Abstract
Sexual talk is a type of verbal communication that occurs exclusively during sexual activity and that is specific to the sexual activity itself. Previous research has identified two types of sexual talk: individualistic (i.e., self-focused) and mutualistic (i.e., sharing/partner-focused), which have generally been linked to greater sexual and relationship well-being. Whether sexual talk use varies by gender/sex (i.e., men, women, gender/sex diverse individuals; GSD) or dyad type (i.e., same- vs. mixed-gender/sex) has not been examined. Given initial evidence that the types of sexual talk may contribute differently to sexual and relationship well-being, it is important to identify factors (e.g., gender/sex) that may be associated with the amount of sexual talk used. We examined differences by gender/sex and dyad type in the average sexual talk use among long-term couples (N = 229; 69 same-gender/sex) using retrospective cross-sectional dyadic data. We also examined these differences in the same sample (N = 217) using a 35-day dyadic daily diary study. Retrospectively, but not daily, women reported using more mutualistic talk than men, especially when partnered with a woman. There were no significant gender/sex or dyad type differences in use of individualistic talk retrospectively or daily. Exploratory analyses with the GSD couples suggested that there may be gender/sex and dyad type differences retrospectively and daily, for individualistic and not mutualistic talk; however, these analyses must be interpreted with caution due to the small subsample size of GSD couples.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
De-identified data are available on the OSF page for this Project (https://osf.io/dcnvw/?view_only=447b0753ddbc4809903f73840ecc0f88). This file is password protected and to be used for research purposes only. Please contact the corresponding author for access.
Code Availability
Syntax files for all analyses are available on the OSF page for this Project (https://osf.io/dcnvw/?view_only=447b0753ddbc4809903f73840ecc0f88).
Notes
Participants who did not identify with any of the provided sexual orientation labels were able to select ‘Other’ and provide a written response with their sexual orientation. These responses included: mostly straight (n = 1), homoromantic demisexual (n = 1), homoflexible (n = 1), dyke (n = 2), demisexual (n = 1), and bisexual but designation is irrelevant given the length of the marriage (n = 1).
Data file is password protected and to be used for research purposes only. Please contact the corresponding author for access.
Based on reviewer feedback we re-ran all analyses controlling for relationship satisfaction, relationship duration, and age; the pattern of statistical significance remained the same. The estimated marginal means changed on average 0.24 points after including covariates.
Based on reviewer feedback we also re-ran all analyses controlling for relationship satisfaction, relationship duration, and age; the pattern of statistical significance remained the same. The estimated marginal means changed on average 0.28 points after including covariates.
References
Ackerman, R. A., & Kenny, D. A. (2016). APIMPowerR: An interactive tool for actor-partner interdependence model power analysis. https://robert-a-ackerman.shinyapps.io/APIMPowerRdis/
Babin, E. A. (2012). An examination of predictors of nonverbal and verbal communication of pleasure during sex and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 270–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512454523
Barr, S. M., Budge, S. L., & Adelson, J. L. (2016). Transgender community belongingness as a mediator between strength of transgender identity and well-being. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 63(1), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000127
Bauer, G. R., Braimoh, J., Scheim, A. I., & Dharma, C. (2017). Transgender-inclusive measures of sex/gender for population surveys: Mixed-methods evaluation and recommendations. PLoS ONE, 12(5), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178043
Ben-Shachar, M., Lüdecke, D., & Makowski, D. (2020). effectsize: Estimation of effect size indices and standardized parameters. Journal of Open Source Software, 5(56), 2815. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.02815
Blair, K. L., & Goldberg, A. E. (2016). Ethical research with sexual and gender minorities. In The SAGE encyclopedia of LGBTQ studies. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483371283.n139
Blunt-Vinti, H., Jozkowski, K. N., & Hunt, M. (2019). Show or tell? Does verbal and/or nonverbal sexual communication matter for sexual satisfaction? Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 45(3), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2018.1501446
Brogan, S. M., Fiore, A., & Wrench, J. S. (2009). Understanding the psychometric properties of the sexual communication style scale. Human Communication, 12(4), 421–445.
