Young adult participation in intimate behavior typically does occur in just a relationship context, but we understand little concerning the ways that certain options that come with intimate relationships influence intimate decision-making. Prior focus on sexual risk taking concentrates attention on health conditions instead 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 psychological procedures, conflict, demographic asymmetries, and timeframe as well as 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 regularly, and (3) keeping exclusivity that is sexual the connection. We identify distinct habits of risk administration among dating adults that are young discover that certain characteristics and characteristics of those relationships are associated with variants in danger administration. Outcomes out of this paper recommend the requirement to think about relational characteristics in efforts to target and influence adult that is young risk-taking and lower STIs, including HIV.
Throughout the life phase of appearing adulthood (Arnett 2000), many teenagers are perhaps perhaps maybe not hitched, but are sexually active (Lefkowitz and Gillen 2006). As a result, they have been at considerable danger for visibility to sexually transmitted infections (STI). This greater visibility may be the consequence of increases in intercourse, and decreases in condom usage in accordance with the period that is adolescentDariotis et al. 2008; Harris et al. 2006). Regarding the 18.9 million brand new instances of intimately sent infections every year, about half happen among people aged 15-24 (Weinstock et al. 2004); this higher rate of disease is due, to some extent, to adults maybe not once you understand and/or not disclosing their STI status to intercourse lovers ( e.g., Desiderato and Crawford 1995). Behaviors that place adults that are young danger for publicity to heterosexually transmitted infections (for example., inconsistent condom use and multiple and concurrent intimate lovers) fundamentally occur within dyadic relationships. Hence, the importance of the partnership context can’t be over-stated, and scholarship is just starting to observe that comprehending the nature of intimate relationships can 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, family members, peer, and level that is even neighborhood on adolescent and young adult participation in high-risk intimate tasks than about the impact of relationship characteristics such as for instance provided interaction on intimate risk-taking while the handling of STI danger. Relationship procedures play a significant not role that is well-understood likely represent an effective and malleable arena for intervention in accordance with individual, peer, family members, or demographic facets.
The existing 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 when it comes to numerous domains including: (1) questioning the partner about past intimate behaviors/risks; (2) making use of condoms regularly; and (3) keeping exclusivity that is sexual. A energy associated with TARS information is the introduction of a job interview protocol which includes direct assessments of the proportions of risk management along with possibly crucial relationship characteristics and characteristics (i.e., love, intimate self disclosure, and conflict) that could be related to variants within the success associated with individual’s efforts to manage danger. The analysis additionally makes up about conventional relationship parameters such as for instance demographic asymmetries and extent for the relationship as prospective impacts on ways that intimate danger is handled in cupid the context of young adult relationships.
Prior studies of intimate risk behavior have actually dedicated to demographic habits, links with other issue habits, and also the impact of particular wellness values. Using national, local, and clinical examples of adolescents and teenagers, scholars have actually analyzed the impact of age, sex, race/ethnicity, religion/religiosity, parents’ training, and approval that is parental of activity 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 shows that adolescents and adults who will be intimately inexperienced, report greater religiosity, are less educated, and whoever parents are observed to accept of premarital sexual intercourse are more often 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 method of understanding high-risk sexual behavior would be to visualize it included in a wider issue behavior problem ( e.g., DiClemente and Crosby 2006; Jessor and Jessor 1977; Ketterlinus et al. 1992; Luster and Small 1994; Rodgers and Rowe 1990). As an example, medication and liquor usage are connected with earlier in the day onset that is sexual greater amounts of intimate lovers, and much more cases of non-safe sex ( e.g., NIAAA 2002; Santelli et al. 1999); nevertheless, the relationship between liquor and condom usage is inconsistent across relationship contexts and sexual connection with the partners (Leigh 2002). Increased focus on the linkages between different risk behaviors such as for example liquor and medication usage and behavior that is sexual been helpful, especially with furthering our knowing that the ability, inspiration, and abilities of adolescents and adults can be distinct from those of older grownups, especially pertaining to attitudes of invulnerability. However, during adolescence and into young adulthood, sexual intercourse becomes increasingly normative, and unlike delinquency, underage liquor usage and illicit medication usage, could be developmentally appropriate (Harris et al. 2002; Longmore et al. 1999). Therefore, an even more approach that is multifaceted intimate risk-taking is needed – one which recognizes the rewarding and status-enhancing social experiences that romantic and other intimate relationships provide despite the fact that they could amplify the degree of intimate risk-taking.
Yet another theoretical viewpoint within the sexual research/prevention arena could be the Health Belief Model (Becker 1988). This social emotional viewpoint focuses from the individual’s desire to prevent infection and is targeted on wellness values and preventative habits. This process is ideal for highlighting influences that are motivational nevertheless, a limitation for this 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 the focus is individualistic and assumes the behavior under consideration is volitional. Therefore, social and processes that are situational under-emphasized, including problems surrounding the settlement of condom usage.
Our conceptual framework emphasizes that intimate relationships aren’t individualistic (although information will come in one person), but they are complex social bonds which can be likely incompletely described pertaining to any one construct-such as length, regularity of conversation, or kind of intimate relationship ( e.g., casual versus committed). Our approach that is multidimensional derives 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 glance at trade processes sets the phase for thinking about the relationship itself – as opposed to the people or the bigger system as being a device 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 interactionist that is symbolic underscores the necessity to capture and explain these relationships because the actors by by by themselves experience them. This tradition emphasizes that definitions emerge from social interactions; therefore, we explore intimate danger administration by targeting the individual’s view regarding the relationship including provided interaction, heightened emotionality, conflict, and relationship asymmetries.