex Research, 37, 76-88.

Petronio, S. (2002). Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure. Albany:

State University of New York Press.

Prager, K. J. (1995). The psychology of intimacy. New York: Guilford.

Pryor, J. B., & Merluzzi, T. V. (1985). The role of expertise in processing so

cial interaction scripts. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21,

362-379.

Rose, S., & Frieze, I. H. (1989). Young singles’ scripts for a first date. Gender &

Society, 3, 258-268.

Rose, S., & Frieze, I. H. (1993). Young singles’ contemporary dating scripts.

Sex Roles, 28, 499-509.

Sherwin, R., & Corbett, S. (1985). Campus sexual norms and dating relation-

ships: A trend analysis. The Journal of Sex Research, 21, 258-274.

Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1986). Sexual scripts: Permanence and change.

Archives of Sexual Behavior, 15, 97-120.

Spitzberg, B. H. (1998). Sexual coercion in courtship relations. In B. H.

Spitzberg & W. R. Cupach (Eds.), The dark side of close relationships

(pp. 179-232). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Sunnafrank, M. (1986). Predicted outcome value during initial interactions:

A reformulation of uncertainty reduction theory. Human Communication

Research, 13, 3-33.

Surra, C. A., Batchelder, M. L., & Hughes, D. K. (1995). Accounts and the

demystification of courtship. In M. A. Fitzpatrick & A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.),

Explaining family interactions (pp. 112-141). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Weschler, H., Davenport, A., Dowdall, G., Moeykens, B., & Castillo, S. (1994).

Health and behavioral consequences of binge drinking in college. Journal

of the American Medical Association, 272, 1672-1677.

Mary Claire Morr (Ph.D., Arizona State University, 2002) is an assistant

professor in the Department of Human Communication Studies at the Uni

versity of Denver. Her research interests include privacy in family relation

ships, in-law relationships, and transitions in romantic relationships.

Paul A. Mongeau (Ph.D., Michigan State University, 1988) is a professor at

the Hugh Downs School of Human Communication at Arizona State Univer

sity. His research interests center on the earliest stages of romantic

OMMUNICATION RESEARCH • February 2004

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

relationships including how relationships make the transitions from being

platonic (or nonexistent) to being romantic. He is also interested in the cogni

tive processing of persuasive messages.

Morr, Mongeau • First-Date Expectations

at ARIZONA STATE UNIV on April 23, 2016crx.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Algorithm awareness in online dating: associations with mate-searching difficulty and future expectancies among U.S. online daters

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2024
BEHAV INFORM TECHNOL

Prior research has produced contradictory findings regarding online daters’ potential to navigate the algorithmic systems to find compatible matches. Drawing upon a structuration algorithm media effects model, we examine whether online daters with a higher level of algorithm awareness experience less online mate-searching difficulty and report more optimism and hope after using online dating services. Analysing data from a national representative sample of American online daters (N = 871), we found that, in general, algorithm awareness was negatively related to mate-searching difficulty, which was negatively related to optimism but not hope. In addition, the relationship between algorithm awareness and mate-searching difficulty was stronger among female users than male users in our sample. The findings suggest a potentially positive role of algorithm awareness in promoting immediate online mate-searching experience on current dating platforms used by American online daters. We further discuss the implications on the role of algorithm awareness and positive immediate mate-searching experience in relation to more long-term outcomes, which calls for a dialectic view of algorithm awareness and immediate online success.

FROM ORTHODOXY TO THE UNIVERSAL LOGIC OF HUMAN RIGHTS: A CASE STUDY OF FILM THAPPAD (THE SLAP)

Article

Full-text available

Dec 2022

This article analyses the film Thappad (The Slap) (2020) directed by Anubhav Sinha, which portrays slapping as a form of domestic abuse and a violation of women’s right to self-respect. This study investigates the incorporation of Universal Human Rights principles into the discourse of Hindi cinema. Through textual analysis of the film text, the paper examines how the film employs the language of rights as a counter-narrative against patriarchal ideologies, promoting gender equality and dignity within domestic settings. It argues that by countering the conservative cultural perspectives pertaining to spousal abuse through the discourse and philosophy of Human Rights, the film contributes to societal transformation. The paper identifies a shift in the film’s discourse from traditional, orthodox narratives to universal narratives centred around rights.

Dating Relationships

Chapter

Jun 2008

Laura Stafford

Dating relationships have no uniform defining characteristics. They have romantic or sexual overtones, occur between two people who are not married to each other or to anyone else, typically do not share a residence, have not formally acknowledged plans to marry, and may or may not expect continued involvement. These relationships vary in expectations for and level of commitment, intimacy, exclusivity, and sexual activity. Dating relationships have often been equated with “premarital” relationships or are considered part of “courtship,” though it is recognized that most “premarital” relationships do not result in marriage, nor are they intended to. Dating as a relational form emerged in the US and has received limited research attention in nonwestern countries.

