Student Bodies: Does the Sex Ratio Matter for Hooking Up and Having Sex at College?
Abstract
Using the Online College Social Life Survey, we examine whether the sex ratio of the student body of a college or university affects whether heterosexual students hook up, have relationships, have intercourse, or have attitudes favorable toward casual sex. The gendered dyadic power model predicts that, if men are more interested in having sex than women, as the ratio of women to men goes up, men will increasingly have the upper hand and more sex will occur. Consistent with the prediction, we find that where the ratio of women to men is higher, students of both sexes hook up more and accumulate more sexual partners, but inconsistent with it, students are no more likely to have intercourse in a given hookup where the ratio of women is higher.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Past research on hookups has mostly focused on what type of activity occurs during, or just prior to, the hookup, while limited research has explored selection into hookups and number of casual sex partners by personality, attitudes toward sexuality, other individualistic and psychological characteristics, demographic characteristics, and local campus factors such as sex ratios.
“Past research on hookups has mostly focused on what type of activity occurs during, or just prior to, the hookup, while limited research has explored selection into hookups and number of casual sex partners by personality, attitudes toward sexuality, other individualistic and psychological characteristics, demographic characteristics, and local campus factors such as sex ratios (Adkins et al., 201”
From The role of culture in explaining college students’ selection into hookups, dates, and long-term romantic relationships (2016) · cites this paper as Adkins et al., 2015
Prior research found that when women comprised a greater proportion of students on campus, they were less likely to go on traditional dates or have boyfriends, more likely to be sexually active, and had more sexual partners.
“Prior research found that when women comprised a greater proportion of students on campus, they were less likely to go on traditional dates or have boyfriends, more likely to be sexually active, and had more sexual partners (Adkins et al., 2015; Uecker & Regnerus, 2010).”
From The role of culture in explaining college students’ selection into hookups, dates, and long-term romantic relationships (2016) · cites this paper as Adkins et al., 2015
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 27 · Cited by 28
- Authors
- Adkins, T., England, P., Risman, B. J., & Ford, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
- New York University (US)
- University of Illinois at Chicago, USA
- Venue
- Social Currents
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-04-13
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 144-162
- ISSN
- 2329-4965 (ISSN-L)
- 2329-4973
- OpenAlex
- W2084101673
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 12.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Currents (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Marriage and Sexual Relationships
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Keywords
- sex ratio, university students, hookups, casual sex, sexual relationships, gender differences in sexual behavior, student social life
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
