Capstone Final Draft

Running head: NEED FOR SEX PREDICTS COMFORT WITH RISKY SEX 1
Need for Sex Predicts Comfort with Casual Sex and Risky Sexual Behavior
Kate Sansone
University of Missouri
Author Note
This research was conducted to fulfill the requirements of a Capstone in
Psychological Sciences during Fall Semester 2015. Thanks to my TA for helpful feedback on
drafts. Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Capstone Student, Hatch
Hall Box 1421, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211. Email: kesp8b@mail.mizzou.edu.

NEED FOR SEX PREDICTS COMFORT WITH RISKY SEX 2
Abstract
Sexual behavior is a natural part of life in which almost every human being participates, but what
makes some people more inclined to partake in more extreme sexual practices than others?
Based on previous research, I hypothesized that possessing a higher need for sex predicts a
higher comfort with casual sexual encounters and a higher likelihood to partake in risky sexual
behavior. In this study, I used data from a survey sent through a link via social media platforms,
including Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. The 111 participants took an online questionnaire
that measured levels of need for sex and comfort with casual sex, as well as a description of their
sexual behavior and history. Higher need for sex was positively correlated with the likelihood of
comfort with casual sex and engaging in more frequent risky sexual encounters, but no
significant interaction occurred between the three measures. These findings can help lead fellow
researchers to study how these measures, and others, interact and predict the active participation
of hazardous sexual behavior.
Keywords: need for sex, sociosexual orientation inventory, risky sexual behavior, casual sex

Need for Sex Predicts Comfort with Risky Sex
Sexual reproduction is a natural part of the human life cycle, but some people engage in
sexual activity more frequently than others (Cooper, Shapiro, & Powers, 1998). Risky sexual
behavior has been a common topic in psychological research for many years, but I wanted to
delve into more psychological and personality-driven reasons for risky sexual activity. In this
study, I examined whether a person’s need for sex can determine a person’s psychological
comfort with having casual sexual encounters and the behavioral representation of risky sexual
behavior.
Need for sex determines how important sexual activity is to an individual. How much an
individual feels a need for sexual activity may be impacted by a person’s level of impulse
control. Unbalanced levels of impulse control can influence how often a person feels the urge to
have sex or sexual thoughts. When strong impulses for sexual behavior occur, the activity in the
ventral striatum (VS) is increased as well, which reinforces “approach behaviors, reward drive,
and impulsivity (Hariri, 2015)” (Victor, Sansosti, Bowman, & Hariri, 2015, p. 8896). The
stronger these urges are, the more likely it is that the frequency of sexual behavior will be
habitual. Activation of the VS creates more positive associations between reward and sexual
pleasure and augments the incentive to partake in more sexual behavior. Low levels of impulse
control and self-regulation are linked to problematic behaviors, like lowered inhibition, leading
to more frequent sexual encounters (Baams, Overbeek, Dubas, & Van Aken, 2014). According to
Cooper, Shapiro, and Powers (1998), “Whether people engage in different behaviors to achieve
the same goals or in the same behavior to achieve different goals, the key to understanding is
contained within the purposes and motives that underlie and give rise to the behavior” (p. 1529).
In other words, people participate in sexual behavior for different reasons. Snyder and Omoto

(e.g., Snyder, 1993; Snyder & Omoto, 1992) also found that the person’s extent of a person’s
sexual needs varies greatly. Cooper, Shapiro, & Powers (1998) clarify Snyder and Omoto’s
findings:
… Individuals who differed in their predominant motives exhibited distinctive
personality profiles and were disposed to seek out features of the situation or activities
that best allowed them to meet their predominant goals. For example, volunteers who
were primarily motivated by esteem enhancement needs had relatively low self-esteem
and high need for social recognition. In contrast, those who volunteered primarily for
humanitarian reasons had relatively high scores on nurturance, empathy, and social
responsibility and sought out activities that offered greater potential to nurture and be
empathic (p. 1529).
Motivations for sexual acts are specific to an individual and are highly involved in the emotional
component of a sexual act. When determining a person’s need for sex, it is necessary to evaluate
one’s impulse control and personal rewards, which motivate sexual behavior.
An extremely important factor in determining the outcomes of a high need for sex is
one’s psychological comfort of having casual sex. These views are either restricted or
unrestricted (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). A restricted individual is more likely to feel
uncomfortable having causal sex with multiple partners, while “Unrestricted individuals
indicate…that they could enjoy sex without commitment, they have had several different sexual
partners in the past year, and they have engaged in sex with partners once and only once on
several different occasions” (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991, p. 870). The more important sex is to
an individual, the more likely it is that an individual has an unrestricted view of casual sexual
encounters.

