Associations between attempts at physical intimacy and relational outcomes among cohabiting and married couples

Abstract

Attempting to initiate physical intimacy with a partner has traditionally been explored through the lens of sexual pressure and coercion and linked to negative couple outcomes. The present study utilized a sample of 397 male/female couples in committed relationships (married and cohabiting) to explore more generally how attempts at sexual intimacy were associated with varying relational outcomes. Results suggested that unlike previously established associations with sexual coercion, more generalized attempts at physical intimacy were associated with better relationship outcomes, including more relationship satisfaction, better couple communication, and less couple conflict. Gender moderated the results in that men’s attempts at intimacy were particularly associated with positive relational outcomes. The implications of considering attempts for physical intimacy as a positive aspect of couple sexuality are discussed.

Keywords

Couples marriage physical intimacy sexual coercion sexual frequency sexuality

Maintaining a healthy sex life is an important element of individual and relational well-being. Previous scholarship has linked increased sexuality within couple relationships with greater relationship satisfaction, marital stability, and life satisfaction (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004; Sprecher, 2002; Yeh, Lorenz, Wickrama, Conger, & Elder, 2006). Despite the fact that many couples experience a natural decrease in sexual activity over the course of their relationship (Klusmann, 2002), sexual satisfaction, sexual frequency, and sexual desire continue to be associated with higher relationship satisfaction at all stages of relational development (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004; Trudel, Landry, & Larose, 1997).

One understudied element of relational sexuality is the initiation of sexual activity from one partner toward another. Attempting to be physically intimate may be viewed as coercion if unwanted pressure or force is present in the initiation (Pacifici, Stoolmiller, & Nelson, 2001). On the other hand, attempting to initiate sexual activity with a partner may represent a salient element of sexual desire. Early in the relationship, partners may be flattered by the initiation of sexual behavior, feeling it is a signal of desire and closeness, thereby strengthening relationship satisfaction (Klusmann, 2002).

While previous studies have documented clear links between sexual desire, sexual frequency, and relational satisfaction (Impett, Strachman, Finkel, & Gable, 2008; Johnson, Wadsworth, Wellings, & Field, 1994; Klusmann, 2002), no studies have explored general attempts at physical intimacy and the associated relational well-being. Understanding attempts to be physically intimate is a critical next step in exploring the intricacies of sexual initiation.

Another important element of sexual initiation relates to the gendered dynamic of sexual interaction. As men are typically the initiators and women are generally thought of as the gatekeepers of sexual expression, understanding the difference between men and women as initiators and the resulting associations with relational outcomes is also salient. The present study aims to be the first to explore how men’s and women’s attempts to be physically intimate collectively may differentially be associated with relational outcomes in ways that are distinctive from previous effects found when sexual coercion is utilized within a relationship.

Thus, an additional important contribution of the current study is to explore the differing implications for men and women in their attempts at physical intimacy. Couples in various relationships may respond to attempts at physical intimacy differently. Although this study specifically addresses the relationships of heterosexual couples, gender issues of same-sex couples and couples at various stages during the life span would need to be addressed as well.

Sexual coercion and sexual initiation

The majority of previous research exploring the initiation of sexual activity within committed relationships has focused on coercive or forceful initiation. Factors that may be interpreted as coercion have been examined in a substantial amount of research. Even then, the construct of sexual coercion is often difficult to define clearly (Craig, 1990). Sexual coercion has been operationalized as using a variety of behaviors, and previous studies have mainly found that sexual coercion is directed toward women from men (Clements-Schreiber, Rempel, & Desmarais, 1998; Katz, Moore, & Tkachuk, 2007). In fact, sexual coercion toward men was not viewed by study participants as having as harmful an effect as sexual coercion toward women (Katz et al., 2007). Sexual coercion may be viewed across a continuum where one extreme may include highly overt coercive dating violence and sexual aggression, such as forced or unwanted touching (Craig, 1990; McGregor, 2005; Pacifici et al., 2001; Ramisetty-Mikler, Caetano, & McGrath, 2007). Subtler forms of coercion may include psychological or verbal coercion, efforts to create jealousy, sensual massages, or getting someone drunk (Clements-Schreiber et al., 1998; Katz et al., 2007).

Regardless of the type of coercion in a relationship, sexual coercion is associated with numerous negative outcomes such as an inability to effectively respond to future abuse (Noll & Grych, 2011), social anxiety, depressive symptoms (Zweig, Barber, & Eccles, 1997), and lower sexual self-esteem (Zweig, Crockett, Sayer, & Vicary, 1999). In addition to these negative individual outcomes, couples who experience coercion are more likely to seek therapy and report other forms of abuse within the relationship (Meyer, Vivian, & O’Leary, 1998).

Distinction between sexual coercion and attempts to be physically intimate

As mentioned above, sexual coercion is difficult to define but typically includes the use of physical or psychological force or intimidation to achieve compliance (Clements-Schreiber et al., 1998; Craig, 1990; Katz et al., 2007; McGregor, 2005; Pacifici et al., 2001; Ramisetty-Mikler et al., 2007). Because coercion can be a matter of perception, some people may view pressure to cuddle as coercion, while others would only consider pressure for intercourse to be coercion. Although the literature understandably has focused on the damaging aspects of sexual pressure and coercion (mainly for women), it is logical that each sexual encounter between partners began with some form of initiation and not all such initiation can be classified as coercive or forceful. If sexual coercion and violence fall on one extreme of the sexual initiation spectrum, low-pressure attempts at initiating physical intimacy might be placed on the other extreme.

In the present study, we operationalize an “attempt to be physically intimate” as an effort to initiate some form of sexual behavior or an act of trying to engage in sexual intimacy with one’s partner. This attempt may not ultimately result in actual sexual activity, and attempts are likely nonforceful behaviors intended to both gauge partner responsiveness and express sexual desire for one’s partner.

This is in contrast to sexual coercion where the goal is likely to engage in sexual behavior regardless of a partner’s responsiveness. In this way, such attempts to be physically intimate may be a more normalized form of sexual initiation that may have positive effects on relationship outcomes. The effort to be physically intimate does not drive to a specific intimate activity (intercourse, oral sex, cuddling). Rather, it is a subjective gauge of the respondents’ efforts to initiate physical intimacy. The specific activity or exact frequency of the attempt for intimacy is not the focus but rather the initiation for physical intimacy. Respondents’ general assessment of the level of initiation within their relationship would provide a way to capture their generalized evaluation of physically intimate initiation.

