“Are they into each other?” What drinking alcohol and leaving a party together signal to college students about sexual intent

References

• Fedina L, Holmes JL, Backes BL. Campus sexual assault: a systematic review of prevalence research from 2000 to 2015. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2018;19(1):76–93. doi:10.1177/1524838016631129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cantor D, Fisher B, Chibnall SH, et al. Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct. Charlottesville, VA: Westat; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Kaltman S, Krupnick J, Stockton P, Hooper L, Green BL. Psychological impact of types of sexual trauma among college women. J Trauma Stress. 2005;18(5):547–555. doi:10.1002/jts.20063.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mengo C, Black BM. Violence victimization on a college campus: impact on GPA and school dropout. J Coll Stud Res. 2016;18(2):234–248. doi:10.1177/1521025115584750.
   Google Scholar
• Adams-Curtis LE, Forbes GB. College women’s experiences of sexual coercion. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2004;5(2):91–122. doi:10.1177/1524838003262331.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ford JV. Sexual assault on college hookups: the role of alcohol and acquaintances. Sociol Forum. 2017;32(2):381–405. doi:10.1111/socf.12335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton TE, Simons LG. Sexual assault among college students: family of origin hostility, attachment, and the hook-up culture as risk factors. J Child Fam Stud. 2015;24(10):2827–2840. doi:10.1007/s10826-014-0087-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleere C, Lynn SJ. Acknowledged versus unacknowledged sexual assault among college women. J Interpers Violence. 2013;28(12):2593–2611. doi:10.1177/0886260513479033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Testa M, Livingston JA. Alcohol consumption and women’s vulnerability to sexual victimization: can reducing women’s drinking prevent rape? Subst Use Misuse. 2009;44(9–10):1349–1376. doi:10.1080/10826080902961468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbey A, McAuslan P, Ross LT. Sexual assault perpetration by college men: the role of alcohol, misperception of sexual intent, and sexual beliefs and experiences. J Soc Clin Psychol. 1998;17(2):167–195. doi:10.1521/jscp.1998.17.2.167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donat PL, Bondurant B. The role of sexual victimization in women’s perceptions of others’ sexual interest. J Interpers Violence. 2003;18(1):50–64. doi:10.1177/0886260502238540.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farris C, Treat TA, Viken RJ, McFall RM. Sexual coercion and the misperception of sexual intent. Clin Psychol Rev. 2008;28(1):48–66. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2007.03.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kunstman JW, Maner JK. Sexual overperception: power, mating motives, and biases in social judgment. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011;100(2):282–294. doi:10.1037/a0021135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malamuth NM, Brown LM. Sexually aggressive men’s perceptions of women’s communications: testing three explanations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1994;67(4):699–712. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivy DK. College students’ sexual safety: the verbal and nonverbal communication of consent. In: Manning J, Noland CM, eds. Contemporary Studies of Sexuality and Communication: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives: Theory and Application. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt; 2016:405–420.
   Google Scholar
• Jozkowski KN, Humphreys TP. Sexual consent on college campuses: implications for sexual assault prevention education. Health Educ Monograph. 2014;31(2):30–36.
