Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPER
Sexting and Sexual Satisfaction on Young
Adults in Romantic Relationship
Psychological Research
on Urban Society
2020, Vol. 3(1): 30-39
© The Author(s) 2020
DOI: 10.7454/proust.v3i1.61
proust.ui.ac.id
Abstract
The integration of technology into everyday life contributes to the urgency to study virtual activities
within the context of a romantic relationship, one of them being sexting or the exchange of sensual
messages through communication technology. Sexting, until recently, had been looked upon as
risky sexual behavior. Researchers, however, have come to view sexting as a positive activity in
romantic relationships, especially in regards to sexual satisfaction. Sexual satisfaction may be
enhanced by sexting as it can function as a means of sexual communication and activity. This
research aims to investigate the relationship between sexting and sexual satisfaction, especially with
sexting as the predictor of sexual satisfaction. Regression analysis is used to test the hypothesis, and
the result shows that sexting significantly predicted sexual satisfaction (F(1,70) = 8,602, p = 0,005,
<0,01) with the determinant coefficient of 0,109, interpreable as 10,9% variance of sexual satisfaction
explained by sexting.
Keywords
Romantic relationship, Sexting, Sexual satisfaction, Sexuality, Technology, Young adult
S
ome aspects of human nature, from
social interaction and basic fulfillment of
necessities to professional work, are
already being deeply integrated with
technology. The effectiveness and efficiency
provided by technology drive the massive shift
in activities that are traditionally dealt with
human power—or the activities are now mediat-
ed via technology. Internet, as a result of the
integration of technology, is situated in the core
of human interaction. Demographically, teenag-
ers and young adults make up the majority of
internet users, and communication is one of the
biggest functions of the internet. Interpersonal
relations are one of the developmental tasks of
young adults (Erikson, 1982, & Miller, 2011),
where at a certain age, intimacy formed with
other people is critical to determining their
success at this developmental stage. Sex is one of
the key aspects of intimate relationships nur-
tured at this stage.
With the rapid advancement of information
and communication technology, sexual activity
has found its novel form, where activities that
are in the past being done physically can now be
done virtually. Sexual activities mediated by
technology, especially the internet, is known as
online sexual activity (OSA). One of the activi-
ties included in OSA is sexting, an exchange of
sexual messages in the form of text, photos,
videos, or graphic content done through com-
municating gadgets, especially via mobile
phones. The content exchanged between partici-
pants is usually self-produced (Klettke et al.,
2014).
Corresponding Author:
Imelda Ika Dian Oriza
Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Indonesia
Kampus Baru UI, Depok, Jawa Barat - 16424
Indonesia
Email: imelda.ika@ui.ac.id
Imelda Ika Dian Oriza1*, Magdalena Anastasia
Hanipraja1
1Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Indonesia
Received: August 18th, 2019
Revision Accepted: March 3rd, 2020
e-ISSN 2615-8582
p-ISSN 2620-3960
31 Oriza & Hanipraja
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
Exchanging “naughty” messages, especially
when involving graphic content, is still widely
recognized as deviant behavior. According to a
review by Döring (2014), 66% of published
articles on sexting investigated the negative
impacts of sexting, including risky sexual behav-
ior and other negative influences on the person-
al well-being of sexters. Nevertheless, in accord-
ance to the continuing growth of a sex-positive
paradigm, the view on sexuality mediated by
technology, including sexting, is shifting as
there are attempts on investigating sexting as
healthy and positive sexual behavior. Instead of
viewing sexting as a risky and deviant, a sex-
positive paradigm recasts sexting as a form of a
healthy, albeit, new expression of sexuality and
an attempt of increasing and maintaining inti-
macy in a relationship (Döring, 2014).
The sex-positive paradigm on sexting may
have been based on various positive impacts,
and the correlation sexting has across various
functions, both individually and interpersonally.
In the early budding stages of a relationship,
communication surrounding sexuality will help
strengthen the emotional bond shared between a
couple, serving to developing mutual trust. In
an ongoing relationship, sexting itself may serve
a purpose as a proof of commitment a person
has to their partner (Weisskirch & Delevi, 2011).
Sexting is also a novel sexual behavior or one
that may be found as unique, and thus it may
serve as a novelty in the sexual relationship
between the couple, and even as a form of an
“invitation” for further physical sexual activities
(Cupples & Thompson, 2010; Hertlein & Anche-
ta, 2014).
Researchers have found that there’s a rela-
tionship between sexting and sexual satisfaction,
where sexting is viewed as a means of com-
municating sexually within between romantic
partners, therefore also a sexual behavior
(Parker et al., 2013; Stasko & Geller, 2015a;
Stasko & Geller, 2015b; Galovan, et al., 2018).
