Contemporary casual sex behaviour, along with the social and cultural representations surrounding such behaviours, has taken root throughout North America as socially normative (for reviews see Bogle, Reference Bogle2008; Garcia, Reiber, Massey, & Merriwether, Reference Garcia, Reiber, Massey and Merriwether2012; Wade, Reference Wade2017). Based on studies in the United States and Canada, a majority (60–85%) of college students have had a casual sex ‘hookup’ at some point (Garcia et al., Reference Garcia, Reiber, Massey and Merriwether2012). While the pervasiveness of sexual hookup culture has been well documented, the colloquial terminology surrounding hookup sexual activity is ambiguous — and perhaps strategically so — referring more to the uncommitted nature of these encounters than to the specific behaviours occurring within this context (Garcia et al., Reference Garcia, Reiber, Massey and Merriwether2012; Hatfield, Hutchison, Bensman, Young, & Rapson, Reference Hatfield, Hutchison, Bensman, Young, Rapson, Turner and Mitchell2012). In addition to hookups, if one includes the varieties of uncommitted sex described by emerging adults (Claxton & van Dulmen, Reference Claxton and van Dullmen2013; Wentland & Reissing, Reference Wentland and Reissing2011), such as ‘booty calls’ (i.e., late night visits for sex) and ‘friends with benefits’ (i.e., ongoing sexual but supposedly not romantic relationships), the rates of casual sex encounters would be considerably greater. While often couched under a label of ‘hooking up’, reports of the specific sexual behaviours occurring in hookups also vary widely, ranging from only kissing and heavy petting to oral sex to penetrative vaginal and/or anal intercourse. Research on sexual hookups has tended to focus on sexual behaviours rather than other interpersonal factors related to dimensions of intimacy, such as affectionate behaviours, and related factors that have received attention in studies of romantic relationships.
The existing literature on sexual hookups and on casual sex more broadly has tended to employ operational definitions of casual sex experiences that specifically focus on the uncommitted relationship context between sexual partners, rather than on the specific behaviours engaged in (Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey, & Merriwether, Reference Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey, Merriwether, DeLamater and Plante2015). While researchers have certainly collected reports of specific sexual behaviours engaged in during casual sex activity, to date research has not examined casual sex as a site for affectionate behaviours that may occur as a function of desired or experienced intimacy in a sexual encounter. In the current study, we examine emerging adults’ propensities to engage in affectionate behaviours, comparing attitudes in hypothetical contexts of an uncommitted casual sex encounter and a traditional committed romantic relationship. Through this initial inquiry, we aim to provide a more nuanced perspective on the behaviours and psychoemotional factors occurring in emerging adults’ casual sex experiences, and illustrate that conceptualising the ‘no strings attached’ aspect of casual sex as meaning no intimacy or emotional engagement may be unnecessarily limiting our understanding of human sexuality and relationships.
Sexual Hookup Culture Among Emerging Adults
For many young people in North America, emerging adulthood — a period spanning approximately age 18 years through the mid-twenties, which coincides with traditional age for college enrolment — is a period of negotiating their sexual and gender identity (Arnett, Reference Arnett2004). For many, this period is also one of semi-independence and increasing freedom from supervision, with continued care and input from one's family, co-occurring with increased autonomy. This transition to more autonomy now generally takes place with fewer responsibilities and concerns of traditional compulsory heterosexual partnering and family formation that have structured this age range in past decades. At the same time, the regulation of dating practices among emerging adults has loosened considerably over the past few decades, largely with respect to the declining role of parental supervision and parental influence in young people's romantic and sexual lives (Bailey, Reference Bailey1988; Garcia et al., Reference Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey, Merriwether, DeLamater and Plante2015; Stinson, Reference Stinson2010). Further, the onset of puberty and sexual maturation is occurring at earlier ages while first marriage and first reproduction are occurring later than previous generations, leading to a gap wherein individuals are freer to explore various aspects of their intimate lives (Bogle, Reference Bogle2008; Garcia & Reiber, Reference Garcia and Reiber2008). Moreover, young people today have access to a range of potential romantic and sexual partners to choose from, enabled by internet availability and new mobile technologies (Finkel, Eastwick, Karney, Reis, & Sprecher, Reference Finkel, Eastwick, Karney, Reis and Sprecher2012; Lenhart, Smith, & Anderson, Reference Lenhart, Smith and Anderson2015; Slater, Reference Slater2014). These aggregated changes have led to the emergence of an unprecedented moment in human sexual development, where young adults are conducting their sexual lives in ways not seen in the past.
While casual sex behaviour is not new (Garcia et al., Reference Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey, Merriwether, DeLamater and Plante2015; Hatfield et al., Reference Hatfield, Hutchison, Bensman, Young, Rapson, Turner and Mitchell2012), the way it is represented, understood, and experienced by young people today suggests the emergence of a new sexual culture. Although many emerging adults still report having romantic relationships in addition to casual sex experiences (Bradshaw, Kahn, & Saville, Reference Bradshaw, Kahn and Saville2010; Fielder, Carey, & Carey, Reference Fielder, Carey and Carey2013), public moral panics about the implications of casual sex abound. These concerns are due largely to the putative erosion of romance and intimacy, and the worry that young people are in favour of one-off encounters that involve sexual gratification and nothing more (e.g., Yglesias, Reference Yglesias2013; Sales, Reference Sales2015). However, little is known about the meaning and motivations for these casual encounters, and whether such experiences of casual sex do in fact confirm this intimacy-free narrative. Because of the contemporary normalcy of sexual hookups for emerging adults and the general understanding of sexual activity as an intimate and connective act that tends to involve more than just bodily pleasure, some emerging adults may be integrating intimacy-motivated behaviours into their casual sex encounters that would typically be understood as exclusive to the romantic relationship context. Consequently, a deeper understanding of how emerging adults behave with respect to affectionate behaviours (e.g., cuddling), across varied sexual contexts is needed.
