(Solved): You are responsible for analyzing an academic research article. Article is given above.Please review ...

Pluralistic Ignorance and Hooking Up Tracy A. Lambert, Arnold S. Kahn, and Kevin J. Apple James Madison University "Hooking up"-when two people agree to engage in sexual behavior for which there is no future commitment-has become popular on college campuses. In this study we examined the extent to which pluralistic ignorance affects hooking up. One hundred thirty-six female and 128 male college students answered questions regarding their own comfort and their perceived peers' comfort in engaging in a variety of sexual behaviors while hooking up. We hypothesized and found that both women and men rated their peers as being more comfortable engaging in these behaviors than they rated themselves. Men expressed more comfort than did women in engaging in these behaviors, and both sexes overestimated the other gender's comfort with hooking up behaviors. Pluralistic ignorance appears to apply to hooking up on college campuses, and we explore some potential consequences of pluralistic ignorance in this context. Although one-night stands and uncommitted sexual viduals, each person believes his or her private attitudes, behaviors are not a recent phenomenon, past research has beliefs, or judgments are discrepant from the norm disfocused on personality traits, attitudes, and individual dif- played by the public behavior of others. Therefore, each ferences in willingness to engage in such behaviors (e.g., group member, wishing to be seen as a desirable member Gerrard, 1980; Gerrard \& Gibbons, 1982; Simpson \& of the group, publicly conforms to the norm, each believGangestad, 1991; Snyder, Simpson, \& Gangestad, 1986). ing he or she is the only one in the group experiencing The tacit assumption in this past research was that sexual conflict between his or her private attitude and his or her behaviors within a committed and loving relationship were public behavior. Group members believe that most others unproblematic, but that unloving, uncommitted sexual in their group, especially those who are popular and opinrelations had to be explained. However, today on college ion leaders (Katz \& Lazarsfeld, 1955), actually endorse campuses across the United States what was once viewed the norm and want to behave that way, while they themas problematic has now become normative, and students selves privately feel they are going along with the norm refer to this process as "hooking up." because of a desire to fit in with the group and exemplify Hooking up occurs when two people who are casual the norm (Prentice \& Miller, 1993, 1996). In this study we acquaintances or who have just met that evening at a bar or examined the extent to which pluralistic ignorance might party agree to engage in some forms of sexual behavior for be related to U.S. college students' comfort levels with which there will likely be no future commitment (Boswell sexual behaviors involved in hooking up. Consistent with \& Spade, 1996; Kahn et al., 2000; Paul, McManus, \& the premise of pluralistic ignorance, we hypothesized that Hayes, 2000). The couple typically does not communicate college students would perceive others as having a greater what sexual behaviors they will or will not engage in, and comfort level engaging in a variety of sexual behaviors frequently both parties have been drinking alcohol (Kahn et than they themselves would have. al., 2000; Paul et al., 2000). Paul et al. (2000) found that Prentice and Miller (1993) demonstrated pluralistic $78\%$ of women and men on the campus being studied had ignorance among college students in the area of alcohol engaged in hooking up at least once. In the Kahn et al. consumption. On a campus where heavy alcohol use was (2000) sample of college students, $86\%$ of the women and the perceived norm, Prentice and Miller found that stu$88\%$ of the men indicated they had hooked up. Almost one dents estimated both the average student and their friends half $(47\%)$ of the men and one third of the women in the to have less discomfort with the level of alcohol consumpPaul et al. sample engaged in sexual intercourse during the tion on campus than they reported for themselves. hookup, and Kahn et al. found that their sample believed Furthermore, for male but not female students, they found petting below the waist, oral sex, and sexual intercourse greater consistency between respondents' comfort levels occurred with some regularity in the process of hooking up. with alcohol consumption and the perceived norm and Pluralistic ignorance, a concept first coined by Floyd between respondents' reported drinking levels and the perAllport (1924, 1933), exists when, within a group of indi- ceived norm at the end of the semester than at the beginning of the semester. Although correlational in nature, Tracy A. Lambert is now at the University of Georgia. these results suggest that over time, male students may This paper is based on an honors thesis by the first author under the direction have changed their attitudes and behaviors to bring them of the second author. We wish to thank Steven Wise for his statistical assistance. more in line with the perceived norm. Perkins and Address correspondence to Amold S. Kahn, School of Psychology, Berkowitz (1986) reported similar findings with regard to MSC 7401 , James Madison University, Harrisonburg. VA 22807; e-mail: the discrepancy between college students' own comfort 130 Pluralistic Ignorance and Hooking Up with the amount of drinking at the university and what ence" for the men was usually due to the women wanting they estimated to be the general campus attitude. a relationship or to the use of too much alcohol or drugs; Although pluralistic ignorance was originally conceptu- none mentioned pressure to go further than they desired. alized as a discrepancy between public behavior and pri- However, nearly one half of the women (48.3\%) who vate beliefs (Miller \& McFarland, 1987), others have used reported having a terrible hooking-up experience indicated the concept to refer to situations in which there is not that they were pressured to go further than they had wantdirect evidence of behavioral similarity (e.g., Fields \& ed to go. They gave responses such as "I hooked up with a Schuman, 1976; O'Gorman \& Garry, 1976). More recent- guy who didn't understand the meaning of "no"" and "I ly, Cohen and Shotland (1996) invoked the concept of plu- didn't want to-he did-he wouldn't back off." These ralistic ignorance in a variety of dating situations for which women may have experienced sexual assault during a public scrutiny was absent. They found that both men and hook up but did not label their experiences as such because women believed that the average other person of their sex they believed the behaviors to be normative. In addition, had more liberal sexual expectations than they set for $10.3\%$ of the women and $11.1\%$ of the men in this sample themselves, both sexes believing the average other person said the hook up was terrible because they had gone too far of their sex would expect sexual intercourse much sooner without mentioning pressure from partner. Going too far in a relationship than they themselves would expect it. might have been the consequence of pluralistic ignorance, When asked whether a same-sex peer would expect to conforming to a presumed norm. have sexual intercourse with a person with whom they The present study sought to extend the findings of were emotionally involved but for whom they felt no phys- Cohen and Shotland (1996), which were restricted to ical attraction, both men and women believed the average expectations of sexual intercourse in dating situations, to man and woman would expect sexual intercourse, while the area of hooking up. Further, we wanted to examine only approximately $50\%$ of the participants would expect whether pluralistic ignorance occurred with other sexual sex themselves in such a relationship, and an even smaller behaviors besides sexual intercourse. Based on the percentage reported having had sex in such a relationship. research on pluralistic ignorance and gender differences in Finally, when there was neither emotional nor physical expected sexual behaviors, we hypothesized that both attraction to a partner, few women or men expected that male and female students would see other students as more they would have sexual intercourse with the partner, but comfortable with various hooking-up behaviors than they believed the average man and woman would indeed expect were themselves. Although we expected individuals would sexual intercourse. vary in their own comfort levels with various hooking-up Pluralistic ignorance might have consequences when behaviors, we expected they would believe other students beliefs about the norm condone intimate sexual behaviors. to be uniformly more comfortable engaging in those In the process of hooking up, pluralistic ignorance may behaviors than they were themselves. Furthermore, consislead one or both sexual partners to act according to the per- tent with previous literature, we hypothesized that men ceived norm rather than to their own convictions. There is would be significantly more comfortable than women with a large literature showing that men have more liberal atti- engaging in all hooking-up behaviors. Finally, we hypothtudes towards sexual behaviors and expect sexual inter- esized that due to pluralistic ignorance, both women and course sooner in a relationship than do women (Cohen \& men would overestimate the other gender's comfort with Shotland, 1996; Knox \& Wilson, 1981; Oliver \& Hyde, all hooking-up behaviors. 1993) and that men are much more receptive than are women to offers of sexual intercourse (Clark \& Hatfield, METHOD 1989). Byers and Lewis (1988) found that disagreements among dating partners on the desired level of sexual behavior was almost always in the direction of the male One hundred seventy-five female and 152 male underpartner wanting a higher level of sexual intimacy than that graduate students from a mid-sized residential southeastdesired by the female partner. Thus, it is possible that ern public university that has few nontraditional students many men go into hooking-up situations hoping to engage served as participants for the study. The convenience samin more intimate sexual behaviors than are desired by their ple represented a moderately even distribution of year in female partners. Because men are expected to initiate sex- school: for first years, $n=79$ (41 females, 38 males); for ual activity (DeLamater, 1987; Peplau \& Gordon, 1985), it sophomores, $n=70$ ( 37 females, 33 males); for juniors, $n$ is possible that in the process of hooking up, some women $=84$ (45 females, 39 males); and for seniors, $n=93$ (52 will experience unwanted sexual advances and possibly females, 41 males). A female experimenter approached even sexual assault or rape. students as they entered the university library and asked In their research on hooking up, Kahn et al. (2000) them to volunteer to answer some questions about hooking asked 92 female and 50 male college students if they had up and sexual behaviors as part of her senior honors proever had a "really terrible hooking up experience." Nearly ject. She approached other students in their residence halls. one half of the women $(42\%)$ and the men $(46\%)$ indicat- No differences appeared between these two samples for ed they had had such an experience. A "terrible experi- any of the dependent measures. Analyses concerning plu- Table 2. Ratings of Men and Women's Own Comfort With that most students believe that others are comfortableHooking-Up Behaviors more comfortable than they are themselves-with engaging in a variety of uncommitted sexual behaviors. It is likely that most students believe others engage in these hooking-up behaviors primarily because they enjoy doing so, while they see themselves engaging in these behaviors primarily due to peer pressure. Consistent with other pluralistic ignorance research (e.g., Prentice \& Miller, 1993), this study showed evidence of an illusion of universality. The students failed to appre- We tested the hypothesis that both men and women ciate the extent to which others have different comfort levwould overestimate the other gender's comfort with hook- els with hooking-up behaviors. That is, students wrongly ing-up behaviors using two separate MANOVAS. The assumed that the attitudes of others about hooking up were first examined the men's estimates of the average more homogenous than they actually were. woman's comfort, and the second examined the women's Similar to other researchers (Cohen \& Shotland, 1996; estimates of the average man's comfort. To evaluate the Knox \& Wilson, 1981; Oliver \& Hyde, 1993), we found accuracy of these estimates, the comfort estimates were that men expressed greater comfort than did women with compared with the means of the actual comfort ratings sexually intimate hooking-up behaviors. In the context of of these hooking-up behaviors. Both the men, $F(4,259)$ hooking up, this could lead to serious consequences. Our $=7.82,p<.0001$, partial ${?}^2=.108$, and the women, $F(4$, study suggests that men believe women are more com$259)=16.25,p<.0001$, partial ${?}^2=.201$, significantly fortable engaging in these behaviors than in fact they are, overestimated the other gender's actual comfort levels and also that women believe other women are more comwith various hooking-up behaviors. As shown in Table 3, fortable engaging in these behaviors than they are themthis overestimation occurred for both sexes on each of the selves. As a consequence, some men may pressure four hooking-up behaviors. Women to engage in intimate sexual behaviors, and some DiSCUSSION women may engage in these behaviors or resist only Cohen and Shotland (1996) found evidence of pluralistic weakly because they believe they are unique in feeling ignorance regarding expectations of sexual intercourse on discomfort about engaging in them. In this context it is a date. The current research extended these findings to possible for a woman to experience sexual assault but not other sexual behaviors, and did so in the context of hook- tive behavior with which her peers are comfortable. ing up. We found that both women and men reported less "Most of Us" is a campaign implemented on many colcomfort with their perceived norm of hooking up than they lege campuses in an attempt to reveal pluralistic ignobelieved was experienced by their same-sex peers, with rance about alcohol consumption among college students men showing a greater difference between self- and peer- (DeJong \& Langford, 2002; Haines, 1998). The campaign ratings than women. In addition, both men and women is based on providing students with statistical evidence believed members of the other gender experienced greater about actual student attitudes and behaviors regarding comfort with hooking-up behaviors than members of the alcohol consumption. The goal of the campaign is to show other gender actually reported. Men were less comfortable that pluralistic ignorance exists regarding college stuwith engaging in hooking-up behaviors than women dent's heavy alcohol consumption, and that most students believed them to be, and women were less comfortable prefer to drink less than what is commonly perceived to with engaging in hooking-up behaviors than men believed be the norm. Considering the results of this study, we prothem to be. These findings appear to be due to pluralistic pose that a similar campaign highlighting students' beliefs ignorance: Hooking up has become the norm for hetero- about and comfort levels with sexual behaviors while sexual sexual relationships on this campus, and since the hooking up might help reduce pluralistic ignorance about great majority of students do in fact hook up, it appears hooking up. Table 3. Differences Between Each Gender's Own Comfort Level With Hooking-Up Behaviors and Estimates of the Other Gender's Comfort Levels REFERENCES Katz, E., \& Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by Allport, F. H. (1924). Social psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. people in the flow of mass communication. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Allport, F. H. (1933), Institutional behavior. Chapel Hill: University of Knox, D., \& Wilson, K. (1981). Dating behaviors of university students. Boswell, A., \& Spade, J. (1996). Fraternities and collegiate rape culture. Miller. T. D.. \& McFarland, C. (1987). Pluralistic ignorance: When similarNorth Carolina Press. Gender and Society, 10,133-147. ity is interpreted as dissimilarity. Journal of Personality and Social Byers, S., \& Lewis, K. (1988). Dating couples' disagreements over the desired Psychology, 53, 298-305. level of sexual intimacy. The Joumal of Sex Research, 24, 15-29. O'Gorman, H. J., \& Garry, S. L. (1976). Pluralistic ignorance: A replication Clark, R. D., \& Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sex-_ and extension. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 449-458. ual offers. Joumal of Psychology and Human Sexuality; 2, 39-55. Oliver, M. B., \& Hyde, J. S., (1993), Gender differences in sexuality: A Cohen, L. L., \& Shotland, R. L. (1996). Timing of first sexual intercourse meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 129-151. in a relationship: Expectation, experiences, and perceptions of others. Paul, E. L., McManus, B., \& Hayes, A. (2000). "Hookups": Characteristics The Journal of Sex Research, 33, 291-299. and correlates of college students' spontaneous and anonymous sexual DeLamater, J. (1987). Gender differences in sexual scenarios. In K. Kelley experiences. The Joumal of Sex Research, 37, 76-88. (Ed.), Females, males, and sexuality (pp. 127-139). Albany, NY: SUNY Peplau, L. A., \& Gordon, S. L. (1985). Women and men in love: Gender difPress. ferences in close heterosexual relationships. In V. E. O'Leary, R. K. DeJong, W., \& Langford, L. A. (2002). Typology for campus-based alcohol Unger, \& B. S. Wallston (Eds.), Women, gender, and social psychology (pp. 257-292). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. prevention: Moving toward environmental management strategies. Journal of Studies on Alcohol Supplement, 14, 140-147. Perkins, H. W., \& Berkowitz, A. D. (1986). Perceiving the community Fields, J. M., \& Schuman, H. (1976). Public beliefs and the beliefs of the norms of alcohol use among students: Some research implications for public. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 427-448. campus alcohol education programming. International Journal of the Gerrard, M. (1980). Sex guilt and attitudes towards sex in sexually active Addictions, 2I, 961-976. and inactive female college students. Journal of Personality Assessment, Prentice, D. A., \& Miller, D. T. (1993), Pluralistic ignorance and alcohol use 44,258-261. on campus: Some consequences of misperceiving the social norm. Gerrard, M., \& Gibbons, F. X. (1982), Sexual experience, sex guilt, and Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, $243?256$. sexual moral reasoning. Joumal of Personality, 50, 345-359. Prentice, D. A., \& Miller, D. T. (1996). Pluralistic ignorance and the perHaines, M. (1998). Social norms: A wellness model for health promotion in petuation of social norms by unwitting actors. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), higher education. Wellness Management, 14(4), 1-8. Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 28, pp. 161-209). San James Madison University Office of Institutional Research (2001-2002). Diego, CA: Academic Press. Retrieved February 22, 2003, from http://www.jmu.edw/instresreh/ Simpson, J. A., \& Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences sociostatsum/2001_02/2001-02toc.htm _ sexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Kahn, A. S., Fricker, K., Hoffman, J., Lambert, T., Tripp. M., Childress, K., Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870-883. et al. (2000, August). Hooking up: Dangerous new dating methods? In Snyder, M., Simpson, J. A., \& Gangestad, S. (1986). Personality and sexuA. S. Kahn (Chair), Sex, unwanted sex, and sexual assault on college al relations. Joumal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5I, 181-190. campuses. Symposium conducted at the annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC. Manuscript accepted August 21, 2002