   Google Scholar
• Jozkowski KN, Peterson ZD, Sanders SA, Dennis B, Reece M. Gender differences in heterosexual college students’ conceptualizations and indicators of sexual consent: implications for contemporary sexual assault prevention education. J Sex Res. 2014;51(8):904–916. doi:10.1080/00224499.2013.792326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis M, Hunt M, Wodika A, Rhodes DL, Goodman J, Jozkowski KN. Explicit verbal sexual consent communication: effects of gender, relationship status, and type of sexual behavior. Int J Sexual Health. 2019;31(1):60–70. doi:10.1080/19317611.2019.1565793.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trinh SL. “Enjoy your sexuality, but do it in secret” exploring undergraduate women’s reports of friends’ sexual communications. Psychol Women Q. 2016;40(1):96–107. doi:10.1177/0361684315596914.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbey A. Misperceptions of friendly behavior as sexual interest: a survey of naturally occurring incidents. Psychol Women Q. 1987;11(2):173–194. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1987.tb00782.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bondurant B, Donat PLN. Perceptions of women’s sexual interest and acquaintance rape. Psychol Women Q. 1999;23(4):691–705. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1999.tb00392.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muehlenhard CL, Friedman DE, Thomas CM. Is date rape justifiable?: The effects of dating activity, who initiated, who paid, and men’s attitudes toward women. Psychol Women Q. 1985;9(3):297–310. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1985.tb00882.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jozkowski KN. Why does “Rape” Seem Like a Myth? Contemporary Studies of Sexuality & Communication: Theory and Application. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Hickman SE, Muehlenhard CL. “By the semi‐mystical appearance of a condom”: how young women and men communicate sexual consent in heterosexual situations. J Sex Res. 1999;36(3):258–272. doi:10.1080/00224499909551996.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis M, Jozkowski KN. Sexual precedent’s effect on sexual consent communication. Arch Sex Behav. 2019;48(6):1723–1734. doi:10.1007/s10508-018-1348-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muehlenhard CL, Humphreys TP, Jozkowski KN, Peterson ZD. The complexities of sexual consent among college students: a conceptual and empirical review. J Sex Res. 2016;53(4–5):457–487. doi:10.1080/00224499.2016.1146651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willis M, Blunt-Vinti HD, Jozkowski KN. Associations between internal and external sexual consent in a diverse national sample of women. Pers and Individual Differences. 2019;149:37–45. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2019.05.029.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muehlenhard CL, Peterson ZD. III. Wanting and not wanting sex: the missing discourse of ambivalence. Feminism Psychol. 2005;15(1):15–20. doi:10.1177/0959353505049698.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson ZD, Muehlenhard CL. Conceptualizing the “wantedness” of women’s consensual and nonconsensual sexual experiences: implications for how women label their experiences with rape. J Sex Res. 2007;44(1):72–88. doi:10.1080/00224490709336794.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh K, Honickman S, Valdespino-Hayden Z, Lowe SR. Dual measures of sexual consent: a confirmatory factor analysis of the Internal Consent Scale and External Consent Scale. J Sex Res. 2019;56(6):802–810. doi:10.1080/00224499.2019.1581882.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beres M. Sexual miscommunication? Untangling assumptions about sexual communication between casual sex partners. Cult Health Sex. 2010;12(1):1–14. doi:10.1080/13691050903075226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beres MA. Rethinking the concept of consent for anti-sexual violence activism and education. Fem Psychol. 2014;24(3):373–389. doi:10.1177/0959353514539652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphreys TP. Understanding sexual consent: an empirical investigation of the normative script for young heterosexual adults. In: Cowling M, Reynolds P, eds. Making Sense of Sexual Consent. Burlington, VT: Ashgate; 2004:209–225.
   Google Scholar
• Jozkowski KN, Manning J, Hunt M. Sexual consent in and out of the bedroom: disjunctive views of heterosexual college students. Women’s Stud Commun. 2018;41(2):117–139. doi:10.1080/07491409.2018.1470121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jozkowski KN, Willis M. People perceive transitioning from a social to a private setting as an indicator of sexual consent. Psychol Sexual. 2020;11(4):359–372. doi:10.1080/19419899.2020.1769162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jozkowski KN. Barriers to affirmative consent policies and the need for affirmative sexuality. U of Pac L Rev. 2015;47:741.