Intimacy-Motivated Sexual Activity
There are a variety of psychosocial outcomes found in the sexual and relationship science literature that can be tied to both sexual and intimacy motivations. For instance, in studies asking emerging adults about their experience of orgasm during sexual hookups, some reported that the context of a casual sex encounter lacked the level of intimacy both desired and needed for them to reach orgasm (Armstrong, England, & Fogarty, Reference Armstrong, England and Fogarty2012; Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey, & Merriwether, Reference Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey and Merriwether2018). Others have suggested that complex motivational dynamics (including goals of sex, intimacy, and relationships) are at play within, or as a result of, seemingly uncommitted sexual encounters (e.g., Garcia & Fisher, Reference Garcia, Fisher and Tarrant2015; Garcia & Reiber, Reference Garcia and Reiber2008; Regan & Dreyer, Reference Regan and Dreyer1999). In one large U.S. national sample of adults, over one in three men and nearly one in four women indicated that a one-night stand or a friends-with-benefits situation had turned into a committed romantic relationship (Garcia & Fisher, Reference Garcia, Fisher and Tarrant2015). Taken together, these findings suggest that for some people, engaging in intimacy-motivated behaviours typically understood as relationship-oriented may create more positive sexual experiences in casual sex contexts and, for some, may be providing the foundations of pair-bonding (Garcia & Fisher, Reference Garcia, Fisher and Tarrant2015).
Research has shown that people express a wide range of motives for engaging in sexual activity, with interpersonal reasons tied to partner closeness, including intimacy expression and maintenance, commonly reported (Meston & Buss, Reference Meston and Buss2007). In order to examine the role of intimacy across relational contexts including in casual sex encounters, it is critical to consider various motivations that have been reported for engaging in casual sex. In one study of 105 U.S. college students, both men and women reported a series of motives for engaging in casual sex (Regan & Dreyer, Reference Regan and Dreyer1999), including 89% of participants (85.4% of women and 90.6% of men) noting personal or intraindividual reasons (e.g., sexual desire, sexual experimentation, physical pleasure, alcohol use), and 39% (58.5% of women and 26.6% of men) indicating interpersonal or relational reasons (e.g., attractiveness, desire for long-term commitment from sex partner). Another study of 507 U.S. college students asked participants to report the multiple reasons they engage in sexual hookups (Garcia & Reiber, Reference Garcia and Reiber2008). While 89% of participants noted physical gratification as a motivation, 54% identified emotional gratification, and 51% indicated a desire to initiate a romantic relationship. In addition, although only 6% of participants (4.35% of men, 8.19% of women) expected a romantic relationship as an outcome, 37% of participants (28.99% of men, 42.94% of women) identified a romantic relationship as the ideal outcome (Garcia & Reiber, Reference Garcia and Reiber2008). These findings suggest that, despite deviation from traditional conceptions of courtship and romantic relationships, sexual activity in the context of casual sex encounters may at times be motivated by a desire for intimacy distinct from the desire for a romantic relationship.
Gender, Intimacy, and Casual Sex
Existing literature suggests that gender plays a complex role in shaping attitudes toward casual sex. On average, men have more permissive attitudes toward, and greater interest in, casual sex than women (see Oliver & Hyde, Reference Oliver and Hyde1993; see also Petersen & Hyde, Reference Petersen and Hyde2010). Interestingly, however, rates of engaging in casual sex tend to show few gender differences, and several studies examining the motives underlying casual sex show little to no gender differences (i.e., Garcia & Reiber, Reference Garcia and Reiber2008; Lyons, Manning, Longmore, & Giordano, Reference Lyons, Manning, Longmore and Giordano2014). This is despite indications that casual sex encounters pose greater risks for women (Garcia et al., Reference Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey, Merriwether, DeLamater and Plante2015) — risks that can include unintended or unwanted pregnancy (Seibold-Simpson, Gesselman, Garcia, Massey, & Merriwether, Reference Seibold-Simpson, Gesselman, Garcia, Massey and Merriwether2017), sexual violence (Flack et al., Reference Flack, Daubman, Caron, Asadorian, D'Aureli, Gigliotti and Stine2007), and sexual double standards resulting in greater disapproval and stigmatisation of women who engage in casual sex activity compared to men who engage in the very same behaviour (Conley, Ziegler, & Moors, Reference Conley, Ziegler and Moors2013).
Gender may also influence engagement with intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours across relational contexts. Gender roles in the United States tend to expect men to be less emotive and more emotionally guarded, and women to be more affectionate and emotionally expressive (Brody, Reference Brody1985; Fischer, Reference Fischer2000; Shields, Garner, Leone, Hadley, Reference Shields, Garner, Di Leone and Hadley2006). This is consistent with literature highlighting gender differences in, and at times problems with, men's relatively less emotionally expressive interpersonal communication in friendships and couples. However, evolutionary behavioural models predict that the behavioural adaptations of men and women to more general evolutionary pressures, such as the shared challenge of finding and maintaining long-term pair-bonds, will be more similar than dissimilar (Fisher, Reference Fisher2016; Gray & Garcia, Reference Gray and Garcia2013). Consequently, both gender role and evolutionary theories predict that although women may be relatively more expressive of their affection, the psychological/emotional capacity for intimacy extends across social contexts and relationship statuses for both women and men. This prediction is supported by national U.S. data demonstrating that men and women do not significantly differ in self-report of subjective emotions and feelings (Simon & Nath, Reference Simon and Nath2004).