Expectancy Violation

Chapter

Jun 2008

Laura K. Guerrero

People have expectations about how others should and will act in a given situation. Some expectations are based on personal knowledge about an individual, relationship, or situation. Other expectations are based on rules of social and cultural appropriateness. When a communicator's behavior deviates from these expectations, an expectancy violation has occurred.

Thanks for the offer: Testing drink offers as predictors of sexual activity

Article

Jun 2022
J AM COLL HEALTH

Objective: Drink offers are related to increased alcohol consumption, which is linked to sexual activity among college students. However, offers of alcohol may increase the odds of sexual activity that night independent of the amount of alcohol consumed. Participants: 540 undergraduate students were recruited for a longitudinal study of daily experiences. Method: Participants completed up to four annual waves of a measurement burst daily diary study. Using these longitudinal data, we examined whether receiving a drink offer on a given night was related to greater odds of having sex. Results: Receiving a drink offer (but not the number of drinks accepted) is related to greater odds of having sex, controlling for drinking level. Conclusions: Receiving a drink offer is uniquely related to odds of having sex when controlling for the amount of alcohol participants consumed. This may have implications for psychological functioning and relationship development.

Comunicación sobre sexo: implicaciones para las relaciones, la salud, la cultura y la identidad. Una revisión

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2021
PROF INFORM

Jimmie Manning

En este artículo se presenta una revisión de la comunicación científica sobre sexo producida en las últimas dos décadas (2000-2020). El análisis tipológico de la bibliografía revela 11 áreas temáticas principales de investigación sobre comunicación sexual interpersonal. Seis de estas áreas están orientadas a las relaciones naturales: flirteo e iniciación; placer y deseo; expectativas sexuales; satisfacción relacional y sexual; comunicación después del sexo; y aspectos negativos del sexo y la sexualidad. Otros tres tratan aspectos de salud: educación sexual, especialmente teniendo en cuenta cómo se trata el tema entre padres e hijos en las familias; negociación o discusión con la pareja de prácticas sexuales seguras; y disfunciones sexuales. Finalmente, dos de los temas son de tipo cultural: factores e influencias sociales; e influencias y representaciones de/en los medios. La producción científica también se revisa en términos de compromisos teóricos, siguiendo la mayoría de las investigaciones tradiciones sociopsicológicas o críticas, aunque un número notable también abarca paradigmas socioculturales o biológicos. Con base en estas observaciones se ofrecen cinco direcciones para futuras investigaciones: programas de investigación sexual interpersonal; avance/creación de métodos para la investigación de la comunicación sexual; eliminación de la heteronormatividad; consideración de los aspectos prácticos de la investigación sexual; y, quizá, lo más importante, teorizar el sexo como comunicación.

Communication studies about sex: Implications for relationships, health, culture, and identity. A review

Article

Full-text available

Feb 2021
PROF INFORM

Jimmie Manning

This article features a review of communication scholarship about sex from the past two decades (2000-2020). A typographic analysis of relevant research reveals 11 primary topic areas related to how interpersonal sexual communication is commonly researched in communication studies. Six of these topic areas are relationship-oriented in nature: flirting and initiation; pleasure and desire; sexual expectations; relational and sexual satisfaction; communication after sex; and negative aspects of sex and sexuality. Three of the topics are health-oriented in nature: sex education, especially in consideration of how parent-child talk happens in families; negotiation of safe sex practices; and sexual dysfunction. Finally, two of the topics are cultural in nature: social factors and influences; and media influences and representations. Scholarship is also reviewed in terms of theoretical commitments, with most research following sociopsychological or critical traditions but with a noteworthy number also embracing sociocultural or biological paradigms. Based on these observations, five directions are offered for future research: supporting programs of interpersonal sex research; advancing and/or creating methods related to communication sex research; eliminating heteronormativity; considering the practical aspects of sex research; and, perhaps most importantly, theorizing sex as communication.

Examining First Date Goals across Different Types of Date Initiation

Article

Mar 2020

Individual goals for first dates are examined in the context of requesting the first date, accepting a first date request, going on a blind date, and going on a group date in a sample of 211 college students. Results indicate that first dates are more likely to be group dates than blind dates or requested dates and those individuals on blind dates and group dates are less likely to endorse goals of having sex or investigating romantic potential than those who request or accept the first date. Results are considered using error management theory, cognitive valence theory, and stage models of relationships. The differences that emerge across the type of date initiation indicate the type of date initiation and are important in addressing courtship.