Byers, E. S., & Demmons, S. (1999). Sexual satisfaction and sexual self-disclosure within dating relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 36(2), 180–189.
Chatard, A., Guimond, S., & Selimbegovic, L. (2007). “How good are you in math?” The effect of gender stereotypes on students’ recollection of their school marks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(6), 1017–1024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.10.024
Coffelt, T. A., & Hess, J. A. (2014). Sexual disclosures: Connections to relational satisfaction and closeness. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 40(6), 577–591. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2013.811449
Courtice, E. L., & Shaughnessy, K. (2018). The partner context of sexual minority women’s and men’s cybersex experiences: Implications for the traditional sexual script. Sex Roles, 78, 272–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0792-5
Eaton, A. A., & Rose, S. (2011). Has dating become more egalitarian? A 35 year review using sex roles. Sex Roles, 64(11–12), 843–862. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9957-9
Fisher, T. (2013). Gender roles and pressure to be truthful: The bogus pipeline modifies gender differences in sexual but not non-sexual behavior. Sex Roles, 68(7–8), 401–414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0266-3
Flores, A. R., Herman, J. L., Gates, G. J., & Brown, T. N. T. (2016). How many adults identify as transgender in the United States. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Trans-Adults-US-Aug-2016.pdf
Fraser, G. (2018). Evaluating inclusive gender identity measures for use in quantitative psychological research. Psychology and Sexuality, 9(4), 343–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2018.1497693
Fraser, G., Bulbulia, J., Greaves, L. M., Wilson, M. S., & Sibley, C. G. (2020). Coding responses to an open-ended gender measure in a New Zealand national sample. Journal of Sex Research, 57(8), 979–986. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2019.1687640
Gabb, J. (2019). The relationship work of sexual intimacy in long-term heterosexual and LGBTQ partnerships. Advance Online Publication. Current Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392119826619
Gagnon, J. H. (1990). The explicit and implicit use of scripting perspective in sex research. Annual Review of Sex Research, 1(1), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/10532528.1990.10559854
Gauvin, S., & Pukall, C. F. (2018). Sexual problems and sexual scripts: Overview and future directions for bisexual-identified individuals. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 33(1–2), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2018.1426851
Graham, C. A., Catania, J. A., Brand, R., Duong, T., & Canchola, J. A. (2003). Recalling sexual behavior: A methodological analysis of memory recall bias via interview using the diary as the gold standard. Journal of Sex Research, 40(4), 325–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490209552198
Greene, K., & Faulkner, S. L. (2005). Gender, belief in the sexual double standard, and sexual talk in heterosexual dating relationships. Sex Roles, 53(3–4), 239–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-5682-6
Holmberg, D., & Blair, K. L. (2009). Sexual desire, communication, satisfaction, and preferences of men and women in same-sex versus mixed-sex relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 46(1), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490802645294
Jacobson, R., & Joel, D. (2019). Self-reported gender identity and sexuality in an online sample of cisgender, transgender, and gender-diverse individuals: An exploratory study. Journal of Sex Research, 56(2), 249–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2018.1523998
Jodouin, J.-F., Rosen, N. O., Merwin, K. E., & Bergeron, S. (2021). Discrepancy in dyadic sexual desire predicts sexual distress over time in a community sample of committed couples: A daily diary and longitudinal study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 50, 3637–3649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-01967-0
James, S. E., Herman, J. L., Rankin, S., Keisling, M., Mottet, L., & Anafi, M. (2016). The report of the 2015 U.S. transgender survey. https://www.transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/USTS-Full-Report-FINAL.PDF
Jonason, P. K., Betteridge, G. L., & Kneebone, I. I. (2016). An examination of the nature of erotic talk. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(1), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0585-2
Jozkowski, K. N., & Peterson, Z. D. (2013). College students and sexual consent: Unique insights. Journal of Sex Research, 50(6), 517–523. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.700739
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford.