Specifically, there's a significant increase in
sexual satisfaction following the increase of
frequency of people exchanging sexual messag-
es with their partners. This finding is important
when considering the huge role sexual satisfac-
tion holds in maintaining quality of life, accord-
ing to a study that showed the correlation
between high sexual satisfaction and high emo-
tional and relationship satisfaction (Rosen &
Bachmann, 2008). Sexual satisfaction also holds
a key role in keeping marriages intact (Sprecher,
2002), amongst other forms of romantic relation-
ships.
Sexual satisfaction can be influenced by both
individual and social factors (Henderson et al.,
2009, in Sánchez-Fuentes et al., 2014). First, with
ideal communication, a person can compromise
and discuss with their partner to build and
establish a sexual script that respects both
persons in the relationship and, in line with the
concept of sexual satisfaction based on the
exchange model, reward the person in the rela-
tionship (Cupach & Comstock, 1990). Second,
sexual dynamics may also influence the view a
person has on their own sexual behavior, where
novelty and variations in sexual behavior may
increase satisfaction in their holistic sexual life
(Haavio-Mannila & Kontula, 1997).
In the previous studies, sexting and sexual
satisfaction were examined in young adults, but
not specifically within the context of romantic
relationships. However, there were implications
that there are effects of relationship status on the
relationship between the two variables. This
research, therefore, aims to examine the relation-
ship between sexting and sexual satisfaction
within a romantic context. In accordance to the
urban lifestyle, which is characterized by high
mobility and rapid dynamics, people have
turned to digital alternatives of romantic and
sexual behavior to build and maintain romantic
relationships (Hobbs et al., 2016). Thus, sexting
and its role in maintaining the quality of roman-
tic and sexual relationships should be studied,
as its results may also be of help in giving way
for couples to keep their sexual lives intact
despite their rapid urban lifestyle.
Theoretical
Sexual satisfaction in this study is defined as the
affective response emerging from an individu-
al’s subjective evaluation of the positive and
negative dimensions in regards to their sexual
relations (Lawrance & Byers, 1995). The sexual
satisfaction theory is based on the social ex-
change theory (Rusbult, 1983; Kelley & Thibaut,
1953) with the assumption that social interaction
is hedonistic, yet they still understanding that in
order to gain a pleasurable interaction (reward),
there has to be an effort or cost that has to be
Sexting and Sexual Satisfaction 32
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
made, and in this case, the cost is in the form of
behavior exerted that can produce psychological
“loss”, such as anxiety or shame.
Sexual satisfaction can be influenced by
several factors within interpersonal relation-
ships, including sexual communication and
sexual behavior variation. Sexual communica-
tion can give room for couples to create the
sexual script that suits the consensual needs and
wants of both sides in the relationship, so that
no sides may feel wronged or burdened by the
sexual role in the relationship (Metts & Cupach,
1989, in Cupach, 1990). This form of sexual
communication can be categorized based on the
content exchanged, either as a form of sexual
initiation or rejection, or as a means of com-
municating sexual preferences.
Variation of sexual behavior within a ro-
mantic relationship also contributes to the
increase in sexual satisfaction. Studies have
shown that couples who experimented with
novel sexual behavior were found to have
higher sexual satisfaction (Greeley, 1991, in
Sprecher & Cate, 2004). When couples incorpo-
rate variations of sexual behavior by experi-
menting with positions, sex tools, and even
location to have a more enhanced and passion-
ate sexual life (Blumstein & Schwartz, 1983, in
Sprecher & Cate, 2004; Frederick et al., 2017).
Alongside the development of technology with-
in the context of sexuality, every sexual behavior
mediated by technology is seen as an authentic
sexual behavior, including sexting (Döring,
2009).
Sexting
Sexting in this study is analyzed by using the
concept developed by Gordon-Messer et al.,
(2013) composed of components from other
definitions, that is the act of sending and receiv-
ing messages in the form of text and/or picture
that is sexual in nature, both suggestive and
explicit, that is exchanged by forms of media.
Within the context of a romantic and sexual
relationship, sexting has several correlated
variables. First, some studies have shown that
there was a correlation between sexting and
physical sexual activity. Kosenko, Luurs, and
Binder (2017) have done a meta-analysis on
studies conducted surrounding sexting and
sexual behavior. Their findings suggest that
individuals who sext are in general more active
sexually, in regards to physical sexual activity
(e.g. Dake et al., 2012, Gordon-Messer et al.,
2013). Sexting, therefore, can be viewed as a
‘gateway’ to real-life physical sexual activity, or
also may be considered as a form of foreplay
(Hertlein & Ancheta, 2014; Hudson & Marshall,
2017). Within romantic relationships, sexting can
be viewed as a rewarding sexual activity that
can even enhance the dynamic of a person’s
romantic endeavors (Parker, et al., 2013).
