Toward a Post-Sex Disclosures Model: Exploring the Associations Among Orgasm,Self-Disclosure,and Relationship Satisfaction

Abstract

This study investigates communication during the post-sex time interval (PSTI) and extends previous work on communication after sexual activity by testing a post-sex disclosures model (PSDM) using structural equation modeling (SEM). Two-hundred six individuals completed surveys after sexual activity regarding their communication behaviors during the PSTI. The results revealed that individuals who orgasmed assessed greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing after sexual activity, and orgasm was indirectly associated with positive relational disclosures through risk-benefit assessments. However, positive relational disclosures after sexual activity were not predictive of relationship satisfaction. Rather, perceiving greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing was associated with increased relationship satisfaction, and orgasm was indirectly related to relationship satisfaction through risk-benefit assessments. Together, these findings suggest that fundamental communication and relational processes occur after sexual activity and that assessments of the potential outcomes of post-sex communication have important effects on relationship well-being.

Keywords

post-sex time interval sexual communication disclosure risk-benefit assessments pillow talk oxytocin

Communication is an important part of sexual and relationship satisfaction in romantic relationships (Byers, 2005; Byers & Demmons, 1999; Cupach & Comstock, 1990). Low-quality communication is associated with decreased sexual and relationship satisfaction, and communication helps explain why sexual and relationship satisfaction change together over time (Byers, 2005). In other words, communication appears to be an important predictor of changes in both forms of satisfaction and may affect sexual and relationship satisfaction in similar ways. As researchers continue to explore the pivotal role of communication in relationship functioning, it is also important to consider the communication that occurs following sexual episodes. Given the known links between general communication patterns and sexual and relationship satisfaction (Byers, 2005; Byers & Demmons, 1999; Cupach & Comstock, 1990), it is likely that communication during the intimate time immediately following sexual activity is also associated with relationship functioning.

For many individuals, the most rewarding aspects of sexual activity may involve sharing feelings with their partners afterwards, during “pillow talk” (Denes, 2012). The time immediately following sexual activity is often described as one of heightened emotion and intimacy (Halpern & Sherman, 1979; Veenestra, 2007) during which couples may engage in important pair-bonding behaviors such as disclosing feelings, sharing emotions, and connecting nonverbally (Hughes & Kruger, 2011). An emerging line of research explores predictors of post-sex communication, finding that individuals who reach orgasm are more likely to disclose positive feelings for their partners after sexual activity (Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014). The positivity and duration of post-sex interactions are also linked to increased relationship satisfaction (Denes, 2012; Muise, Giang, & Impett, 2014). However, it is unclear whether orgasm and relationship satisfaction are indirectly associated through post-sex communication, and whether other potential theoretical mechanisms underlie the post-sex disclosure decision process (i.e., the process by which individuals determine whether to share information with their partners after sexual activity). The present study extends previous work on post-sex communication by testing a theoretical model linking orgasm, risk-benefit assessments, post-sex disclosures, and relationship satisfaction. Specifically, this study more intricately explores verbal communication processes after sexual activity, the theoretical mechanisms underlying communication during this time period, and the association between post-sex communication and relationship satisfaction. Because the time immediately following sexual activity is often one of increased connection, it is especially important to understand the mechanisms that may promote or restrain individuals’ bonding in this context, as such communication may have important links to couples’ overall relationship satisfaction.

The Post-Sex Time Interval (PSTI)

The post-sex time interval (PSTI) is a term adapted from Kruger and Hughes’s (2010) term, post-coital time interval, which they define as the time after sexual activity “ . . . before one partner leaves or falls asleep,” and is argued to be “an important component of sexual relationships” (p. 255). In order to be inclusive of a range of sexual orientations and practices, the term “sex” is used instead of “coital,” as the latter privileges heterosexual penetrative sex. Research investigating post-sex behavior is in the early stages, though the importance of individuals’ behavior after sexual activity has long been recognized, such as in Halpern and Sherman’s (1979) work on “afterplay.” Afterplay focuses on how individuals exit sexual activity, and such exits may play an important role in relationships (Halpern & Sherman, 1979). Halpern and Sherman (1979) went as far as to claim that afterplay is more closely linked to sexual satisfaction than any other element of sexual encounters, including foreplay, orgasm, and sex itself. They further point out that what happens immediately after sexual activity likely has effects not only on sexual satisfaction, but also on relational satisfaction.

Recent research investigated afterplay and the PSTI from a communication perspective (Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014). Such studies have investigated communication immediately after sexual activity, focusing on post-sex self-disclosure. Derlega and Grzelak (1979) defined self-disclosure as “any information exchange that refers to the self, including personal states, dispositions, events in the past, and plans for the future” (p. 152). Individuals often self-disclose with the goals of expressing their feelings or emotions and/or to help develop a relationship (Derlega & Grzelak, 1979). These goals may also be guiding post-sex disclosures, as the PSTI is an important time for expressing emotions and bonding with one’s partner (Halpern & Sherman, 1979; Veenestra, 2007). One way that individuals may express such feelings is by engaging in “positive relational disclosures” (Denes, 2012). Positive relational disclosures involve sharing “positive aspects of the relationship between the two partners such as declarations of love, affection, and intimacy” (Denes, 2012, p. 95), and may be one way in which individuals meet their self-disclosure goals during the PSTI.

However, it is also important to consider the various factors that influence individuals’ decisions whether to disclose and the extent to which individuals share their feelings for their partners post sex. One such factor that is associated with disclosures during the PSTI is orgasm (Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014). Although orgasm precedes the PSTI, what happens during the sexual activity itself (e.g., whether an individual experiences orgasm during sexual activity) is likely to influence individuals’ communication later. Halpern and Sherman (1979) suggested that sexual satisfaction may play a pivotal role in bonding and emotional sharing, and orgasm has been pointed to as one component of sexual satisfaction (Haavio-Mannila & Kontula, 1997). The link between orgasm and communication may be explained by the physiological experience that accompanies different indicators of sexual satisfaction. More specifically, the hormone oxytocin may underlie the post-sex disclosure decision process. Oxytocin is released in large amounts when individuals experience orgasm (Blaicher, Gruber, Bieglmayer, Blaicher, Knogler, & Huber, 1999; Carmichael, Humbert, Dixen, Palmisano, Greenleaf, & Davidson, 1987; Murphy, Seckl, Burton, Checkley, & Lightman, 1990), and oxytocin is linked to decreases in aggression, fear responses, and stress responses, and increases in positive interpersonal behaviors, perceptions of trust, and eye gaze (e.g., Ditzen, Schaer, Gabriel, Bodenmann, Ehlert, & Heinrichs, 2009; Domes, Heinrichs, Michel, Berger, & Herpertz, 2007; Guastella, Mitchell, & Dadds, 2008; Kirsch et al., 2005; Kosfeld, Heinrichs, Zak, Fischbacher, & Fehr, 2005; Lim & Young, 2006). Although the physiological component associated with orgasm is not directly tested in this study due to limitations in the ability to collect such samples (see Horvat-Gordon, Granger, Schwartz, Nelson, & Kivlighan, 2005), it is possible that physiological processes are linked to post-sex communication and may ultimately help explain why orgasm is associated with communication during the PSTI.