Thus, evolutionary behavioural theory would predict that in committed romantic relationships — the typical site for intimate interpersonal connection — both men and women will want to engage in intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours at roughly similar rates as a strategy for maintaining long-term relationships. However, in the context of casual sex encounters, due to sex/gender differences in potential costs associated with casual sex (see Schmitt, Shackelford, & Buss, Reference Schmitt, Shackelford and Buss2001), sex/gender differences in intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours are likely to emerge. Men may be expected to engage in relatively fewer affectionate behaviours in the context of casual sex encounters than women — in line with the male sexual strategy for short-term sexual activity that does not involve an investment in a primary pair-bond. Women, on the other hand, may be expected to engage in relatively more intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in the context of casual sex encounters — in line with the female sexual strategy to encourage a more enduring primary pair-bond with a primary partner. Alternatively, institutionalised gender role norms may encourage both male sexual entitlement and subsequent emotional detachment during casual sex, and may also encourage women to engage in affectionate behaviours during casual sex as a way to psychosocially justify sexual activity not traditionally conceptualised as ‘appropriate’ for women. Some preliminary research supports this proposed gender difference. While both men and women value post-sex affectionate behaviours in the context of romantic relationships (Muise, Giang, & Impett, Reference Muise, Giang and Impett2014), in the context of short-term sexual encounters women have been shown to value affectionate behaviours more, and also appear to require affectionate behaviours for their satisfaction more than do men (Kruger & Hughes, Reference Kruger and Hughes2010).
Intimacy-Motivated Affectionate Behaviours During Sexual Activity
Some researchers have found positive somatosensory responses associated with affectionate affiliative touch between relationship partners and have suggested that these responses correspond to the attachment behaviours that create and maintain bonds between parent and offspring (Linden, Reference Linden2015). In this light, affectionate behaviours between partners are analogues to the socially important and physiologically regulating affiliative gestures observed in non-human animals, such as grooming, licking, and huddling (Hertenstein, Verkamp, Kerestes, & Holmes, Reference Hertenstein, Verkamp, Kerestes and Holmes2006; Nelson & Geher, Reference Nelson and Geher2007; Suomi, Reference Suomi, Goldberg, Muir and Kerr1995). Indeed, research suggests that highly affectionate couples report lower stress, better mental health, and higher relationship satisfaction (Floyd, Reference Floyd2002). Similarly, couples who engage in more affectionate behaviours, including backrubs/massages, caressing/stroking, holding hands, kissing on the lips, and kissing on the face, were more satisfied with their relationships (Gulledge, Gulledge, & Stahmann, Reference Gulledge, Gulledge and Stahmannn2003).
Several studies have suggested that affectionate behaviours like touch and foreplay impact the sexual satisfaction of couples (Muise, Giang, & Impett, Reference Muise, Giang and Impett2014). Van Anders, Edelstein, Wade, and Samples-Steele (Reference van Anders, Edelstein, Wade and Samples-Steele2013) found that three-quarters of their participants reported that cuddling was involved in the initiation of sexual activity, and many reported that cuddling was sexually arousing to them. In a multinational study of mid- to later-life adults, those in relationships who reported more frequent kissing and cuddling with their partner also reported overall greater sexual satisfaction (Heiman et al., Reference Heiman, Long, Smith, Fisher, Sand and Rosen2011). In another large study of couples in the United States, those who reported more hugging/cuddling after sexual activity also reported being more sexually satisfied (Frederick, Lever, Gillespie, & Garcia, Reference Frederick, Lever, Gillespie and Garcia2017). Finally, another national survey of approximately 1,000 U.S. participants currently in long-term committed romantic relationships found that those who reported engaging in more frequent hand holding, caressing, massaging, cuddling, spooning, and kissing also reported higher sexual satisfaction (Gesselman et al., Reference Gesselman, Garcia, Mark and Frederick2018).
This research suggests a potentially bidirectional association between satisfaction and affectionate behaviours, possibly because intimacy facilitates better relationships and sexual experience. However, it is also possible that individuals and couples engage in these affectionate behaviours because they are key elements of the socially sanctioned context for sexual behaviour. This may then reduce or alleviate any guilt, anxiety, or cognitive dissonance associated with transgressive or disallowed sexual activity which, in turn, increases the possibility of pleasure and satisfaction. These reasons noted above are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Little is known about intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in the context of casual sex, and less is understood about how someone's relationship preferences, including the relational context within which sexual activity may expectedly occur, might influence engagement in intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in those different contexts. In a social and cultural landscape that is both increasingly permissive of casual and uncommitted sex, but where expressions of intimacy with casual sex can serve as a prelude to a more committed romantic relationship (H.E. Fisher & Garcia, Reference Fisher, Garcia, Sternberg and Sternberg2018), it is important to explore the various motivations that may be influencing the sexual behaviours of emerging adults in these different relational contexts. The research literature suggests that emerging adult men and women are navigating a variety of potential motives in their casual sex encounters. These motives likely include erotic desire and physical gratification, but also include the need for interpersonal connection and intimacy beyond what is typically connoted in ‘no strings attached’ casual sex. Clearly, a wide variety of theoretical and empirical questions remain regarding the role intimacy and related affectionate behaviours play in casual sex encounters.