   Google Scholar
• Muehlenhard CL, Powch IG, Phelps JL, Giusti LM. Definitions of rape: scientific and political implications. J Soc Issues. 1992;48(1):23–44. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01155.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perilloux C, Easton JA, Buss DM. The misperception of sexual interest. Psychol Sci. 2012;23(2):146–151. doi:10.1177/0956797611424162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farris C, Viken RJ, Treat TA, McFall RM. Heterosocial perceptual organization: application of the choice model to sexual coercion. Psychol Sci. 2006;17(10):869–875. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01796.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farris C, Viken RJ, Treat TA. Perceived association between diagnostic and non-diagnostic cues of women’s sexual interest: general recognition theory predictors of risk for sexual coercion. J Math Psychol. 2010;54(1):137–149. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2008.10.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koukounas E, Letch NM. Psychological correlates of perception of sexual intent in women. J Soc Psychol. 2001;141(4):443–456. doi:10.1080/00224540109600564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treat TA, Church E, Viken RJ. Effects of gender, rape-supportive attitudes, and explicit instruction on perceptions of women’s momentary sexual interest. Psychon Bull Rev. 2017;24(3):979–986. doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1176-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbey A, Melby C. The effects of nonverbal cues on gender differences in perceptions of sexual intent. Sex Roles. 1986;15(5–6):283–298. doi:10.1007/BF00288318.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalski RM. Inferring sexual interest from behavioral cues: effects of gender and sexually relevant attitudes. Sex Roles. 1993;29(1–2):13–36. doi:10.1007/BF00289994.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbey A, Harnish RJ. Perception of sexual intent: the role of gender, alcohol consumption, and rape supportive attitudes. Sex Roles. 1995;32(5–6):297–313. doi:10.1007/BF01544599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanier CA. Rape-accepting attitudes: precursors to or consequences of forced sex. Violence against Women. 2001;7(8):876–885. doi:10.1177/10778010122182802.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abbey A. Sex differences in attributions for friendly behavior: do males misperceive females’ friendliness? J Pers Soc Psychol. 1982;42(5):830–838. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.42.5.830.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shotland RL. A model of the causes of date rape in developing and close relationships. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 1989;10:247–270.
   Google Scholar
• Clark RD, Hatfield E. Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. J Psychol Hum Sex. 1989;2(1):39–55. doi:10.1300/J056v02n01_04.
   Google Scholar
• Tappé M, Bensman L, Hayashi K, Hatfield E. Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers: a new research prototype. Interpersona. 2013;7(2):323–344. doi:10.5964/ijpr.v7i2.121.
   Google Scholar
• Jozkowski KN, Peterson ZD. College students and sexual consent: unique insights. J Sex Res. 2013;50(6):517–523. doi:10.1080/00224499.2012.700739.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corcoran KJ, Thomas LR. The influence of observed alcohol consumption on perceptions of initiation of sexual activity in a college dating situation. J Appl Social Pyschol. 1991;21(6):500–507. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00533.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeSouza ER, Pierce T, Zanelli JC, Hutz C. Perceived sexual intent in the U.S. and Brazil as a function of nature of encounter, subjects’ nationality, and gender. J Sex Res. 1992;29(2):251–260. doi:10.1080/00224499209551645.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George WH, Gournic SJ, McAfee MP. Perceptions of postdrinking female sexuality: effects of gender, beverage choice, and drink payment 1. J Appl Social Pyschol. 1988;18(15):1295–1316. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb01208.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George WH, Lehman GL, Cue KL, Martinez LJ, Lopez PA, Norris J. Postdrinking sexual inferences: evidence for linear rather than curvilinear dosage effects. J Appl Social Pyschol. 1997;27(7):629–648. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb00652.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koukounas E, Djokic J, Miller P. The effect of gender and alcohol placement in the processing of sexual intent. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2015;34(2):194–201. doi:10.1111/dar.12214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vélez‐Blasini CJ, Brandt HJ. Expectancies, setting, age, and beverage choice as predictors of sexual behaviors in hypothetical dating situations. J Appl Social Pyschol. 2000;30(9):1954–1976. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02476.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koukounas E, Dimitriadis S, Miller P. The effects of gender, clothing style, and alcohol consumption on the perception of sexual intent. J Subst Use. 2017;22(2):211–217. doi:10.1080/14659891.2016.1179804.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis KC, Stoner SA, Norris J, George WH, Masters NT. Women’s awareness of and discomfort with sexual assault cues: effects of alcohol consumption and relationship type. Violence against Women. 2009;15(9):1106–1125. doi:10.1177/1077801209340759.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jozkowski KN, Wiersma‐Mosley JD. The Greek system: how gender inequality and class privilege perpetuate rape culture. Fam Relat. 2017;66(1):89–103. doi:10.1111/fare.12229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muehlenhard CL. Misinterpreted dating behaviors and the risk of date rape. J Soc Clin Psychol. 1988;6(1):20–37. doi:10.1521/jscp.1988.6.1.20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A, Buchner A. G* power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175–191. doi:10.3758/BF03193146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerger H, Kley H, Bohner G, Siebler F. The acceptance of modern myths about sexual aggression scale: development and validation in German and English. Aggress Behav. 2007;33(5):422–440. doi:10.1002/ab.20195.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• California Legislature Information. SB-967 Student safety: sexual assault; 2014. SB-967, Chapter 748.