While both attempts to be physically intimate and sexual coercion seem to have the same goal, to initiate sexual behavior, the approach may be drastically different. For example, the act of one partner attempting to have sex may communicate his or her sexual desire to the other partner. Desire can be generally defined as a motivation or drive to engage in sexual activities (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004; Diamond, 2004). Although sexual desire plays an important role in relationship satisfaction and researchers have documented this association for both married and dating couples (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004; Regan, 2000; Sprecher, 2002), specific efforts at communicating desire through an attempt to be physically intimate have been understudied in the sexuality literature.

Gender

Gender is an essential element of understanding sexual initiation and specifically the dynamics of attempts at physical intimacy. Men’s and women’s motivations for initiating physical intimacy may be quite different and may vary across the life span. Both sexual coercion and sexual initiation are gendered topics and need to be addressed within the context of that lens. The sexual double standard that exists in which men are applauded for sexual contact and women are stigmatized for the same behavior may influence how attempts at physical intimacy are initiated and received (Jeffords, 1984; Kreager & Staff, 2009). Consistent with this double standard, men are typically the initiators of sexual contact (Clements-Schreiber et al., 1998; Katz et al., 2007). Because the sexual double standard seems to impose a “gender-appropriate” behavior, women may feel less inclined to attempt to initiate physical intimacy. Such a double standard may have varying effects on the role of attempts at physical intimacy in relationships. On the one hand, women who reject the double standard and attempt to initiate physical intimacy may be viewed as breaking gendered norms within a relationship. This may cause such women to be viewed as too “forward” or “liberal” by some men. These same women may also be viewed positively, as their initiation of physical intimacy is perceived as an indication of sexual desire that is strong enough to violate established behavioral norms. Conversely, men are expected to initiate sexual intimacy, and such attempts may be viewed as normative and have little effect on relational well-being unless such attempts are perceived as excessive or coercive.

Theoretical framework

Previous theoretical work also suggests that attempts to be physically intimate may generally provide positive benefit to some relationships. Both social approach goals and social exchange theory explain the benefit of positive initiation within relationships (Impett et al., 2008; Sprecher, 1998). Social motivational theorists such as Gable, Reis, and Elliot (2000) have shown that social approach goals (i.e., goals to initiate positive experiences such as fun, growth, and development) direct people toward more intimacy within their relationships. Attempting to be physically intimate may be included in the positive behaviors that approach goals suggest would maintain sexual desire over time by creating positive feelings and encouraging a feeling of having fun with each other (Impett et al., 2008).

Building on that theory, research has shown that individuals who create positive experiences in their relationship view sexual interactions as one way to increase closeness and intimacy (Impett et al., 2008). When efforts within the relationship are aimed at creating desire and closeness, couples may feel a greater sense of connection (Impett et al., 2008). Attempts to be physically intimate may create such positive experiences, develop a greater sense of connection, and create a playful attitude that creates intimacy.

Social exchange theory has also been used to explain many social interactions, including sexual interactions (Sprecher, 1998). Social exchange theory suggests that individuals weigh the benefits and costs of each relationship in order to determine their own behavior and perceptions toward that relationship. Social exchange theory has been used specifically to explain sexual behavior such as the interpersonal model of sexual satisfaction (Lawrance & Byers, 1995). Initiation of sexual behavior was specifically mentioned (although not tested) as an example of how social exchange theory applies to sexual relationships (Sprecher, 1998). As partners initiate physical intimacy, the perceived relational benefit may increase and improve the relational quality. We expect that most attempts to be physically intimate will represent a positive type of sexual initiation and will likely be viewed as a benefit to the relationship. Conversely, according to social exchange theory, we would expect associations with sexual coercion to be consistent with the findings of previous research that such behavior will be linked to negative relational outcomes, as it would be considered a cost to the relationship.

Despite these theoretical and empirical connections, to date the positive general effect of attempts to be physically intimate has not been addressed in the literature. Such inquiry is important to the study of healthy sexuality as it may help scholars and practitioners understand the healthy side of the sexual initiation spectrum. This study explores the potential positive association between attempting to be physically intimate and relational outcomes. Further we seek to understand the differences or similarities in how relational outcomes may be associated with attempts to be physically intimate and more traditional assessments of sexual coercion.

Present study

In the present study, we explored attempts to be physically intimate and sexual coercion within committed male/female relationships and their association with several measures of relational well-being: relationship satisfaction, stability, communication, and couple conflict. These variables are common relationship markers that help evaluate the overall relationship. Research is abundant with support indicating that satisfactory relationships can have positive effects on each partner’s physical (e.g., Walker & Luszcz, 2009) and mental health (e.g., Gleason, Iida, Bolger, & Shrout, 2003). Marital quality is most often measured by marital satisfaction with conflict as a subcategory (sometimes called problem solving; Fincham & Beach, 1999). Despite the debate, conflict has been treated as a distinct category (Heyman, Sayers, & Bellack, 1994) that is useful in assessing relational quality. Lack of communication is also a factor in relationship dissolution (Thachil & Bhugra, 2006) and has been shown to increase with lower sexual frequency. Additionally, sexual frequency factors into relational stability (Yabiku & Gager, 2009). Each of these variables has been used in understanding the impact of sexual frequency within a relationship (Willoughby, Farero, & Busby, 2014). Due to the associations between these markers of relational well-being, we include them as important variables of interest in the present study.

Although we include measures of sexual coercion into our models, the present research significantly extends the current literature by examining the potentially positive behavior of generalized attempts to be physically intimate. Using a secondary national data set of individuals in committed cohabiting or married relationships, we sought to address this limitation. While the secondary data provide only limited measurement of sexual attempts and were cross-sectional in nature, no previous study has sought to explore these associations, presenting an important gap in our understanding of sexual initiation.

As our data pool included data from both partners, we utilized Kenny’s Actor–Partner Interdependence Model (APIM; Cook & Kenny, 2005; Kenny & Cook, 1999) as a basis to explore both individual and partner effects for attempts to be physically intimate. This model suggests that outcomes associated with individuals within an interdependent couple system are influenced by their own attitudes and behaviors (actor effects) and the attitudes and behaviors of their partner (partner effects). This viewpoint is useful when attempting to understand cross-partner effects within interdependent couple systems. While typical regression-based models may be used to explore how an individual’s attempts to be physically intimate may influence that same individual’s perception of relationship outcomes, in the presence of couple data, we are able to utilize the APIM to explore how one’s own attempts to be physically intimate may also be associated with partner perceptions of relationship outcomes. For the current study we explored how one’s own attempts to be physically intimate would influence both one’s own assessment of the relationship and one’s partner’s assessment. This statistical model has been used frequently to study cross-partner aspects of couple dynamics (Gilbar, Weinberg, & Gil, 2012; Knobloch & Knobloch-Fedders, 2010; Knobloch & Theiss, 2010; Paleari, Regalia, & Fincham, 2010; Ramirez, 2008). Within the present study we believe that both actor and partner attempts to be physically intimate may have unique associations with relational outcomes of both partners based on social exchange theory and social approach goal theory. Specifically we propose the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: More actor and partner attempts to be physically intimate will be associated with higher relationship satisfaction, higher stability, more positive communication, and less couple conflict.