Klein, V., Imhoff, R., Reininger, K. M., & Briken, P. (2019). Perceptions of sexual script deviation in women and men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(2), 631–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1280-x
Klinkenberg, D., & Rose, S. (1994). Dating scripts of gay men and lesbians. Journal of Homosexuality, 26(4), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v26n04_02
Kosenko, K. A. (2010). Meanings and dilemmas of sexual safety and communication for transgender individuals. Health Communication, 25(2), 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410230903544928
Kosenko, K. A. (2011). The safer sex communication of transgender adults: Processes and Problems. Journal of Communication, 61(3), 467–495. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01556.x
Kuper, L. E., Nussbaum, R., & Mustanski, B. (2012). Exploring the diversity of gender and sexual orientation identities in an online sample of transgender individuals. Journal of Sex Research, 49(2–3), 244–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2011.596954
Kuper, L. E., Wright, L., & Mustanski, B. (2018). Gender identity development among transgender and gender nonconforming emerging adults: An intersectional approach. International Journal of Transgenderism, 19(4), 436–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2018.1443869
Lyons, S., Duxbury, L., & Higgins, C. (2005). Are gender differences in basic human values a generational phenomenon? Sex Roles, 53(9/10), 763–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-7740-4
MacNeil, S., & Byers, E. S. (2005). Dyadic assessment of sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction in heterosexual dating couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(2), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407505050942
MacNeil, S., & Byers, E. S. (2009). Role of sexual self-disclosure in the sexual satisfaction of long-term heterosexual couples. Journal of Sex Research, 46(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490802398399
Mallory, A. B., Stanton, A. M., & Handy, A. B. (2019). Couples’ sexual communication and dimensions of sexual function: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sex Research, 56(7), 882–898. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2019.1568375
Masters, N. T., Casey, E., Wells, E. A., & Morrison, D. M. (2013). Sexual scripts among young heterosexually active men and women: Continuity and change. Journal of Sex Research, 50(5), 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.661102
McCall, K. M., Rellini, A. H., Seal, B. N., & Meston, C. M. (2007). Sex differences in memory for sexually-relevant information. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(4), 508–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9106-7
Mertens, D. M., & Hesse-Biber, S. (2012). Triangulation and mixed methods research: Provocative positions. [Special issue]. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689812437100
Merwin, K. E., & Rosen, N. O. (2019). Perceived partner responsiveness and sexual talk dataset (Version 1). OSF. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TJ76W
Merwin, K. E., & Rosen, N. O. (2020). Perceived partner responsiveness moderates the associations between sexual talk and sexual and relationship well-being in individuals in long-term relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 57(3), 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2019.1610151
Mikalson, P., Pardo, S., & Green, J. (2013). First, do no harm: Reducing disparities for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning populations in California. https://lhc.ca.gov/sites/lhc.ca.gov/files/Reports/225/ReportsSubmitted/CRDPLGBTQReport.pdf
Okada, K. (2017). Negative estimate of variance-accounted-for effect size: How often it is obtained, and what happens if it is treated as zero. Behavior Research Methods, 49(3), 979–987.
Passuth Lynott, P., & McCandless, N. J. (2000). The impact of age vs. life experience on the gender role attitudes of women in different cohorts. Journal of Women & Aging, 12(1–2), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1300/J074v12n01_02
Pazmany, E., Bergeron, S., Verhaeghe, J., Van Oudenhove, L., & Enzlin, P. (2015). Dyadic sexual communication in pre-menopausal women with self-reported dyspareunia and their partners: Associations with sexual function, sexual distress and dyadic adjustment. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 12(2), 516–528. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12787
Revelle, W. (2020). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. Northwestern University.
Richards, C., Bouman, W. P., Seal, L., Barker, M. J., Nieder, T. O., & T’Sjoen, G. (2016). Non-binary or genderqueer genders. International Review of Psychiatry, 28(1), 95–102. https://doi.org/10.3109/09540261.2015.1106446
Rubinsky, V., & Hosek, A. (2020). “We have to get over it”: Navigating sex talk through the lens of sexual communication comfort and sexual self-disclosure in LGBTQ intimate partnerships. Sexuality & Culture, 24(3), 613–629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-019-09652-0
Shen Johfre, S., & Saperstein, A. (2019). State of the Union 2019: Racial and gender identities. Stanford Center on Poverty & Inequality.