Previous work addressing PSTI behaviors from a communication perspective found that individuals who orgasm engage in more positive relational disclosures after sexual activity than those who do not orgasm, both when looking at a one-time occurrence and when exploring post-sex disclosures over a two-week period (Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014). Denes and colleagues (Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014) suggest that oxytocin may be a key factor in the orgasm-post-sex disclosure link, as individuals who orgasm experience spikes in oxytocin, which may cause feelings of elation, euphoria, and closeness that result in more positive disclosures post sex. Thus, there is growing evidence that the experience of orgasm is linked to patterns of post-sex communication, and oxytocin may be the generative mechanism that explains this link.

A key theoretical mechanism underlying decisions to disclose involves assessments of the risks and benefits of sharing information (see Petronio, 2002). Risk-benefit assessments are central to classic models of disclosure decision processes such as social penetration theory (Altman & Taylor, 1973), as well as to more recent disclosure models such as the risk revelation model (Afifi & Steuber, 2009), the disclosure decision model (Omarzu, 2000), and communication privacy management (CPM) theory (Petronio, 2002). Risk-benefit assessments are also central in preliminary research investigating the theoretical mechanisms underlying post-sex communication. For example, Denes and Afifi (2014) found that individuals who orgasmed assessed greater benefits to disclosing to their partners post sex in comparison with those who did not orgasm. They further explain that an important aspect of disclosure, including post-sex disclosure, is deciding whether information is worth revealing and will ultimately result in rewards or benefits to the individual disclosing, such as relationship satisfaction and increased intimacy. It is possible that disclosing feelings to one’s partner post sex can result in greater affection, love, and closeness. However, disclosures also involve vulnerability. Baxter and Montgomery (1996) presented several risks of disclosure connected to the concept of vulnerability, such as losing autonomy and/or integrity, being rejected, losing control, and causing embarrassment or hurt to the receiver. Thus, post-sex disclosure risks might include rejection by the target of the disclosure, or scaring the partner away if the information shared is too intimate for the relationship.

CPM theory (Petronio, 1991, 2000, 2002) is one theory that is used to understand individuals’ assessments of the risks and benefits of disclosing information to others. CPM theory is concerned with “boundaries of privacy,” explaining that individuals establish boundaries between private and public information (Petronio, 2000, 2002). Boundary structures dictate who is and is not allowed access to information (Petronio, 2000, 2002). The permeability of these boundaries varies, as individuals allow access to certain information within the boundary. Some boundaries are less permeable (or rigid), meaning that information is rarely disclosed, while other boundaries are more permeable (or porous), meaning that information is easily shared (Petronio, 2000, 2002). The permeability will also vary with the risk of the information, such that risky or vulnerable information is often contained within a rigid boundary, while less risky information may have a porous boundary (Petronio, 2002).

In the context of post-sex communication, it is possible that individuals’ boundary structures become more permeable when they experience orgasm, resulting in decreased risk assessments and increased benefit assessments. More specifically, individuals who orgasm may perceive fewer risks and greater benefits to disclosing, and orgasm and post-sex positive relational disclosures may be indirectly related through risk-benefit assessments. This possibility aligns not only with the tenets of CPM theory and other disclosure theories utilizing a risk-benefit approach to disclosure decisions, but also with the research on oxytocin detailed above, which indicates that the hormone is released during orgasm and decreases perceptions of threat and increases perceptions of trust (Kirsch et al., 2005; Kosfeld et al., 2005). Thus, when individuals experience the surge of oxytocin that accompanies orgasm, the decreased feelings of fear and vulnerability and increased feelings of trust, safety, and warmth that are associated with oxytocin (Kirsch et al., 2005; Kosfeld et al., 2005; Lim & Young, 2006) may result in individuals communicating in increasingly intimate ways post sex. Thicker or less permeable boundaries that previously surrounded vulnerable information (e.g., feelings of love) may become more permeable and surrounded by a thinner boundary in the post-orgasm euphoria, potentially resulting in disclosure (e.g., saying “I love you”).

Previous work exploring the associations among orgasm, risk-benefit assessments, and post-sex communication reveals mixed results. For example, orgasm has been associated with both benefit assessments and positively valenced disclosures, but benefit assessments did not mediate this relationship (Denes & Afifi, 2014). Furthermore, risk assessments were not associated with orgasm (Denes & Afifi, 2014). To more clearly test the associations detailed in this growing line of research, a post-sex disclosures model (PSDM, see Figure 1) is tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) on a new data set. The present study attempts to not only replicate previous findings with a new sample, but also to use more advanced statistical techniques to test such pathways and clarify the mixed results of previous studies. SEM allows the researcher to test multiple regression equations simultaneously, to test relationships between latent variables, and “the opportunity to analyze the dependencies of psychological constructs without measurement error” (Nachtigall, Kroehne, Funke, & Steyer, 2003, p. 10). In this way, SEM will provide a stronger test of the pathways detailed in previous research on post-sex communication by allowing multiple pathways to be tested together in one cohesive model. Thus, the following pathways are predicted:

Hypothesis 1 (H1): Individuals who orgasm will perceive greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing after sexual activity in comparison with individuals who do not orgasm.

Hypothesis 2 (H2): Risk-benefit assessments will predict positive relational disclosures, such that the greater benefits/fewer risks individuals perceive, the more positive relational disclosures they will engage in with their partners after sexual activity.

Hypothesis 3 (H3): Risk-benefit assessments will mediate the association between orgasm and positive relational disclosures after sexual activity, such that individuals who orgasm will perceive greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing, which will subsequently predict greater positive relational disclosures.

Figure 1.

