The Influence of Parental Attachment on Sexual Promiscuity in College Students

Despite popular belief, studies show that parents and their values, beliefs, and attitudes still exert a great influence on their children into late adolescence. The quality of general communication between parent and child contributes to this influence by giving the child a clear sense of their parents' opinions. Keeping the lines of communication open also deepens the bond between the parent and their child by instilling a feeling of acceptance and love. This closeness makes the child more accepting of their parents' ideas and increases the likelihood that the child will put their parents' opinions into practice.

This situation is especially true when considering sexual promiscuity of the child. Several studies have found that the general quality of communication between parent and child leads to lower rates of promiscuity among young adults. This is due in part to that fact that the parent is able to impart their feelings on their child's sex life. It is also due to the overall closeness one feel to their parents. If a child feels secure in the loving relationship they experience with their parents they are less likely to look for a "love" relationship, which often entails sex.

This paper will review the previous literature on the topic of parental attachment and its influence on the sexual promiscuity of adolescents. In addition, this paper will analyze the data collected from a small scale survey of Ursinus College students. Both the literature review and the analysis of data will lead to a better understanding of how closeness to one's parents affects late adolescent promiscuity in college students.LITERATURE REVIEW

It has long been thought that peer group held the greatest influence over an adolescent's sexual behavior. However, one study showed that it is only during mid-adolescence that peers hold a greater influence over children. Early in childhood and in late adolescence parents hold the greatest influence over their children and their subsequent sexual behavior. This is an important fact because it shows that parents influence their children at two critical points in their development: when they are learning behaviors, and when they are acting out sexual behaviors (Fisher 481).

This has important implications for this study. It shows that during college, when late adolescence occurs, parents still exert great influence over how their children act; especially in sexual matters. In fact, studies have shown that relationships between parents and offspring are actually strengthened by the departure of the adolescent from their parents to college. This is because as the adolescent distances themselves from their parents they gain a sense of independence which makes them fell less threatened by closeness and similarity with their parents (Fisher 482).

Closeness to one's parents is very important when it comes to deterring adolescences from sexual promiscuity. That is because having a base to attach one's self to promotes social competence. This base is most commonly and parent and closeness has been show to increase this social competence (Kenny 39).

Several studies have found that adolescents are more likely to curb their sexual activity if they feel connected to their mothers and satisfied with that relationship (Roche et al. 37). Researchers also found that if a child perceived their relationship with their parents to be poor, they often had a lower age at first intercourse (Miller et al. 54). In turn, a lower age at first intercourse seems to aid in attaining a greater number of sexual partners throughout one's lifetime (Miller et al. 59).

Yet another survey found that the lower a subject evaluated their attachment to their parents, the higher the number of sexual partners they had (Walsh 101). Communication also plays a factor. Adolescences who perceive their communication with their parents as poor are more sexually active (Darling and Hicks 233). Happiness in one's parents' home also reflects a lower level of sexual promiscuity in adolescents (Lewis 161).

Also, it has long been argued by clinicians that sexual promiscuity is linked to a history of substandard parental attachment (Walsh 95). This phenomenon occurs more often in women who satisfy their need for love and affection through sex partners because of the lack of a bond with a parent (Walsh 95). It has been called the "acting out" phenomenon (Lewis 161). In fact one study shows that females are at high risk to involve themselves in behaviors such as sexual promiscuity when they come from homes with low parental supervision (Cookston 119).

Those individuals missing closeness with their parents are subject to anxiety and feelings of insecurity. This eventually leads to defects in the way the individual forms and maintains romantic relationships (Walsh 96). This is due to the social support theory which states that social relationships help individuals avoid stress and maintain their health, both physically and mentally (Kenny 39).

Particularly, a lack of closeness hinders one's ability to become monogamous in a romantic relationship. This is because the individual uses their sexual promiscuity as an aid in easing anxiety, insecurity, and depression. These individuals are often known as "love addicts" (Walsh 96). However, sexual unrestrictiveness often deters males from committing to these women and their children (Walsh 103).

