The risks and benefits of technologised sexual practice scale: a quantitative measure of technology facilitated sex and intimacy
Lily Moor A , Joel R. Anderson
A B * , Jennifer Power A , Alexandra James A , Andrea Waling A and Nicole Shackleton A C
A
B
C
Abstract
Technologies such as the Internet, smartphones, and sex toys have demonstrated the capacity to facilitate and enhance sexual and intimate practice by offering new ways to meet sexual partners, maintain and establish intimate connections, and providing access to sexual education and exposure to new ways of engaging in sex. They have also afforded novel risks to safety, privacy, and sexual autonomy. Understanding how people perceive and experience both the risks and benefits of using technology to facilitate sex and intimacy is important to understanding contemporary sexual practice, health, and pleasure. However, research in this space is currently hampered by a lack of quantitative measures to accurately and holistically assess both the risks and benefits in the context of technologised sexual practices.
To facilitate a nuanced quantitative exploration of these concepts, we present the psychometric properties of the newly developed Risks and Benefits of Technologised Sexual Practice Scale.
Using an exploratory (Study 1, n = 445) and confirmatory factor analysis (Study 2, n = 500), this paper presents evidence for a 6-factor scale (Benefits (3): ‘sexual gratification’, ‘connection’, and ‘access to information and culture’; Risks (3): ‘concerns’, ‘worries’, and ‘knowledge of rights and ownership’).
This scale may be used to contribute to research areas including sexual health, sexual behaviour, sexual education, online connection, online safety, and digital literacy with the aim to contribute to a sex- and technology-positive framework for understanding sexual health and pleasure.
Keywords: benefit, intimacy, online dating, risk, sexual practices, technology.
References
1 Cabecinha M, Mercer CH, Gravningen K, Aicken C, Jones KG, Tanton C, et al. Finding sexual partners online: prevalence and associations with sexual behaviour, STI diagnoses and other sexual health outcomes in the British population. Sex Transm Infect 2017; 93(8): 572-82.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
2 Heijman T, Stolte I, Geskus R, Matser A, Davidovich U, Xiridou M, et al. Does online dating lead to higher sexual risk behaviour? A cross-sectional study among MSM in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. BMC Infect Dis 2016; 16(1): 288.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
3 Drouin M, Ross J, Tobin E. Sexting: a new, digital vehicle for intimate partner aggression? Comput Hum Behav 2015; 50: 197-204.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
4 Powell A, Henry N. Technology-facilitated sexual violence victimization: results from an online survey of Australian adults. J Interpers Violence 2016; 34(17): 3637-65.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
5 Lehmiller JJ, Garcia JR, Gesselman AN, Mark KP. Less sex, but more sexual diversity: changes in sexual behavior during the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. Leis Sci 2021; 295-304.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
6 Power J, Moor L, Anderson J, Waling A, James A, Shackleton N, et al. Traversing TechSex: benefits and risks in digitally mediated sex and relationships. Sex Health 2022; 19(1): 55-69.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
7 Albury K. Porn and sex education, porn as sex education. Porn Stud 2014; 1(1–2): 172-81.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
8 McKeown JKL, Parry DC, Penny Light T. “My iPhone Changed My Life”: how digital technologies can enable women’s consumption of online sexually explicit materials. Sex Cult 2018; 22(2): 340-54.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
9 Attwood F, Hakim J, Winch A. Mediated intimacies: bodies, technologies and relationships. J Gend Stud 2017; 26(3): 249-53.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
10 Francisco V. ‘The Internet Is Magic’: technology, intimacy and transnational families. Crit Sociol 2015; 41(1): 173-90.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
11 Chayko M. Techno-social life: the internet, digital technology, and social connectedness. Sociol Compass 2014; 8(7): 976-91.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
12 Hobbs M, Owen S, Gerber L. Liquid love? Dating apps, sex, relationships and the digital transformation of intimacy. J Sociol 2017; 53(2): 271-84.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
13 Gassó AM, Klettke B, Agustina JR, Montiel I. Sexting, mental health, and victimization among adolescents: a literature review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16(13): 2364.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
14 Henry N, Powell A. Beyond the ‘sext’: technology-facilitated sexual violence and harassment against adult women. Austral N Z J Criminol 2015; 48(1): 104-18.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
15 Camilleri C, Perry JT, Sammut S. Compulsive internet pornography use and mental health: a cross-sectional study in a sample of university students in the United States. Front Psychol 2021; 11: 613244.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
16 Duffy A, Dawson DL, das Nair R. Pornography addiction in adults: a systematic review of definitions and reported impact. J Sex Med 2016; 13(5): 760-77.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
17 Albury K, McCosker A, Pym T, Byron P. Dating apps as public health ‘problems’: cautionary tales and vernacular pedagogies in news media. Health Sociol Rev 2020; 29(3): 232-48.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
20 Dobson AS. ‘The Things You Didn’t Do’: gender, slut-shaming, and the need to address sexual harassment in narrative resources responding to sexting and cyberbullying. In: Vandebosch H, Green L, editors. Narratives in research and interventions on cyberbullying among young people. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. pp. 147–60.