Risky sex is more difficult to scientifically measure, and therefore, is more highly
disputed. Determining risky sexual behavior can be difficult since the sociosexual features that
determine risky sexual activity vary cross-culturally. While risky sexual behavior can be
perceived in many forms, Simpson & Gangestad (1991) described the performance of risky
sexual behavior as:
…Frequency of actual and preferred sexual intercourse, number of actual and preferred
partners, incidence of concurrent (e.g., extramarital) affairs, number of different sexual
partners foreseen in the future, attitudes toward engaging in uncommitted sexual
relations, the ease with which uncommitted sexual relationships can be entered into, and
the frequency with which sexual fantasies about partners other than the current one
predominate in one’s thoughts (p. 870).
A person’s sex drive, or need for sex, can determine distinctive patterns of sexual behavior and
can reflect an individual’s sexual goals and personality.
Activation of the reward center in the ventral striatum can affect how efficiently a person
can control one’s drive to have sex and the motivations behind an individual’s sexual urges.
Because need for sex is affected by reward and impulse control and differs on an individual
level, it is expected that it can affect an individual’s views on casual, even anonymous, sex, and
predict the likelihood of the continuous engagement of risky sexual behavior. The current study
sought to test this hypothesis.
Method
Participants
Participants (N = 111) in this study were men (N = 31) and women (N = 80), ages ranging
from 19-65. Subjects varied in race and geographic location within the United States. Volunteers

were asked questions about their sexual behavior and history. Virgins were excluded from the
data analysis.
Procedure
Participants were given a link via Facebook that directed volunteers to an online
questionnaire. The survey was hosted by Qualtrics and took about fifteen minutes to complete.
Measures
Needfor sex. The extent of how important sex is to a participant was indexed by Cooper,
Shapiro, & Powers’ (1998) sex motives. An example from this measure includes “How
important is it to you to get your sexual needs met?”. Participants chose from 1 (not at all), 2
(only a little), 3 (somewhat), 4 (very), and 5 (extremely). The measure was normally distributed,
with responses ranging from 1 to 5 (M = 3.69, SD = .76).
Sociosexual orientation inventory (SOI). To measure how restricted or unrestricted a
participant’s view is towards engaging in casual sex, a four-item measure (Appendix A) was
used (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). An example of one out of three open-ended questions for
SOI is “With no consequences, how many different partners do you see yourself having sex with
during the next 5 years?”. The fourth item, “How often do you fantasize about having sex?” was
answered using a seven-point scale: 1 (never), 2 (almost never), 3 (some of the time), 4 (half of
the time), 5 (most of the time), 6 (almost all of the time), and 7 (all of the time). The items in this
measure were averaged together and standardized. The measure was normally distributed,
ranging from -.57 to .68 (M = -.098, SD = .31).
Risky sexual behavior (Sex Experience). Risky sexual behavior was indexed using
seven, open-ended questions that collected data about their sexual behavior and history, adapted
from Cooper, Shapiro, & Powers (1998). The examples of open-ended questions from this