Conversely, closeness to one's parents also correlates with higher overall satisfaction in life (Darling and Hicks 232). One of the main indicators of higher satisfaction in one's life is a high satisfaction with one's sexual life (Darling and Hicks 231). This sexual satisfaction may be influenced by the way in which parents talk to their children about sex. For instance, it has been shown that a higher level of satisfaction with one's sex life is correlated to how many positive messages about sex parents send out during adolescence (Darling and Hicks 237).

These messages about sex can be sent out even if the parent does not discuss sex directly with their children (Darling and Hicks 232). Some psychologists blame a parent's inability to communicate with their child about sex on the incest taboo. They claim that this taboo which prohibits sex between a parent and child has pervaded the parent's psyche to the extent to which they can not even verbalize sexual matters (Lewis 167). However, the more topics of sexuality parents discuss with their children, the less adolescents engaged in sex as a young adult (Darling and Hicks 233). Either way, parental sex education has been shown to correlate to lower levels of sexual promiscuity among adolescents across the board (Lewis 165).

The sex life of one's mother seem to have a great effect on adolescents. Children also engage in sexual intercourse at a younger age if their mother has modern views towards sex and does not pair this message with guidance and affection (Darling and Hicks 233). Another investigation uncovered the fact that when a mother undertakes sexual intercourse at a younger age, their children are more likely to follow suit and initiate intercourse younger (Miller et al. 57).

A lack of closeness between a parent and their child can be a result of many things. However, one tell tale sign of a disconnect between a parent and their child is lack of parental supervision. One study argues that an earlier age at first intercourse is correlated to higher amounts of parental supervision (Cookston 110). Another investigation into the topic revealed that greater parental control over dating experiences resulted in less sexual activity in children (Miller et al. 57).

This lack of supervision has a grave impact on the sexual promiscuity of the child. One study showed that lack of supervision allows adolescents the opportunity to engage in sexual activity. The mere presence of this opportunity leads to an increase in these behaviors (Cookston 108). This becomes especially evident when the child is old enough to care for themselves, is consequently left home alone, and in turn becomes sexually active (Cookston 110).

However, parents who exert too much control on their children may influence their child to become sexually active at an earlier age. Studies have shown that children whose parents were extremely controlling of their lives lost their virginity at a younger age (Roche et al. 34). Another study by Lehr et all. discovered that the more rigidly boundaries and limits were enforced, the younger children would initiate sexual intercourse (Lehr et al. 192).

The question of parental supervision and its relationship to an adolescent's sexual promiscuity has important implications when it comes to single parent households. Children from these homes have shown that they initiate sexual intercourse at younger ages than children from two parent homes. This observable fact is largely due in part to the lack of a second supervisor of the child's activities.

Still, it is also due to the fact that when parents who are single date, they set up role models for their children that have permissive attitudes towards sex outside of marriage. (Miller et al. 58). In fact, one of the antecedents of sexual promiscuity in adolescents which have been repeatedly tested and proven is one's parents' marital status (Miller et al. 76). For example, women were found to have lost their virginity at a younger age with the more time they spent in a single parent household (Miller et al. 78). Overall, adolescents from households lacking a father have a higher vulnerability to conduct disorders than children from two parent homes (Cookston 109).

Overall the literature shows that parental involvement in their children's lives increases the likelihood that their children will wait longer to engage in sexual activity. In addition, adolescents who experience high parental involvement have fewer sexual partners and are less sexually promiscuous. Furthermore, sexual promiscuity is affected by many factors which contribute to parental attachment such as the presence of a second parent and how much sex education they receive from their parents.