We also expect that the effect of attempts to be physically intimate may be moderated by several key factors. A number of large studies report that higher levels of sexual frequency are associated with greater couple satisfaction (Johnson et al., 1994; Klusmann, 2002). Although attempts to be physically intimate may represent communicated sexual desire, if such desire never materializes into actual sexual activity, partners may become frustrated, resentful, and angry. This may diminish or even reverse any positive effect of attempting to initiate physical intimacy. We believe that it is reasonable to expect that only couples who are engaging in regular sexual behavior will be influenced by attempts to be physically intimate and that such influence may increase as frequency increases. As such, we believe that the effect of attempts to be physically intimate on relational outcomes may be dependent on actual sexual frequency levels and propose the following additional hypothesis:

Hypothesis 2: The relationship between attempts to be physically intimate and relational outcomes will only be present at higher levels of sexual frequency.

In addition to sexual frequency moderation, we also explore moderation by gender. Men’s desire within relationships has been reported to remain constant while women’s desire diminishes the longer the relationship lasts (Klusmann, 2002). Some research suggests that women generally have a lower sex drive than men (Baumeister, Catanese, & Vohs, 2001). However, women may have a greater desire for intimacy, including physical closeness, than do men. While we know from prior research that increased desire is associated with higher relationship satisfaction (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004; Trudel et al., 1997), if women are the sexual initiators, it may be an indication that they feel positive about the relationship. If a woman initiates physical intimacy, it may indicate more positive feelings within the relationship than if a man initiates, given that his desire may be more constant. Therefore, we expect that when women attempt to be physically intimate, both the man and woman would report better relational outcomes. We propose the following additional hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3: The relationship between attempts to be physically intimate and positive relational outcomes will be significant when women attempt sexual initiation.

Finally, we explore moderation by two relational factors, relationship status and relationship duration. Past research has suggested that sexuality may operate differently and have different relational consequences for married and cohabiting couples. Married couples generally reported more sexual satisfaction than dating and cohabiting couples (Christopher & Sprecher, 2000; Waite & Joyner, 2001). Conversely, cohabiting couples report higher sexual frequency rates than married couples (Yabiku & Gager, 2009). This may be due to the fact that cohabiters are generally younger and have been in their relationships for shorter periods of time.

Sex also appears to be a more important factor in relational dissolution for cohabiting couples. Yabiku and Gager (2009) found that cohabiters were more likely than married couples to end their relationship due to unmet sexual frequency expectations. Additionally, some past research has suggested that the effect of sexual desire and frequency varies as relationships progress (Klusmann, 2002; Willoughby & Vitas, 2012; Yabiku & Gager, 2009). While this research suggests that sexuality may operate differently within cohabiting and marital relationships and among relationships of different durations, research in this area remains limited. Thus, we propose the following final hypothesis regarding the existence of moderating effect by relational status and length but refrain from predicting the nature of such moderation, given the lack of empirical evidence to support such a claim.

Hypothesis 4: The relationship between attempts to be physically intimate and relational outcomes will be moderated by relationship status and relational length.

Method

Participants

This study included a total sample of 397 couples (794 individuals) who were in a committed relationship (either cohabiting or marital) identified as being in a male/female relationship and who took the RELATE instrument online (Busby, Holman, & Taniguchi, 2001). The largest racial group was White (75.2%), followed by African American (8.2%), Asian (6.2%), Latino (4.2%), and Other (6.3%). Of the sample, 55.4% were cohabiting, while 44.6% were married. Among cohabiting individuals, 22.7% had been dating for 1 year or less, while 4.5% had been dating for more than 10 years; the remaining participants answering somewhere between 1 and 10 years. Among married individuals, 52.4% had been married for 5 years or less, while 33.8% had been married for more than 10 years; the remaining participants being married between 6 and 9 years. Thirty-nine percent of the sample reported a yearly personal income of less than US$40,000, while 10.1% of the sample reported a personal yearly income of more than US$120,000. The average age of men in the sample was 32.45 (SD = 8.99) and the average age of females was 30.67 (SD = 8.21). More detailed demographic information on the sample is shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Means and proportions for study sample.

Variable	n (%)	M	SD
Attempts at intimacy^a
Male		3.79	.93
Female		3.48	1.05
Sexual pressure^a
Reported by respondent		1.22	.58
Reported by respondent for partner		1.19	.53
Income^b
Male		4.14	2.77
Female		3.07	2.32
Age
Male		32.44	8.99
Female		30.67	8.21
Relationship status
Cohabiting	440 (55.4)
Married	354 (44.6)
Race (male)
White	329 (74.6)
African American	44 (10)
Asian	26 (5.9)
Latino	20 (4.5)
Other	21 (4.7)
Race (female)
White	265 (76.1)
African American	20 (5.7)
Asian	22 (6.3)
Latino	13 (3.7)
Other	28 (8.1)
Relationship satisfaction^c
Male		3.91	.74
Female		3.83	.86
Relationship stability^c
Male		4.17	.78
Female		4.12	.83
Relationship communication^c
Male		3.90	.60
Female		3.91	.58
Relationship conflict^c
Male		1.96	.52
Female		2.08	.55

^aAttempt at intimacy and pressure values ranged from 0 to 5. ^bIncome values ranged from 0 (none) to 9 (US$160,000 or more per year). ^cRelationship satisfaction, stability, communication, and conflict scales range from 1 to 5.

Procedure

All participants completed an appropriate consent form prior to the completion of the RELATE instrument, and all data collection procedures were approved by the institutional review board at the authors’ university. Individuals completed RELATE online after being exposed to the instrument through a variety of settings such as university instructors, educators, therapists, clergy, friends, family, ads, or websites. Participants were instructed to complete the assessment alone and not to discuss their responses with their partner. Participants who completed the RELATE instrument were given computer-generated feedback on their relationship with their partner, including areas of strengths and potential areas of weakness.

Individuals who completed RELATE without a partner are included in a separate, individual database. The present study only utilized data from those couples who both took the RELATE assessment. The RELATE assessment is an internationally administered online couple assessment tool utilized by clinicians, educators, and couples to help them assess and improve their relationship. Various research groups also use the assessment’s data for scholarly purposes. Because RELATE is an ongoing data collection effort, reporting a specific response rate is impossible, as no recruitment strategy is employed. We refer the reader specifically to the discussion in Busby et al. (2001) for detailed information regarding the theory underlying the RELATE instrument, its psychometric properties, and how the sample is recruited.

