Show simple item record

Determinants of Variability in College Men's Sociosexuality: A Focus on Avoidance, Bros, and Masculinity Ideologies.

dc.contributor.authorCalzo, Jerel Pasionen_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-01-18T16:17:20Z
dc.date.availableNO_RESTRICTIONen_US
dc.date.available2011-01-18T16:17:20Z
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.date.submitteden_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/78896
dc.description.abstractStereotypes about college sexuality often characterize men as relationship-phobic and hook up-focused. Such stereotypes contrast with emerging research noting considerable within-gender variability in men’s sociosexuality (i.e., the orientation towards uncommitted sex). This dissertation explored the diversity in college men’s sociosexuality and investigated the factors contributing to variation in sociosexual beliefs, desire, and behavior. I hypothesized that men’s internal models of relationships (attachment avoidance), the internalization of traditional masculinity ideologies (TMI), and male peer relationships that reinforce TMI (homosociality) contribute to greater engagement in uncommitted sex. Study 1 examined the relative contributions of TMI, attachment avoidance, and homosociality to sociosexuality among 495 undergraduate men. TMI and two dimensions of homosociality (i.e., peer sex norms and sexual storytelling) directly predicted greater sociosexual beliefs, behavior, and desire. TMI also fully mediated the associations of attachment avoidance with sociosexuality. In Study 2 I more directly examined the diversity in participants’ sociosexuality through latent profile analysis. Profiles were based on standardized sociosexuality, homosociality, TMI, and attachment variables. One emerging profile was high on all constructs (Players; 10% of the sample), and one was low on all constructs (Restricted; 30%). Three additional profiles emerged with discrepant patterns: Wannabes (similar to Players, but below average in sociosexual behavior; 36%), Avoidant (similar to Restricteds, but with above average avoidance; 16%), and Discrepant (above average sociosexual behavior, but discordant across constructs; 8%). The latter three subgroups indicate that the key constructs do not always “go together,” perhaps explaining the modest associations in Study 1. There were several notable demographic, personality, and behavioral differences between the profiles (e.g., nearly 50% of the Discrepants self-identified as sexual minorities, Restricteds were the most religious, Avoidants were the most shy). Analysis of 15 in-depth interviews in Study 3 further synthesized the results from Studies 1 and 2, highlighted heterogeneity within relationship- and hook up-oriented perspectives, and indicated that the processes shaping sociosexuality may vary for different college sub-populations (e.g., sexual minorities). Findings also provide evidence regarding potential trajectories of change in perspectives that future research can address.en_US
dc.format.extent871916 bytes
dc.format.extent1373 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/octet-stream
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectMasculinityen_US
dc.subjectSociosexualityen_US
dc.subjectPeers/Peer Normsen_US
dc.subjectHooking Up/Hook Upsen_US
dc.subjectCollege Students/University Studentsen_US
dc.subjectAttachment/Attachment Avoidanceen_US
dc.titleDeterminants of Variability in College Men's Sociosexuality: A Focus on Avoidance, Bros, and Masculinity Ideologies.en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreenamePhDen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreedisciplinePsychologyen_US
dc.description.thesisdegreegrantorUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studiesen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberWard, Lucretia M.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberEdelstein, Robin Staceyen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberMartin, Karin A.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberSchulenberg, John E.en_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPsychologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78896/1/jcalzo_1.pdf
dc.owningcollnameDissertations and Theses (Ph.D. and Master's)


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.