Sexting can also affect the evaluation one
has on his or her sexual life (Parker et al., 2013).
In his study, Parker et al., (2013) sees the possi-
bility of sexting as a factor that can influence
sexual satisfaction. The assumption is supported
by the corresponding results from several fol-
lowing studies (e.g. Castañeda, 2017, Galovan et
al., 2018, Stasko & Geller, 2015). The relationship
between the two variables is one of the pillars of
the sex-positive paradigm towards sexting,
where the relationship may serve as a base to
place sexting as a form of healthy sexual behav-
ior that can contribute to enhancing the quality
of people’s sexual lives.
Methods
Sample
Participants for this research were male and
female Indonesian citizens who were in a
romantic relationship or had sexted while in
romantic relationships. As this research is aimed
to determine the dynamics between variables in
the context of young adults, participants must
be between the ages 20-29 years old. To measure
sexual satisfaction, participants were required to
be sexually active physically in at least one type
of sexual activity with their partner.
Research Design
This research was a quantitative research with
correlational research design.
Instruments
Sexual satisfaction was measured by the Global
Measure of Sexual Satisfaction (GMSEX), a
measurement developed by Lawrence and Byers
(1995) consisted of 5 items, acquired from
33 Oriza & Hanipraja
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
Lawrence, Byers, and Cohen (n.d.). The items for
GMSEX were 7-points bipolar scale used to
express the participants’ rating about their sexu-
al life with their partners. The five responses
were Good-Bad, Pleasant-Unpleasant, Positive-
Negative, Satisfying-Unsatisfying, and Valuable
-Worthless in which the highest score indicated
a positive response, and the lowest score indi-
cated a negative response. The higher the score,
the higher a person’s satisfaction for his or her
sexual life was, and vice versa. The lowest score
for this instrument was 5 points, and the highest
score was 35 points. The reliability score for this
instrument was 0.95 (Lawrence, Byers, & Cohen,
n.d.; Mark et al., 2014).
Sexting behavior was assessed by an
adapted version (Rahardjo et al., 2015) of the
measurement developed by Gordon-Messer et
al., (2013). This measurement consists of two
subscales that assessed the behavior of sending
and receiving sexual texts or pictures (photos or
videos). Each scale consisted of four items,
meaning this measurement had eight items in
total. Each item measured the frequency of
sexting behavior based on four sexting contents:
texts (formerly described as “SMS”. It was modi-
fied in this research to “text messages” in order
to increase sensitivity for the technology used),
pictures, photos, and videos that were described
as “provocative”. The response scale for these
instruments consisted of 6 points, one indicating
“Never” and six indicating “Very Often.” This
measurement had reliability of 0.923.
Research Procedures
In the pilot study, there were three other
measurements designed to assess three different
variables with the same population. Thirty
people participated in the pilot study. Based on
the pilot study, there were no changes made to
the items in the measurements. The measure-
ments in the pilot study were GMSEX, devel-
oped by Lawrance and Byers (1995) and sexting
measurement developed by Gordon-Messer et
al. (2013). GMSEX was translated to Indonesian
and went through readability tests, while
sexting measurement was acquired from Indo-
nesian research that assessed the same con-
struct.
A number of 89 participants filled the ques-
tionnaires distributed online (ages ranged from
20-36 years old, M = 22.62, 69% female) with a
reward of Rp10,000 for each participant in the
form of e-money (GoPay or OVO) or phone
credit. In the first page, participants were given
informed consent to assure willingness to partic-
ipate in this study. If they agreed to participate,
participants were asked to press next to contin-
ue with the study. If they declined, participants
were allowed to close the page. In the last page,
participants were given short debriefing state-
ment regarding the purpose of the research and
researchers’ contacts in case they had questions
or advice about the research.
