1 / 22

Psychology 440: Mini Thesis

Psychology 440: Mini Thesis. Presented by: Kristen Coveyduc Madeleine Midtgaard Julie Windle. Previous Research Dating Culture & Hooking Up. Dating culture has changed Practice of courtship not as common in college anymore Moved towards hooking up Hooking up definition ( Bogle , 2007)

jolie
Télécharger la présentation

Psychology 440: Mini Thesis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Psychology 440: Mini Thesis Presented by:Kristen CoveyducMadeleine MidtgaardJulie Windle

  2. Previous ResearchDating Culture & Hooking Up Dating culture has changed Practice of courtship not as common in college anymore Moved towards hooking up Hooking up definition (Bogle, 2007) Hook-up location: Bars, restaurants, parties (Bersamin, Paschall, Saltz & Zamboanga, 2011)

  3. Previous Research Gender & Hooking Up Gender differences in hook up literature Findings show that men are more likely to take part in hooking up Pluralistic ignorance Men more comfortable/thought to be more comfortable (Lambert, Kahn & Apple, 2003) Women more likely to be upset about hooking up experience (Owen, Rhoades, Stanley & Fincham, 2010)

  4. Previous ResearchAlcohol & hooking Up Review of studies show significant link between alcohol use and hooking up behaviours 40% of college students can be classified as heavy episodic drinkers Level of alcohol involvement predicted level of sexual involvement Drinking in situations where sexual activity may occur was associated with increased probability of sexual activity (Cooper, 2002) 44% of students now binge drink (increase from previous decades) Alcohol primary predictor of engaging in sexual activities in a hook up (Heldman & Wade, 2010)

  5. The Current Study Time to Settle Down?: Comparing Attitudes of First and Third Year University Students on Casual Sexual Relationships By: Coveyduc, K., Midtgaard, M., & Windle, J. (2013)

  6. Hypotheses H1: first year students will have more positive attitudes towards hooking up than third year students H2: Men will have more positive attitudes towards hooking up than women, in both first and third year samples H3: Higher alcohol consumption will be associated with a higher number of hooking up experiences

  7. Participants 54 Undergraduate Students at St. Francis Xavier University 29 Participants from First Year Psychology Class 21 Female Participants 8 Male participants (Students in the First Year class received class credit for participation) 25 Participants from Third Year Psychology Class 22 Female Participants 3 Male Participants

  8. Materials 3 handouts were distributed to students Invitation to Participate Questionnaire Debriefing Form All handouts were cleared by the Ethics Department at St. Francis Xavier University

  9. Materials Two-Part Questionnaire Part 1 3 Demographic Questions (Age, Gender, Year of Study) 3 Multiple Choice Questions (Analyzing attitudes towards hooking up) 3 open-ended questions Part 2 5 seven point likert scale questions Level 1 indicating participants “Strongly Agree” to the statement Level 7 indicating participants “Strongly Disagree” to the statement

  10. Procedure and Design Agreement to participate in study acted as individual’s informed consent Completed questionnaires regarding casual sexual relationships (Hooking Up) Participants were given debriefing form after completion of questionnaires

  11. Procedure & Design Descriptive Design Questionnaire Surveys- Administered to Psychology 100 (Introductory), Psychology 300 (Personality)- Hooking Up Questions- Variables that may influence hooking up (ex. Alcohol consumption)

  12. Procedure and Design Attitudes measured on 5 item scale Attitudes analyzed through an Independent t-test. Attitudes differing between gender analyzed through an Independent t-test. Measures of alcohol consumption and number of hooking up experiences analyzed through a one-way ANOVA

  13. What Did We Find? Hypothesis1: Independent samples t-test Although there were differences in the opposite direction, there were no overall significant differences. first year (M=21.89, SD=7.40) third year (M=19.16, SD=4.54) **original hypothesis not supported. Third year students had more positive attitudes towards casual sexual relationships.

  14. What Did We Find? Hypothesis 2: Independent samples t-test no significant difference found. We can assume that there was no difference due to having low statistical power (Females, N=43)(Males, N=11)

  15. What Did We Find? Hypothesis 3: One-Way ANOVA - 89% indicated the 1-2 drinks per week. - 9% (5 people) indicated never - 1 person said 3-4 - none said 5 or more. limited variability in comparison by alcohol consumption because alcohol consumption is similar across participants group 1 (the never drink group) is the one that differs from the rest. Had positive attitudes

  16. Interesting Findings Third year students had more positive attitudes compared to first year students**this direction was unexpected Out of 54 participants, only 5 indicated never drinking Bars and parties were indicated as the most common places for hook ups University setting promotes casual sexual relationships

  17. Interesting Findings Hooking up behaviour considered normative (consistent with pluralistic ignorance) More negative attitudes towards hooking up rather than discussing feelings More negative attitudes towards FWBR No drink group had more positive attitudes than other groups

  18. Limitations Overall sample size Gender distribution (F=43, M=11) Little variance in alcohol consumption (89%) Did not distinguish the difference between hooking up and “Friends with Benefits Relationships” (FWBRs)

  19. Limitations Did not get the original sample that we wanted We included both hooking up and FWBRs Not enough statistical knowledge needed to analyze results

  20. What Do You Think? Why do you think that a larger number of participants stated that they would not engage in FWBRs (M=14.9) but that they would have sex with someone that they did not plan to talk to again (M=9.4)? If a larger sample size was used including more male students, do you think that there would be a significant gender difference in the results?

  21. What Do You Think? Do you think that attitudes anticipating hooking up on a university campus would have been different if given to grade 12 students? Do you think that different results would have been found if the study was conducted at a larger university?

  22. What Do You Think? If we had used fourth year Business students as participants, do you think results would have had different effects? Do you think there are certain things we could have done differently to enhance significance in our findings? Why do you think the no drink group had more positive attitudes than the other groups?

More Related