21 Angelides S. ‘Technology, hormones, and stupidity’: the affective politics of teenage sexting. Sexualities 2013; 16(5–6): 665-89.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
22 McGlynn C, Rackley E, Houghton R. Beyond ‘Revenge Porn’: the continuum of image-based sexual abuse. Fem Leg Stud 2017; 25(1): 25-46.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
24 Scott AJ, Gavin J. Revenge pornography: the influence of perpetrator-victim sex, observer sex and observer sexting experience on perceptions of seriousness and responsibility. J Crim Psychol 2018; 8(2): 162-72.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
25 Flynn A, Henry N. Image-based sexual abuse: an Australian reflection. Women Crim Justice 2021; 31(4): 313-26.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
26 McGlynn C, Rackley E. Image-based sexual abuse. Oxf J Leg Stud 2017; 37(3): 534-61.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
27 Carrotte ER, Davis AC, Lim MSC. Sexual behaviors and violence in pornography: systematic review and narrative synthesis of video content analyses. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22(5): e16702.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
28 Willis M, Canan SN, Jozkowski KN, Bridges AJ. Sexual consent communication in best-selling pornography films: a content analysis. J Sex Res 2020; 57(1): 52-63.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
29 Maris E, Libert T, Henrichsen JR. Tracking sex: the implications of widespread sexual data leakage and tracking on porn websites. New Media Soc 2020; 22(11): 2018-38.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
31 Liberati N. Teledildonics and new ways of “Being in Touch”: a phenomenological analysis of the use of haptic devices for intimate relations. Sci Eng Ethics 2017; 23(3): 801-23.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
32 Baumeister RF, Leary MR. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull 1995; 117(3): 497-529.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
33 Grieve R, Indian M, Witteveen K, Anne Tolan G, Marrington J. Face-to-face or Facebook: can social connectedness be derived online? Comput Hum Behav 2013; 29(3): 604-9.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
34 Pettigrew J. Text messaging and connectedness within close interpersonal relationships. Marriage Fam Rev 2009; 45(6-8): 697-716.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
35 Skierkowski D, Wood RM. To text or not to text? The importance of text messaging among college-aged youth. Comput Hum Behav 2012; 28(2): 744-56.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
36 Widman L, Nesi J, Choukas-Bradley S, Prinstein MJ. Safe sext: adolescents’ use of technology to communicate about sexual health with dating partners. J Adolesc Health 2014; 54(5): 612-4.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
37 Morris N. The rise of sex education on Instagram. The New Statesman; 2019. Available at https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/2019/11/the-rise-of-sex-education-on-instagram
38 Johnston J. Subscribing to sex edutainment: sex education, online video, and the youtube star. Telev New Media 2017; 18(1): 76-92.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
39 Robards B. ‘Totally straight’: contested sexual identities on social media site reddit. Sexualities 2018; 21(1–2): 49-67.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
40 Nobles A, Dreisbach C, Keim-Malpass J, Barnes L. “Is This an STD? Please Help!”: online information seeking for sexually transmitted diseases on Reddit. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media; 2018. Available at https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/download/15050/14900
41 Evers CW, Albury K, Byron P, Crawford K. Young people, social media, social network sites and sexual health communication in Australia: “This is funny, you should watch it”. Int J Commun 2013; 7: 263-80.
| Google Scholar |
42 Döring NM. The Internet’s impact on sexuality: a critical review of 15years of research. Comput Hum Behav 2009; 25(5): 1089-101.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
43 Ezer P, Kerr L, Fisher CM, Heywood W, Lucke J. Australian students’ experiences of sexuality education at school. Sex Educ 2019; 19(5): 597-613.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
44 Harden KP. A sex-positive framework for research on adolescent sexuality. Perspect Psychol Sci 2014; 9(5): 455-69.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
45 Waling A, Kerr L, Bourne A, Power J, Kehler M. ‘It’s nice to be appreciated’: understanding heterosexual men’s engagements with sexting and sharing Dick Pics. Sexualities 2022; 25: 198-221.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
46 Burkett M. Sex(t) talk: a qualitative analysis of young adults’ negotiations of the pleasures and perils of sexting. Sex Cult 2015; 19(4): 835-63.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
47 Hasinoff AA. Sexting as media production: rethinking social media and sexuality. New Media Soc 2013; 15(4): 449-65.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
48 Setty E. A rights-based approach to youth sexting: challenging risk, shame, and the denial of rights to bodily and sexual expression within youth digital sexual culture. Int J Bullying Prev 2019; 1(4): 298-311.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
49 Wellings K, Johnson AM. Framing sexual health research: adopting a broader perspective. Lancet 2013; 382(9907): 1759-62.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
50 Braun V, Clarke V, Boulton E, Davey L, McEvoy C. The online survey as a qualitative research tool. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2021; 24(6): 641-54.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
51 Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 2023; Guilford Publications.
| Google Scholar |
52 Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equat Model 1999; 6(1): 1-55.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
53 Cronbach L. Essentials of psychological testing. New York: Happer and Row Publishers. 1990;
| Google Scholar |
54 Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Eval 2005; 10(7): 1-9.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
55 Fabrigar LR, Wegener DT, MacCallum RC, Strahan EJ. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psycholog Methods 1999; 4(3): 272-299.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
57 Queirós A, Faria D, Almeida F. Strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative research methods. Eur J Educ Stud 2017; 3: 369-87.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