Results
Descriptive Results
There were 71 participants who were included
for data analysis. In general, most of the partici-
pants were between the ages of 20-24 years old
(72%), while other participants were between
the ages of 25-36 years old (28%) and were
dominated by female (69%), with other partici-
pants being male (29.6%) and one participant
being gender-neutral (1.4%). Participants were
mainly dating (91.5%) but there were also partic-
ipants who were married (7.1%) and single
(1.4%). Most of the participants experienced
sexting with someone when they were dating
(89.9%), and eight people last experienced it
when they were married (11.1%). All of the male
participants did sexting with their dating part-
ner, while 5 of the female participants did so
with their husbands. Regarding who initiated
the sexting behavior, half of the participants
answered that their partners initiated sexting
(50.7%), and others answered they initiated it
themselves (31%) or that both initiated sexting
(18.3%). For male participants, most of them
were initiators for texting (66,7%), while others
were started by their partners (9,5%) or both
(23,8%). Meanwhile, for female participants,
most of them were initiated by their partners
(69,4%), and others were initiated by themselves
(14,3%), both (14,3%), and one participant
answered: “I don’t know.” In sexting, partici-
pants, for the most part, were both senders and
receivers of ‘sexts’ (78,9%), while some were just
senders (11,3%) or receivers (9,9%), and in both
genders, a similar ratio was found where most
of the participants were both senders and receiv-
Sexting and Sexual Satisfaction 34
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
ers, but more male were exclusive receivers
(14,3%), while more female were exclusive
senders (12,2%).
The measured sexual frequency was lifetime
sexting experience, meaning there was no specif-
ic time range for sexting behavior. The means
for the frequency of receiving behavior (M =
11.42) or sending behavior (M = 10.83) of sext
were not far apart from the median of each
behavior. Similar results were found for sexting
scores based on the content of the sext, whether
it was texted (M = 7,06), photos, (M = 5,4),
videos (M = 5,5), or pictures (M = 4,3), which
were all considerably approaching median.
Ranges for each score were quite small, averag-
ing on 2-4 scores above or below the mean.
Main Results
This part will present the main results aimed to
answer the research question, that is whether
sexting behavior could predict an individual’s
sexual satisfaction score. Data were analyzed
using simple linear regression. Table 1 is the
result of the regression analysis between the two
variables.
Based on the below result, it could be seen
that the frequency of sexting behavior signifi-
cantly predicted sexual satisfaction score (β
= .331, p < .01). Thus, the results support the
hypothesis. The correlation was positive, indi-
cating that an individual’s higher frequency for
sexting behavior would predict the increase of
sexual satisfaction score. Frequency of sexting as
a predictor could describe 10.9% variants of
sexual satisfaction (R2 = .109, p < .01). Based on
Cohen’s G, f2, effect size from the correlation
was small (f2 = 0.12) (Cohen, 1988).
Additional Results
Aside from the main research question, analyses
were also done to see the correlations between
sexting behavior and sexual satisfaction based
on demographic variables, types of sexting
behavior (sending or receiving) and content of
‘sexts’ exchanged (texts, photos, videos, pic-
tures). Based on demographic variables (age,
gender, relationship status, sexual orientation,
sexting initiator, and sexting partner), no signifi-
cant correlation was found for each variable
with sexual satisfaction (p < .05). There was a
significant correlation between sexual satisfac-
tion with sending ‘sexts’ (r = .384, p < .01).
Meanwhile, the content of each ‘sext’ exchanged,
whether it was texts (r = .308, p < .01), photos (r
= .278, p < .05), video (r = .288, p < .05), or
pictures (r = .250, p < .05), showed a significant
positive correlation with sexual satisfaction. In
other words, an increase in sexual satisfaction
was accompanied by an increase in texts, videos,
photos, and pictures sexting scores.
Discussions
The main result of this study showed a signifi-
cant correlation between sexting behavior and
sexual satisfaction in individuals in romantic
relationships, with no interference from demo-
graphical factors like age, gender, sexual orien-
tation, or which partner initiated the sexting.
The result was aligned with previous studies
(e.g. Parker et.al., 2013; Stasko & Geller, 2015a;
Stasko & Geller, 2015b; Galovan et al., 2018). The
correlation could be explained by looking at
sexting as a form of sexual communication or a
variation of sexual activity by taking into ac-
count a few aspects of individual sexualities,
like chances to show individual sexual autono-
my as explained below.
Firstly, some researches classified sexting as
a form of sexual communication or a way for an
individual to communicate or explore their
sexual preferences and initiate sexual inter-
Table 1. Prediction of sexting frequency towards sexual satisfaction
Variable B SE Β t Sig (p) R2
Sexting Frequency 0.231 0.079 0,331 2,933 0,005** 0,109
Dependent variable: sexual satisfaction
**Significant in L.o.S 0.01
35 Oriza & Hanipraja
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
course with their partner. One function of
sexting linked with physical sexual activities
was its role as a tool for flirting with their
partner before continuing on to physical sexual
relations, or in other words, sexting was used as
an initiator for sexual intercourse (Hartlein &
Ancheta, 2014; Hasinoff, 2013; Hudson & Mar-
shall, 2017). When an individual actively partici-
pated in sexting, they were able to express their
sexuality with their partner through exchanging
sensual content, whether through texts, photos,
videos, or pictures. Thus, that individual had a
means to disclose their preferences with their
partners, resulting in increased sexual satisfac-
tion (Rehman et al., 2011). Moreover, the chance
to exchange sexual media served as a good
source of information and feedback to enrich the
sexual relationship with their partner.