Hypothesized post-sex disclosures model (PSDM).

While previous research on post-sex disclosures has confirmed several of the pathways detailed above, the present study tests these pathways in one cohesive model to better understand the relationships among orgasm, risk-benefit assessments, and post-sex communication.

Post-Sex Communication and Relationship Satisfaction

An important next step in understanding the relational outcomes of post-sex communication is to explore its association with relationship satisfaction. The highly intimate nature of the PSTI may provide a space for couples to communicate feelings of closeness and love and strengthen their relationship. Such pillow talk may be associated with overall relationship satisfaction, as individuals may use this time to express emotions and feelings that bring the couple closer. While communication plays an important role in sexual and relationship satisfaction in romantic relationships (Byers, 2005; Byers & Demmons, 1999; Cupach & Comstock, 1990), the association between post-sex communication and relationship satisfaction is under-explored, despite mounting evidence that pillow talk influences relationship functioning (Denes, 2012; Halpern & Sherman, 1979; Muise et al., 2014).

Recent research confirms the link between both positive relational disclosures and the quantity of post-sex affection and relationship satisfaction (Denes, 2012; Muise et al., 2014). Muise et al. (2014) found that the greater the amount of time individuals spent engaging in affectionate behavior (i.e., cuddling, intimate talk, etc.), the greater their relationship satisfaction. Similarly, Denes (2012) found that positive relational disclosures after sexual activity were positively correlated with relationship satisfaction. However, it is unclear whether orgasm and risk-benefit assessments influence such associations. Although previous work has confirmed (1) the links between orgasm, risk-benefit assessments, and positive relational disclosures, and (2) the association between positive relational disclosures and relationship satisfaction, these variables have yet to be tested in a cohesive theoretical model. To fill this gap, the present study investigates the potential indirect effects of orgasm on relationship satisfaction through risk-benefit assessments and positive relational disclosures, while also attempting to replicate previous findings linking positive relational disclosures to relationship satisfaction. In line with previous research, it is likely that individuals who engage in more positive relational disclosures (i.e., disclose more positive feelings for their partners after sexual activity) will report greater relationship satisfaction immediately following the sexual episode. Thus, the following pathway is predicted and a research question is posed:

Hypothesis 4 (H4): Positive relational disclosures will predict relationship satisfaction, such that the more positive relational disclosures individuals engage in post sex, the greater their relationship satisfaction.

Research Question 1 (RQ1): Is orgasm indirectly associated with relationship satisfaction through risk-benefit assessments and positive relational disclosures?

Together, this study extends previous work on communication during the PSTI by testing the PSDM to better understand the relationships between predictors and outcomes of post-sex communication. Testing a cohesive model, rather than separate components of the model, will provide a more advanced understanding of the ways that orgasm, risk-benefit assessments, positive relational disclosures, and relationship satisfaction function together. In this way, the present study will help sexual communication scholars better understand the potentially important role of post-sex disclosures in couples’ well-being and relationship satisfaction. In addition, though previous research has identified differences in women’s and men’s post-sex communication (e.g., Denes, 2012), sex differences in communication are largely over-estimated (for a review, see Canary & Hause, 1993). The hypotheses and research question are therefore approached without the assumption of sex differences, though the potential influence of biological sex is considered in the preliminary analyses, which are explained in greater detail below.

Method

Participants

Participants were college students recruited through the Department of Communication participant pool at a large public university. The sample consisted of 206 individuals (women, n = 158; men, n = 48), which meets the suggested criteria that the sample size should be over 200 for conducting SEM (Kline, 1998). The participants ranged in age from 18 to 32 years, with an average age of 19.3 years. The average age of participants in this study is similar to that of previous research investigating post-sex communication (e.g., Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014).

To qualify for the study, all participants were required to currently be in a romantic relationship that included sexual activity (defined as a relationship that includes any sexual activity “below the belt”). The average relationship length for participants in the study was 13.6 months (SD = 14.7, range = 0-63). Participants were also asked to report their sexual orientation in an open-ended question. Nearly the entire sample (98%, n = 201) self-identified as heterosexual. The sample was racially diverse, with 68% of participants identifying as White/Caucasian (n = 139), 16% (n = 33) as Hispanic or Latino, 9% (n = 18) as Asian, 4% as mixed race (n = 8), 2% (n = 5) as African American, and 1% (n = 2) as Other.

Procedure

The procedures closely align with those of previous research investigating post-sex communication (see Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014). After signing up for the study, participants who met the criterion of being in a sexual relationship were emailed a link to the study survey and asked to complete the survey after the next time they engaged in sexual activity with their partner (each participant only completed the survey one time). The link directed participants to the survey website, where they were informed that they should complete the survey within two hours of sexual activity with their partner, which was defined as activity “below the belt.” As described by Denes and Afifi (2014), “This time frame was chosen to ensure that participants completed the survey as close to the time of the sexual activity as possible and to lessen the chances of participants engaging in other activities such as sleep” (p. 341). Participants’ self-reported time of sexual activity was cross-checked with the timestamp collected from the survey hosting website. When participants returned to the website to complete the survey after sexual activity, they were asked to complete demographic measures and several questions assessing the nature of the sexual activity, their relationship, and their communication with their partners after sexual activity.

Measures

Demographics

First, participants were asked to respond to demographic questions regarding their age, sex, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and relationship length.

Nature of sexual activity

Next, several questions regarding the nature of the sexual activity were presented (from Denes, 2012). More specifically, participants were asked to indicate when the sexual activity occurred (day/time). They were then presented with an open-ended question asking about the nature of the sexual activity. Participants reported engaging in a variety of sexual activities. Sixty-three percent (n = 130) of participants reported engaging in penile-vaginal intercourse, 24% (n = 50) in penile-vaginal intercourse plus other forms of sexual activity, 12% (n = 24) in oral sex as giver and/or receiver, and 1% (n = 2) in other sexual activity (e.g., anal sex). Next, participants were asked whether the sexual activity resulted in orgasm. Thirty-six percent (n = 75) of the sample reported that they did not experience orgasm from the sexual activity; 64% (n = 131) of the sample reported that they did experience orgasm. An independent samples t test revealed a statistically significant difference between women’s (M = .56, SD = .50) and men’s (M = .88, SD = .33) frequency of orgasm, t(204) = 4.07, p < .01. The implications of this difference are discussed in greater detail in the preliminary analyses below.

