CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 228Gender, Feminism, and MediaImpact of Technology on AdolescentsSexuality, Behavior, and Technology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sexting: adolescents’ perceptions of the applications used for, motives for, and consequences of sexting

Open access
Van Ouytsel, Joris, Van Gool, Ellen, Walrave, Michel, Ponnet, Koen, Peeters, Emilie·2017·Journal of Youth Studies
DOI 10.1080/13676261.2016.1241865
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study explores adolescents’ perceptions of applications used for sexting, the motives for engaging in sexting, and the consequences they relate to sexting behavior. We conducted 11 same-sex focus groups among 57 adolescents (66.67% females; n = 38) between 15 and 18 years old in Flanders, Belgium. The analysis revealed that sexting mostly occurs through smartphone applications, such as Snapchat, which are perceived to be a more intimate form of communication than other digital applications, such as social networking sites. Both female and male respondents observed that girls might sometimes feel pressured to engage in sexting. They did so mostly out of fear that otherwise they would lose their boyfriends. Female and male respondents mentioned three main ways in which sexting photographs could be abused: (1) they could be used to coerce or to blackmail the victim, (2) they could be distributed out of revenge after the breakup of a romantic relationship, or (3) they could be forwarded or shown to peers in order to boast about having received the digital photograph. Anecdotes, which illustrate our findings, are included in the results. Suggestions for future research and implications for practice are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13676261.2016.1241865

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 60 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Associated Press and MTV. 2009. A Thin Line. 2009 AP-MTV Digital Abuse Study. Executive Summary: MTV - AP.
  2. Englander, Elisabeth K. 2015. “Coerced Sexting and Revenge Porn among Teens.” Bullying, Teen Aggression & Social Media 1 (2): 19–21.
  3. Fox, Jesse, and Bridget Potocki. 2014. “Technology and Culture: Sociocultural Explanations for Sexting.” In Sexting and Youth: A Multidisciplinary Examination of Research, Theory, and Law, edited by T. C. Heistand and W. J. Weins, 95–122. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
  4. Lamphere, Renee. 2014. “Prevalence & Research Methodology.” In Sexting and Youth. A Multidisciplinary Examination of Research, Theory, and Law, edited by Todd C. Hiestand and W. J. Weins, 33–63. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
  5. Le, Vi Donna, Jeff R. Temple, Melissa Peskin, Christine Markham, and Susan Tortolero. 2014. “Sexual Behavior and Communication.” In Sexting and Youth: A Multidisciplinary Examination of Research, Theory, and Law, edited by Todd C. Hiestand and W. Jesse Weins, 63–94. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
  6. Temple, Jeff R. 2015. “A Primer on Teen Sexting.” JAACAP Connect 2 (4): 6–8.
  7. Temple, Jeff R., Vi Donna Le, Melissa Peskin, Christine Markham, and Susan Tortolero. 2014. “Risky Behavior and Adolescent Development.” In Sexting and Youth: A Multidisciplinary Examination of Research, Theory, and Law, edited by Todd C. Hiestand and W. Jesse Weins, 77–94. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
  8. 10.1016/j.tele.2015.03.008.3 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 228

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Van Ouytsel, J., Van Gool, E., Walrave, M., Ponnet, K., & Peeters, E.
Affiliations
  • ,
  • University of Antwerp (BE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Youth Studies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2016-11
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
446-470
ISSN
  • 1367-6261 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-9680
DOI
10.1080/13676261.2016.1241865
OpenAlex
W2548728709
Cited by
228
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
25.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Journal of Youth Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Research Fund of the University of Antwerp
  • Research Foundation - Flanders
  • University of Antwerp Doctoral School
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Feminism, and Media
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Keywords
sexting, adolescents, mobile application, Snapchat, peer pressure, romantic relationships, extortion, revenge, sexual harassment, social networking sites, adolescents' perceptions

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