Secondly, sexting could also be seen as a
variation of sexual activity in an existing sexual
relationship. In this research, participants were
required to be active in physical sexual activities
with their partner. Outside of physical activity,
sexting could be a “novel” and “exciting” form
of sexual activity (Doring, 2009). Sexting offered
different virtual sexual experience compared to
the usual physical sexual activities. In fact, as an
independent form of sexual activity, some
people could exchange sensual messages with-
out continuing on to physical sexual intercourse
or when physical meetings were unavailable,
thus sexting was seen as a fun variation of sexu-
al activity that could affect sexual satisfaction of
said individual (Greely, 1991, in Sprecher &
Cate, 2004).
Lastly, from the context of the type of sex-
ting used, receiving or sending sensual messag-
es, sending sensual messages significantly
affects sexual satisfaction, while receiving sensu-
al messages did not. This relationship could be
explained with the function of sexting as a
vessel of sexual self-disclosure, where someone
could express their sexuality in their romantic
relationship (Rehman et al., 2011). Regarding
content types and sexual satisfaction, results in
this study were aligned with a previous study
by Galovan et al., (2018) which showed that all
types of ‘sext’ content were significantly corre-
lated with sexual satisfaction, whether it was
texts, photos, videos, or pictures.
The effect size for the result of this study
was small, or in other words, sexting could only
explain a small number of variants of individual
sexual satisfaction. This could be explained as
even though sexting functioned as sexual com-
munication or as a variation of sexual activity,
sexting was a small and specific aspect of both
activities, thus someone’s sexual satisfaction
might be explained by other more general types
of communication or sexual activities.
Conclusion
This study aimed to find out whether sexting
behavior could predict sexual satisfaction in
young adults who were in a romantic relation-
ship. In order to answer the research question,
data collection was done. Through the collected
data, it was found that frequency of sexting be-
havior significantly predicted sexual satisfaction
scores positively, or in other words, the more
often someone did sexting, there would be an
increase of sexual satisfaction on said individu-
al. This correlation was not affected by demo-
graphic variables or characteristics of sexting
behavior.
Suggestion
Like the aforementioned explanation in both
discussions and limitations, we concluded that
the topic of sexting and sexual satisfaction
leaves a vast opportunity to be explored. This
research limited the population into young
adults who were mainly in a dating relationship.
Future research could focus more on the dynam-
ics of sexting behavior in older ages, and in
types of relationships with bigger commitment
and responsibilities like marriage to see whether
the significant correlation between sexting and
sexual satisfaction persists.
Furthermore, the result of this study could
be a reference for sexually active couples in
considering sexting as an alternative, especially
for couples with problems in maintaining
intimacy because of conflict in schedules or
distance. Not only couples, but this study could
also be beneficial for adults in the context of sex
education, especially to change the narrative
that sexting is a risky behavior, or even a crime.
Even though studies can only occur in the
context of consensual adult relationships, the
existence of research regarding sexting and its
positive outcomes may prove to be a good
Sexting and Sexual Satisfaction 36
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
source of information about sexual relation-
ships, especially in this digital era.
Declaration of Conflicting Interest
There is no conflict of interest surrounding the
authorship and the publication of this manu-
script.
Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank Dian Rizki
Adiningtyas for partaking a huge part in trans-
lating and proofreading the manuscript. The
author would also like to thank Anisa Rizqi and
Christiana Daraclaudia as part of the research
team.
Funding
The authors receied no finansial support for this
research. It was independently provided by the
authors.
References
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological
testing (7th ed.). Prentice Hall/Pearson Edu-
cation.
Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia.
(2017). Infografis Penetrasi & Perilaku
Pengguna Internet di Indonesia. https://web.
k o m i n f o . g o . i d/ s i t e s / d e f a u l t / f i l e s /
Laporan%20Survei%20APJII_2017_v1.3.pdf
Barrense-Dias, Y., Berchtold, A., Suris, J. C., &
Akre, C. (2017). Sexting and the definition
issue. Journal of Adolescent Health, 61(5), 544-
554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealt
h.2017.05.009
Birnbaum, G. E., & Finkel, E. J. (2015). The
magnetism that holds us together: Sexuality
and relationship maintenance across rela-
tionship development. Current Opinion in
Psychology, 1, 29-33. https://doi.org/10.101
6/j.copsyc.2014.11.009
Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strat-
egies of human mating. Basic Books.