Positive relational disclosures

The relational disclosures scale was used to investigate post-sex communication (Denes, 2012). The scale consists of five items assessing positive and negative relational disclosures after sexual activity (e.g., “I expressed some positive feelings for my partner to him/her”; “I told my partner some negative thoughts I’ve been having about him/her”). Participants were asked to answer the questions in reference to their communication immediately following the sexual activity. A 5-point Likert-type scale was used (with 1 being strongly disagree and 5 being strongly agree). The negatively valenced items were reverse-coded so that higher scores indicated more positive relational disclosures. The Cronbach’s alpha for the final positive relational disclosures scale (see final measurement model detailed below) was .96.

Risk-benefit assessments

Participants were asked to respond to several items similar to those used by Denes and Afifi (2014) that assessed the risks and benefits of disclosing to their partners. While many studies have addressed risk-benefit assessments by having individuals list perceived risks and perceived benefits, fewer studies have assessed general perceptions of the risks and benefits of disclosing. One approach in previous work involves having participants rate already identified, context-specific risks and benefits (e.g., risks of revealing a secret, Afifi & Steuber, 2009; risks and benefits of exchanging information online, Youn, 2005). For example, Afifi and Steuber (2009) investigated risk assessments by looking at self, other, and relationship protection needs. In other words, high concern about how these needs would be affected indicated a high risk assessment. However, to tap into more general risk and benefit assessments, rather than context-specific assessments, general risk-benefit assessment items were used in the present study.

Participants were asked to respond to five general items assessing perceptions of the risks (three items) and benefits (two items) of disclosing to their partners (e.g., “I felt safe disclosing how I felt about my partner to him/her”; “I saw some danger in expressing my feelings to my partner”; Denes & Afifi, 2014). Participants were asked to answer the questions in reference to their perceptions immediately following the sexual activity. A 5-point Likert-type scale was used (with 1 being strongly disagree and 5 being strongly agree). The risk items were reverse-coded so that higher scores indicated perceiving greater benefits/fewer risks and lower scores indicated perceiving fewer benefits/greater risks. The Cronbach’s alpha for the risk-benefit scale was .91.

Relationship satisfaction

A modified version of Huston, McHale, and Crouter’s (1986) Marital Opinion Questionnaire was used to assess relationship satisfaction. The modified version of this scale has been used in many studies investigating relationship satisfaction in non-marital relationships (e.g., Afifi & Schrodt, 2003; Caughlin & Golish, 2002; Caughlin & Malis, 2004; Denes, 2012; Schrodt & Afifi, 2007). Participants were asked to respond to 10 items and an additional global satisfaction item presented on a 5-point semantic differential scale (e.g., “miserable-enjoyable,” “discouraging-hopeful,” “disappointing-rewarding,” and “completely dissatisfied-completely satisfied”). The Cronbach’s alpha for the final relationship satisfaction scale (see final measurement model detailed below) was .95.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Descriptive statistics and correlations for all continuous variables (using the final item loadings for the latent variables identified in the measurement model described below) are presented in Table 1. Overall, individuals generally perceived benefits to disclosing to their partners post sex, disclosed positive information to their partners after sexual activity, and were satisfied with their relationships. In addition, bivariate analyses revealed that perceiving greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing post sex was positively correlated with relationship satisfaction and positive relational disclosures, and relationship satisfaction was positively correlated with positive relational disclosures.

Table 1.

Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations for All Continuous Variables.

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3
1. Positive relational disclosures	4.44	.75	—
2. Risk-benefit assessments	3.81	.88	.24**	—
3. Relationship satisfaction	4.03	.96	.17**	.51**	—

p < .01.

SEM using AMOS 22.0 software was used to test the PSDM. A two-step approach was used in which a measurement model was first estimated, followed by the structural model (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). The model chi-square, comparative fit index (CFI), and root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA) were used to test for goodness of fit. Criteria were set as χ²/df < 3.00, CFI > .90, and RMSEA < .05 (Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Kline, 1998). To parcel out latent constructs and determine the construct validity of the measures, a confirmatory factor analysis measurement model was conducted first. The hypothesized measurement model involved three latent variables (i.e., positive relational disclosures, risk-benefit assessments, and relationship satisfaction) and one observed variable (i.e., orgasm). The initial measurement model did not show adequate fit: χ² = 842.08, df = 247, p < .01; χ²/df = 3.41; CFI = .86; RMSEA = .11. Several modifications indicated by the analysis were used (one at a time) to improve model fit. First, the analysis indicated that the negatively valenced (reverse-coded) positive relational disclosures items were better indicators of the latent construct of positive relational disclosures than the positively valenced items, and thus those three items were retained. Second, seven of the 11 relationship satisfaction items loaded strongly onto the latent construct of relationship satisfaction and were retained. Lastly, the errors between the two benefit assessment items in the risk-benefit scale were allowed to correlate. Theoretically, this decision made sense as these two items were worded similarly compared with the risk assessment items. With these three modifications, the final measurement model showed adequate fit with a CFI of 1.00 and a RMSEA of .03 (χ² = 110.85, df = 98, p = .18; χ²/df = 1.13).

In addition, biological sex was explored as a possible variable of interest in the analyses. In line with Canary and Hause (1993), the analyses were approached without the assumption that sex differences always exist. However, previous research has identified differences in frequency of orgasm for women and men (Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014). Therefore, preliminary analyses were conducted to test for possible differences in the present data. As noted above, an independent samples t test revealed a statistically significant difference between women’s (M = .56, SD = .50) and men’s (M = .88, SD = .33) frequency of orgasm, t(204) = 4.07, p < .01. For men in the sample, 88% reported experiencing orgasm from the sexual activity, though only 56% of women reported experiencing orgasm. Therefore, two additional models were tested to investigate potential differences in women’s and men’s post-sex communication.

Primary Analyses

The hypothesized PSDM was tested using SEM with maximum likelihood estimation using AMOS 22.0 software. The model predicted that (H1) individuals who orgasmed would perceive greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing after sexual activity, (H2) risk-benefit assessments would predict positive relational disclosures, (H3) risk-benefit assessments would mediate the association between orgasm and positive relational disclosures after sexual activity, and (H4) positive relational disclosures would predict relationship satisfaction. Bootstrap analysis was used to test the indirect effects of orgasm on positive relational disclosures through risk-benefit assessments using 5,000 bootstrap resamples. Bootstrap analysis tests whether the independent variable and dependent variable are indirectly related through the mediating variable. If zero is not included in the 95% confidence interval (CI), then the indirect effect is significantly different from zero at p < .05 (Preacher & Hayes, 2004).