However the literature failed to examine many of these factors in regards to college age adolescents. It was unclear whether their findings applied across all age groups. Moreover, previous findings have not thoroughly investigate the difference things such as gender, race, and income make when studying sexual promiscuity and how it correlates to parental attachment. METHOD

A survey of twenty two college students was taken in April of 2005. It was performed on the Ursinus College campus and includes only students who attend Ursinus College full-time. A snowball sample was used to obtain responses. However, close attention was given to trying to keep the sample representative of Ursinus College in gender and race. The survey consisted of thirty four questions. When issuing the survey, takers where told that anonymity would be ensured. The survey was broken into three sections: demographic information, questions on parental attachment and involvement, and questions pertaining to the respondents' sexual promiscuity.

Demographic questions were asked to ease the taker into answering personal questions. A question such as "Sexual Orientation" might be more sensitive so it was kept the right along with "Race", after the easier questions such as "Class Year" and "Major" which is widely known characteristics of the respondent. After basic demographic questions the survey was designed to ask increasingly more personal issues. The following sections involved examining the respondents' parental involvement and sexual promiscuity.FINDINGS

Demographic Information

Several demographic questions were asked in order to gain a clearer picture of the background the respondents were coming from. 28.5% of the respondents were Sociology majors. This is due to the bias in the snowball sampling process I mentioned above. Other respondents were International Relations, Psychology, Media, Spanish, Politics, and Biology majors. 33.3% were Seniors, 42.9% were Juniors, and 19% were Sophomores were surveyed with 57.1% being female and 42.9% being male.

76.2% of the respondents were White while 9.5% were Black, 4.8% were Asian, and 9.5% were Bi-racial. 81% of students surveyed were heterosexual, 9.5% were homosexual, and 14.3% were bisexual. Finally, household income was spread with 23.8% reporting below $20,000 a year, 19% reporting $20,000 to $40,000 a year, 23.8% reporting $40,000 to $60,000 a year, 14.3% reporting $60,000 to $80,000 a year, 4.8% claimed $80,000 to $100,000, and 14.3% reporting more than $100,000 a year. This distribution can be seen in the below in Table 1 which contains all demographic information collected.Table 1Respondent

Major

Age

Class Year

Sex

Household Income

(In Thousands)

Sexual Orientation

Race

1

BIOLOGY/SOCIOLOGY22

SENIOR

F

20-40

GAY

BI-RACIAL2

SOCIOLOGY21

JUNIOR

M

40-60

STRAIGHT

WHITE3

PSYCHOLOGY/SPANISH19

SOPHMORE

F

100 +

STRAIGHT

WHITE4

POLITICS20

JUNIOR

M

100 +

STRAIGHT

WHITE5

IR/SPANISH20

SOPHMORE

M

20-40

GAY

WHITE6

MEDIA22

SENIOR

F

100 +

STRAIGHT

ASIAN7

PSYCHOLOGY20

JUNIOR

F

< 20

BISEXUAL

BI-RACIAL8

IR21

SENIOR

M

< 20

STRAIGHT

WHITE9

SOCIOLOGY20

JUNIOR

F

60-80

STRAIGHT

BLACK10

SOCIOLOGY20

SOPHMORE

F

< 20

STRAIGHT

WHITE11

BIOLOGY20

JUNIOR

M

20-40

STRAIGHT

WHITE12

MEDIA21

JUNIOR

M

< 20

STRAIGHT

WHITE13

MEDIA21

SENIOR

F

20-40

STRAIGHT

BLACK14

MEDIA19

FRESHMAN

F

40-60

STRAIGHT

WHITE15

SOCIOLOGY20

JUNIOR

F

< 20

BISEXUAL

WHITE16

POLITICS21

JUNIOR

M

40-60

STRAIGHT

WHITE17

POLITICS21

SENIOR

F

40-60

STRAIGHT

WHITE18

CHEMISTRY21

SENIOR

M

60-80

STRAIGHT

WHITE19

BIOLOGY21

JUNIOR

F

80-100

BISEXUAL

WHITE20

MATH19

SOPHMORE

M

40-60

STRAIGHT

WHITE21

SOCIOLOGY22

SENIOR

F

60-80

STRAIGHT

WHITE

Parental Involvement and Attachment

A few questions were asked of those surveyed to understand the proximity they have to their parents. This was done in an effort to understand how readily available their parents are to them. 57.1% of those surveys said that they lived an hour or less from home, however there were some students who traveled much more than an hour to get home. The average number of siblings was 1.1 with 33.3% of those questioned reporting that they were an only child. 23.8% of those surveyed reported being in a relationship. 76.2% were not in relationships.

