Young adult participation in intimate behavior typically does occur within a relationship context, but we all know little concerning the ways that particular popular features of intimate relationships influence decision-making that is sexual. Prior focus on sexual risk taking concentrates attention on medical issues in place of relationship characteristics. We draw on data through the Toledo Adolescent Relationships research (TARS) (letter = 475) to look at the relationship between characteristics and characteristics of current/most recent romantic relationships such as interaction and emotional procedures, conflict, demographic asymmetries, and extent and also the handling of intimate danger. We conceptualize ‘risk management’ as encompassing multiple domain names, including (1) questioning the partner about previous intimate behaviors/risks, (2) making use of condoms consistently, and (3) keeping exclusivity that is sexual the connection. We identify distinct habits of danger administration among dating teenagers and discover that certain qualities and characteristics of those relationships are linked to variants in danger administration. Outcomes with this paper suggest the necessity to give consideration to relational characteristics in efforts to target and influence young adult intimate risk-taking and minimize STIs, including HIV.
Throughout the life phase of rising adulthood (Arnett 2000), many teenagers are perhaps maybe not hitched, but they are intimately active (Lefkowitz and Gillen 2006). As a result, they have been at considerable danger for publicity to infections that are sexually transmitted. This greater visibility could be the results of increases in sexual intercourse, and declines in condom usage relative to the period that is adolescentDariotis et al. 2008; Harris et al. 2006). Of this 18.9 million brand brand new instances of sexually sent infections every year, about half happen among individuals aged 15-24 (Weinstock et al. 2004); this higher level of disease is due, in component, to teenagers perhaps perhaps perhaps not once you understand and/or not disclosing their STI status to intercourse partners ( e.g., Desiderato and Crawford 1995). Behaviors that place young adults at danger for visibility to heterosexually transmitted infections (for example., inconsistent condom use and numerous and concurrent intimate lovers) always happen within dyadic relationships. Hence, the significance of the connection context can not be over-stated, and scholarship is starting to observe that comprehending the nature of intimate relationships might help avoid STIs ( e.g., Ickovics et al. 2001; Kusunoki and Upchurch 2010; Manning et al. 2009; Manlove et al. 2007; Santelli et al. 1996; Sheeran et al. 1999; Soler et al. 2000; Tschann et al. 2002). Interestingly, scientists learn more about specific, household, peer, and also neighborhood degree impacts on adolescent and young adult participation in high-risk intimate tasks than concerning the impact of relationship dynamics such as for instance provided interaction on intimate risk-taking together with handling of STI danger. Relationship procedures play an essential although not well-understood part and likely represent an effective and malleable arena for intervention in accordance with individual, peer, household, or demographic facets.
The present research, drawing on recently gathered information through the Toledo Adolescent Relationships research (TARS), explores variants in danger administration inside the context of respondents’ current/most present relationship. We conceptualize the entire process of handling danger with regards to numerous domain names including: (1) questioning the partner about previous intimate behaviors/risks; (2) making use of condoms regularly; and (3) keeping exclusivity that is sexual. A energy associated with the TARS information is the growth of an meeting protocol which includes direct assessments of those proportions of danger administration along with potentially relationship that is important and dynamics (i.e., love, intimate self disclosure, and conflict) which may be related to variants within the popularity for the individual’s efforts to manage danger. The analysis additionally is the reason old-fashioned relationship parameters such as for instance demographic asymmetries and extent for the relationship as prospective influences on ways in which intimate risk is handled in the context of young adult relationships.
Prior studies of intimate danger behavior have actually centered on demographic habits, links to other issue actions, together with effect of certain wellness philosophy. Using nationwide, local, and medical examples of adolescents and teenagers, scholars have actually examined the impact of age, sex, race/ethnicity, religion/religiosity, parents’ training, and approval that is parental of task on condom usage ( ag e.g., Darroch and Singh 1999; Forrest and Singh 1990; Glei 1999; Katz et al. 2000; Longmore et al. 2003; Lowenstein and Furstenberg 1991; Manlove et al. 2007; Manning et al. 2009; Mosher 1990; Sonenstein et al. 1989). Proof implies that adolescents and teenagers who’re intimately inexperienced, report greater religiosity, are less educated, and whose parents are sensed to accept of premarital activity that is sexual more frequently inconsistent or inadequate condom users or non-users. These studies have focused primarily on a specific behavior, i.e., condom or contraceptive use, and typically have not examined other aspects of intimate relationships that characterize the young adult period although useful in providing a descriptive portrait.
Another typical way of understanding high-risk sexual behavior is always to notice it as an element of a wider problem behavior syndrome ( e.g., DiClemente and Crosby 2006; Jessor and Jessor 1977; Ketterlinus et al. 1992; Luster and Small 1994; Rodgers and Rowe 1990). For instance, medication and liquor usage are connected with earlier in the day onset that is sexual greater amounts of sexual lovers, and much more cases of non-safe sex ( ag e.g., NIAAA 2002; Santelli et al. 1999); nevertheless, the relationship between liquor and condom use is inconsistent across relationship contexts and intimate connection with the partners (Leigh 2002). Increased focus on the linkages between various risk behaviors such as for example alcohol and medication usage and behavior that is sexual been helpful, especially with furthering our comprehending that the information, inspiration, and abilities of adolescents and young adults can be distinct from those of older grownups, specially pertaining to attitudes of invulnerability. Nonetheless, during adolescence and into young adulthood, sexual intercourse becomes increasingly normative, and unlike delinquency, underage alcohol usage and illicit medication usage, could be developmentally appropriate (Harris et al. 2002; Longmore et al. 1999). Hence, an even more approach that is multifaceted intimate risk-taking is required – the one that recognizes the rewarding and status-enhancing social experiences that romantic and other intimate relationships provide and even though they are able to amplify the degree of intimate risk-taking.
An extra perspective that is theoretical the intimate research/prevention arena may be the Health Belief Model (Becker 1988). This social mental viewpoint focuses from the individual’s desire in order to prevent infection and is targeted on wellness values and preventative actions. This method happens to be ideal for highlighting influences that are motivational nonetheless, a limitation of the and relevant approaches such as for example Fishbein and Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein et al. 2001) is the fact that focus is individualistic and assumes the behavior under consideration is volitional. Hence, social and processes that are situational under-emphasized, including dilemmas surrounding the settlement of condom usage.
Our framework that is conceptual emphasizes intimate relationships aren’t individualistic (although information will come in one individual), but they are complex social bonds which can be likely incompletely described pertaining to any one construct-such as timeframe, regularity of connection, or style of intimate relationship ( ag e.g., casual versus committed). Our multidimensional approach derives from a symbolic interactionist view of relationship exchanges ( ag e.g., Giordano et al. 1986; McCall and Simmons 1978). As Burgess and Huston (1979, p. 9) note: “an explicit view trade procedures sets the phase for thinking about the relationship itself – rather than the people or perhaps the bigger system being a product of analysis. ” The partner as reference other, and the qualities of the relationship, itself, become central to a comprehensive understanding of the likelihood and manner in which sexual behavior and in turn sexual risk occur (Giordano et al. 2001) as applied to intimacy, by highlighting the dyadic character of sexual relations. The symbolic interactionist lens underscores the requirement to capture and explain these relationships due to the fact actors by by themselves encounter them. This tradition emphasizes that definitions emerge from social interactions; therefore, we explore intimate danger administration by concentrating on the view that is individual’s of relationship including provided interaction, heightened emotionality, conflict, and relationship asymmetries.