The hypothesized PSDM was first tested with the entire sample (women and men) and showed close, but not quite adequate, fit: χ² = 172.49, df = 100, p < .01; χ²/df = 1.73; CFI = .98; RMSEA = .06. The modification indices suggested that the model fit would be improved if a direct path between risk-benefit assessments and satisfaction was added. The revised model (see Figure 2) fit the data well with a CFI of 1.00 and a RMSEA of .03 (χ² = 111.77, df = 99, p = .18; χ²/df = 1.13). This modification made sense theoretically, as individuals’ perceptions of a safe space for communicating may also be associated with post-sex relationship satisfaction. This point is discussed in greater detail later.

Figure 2.

Final post-sex disclosures model (PSDM).

As predicted (H1), individuals who orgasmed assessed greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing after sexual activity (β = .15, p < .05). Also as hypothesized (H2), perceiving greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing was associated with increased positive relational disclosures after sexual activity (β = .34, p < .01). The total effect of orgasm on positive relational disclosures was not significant (β = .001, p = ns), nor was the direct effect (β = −.05, p = ns). However, even when a direct effect does not exist, indirect effects can be present (see Rucker, Preacher, Tormala, & Petty, 2011). Though the effect was small, the indirect effect of orgasm on positive relational disclosures was significant (95% CI = [.008, .113], p < .05; β = .05), indicating that orgasm is indirectly related to positive relational disclosures through risk-benefit assessments, supporting H3.

Follow-up analyses were conducted to further explore the relationship between orgasm and positive relational disclosures, given their association in previous research (Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014). Though the measurement model indicated that the reverse-coded negatively valenced items should be retained to assess positive relational disclosures, the follow-up analyses used the positively valenced items, which have been included in previous research (M = 3.95, SD = 1.05, Cronbach’s α = .93). Using the positively valenced items, an independent samples t test revealed a statistically significant difference in positive relational disclosures for individuals who orgasmed (M = 4.06, SD = 1.01) compared with those who did not orgasm (M = 3.75, SD = 1.10), t(204) = −2.03, p < .05. The implications of these results are discussed in greater detail later.

Unlike what was predicted (H4), positive relational disclosures were not associated with relationship satisfaction (β = .01, p = ns). However, perceiving greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing was associated with increased relationship satisfaction (β = .56, p < .01). Furthermore, the indirect effect of orgasm on relationship satisfaction (95% CI [.010, .169], p < .05; β = .09) was significant, indicating that orgasm is indirectly related to relationship satisfaction through risk-benefit assessments (RQ1).

Women’s and men’s models

Given the differences in women’s and men’s frequency of orgasm, two additional models were tested (one for each of the sexes separately). However, because the recommended sample size for conducting SEM is 200 and the separate models do not meet this criterion (Kline, 1998), the results of the separate models should be interpreted with caution.

First, the final PSDM indicated above was tested only on the women in the sample. The model showed adequate fit: χ² = 113.53, df = 99, p = .15; χ²/df = 1.15; CFI = .99; RMSEA = .03. However, as indicated in Figure 3, the path from orgasm to risk-benefit assessments was not significant in the women’s PSDM, and the indirect effects of orgasm on positive relational disclosures and relationship satisfaction were only approaching significance.

Figure 3.

Women’s post-sex disclosures model (PSDM).

The men’s PSDM showed close, but not quite adequate fit: χ² = 144.92, df = 99, p < .01; χ²/df = 1.46; CFI = .94; RMSEA = .10. Two modifications indicated by the analysis were employed (one at a time) to improve model fit. First, the errors between two of the risk assessment items in the risk-benefit scale were allowed to correlate. Next, two items in the relationship satisfaction scale were allowed to correlate. Both of these decisions made sense theoretically, given the wording of the items. With these two modifications, the final measurement model showed nearly adequate fit, though the RMSEA was slightly above acceptable levels: χ² = 118.62, df = 97, p = .07; χ²/df = 1.22; CFI = .97; RMSEA = .07. However, none of the other suggested modification indices made theoretical sense and were therefore not employed. As indicated in Figure 4, the indirect effect of orgasm on relationship satisfaction was not significant, and the path from orgasm to risk-benefit assessments and the indirect effect of orgasm on positive relational disclosures were only approaching significance. The differences revealed in the women’s and men’s models are discussed in greater detail below.

Figure 4.

Men’s post-sex disclosures model (PSDM).

Discussion

A growing body of literature indicates the importance of post-sex communication in couples’ relationship well-being and satisfaction (Muise et al., 2014). This study contributed to this line of work by testing the associations among orgasm, risk-benefit assessments, positive relational disclosures, and relationship satisfaction, as explicated in the PSDM. Although the pathways detailed in the PSDM built upon previous research exploring post-sex communication, the present study extended this line of research by using SEM to test a model of post-sex disclosures. This analysis confirms previous research on communication during the PSTI, while also revealing unique pathways. More specifically, this study revealed that individuals who orgasmed assessed greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing after sexual activity, and orgasm was indirectly associated with positive relational disclosures through risk-benefit assessments. However, unlike what was predicted, positive relational disclosures after sexual activity were not associated with relationship satisfaction. Rather, perceiving greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing was associated with increased relationship satisfaction, and orgasm was indirectly related to relationship satisfaction through risk-benefit assessments. These findings and their implications for couples’ communication and PSTI researchers are discussed in greater detail below.

Risk-Benefit Assessments During the PSTI

The findings of the present study make an important contribution to research on post-sex communication by using communication theory to understand the reasons for individuals’ disclosures after sexual activity. Many models of disclosure discuss the importance of the risk-benefit assessment in individuals’ decisions to disclose (e.g., Afifi & Steuber, 2009; Altman & Taylor, 1973; Omarzu, 2000; Petronio, 2002). Given that the PSTI is a pivotal time in which partners engage in pair-bonding behavior and intimate communication (Halpern & Sherman, 1979; Veenestra, 2007), it is important to understand the reasons why individuals may choose to reveal or conceal feelings for their partners during the PSTI. The findings of this study suggest that both orgasm and risk-benefit assessments play an important role in the disclosure decision process. In the present study, orgasm was associated with decreased risk and increased benefit assessments, and these assessments accounted for the relationship between orgasm and the disclosure of positive feelings for one’s partner after sexual activity.