66.7% of those surveyed were raised in two parent homes. 23.8% were raised in single-parent homes with 4.8% reporting they lived with other family members and 4.8% reporting they lived in a household in which their parents had separated. All but one respondent reported that both of their parents were alive. 76.2% of these students live at home on breaks from school while 23.8% do not. This information is displayed for each individual surveys below in Table 2.Table 2Respondent

Hour from Campus

Siblings

Relationship

Household Environment

Parents Living

Residence on Breaks

1< 12

YES

TWO PARENT

BOTH

NO2< 13

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES341

YES

SINGLE PARENT

BOTH

NO440

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES510

NO

SINGLE PARENT

BOTH

YES6141

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

NO711

NO

SINGLE PARENT

MOTHER ONLY

YES8NO

SINGLE PARENT

BOTH

NO901

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES1013

NO

OTHER

BOTH

YES11< 11

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES1220

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES13< 13

NO

SEPERATED

BOTH

YES1421

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES1510

NO

SINGLE PARENT

BOTH

NO1610

YES

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES1742

YES

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES1831

YES

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES1900

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES20< 12

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES21< 12

NO

TWO PARENT

BOTH

YES

A few questions pertaining to the students contact with their parents were asked. In addition, a few questions on how they perceive their relationship with their parents were solicited. On average students reported seeing their parents 1.5 times a month. Respondents also accounted for an average of 3.3 hours a day spent with their parents when they are home. They also said they spoke to their parents an average of 2.1 times per week.

47.6% of those surveyed claimed they would call a friend in the event of a non-medical emergency. 52.4% said they would contact their parents. 61.9% of respondents felt that both of their parents acted as friends to them while 19% said they considered neither parent a friend. 14.3% claimed their mother as a friend while only 4.8% claimed their father. 61.9% of individuals surveyed believe they are "close" to their parents. 28.6% say they are "very close" to their parents, 4.8% say they are "not close", and 4.8% say they are not on speaking terms with their parents. Individual answers to each question can be found in Table 3 below.Table 3Respondent

See Parents per Month

Hours with Parents

Talk on Phone

Emergency Call

Consider Parents Friends

Closeness

1241

FRIEND

BOTH

CLOSE2313

FRIEND

BOTH

VERY CLOSE3157

FRIEND

MOTHER

CLOSE4212

FRIEND

BOTH

CLOSE5120

PARENT

NEITHER

CLOSE6044

FRIEND

BOTH

VERY CLOSE7152

PARENT

MOTHER

VERY CLOSE8000

FRIEND

NEITHER

NOT SPEAKING9112

PARENT

MOTHER

CLOSE10131

FRIEND

NEITHER

CLOSE11021

FRIEND

BOTH

VERY CLOSE12231

PARENT

BOTH

VERY CLOSE13113

PARENT

FATHER

CLOSE14174

PARENT

BOTH

VERY CLOSE15543

PARENT

NEITHER

NOT CLOSE16121

FRIEND

BOTH

CLOSE170164

FRIEND

BOTH

CLOSE18121

PARENT

BOTH

CLOSE19223

PARENT

BOTH

CLOSE20430

PARENT

BOTH

CLOSE21211

PARENT

BOTH

CLOSE

Several questions were asked of those surveyed to gage how well they communicate with their parents. 47.6% of individuals reported talking to their parents about money problems infrequently or never. However 52.4% that they talked with their parents about this issue often or always. The communication broke down when 76.2% of those surveyed said they infrequently or never talked to their parents about their relationship problems. This left only 23.8% who talked to their parents about relationship problems often or always.

