5‘ <3 577 (I 0 73 III II III IIII II III III III I I IIIII 3 129 3 00604 7728 r..— LEE m: Wchlgon State University This is to certify that the dissertation entitled The Adolescent's Decision To Engage in Sexual Behavior presented by Mary K. Roberson has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for PhoDo degree in Psychology ’n/ILflK///’ 3/ Major professor / Date 57/5/ff / / MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0— 12771 PLACE IN RETURN BOX to r TO AVOID FlNES return on or «nave this checkout from your record. More dd. duo. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE I "JUL27Iy~_ " 217 ______—.—-—-—- _____,__..——-—-—— __‘— I / _____———-—- 4 MSU ls An Affirmative AdionlEqual Opportunity lmtltution M. ?\Ob€rSOI\ u..." It . . A . l '1' ‘ 'mE ADOLESCEN-r's DECISION TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL BEHAVIOR by be;:x I Mary Kathleen Roberson A DISSERTATION ’> N .. Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY C .‘r - . Isa ., Department of Psychology _ .__ H, , I988 ‘- ‘ "I" 2" "‘2, .».. . ' Canny gags-II . . . I _ '. . ' ;. p'-_éontattnu—»1cr‘ C" .bhz z zflhy‘tg‘b.‘\tf.fietlng"!r ,paif A ‘ ,‘ Jeanv¢iaad, [-T‘Jitih 'wci .et: hrirr1;2 on: in‘ "$12.“ 2.x; “'5 vm-II - ‘_ 5m Iflfij ABSTRACT THE ADOLESCENT'S DECISION TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL BEHAVIOR By Mary Kathleen Roberson Because recent research on teenage sexuality has been directed toward the important social problems of pregnancy and contraception, the focus has been primarily on intercourse behavior. The goal of this research was to enhance teenagers' sexual development by elaborating experiential aspects of adolescent sexuality, particularly the cognitive process involved in a decision to engage or not to engage in sexual behavior. This study elaborated a rich description of teenagers' sexual decision making experiences. The sample included 46 randomly selected male and female high school students and 14 group home residents. The sample was drawn to overrepresent minorities to ensure participation across social classes. Quantitative measures used were a short inter- view to collect demographic information, a research short form of the WISC-R or WATS-R, and two semi-structured interviews based on the Gilligan, Langdale, Lyons, and Murphy (1982) study to identify cogni- tive moral orientation--justice/rights and responsibility/caring--in reasoning. As hypothesized, teenagers used both orientations in A making sexual decisions, and the moral orientation used in a sponta- neous dilemma was significantly related to the moral orientation used in a sexual dilemma. However, the hypothesis that females would be more responsibility/caring oriented than boys was not supported. Qualitative thematic analysis of teenagers' interviews revealed marked gender differences. The seven theoretical themes were: (I) differentiation of self as separate from self as connected to partner (girls); (2) developmental milestone for self in relation to partner (girls) and developmental milestone for self as separate (boys) (3) relinquishing of self as separate to self as connected to partner (girls say 32, boys say yes); (4) identification with others and internalization of values (boys and girls); (5) fear of premature foreclosure of self development (boys); (6) maintaining the integrity of self boundaries (boys and girls) and (7) predominance of self as separate over possible repercussions in relationship with partner (boys). Implications for research methodology, identity development, personality theory, sexual decision making, and future research are discussed. Copyright by MARY KATHLEEN ROBERSON I988 Copyright by MARY KATHLEEN ROBERSON [C are no man; pr ~ ' Slocum 09.12 I. tins praiely. v A tflticth prcn'i: .1 ,. nun d aerononv an; 5.; I‘v.oaelruo. th or. - ‘ Is 02 an “remain -uI’OM€n arm} *arv [- I; . *‘OI ‘htif '(:'-'.'l! on ’ "'C Warp for I». aura-“I.“ Y’I' WOII, Broking}. é.’ \‘ V I 4“ ‘~\ ~ I ‘ "I \4‘. x to my family .‘MCKCh CI’OUD, DIIE- 's‘tdfl'. -._ .rJ'. " "~.‘ nolo ical (esra- r pron A; I’!"°.e g t _ o ~1qu grows also gum the runner. plturIb I {ensuring menu: at in“, also; sun .14 {h but sot-i. for their cooper-(loo la. “thin“ mmw. ' an». Plan, Eve lei-it Vance. m Italics, cad ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are so many people to acknowledge! I am grateful for the contributions of all those who have been a part of my life during this dissertation process. John Paul McKinney, as my advisor and Chairperson, provided guidance, support and protection in a way that encouraged autonomy and also kept me from going too far afield. Elaine Donelson, who was with me through all my research endeavors, reminded me of my strengths numerous times when I lost sight of them. Ellen Strommen and Mary Ann McGrath rounded out my committee; I thank them for their efforts on my behalf. I would also like to thank Floyd Westendorp for his encouragement and the Michigan State University Department of Psychiatry for providing financial support for this project. I have been part of several research groups whose members pro- vided support, knowledge, challenge, friendship and growth: MSU Women's Research