On-Again, Off-Again Relationships: Navigating (In)Stability in Romantic Relationships

Book

Dec 2019

René M. Dailey

Cambridge Core - Social Psychology - On-Again, Off-Again Relationships - by René M. Dailey

References

Chapter

Dec 2019

René M. Dailey

Gender Differences in Sexuality: A Meta-Analysis

Article

Full-text available

Jul 1993

This meta-analysis surveyed 177 usable sources that reported data on gender differences on 21 different measures of sexual attitudes and behaviors. The largest gender difference was in incidence of masturbation: Men had the greater incidence (d = .96). There was also a large gender difference in attitudes toward casual sex: Males had considerably more permissive attitudes (d = .81). There were no gender differences in attitudes toward homosexuality or in sexual satisfaction. Most other gender differences were in the small-to-moderate range. Gender differences narrowed from the 1960s to the 1980s for many variables. Chodorow's neoanalytic theory, sociobiology, social learning theory, social role theory, and script theory are discussed in relation to these findings.

Eroding stereotypes: College women's attempts to influence reluctant male sexual partners

Article

Full-text available

Aug 1993

Guided by descriptions of the traditional sexual script, researchers have examined men's, but not women's, attempts to influence a reluctant dating partner to engage in sex. In the current study, we examined both men's and women's experiences of women's attempts to influence a reluctant male dating partner to engage in sexual activity. Ninety male and 111 female participants completed a series of questionnaires assessing sexual/dating histories and attitudes toward sexuality. Participants also completed the Sexual Situation Questionnaire designed to assess the situational and behavioral characteristics of disagreements in which a woman attempted to influence a reluctant man to engage in sex. Fifty‐six percent of the participants reported having experienced such a disagreement interaction in the year prior to the study. In accordance with attribution theory, men were expected to be more likely than were women to make personal attributions for their reluctance, whereas women were expected to be more likely than were men to make situational attributions for men's refusals. Our findings supported these predictions. Most participants indicated that the woman complied with the man's indication of reluctance and used no influence behaviors. Somewhat fewer indicated that the woman complied but also used some form of influence, whereas a distinct minority indicated that the woman did not comply with the man's refusal. No influence strategy was rated consistently as having had a positive, negative, or neutral impact on the man, which indicates that influence behaviors can have varying impacts depending on the context in which the influence occurs. In general, few negative emotional or relational consequences were found to be associated with these disagreements. As most disagreements did not result in engaging in the disputed level of sexual activity, women appear to have had little success in their attempts to orchestrate sexual encounters (traditionally men's role in sexual dating interactions).

Boundaries of Privacy: Dialectics of Disclosure

Book

Jan 2002

Sandra Petronio

Accounts and the Demystification of Courtship

Chapter

Jan 1995

First Date Initiation and Enactment: An Expectancy Violation Approach

Chapter

Feb 1998

Alcohol expectancies and sexuality

Article

Jan 1991
Alcohol Health Res World

Interpersonal Communication and Human Relationships

Book

Jan 2014

The Psychology of Intimacy

Article

Aug 1996

Health and Behavioral Consequences of Binge Drinking in College

Article

Dec 1994

Henry Wechsler

Objective. —To examine the extent of binge drinking by college students and the ensuing health and behavioral problems that binge drinkers create for themselves and others on their campus.Design. —Self-administered survey mailed to a national representative sample of US 4-year college students.Setting. —One hundred forty US 4-year colleges in 1993.Participants. —A total of 17592 college students.Main Outcome Measures. —Self-reports of drinking behavior, alcohol-related health problems, and other problems.Results. —Almost half (44%) of college students responding to the survey were binge drinkers, including almost one fifth (19%) of the students who were frequent binge drinkers. Frequent binge drinkers are more likely to experience serious health and other consequences of their drinking behavior than other students. Almost half (47%) of the frequent binge drinkers experienced five or more different drinking-related problems, including injuries and engaging in unplanned sex, since the beginning of the school year. Most binge drinkers do not consider themselves to be problem drinkers and have not sought treatment for an alcohol problem. Binge drinkers create problems for classmates who are not binge drinkers. Students who are not binge drinkers at schools with higher binge rates were more likely than students at schools with lower binge rates to experience problems such as being pushed, hit, or assaulted or experiencing an unwanted sexual advance.Conclusions. —Binge drinking is widespread on college campuses. Programs aimed at reducing this problem should focus on frequent binge drinkers, refer them to treatment or educational programs, and emphasize the harm they cause for students who are not binge drinkers.(JAMA. 1994;272:1672-1677)

The Two Sexes: Growing up Apart, Coming Together

Article

Jul 1999

First-Date Expectations

Abstract

Recommended publications

Does one day of drinking matter? 21st birthday drinking predicts subsequent drinking and consequence...

Women and Substance Abuse: Research Directions for the 1990s

Alcohol Consumption, Drinking Patterns, and Alcohol Problems among Managerial versus Non-Managerial...

Psychosocial correlates of recidivism in a sample of ex-prisoners: the role of oppositional defiant...