Current Study
The overarching goal of the current study was to better understand the preferences of emerging adults for intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in their sexual relationships. First, we assessed emerging adults’ attitudes toward one particular and widespread intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviour: cuddling. We then determined whether attitudes toward cuddling varied by gender. Next, we assessed whether the desire for affiliative behaviours varied by the relational context of sexual activity (i.e., no context given, a casual sex encounter, or a traditional romantic relationship), and whether this difference also varied by gender. The existence of differences would suggest that future studies exploring questions related to concepts like sexual attitudes or sexual motivation must take care to include relational context in their studies. Finally, we anticipated that the preference for intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviour during sex would be influenced by participants’ preferred relationship context. If this is the case, it suggests that the need for intimacy is not only found in the context of a committed romantic relationship, or a casual sex encounter that is on its way to becoming a committed romantic relationship, but may also be found within uncommitted casual sex encounters that are desired for being just that — casual and uncommitted. To explore these questions in greater detail, the following hypotheses were proposed:
Hypothesis 1a: In the absence of information about relationship context, most participants will report that they enjoy intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours (e.g., cuddling/intimately embracing).
Hypothesis 1b: In the absence of information about relationship context, women will report that they enjoy intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours (e.g., cuddling/intimately embracing) more than will men.
Hypothesis 2a: Most participants will report greater liking of intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during sexual activity in the context of traditional committed romantic relationships than in the context of an uncommitted casual sex encounter (a sexual hookup).
Hypothesis 2b: In the context of a casual sex encounter (a sexual hookup), women will report greater liking of intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during sex than will men.
Hypothesis 3: Participants will report greater desire for intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during sexual activity in their preferred relationship context.
Methods
Participants
The initial sample included 672 participants, ranging in age from 18 years to 61 years (M = 20.0 years, SD = 3.8 years). However, because our investigation centred around the experiences of emerging adults, we restricted our sample to those 25 years old or younger. This sample included 639 participants, of whom 38.2% (n = 244) were men and 61.7% (n = 394) were women. One participant did not specify their gender. Because our hypotheses included tests of gender differences, we removed this person from the final dataset. Our final sample (N = 638) had a mean age of 19.54 years (SD = 1.32 years). The majority of participants identified as White/Caucasian (62.4%), followed by Asian/Asian American (13.0%), Black/African American (12.1%), Hispanic (8.0%), and ‘Other’ (4.5%). Most participants (82.8%) identified their sexual orientation as exclusively heterosexual, followed by predominantly heterosexual (11.9%), bisexual (2.7%), predominantly homosexual (0.6%), exclusively homosexual (1.4%), and non-sexual (0.6%). Sixty-three percent of participants (n = 400; 62.4% of men, 63.4% of women) reported having had a casual sex experience (e.g., hookups, friends with benefits) in the past.
Procedure
Data for the current study were collected via a web-based questionnaire, administered electronically through StudentVoice (now known as CampusLabs), a higher-education assessment provider. StudentVoice randomly generated a sample of 1,000 undergraduate email addresses from the population of approximately 12,000 undergraduates attending the target U.S. northeast state university at that time. To protect potential participants and maintain complete anonymity, this list was not shared with the researchers (thus, no comparisons can be made between responders and non-responders). A voluntary recruitment email was sent to these 1,000 students requesting their participation in the study and providing a link to the web-based survey. Potential participants were notified that the study was completely anonymous and that they could skip questions they did not wish to answer. Students (n = 707) responded to the invitation by clicking the emailed link to the study description and agreeing to the informed consent page; of those, 35 initial respondents did not continue to complete a majority of the survey. A total of 672 participants continued to complete the survey, providing the initial dataset used here. All study procedures were approved by the university's Institutional Review Board (IRB).
Questionnaire
The questions for this study were included as part of a larger self-report questionnaire containing demographic information, personality scales, and romantic and sexual attitudes and behaviours. The questionnaire focused on experiences and motivations surrounding hookup behaviour. At the start of questions about sexual hookup behaviour, participants were given the following priming definition: ‘A hookup is a sexual encounter between people who are not dating or in a relationship, and where a more traditional romantic relationship is NOT an explicit condition of the encounter.’
Sociodemographics
Participants were asked a series of sociodemographic questions, including age (in years), sex/gender (male, female), year in school, racial and ethnic background, socio-economic status, and sexual orientation.
Affectionate behaviours
The likelihood to engage in intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours was initially assessed by the question, ‘Do you like to engage in cuddling/intimate embracing with others?’ with independent responses of Yes or No. The desire for these behaviours during sexual activity in different relational contexts was further assessed by asking participants two additional sets of questions later in the questionnaire, ‘If you were in a traditional romantic relationship with someone … ?’ and ‘If you were engaging in an uncommitted sexual hookup with someone … ?’ Each of these questions was followed by: ‘Would you want to cuddle with him or her?’; ‘Would you want to spend the night and cuddle with him or her after sexual activity?’; ‘Would you want to engage in foreplay?’; and ‘Would you enjoy looking deep into his or her eyes?’. Each item had response options of Yes and No. The different behaviours — cuddling, foreplay, eye gazing, cuddling and co-sleeping after sex (with the possibility of social interactions in the morning) — were intended to reflect increasing levels of intimacy.