Butzer, B., & Campbell, L. (2008). Adult attach-
ment, sexual satisfaction, and relationship
satisfaction: A study of married cou-
ples. Personal relationships, 15(1), 141-154.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.200
7.00189.x
Castañeda, D. M. (2017). Sexting and sexuality in
romantic relationships among Latina/o
emerging adults. American journal of sexuality
education, 12(2), 120-135. https://doi.org/10.
1080/15546128.2017.1298069
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the
Behavioral Sciences (2nd Edition). Lawrence
Earlbaum Associates.
Cupach, W. R., & Comstock, J. (1990). Satisfac-
tion with sexual communication in mar-
riage: Links to sexual satisfaction and dyadic
adjustment. Journal of Social and Personal Re-
lationships, 7(2), 179-186. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0265407590072002
Cupples, J., & Thompson, L. (2010). Heterotextu-
ality and digital foreplay: Cell phones and
the culture of teenage romance. Feminist
Media Studies, 10(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/
10.1080/14680770903457063
Currin, J. M., Jayne, C. N., Hammer, T. R., Brim,
T., & Hubach, R. D. (2016). Explicitly press-
ing send: Impact of sexting on relationship
satisfaction. The American Journal of Family
Therapy, 44(3), 143-154. https://doi.org/10.
1080/01926187.2016.1145086
Dake, J. A., Price, J. H., Maziarz, L., & Ward, B.
(2012). Prevalence and correlates of sexting
behavior in adolescents. American Journal of
Sexuality Education, 7(1), 1-15. https://doi.
org/10.1080/15546128.2012.650959
Davis, M. J., Powell, A., Gordon, D., & Kershaw,
T. (2016). I want your sext: Sexting and sexu-
al risk in emerging adult minority
men. AIDS Education and prevention, 28(2),
138-152. https://doi.org/10.1521/aea
p.2016.28.2.138
De Ryck, I., Van Laeken, D., Nöstlinger, C.,
Platteau, T., Colebunders, R., & Eurosupport
Study Group. (2012). Sexual satisfaction
among men living with HIV in Eu-
rope. AIDS and Behavior, 16(1), 225-230.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-011-9987-x
Dir, A. L., Coskunpinar, A., Steiner, J. L., &
Cyders, M. A. (2013). Understanding differ-
ences in sexting behaviors across gender,
relationship status, and sexual identity, and
the role of expectancies in sex-
ting. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 16(8), 568-574. https://
doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0545
Döring, N. M. (2009). The Internet’s impact on
37 Oriza & Hanipraja
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
sexuality: A critical review of 15 years of
research. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(5),
1089-1101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.20
09.04.003
Döring, N. (2014). Consensual sexting among
adolescents: Risk prevention through
abstinence education or safer sex-
ting?. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychoso-
cial Research on Cyberspace, 8(1). https://
doi.org/10.5817/CP2014-1-9
Döring, N., & Mohseni, M. R. (2018). Are Online
Sexual Activities and Sexting Good for
Adults’ Sexual Well-Being? Results From a
National Online Survey. International
Journal of Sexual Health, 1-14. https://doi.
org/10.1080/19317611.2018.1491921
Drouin, M., & Landgraff, C. (2012). Texting,
sexting, and attachment in college students’
romantic relationships. Computers in Human
Be havior, 28 ( 2) , 444-449. https:/ /
doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.10.015
Drouin, M., Vogel, K. N., Surbey, A., & Stills, J.
R. (2013). Let’s talk about sexting, baby:
Computer-mediated sexual behaviors
among young adults. Computers in Human
Behavior, 29(5), A25-A30. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.030
Drouin, M., Ross, J., & Tobin, E. (2015). Sexting:
A new, digital vehicle for intimate partner
aggression?. Computers in human behavior, 50,
197-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.20
15.04.001
Drouin, M., & Tobin, E. (2014). Unwanted but
consensual sexting among young adults:
Relations with attachment and sexual moti-
vations. Computers in Human Behavior, 31,
412-418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.
11.001
Dundon, C. M., & Rellini, A. H. (2010). More
than sexual function: Predictors of sexual
satisfaction in a sample of women age
40–70. The journal of sexual medicine, 7(2), 896-
904. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.20
09.01557.x
Fincham, F. D., & Cui, M. (Eds.).
(2010). Romantic relationships in emerging
adulthood. Cambridge University Press.