The present findings also suggest that the PSTI is a time when individuals feel especially safe and connected with their partners, which may be linked to the surges of oxytocin that accompany orgasm (Blaicher et al., 1999; Carmichael et al., 1987). Oxytocin decreases fear and increases pro-social behavior (Guastella et al., 2008; Lim & Young, 2006). Thus, it makes sense that individuals perceive greater benefits to disclosing during times when oxytocin is surging through their systems, as oxytocin is associated with being more trusting and social, which may include being more open and communicative with one’s sexual partner. In the present data, the perceived benefits of disclosing appear to be more salient for individuals who orgasmed compared with those who did not, suggesting that orgasm (and perhaps the surge of oxytocin that occurs with orgasm) is associated with increased perceptions that the PSTI is a safe space for communicating. From the perspective of CPM theory, this may also suggest that orgasm and oxytocin are related to more permeable boundary structures (Petronio, 2000, 2002). An important future direction for exploring communication during the PSTI is to assess the physiological experience that accompanies individuals’ communicative experience. For example, future research would benefit from measuring individuals’ oxytocin levels during the PSTI, and testing whether individuals’ oxytocin levels predict the breadth, depth, and valence of their disclosures. However, such studies are unlikely to occur until more sophisticated and less invasive means of collecting such data are developed and made available to researchers.

Taken together, the results suggest that individuals may engage in disclosure processes in unique ways during the PSTI, becoming keenly aware of the benefits of sharing positive feelings with their partners due to the heightened intimacy of this context. Denes and Afifi (2014) found that individuals who orgasmed were more intentional in their post-sex disclosures, suggesting that rises in oxytocin may make individuals act in more intentional ways to achieve their goals for post-sex communication (e.g., bonding, intimacy). Thus, rises in oxytocin may make individuals not only more trusting and intimate with their partners, but also more aware that disclosing feelings to their partners may aid in pair-bonding and help develop and/or maintain the relationship.

These findings also corroborate previous research emphasizing the importance of orgasm when investigating post-sex communication (Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014). Individuals seem to perceive the post-orgasm context as a time when it is acceptable to share positive or warm feelings with their partners. Orgasm and positive relational disclosures were found to be indirectly related through individuals’ assessments of the risks and benefits of disclosing. In other words, risk-benefit assessments appear to be the theoretical mechanism that accounts for the link between orgasm and disclosures during the PSTI. However, it is important to note that the direct and total effects of orgasm on positive relational disclosures were not significant. This finding is surprising, as previous research (i.e., Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014) reveals a significant positive association between orgasm and post-sex positive relational disclosures. Follow-up analyses using the positively valenced post-sex disclosure items revealed a positive association between orgasm and positive relational disclosures, in line with earlier work.

One reason for the discrepancy in the above findings may involve the way individuals interpret the positively versus negatively valenced items. A closer examination of the means reveals that the reverse-coded negatively valenced items had a high mean (4.44), while the positively valenced items had a slightly lower mean (3.95). Individuals may be less likely to report that they expressed negative sentiments to their partners post sex (and thus “strongly disagree” with these statements), though they may be more willing to admit to not disclosing entirely positive sentiments (and thus “somewhat agree” with these statements). Such a possibility may explain why the positively valenced items revealed unique differences for individuals who did versus did not orgasm, while the negatively valenced items did not. Despite this possibility, the measurement model indicated that the reverse-coded negatively valenced items were the strongest indicators of positive relational disclosures, and thus, the follow-up analyses should be interpreted with caution.

Post-Sex Communication and Relationship Satisfaction

The second aim of this study was to test the relationship between post-sex communication and relationship satisfaction. Interestingly, this study revealed that positive relational disclosures were not directly related to relationship satisfaction. However, individuals’ assessments of the risks and benefits of disclosing were associated with relationship satisfaction, such that perceiving greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing feelings to one’s partner during the PSTI was positively associated with relationship satisfaction. Furthermore, orgasm was indirectly associated with relationship satisfaction through risk-benefit assessments, such that orgasm is associated with perceiving greater benefits/fewer risks to disclosing, which is in turn associated with increased relationship satisfaction.

Taken together, these findings may suggest that how an individual feels about communicating during the PSTI is more important than the actual communication that occurs in terms of relationship satisfaction. These findings are understandable when considering the many factors that may impede verbal communication post sex. For example, research on the PSTI reveals a multitude of behaviors individuals engage in post sex such as snacking, sleeping, using the bathroom, showering, and so on (Hughes & Kruger, 2011). For many couples, there may not be an opportunity to disclose feelings verbally for one’s partner when other post-sex activities such as these take precedent. However, these findings are promising in that merely perceiving the PSTI as a context conducive to positive relational communication is associated with greater relationship satisfaction. It is possible that seeing greater benefits/fewer risks to communicating with one’s partner during the PSTI is also indicative of feeling more comfortable and close with one’s partner, and therefore increases relationship satisfaction. Thus, even when couples do not find the time to verbally disclose their feelings for their partners post sex, recognizing the potential positive outcomes of pillow talk may be beneficial in and of itself.

Women’s and Men’s PSDM

Lastly, it is important to note that several significant pathways were no longer significant when investigating women’s and men’s experiences separately. These models were tested due to differences in women’s and men’s frequency of orgasm, which revealed that men were significantly more likely to report orgasming from the sexual activity compared with women. However, several differences emerged in these analyses. First, the path from orgasm to risk-benefit assessments was not significant for women, though the indirect effects of orgasm on positive relational disclosures and relationship satisfaction (through risk-benefit assessments) were both approaching significance. In the men’s model, the indirect path from orgasm to positive relational disclosures was approaching significance, though the indirect path from orgasm to relationship satisfaction was not significant. However, for both women and men, the paths from risk-benefit assessments to positive relational disclosures and relationship satisfaction were both significant. This finding suggests that risk-benefit assessments remain an important predictor of communication during the PSTI for both sexes, and that such assessments are strongly associated with relationship satisfaction for both women and men.

