Sexual (Double) Standards Revisited: Similarities and Differences in the Societal Evaluation of Male and Female Sexuality

IF 4.3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL

Social Psychological and Personality Science Pub Date : 2024-04-12 DOI:10.1177/19485506241237288

Marcel Weber, Malte Friese

{"title":"Sexual (Double) Standards Revisited: Similarities and Differences in the Societal Evaluation of Male and Female Sexuality","authors":"Marcel Weber, Malte Friese","doi":"10.1177/19485506241237288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Past research has been inconclusive regarding the continued existence of the sexual double standard (SDS)—that is, differential expectations and evaluations of sexual activity for men (rewarded for sexual activity) and women (punished for sexual activity). Here, we present the similarities and differences (S&D) model of sexual standards, which significantly qualifies the traditional SDS by highlighting both similarities and differences between standards applied to women and men. Across two samples (student/community sample, crowdsourcing sample; Ntotal = 342) and seven sexual outcomes, high sexual activity was rated more favorably in men than in women (replicating previous research), and the opposite was true for low sexual activity (extending previous research). Importantly, moderate (not extremely low or high) sexual activity was rated most favorably in both genders, suggesting similar and curvilinear intragender trajectories. These findings illustrate a distinctly different perspective on male and female sexuality and open avenues for new research.","PeriodicalId":21853,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","volume":"56 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychological and Personality Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506241237288","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Past research has been inconclusive regarding the continued existence of the sexual double standard (SDS)—that is, differential expectations and evaluations of sexual activity for men (rewarded for sexual activity) and women (punished for sexual activity). Here, we present the similarities and differences (S&D) model of sexual standards, which significantly qualifies the traditional SDS by highlighting both similarities and differences between standards applied to women and men. Across two samples (student/community sample, crowdsourcing sample; Ntotal = 342) and seven sexual outcomes, high sexual activity was rated more favorably in men than in women (replicating previous research), and the opposite was true for low sexual activity (extending previous research). Importantly, moderate (not extremely low or high) sexual activity was rated most favorably in both genders, suggesting similar and curvilinear intragender trajectories. These findings illustrate a distinctly different perspective on male and female sexuality and open avenues for new research.

查看原文本刊更多论文

重新审视性（双重）标准：社会对男性和女性性行为评价的异同

过去的研究对性双重标准（SDS）的持续存在一直没有定论，即对男性（因性活动而获得奖励）和女性（因性活动而受到惩罚）的性活动有不同的期望和评价。在此，我们提出了性标准的相似与差异（S&D）模型，通过强调适用于女性和男性的标准之间的相似与差异，对传统的 SDS 进行了显著的修正。在两个样本（学生/社区样本、众包样本；总人数 = 342）和七种性结果中，男性对高性活动的评价比女性更高（重复了之前的研究），而对低性活动的评价则相反（扩展了之前的研究）。重要的是，中度（非极低或极高）的性活动在两性中都得到了最有利的评价，这表明两性内部的轨迹相似且呈曲线。这些发现从一个截然不同的角度说明了男性和女性的性行为，并为新的研究开辟了道路。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Social Psychological and Personality Science PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-

CiteScore

12.50

自引率

1.80%

发文量

期刊介绍： Social Psychological and Personality Science (SPPS) is a distinctive journal in the fields of social and personality psychology that focuses on publishing brief empirical study reports, typically limited to 5000 words. The journal's mission is to disseminate research that significantly contributes to the advancement of social psychological and personality science. It welcomes submissions that introduce new theories, present empirical data, propose innovative methods, or offer a combination of these elements. SPPS also places a high value on replication studies, giving them serious consideration regardless of whether they confirm or challenge the original findings, with a particular emphasis on replications of studies initially published in SPPS. The journal is committed to a rapid review and publication process, ensuring that research can swiftly enter the scientific discourse and become an integral part of ongoing academic conversations.