Romantic Partners, Friends, Friends with Benefits, and Casual Acquaintances as Sexual Partners

Shaffer, Laura A.

doi:10.1080/00224499.2010.535623

Cited by 72 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The borders between same-sex groups begin to dissolve in middle school, but othersex friendships are still highly atypical and pressure to conform to same-sex structures remains considerable. Sexual feelings and jealousy may arise creating conflict (Furman & Shaffer, 2011). It is also likely that some portion of mixed-sex friendship briefly passed through a romantic phase prior to relationship dissolution.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survival Analysis of Adolescent Friendships: The Downside of Dissimilarity

Hartl¹,

Laursen²,

Cillessen³

2014

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examined whether adolescent friendships dissolve because of characteristics of friends, differences between friends, or both. Participants included 410 adolescents (201 boys, 209 girls) who reported a total of 573 reciprocated friendships that originated in the 7 th grade (M age = 13.20 years). Discrete-time survival analyses were conducted in which peer nominations and teacher ratings collected in Grade 7 predicted the occurrence and timing of friendship dissolution across grades 8 to 12. Grade 7 individual characteristics were unrelated to friendship stability, but Grade 7 differences in sex, peer acceptance, physical aggression, and school competence predicted subsequent friendship dissolution. The findings suggest that compatibility is a function of similarity between friends rather than the presence or absence of a particular trait. KeywordsFriends; relationship dissolution; survival analysis; aggression; peer acceptance No one likes to lose a friend. For adolescents navigating autonomy from the family, the dissolution of a friendship can be especially challenging (Hartup, 1993). But why do friendships end? High levels of an undesirable characteristic, such as aggression, threaten friendships (Piehler & Dishion, 2007). Dissimilarity also anticipates dissolution (Poulin & Chan, 2010). Previous studies have focused on either levels of individual characteristics or differences between friends (known henceforth as dyadic differences), making it difficult to draw firm conclusions about adolescent friendship dissolution because the two are confounded: The largest dyadic differences occur when individual characteristics are most pronounced (e.g., those with the highest levels of aggression are also the least similar to the bulk of their peers, whose scores fall in the normal range of the distribution). In the present study, we compared dyadic differences in school-related behaviors and individual levels of each to predict the occurrence and timing of the dissolution of friendships originating in middle school. The voluntary nature of friendships allows participants to leave unsatisfactory relationships with few countervailing external pressures. As is the case in voluntary romantic relationships, dissatisfaction with friends is assumed to arise from an imbalance of relationship rewards and costs (Levinger, 1979). Dissatisfaction may have origins in dissimilarity or in the presence of one or more undesirable attributes in a partner. We review each in turn. HHS Public Access Dissimilarity as a Source of Friendship DissolutionEvidence for homophily, the tendency for friends to resemble one another, (Lazarsfeld & Merton, 1954) suggests that similarity is important for establishing and maintaining friendships. Dissimilarity propagates conflict and negative affect (Laursen, Hartup, & Koplas, 1996). In social exchange terms (Thibaut & Kelley, 1959), dissimilarity threatens perceptions that relationship participants share equally in the benefits of affiliation. One partner is apt to bear more co...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survival Analysis of Adolescent Friendships: The Downside of Dissimilarity

Hartl¹,

Laursen²,

Cillessen³

2014

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study suggested that true friends was the most frequent type of FWB relationship individuals reported having, but it only represented one fourth of the total FWB relationships reported. Because FWB relationships can differ with regard to who participates, some researchers allow individuals to use their own definition of FWB relationships (Furman & Shaffer, 2011).…”

Section: Friends With Benefits (Fwb) Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Casual Sexual Relationships and Experiences in Emerging Adulthood

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Casual sexual relationships and experiences (CSREs) such as hookups, one-night stands, friends with benefits relationships, and booty calls have received increasing attention in the past decade. This review examines the role of CSREs during emerging adulthood, as well as similarities and differences among the different types of CSREs. Furthermore, we examine the predictors and positive and negative consequences of engaging in CSREs. While research in the area of CSREs has provided important information about the development and course of these relationships/experiences, future research should focus on exploring these relationships/experiences using an integrated theoretical perspective and longitudinal methods, in diverse, noncollege samples.

show abstract

“…The little psychological research that has been conducted on casual or non-romantic sex is predominantly quantitative, focused on individual attitudes and personality characteristics and generally based on the assumption that such sexual activities are self-evidently problematic (Furman & Shaffer, 2011;Mikach & Bailey, 1999;Wentland, Herold, Desmarais, & Milhausen, 2009). Further, it has generally not considered the gender dynamics of nonromantic sex encounters, nor the gendered power relations between men and women and the discourses in which they, and sexual encounters, are situated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Women’s constructions of heterosexual non-romantic sex and the implications for sexual health

Moran¹,

Lee²

2012

Psychology & Sexuality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Qualitative interviews with 15 Australian women who engage in non-romantic sex demonstrate that women choose a variety of non-romantic sexual arrangements and activities. A discourse analysis examined the ways in which the women position themselves relative to dominant constructions of femininity and heterosexuality, themselves embedded in neoliberal, post-feminist assumptions of women's unproblematic capacity for individual empowerment, choice and sexual freedom. Despite choosing non-normative sexual encounters, the women were frequently constrained by the gendered hetero-normative discourses of hetero monogamy and gender differences. The analysis demonstrates that the conventions of heterosex implicit in both of these discourses subordinate the legitimacy of women's sexual agency, sexual desire and sexual entitlement. Although the women resisted these constructions with varying levels of success, we argue that they cannot be resisted outright because women have no discourse to draw upon which encapsulates an empowered female sexual agency. Thus, women who have non-romantic sex frequently internalise the discourses of hetero monogamy and gender differences, posing serious risks to their sexual health, both physically and emotionally. For women to ensure their sexual health, conventional constructions of female sexuality need to be challenged at a societal level.

show abstract

Romantic Partners, Friends, Friends with Benefits, and Casual Acquaintances as Sexual Partners

Cited by 72 publications

References 19 publications

A Survival Analysis of Adolescent Friendships: The Downside of Dissimilarity

A Survival Analysis of Adolescent Friendships: The Downside of Dissimilarity

Casual Sexual Relationships and Experiences in Emerging Adulthood

Women’s constructions of heterosexual non-romantic sex and the implications for sexual health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About