Exploring the Influence of Romantic Relationship Communication on Adolescents’ Self-Efficacy to Ask for Sexual Consent

ABSTRACT

Adolescence represents a crucial period for sexual and romantic relationship development, and acquisition of skills and confidence essential for effective sexual consent communication. However, various barriers may interfere with adolescents’ belief in their ability (i.e., their self-efficacy) to negotiate consent in practice. This study aimed to investigate the state of adolescents’ self-efficacy to ask for consent and explore the influence of romantic relationship communication (a construct comprised of three characteristics: relationship assertiveness skills, positive conflict resolution, and communication awkwardness). Participants were 411 adolescents who had current or past relationships (61% girls, 77% Latine, 79% heterosexual). Participants generally reported above-average levels of self-efficacy to ask for consent (M = 4.14 out of 7, SD = 1.24), with LGBQ+ adolescents exhibiting statistically significantly higher levels of self-efficacy compared to heterosexual adolescents (M = 4.51 vs. 4.09, t = -2.66, p = .008). Self-efficacy to ask for consent was positively individually related to positive conflict resolution and relationship assertiveness skills, and negatively related to communication awkwardness (all ps < .001). In a path model, romantic relationship communication displayed a statistically significant association with adolescents’ self-efficacy to ask for consent, with high positive conflict resolution, low communication awkwardness, and high relationship assertiveness skills being associated with higher self-efficacy to ask for consent. Findings suggest improving adolescents’ romantic communication skills may enhance their self-efficacy to ask for consent, and contribute to increased rates of sexual consent communication. Intervention strategies should target multiple levels of influence to promote positive consent cognitions, behaviors, and cultural norms.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the Family and Youth Services Bureau [90AP2682-05-00].