Only 28.6% of students said they talked to their parents about their sex life. Of these respondents only one respondent said they revealed most of the details of their sex life while half said they only tell their parents a few details. Only 19% of those asked said they were taught to wait till marriage before engaging in sexual intercourse. These responses can be found in Table 4 below.Table 4Respondent

Money Problems

Relationship Problems

Sex Life Communication

Details of Sex Life

Taught to Wait

1

OFTEN

OFTEN

YES

SOME

NO2

ALWAYS

INFREQUENTLY

NO

NONE

NO3

NEVER

NEVER

NO

NONE

NO4

INFREQUENTLY

NEVER

NO

FEW

NO5

OFTEN

INFREQUENTLY

YES

SOME

YES6

ALWAYS

INFREQUENTLY

NO

NONE

YES7

OFTEN

ALWAYS

NO

NONE

YES8

NEVER

NEVER

NO

NONE

NO9

ALWAYS

ALWAYS

YES

MOST

NO10

INFREQUENTLY

NEVER

NO

NONE

NO11

OFTEN

INFREQUENTLY

NO

NONE

YES12

INFREQUENTLY

NEVER

NO

NONE

NO13

OFTEN

OFTEN

YES

FEW

NO14

OFTEN

INFREQUENTLY

NO

NONE

NO15

OFTEN

INFREQUENTLY

YES

FEW

NO16

INFREQUENTLY

NEVER

NO

NONE

NO17

INFREQUENTLY

INFREQUENTLY

NO

NONE

NO18

INFREQUENTLY

NEVER

NO

NONE

NO19

INFREQUENTLY

NEVER

NO

NONE

NO20

OFTEN

INFREQUENTLY

NO

NONE

NO21

INFREQUENTLY

OFTEN

YES

SOME

NO

Sexual Promiscuity

Several questions regarding the respondents' sexual promiscuity and first experience were asked. 76.2% of individuals, or 16 respondents, had engaged in sexual intercourse. This means that 23.8% of those surveyed were virgins. However, only 60% of those who had not had sexual intercourse were waiting for marriage. The rest of the analysis will be based on the responses of the 16 individuals who have had sex.

The average number of sexual partners was 4.9 with 25% of non-virgins have more than ten sexual partners. The majority of non-virgins or 37.5% had only one sex partner. The average age at the first occurrence of sexual intercourse was 17.6. 50% of those who had had intercourse lost their virginity within a relationship. 31.3% lost their virginity in a friendship. Finally, 18.7% of respondents engaged in their first sexual encounter through a one-night stand. The full spread of this information can be found in Table 5 below.Table 5Respondent

Sexual Intercourse

Waiting for Marriage

Partners

Age at First Experience

First Encounter

1

YES

NO415

FRIENDSHIP2

YES

NO117

RELATIONSHIP3

YES

NO117

RELATIONSHIP4

YES

NO119

ONE-NIGHT STAND5

YES

NO1019

ONE-NIGHT STAND6

YES

NO320

ONE-NIGHT STAND7

YES

NO118

FRIENDSHIP8

YES

NO1317

FRIENDSHIP9

YES

NO418

RELATIONSHIP10

NO

NO0N/A

N/A11

NO

YES0N/A

N/A12

NO

NO0N/A

N/A13

NO

YES0N/A

N/A14

NO

YES0N/A

N/A15

YES

NO1115

RELATIONSHIP16

YES

NO219

RELATIONSHIP17

YES

NO318

RELATIONSHIP18

YES

NO220

FRIENDSHIP19

YES

NO117

FRIENDSHIP20

YES

NO116

RELATIONSHIP21

YES

NO2116

RELATIONSHIP

The final questions in the survey addressed whether the student had told their parents about their sexual encounter and how often they have sex within a relationship, within a friendship, and through a one-night stand. 56.3% reported that they had never told their parents that they had had sex. 25% waited less than a year to tell their parents while 6.3% waited less than a month, and 12.5% told their parents immediately after the encounter.

