Calzo Jerel P
a Division of Adolescent and Young Adult Medicine , Boston Children's Hospital.
J Sex Res. 2014;51(2):221-33. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2012.724119. Epub 2013 Jan 11.
Although early research and the popular press have characterized college men as universal beneficiaries of uncommitted sex, emerging research notes considerable variability in men's sociosexuality (i.e., uncommitted sexual beliefs, desires, and behaviors). This study examined how diversity in sociosexuality is tied to the ways in which attachment orientations, conformity to masculinity norms, and homosocial engagement (i.e., nonromantic same-sex bonds) are organized across individuals. Latent profile analysis of 495 college males (ages 17 to 25, 62% White, 83.5% heterosexual) detected five subgroups: Fully Unrestricted (10% of sample; high on sociosexuality and conformity to masculinity norms); Cognitively Unrestricted (36%; comparable to Fully Unrestricteds but low on sociosexual behavior), Fully Restricted (30%; opposite on all constructs when compared to Fully Unrestricteds); Avoidant (16%; similar to Fully Restricteds but with greater attachment avoidance); and Discrepant (8%; above average on sociosexual behavior but discordant within and across constructs). There were notable demographic, personality, and behavioral differences among the subgroups (e.g., nearly 50% of the Discrepants self-identified as sexual minorities; Fully Restricteds were the most religious; Avoidants were the most shy). Findings indicate that college men's sociosexuality is highly nuanced and suggest the need for additional work to understand how attachment, masculinity norms, and homosociality shape men's sexual relationships.
尽管早期研究和大众媒体将大学男生描述为随意性行为的普遍受益者,但新出现的研究指出,男性的社会性取向(即随意的性观念、欲望和行为)存在相当大的差异。本研究考察了社会性取向的多样性如何与个体在依恋取向、对男性气质规范的遵从以及同性社交参与(即非浪漫的同性关系)的组织方式相关联。对495名大学男性(年龄在17至25岁之间,62%为白人,83.5%为异性恋)进行的潜在剖面分析发现了五个亚组:完全无约束型(占样本的10%;社会性取向高且对男性气质规范的遵从度高);认知无约束型(36%;与完全无约束型相当,但性行为方面低);完全约束型(30%;与完全无约束型在所有指标上相反);回避型(16%;与完全约束型相似,但依恋回避程度更高);以及不一致型(8%;性行为高于平均水平,但在各指标内部和之间不一致)。各亚组在人口统计学、个性和行为方面存在显著差异(例如,近50%的不一致型自我认定为性少数群体;完全约束型是最虔诚的;回避型是最害羞的)。研究结果表明,大学男生的社会性取向非常微妙,并表明需要进一步开展工作来理解依恋、男性气质规范和同性社交如何塑造男性的性关系。