Measures

Demographics

Certain demographic attributes influence both sexual behavior and relational outcomes and thus need to be accounted for. Specifically, sexual behaviors tend to vary by ethnic group (Cavanagh, 2004; Christopher & Sprecher, 2000), while higher income is generally associated with better relational outcomes (Andersen, 2005; Dean, Carroll, & Yang, 2007; Table 2). Due to these established associations, we controlled for both race and income in the analyses for this study. Racial group was determined by having each participant indicate which racial group they identified with. These responses were then dummy coded for analyses.

Table 2.

Bivariate correlations between continuous variables.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. Sexual attempt	–
2. Sexual coercion	−.151**	–
3. Sexual frequency	.364**	.038*	–
4. Income	−.016	−.047**	.099**	–
5. Age	−.068*	.001	.106**	.473**	–
6. Satisfaction	.271**	−.190**	.129**	−.068**	−.177**	–
7. Stability	.106**	−.199**	.019**	−.019	−.072**	.561**	–
8. Communication	.233**	−.160**	.035**	−.093**	−.149**	.666**	.405**	–
9. Conflict	−.177**	.233**	−.260**	.046*	.152**	−.669**	−.536**	−.544**	–
10. Relationship length	−.293**	.035	−.299**	.137**	.681**	−.204**	−.080**	−.168**	.326**	–

*p < .05; **p < .01.

Income was assessed by 1 item, which asked participants to indicate their current yearly gross income before taxes and deductions. Response ranged from 0 (None) to 9 ($160,000 and above). In addition, gender, sexual frequency, and relationship status information were obtained to test for possible moderation effects. Relationship status was assessed by 1 item, which asked, “What best describes your marital status?” Responses contained a range of options, but only participants who reported their relationship status as currently married or cohabiting were included.

Relationship length was measured with the following questions: “How long has it been since you first started dating your partner?” or if married, “How long have you and your partner been married?” Responses ranged from 1 (0–3 months), 2 (4–6 months), 3 (6–12 months), 4 (1–2 years), 5 (3–5 years), 6 (6–10 years), 7 (11–15 years), 8 (16–20 years), 9 (21–30 years), 10 (31–40 years), to 11 (more than 40 years).

Gender was coded as 0 (male) and 1 (female). Sexual frequency was measured with 1 item, “About how often do you currently have sex with your partner?” Responses were 0 (Never), 1 (Less than once a month), 2 (One to three times a month), 3 (About once a week), 4 (Two to four times a week), 5 (Five to seven times a week), to 6 (More than once a day). The sample average was 2.57 (SD = 1.67). Twenty percent of the sample reported no sexual intercourse in their current relationship, while 8.7% of the sample reported at least weekly sexual intercourse.

Relational outcomes

Four measures of relational outcomes were assessed, measuring individual satisfaction with the relationship, individual perception of the stability of the relationship, couple communication, and couple conflict. All scales used have been validated in previous research (see Busby et al., 2001) and have been used in numerous previous studies utilizing the RELATE assessment. Relationship satisfaction was assessed with an average of 7 items asking participants how satisfied they were with various aspects of their relationship, for example, “Your overall relationship,” “The love you feel,” and “The quality of your communication.” Responses ranged from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied). Cronbach’s α was in the acceptable range (α = .86).

Relationship stability was assessed by averaging 3 items that asked participants how often the following three things had happened in their relationship: “How often have you thought your relationship (or marriage) might be in trouble?” “How often have you and your partner discussed ending your relationship (or marriage)?” and “How often have you broken up or separated and then gotten back together?” Responses ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (very often). These items were reverse coded so that higher scores indicated more stability. Cronbach’s α was in the acceptable range (α = .80).

Couple communication was assessed by averaging 8 items that asked the couples to rate their ability to communicate with statements such as, “I sit down with my partner and just talk things over,” “I talk over pleasant things that happen during the day when I am with my partner,” or “I discuss my personal problems with my partner.” Responses ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (very often). Cronbach’s α was in the acceptable range (α = .74).

Couple conflict was assessed by averaging 12 items that asked the couple to assess if such topics as in-laws, weight, financial matters, rearing children, and roles were a problem in their relationship. Responses ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (very often). Cronbach’s α was in the acceptable range (α = .79). Responses were summed across the 12 topic areas, with high numbers indicating more areas of problem or more conflict in the relationship.

Attempts to be physically intimate, sexual desire, and sexual coercion

The generalized degree to which partners attempted to be intimate with their partner was measured by one question that asked, “I often attempt to be physically intimate with my partner.” Responses ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sexual desire was measured by the question, “How often do you desire to have sexual intercourse with your partner?” Responses were 0 (Never), 1 (Less than once a month), 2 (One to two times a month), 3 (About once a week), 4 (Two to four times a week), 5 (Five to seven times a week) to 6 (More than once a day). The average across the sample was 3.81 (SD = 1.34). Sexual coercion was assessed with two questions asked to the respondent, “How often have you been pressured against your will to be intimate with your partner?” and “How often has your current partner been pressured against their will to be intimate with you?” Responses ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (very often).

Data analysis plan

In order to test both actor and partner effects simultaneously, mixed-effects regression models were run using the MIXED command in SPSS for each of the four couple outcomes. Gender was utilized as a within-couple repeating measure, while couple codes were used to distinguish unique couple pairings. Such mixed-effects models allowed us to control for the inherent couple dependency within the data set by identifying each couple with a unique couple code and then using gender as a distinguishing variable as all couples were mixed-sex partnerships. Mixed-effects modeling allowed us to control for the correlated residuals and nonindependence that exists between partners by identifying the correlated partners and then calculating nonbiased estimates of regression terms using the MIXED command. Such a technique has been used previously to explore actor and partner effects within coupled data sets (De Smet, Loeys, & Buysse, 2013; Gilbar et al., 2012; Knobloch & Knobloch-Fedders, 2010; Knobloch & Theiss, 2010; Paleari et al., 2010; Ramirez, 2008; Willoughby & Vitas, 2012). In keeping with the APIM (Cook & Kenny, 2005; Kenny & Cook, 1999), we included both actor and partner effects to each model not only to test the individual effect of one’s own attempts to be physically intimate on the perception of relational outcomes but also to test the possible effect of partner attempts to be physically intimate on one’s perception of relational outcomes.

