ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2022
An Empirical Examination of Hookup Definitions Across the Literature, 2000-2019.
Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- "It Is A Purposefully Ambiguous Term": Examining Emerging Adults' Definitions of Hooking Up and How They Vary by Sex/Gender and Educational Background.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Article
- How LGBTQ+ Young Adults Navigate Personal Risk in App-Based Hookups: The Safety Spectrum Theory.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Article
- The Role of Feminism and Gender in Endorsement of Hookup Culture among Emerging Adults.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Article
- Condom use across casual and committed relationships: The role of relationship characteristics.PloS one · 2024Article
- Multiple Casual Sex Scripts: Shared Beliefs about Behavior among Portuguese Emerging Adults.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There has been a longstanding debate about what constitutes hooking up. To date, little research has analyzed how hookups are being defined such that the field can foster consistency across definitions. To inform this debate, we conducted a content analysis of 122 empirical articles across disciplines (e.g., human sexuality, public health) from 2000 to 2019 by systematically coding conceptual definitions of hooking up contained in the articles using five commonly discussed dimensions of hooking up (behaviors, nature of partner relationship, span of hookup interaction, frequency of hookup behavior, and level of romantic commitment expectation). Unspecified sexual intercourse (52.5%) was the most frequently identified behavior in definitions. The majority of hookup definitions did not mention the nature of partner relationship (e.g., acquaintance, friend), the duration of the hookup interaction, or the frequency of hookup behavior. Additionally, most conceptual definitions (82.0%) mentioned that the relationship was uncommitted, but only half discussed the level of romantic commitment expectations. Overall, most conceptual definitions relied on behaviors rather than all five dimensions, resulting in broad and non-descript definitions of hookups. We suggest that future hookup definitions explicitly reference behaviors, nature of partner relationship, span of hookup interaction, frequency of hookup behavior, and level of romantic commitment expectation to provide clarity, comparability, and validity across future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.