75% of individuals said they engaged in intercourse within a relationship at least once a week. Only 12.5% said that they never had sex within a relationship. 50% of those surveyed said they never had sex within a friendship while 25% reported this behavior occurring only once a year or less. 43.8% of non-virgins claimed that they never have one-night stands. 31.3% said they had one-night stands less than once a year while 25% said this took place more than once a year in their lives. This information can be seen below in Table 6.Table 6

Told Parents When

Sex in a Relationship

Sex in a Friendship

One-night Stands

1

< MONTH

ONCE A WEEK

NEVER

NEVER2

< YEAR

> ONCE A WEEK

> ONCE A MONTH

< ONCE A YEAR3

NEVER

ONCE A WEEK

NEVER

NEVER4

NEVER

NEVER

NEVER

< ONCE A YEAR5

< YEAR

NEVER

ONCE A YEAR

> ONCE A YEAR6

NEVER

> ONCE A WEEK

ONCE A YEAR

> ONCE A YEAR7

NEVER

> ONCE A WEEK

NEVER

NEVER8

NEVER

> ONCE A WEEK

> ONCE A WEEK

< ONCE A YEAR9

IMMEDIATELY

ONCE A MONTH

NEVER

NEVER10

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A11

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A12

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A13

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A14

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A15

IMMEDIATELY

> ONCE A YEAR

> ONCE A YEAR

> ONCE A YEAR16

NEVER

> ONCE A WEEK

NEVER

NEVER17

NEVER

> ONCE A WEEK

NEVER

NEVER18

< YEAR

> ONCE A WEEK

< ONCE A YEAR

< ONCE A YEAR19

NEVER

ONCE A WEEK

< ONCE A YEAR

< ONCE A YEAR20

NEVER

< ONCE A YEAR

NEVER

NEVER21

< YEAR

> ONCE A WEEK

> ONCE A YEAR

> ONCE A YEAR

After the data was compiled four groups, characterized by sexual promiscuity were established: virgins, those with only one sexual partner, those with two to nine sexual partners, and those with ten or more sexual partners. "Virgins" said they were close or very to their parents, lived with their parents on breaks from school, and spent an average of 3.2 hours of one-on-one quality time with their parents a day when they were home. Every "virgin" was heterosexual and none of them were currently in relationships. 60% of them said that in the event of an emergency they would rather call their parents. Only one "virgin" reported not considering their parents friends. 60% said they were waiting till marriage to have sex.

Those who have had sex with only one person comprised 37.5% of the sample. All but one was raised in two parent homes. All said that they were close or very close to their parents. All of them said they lived with their parents on breaks and the average amount of time spent while at home with their parents was 2.4 hours a day; slightly less than the time the "virgins" spent with their parents. None of the individuals with one sexual partner said they didn't consider either of their parents' friends. In addition, they all reported talking to their parents about money problems often but none talked to their parents about their sex lives. Only one respondent was raised to wait till marriage to have sexual intercourse.

The average age these individuals lost their virginity was 17.4. 80% never told their parents about their first sexual encounter. All of these individuals reported that they were not currently in a relationship suggesting that the one person they had had sex with is not a life-long partner. Every one of them said they engaged in one-night stands less than once a year or never.

Those who have had sex with two to nine partners made up 37.5% of the sample. They were all raised in two parent households and 66.7% reported living home on breaks from school, spending an average of 5.8 hours a week one-on-one with their parents. 66.7% said they would call a friend rather than a parent in the event of an emergency and 66.7% said they never or infrequently talk to their parents about their sex lives. 100% reported that they considered their mother a friend, while 83.3% said they thought of their fathers as friends. They all rated their relationship with their parents to be close or very close.

