Gender Differences in Heterosexual College Students' Conceptualizations and Indicators of Sexual Consent: Implications for Contemporary Sexual Assault Prevention Education

Abstract

Because sexual assault is often defined in terms of nonconsent, many prevention efforts focus on promoting the clear communication of consent as a mechanism to reduce assault. Yet little research has specifically examined how sexual consent is being conceptualized by heterosexual college students. In this study, 185 Midwestern U.S. college students provided responses to open-ended questions addressing how they define, communicate, and interpret sexual consent and nonconsent. The study aimed to assess how college students define and communicate consent, with particular attention to gender differences in consent. Results indicated no gender differences in defining consent. However, there were significant differences in how men and women indicated their own consent and nonconsent, with women reporting more verbal strategies than men and men reporting more nonverbal strategies than women, and in how they interpreted their partner's consent and nonconsent, with men relying more on nonverbal indicators of consent than women. Such gender differences may help to explain some misunderstandings or misinterpretations of consent or agreement to engage in sexual activity, which could partially contribute to the occurrence of acquaintance rape; thus, a better understanding of consent has important implications for developing sexual assault prevention initiatives.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the Kinsey Institute and the Foundation for the Scientific Study of Sexuality for providing funding for this study.

Notes

Note. There were no significant gender differences on any of the demographic characteristics.

Note. There were no significant differences between women's and men's frequency of endorsing each definition of consent (X ² = 13.01, df = .14).

Note. Overall gender comparisons are based on chi-square tests. Follow-up gender comparisons are based on Fisher's exact tests. Only themes that were endorsed by at least 5 men and at least 5 women were included in the analyses. As such, cells with less than 5 were not included in the chi-square analyses.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

^a For anal sex, only male participants stated they would initiate the behavior and check partners' status.

^b Nonverbal cues for fooling around included flirting, smiling, making eye contact; for oral sex, these included kissing parts of the body, heading toward the genitals; for vaginal-penile sex, these included getting a condom, flirting, and touching; and for anal sex, these included men stating they would direct their penis toward a woman's anus.

^c For verbal communication across all behaviors, participants indicated they would ask their partner or tell their partner they wanted to engage in the specific behavior; for vaginal-penile sex participants also reported asking about a condom.

⁺There were significant differences in consent cues between fooling around and vaginal-penile sex; fooling around and anal sex; and vaginal-penile sex and anal sex.