Contacts Between Sexting Regularity and you may Lead Details
Descriptive Statistics and you will Correlations
Variable score more than ± step three.29 was in fact considered to be outliers, causing removing about three people, making an example regarding 244. Skewness and kurtosis statistics was indeed looked at, showing that most variables was generally speaking distributed. Detailed statistics and correlations to the head studies variables are supplied when you look at the Desk step 1. Cohen’s (1988) requirements for Pearson’s relationship coefficient impression proportions were utilized to determine the effectiveness of the effects (we.elizabeth., quick, roentgen = .10; typical, r = .30; higher, roentgen = .50).
Engagement when https://datingmentor.org/tr/transgenderdate-inceleme/ you look at the Sexting Behavior
We discovered that 77.6% of the expose sample got delivered otherwise gotten good sext when you look at the the lifetime, while twenty-two.4% had never sexted. Then, volume studies revealed that 74.8% out-of users showed that they had sexted an intimate partner for the the past half a year, while 43.1% had sexted some body aside from an intimate lover in identical period. Get a hold of Dining tables 1 and you may 2 to possess frequency out-of response to for every sexting behavior items getting close spouse sexting and you can sexting others.
Class
Independent-products t examination were utilized to examine intercourse differences for everyone chief research variables. People (Yards = 0.ninety, SD = 0.70) obtained notably higher than female (Yards = 0.48, SD = 0.65) to your SE sexting, t(87) = ? 2.91, p = .005, and you will RP sexting t(step 152) = ? step 1.99, p = .049; Meters = 0.98, SD = 0.87 and Yards = 0.75, SD = 0.57, correspondingly. There have been no high variations in sexting conclusion predicated on sexual direction otherwise relationships status. Therefore, these details weren’t utilized in subsequent analyses. Individuals who had sexted in the past (Meters = step 3.03, SD = .55) demonstrated rather higher sexual satisfaction as opposed to those who had never ever sexted (Yards = dos.73, SD = .63), t(24step three) = step three.21, p = .002. Ages is negatively correlated that have RP sexting (r (151) = ? .26, p Table 3 Descriptive statistics and you can Pearson’s correlations one of SE sexting, social–cognitive items, and consequences variables (n = 91)
SE sexting presented a critical bad connection with identified risk of getting into high-risk intimate decisions and you may a serious confident connection that have detected advantageous asset of entering high-risk sexual choices. But not, SE sexting try unrelated to help you sexual pleasure. RP sexting, on the other hand, are not related so you can sexual joy, relationship satisfaction, and risk/advantageous asset of engaging in risky sexual decisions.
Regression Analyses
Preliminary analyses have been achieved making sure that the content performed maybe not violate the presumptions out-of multicollinearity, independent errors, nonzero variances, normality, homoscedasticity, and you can linearity. Therefore, the info have been deemed right for regression investigation. Because required by the Cohen (1988) to own regression study, a direct effect measurements of R 2 = .02 try reported to be a tiny impression, R dos = .15 are felt a moderate perception, and you can R 2 = .thirty-five is deemed becoming a big impact.
Social–Intellectual Parameters since the Predictors of somebody Else Sexting
To start with, hierarchical several regression is actually carried out to decide if personal–intellectual details which were rather from the SE sexting regarding the univariate studies (significance, reinforcement, and you may differential organization-peer) predict the fresh frequency out of SE sexting, controlling for gender (find Dining table 5). From the Step one, intercourse told me a significant proportion of your difference into the SE sexting (p = .038). Through to incorporating brand new social–intellectual variables a lot more than, you will find a critical boost in Roentgen 2 (p Dining table 5 Hierarchical several regression data anticipating SE sexting volume that have SE definitions, SE reinforcement, and you can SE differential association (peers) (n = 91)
Social–Cognitive Variables since Predictors out of Romantic Spouse Sexting
A further regression model try conducted to understand more about the latest propensity to possess social–intellectual variables which were notably of the RP sexting regarding the univariate research (meanings, reinforcement, simulation (friends), and you will simulation (famous)) to predict regularity out of RP sexting, controlling to own decades and you will intercourse (come across Desk 6). Merely professionals which said in a partnership was indeed integrated in this study. In the 1, many years and sex taken into account a significant proportion of one’s difference (p = .002). Incorporating the brand new personal–cognitive details into the regression formula led to a life threatening improve for the R dos (p Table 6 Hierarchical numerous regression studies anticipating RP sexting volume having RP definitions, RP reinforcement, simulation (friends), and replica (famous), handling having decades (n = 153)
この記事へのコメントはありません。