measure ask, “How old were you the first time you ever had intercourse (penis in vagina or
butt)?” or “In your lifetime, how many times, if ever, have you had a one night stand- that is, you
had sex with a person one and only one time?”. The full seven questions can be found in
Appendix B. These open-ended questions collected numerical data to quantify behavior. Those
who had never partaken in the sexual behavior being described were encouraged to enter the
number “0”. I chose to leave these items open-ended in order to avoid any influence of limitation
from any of the participants. The items in this measure were averaged together and standardized.
The measure was normally distributed, ranging from -.63 to 1.65 (M = -.08, SD = .43).
Results
In order to test if need for sex predicts comfort with casual sex and risky sexual behavior,
I conducted correlation, reliability, and a bivariate regression tests between the three measures.
Three outliers and all virgins were eliminated from the study. Risky sex is labeled as sex
experience and comfort with casual sex is labeled as SOI in the data analysis.
A reliability analysis was performed on nine sexual behavior based items. The items form
a composite measure of how much an individual values sex impacts an individual’s comfort with
casual sex, actual and desired number of sexual partners, number and type of sexual encounters,
and outlook on sex in general. This test produced reliable (𝛼 = .77) analysis between the number
of items and correlations between items involved in the SOI and Sex Experience/Risky Sex
measures.
In this study, the bivariate correlation test produced positive and significant correlations
for both SOI and risky sexual behavior (see Table 1). The test showed that individuals (N = 111)
who place a higher value on sex have a greater comfort with casual sex (r = .48, p < .001) and

are more likely to partake in risky sexual behavior (r = .19, p < .05). Comfort with casual sex is
also positively correlated with the likelihood of partaking in risky sexual behavior (Table 1).
A regression analysis was set up to model the relationships of gender differences in need
for sex predicting risky sexual behavior. Figure 1 shows these models were not significant, had
no differences in gender (𝛽 = .06, p = .53), and had no interaction (𝛽 = -.017, p = .86). The need
for sex variable was significant (𝛽 = .198, p = .04). A regression analysis was also set up to
model the relationship of need for sex predicting comfort with casual sex, which was, similarly,
not significant (𝛽 = -.013, p = .87), nor did it have an interaction. The gender (𝛽 = -.23, p = .007)
and need for sex (𝛽 = .47, p = .00) variables both proved to be significant individually, but not as
an interaction.
Although there was no significant interaction between need for sex, risky sexual
behavior, and comfort with casual sex, the results were positively correlated and reliable. The
data supports my hypothesis by showing that an individual’s need for sex is related to one’s
psychological comfort with casual sex and the physical participation in risky sexual behavior, but
conflicts with my hypothesis because there is no found interaction between need for sex causing
risky sexual behavior and comfort with casual sexuality.
Discussion
Happily, the data I collected partly supports my hypothesis that the perceived value of
one’s need for sex predicts the likelihood of risky sexual behavior and one’s comfort level with
casual sex. An interaction between need for sex, risky sexual behavior, and comfort with casual
sex was not found in my experiment, but the three variables are all positively correlated,
meaning that there is a high probability of them being related. In this study, I was able to echo

the findings of Cooper, Shapiro, and Powers (1998) showing that a person’s sexual needs vary
on an individual basis and can be related to their sexual behavior.
While my study has its strengths, I also want to point out the weaknesses. It is very
possible that the design of my study is flawed and does not accurately depict the correlation
between need for sex, psychological comfort with casual sex, and the participation in risky
sexual behavior. More females took the survey than males and three outliers were removed from
the data. There were also a number of incomplete surveys that I was unable to use in the data.
This study could have dove further into personality traits, societal, and emotional conditions of
each participant, giving a better idea of the participants’ state of mind while taking this survey.
The participants used in this study were a convenience sample due to the fact that the study was
completely unfunded and I am a novice researcher.
My study contributes to science by implying that these measures are not mutually
exclusive. I believe that my study could lead this discussion of sexuality in many different
directions. Additional study could shed light on sexual behavior and its origins. It could also lead
to future analysis on current sexual behaviors that have become normalized in society, such as
hook-up culture, dating apps, and a decrease in formal dating, as well as personal experiences
and interactions with others that shape our sexuality. I conclude that sexual behavior is an area
that needs to be studied a lot more due to the recent society changes in sexuality norms. An
individual’s need for sex may not cause a psychological comfort with casual sex or a person to
have more risky sex, but they are the product of something else. I believe the answer may lie
within a combination of individual personality traits, personal experience, value placed on sex,
and societal norms. A future analysis to determine how sexual behavior is defined and valued by
an individual is necessary in order to understand why sexual behaviors are performed.