Preferred relationship type
Participants were also asked ‘At this point in your life, which type of relationship would you prefer?’ with independent response options of (1) Traditional romantic relationship, (2) Hookup/casual sex/friends with benefits, or (3) Neither.
Results
Affectionate Behaviours
Hypothesis 1 predicted that in the absence of information about preferred relationship context, (a) most participants would report that they like cuddling/intimate embracing, but (b) more women than men would report liking cuddling/intimate embracing. Hypothesis 1a was confirmed. Most participants (95.4%; 94.5% of men, 95.9% of women) reported that they liked cuddling/intimate embracing with others. However, no significant differences between men and women were observed (t 628 = 0.80, p = .42, d = 0.06) and Hypothesis 1b, therefore, was not supported.
Engagement in Affectionate Behaviours During Sexual Activity by Relational Context
Hypothesis 2 predicted (a) that most participants would report greater liking of intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during sex in the context of traditional romantic relationships than in casual sex encounters, but that (b) in the context of casual sex encounters, women would like engaging in these behaviours more than men.
In the context of a traditional romantic relationship, most participants — 89.0% to 97.2%, regardless of gender — reported that they liked cuddling/intimate embracing during sex, would want to spend the night after sex to cuddle, enjoyed looking deeply into their partner's eyes, and would want to engage in foreplay before sex. As shown in Table 1, in the context of a casual sex encounter, however, responses were much more varied, ranging from 27.1% to 78.7% of participants liking or wanting to engage in these behaviours. We conducted four McNemar's tests to determine whether the proportion of participants who reported liking or wanting to engage in each of the behaviours varied significantly depending on the relational context in which the sex took place. Results of all four tests indicated that participants reported a greater likelihood of liking or wanting to engage in each of the affectionate behaviours in the context of romantic relationship than a casual sex encounter (all ps < .001). Hypothesis 2a was supported.
Table 1. Percentage of People Who Would Engage in Each Affectionate Behaviour, By Sexual Relationship Context and Participants’ Preferred Relationship Type
To address Hypothesis 2b, four chi-square tests were conducted with sex/gender as the independent variable and whether participants were likely, or wanted, to engage in the behaviour (yes/no) as the dependent variable. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated from the contingency tables produced from the chi-square analyses. Only two sex/gender differences emerged. Women were nearly 1.5 times more likely than men to like cuddling/intimate embracing in the context of a casual sex encounter, χ2(1, 634) = 5.13, p < 0.05; OR = 1.45, 95% CI [1.05, 2.01]. Additionally, women were 1.4 times more likely than men to want to spend the night and cuddle in the context of a casual sex encounter, χ2(1, 631) = 4.03, p < .05; OR = 1.40, 95% CI [1.01, 1.94]. No significant sex/gender differences emerged for wanting to engage in foreplay before sex, χ2(1, 630) = 0.13, p = 0.72; OR = 0.93, 95% CI [0.62, 1.39], or enjoying looking deeply into partner's eyes, χ2(1, 634) = 0.02, p = 0.89; OR = 1.03, 95% CI [0.72, 1.47], in the context of a casual sex encounter. Hypothesis 2b was only partially supported.
Preferred Relationship Type
Both men and women indicated a preference for a traditional romantic relationship. When asked the type of relationship they would prefer, 74.7% (62.7% of men, 82.3% of women) reported that they would prefer a traditional romantic relationship over a hookups/casual sex/friends with benefits (20.9%; 34.0% of men, 12.6% of women) or neither relationship type (4.4%; 3.3% of men, 5.1% of women).
Interaction of Preferred Relationship Type, Relational Context of Sexual Activity, and Intimacy-Motivated Affectionate Behaviours
Finally, Hypothesis 3 predicted that overall, participants would report greater desire for intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during sexual activity in the relational context corresponding to their preferred relationship type. Because of the strong preference for intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in the context of a romantic relationship, splitting the sample by sex/gender resulted in some cell sizes smaller than 20 (an understood threshold standard) for some of the outcome measures. Consequently, sex/gender was excluded from these final analyses.
Four chi-square tests were conducted, with preferred relationship type as the independent variable and each of the four intimacy-motived affectionate behaviours as dependent variables. From the contingency tables produced in the chi-square testing, we calculated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. The 28 participants who indicated they wanted neither type of relationship were excluded from analyses.
Hypothesis 3 was partially supported in the casual sex context. Those who preferred casual sex encounters were approximately 1.6 times as likely as those who preferred romantic relationships to like cuddling/intimate embracing, χ2(1, 603) = 5.24, p < .05; OR = 1.61, 95% CI [1.07, 2.42], and to want to spend the night and cuddle, χ2(1, 600) = 6.03, p < .05; OR = 1.62, 95% CI [1.10, 2.39], after sex. Those preferring casual sex encounters were nearly five times, χ2(1, 600) = 20.19, p < .001; OR = 4.82, 95% CI [2.29, 10.16], as likely to enjoy engaging in foreplay with a sex partner than were those preferring a romantic relationship. However, there was no significant difference between those preferring casual sex encounters or romantic relationships in enjoying eye gazing with a sex partner, χ2(1, 603) = 1.56, p = .21; OR = 1.31, 95% CI [0.86, 1.99].