Models included controls of gender, race, income, age, relationship status, and sexual frequency. In addition, measures of sexual coercion were also included into models to examine if attempts to be physically intimate predicted outcomes beyond the effect of sexual coercion measures. This also had the effect of more specifically testing if attempts to be physically intimate had a positive association with relational outcome once attempts that included sexual pressure (which would be included in our measure of sexual coercion) were controlled for. Model fit indices (−2 log likelihood, Akaike information criterion, and Bayesian information criterion) were examined across multiple models to gauge if model fit was improving with the inclusion of additional variables. In all cases, models with all controls indicated the best fitting models. To test for moderation effects, interaction terms were added to regression models. When significant, moderation effects were examined by running simple slope analyses (Aiken & West, 1991) to explore the nature of such effects. All missing data were assumed to be missing at random, and listwise deletion was used in all models.

Results

Descriptive results of attempts to be physically intimate and sexual pressure

Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics for variables in the study. The average for the attempts to be physically intimate score for the sample was 3.66 (SD = .996), which indicates that individuals regarded their overall level of attempts to be physically intimate as fairly strong. Women had an average score of 3.48 (SD = 1.05), while men had an average score of 3.79 (SD = .93). This difference was statistically significant (t = 4.19, p < .001, df = 792), suggesting that compared to women, men attempted to be more physically intimate. When comparing partners, only 27.6% of women reported attempting to be more physically intimate. In contrast, 42.1% of men reported attempting to be more physically intimate. The average sexual coercion toward respondent was 1.22 (SD = .58) and the average sexual coercion reported toward partners was 1.19 (SD = .53). The correlation between actor attempts to be physically intimate and reported sexual coercion toward partners was not significant (r = .024, p = .494), suggesting that attempting to be physically intimate item was not capturing coercive sexual attempts. The correlation between actor attempts to be physically intimate and reported sexual coercion toward respondents was weakly negative (r = −.188, p < .001). The correlation between attempts to be physically intimate and sexual desire was significant (r = .492, p < .001), providing some evidence that the attempt to be physically intimate item was tapping a similar construct as sexual desire.

Predicting relational outcomes

Initial models without controls regressing actor and partner attempts to be physically intimate on relational outcomes suggested that both actor and partner attempts to be physically intimate were significantly associated with more relationship satisfaction (actor: β = .187, t = 9.40, p < .001; partner: β = .170, t = 8.64, p < .001), greater reports of stability (actor: β = .075, t = 3.42, p = .001; partner: β = .054, t = 2.48, p = .013), more positive communication (actor: β = .127, t = 8.05, p < .001; partner: β = .077, t = 4.80, p < .001), and less couple conflict (actor: β = −.085, t = −5.72, p < .001; partner: β = −.069, t = −4.72, p < .001). This provided initial evidence that attempts to be physically intimate were differentially associated with relational outcomes compared to traditional measures of sexual coercion.

We next added several controls to our models. Table 3 shows results for the prediction of relationship satisfaction, stability, communication, and conflict based on attempts to be physically intimate and sexual coercion reported by respondents both toward their partner and themselves. After controlling for race, income, age, sexual frequency, relationship status, and gender, relationship satisfaction was significantly associated with both actor (β = .152, t = 5.54, p < .001) and partner (β = .150, t = 5.83, p < .001) attempts to be physically intimate. No significant relationship was found between attempts to be physically intimate and relationship stability. Attempts to be physically intimate for both actors (β = .127, t = 5.56, p < .001) and partners (β = .080, t = 3.68, p < .001) were also positively associated with relationship communication.

Table 3.

Unstandardized regression estimates for associations between sexual initiation, sexual coercion, with relationship satisfaction, stability, communication, and problems controlled for race, income, age, sexual frequency, and relationship status.

	Relationship satisfaction		Relationship stability		Relationship communication		Relationship conflict
Variable	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE
Race^a
Black	−.131	.097	−.589**	.105	−.159*	.081	.174*	.071
Asian	.018	.096	−.048	.098	−.032	.084	−.062	.071
Latino	−.028	.107	−.269*	.109	−.031	.097	.114	.081
Other	−.101	.092	−.260**	.094	.030	.082	.098	.070
Income	−.011	.009	−.006	.010	−.009	.009	.009	.007
Age	−.008*	.003	−.005	.004	−.004	.003	.002	.002
Sexual frequency	.126**	.021	.089**	.022	.051**	.017	−.057**	.015
Married	−.116**	.044	.127**	.044	−.118**	.040	.110**	.033
Female	−.135**	.042	−.116**	.040	.048	.040	.103**	.032
Actor AI	.152**	.027	.051	.029	.127**	.022	−.080**	.020
Partner AI	.150**	.026	.040	.028	.080**	.022	−.086**	.019
SPR	−.181*	.073	−.187**	.074	−.069	.066	.234**	.054
SPRP	−.149*	.070	−.190**	.070	−.167**	.065	.062	.053

Note. AI = attempt at intimacy; SPR = sexual pressure reported by respondent; SPRP = sexual pressure reported by respondent for their partner.

^aReference group is White AI.

*p < .05; **p < .01.

Finally, couple conflict was significantly and negatively associated with both actor (β = −.080, t = 4.08, p < .001) and partner attempts to be physically intimate (β = −.086, t = −4.59, p < .001). In sum, results suggested that a greater degree of attempts to be physically intimate by both actors and partners was associated with significantly higher reported relationship satisfaction and couple communication and less couple conflict even after controls were taken into account, including holding reports of sexual coercion constant. These results supported Hypothesis 1.

These associations between attempts to be physically intimate and generally positive outcomes were in contrast to model results for sexual coercion. Reported sexual coercion either toward respondents or from respondents to their partners was generally associated with negative relationship outcomes including less relationship satisfaction, less relationship stability, less positive couple communication (only when coercion was reported toward partner), and more couple conflict (only when coercion was reported toward respondents).

Moderation effects

To test our Hypotheses 2, 3, and 4, we next explored how four factors—gender, relationships status, sexual frequency, and relational duration—might moderate the relationship between attempts to be physically intimate and relationship outcomes (see Table 4). These moderation effects were explored by adding all four interaction terms simultaneously to the regression models predicting each outcome. Specific results are discussed below.

Table 4.

Mixed regression results for interaction effects between attempts to be physically intimate, gender, relationship status, and sexual frequency.

	Relationship satisfaction		Relationship stability		Relationship communication		Relationship conflict
Variable	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE	b	SE
Gender × AAI	−.051	.053	−.001	.057	−.142**	.043	−.004	.038
Relationship status × AAI	.053	.046	.064	.047	−.039	.041	−.062	.035
Frequency × AAI	.004	.016	−.004	.017	.012	.014	−.013	.012
Gender × PAI	.129*	.053	.112*	.057	.127**	.042	−.009	.038
Status × PAI	.000	.044	−.033	.046	.038	.041	.037	.034
Frequency × PAI	−.031*	.015	.001	.017	−.004	.014	−.007	.012

Note. Analyses controlled for gender, race, age, sexual frequency, relationship status, sexual coercion (actor and partner), and income. AAI = actor attempt at intimacy; PAI = partner attempt at intimacy.