The average age at which these takers reported loosing their virginity was 18.3. They had an average of 3 sex partners. 66.7% said they have never had a one-night stand. The same amount also reported never having sex within a friendship.

Those who have had sex with more than ten people encompassed 25% of the sample. 75% of these respondents came from single parent household. They reported that they never talked to their parents on the phone an average of once a week and only spent an average of 1.75 hours a day with their parents when they did go home on breaks. 75% considered neither of their parents friends and said they never or infrequently talked to their parents about problems with their schoolwork.

They had an average of 13.75 partners and lost their virginity at an average age of 16.75. Only half of respondents reported their first sexual encounter being within a relationship. 75% waited less than a year or never told their parents that they had had sexual intercourse. 75% had one-night stands more than once a year while all of them reported having sex within a friendship once a year or more.CONCLUSIONS

This study had many limitations. It only questioned Ursinus College students who tend to have higher than average incomes and education. This has a major impact on the number of sexual partners an individual may encounter because of the time devotion and social climate of Ursinus College. In addition, the sample was not representative of the population of college students. Race, gender, income, major, ect. were unevenly distributed. Furthermore, sampling should be done randomly in future research to avoid the bias a snowball sample incurs.

The question that asked whether the respondent felt close to their parents seemed to be ineffective. However, the time that lapsed between the child's first occurrences of sexual intercourse seemed to be a good indicator of parental attachment. Also, communication about issues such as money, schoolwork, relationships, and sex life seemed to create a good picture of how close an individual really was to their parents. When the data collected on sexual promiscuity is compared to these variables we can see patterns which support prior research.

From the data collected in this survey we can see that the literature on this subject is supported. The respondents who had engaged in sexual intercourse did report lower levels of communication and connection to their parents. This lack of closeness also increased as the number of sexual partners of the individual increased. Furthermore, respondents on average lost their virginity at younger ages when they were not close to their parents. In addition, we can see evidence that adolescents from single parent household do in fact have a greater number of sexual partners.
Works Cited

Cookston, Jeffrey T. "Parental Supervisions and Family Structure: Effects on Adolescent

Problem Behaviors." Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 32.1/2 (1999): 107-122.

Darling, Carol A., and Mary W. Hicks. "Parental Influence on Adolescent Sexuality:

Implications for Parents as Educators." Journal of Youth and Adolescence 11.3 (1982): 231-245.

Fisher, Terri D. "Family Communication and the Sexual Behavior and Attitudes of

College Students." Journal of Youth and Adolescences 16.5 (1987): 481-495.

Kenny, Maureen E. "College Seniors' Perceptioins of Parental Attachements: The Value

and Stability of Family Ties." Journal of College Student Developement 31 (1990): 39-46.

Lehr, Sally T., Colleen DiIorio, William N. Dudley, and Jenny Ann Lipana. "The

Relationship Between Parent-Adolescent Communication and Safer Sex Behaviors in College Students." Journal of Family Nursing 6.2 (2000): 180-196.

Lewis, Robert A. "Parents and Peers: Socialization Agents in the Coital Behavior of

Young Adults." Journal of Sex Research 9.2 (1963): 156-170.

Miller, Brent C., Maria C. Norton, Thom Curtis, and E. Jeffrey Hill. "The Timing of

Sexual Intercourse Among Adolescents." Youth and Society 29.1 (1997): 54-83.

Roche, Kathlee M., Debra Mekos, Cheryl S. Alexander, and Nan Marie Astone.

"Parenting Influences on Early Sex Initiation Among Adolescents." Journal of

Family Issues 26.1 (2005): 32-54.

Walsh, Anthony. "Parental Attachment, Drug Use, and Facultative Sexual Strategies."

Social Biology 42.1-2 (1995): 95-107.