In an attempt to increase the validity of participants’ attitudinal responses, we restricted the sample to only those participants who reported having engaged in casual sex in the past and reran each of the analyses. Only one chi-square test was significant at p < .05. Those preferring casual sex encounters were again over four times more likely to enjoy engaging in foreplay with a sex partner than were those preferring romantic relationships, χ2(1, 383) = 8.81, p < .01; OR = 4.37, 95% CI [1.53, 12.51]. Although non-significant, those preferring casual sex encounters were around 1.6 times as likely as those preferring romantic relationships to like cuddling with a sex partner, χ2[1, 385] = 3.37, p = .07; OR = 1.59, 95% CI [0.97, 2.61]. Those preferring casual sex encounters were around 1.4 times as likely as those preferring romantic relationships to want to spend the night and cuddle with a sex partner, χ2(1, 383) = 1.98, p = .16; OR = 1.38, 95% CI [0.88, 2.18]. Last, those preferring casual sex encounters were around 1.3 times as likely as those preferring romantic relationships to enjoy eye gazing with a sex partner, χ2(1, 385) = 1.48, p = .22; OR = 1.34, 95% CI [0.83, 2.17].
Discussion
The claim that casual sex is just sex (i.e., truly ‘no strings attached’ sexual activity) and devoid of other emotional factors, or fulfilling other interpersonal motivations, while widespread, has received little empirical interrogation. Those few studies that have investigated these issues have suggested that within casual sex encounters, many men and women are attempting to manage multiple sexual and romantic desires — such as emotional gratification, relational and emotional connection, or desire to initiate a romantic relationship (e.g., Epstein, Calzo, Smiler, & Ward, Reference Epstein, Calzo, Smiler and Ward2009; Garcia & Reiber, Reference Garcia and Reiber2008; Snapp, Lento, Ryu, & Rosen, Reference Snapp, Lento, Ryu and Rosen2014). However, how, and the extent to which, each of these occurs remains poorly understood.
The current study explores the hypothetical occurrence of intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in the contexts of both a committed traditional romantic relationship and an uncommitted casual sex encounter (casual sex, sexual hookups, friends with benefits), in a sample of U.S. emerging adult college students. While several studies have pointed to the role of romantic desires and outcomes associated with casual sex behaviour (e.g., Garcia & Fisher, Reference Garcia, Fisher and Tarrant2015; Garcia & Reiber, Reference Garcia and Reiber2008; Regan & Dreyer, Reference Regan and Dreyer1999), relatively little research has explored how men and women pursue intimacy in different sexual contexts, particularly those that are ‘casual’ and are thus generally presumed to be less intimate.
The current study is an initial investigation into intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours, or what may be conceptualised as interpersonal affiliative behaviours, to promote close relationships and intimacy. We explored whether the desire to engage in these affectionate behaviours during sexual activity is influenced by the relational context of the sex, the person's preference for particular relationship types — casual or romantic — and further by participant's sex/gender. Results suggested that in a general and decontextualised sense, most people enjoy engaging in intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during sex, particularly cuddling (Hypothesis 1a). Additionally, when relational context was given, participants were more likely to want to engage in intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during sexual activity in the context of committed romantic relationships than in the context of uncommitted casual sex encounters (Hypothesis 2a). Contrary to Hypotheses 1b and 2b, however, there were no sex/gender differences in either the wanting or liking of affectionate behaviours or in the desire to engage in these behaviours in the context of a casual sex encounter. Finally, results suggested that participants who preferred casual sex encounters (compared to romantic relationships) were more likely to engage in intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during sex in the context of casual sex encounters than were participants who preferred romantic relationships (Hypothesis 3).
There are several important observations to be drawn here. First, as stated at the start, traditional romantic relationships are indeed sites of relatively more intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours. However, with more than half of participants indicating a desire to cuddle/intimately embrace in a casual sex encounter, we must recognise that for many of the young men and women who participated, uncommitted casual sex encounters are also sites from which to engage in and obtain affection and by doing so possibly seek and fulfill their need for intimacy. This is counter to popular representations of, and prevailing sexual scripts related to, casual sex. As such, this finding also further highlights that people's sexual lives (including their casual sexual lives), as well as their need for and pursuit of intimacy, are more nuanced than generally represented.
Counter to predominant sexual scripts related to sex/gender roles that suggest the existence of a sexual double standard, as well as predictions derived from evolutionary sexual strategies theory, men and women did not differ in their desire to engage in most intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours during casual sex encounters. The desire of women to cuddle/intimately embrace more than men was the only exception, and this effect size was small (r = .09). This suggests that while many of our existing representations of casual sex predict sex/gender differences in both sexual behaviour and sexual attitudes, and in giving and receiving affection, emerging adult men and women may have developed new sexual and relational scripts related to both the context of casual sex, as well as to where one can seek and potentially fulfill the need for intimacy and affection.
The current findings echo those of other studies on casual sex, demonstrating that despite popular discourse, the reasons people engage in uncommitted casual sex are diverse, and that casual sex encounters are not solely motivated by the need for sexual gratification or pleasure. For some, if not many, casual sex is not simply about sexual activity, but simultaneously about exploring the edges of their behavioural repertoires, social experiences, pleasure, sexual desires, and intimacy. Indeed, in a large national U.S. sample, both men and women reported significant amounts of both sexual satisfaction and emotional satisfaction across a wide variety of committed and uncommitted relationship contexts (Mark, Garcia, & Fisher, Reference Mark, Garcia and Fisher2015). Taken together, the available evidence suggests that for many people, engagement in sexual hookups involves erotic activities, experiences with affectionate behaviours, romantic and emotional motivations, relatively less sexual pleasure than in a romantic relationship, yet still considerable sexual and emotional satisfaction. Even more, in some cases casual sex encounters can result in enduring relationships. In sum, uncommitted casual sexual encounters can, and for many do, involve a variety of affectionate factors that require further theoretical and empirical investigation. Scholars must challenge the notion that the myriad forms of casual sex emerging adults engage in today are solely experiences of sexual pleasure and fun, or substance induced follies, absent of romance or intimacy.