Frederick, D. A., Lever, J., Gillespie, B. J., &
Garcia, J. R. (2017). What keeps passion
alive? Sexual satisfaction is associated with
sexual communication, mood setting, sexual
variety, oral sex, orgasm, and sex frequency
in a national US study. The Journal of Sex
Research, 54(2), 186-201. https://doi.org/10.
1080/00224499.2015.1137854
Galovan, A. M., Drouin, M., & McDaniel, B. T.
(2018). Sexting profiles in the United States
and Canada: Implications for individual and
relationship well-being. Computers in Human
Behavior, 79, 19-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.chb.2017.10.017
Gordon-Messer, D., Bauermeister, J. A., Grod-
zinski, A., & Zimmerman, M. (2013). Sexting
among young adults. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 52(3), 301-306. https://doi.org/10.10
16/j.jadohealth.2012.05.013
Gossmann, I., Mathieu, M., Julien, D., &
Chartrand, E. (2003). Determinants of sex
initiation frequencies and sexual satisfaction
in long-term couples' relationships. The
Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 12(3-4),
169-182.
Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano, L. B. (2012). Research
Methods for the Behavioral Sciences (4th
ed.). Wadsworth.
Haavio-Mannila, E., & Kontula, O. (1997). Cor-
relates of increased sexual satisfac-
tion. Archives of sexual behavior, 26(4), 399-
419. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024591318
836
Hasinoff, A. A. (2013). Sexting as media produc-
tion: Rethinking social media and sexuali-
ty. New Media & Society, 15(4), 449-465.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812459171
Hertlein, K. M., & Ancheta, K. (2014). Ad-
vantages and disadvantages of technology
in relationships: Findings from an open-
ended survey. The Qualitative Report, 19(11),
1-11. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/
vol19/iss11/2
Hobbs, M., Owen, S., & Gerber, L. (2016). Liquid
love? Dating apps, sex, relationships and the
digital transformation of intimacy. Journal of
Sociology, 53(2), 271-284. https://
doi.org/10.1177%2F1440783316662718
Hudson, H. K., Fetro, J. V., & Ogletree, R. (2014).
Behavioral indicators and behaviors related
to sexting among undergraduate stu-
dents. American journal of health education, 45
(3), 183-195. https://doi.org/10.108
0/19325037.2014.901113
Ji, J., & Norling, A. M. (2004). Sexual satisfaction
of married urban Chinese. Journal of Develop-
ing Societies, 20(1-2), 21-38. https://doi.org/
Sexting and Sexual Satisfaction 38
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
10.1177/0169796X04048301
Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interper-
sonal relations: A theory of interdependence.
John Wiley & Sons.
Klettke, B., Hallford, D. J., & Mellor, D. J. (2014).
Sexting prevalence and correlates: A system-
atic literature review. Clinical psychology
review, 34(1), 44-53. https://doi.org/10.10
16/j.cpr.2013.10.007
Kosenko, K., Luurs, G., & Binder, A. R. (2017).
Sexting and sexual behavior, 2011–2015: A
critical review and meta-analysis of a grow-
ing literature. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication, 22(3), 141-160. https://doi.
org/10.1111/jcc4.12187
La France, B. H. (2010). Predicting sexual satis-
faction in interpersonal relationships.
Southern Communication Journal, 75(3), 195-
214. https://doi.org/10.1080/104179409027
87939
Lawrance, K. A., & Byers, E. S. (1995). Sexual
satisfaction in long‐term heterosexual
relationships: The interpersonal exchange
model of sexual satisfaction. Personal
Relationships, 2(4), 267-285. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00092.x
Lenhart, A. (2009). Teens and sexting. Pew internet
& American life project, 1, 1-26. http://
www.ncdsv.org/images/pewinternet_teen
sandsexting_12-2009.pdf . http://hdl.hand
le.net/11212/2060
Mark, K. P., Herbenick, D., Fortenberry, J. D.,
Sanders, S., & Reece, M. (2014). A psycho-
metric comparison of three scales and a
single-item measure to assess sexual satis-
faction. The Journal of Sex Research, 51(2), 159-
169. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.20
13.816261
McClelland, S. I. (2010). Intimate justice: A criti-
cal analysis of sexual satisfaction. Social and
Personality Psychology Compass, 4(9), 663-680.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.201
0.00293.x
McDaniel, B. T., & Drouin, M. (2015). Sexting
among married couples: Who is doing it,
a n d a r e t h e y m o r e s a t i s -
fied?. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 18(11), 628-634. https://
doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0334
Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2007). Why
humans have sex. Archives of sexual behav-
ior, 36(4), 477-507. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10508-007-9175-2
Neustaedter, C., & Greenberg, S. (2011). Intima-
cy in long-distance relationships over video
calling. Research Report 2011-1014-26, Dept.
of Computer Science.