*p < .05; **p < .01.

No evidence was found for relationship status moderation across all four relational outcomes. Full results are given in Table 3. This suggested that the relationship between attempts to be physically intimate and relational outcomes was consistent across both cohabiting and marital relationships. Likewise, little evidence was found for moderation by sexual frequency. The lone exception was a significant but weak interaction between partner attempts to be physically intimate and sexual frequency found for the model predicting relationship satisfaction (β = −.031, t = −1.98, p = .048). Follow-up simple slope analyses examined the effect of attempts to be physically intimate at ± 1 SD and at the mean of sexual frequency.

These results found that while more partner attempts to be physically intimate had a positive effect on relationship satisfaction at all three points, the effect was slightly reduced at high levels of sexual frequency (−1 SD: β = .197, t = 5.68, p < .001; M: β = .178, t = 6.07, p < .001; +1 SD: β = .159, t = 3.71, p < .001). All other interaction terms were nonsignificant, suggesting that, in general, the effect of attempts to be physically intimate on relational outcomes did not differ as a function of actual sexual frequency.

Strong evidence was found for gender moderation across multiple outcomes, particularly for partner attempts to be physically intimate. The partner attempt to be physically intimate by gender interaction term was significant in models predicting relationship satisfaction, relationship stability, and positive communication. Again, simple slope analyses were used to examine the nature of these moderation effects.

Results for relationship satisfaction suggested that more partner attempts to be physically intimate were associated with higher relationship satisfaction for both men (β = .238, t = 5.78, p < .001) and women (β = .273, t = 7.33, p < .001), but that the effect was of slightly greater magnitude for women. A more pronounced result was found for relationship stability where more partner attempts to be physically intimate were only related to more relationship stability for women (β = .122, t = 3.10, p = .002) but was not found for men (β = .049, t = 1.19, p = .235). Results for positive communication were also in a similar direction. More partner attempts to be physically intimate were associated with more positive communication for both men (β = .094, t = 2.41, p = .016) and women (β = .196, t = 4.77, p < .001), but the result was of greater magnitude for women.

Only one significant interaction was found between gender and actor attempts to be physically intimate when predicting positive communication (β = −.142, t = −3.28, p = .001). A follow-up simple slope analysis found that more actor attempts to be physically intimate were associated with more positive communication for both men (β = .288, t = 7.61, p < .001) and women (β = .226, t = 5.61, p < .001), but the result was slightly of greater magnitude for men.

We next tested for relationship length moderation. Differing assessments of relational duration for married and cohabiting couples necessitated running these analyses separately for each union type. For cohabiting couples, the length of their dating relationship was assessed. For married couples the length of the marriage was assessed. One significant interaction was found predicting relationship outcomes. The interaction between marital length and actor attempts to be physically intimate was significant for stability (β = −.093, t = −3.02, p = .006). Simple slope analyses suggested that actor attempts to be physically intimate were significantly associated with greater perceived stability at marital lengths −1 SD and at the mean but were not significantly related to stability among marriages of greater length (+1 SD: β = −.052, t = −.452, p = .652).

Discussion

Results indicated that attempts to be physically intimate in male/female couples represent a generalized type of sexual initiation that is likely different in both its intent and its effect compared to sexual coercion. According to social exchange theory, if partners attempt to be physically intimate, this initiation may increase the perceived benefit of the relationship, thereby adding to the positive assessment of the relationship. This theory would also help explain why attempts to be physically intimate were generally associated with positive outcomes, but sexual coercion reported by respondent was associated with negative couple outcomes.

Social exchange theory would explain coercion as a perceived social cost that diminishes the value of the relationship. These contrasting associations with relational well-being denote differences between the sexual approaches. While increased attempts to be physically intimate may strengthen the relationship and possibly reduce conflict, sexual coercion indicated associations in the opposite direction. This result of sexual coercion is consistent with prior research (Noll & Grych, 2011; Zweig et al., 1997, 1999).

While some attempts to be physically intimate may be conceptualized as a mild form of sexual pressure, these divergent findings suggest that general attempts to initiate sexual behavior may be indicative of underlying sexual desire and healthy relationship functioning. That attempts to be physically intimate and desired sexual frequency were positively correlated in the present sample provides additional evidence that such general attempts may represent expressed desire between partners and that generalized attempts to be sexually intimate may be a missing component of the scholarly discourse on healthy sexuality.

Consistent with our first hypothesis, we found that attempts to be physically intimate by both actors and partners had a significant positive association with relationship satisfaction and positive communication and a significant negative relationship with conflict, even after several demographic controls. These findings indicate that attempts to be physically intimate may be viewed as a positive initiation that communicates sexual desire and has associations with positive outcomes similar to those reported in prior desire research (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004).

It is interesting that higher sexual frequency was not a necessary factor in the association between positive relational outcomes and attempts to be physically intimate. The attempt to be physically intimate, even without the attempt resulting in sexual intercourse, was associated with positive relational outcomes and negatively related to relational problems. This finding is salient because most research associates more frequent sex with more satisfaction (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004; Trudel et al., 1997). While sexual frequency is associated with greater relational satisfaction, attempts to be physically intimate alone were found in this study to be associated with greater relational satisfaction as well. As attempts to be physically intimate may be viewed as an expression of sexual desire, the additional act of sex may not be a critical outcome in the association with the perception of positive relationship outcomes. Since sexual desire is a consistent positive influence on relationship outcomes, and attempts to be physically intimate may be an expression of sexual desire, this finding may indicate why the actual result of sexual intercourse is not essential in obtaining the positive relationship outcomes.

Another theory that may explain the results is that of social approach goals that direct people toward more intimacy within their relationships (Impett et al., 2008). Activities that encourage positive interaction create better outcomes within relationships. Sexual interactions may create positive experiences that increase closeness and intimacy. Beyond creating a positive environment, the findings would suggest that more frequent sexual initiation goes hand in hand with better communication and overall relationship satisfaction for both men and women.

Our hypothesis that gender would moderate the association of attempts to be physically intimate on relational outcomes was found to be accurate. However, the association was in the opposite direction from the one hypothesized. While attempts to be physically intimate had a positive influence on relational outcomes for men and women, results suggested that husbands’ attempts to be physically intimate toward wives were particularly associated with higher reports of relationship satisfaction, communication, and less couple conflict among wives. While some research indicates that women feel coercion more readily than do men (Byers & Glenn, 2012), this research shows that women may also feel positive benefits of attempts to be physically intimate more saliently than men.