The current study also uncovered an important methodological point regarding the desire for the assessed intimacy-motived affectionate behaviours varying by relational context. Early in the survey participants were asked, in the general sense, if they liked to engage in cuddling with others. In this general sense, 95% of participants indicated yes. But later in the survey, when participants were provided with relationship contexts and asked about various affectionate behaviours, the rates shifted substantially — with the rates for wanting to cuddle in a romantic relationship being slightly higher, but the rates for wanting to cuddle in a casual sex encounter being markedly lower. This highlights the importance of clarifying specific contexts of behaviours, and when possible, considering both committed and uncommitted relationship contexts in sexuality research (e.g., Garcia et al., Reference Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey, Merriwether, DeLamater and Plante2015; Mark et al., Reference Mark, Garcia and Fisher2015; Wentland & Reissing, Reference Wentland and Reissing2011). When context is not specified, respondents may either assume a particular context for questions when study stimuli do not specify, or may simply be unable to provide accurate information regarding the realities of their romantic and sexual lives.
While affectionate behaviours have profound effects on romantic relationship function and stability (Frederick et al., Reference Frederick, Lever, Gillespie and Garcia2017; Heiman et al., Reference Heiman, Long, Smith, Fisher, Sand and Rosen2011; Muise et al., Reference Muise, Giang and Impett2014; van Anders et al., Reference van Anders, Edelstein, Wade and Samples-Steele2013), their role in casual sex has been much less understood. The current findings suggest that a participant's preferred relationship type had inconsistent associations with affectionate behaviours in different relationship contexts, and this preference moderates desire for intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in different relationship contexts. While limited by variation in sample size and preferred relationship type — we could not test for differences within a romantic relationship context because nearly everyone reported that they would like to engage in affectionate behaviours in the romantic relationship context — those who preferred casual sex were significantly more likely to want to engage in three of the four assessed affectionate behaviours during an uncommitted casual sex encounter than were those who preferred romantic relationships. Thus, for some emerging adults who prefer casual sex encounters, they may be obtaining affection, and with it aspects of intimacy, within these uncommitted contexts and in the absence of romantic commitment or an exclusive romantic relationship. This is consistent with research suggesting that the behavioural acts of affection themselves, even in the face of varying intent and social context, provide some of the same physiological and emotional benefits associated with intimacy as more typically understood to occur in committed relationships (Horan & Booth-Butterfield, Reference Horan and Booth-Butterfield2011).
Longitudinal research has shown that when people engage in casual sex for internal autonomous reasons (i.e., because they wanted to) rather than external non-autonomous reasons (i.e., because of social pressure or lack of intentionality) they are much less likely to experience negative outcomes associated with their casual sex history, such as low self-esteem, depression and anxiety, or physical symptoms (Vrangalova, Reference Vrangalova2015). For example, in a sample of Canadian university students, those casual sex encounters that include heavy alcohol and/or drug use and non-use of condoms, and those characterised by poor quality sex, were more likely to be associated with sexual regret (M.L. Fisher, Worth, Garcia, & Meredith, Reference Fisher, Worth, Garcia and Meredith2012). Correspondingly, those casual sex encounters characterised by some degree of agency and intentionality tend to have better outcomes.
While speculative, it is possible that for many emerging adults, engaging in affectionate behaviour during an uncommitted casual sex encounter is not an a priori condition of one's desires. For some, affection is part of a sexual script and/or a source of pleasure, regardless of the sexual relationship context it is experienced within. This may suggest that those who are engaging in affectionate behaviours achieve some degree of intimacy, but are not necessarily relationship-oriented individuals who solely use casual sex to achieve their relationship outcome. Rather, this may suggest less linear patterns, wherein affectionate behaviours, intimacy, and relationship outcomes are part of a dynamic biopsychosocial process that emerges with sexual activity, perhaps somewhat spontaneously and in response to aspects of the experience, rather than a sequential series of events associated with specific pathways for different sociosexual orientations and strategies.
Limitations and Future Directions
The current study pursued exploratory hypotheses in a sample of college students to further inquire into the role of intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in casual sex encounters. The current study has several limitations that require further exploration in future research. Only a limited number of affectionate behaviours were available to consider in the current study. There are no widely used measures of affiliative or attachment behaviours in humans, and while our current assessment is an initial attempt based on theory and previous literature on social behaviour, a deeper investigation into various behavioural expressions — ranging from affective touch to particular sexual acts — would be informative. Future work should expand upon this list to capture a wider variety of affectionate behaviours involved in people's romantic and sexual lives (e.g., Frederick et al., Reference Frederick, Lever, Gillespie and Garcia2017). Further, while the current study importantly included two sexual relationship contexts (committed traditional romantic relationship and uncommitted casual sex encounters), future research should expand this list further to include a wider variety of committed and uncommitted relationship contexts that people express their sexuality within (e.g., Mark et al., Reference Mark, Garcia and Fisher2015; Wentland & Reissing, Reference Wentland and Reissing2011), including the possibility of holding multiple preferences and engaging in multiple types of sexual relationships at the same time.