References
Baams, L., Overbeek, G., Dubas, J. S., & van Aken, M. G. (2014). On early starters and late
bloomers: The development of sexual behavior in adolescence across personality
types. Journal of Sex Research, 51(7), 754-764. doi:10.1080/00224499.2013.802758.
Baams, L., Overbeek, G., van de Bongardt, D., Reitz, E., Dubas, J. S., & van Aken, M. G.
(2015). Adolescents’ and their friends’ sexual behavior and intention: Selection effects of
personality dimensions. Journal of Research In Personality, 54, 2-12.
doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.009.
Cooper, M. L., Shapiro, C. M., & Powers, A. M. (1998). Motivations for sex and risky sexual
behavior among adolescents and young adults: A functional perspective. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 75(6), 1528-1558. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.6.1528.
Hariri, A.R. (2015). Looking inside the disordered brain. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.
Holtzman, N. S., & Strube, M. J. (2013). Above and beyond short-term mating, long-term
mating is uniquely tied to human personality. Evolutionary Psychology, 11(5), 1101-
1129.
Jonason, P. K., Hatfield, E., & Boler, V. M. (2015). Who engages in serious and casual sex
relationships? An individual differences perspective. Personality and Individual
Differences, 75, 205-209. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.042.
Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence
for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
60(6), 870-883. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.870.

Snyder, M. (1993). Basic research and practical problems: The promise of a "functional"
personality and social pathology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 251-
264.
Snyder, M., & Omoto, A. M. (1992). Volunteerism and society's response to the HIV epidemic.
Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 113-116.
Victor, E. C., Sansosti, A. A., Bowman, H. C., & Hariri, A. R. (2015). Differential patterns of
amygdala and ventral striatum activation predict gender-specific changes in sexual risk
behavior. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35(23), 8896-8900.
doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0737-15.2015.

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations for Need for Sex, SOI, and Sex Experience
(n = 111) Need for Sex SOI Sex Experience
SOI .48** - .36**
Sex Experience .19* .36** -
Mean 3.69 -.09 -.08
SD .76 .31 .43
Alpha .77 .77
Note: *p < .05, ** p < .01 **

Figure 1. This line graph shows the interaction of Risky Sexual Behavior and Need for Sex.
-1
0
1
low high
RiskySexualBehavior
Men
Women
Predicted Values of Risky Sexual Behavior and Need
for Sex in Men vs. Women
Need for Sex

Appendix A
The sociosexual orientation inventory, adapted from Simpson & Gangestad (1991), was
conducted as a four-item measure. This measure includes three open-ended questions: “If there
was nothing to inhibit you – e.g., no threat of disease, no fear of pregnancy, your partners
willingly consented – with how many different persons that you currently know would you like
to have sex?”, “With no consequences, how many different partners do you see yourself having
sex with during the next 5 years?”, and “Realistically, with how many different partners do you
see yourself having sex during the next 5 years?”. The fourth item, “How often do you fantasize
about having sex?”, was answered using a seven-point scale: 1 (never), 2 (almost never), 3 (some
of the time), 4 (half of the time), 5 (most of the time), 6 (almost all of the time), and 7 (all of the
time).

Appendix B
Risky sexual behavior measure (Cooper, Shapiro, & Powers, 1998) uses seven, open-
ended questions to index quantifiable sexual behavior. The seven questions are as followed:
“How old were you the first time you ever had intercourse (penis in vagina or butt)?”, “About
how many times would you say that you have had intercourse in your life?”, “About how many
different people would you say that you have had sexual intercourse (penis in vagina or butt)
with in your lifetime?”, “Please estimate the number of different partners with whom you have
ever had sexual contact (anything you think is “sexual”) in your life.”, “With about how many
different people did you have sexual intercourse during the past 12 months?”, “In your lifetime,
how many times, if ever, have you had a one night stand – that is, you had sex with a person one
and only one time?”, and “In your lifetime, how many times, if ever, have you had sex with
someone who was a stranger to you? By stranger, we mean someone you met on the same day or
evening that you had sex.”. The questions within this measure were left open-ended to reduce the
chance of swaying the participant to answer within certain parameters.

Capstone Final Draft

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Capstone Final Draft

Similar to Capstone Final Draft (8)

Capstone Final Draft