The lack of significant pathways between orgasm and the other variables in the men’s model may be a result of the small sample of male participants. Furthermore, the majority (88%) of men reported orgasming. Future research would benefit from testing the men’s PSDM with a larger sample of men that includes more men who did not experience orgasm. Furthermore, SEM is meant to be conducted on samples of 200 individuals or larger (Kline, 1998). Given that each of the separate women’s and men’s models had a smaller sample size than recommended, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Implications, Limitations, Future Directions, and Conclusion

Together, the findings from this study have implications for both couples’ communication and relationship researchers alike. First, these findings suggest that important relational processes may occur immediately after sexual activity and reinforce the need for continued research investigating communication during the PSTI. Given that this is often a time of increased closeness and openness, the communication (or lack of communication) that occurs during the PSTI may predict satisfaction and interpersonal intimacy in other, non-sexual contexts of couples’ lives. It would be worthwhile for future research to explore how communication during the PSTI influences other aspects of couples’ lives and everyday experiences, such as couples’ ability to deal with stressors and conflict.

The findings of this study may also prompt therapists to design techniques that focus on the importance of communication during the PSTI. For example, encouraging couples to increase their communication during the PSTI may aid in greater relational satisfaction in general (though this association remains to be tested). Future research would benefit from using an experimental design to investigate the effects of pillow talk on relationship satisfaction. For example, over the course of a month, researchers could have some couples increase their amount of pillow talk after each sexual episode, while other couples maintain their current levels of pillow talk. Changes in relationship satisfaction over the course of a month could then be compared between the two groups. While the majority of research has focused on couples’ communication before sexual activity, shifting attention to the behaviors that take place during the afterglow (Veenestra, 2007) period may result in unique approaches to improving couples’ relational health.

Though this study offers valuable insights into post-sex communication, it is not without its limitations. First, only 48 men participated in the study, which may have influenced the results of the men’s model. Given that women perceive sexual communication as less threatening than men (Theiss & Estlein, 2014), it is possible that women were more interested and comfortable participating in the study and discussing their sexual experiences, thus resulting in a larger sample of women than men. In addition, the sample consisted only of college students, and thus the results cannot be generalized to the range of relationships that exist outside of this population. Future studies would benefit from a more relationally diverse sample and a more even distribution of women and men in the sample, which would allow for replication of the results of the separate women’s and men’s models with a larger sample and greater generalizability. For example, such studies may reveal that married or partnered individuals use pillow talk in unique ways to maintain intimacy in their relationships, and thus a direct link between positive relational disclosures and satisfaction may exist in other couple types.

Several limitations also arose involving the design of the study. First, it is possible that some participants may have initiated sex for the purposes of the study. For example, participants may have had sex during a less naturally occurring time, which may have influenced their post-sex communication. Similarly, the awareness that one had to get out of bed and complete an online survey after sex may have created an artificial situation, especially for conscientious participants. Such participants may have felt the need to immediately get out of bed and complete the survey, which may have altered their normal post-sex behavior. Furthermore, such a situation may have resulted in less post-sex communication and potentially less relationship satisfaction. Future research would benefit from asking participants (and potentially controlling for) whether they engaged in sexual activity due to their participation in the study and whether the post-sex behavior they reported on is in line with what normally occurs in their relationship. Lastly, it is possible that participants did not accurately report on the time they engaged in sexual activity, which may have resulted in individuals completing the survey beyond the intended two-hour window. Though participants were not told that self-reported time would be compared with the survey timestamp, demand characteristics (i.e., cues to the goal of the investigation and “what the experimenter hopes to find”; Orne, 1969/2009, p. 146) may nonetheless have influenced their responses. In other words, if participants were aware of the possibility that their self-reported time of sexual activity might be compared with the survey timestamp, they may have provided inaccurate information.

Though research is beginning to emerge investigating behaviors after sexual activity from a communication perspective (e.g., Denes, 2012; Denes & Afifi, 2014) and the effects of post-sex behavior on relationship satisfaction (Muise et al., 2014), a cohesive theoretical model of post-sex communication and its relational outcomes had yet to be tested. The present study addressed this gap by using SEM to test a model linking orgasm, risk-benefit assessments, positive relational disclosures, and relationship satisfaction. Testing of the PSDM both reinforced previous findings and also revealed unique pathways among these variables. More specifically, the findings of this study extend previous research by revealing that risk-benefit assessments mediate the association between orgasm and positive relational disclosures after sexual activity and that risk-benefit assessments are associated with relationship satisfaction. Together, these findings suggest that fundamental communication and relational processes may be occurring after sexual activity and that assessments of the potential outcomes of post-sex communication may have important effects on relationship well-being. The findings of this study reinforce the need for communication scholars to further address the unique and important behaviors that take place during the PSTI and their larger effects on interpersonal processes.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Laura Denes, John Crowley, and D. Betsy McCoach and the Data Analysis Training Institute of Connecticut for their feedback, advice, and training in preparing this manuscript. The author also thanks the editors and reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions throughout the review process.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biography

Amanda Denes, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Connecticut. She received her PhD in Communication from the University of California, Santa Barbara, with an emphasis in feminist studies. Her primary area of specialization is interpersonal communication, with emphases in disclosure, sexuality, and identity. Much of her work looks at the association between communication in interpersonal relationships and people’s physiological, psychological, and relational health.

References

Afifi

T. D.

Schrodt

(2003). Uncertainty and the avoidance of the state of one’s family in stepfamilies, postdivorce single-parent families, and first-marriage families. Human Communication Research, 29, 516-532. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2003.tb00854.x

Afifi

T. D.

Steuber

(2009). The risk revelation model (RRM) and strategies used to reveal secrets. Communication Monographs, 76, 144-176. doi:10.1080/03637750902828412

Altman

Taylor

(1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Anderson

J. C.

Gerbing

D. W.

(1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411

Baxter

L. A.

Montgomery

B. M.

(1996). Dialogues and dialectics. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Blaicher

Gruber

Bieglmayer

Blaicher

A. M.

Knogler

Huber

(1999). The role of oxytocin in relation to female sexual arousal. Gynecological and Obstetric Investigation, 47, 125-126. doi:10.1159/000010075

Browne

M. W.

Cudeck

(1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen

K. A.

Long

J. S.

(Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

Byers

E. S.

(2005). Relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction: A longitudinal study of individuals in long-term relationships. The Journal of Sex Research, 42, 113-118. doi:10.1080/00224490509552264

Byers

E. S.

Demmons

(1999). Sexual satisfaction and sexual self-disclosure within dating relationships. The Journal of Sex Research, 36, 1-10. doi:10.1080/00224499909551983

10.

Canary

D. J.

Hause

K. S.

(1993). Is there any reason to research sex differences in communication? Communication Quarterly, 41, 129-144. doi:10.1080/01463379309369874

11.