While the current study used a behavioural approach, previous research has also examined the role of attachment styles and casual sexual activity (e.g., Garneau, Olmstead, Pasley, & Fincham, Reference Garneau, Olmstead, Pasley and Fincham2013; Schneider & Katz, Reference Schneider and Katz2017; Snapp et al., Reference Snapp, Lento, Ryu and Rosen2014). Future work may benefit from inclusion of attachment and other psychological traits (e.g., Gute & Eshbaugh, Reference Gute and Eshbaugh2008; O'Brien, Geher, Gallup, Garcia, & Kaufman, Reference O'Brien, Geher, Gallup, Garcia and Kaufman2010; Paul, McManus, & Hayes, Reference Paul, McManus and Hayes2000; Trobst, Herbst, Masters, & Costa, Reference Trobst, Herbst, Masters and Costa2002) to help further explain the diversity of behavioural, emotional, and intimate factors involved in people's sexual experiences across relationship contexts. For instance, it may be possible that attachment styles are associated with specific types of affectionate behaviours, and what type of meaning individuals attribute to those behaviours in different relationship contexts. Future work should also explore other individual sociodemographic factors that influence sexuality, particularly differences and similarities across sexual orientations, race and ethnicity, and socioeconomic class.
Future research will also benefit from employing dyadic methodology to questions of affectionate behaviours across relationship contexts. One challenge for both researchers and sexually active emerging adults that remains is the degree to which affectionate behaviours are understood as interpersonal dyadic communication (much like other forms of both verbal and non-verbal/non-linguistic sexual communication during and after sexual activity; e.g., Denes, Reference Denes2012; Jonason, Betteridge, & Kneebone, Reference Jonason, Betteridge and Kneebone2016; Levin, Reference Levin2006; Muise et al., Reference Muise, Giang and Impett2014). That is, whether both partners consent to intimacy in an otherwise presumed casual sex context, where for some, intimacy is not part of their culturally established sexual script. Moreover, it remains unclear what one's partner understands affectionate behaviours to mean with regard to interest in a particular relationship trajectory following or as a result of a casual sex encounter. While one partner may want and consent to affectionate behaviours in a casual sex context, to another partner this may seem too intimate in an uncommitted context or it may indicate, via non-verbal communication, a perceived interest in a more enduring romantic relationship, despite this not necessarily being the intention of some partners. The ability to interpret what a partner is attempting to convey with their affectionate behaviours during casual sex, if anything, requires individual and dyadic investigation around what this means, how it is understood, and whether and when it is shared. This interpersonal dyadic communication aspect raises several questions about how casual sex partners communicate about consent, desire, intent, and post-sex expectations. These questions also intersect with other complex aspects of casual sex and sexuality among emerging adults, including how sexual consent is generally communicated and understood (see Muehlenhard, Humphreys, Jozkowski, & Peterson, Reference Muehlenhard, Humphreys, Jozkowski and Peterson2016). Issues of consent and coercion extend to why young men and especially young women engage in sexual behaviours in uncommitted contexts that they perceive as normative but that they do not necessarily feel comfortable engaging in (i.e., Lambert, Kahn, & Apple, Reference Lambert, Kahn and Apple2003; Reiber & Garcia, Reference Reiber and Garcia2010).
Last, the current study queried participants about what affectionate behaviours they wish to engage in, as a hypothetical. Future work may wish to explore what behaviours participants want, what they actually have engaged in, and whether engagement predicts the types of emotional and relational outcomes that follow sexual encounters. While the hypothetical scenarios assessed here provide indication of preferences, people's previous experiences may also bias their framing of romantic and sexual encounters (e.g., such as relabelling failed attempts at dating as hookups; Epstein et al., Reference Epstein, Calzo, Smiler and Ward2009). By conducting secondary analyses among those with a history of having ever had casual sex, we somewhat controlled for such a possibility in the current study, but future work could expand on this issue. Similarly, it will also be important for future work to better understand the relationship between motivations and desires with experiences and outcomes.
Our findings show that many emerging adults engage in intimacy-motivated affectionate behaviours in a variety of relational contexts, including outside of a committed romantic relationship. For some, this remains ‘just sex’ with or without inclusion of affiliative behaviours, but for others, intimacy motivations may play a significant role in initiating and/or the outcomes of a casual sex encounter. Just as some people engage in casual sex encounters seeking intimacy and hoping for romantic outcomes (Epstein et al., Reference Epstein, Calzo, Smiler and Ward2009; Garcia & Reiber, Reference Garcia and Reiber2008; Lyons et al., Reference Lyons, Manning, Longmore and Giordano2014; Regan & Dreyer, Reference Regan and Dreyer1999), others go into a sexual encounter for ‘just sex’ and may discover desires for a romantic relationship as an unexpected result of that casual sex encounter (Garcia & Fisher, Reference Garcia, Seibold-Simpson, Massey, Merriwether, DeLamater and Plante2015; Owen & Fincham, Reference Owen and Fincham2011). Pursuing these intimacy-related facets and types of questions will allow researchers and clinicians to better understand the psychoemotional aspects of people's sexual lives across different sexual relationship contexts, and how men and women today negotiate a wide variety of emotional and sexual desires, experiences, and outcomes.
