Coital status and perceptions about sexual abstinence refusal skills.

Full Abstract

PURPOSE:
To compare perceptions and use of sexual refusal skills.

METHODS:
A voluntary, anonymous sample of ninth and tenth grade students (N = 2256) reported their perceptions about and use of sexual refusal skills that had been taught in school. Forty-four percent of the students classified themselves as virgins, 18% reported one sexual partner, and 38% reported multiple sex partners. Coital status groups were compared on measures addressing refusal skills using Chi-square tests.

RESULTS:
Approximately one-third of the students reported using refusal skills either a lot or a little, with virgins more likely to indicate that they used refusal skills a lot. Virgins also were least likely to say that they should have used the refusal skills or that they didn't feel like using refusal skills. Furthermore, virgins were most likely to state that they didn't need to use refusal skills. One partner and multiple partner groups were more likely to indicate that they had not been taught refusal skills.

CONCLUSIONS:
The majority of students did not use the refusal skills taught to them in school; however, all coital status groups used the refusal skills in some capacity. Differences between the virgin and sexually experienced groups present challenges for instructors and curriculum developers. Some of the commonly held assumptions about refusal skill curricula may not be true.

Learn Faster Today Improve your study skills

Author information

Author/s: Nagy, Stephen (S); Watts, Graham F D (GF); Nagy, M Christine (MC);

Affiliation: The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487, USA. Snagy(-atsign-)ches.ua.edu

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Journal Article

Journal: The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine (J Adolesc Health), published in United States. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2002-Jul; vol 31 (issue 1) : pp 79-83

Dates: Created 2002/07/01; Completed 2002/07/26; Revised 2004/11/17;

PMID: 12090968, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 11/6/2008)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

External Links for this article (including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.

MeSH headings (categories)

This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.

This article has not been indexed for related articles as yet, however you can still use the live related article search links below.

See 100+ related articles.