The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The sexual double standard and gender differences in attitudes toward casual sex among U.S. university students
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUNDA significant portion of premarital sexual activity is casual rather than in relationships, and commentators disagree on whether this is what women prefer. OBJECTIVEWe examine gender differences in attitudes toward casual sex.We also assess whether there is a double standard whereby women are judged more harshly for casual sex. METHODSWe use a large online survey of U.S. university students to examine gender differences with regard to attitudes and reports of sexual behavior. RESULTSWhile distributions overlap, the average man looks more favorably on casual sex than the average woman.Both sexes show substantial openness to relationships.We find evidence of a double standard: men are more judgmental toward women than toward men who have casual sex.Men appear to over-report and/or women to under-report intercourse and fellatio, suggesting that men see these acts as enhancing and/or women see them as diminishing their status. CONCLUSIONSWomen face more negative judgment than men when they are known to engage in casual sex, and they also report less interest in casual sex than men.Our analysis does not permit us to assess whether the double standard we find evidence of explains why women have less interest in casual sex, but we hypothesize that this is the case.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Sociologists and feminists argue that gender differences in romantic partnering preferences may result from, cause, or be reinforced by cultural double standards and social norms that result in women receiving negative social sanctions for engaging in casual sex while men receive social rewards (Armstrong, Hamilton, Armstrong, & Seeley, 2014; England & Bearak, 2014; Hamilton & Armstrong, 2009; K”
From The role of culture in explaining college students’ selection into hookups, dates, and long-term romantic relationships (2016) · cites this paper as England & Bearak, 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Men generally were less interested than women of the same ages in settling down in stable relationships, had more permissive attitudes toward sex and casual sex, and were more likely to regret sexual inaction, while women were more likely to regret sexual action and to pursue sex within a relationship (England & Bearak, 2014; Galperin et al., 2013 ; Laumann et al., 2004; Regnerus & Uecker, 2011).”
From The role of culture in explaining college students’ selection into hookups, dates, and long-term romantic relationships (2016) · cites this paper as England & Bearak, 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Men may also be conforming to societal expectations that they be more interested in casual sex”
From The role of culture in explaining college students’ selection into hookups, dates, and long-term romantic relationships (2016) · cites this paper as England & Bearak, 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures
Buss, D. M. (1989) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00023992 · Cited by 4,484
The social organization of sexuality: sexual practices in the United States
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.32-4802a · Cited by 2,889
Pascoe, C. J. (2020) · University of California Press eBooks · doi:10.1525/9780520941045 · Cited by 1,376
Baumeister, R. F., Catanese, K. R., & Vohs, K. D. (2001) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0503_5 · Cited by 862
Sexual double standards: A review and methodological critique of two decades of research
Crawford, M., & Popp, D. (2003) · The Journal of Sex Research · doi:10.1080/00224490309552163 · Cited by 860
Hooking up: sex, dating, and relationships on campus
(2008) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.46-1191 · Cited by 543
Surkyn, J., & Lesthaeghe, R. (2004) · Demographic Research · doi:10.4054/demres.2004.s3.3 · Cited by 502
Gendered Sexuality in Young Adulthood: Double Binds and Flawed Options
Hamilton, L., & Armstrong, E. A. (2009) · Gender & Society · doi:10.1177/0891243209345829 · Cited by 471
Accounting for Women’s Orgasm and Sexual Enjoyment in College Hookups and Relationships
Armstrong, E. A., England, P., & Fogarty, A. C. K. (2012) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122412445802 · Cited by 425
Self-citationDarroch, J., Singh, S., & Frost, J. (2001) · Family planning perspectives · doi:10.2307/3030191 · Cited by 396
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–101 of 101
La educación sexual en España: de las leyes a las aulas
Fernández, M. L., Castro, Y. R., & Román, R. M. (2023) · Universidad Pontificia Comillas eBooks · doi:10.14422/9788484686057-04
Metadata
- Authors
- England, P., & Bearak, J.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- Venue
- Demographic Research
- Published
- 2014-04-29
- Volume
- 30
- Pages
- 1327-1338
- ISSN
- 1435-9871 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2111964210
- Cited by
- 101
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4
- FWCI
- 21.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Demographic Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Marriage and Sexual Relationships
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Keywords
- sexual double standard, gender differences, casual sex, premarital sex, university students, female sexual behavior
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