Group, Dissertation Support Group, and Howard Pollio's phenomenological research group at the University of Tennessee. These groups also made the research process an inter- personal one, ensuring moments of levity along with all the hard work. I would also like to thank the staff of Lansing School District and Wedgwood Acres for their cooperation in participant recruitment. Charlene Eickholt, Renee Flam, Eve Marie Versage, Brenda Nolish, and vi A Betty Rathfon were exceptional students who helped by hanging in until coding was completed, seemingly against all odds. On a more personal level, I acknowledge all the healers who helped me keep my physical, mental and spiritual being healthy. In addition, I thank all the great role models who helped me to internalize a positive sense of myself as researcher and professional. But most of all, I thank my family. My sister, Laura, helped both with computer work and also with timely diversions. Lynne was an excellent editor who managed not only to clean up my English but also kept saying, "Mary, you can do it." Last, my parents provided sup- port, both physical and emotional, without which I would have surely arrived at this moment much later. They gave me what I needed both to pursue my dream and to make it come true. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gender Identity Development . . Gender Issues in Cognitive Moral Development Gender and Sexual Decision Making . . . Gender and Adolescent Sexuality in Delinquents . . Summary and Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 3 METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recruitment Procedures for Minimizing Potential Risk and Informed Consent . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Collection . . . . . Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transcription . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Quantitative Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Training in the Lyons and Gilligan (1984) Research Method . . . . . . . . Coding Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Qualitative Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I Background on Qualitative Research Methodology . Qualitative Data Analysis . . . . . . . . viii u -—.- r‘ r 20 25 28 3] 31 39 4] 42 44 44 44 47 53 53 53 62 CHAPTER 4 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, THE INTERVIEW TERRAIN, AND QUANTITATIVE RESULTS . Sample Description Interview Terrain . The Quantitative Results CHAPTER 5 THE QUALITATIVE RESULTS: OF ADOLESCENT SEXUAL DILEMMAS Theme Theme Theme Theme Theme Theme Theme Introduction Interviews with No Sexual DilEmma Elaborated Dilemma Situations Other Interview Variables Reliability Descriptive Statistics . Hypotheses Testing . Post Hoc Analyses 1: \l SEVEN THEMATIC MEANINGS 0 Although I cared for him, I felt differently --I didn' t want to. It was my first time (females) Keeping the relationship was more important doing what I wanted. a I want trust and respect, not shame and guilt I' m not ready for a baby. myself. I felt violated. I wanted to enjoy myself even though it may not have been right for her. . . Conclusion . . CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION 0 I'm just a kid O o Implication of Results for Developmental Theory . . Sexual Decision Making Research Cognitive Moral Orientation Identity and Personality Development: Other Identity Theorists: Jacobson ix Kaplan, Erikson, Chodorow 67 67 72 72 72 75 80 82 90 94 100 108 118 124 126 130 132 136 138 138 138 140 142 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Strengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Generalizability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fidelity . Implications for Future Research . . . . . . APPENDICES Appendix A High School Recruitment Packet . . Appendix B Group Home Recruitment Packet (Parents) . . Appendix C Group Home Recruitment Packet (Adolescents) Appendix D The Interview Protocol . . . . Appendix E Distinguishing "Care of Self" from "General Effects to Self": An Example of Categorization Appendix F Real Life and Sexual Dilemma Coding Sheets Appendix G Reductions of Interview Data . . . . . . . LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 144 145 147 152 155 .159 164 167 172 176 182 184 219 Table LIST OF TABLES Categories for Considerations in the Real Life Dilemma Interview Method Formulas Used to Calculate Reliabilities and Dilemma Ratio Scores Frequency Statistics for Demographic Variables Intelligence Quotient Estimates as Measured by WISC-R or WAIS-R Relationships Among Sample Descriptive Variables: Pearson Product Moment Correlations Chi Square Analysis: Race with Sample Description of the Sexual Dilemma Interviews Percent Agreement Reliability Results for Coding of Interview Data Mean Number of Responses for Coding Categories in Real Life and Sexual Dilemma Interviews Most Commonly Used Categories in Sexual Dilemmas in Descending Rank Order Ranges of Sexual Dilemma Ratio Scores: Frequency Distribution Pearson Correlations: Sexual Dilemma Ratio with Sample Variables Summary of Themes and Markers in Sexual Dilemma Interviews Summary of the Qualitative Analysis: Themes, Frequencies, and Theoretical