Another possible explanation for this pattern of findings lies in research on infidelity. Research has shown that men are more likely than women to engage in extra-dyadic affairs (e.g., Buunk & Bakker, 1995; Thompson, 1984). As men attempt to be physically intimate, women may feel less concern about men’s desire and likelihood to explore sex outside of the relationship. Attempts to be physically intimate may send a message of desire and commitment that reassures partners. Women, especially in committed relationships, may feel reassured their partner is seeking sex only from them and is less likely to be having sex with others. The current data do not allow us to investigate if such attempts lower concerns regarding extra-dyadic relationships. This would be an important question for future studies.

Limitations and future directions

As mentioned earlier, this study has limitations that should be considered before generalizing the results and should only be considered a first step toward understanding the importance of generalized sexual attempts. First, sample limitations should be noted. Although the sample has some diversity, it comprises predominately White, satisfied couples with high levels of relational satisfaction. Care should be taken not to generalize results from the present study to all types of couples. Attempts to be physically intimate may only be associated with positive outcomes with generally satisfied, younger couples.

The sample is taken from Internet research and is thereby limited to those with access to a computer, which may especially impact low-income and non-English-speaking populations (Suarez-Balcazar, Balcazar, & Taylor-Ritzler, 2009). Future studies should attempt to replicate the results found here in other samples of couples utilizing different data collection strategies to see if patterns persist. Replication in clinical populations may also be especially important, as attempts to be physically intimate may no longer carry positive benefits among distressed couples. As we only included cohabiting and male/female married couples in our sample, findings may also only be representative of couples in committed romantic relationships. It is unknown if results would translate to sexually active dating, less committed relationships, or to understudied populations of couples, such as older couples or same-sex couples.

Additionally, the “attempts to be physically intimate” construct was measured with a 1-item question assessing the general frequency of attempts to be physically intimate. While the wording of this item captures a novel concept within the current sexuality research, it does not provide a complete understanding of how attempts to be physically intimate might be understood. For example, it is unknown how such an attempt was conducted (e.g., was it verbal, behavioral, etc.) or how each partner interpreted such an attempt. It is also unknown what type of sexual behavior the partner attempted to initiate. Future research may build on the present study to develop and explore more detailed measurement of attempts to be physically intimate.

Attempts to be physically intimate are quite general and may be perceived by men and women differently. Although the associations found in the current study with relational outcomes provide important new information for sexuality scholars, studies that include more questions on the nature and context of attempts to be physically intimate are needed before the full impact of positive sexual initiation on couple outcomes can be explained.

Future studies could also strive to explore in more depth measurement and more nuanced aspects of attempts to be physically intimate to better understand its influence. This study limited sexual desire only to asking about desire for sexual intercourse. Future work may explore other forms of sexual behavior that lead to sexual satisfaction and/or orgasm, across the life span.

Finally, due to the cross-sectional nature of the data used in this study, directional causal pathways between scores for attempts to be physically intimate and relational outcomes cannot be established. Consequently, it is unclear whether attempts to be physically intimate influence relationship outcomes or if relationship outcomes drive attempts to be physically intimate. This relationship may also be (and is perhaps likely to be) reciprocal. Understanding the direction of these forces would be valuable.

Likewise, while we found some evidence that sexual frequency moderated the relationship between attempts to be physically intimate and relational outcomes, the utilization of average sexual frequency measures and cross-sectional data does not allow for a more sophisticated understanding of how sexual frequency and attempts to be intimate dynamically interact to influence relational outcomes. Longitudinal studies would help clarify the causal relationship of attempts to be physically intimate, sexual frequency, and relational outcomes.

Although causal effect cannot be determined, this first step in understanding the contribution positive sexual initiation creates is an important gateway to exploring sexual attempt in more depth. The present study provides critical new information regarding the effect of attempts to be physically intimate on relational well-being and distinguishes attempts at intimacy from sexual coercion. These findings both broaden our perspective on attempts to be physically intimate and illuminate the possibilities of future research on this topic.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

Aiken

L. S.

West

S. G.

(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Andersen

J. D.

(2005). Financial problems and divorce: Do demographic characteristics strengthen the relationship? Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 43, 149–161. doi:10.1300/J087v43n01_08

Baumeister

R. F.

Catanese

K. R.

Vohs

K. D.

(2001). Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 242–273. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_5

Brezsnyak

Whisman

M. A.

(2004). Sexual desire and relationship functioning: The effects of marital satisfaction and power. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 30, 199–217. doi:10.1080/00926230490262393

Busby

D. M.

Holman

T. B.

Taniguchi

(2001). RELATE: Relationship evaluation of the individual, family, cultural, and couple contexts. Family Relations: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, 50, 308–316. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3729.2001.00308.x

Buunk

B. P.

Bakker

A. B.

(1995). Extradyadic sex: The role of descriptive and injunctive norms. Journal of Sex Research, 32, 313–318. doi:10.1080/00224499509551804

Byers

E. S.

Glenn

S. A.

(2012). Gender differences in cognitive and affective responses to sexual coercion. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 827–845. doi:10.1177/0886260511423250

Cavanagh

S. E.

(2004). The sexual debut of girls in early adolescence: The intersection of race, pubertal timing, and friendship group characteristics. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14, 285–312. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2004.00076.x

Christopher

Sprecher

(2000). Sexuality in marriage, dating, and other relationships: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 999–1017. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00999.x

10.

Clements-Schreiber

M. E.

Rempel

J. K.

Desmarais

(1998). Women's sexual pressure tactics and adherence to related attitudes: A step toward prediction. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 197–205. doi:10.1080/00224499809551933

11.

Cook

W. L.

Kenny

D. A.

(2005). The actor–partner interdependence model: A model of bidirectional effects in developmental studies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 101–109. doi:10.1080/01650250444000405

12.

Craig

M. E.

(1990). Coercive sexuality in dating relationships: A situational model. Clinical Psychology Review, 10, 395–423. doi:10.1016/0272-7358(90)90045-C

13.

Dean

L. R.

Carroll

J. S.

Yang

(2007). Materialism, perceived financial problems, and marital satisfaction. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 35, 260–281. doi:10.1177/1077727X06296625

14.

De Smet

Loeys

Buysse

(2013). Ex-couples' unwanted pursuit behavior: An actor–partner interdependence model approach. Journal of Family Psychology, 27, 221.

15.

Diamond

L. M.

(2004). Emerging perspectives on distinctions between romantic love and sexual desire. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 116–119. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00287.x

16.

Fincham

F. D.

Beach

S. H.

(1999). Conflict in marriage: Implications for working with couples. Annual Review of Psychology, 5047–5077. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.47

17.