   Google Scholar
• Schur EM. Labeling Women Deviant: Gender, Stigma, and Social Control. New York, NY: Random House; 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Peralta RL. Raced and gendered reactions to the deviance of drunkenness: a sociological analysis of race and gender disparities in alcohol use. Contemp Drug Probl. 2010;37(3):381–415. doi:10.1177/009145091003700303.
   Google Scholar
• Haselton MG. The sexual overperception bias: evidence of a systematic bias in men from a survey of naturally occurring events. J Res Pers. 2003;37(1):34–47. doi:10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00529-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bendixen M. Evidence of systematic bias in sexual over- and underperception of naturally occurring events: a direct replication of Haselton (2003) in a more gender-equal culture. Evol Psychol. 2014;12(5):147470491401200. doi:10.1177/147470491401200510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindgren KP, Parkhill MR, George WH, Hendershot CS. Gender differences in perceptions of sexual intent: a qualitative review and integration. Psychol Women Q. 2008;32(4):423–439. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00456.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maurer T, Robinson D. Effects of attire, alcohol, and gender on perceptions of date rape. Sex Roles. 2008;58(5–6):423–434. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9343-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Byrne R, Hansen S, Rapley M. If a girl doesn’t say ‘no’…”: young men, rape and claims of ‘insufficient knowledge. J Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2008;18(3):168–193. doi:10.1002/casp.922.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Byrne R, Rapley M, Hansen S. ‘You couldn’t say “no”, could you?’: young men’s understandings of sexual refusal. Fem Psychol. 2006;16(2):133–154. doi:10.1177/0959-353506062970.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dworkin SL, O’Sullivan L. Actual versus desired initiation patterns among a sample of college men: tapping disjunctures within traditional male sexual scripts. J Sex Res. 2005;42(2):150–158. doi:10.1080/00224490509552268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vannier SA, O’Sullivan LF. Communicating interest in sex: verbal and nonverbal initiation of sexual activity in young adults’ romantic dating relationships. Arch Sex Behav. 2011;40(5):961–969. doi:10.1007/s10508-010-9663-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byers ES. How well does the traditional sexual script explain sexual coercion? Review of a program of research. J Psychol Human Sex. 1996;8(1–2):7–25. doi:10.1300/J056v08n01_02.
   Google Scholar
• Kim JL, L, Sorsoli C, Collins K, Zylbergold BA, Schooler D, Tolman DL. From sex to sexuality: exposing the heterosexual script on primetime network television. J Sex Res. 2007;44(2):145–157. doi:10.1080/00224490701263660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon W, Gagnon JH. Sexual scripts: origins, influences and changes. Qual Sociol. 2003;26(4):491–497. doi:10.1023/B:QUAS.0000005053.99846.e5.
   Google Scholar
• Manning J, Stern DM. Heteronormative bodies, queer futures: toward a theory of interpersonal panopticism. Inf Commun Soc. 2018;21(2):208–223. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2016.1271901.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar