![Attachment and Sexuality
• Security positive sexual experiences
(Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007)
• Avoidance/anxiety associations
– Sexual strategies (Gillath & Schachner, 2006)
– Sexual goals (Impett, Gordon, & Strachman, 2008)
– Sexual motives (Davis, Shaver, & Vernon, 2004)
• Working models of others [partners]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/sakalukiarrpresentationjul11-140616211302-phpapp01/85/Safe-and-in-secure-Sex-Attachment-and-Attitudes-towards-Condom-Use-and-Non-Use-6-320.jpg)
Safe and (in)secure Sex: Attachment and Attitudes towards Condom Use and Non-Use
- 1. Safe and (in)secure sex: Attachment and attitudes towards condom use and non-use John Sakaluk & Omri Gillath University of Kansas
- 2. Condom Use in the USA • 2010 NSSHB (Reece et al.) – How frequently are condoms used by adults? – Single adults?
- 4. What is the Current State of these Theories? • “Oversimplified” (WHO, 2012) • “Mechanistic” (Feeney & Raphael, 1992) • “Ignoring the interpersonal and affectional nature of sexual relationships” (Ciesla et al., 2004)
- 5. Remedy: Attachment Theory Dismissing/Avoidant Fearful Secure Preoccupied/Anxious High Avoidance Low Avoidance Low Anxiety High Anxiety
- 6. Attachment and Sexuality • Security positive sexual experiences (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) • Avoidance/anxiety associations – Sexual strategies (Gillath & Schachner, 2006) – Sexual goals (Impett, Gordon, & Strachman, 2008) – Sexual motives (Davis, Shaver, & Vernon, 2004) • Working models of others [partners]
- 7. Attachment and Condom Use • Inconsistent findings – Avoidance = condom use; anxiety = non-use (Feeney et al., 1999, 2000) – Anxiety = condom use; security = non-use (Bogaert & Sadava, 2002) – Avoidance and anxiety = condom non-use (Kershaw et al., 2007) • Issues with attitude measurement
- 8. The Present Study • Examine the association between avoidance/anxiety, and evaluations of condom use/non-use
- 9. Participants • 111 young adults—online snowball sample – 84 female – Mdn age = 25 – Sexually experienced – Caucasian (91%) – Engaged, dating, or single – PVI in next 3 months
- 10. Measures • Experience in Close Relationships (Brennan et al., 1998) – Avoidance (α = .93) • “I prefer not to show others how I feel deep down” – Anxiety (α = .88) • “I worry about being rejected and abandoned”
- 11. Measures • Bipolar Attitudes towards Condom Use – Affective (α = .93) • Disgusting-Sexy – Cognitive (α = .88) • Dangerous-Safe • Bipolar Attitudes towards Condom Non-Use – Affective – Cognitive
- 12. Structural Equation Modeling • Mplus ver. 6.11 (Muthén & Muthén, 2011) – Fixed-factor method (Brown, 2006) – High/Low loading parcels • LMS estimation for interaction (Klein & Muthén, 2007) • Robust ML (MLM) for models w/o interaction (Rhemtulla, Brosseau-Liard, & Savalei, in press)
- 13. Results Only interaction pathways are shown for sake of clarity
- 14. Results Significant regressive paths represented by solid lines χ2 = 169.29, p = .002, RMSEA = .06 (90% CI .04-.08), CFI = .96, SRMR = .05
- 15. Limitations and Future Research • Correlational – What about priming attachment (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) • Spoiler: we’ve already done these studies • Lack of male p’s • Future research topics – Negotiating safe-sex – Behavioral “preparedness” (e.g., Lam et al., 2009)
- 16. Thank you! Questions? Email: sakaluk@ku.edu
Editor's Notes
- #3: -condoms are good because they are only contraception that simultaneously prevents unintended pregnancy and STDs -they are also cheap, widely available, hormone free = critical contributors to promoting sexual health -National probability sample study conducted by center -8/last 10 pvi events amongst adults did not include a condom ->5/last 10 amongst single adults
- #4: -reasoned action theories -TPB/Health Belief Model -”cold” analysis of reasons to use condoms
- #6: Theory of emotional bonding in close relationships Infants are helpless—rely on older/wiser/stronger attachment figures When they are caring/responsive = security—feel worthy of love and believe in goodwill of others -otherwise adopt secondary attachment strategies -inconsistent caregiving leads to anxiety—positive other, negative self -unavailable caregiving leads to avo—negative other, positive self -security = low on both dimensions
- #8: -adhoc measures (nothing rigourously developed) -what about affective/cognitive distinction?
- #9: Using a rigorously developed measure of condom use/non-use attitudes
- #12: Sakaluk & Muehlenhard (in prep) Sexiness thought experiment (use/non-use)
- #13: I’ll play it by ear here; if im strapped for time I can skip it
- #16: I can verbally tell them what we’ve found