Gable

S. L.

Reis

H. T.

Elliot

A. J.

(2000). Behavioral activation and inhibition in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1135–1149. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1135

18.

Gilbar

Weinberg

Gil

(2012). The effects of coping strategies on PTSD in victims of a terror attack and their spouses: Testing dyadic dynamics using an actor–partner interdependence model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29, 246–261. doi:10.1177/0265407511426939

19.

Gleason

M. J.

Iida

Bolger

Shrout

P. E.

(2003). Daily supportive equity in close relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1036–1045. doi:10.1177/0146167203253473

20.

Heyman

R. E.

Sayers

S. L.

Bellack

A. S.

(1994). Global marital satisfaction versus marital adjustment: An empirical comparison of three measures. Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 432–446. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.8.4.432

21.

Impett

E. T.

Strachman

Finkel

E. J.

Gable

S. L.

(2008). Maintaining sexual desire in intimate relationships: The importance of approach goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 808–823. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.808

22.

Jeffords

C. R.

(1984). The impact of sex-role and religious attitudes upon forced marital intercourse norms. Sex Roles, 11, 543–552. doi:10.1007/BF00287477

23.

Johnson

Wadsworth

Wellings

Field

(1994). Sexual attitudes and lifestyles. Oxford, England: Blackwell.

24.

Katz

Moore

J. A.

Tkachuk

(2007). Verbal sexual coercion and perceived victim responsibility: Mediating effects of perceived control. Sex Roles, 57, 235–247. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9253-x

25.

Kenny

D. A.

Cook

(1999). Partner effects in relationship research: Conceptual issues, analytic difficulties, and illustrations. Personal Relationships, 6, 433–448. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00202.x

26.

Klusmann

(2002). Sexual motivation and the duration of partnership. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31, 275–287. doi:10.1023/A:1015205020769

27.

Knobloch

L. K.

Knobloch-Fedders

L. M.

(2010). The role of relational uncertainty in depressive symptoms and relationship quality: An actor–partner interdependence model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 137–159. doi:10.1177/0265407509348809

28.

Knobloch

L. K.

Theiss

J. A.

(2010). An actor–partner interdependence model of relational turbulence: Cognitions and emotions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 595–619. doi:10.1177/0265407510368967

29.

Kreager

D. A.

Staff

(2009). The sexual double standard and adolescent peer acceptance. Social Psychology Quarterly, 72, 143–164. doi:10.1177/019027250907200205

30.

Lawrance

Byers

(1995). Sexual satisfaction in long-term heterosexual relationships: The interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 2, 267–285. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00092.x

31.

McGregor

(2005). Is it rape? On acquaintance rape and taking women’s consent seriously. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

32.

Meyer

Vivian

O'Leary

(1998). Men's sexual aggression in marriage: Couples' report. Violence Against Women, 4, 415–435. doi:10.1177/1077801298004004003

33.

Noll

J. G.

Grych

J. H.

(2011). Read-react-respond: An integrative model for understanding sexual revictimization. Psychology of Violence, 1, 202–215. doi:10.1037/a0023962

34.

Pacifici

Stoolmiller

Nelson

(2001). Evaluating a prevention program for teenagers on sexual coercion: A differential effectiveness approach. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69, 552–559. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.69.3.552

35.

Paleari

Regalia

Fincham

F. D.

(2010). Forgiveness and conflict resolution in close relationships: Within and cross partner effects. Universitas Psychologica, 9, 35–56.

36.

Ramirez

A. R.

(2008). An examination of the tripartite approach to commitment: An actor–partner interdependence model analysis of the effect of relational maintenance behavior. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25, 943–965. doi:10.1177/0265407508100309

37.

Ramisetty-Mikler

Caetano

McGrath

(2007). Sexual aggression among White, Black, and Hispanic couples in the U.S.: Alcohol use, physical assault and psychological aggression as its correlates. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 33, 31–43. doi:10.1080/00952990601082639

38.

Regan

P. C.

(2000). The role of sexual desire and sexual activity in dating relationships. Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 51–59. doi:10.2224/sbp.2000.28.1.51

39.

Sprecher

(1998). Social exchange theories and sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 32–43. doi:10.1080/00224499809551915

40.

Sprecher

(2002). Sexual satisfaction in premarital relationships: Associations with satisfaction, love, commitment, and stability. Journal of Sex Research, 39, 190–196. doi:10.1080/00224490209552141

41.

Suarez-Balcazar

Balcazar

F. E.

Taylor-Ritzler

(2009). Using the Internet to conduct research with culturally diverse populations: Challenges and opportunities. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15, 96–104. doi:10.1037/a0013179

42.

Thachil

Bhugra

(2006). Literature update: A critical review. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 21, 91–98. doi:10.1080/14681990500434823

43.

Thompson

A. P.

(1984). Emotional and sexual components of extramarital relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 35–42. doi:10.2307/351861

44.

Trudel

Landry

Larose

(1997). Low sexual desire: The role of anxiety, depression and marital adjustment. Sexual & Marital Therapy, 12, 95–99. doi:10.1080/02674659708408204

45.

Waite

L. J.

Joyner

(2001). Emotional satisfaction and physical pleasure in sexual unions: Time horizon, sexual behavior, and sexual exclusivity. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 247–264. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00247.x

46.

Walker

R. B.

Luszcz

M. A.

(2009). The health and relationship dynamics of late-life couples: A systematic review of the literature. Ageing & Society, 29, 455–480. doi:10.1017/S0144686X08007903

47.

Willoughby

B. J.

Farero

A. M.

Busby

D. M.

(2014). Exploring the effects of sexual desire discrepancy among married couples. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 551–562.

48.

Willoughby

B. J.

Vitas

(2012). Sexual desire discrepancy: The effect of individual differences in desired and actual sexual frequency on dating couples. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 477–486. doi:10.1007/s10508-011-9766-9

49.

Yabiku

S. T.

Gager

C. T.

(2009). Sexual frequency and the stability of marital and cohabiting unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 983–1000. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00648.x

50.

Yeh

Lorenz

F. O.

Wickrama

K. S.

Conger

R. D.

Elder

G. R.

(2006). Relationships among sexual satisfaction, marital quality, and marital instability at midlife. Journal of Family Psychology, 20, 339–343. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.20.2.339

51.

Zweig

J. M.

Barber

B. L.

Eccles

J. S.

(1997). Sexual coercion and well-being in young adulthood: Comparisons by gender and college status. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 291–308. doi:10.1177/088626097012002009

52.

Zweig

J. M.

Crockett

L. J.

Sayer

Vicary

J. R.

(1999). A longitudinal examination of the consequences of sexual victimization for rural young adult women. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 396–409. doi:10.1080/00224499909552012