Example article title:
Communicating Interest in Sex: Verbal and Nonverbal Initiation of Sexual Activity in Young Adults' Romantic Dating Relationships.
Read it in a few seconds to find:
Can you find these in the abstract?
Abstract: "Relatively little is known about the day-to-day initiation of sexual activity between young adults in committed relationships, notably the ways in which young people communicate interest in sexual activity. Sexual script theory (Simon and Gagnon, Society 22:53-60, ) posits that men are traditionally the initiators and women the restrictors of sexual activity early in relationships. However, research suggests that these patterns may be different for individuals in committed relationships. The current study used a diary method to examine verbal/nonverbal and indirect/direct initiation strategies, responses to initiations, and patterns between initiations and responses. Participants included 31 men and 32 women between the ages of 18 and 24 years who were involved in committed heterosexual relationships. Men initiated more frequently than did women and most initiations were nonverbal initiation (91%) rather than verbal (65%). Responses to initiations tended to match the initiators' choice of strategies, suggesting that synchrony plays an important role in initiation patterns. The findings have implications for understanding sexual communication as well as relationship and sexual satisfaction among young adults."
Introduction sample: Despite the large amount of research on sexual behavior during emerging adulthood (Brown, 2008; CDC, 2009; Park, Mulye, Adams, Brindis, & Irwin, 2006), we know surprisingly little about how sexual activity actually comes about for young adults, that is, the day-to-day initiation of sexual activity. Research examining the initiation of sexual behavior has focused primarily on young adults who are dating casually (O’Sullivan &
Byers, 1992), adult cohabitating or married couples (Byers & Heinlein, 1989; Gossman, Julien, Mathieu, & Chartrand, 2003), or else on the introduction of novel sexual behaviors between couples (Humphreys & Newby, 2007) or first intercourse experiences.
Understanding how sexual activity is negotiated between young adults in romantic relationships is important for a number of reasons. First, as sexual activity often involves few words, documenting the behaviors that comprise initiation and response provide insights into the patterns of communication that develop within a couple. Second, emerging adulthood is a period of time when lifetime patterns of behavior are being
formed (Arnett, 2000), and individuals begin to develop stronger,more meaningful relationships with their romantic partners
(Michael, Gagnon, Laumann, & Kolata, 1995).
Lit review sample: Initiation strategies vary according to the type and duration of an intimate sexual relationship. Young adults were asked to judge the likelihood of using different initiation strategies to suggest a novel sexual behavior to a partner (Humphreys & Newby, 2007). Both indirect and direct verbal initiation strategies were rated as more likely and acceptable, and direct nonverbal strategies were rated as less likely and acceptable as relationship duration increased. Increased reliance on verbal initiation strategies may reflect greater openness, comfort, and a norm to be clear about one’s sexual intentions as relationships become more established. For example, young adults who rated their relationship as committed and exclusive were more likely to discuss a range of sexual topics, such as sexual behaviors, preferences, and satisfaction, with their romantic partner.
One of the first studies to examine strategies for the initiation of sexual activity over time between partners in committed relationships found that verbal and nonverbal initiation strategies were actually equally common (Byers& Heinlein, 1989). This finding counters research examining initiation strategies in less committed relationships, which has found that nonverbal strategies tend to be more common than verbal
strategies (Greer & Buss, 1994; Hickman & Muehlenhard, 1999; Mitchell & Wellings, 1998; O’Sullivan & Byers, 1992).
Method sample
Participants were 31 men and 32 women between the ages of 18 and 24 years (M =20.4 years) all of whom were attending an urban college. All participants were involved in a committed heterosexual relationship, and only one partner from a romantic dyad was permitted to participate in the study. The average length of romantic relationships was slightly greater than 2 years (M = 25.7 months, SD = 23.2, range = 1–108 months).The majority(82.5%) of participants were never married and not cohabiting with their partner. Over half (58.7%) of the sample identified their current relationship as their first serious relationship.
Background Questionnaire
Participants provided information about their age, ethnicity, country of origin, student status (full-time or part-time), current relationship status, and length of relationship.
Structured Daily Diaries
Participants monitored their sexual interactions over a 3-week
period using a structured, one-page form designed for this purpose. Participants useda new form each day to indicate whether
they had engaged in sexual activity (yes/no)
For days on which sexual activity did not occur, participants indicated (1) whether sexual activity was initiated (yes/no). If participants reported that sexual activity was initiated, they were asked to provide(2)the reason that sexual activity did not occur that day (open ended), and (3) who initiated sexual activity (self, partner, or both). Participants also indicated (4) whether they considered initiating sexual activity on that day (yes/no), and if so, (5) the reason that they did not initiate (open ended).
Procedure
Students responded to fliers distributed on campus and to class announcements requesting participation in a study of sex, dating, and relationships. Those who contacted the study office were screened to ensure that they were between the ages of 18 and 24 years and currently in a sexually active heterosexual relationship. Appointments were made for students to come to the study office.
In the Results section of a scholarly article, the authors present the core findings of their research without interpretation. This part of the paper tells the story of what the data revealed. It begins by outlining the outcomes that directly address the research questions or hypotheses. Key patterns, trends, and statistically significant results are highlighted, often supported by tables, figures, or charts.
Results example
Sexual Interactions
Over the 3-week period of data collection, participants completed reports for 1,284 of 1,323 person-days (97% response rate) and each participant returned an average of 20.4 daily forms (SD=1.28, range=15–21). There was no significant gender difference in the number of completed forms (Ms=20.4 for both male and female participants, respectively), t(61)\1. Participants reported a total of 378 occasions of sexual activity, and each participant reported an average of six occasions (SD=2.85, range=1–14).There was no significant gender difference in the number of occasions of sexual activity, (Ms=6.25 and 5.74, women and men, respectively), t(61)\1.Frequencies of each type of sexual activity recorded can be found in Table 1.
Here, the authors move beyond the raw data to explore what the results mean in the broader context of the field. Authors often compare their results with previous studies, highlighting consistencies or discrepancies and offering possible explanations. They may also discuss the implications of their findings for theory, practice, or future research.
Discussion sample
This study was designed to provide a closer perspective on the day-to-day interactions that make up, in part, a sexual relationship. What emerged were details regarding verbal and nonverbal forms of communication, ranging from the subtle and coy, to the bold and direct, as well as information regarding days on which individuals initiated sex successfully, unsuccessfully, or considered initiating sex but for some reason chose not to do so.
We found mixed support for sexual script theory, which suggests that men’s and women’s behavior is shaped by traditional gender roles in which men initiate and women restrict sexual activity (Morgan & Zurbriggen, 2007;Simon &Gagnon, 1984, 1987, 2003). In line with our hypothesis, men initiated sexual activity on more occasions did women. This was true for both successful occasions (49% vs. 32%), that is, interactions that led to sexual activity, as well as unsuccessful occasions, that is, interactions that did not lead to sexual activity (58%vs.28%). However, it is important to note that even though female initiation was less frequent than male initiation, it was fairly common. Almost all participants reported at least one occasion of female initiation during the 3-week period. Moreover, on days when sexual activity was not initiated, men and women were equally likely to report considering initiating.