Cited by 183Marriage and Sexual RelationshipsGender and Feminist StudiesGender, Sexuality, and Education

A double standard for “Hooking Up”: How far have we come toward gender equality?

Allison, Rachel, Risman, Barbara J.·2013·Social Science Research

Abstract

While sexual attitudes have liberalized in the past half century, research is mixed as to whether attitudes have become less gendered over time. Recent studies on college students' sexual and romantic relationships suggest that a sexual double standard continues to organize sexuality on many campuses. Data from the Online College Social Life Survey shed light on students' evaluation of casual sex, or "hooking up." In addition to exploring gendered attitudinal patterns, we use gender structure theory to explore how individual characteristics and normative expectations of campus group affiliations shape attitudes. While three quarters of students do not hold different standards for men and women's hooking up, attitudes are more conservative than liberal, with almost half of students losing respect for men and women who hook up "a lot." However, men are more likely to hold a traditional double standard, while women are more likely to espouse egalitarian conservative attitudes. Individual characteristics, including age, religion, race, social class and sexual orientation are frequently related to sexual attitudes, as are number of hook ups, fraternity/sorority affiliation and varsity athletic participation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.04.006

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Women typically experience more negative consequences for engaging in hookups while men receive more positive reinforcement.

    “Women typically experience more negative consequences for engaging in hookups while men receive more positive reinforcement (Allison and Risman 2013; Hamilton and Armstrong 2009; Reiber and Garcia 2010).”

    From Social Motivations for College Hookups. (2021) · cites this paper as Allison and Risman 2013

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 82 · Cited by 183

Authors
Allison, R., & Risman, B. J.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
Allison, Rachel
Venue
Social Science Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-09
Volume
42
Issue
5
Pages
1191-1206
ISSN
0049-089X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2110961596
Cited by
183
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 4
FWCI
46.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Social Science Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Marriage and Sexual Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Sexuality, and Education
Keywords
hooking up, sexual double standard, gender equality, university students, casual sex, romantic relationships, gender norms, varsity athletics, sexual orientation, race, social class, age

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review