Miller, P. H. (2011). Theories of developmental
psychology. 5th ed. New York
Papalia, D. E., Martorell, G., (2014). Experience
human development (13th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Parker, T. S., Blackburn, K. M., Perry, M. S., &
Hawks, J. M. (2013). Sexting as an interven-
tion: Relationship satisfaction and motiva-
tion considerations. The American Journal of
Family Therapy, 41(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/
10.1080/01926187.2011.635134
Rahardjo, W., Saputra, M., & Hapsari, I. (2015).
Harga Diri, Sexting dan Jumlah Pasangan
Seks yang Dimiliki oleh Pria Lajang Pelaku
Perilaku Seks Berisiko. Jurnal Psikologi, 42(2),
101-114. https://doi.org/10.22146/jpsi.7172
Rehman, U. S., Rellini, A. H., & Fallis, E. (2011).
The importance of sexual self‐disclosure to
sexual satisfaction and functioning in
committed relationships. The journal of sexual
medicine, 8(11), 3108-3115. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02439.x
Rosen, R. C., & Bachmann, G. A. (2008). Sexual
well-being, happiness, and satisfaction, in
women: The case for a new conceptual para-
digm. Journal of sex & marital therapy, 34(4),
291-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/009262308
02096234
Rusbult, C. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the
investment model: The development (and
deterioration) of satisfaction and commit-
ment in heterosexual involvements. Journal
of personality and social psychology, 45(1), 101.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.1.101
Sánchez-Fuentes, M. D. M., Santos-Iglesias, P., &
Sierra, J. C. (2014). A systematic review of
sexual satisfaction. International Journal of
Clinical and Health Psychology, 14(1). https://
doi.org/10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70038-9
Simms, D. C., & Byers, E. S. (2013). Heterosexual
daters’ sexual initiation behaviors: Use of
the theory of planned behavior. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 42(1), 105-116. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9994-7
Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1986). Sexual
scripts: Permanence and change. Archives of
sexual behavior, 15(2), 97-120. https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF01542219
39 Oriza & Hanipraja
Psychological Research on Urban Society April 2020 | Vol. 3 | No. 1
Sprecher, S. (2002). Sexual satisfaction in pre-
marital relationships: Associations with
satisfaction, love, commitment, and stabil-
ity. Journal of sex research, 39(3), 190-196.
https://doi.org/10.1080/002244902095521
41
Sprecher, S., & Cate, R. M. (2004). Sexual satis-
faction and sexual expression as predictors
of relationship satisfaction and stability. In J.
H. Harvey, A. Wenzel, S. Sprecher, J. H.
Harvey, A. Wenzel & S. Sprecher (Eds.), The
Handbook of Sexuality in Close Relationships
(pp. 235–256). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Publishers.
Stasko, E. C., & Geller, P. A. (2015). Reframing
sexting as a positive relationship behav-
ior. American psychological association, 6-9.
ht tp s: // w ww .a pa .o r g/ ne ws /p re s s/
releases/2015/08/reframing-sexting.pdf
Stasko, E. C., & Geller, P. (2015). Sexting and
Intimate Partner Relationships Among
Adults (Doctoral dissertation, Drexel Univer-
sity).
Strohmaier, H., Murphy, M., & DeMatteo, D.
(2014). Youth sexting: Prevalence rates,
driving motivations, and the deterrent effect
of legal consequences. Sexuality Research and
Social Policy, 11(3), 245-255. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s13178-014-0162-9
Temple J.R., Lu Y. (2018) Sexting from a Health
Perspective: Sexting, Health, and Risky
Sexual Behaviour. In Walrave M., Van
Ouytsel J., Ponnet K., Temple J. (eds)
Sexting. Palgrave Studies in Cyberpsychology.
Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-319-71882-8_4
Twenge, J. M., Sherman, R. A., & Wells, B. E.
(2017). Declines in sexual frequency among
American adults, 1989–2014. Archives of
sexual behavior, 46(8), 2389-2401. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10508-017-0953-1
Vannier, S. A., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2011).
Communicating interest in sex: Verbal and
nonverbal initiation of sexual activity in
young adults’ romantic dating relation-
ships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(5), 961-
969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-96
63-7
Weisskirch, R. S., & Delevi, R. (2011). “Sexting”
and adult romantic attachment. Computers
in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1697-1701.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.02.008
Ybarra, M. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2014). “Sexting”
and its relation to sexual activity and sexual
risk behavior in a national survey of adoles-
cents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55(6), 757-
764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.20
14.07.012
