The Influence of Partner Status and Sexual Behavior on College Women’s Consent Communication and Feelings

Marcantonio, Tiffany L.; Wiersma‐Mosley, Jacquelyn D.

doi:10.1080/0092623x.2018.1474410

Cited by 41 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That we did not corroborate previous findings regarding between-person sociodemographic variability of sexual consent may have been due to our sample comprising only people who were in committed sexual relationships. 2 Indeed, how people conceptualize sexual consent can vary based on relationship status (Humphreys & Brousseau, 2010;Orchowski et al, 2020;Righi et al, 2019), as can the ways they experience and communicate willingness to engage in sexual activity Marcantonio et al, 2018;Walsh et al, 2019). Because previous studies on the between-person variability of sexual consent collected data from samples that were much more heterogeneous than the present study regarding relational context, comparisons of between-person effects across studies must be done with caution.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Assessing the Within-Person Variability of Internal and External Sexual Consent

Willis

Bridges

Veilleux

et al. 2021

The Journal of Sex Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexual consent is often conceptualized as an internal willingness to engage in sexual activity, which can be communicated externally to a sexual partner. Internal sexual consent comprises feelings of physical response, safety/comfort, arousal, agreement/want, and readiness; external sexual consent includes communication cues that may be explicit or implicit and verbal or nonverbal. Most previous research on sexual consent has focused on between-person differences; little attention has been devoted to examining the within-person variation of sexual consent across time. We conducted a 28-day experience sampling methodology (ESM) study with a sample of adults (N = 113) to assess fluctuations in internal and external sexual consent across a given person's sexual events. We found that more than 50% and up to 80% of the variance in sexual consent scores could be accounted for by within-person variability. The type of sexual behavior participants engaged in during a sexual event predicted their internal and external consent. Further, internal consent feelings predicted external consent communication. Overall, our findings provided initial evidence regarding the extent that situational contexts are relevant for sexual consent. ESM study designs may be used to further investigate the potential contextual, intrapersonal, and interpersonal factors associated with internal and external sexual consent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Assessing the Within-Person Variability of Internal and External Sexual Consent

Willis

Bridges

Veilleux

et al. 2021

The Journal of Sex Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This discrepant finding regarding gender may be due to women being more comfortable communicating consent via explicit verbal cues within a committed relationship than they would in other contexts. Indeed, Marcantonio et al (2018) found that women with serious partners reported greater use of initiator consent communication (e.g., explicit verbal cues) than women with casual or first-time partners-other types of external sexual consent may not be as variable across relationship types.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexual Consent in Committed Relationships: A Dyadic Study

Willis

Murray

2021

Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexual consent is a multidimensional construct that requires the participation of all involved in a sexual encounter; however, previous research has almost exclusively relied on one person's perspective. To address this, we collected open-and closed-ended data on sexual consent from 37 dyads in committed sexual relationships (N = 74). We found that relationship length was associated with sexual consent and couples who accurately perceived each other's consent communication cues reported elevated levels of internal consent feelings. Communicating willingness to engage in sexual activity remains important even within committed relationships. Preliminary findings suggest that further investigations of dyadic nuances of sexual consent are warranted.

show abstract

“…Additionally, the relationship between partners influences how consent is conveyed. Women engaging in sexual acts with a serious dating partner were more likely to use nonverbal cues to convey consent compared to women engaging in sexual acts with less serious partners (Marcantonio et al , 2019). Such scripts could interfere with the application of AC policies.…”

Section: Relationship Between Victim and Offendermentioning

confidence: 99%

Judgments about sexual assault vary depending on whether an affirmative consent policy or a “no means no” policy is applied

Miller

2020

JACPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Affirmative consent (AC) policies require potential sexual partners to clearly and positively confirm that they want to engage in sexual behavior – in contrast to standard “no means no” policies, which typically define consent through resistance. AC policies might not be effective because they do not align well with typical scripts of how consent is given in practice. This study aims to compare participants’ judgments as to what constitutes sexual assault, using either an AC policy or a standard “no means no” policy. Design/methodology/approach Participants read 16 scenarios depicting various male-female sexual encounters and applied either an AC or a standard “no means no” policy to determine whether the encounter was consensual. Findings When an AC policy was used, participants were more likely to judge the scenario as sexual assault. Aspects of the scenario (which reflect AC policy criteria), such as the type of communication (verbal or nonverbal), clarity of communication (clear or unclear) and resistance (high or low) also affected judgments of the scenario. Relationship type (stranger vs acquaintance) did not affect judgments. Students were more likely to perceive the scenarios as sexual assault than community members; they also perceived differences between scenarios based on verbal communication and clarity more than community members. Finally, there was no main effect of participant gender, however, men perceived differences between scenarios based on verbal communication type, whereas women did not. Research limitations/implications Findings indicate that participants are generally able to apply AC policies correctly, even though AC criteria do not generally align with common sexual scripts. Originality/value This is the first study known to test whether decision-makers can properly apply criteria outlined in AC policies and whether the application of these policies affect decisions-makers judgments as to whether a sexual encounter is consensual or assault.

show abstract

The Influence of Partner Status and Sexual Behavior on College Women’s Consent Communication and Feelings

Cited by 41 publications

References 25 publications

Assessing the Within-Person Variability of Internal and External Sexual Consent

Assessing the Within-Person Variability of Internal and External Sexual Consent

Sexual Consent in Committed Relationships: A Dyadic Study

Judgments about sexual assault vary depending on whether an affirmative consent policy or a “no means no” policy is applied

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About