Shibley Hyde, J., Bigler, R. S., Joel, D., Tate, C. C., & van Anders, S. M. (2019). The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist, 74(2), 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307
Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1986). Sexual scripts: Permanence and change. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 15(2), 97–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01542219
Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (2003). Sexual scripts: Origins, influences and changes. Qualitative Sociology, 26(4), 491–497. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:QUAS.0000005053.99846.e5
Streiner, D. L. (2002). The case of the missing data: Methods of dealing with dropouts and other research vagaries. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 47(1), 70–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370204700111
Tate, C. C., Youssef, C. P., & Bettergarcia, J. N. (2014). Integrating the study of transgender spectrum and cisgender experiences of self-categorization from a personality perspective. Review of General Psychology, 18(4), 302–312. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000019
Thomas, K. A., & Clifford, S. (2017). Validity and mechanical turk: An assessment of exclusion methods and interactive experiments. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 184–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.038
Thurmond, V. A. (2001). The point of triangulation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(3), 253–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2001.00253.x
Vaillancourt-Morel, M.-P., Rosen, N. O., Štulhofer, A., Bosisio, M., & Bergeron, S. (2021). Pornography use and sexual health among same-sex and mixed-sex couples: An event-level dyadic analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 56, 667–681. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01839-z
Vaillancourt-Morel, M.-P., Rosen, N. O., Willoughby, B. J., Leonhardt, N. D., & Bergeron, S. (2020). Pornography use and romantic relationships: A dyadic daily diary study. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 37(10-11), 2802–2821. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520940048
van Anders, S. M. (2015). Beyond sexual orientation: Integrating gender/sex and diverse sexualities via sexual configurations theory. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(5), 1177–1213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0490-8
Vannier, S. A., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2011). Communicating interest in sex: Verbal and nonverbal initiation of sexual activity in young adults’ romantic dating relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 961–969. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9663-7
West, T. V., Popp, D., & Kenny, D. A. (2008). A guide for the estimation of gender and sexual orientation effects in dyadic data: An actor-partner interdependence model approach. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(3), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207311199
Wiederman, M. W. (2005). The gendered nature of sexual scripts. Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 13(4), 496–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/1066480705278729
Williamson, K., Burstein, F., & McKemmish, S. (2002). The two major traditions of research. In K. Williamson (Ed.), Research methods for students, academics, and professionals: Information management and systems (2nd ed., pp. 25–47). Chandos. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-876938-42-0.50009-5
Willis, M., Hunt, M., Wodika, A., Rhodes, D. L., Goodman, J., & Jozkowski, K. N. (2019). Explicit verbal sexual consent communication: Effects of gender, relationship status, and type of sexual behavior. International Journal of Sexual Health, 31(1), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/19317611.2019.1565793
Willis, M., & Jozkowski, K. N. (2018). Barriers to the success of affirmative consent initiatives: An application of the social ecological model. American Journal of Sexuality Education: A Special Issue of Health Teen Network, 13(3), 324–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2018.1443300
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Mylène Desrosiers, Myriam Bosisio, Gillian Boudreau, as well as the couples who participated in this research project.
Funding
This research was supported by a Joseph-Armand Bombardier—Canada Graduate Scholarship from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) (Grant No. 767-2017-1826) awarded to the first author, a fellowship from the Fonds de Recherche du Québec—Société et Culture (FRQSC) awarded to the third author, and by an operating Grant from the SSHRC awarded to the second and last authors (Grant No. 435-2016-0668).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
KEM, SB, J-FJ, and NOR author contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by KEM and J-FJ. Data analyses were conducted by KEM and SPM. The first draft of the manuscript was written by KEM and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest or competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Ethics Approval
The materials and methodology for this study were approved by the Human Research Ethics committees of Dalhousie University (Ethics approval number: 2017-4291) and Université de Montréal (Ethics approval number: CERAS-2016-17-232-D).
Consent to Participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Merwin, K.E., Bergeron, S., Jodouin, JF. et al. Few Differences in Sexual Talk by Gender/Sex and Dyad Type: A Retrospective and Daily Diary Study with Couples. Arch Sex Behav 51, 3715–3733 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02363-y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02363-y