Carmichael

M. S.

Humbert

Dixen

Palmisano

Greenleaf

Davidson

J. M.

(1987). Plasma oxytocin increases in the human sexual response. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 64, 27-31. doi:10.1210/jcem-64-1-27

12.

Caughlin

J. P.

Golish

T. D.

(2002). An analysis of the association between topic avoidance and dissatisfaction: Comparing perceptual and interpersonal explanations. Communication Monographs, 69, 275-295. doi:10.1080/03637750216546

13.

Caughlin

J. P.

Malis

R. S.

(2004). Demand/withdraw communication between parents and adolescents as a correlate of relational satisfaction. Communication Reports, 17, 59-71. doi:10.1080/08934210409389376

14.

Cupach

W. R.

Comstock

(1990). Satisfaction with sexual communication in marriage: Links to sexual satisfaction and dyadic adjustment. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 179-186. doi:10.1177/0265407590072002

15.

Denes

(2012). Pillow talk: Exploring disclosures after sexual activity. Western Journal of Communication, 76, 91-108. doi:10.1080/10570314.2011.651253

16.

Denes

Afifi

T. D.

(2014). Pillow talk and cognitive decision making processes: Exploring the role of orgasm and alcohol on communication after sexual activity. Communication Monographs, 81, 333-358. doi:10.1080/03637751.2014.926377

17.

Derlega

V. J.

Grzelak

(1979). Appropriateness of self-disclosure. In Chelune

G. J.

(Ed.), Self-disclosure: Origins, patterns, and implications of openness in interpersonal relationships (pp. 151-176). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

18.

Ditzen

Schaer

Gabriel

Bodenmann

Ehlert

Heinrichs

(2009). Intranasal oxytocin increases positive communication and reduces cortisol levels during couple conflict. Biological Psychiatry, 65, 728-731. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2008.10.011

19.

Domes

Heinrichs

Michel

Berger

Herpertz

(2007). Oxytocin improves “mind-reading” in humans. Biological Psychiatry, 61, 731-733. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2006.07.015

20.

Guastella

A. J.

Mitchell

P. B.

Dadds

M. R.

(2008). Oxytocin increases gaze to the eye region of human faces. Biological Psychiatry, 63, 3-5. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.06.026

21.

Haavio-Mannila

Kontula

(1997). What increases sexual satisfaction? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 26, 399-419. doi:10.1023/A:1024591318836

22.

Halpern

Sherman

(1979). Afterplay: A key to intimacy. New York, NY: Stein & Day.

23.

Horvat-Gordon

Granger

D. A.

Schwartz

E. B.

Nelson

V. J.

Kivlighan

(2005). Oxytocin is not a valid biomarker when measured in saliva by immunoassay. Physiology & Behavior, 84, 445-448.

24.

Hughes

S. M.

Kruger

D. J.

(2011). Sex differences in post-coital behaviors in long- and short-term mating: An evolutionary perspective. The Journal of Sex Research, 48, 496-505. doi:10.1080/00224499.2010.501915

25.

Huston

T. L.

McHale

S. M.

Crouter

A. C.

(1986). When the honeymoon’s over: Changes in the marriage relationship over the first year. In Gilmour

Duck

(Eds.), The emerging field of personal relationships (pp. 109-132). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

26.

Kirsch

Esslinger

Chen

Mier

Lis

Siddhanti

. . . Meyer-Lindenberg

(2005). Oxytocin modulates neural circuitry for social cognition and fear in humans. Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 11489-11493. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3984-05.2005

27.

Kline

R. B.

(1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

28.

Kosfeld

Heinrichs

Zak

P. J.

Fischbacher

Fehr

(2005). Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature, 435, 673-676. doi:10.1038/nature03701

29.

Kruger

D. J.

Hughes

S. M.

(2010). Variation in reproductive strategies influences post-coital experiences with partners. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 4, 254-264.

30.

Lim

M. M.

Young

L. J.

(2006). Neuropeptidergic regulation of affiliative behavior and social bonding in animals. Hormones and Behavior, 50, 506-517. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2006.06.028

31.

Muise

Giang

Impett

E. A.

(2014). Post sex affectionate exchanges promote sexual and relationship satisfaction. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 1391-1402. doi:10.1007/s10508-014-0305-3

32.

Murphy

M. R.

Seckl

J. R.

Burton

Checkley

S. A.

Lightman

S. L.

(1990). Changes in oxytocin and vasopressin secretion during sexual activity in men. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism, 65, 738-741. doi:10.1210/jcem-65-4-738

33.

Nachtigall

Kroehne

Funke

Steyer

(2003). (Why) should we use SEM? Pros and cons of structural equation modeling. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 1-22.

34.

Omarzu

(2000). A disclosure decision model: Determining how and when individuals will self-disclose. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 174-185. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_05

35.

Orne

M. T.

(2009). Demand characteristics and the concept of quasi-controls. In Rosenthal

Rosnow

R. L.

(Eds.), Artifacts in behavioral research (pp. 110-137). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1969).

36.

Petronio

(1991). Communication boundary management: A theoretical model of managing disclosure of private information between marital couples. Communication Theory, 1, 311-335. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.1991.tb00023.x

37.

Petronio

(2000). The boundaries of privacy: Praxis of everyday life. In Petronio

(Ed.), Balancing the secrets of private disclosures (pp. 37-49). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

38.

Petronio

(2002). Boundaries of privacy. New York: State University of New York Press.

39.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717-731. doi:10.3758/BF03206553

40.

Rucker

D. D.

Preacher

K. J.

Tormala

Z. L.

Petty

R. E.

(2011). Mediation analysis in social psychology: Current practices and new recommendations. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 5, 359-371. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00355.x

41.

Schrodt

Afifi

T. D.

(2007). Communication processes that predict young adults’ feelings of being caught and their associations with mental health and family satisfaction. Communication Monographs, 74, 200-228. doi:10.1080/03637750701390085

42.

Theiss

J. A.

Estlein

(2014). Antecedents and consequences of the perceived threat of sexual communication: A test of the relational turbulence model. Western Journal of Communication, 78, 404-425. doi:10.1080/10570314.2013.845794

43.

Veenestra

(2007). Afterglow. In Malti-Douglas

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of sex and gender (Vol. 1, pp. 39-40). Detroit, MI: Macmillan Reference.

44.

Youn

(2005). Teenagers’ perceptions of online privacy and coping behaviors: A risk-benefit appraisal approach. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49, 86-110. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4901_6