Meanings Special Markers of the Responsibility/Caring and Justice/Rights Categories xi Page 52 68 69 7O 71 81 82 85 86 87 89 92 133 177 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION If I am not for myself, who am I? If I am for myself alone, what am I? - Rabbi Hillel This is a study of human separation and connection as it mani- fests during adolescence in the decision to engage or not to engage in sexual activity. Through sexual decision making, teenagers consoli- date not only their sexual and gender identities, but also their identities based in self as separate from sexual partner and self as connected to sexual partner. In a final report to the National Institute of Education, Gilligan, et al. (1982) concluded that, "(1) different conceptions of self [self as separate and self as connected] and morality [justice/rights and responsibility/caring] exist in indi- viduals across the life cycle; and (2) ... they are significantly related to gender." Because recent research on teenage sexuality has been directed toward the important social problems of pregnanéy and contraception, the area has been circumscribed to include primarily intercourse behavior. There has been little research on the more experiential and developmental aspects of adolescent sexuality, including specifically the cognitive process involved in the decision to engage in sexual 4‘ behavior. Surveys of teenagers indicate that both males and females often engage in sexual activity for nonsexual reasons or when they want only to please their partners (Simon, Gagnon, Carns, Elias, & Walshok, 1968). In addition, Elias and Elias (1975) conclude that values play an important part in the decision making process, especially for females (Juhazs 5 Sonnenshein-Schneider, 1987). In this study the semi-structured interview method of Gilligan, Langdale, Lyons and Murphy (1982) is used to explore the sexual deci- sion making process with teenagers. Results were analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. The quantitative method was that developed by Gilligan, et al. (1982) in their cogni- tive moral development rights and responsibility study. These two analyses complement one another, elaborating a rich description of teenagers' sexual decision making experiences. In addition, the results contribute to adolescent identity development and personality theories. Researchers sometimes ask questions that limit responses or sam- ple in a way that limits generalizability. In this research efforts were made to ask research questions that would enable teenagers to define their own sexuality. Although I used a method to study the sexual decision making of both heterosexual and homosexual partici- pants, only heterosexual decisions were elaborated. This is undoubtedly due to volunteer bias and the difficulty of the coming out process for gay adolescents. On the other hand, a successful effort was made to include participants from a wide variety of demographic backgrounds. The purpose of this research was not to control the expression of adolescents' sexuality. Rather, the goal was to enhance sexual func- tioning by uncovering information that give teenagers a wider choice of behaviorSe-specifically to be aware of and "obey her [or his] inner feelings and ... to develop the social, intellectual, and psychologi- cal strengths that will enable her [or him] to engage in sexual activity with security and pleasure" (Lieberman, 1973, p. 227). CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE DEFINITION 9E TERMS There is much confusion in the literature in the use of the terms sex, gender, sexual identity, gender identity, gender role, and sex role. For the purpose of this dissertation, the term sex will refer to the biological differences between male and female (e.g., chromo- somes and primary sex characteristics). However, the term gender will encompass psychosocial derivatives of being male or female. Katchadourian (1979) states: [This] does not imply that these characteristics are psycho- socially rather than biologically determined. What is psychosocial about them in this context is their manifesta- tions and expression, rather than their derivation. What- ever biological and nonbiological factors determine gender identity and [gender] roles, these entities are always mani- fested as psychosocial aspects of an individual. In other words, even though gender identity and sex role are by definition based on the biological sex of the person and may conceivably have biological determinants beyond genital anatomy, such concepts can be understood only as psycholo- gical and social phenomena (p. 9). Therefore, the term gender will be used to refer to male and female differences that relate primarily to characteristics believed to be a result of socialization or of some interaction between a persons biological sex and his or her social world. In this culture, human sexuality often refers primarily to sexual behaviors, particularly intercourse. Researchers therefore ask it 1 r- questions related to intercourse, such as "Has the age of first sexual intercourse been decreasing?" or "Has there been a sexual revolution for teens?" (Cutright, 1972; Hopkins, 1977; Jessor & Jessor, 1975; Jessor, Costa, Jessor, & Donovan, 1983). In the study of adolescence, teenage sexuality is most often directly associated with pregnancy and contraception (e.g., Baldwin, 1982; Nadelson, 1983; Simkins, 1980; Zelnick & Kantner, 1980). Teenage pregnancy has indeed come to be defined as a significant health care and economic problem in this society. However, this reductionistic view of teenage sexuality as pregnancy has led all too often to focusing upon girls as "the problem." Although some studies have been done on male adolescent contraceptive behavior and attitudes (e.g., Finkel & Finkel, 1975; Vadies & Hale, 1977), far more studies have been done on contraceptive use by females. Numerous recent authors cite the need for more research on male sexual and contracep- tive behavior (Beckstein, 1978; Finkel & Finkel, 1983; Oresky & Ewing, 1978). The focus on females may change more rapidly with the current onset of media educational campaigns on Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome [AIDS]. Protection against the sexual transmission of AIDS is most effective with male use of a condom. Nonetheless, at this time girls are often the ones who decide what sexual behaviors are engaged in and what contraceptive protection is used. In addition, girls who become pregnant must always deal with the implications of that fact, whereas boys have more choice about whether or not to take responsibility for the pregnancy. Gochros (1982) believes that the research emphasis on girls, in part, stems from a reproductive bias or a belief that the only accept- able form of sexual expression is that which could result in concep- tion. Although some societal changes are occurring, he notes that tasks dictated for those responsible for children were "(1) to mini- mize the probability of their engaging in sexual activities, (2) to inculcate in them appropriate sex-role behavior and an acceptance of the reproductive bias, and (3) to protect them from sexual encounters with exploitative adults" (p. 37). Numerous theoretical articles have been published which directly or indirectly criticize biases of current research (e.g., Chilman, 1983; Gochros, 1982; Lieberman, 1973; Seiden, 1975). For instance, Jorgensen (1983) notes that priorities of federal research funding sources and scientific researchers are placed on studying causes and outcomes of adolescent pregnancy. He argues that for this reason "scientific understanding of early adolescent sexuality lags behind knowledge in other areas of early adolescent development" (p. 141). Another area of adolescent sexuality research that is deficient is that of sexual orientation. Coming out is defined by DeMonteflores and Schultz (1978) as "the developmental process through which gay people recognize their sexual preferences and choose to integrate this knowledge into their personal and social lives" (p. 59). In her summary of research, Chilman (1983) estimates that homosexual play occurs in early adolescence. Later up to 3% of boys and fewer girls are in committed homosexual relationships. For most part, however, the coming out process is a difficult one for teenagers (Sullivan & Schneider, 1987). Many are not aware of the option of a gay life style, although they sense that they are different. Others are aware, but strive to assimilate with heterosexual culture. Still others vacillate between sexual orientations well into adulthood. Some authors are now beginning to define sexuality more broadly. Jorgensen (1983) wrote, "Sexuality is first defined as the total complement of an individual's attitudes, cognitions (e.g., fantasies, dreams, beliefs, and perceptions), experiences, and behaviors that could eventually result in any type of erotic stimulations; this concept excludes the general ideas of nonsexual friendships, gender roles, self-concept, and identity" (p. 141). Some authors would disagree with this definition because sexual cognitions of an adoles- cent are so intimately related to gender, self concept, and identity (Katchadourian, 1979; Klein, 1983). For the purpose of this dissertation, the definition of sexuality encompasses "physical characteristics and capacities for specific sex behaviors, together with social-psychological learning that shapes values, norms, and attitudes about those behaviors" (Chilman, 1983, p. 16). Concepts of gender identity, gender role, and sexual orientation are also included. "It would seem legitimate to use sexuality as the broad, overarching term as long as we remember that it represents an abstraction and that what is meant by it tends to reflect the the- oretical framework or value assumptions of the user" (Katchadourian, 1979, p. 13). The purpose of this research is not to control expression of adolescents' sexuality. Rather, the goal is to enhance sexual func- tioning by uncovering information that will give teenagers a wider "obey her [or choice of behaviors--specifically to be aware of and his] inner feelings and ... to develop the social, intellectual, and psychological strengths that will enable her [or him] to engage in sexual activity with security and pleasure" (Lieberman, 1973, p. 227). Therefore, similar to adolescent researchers in the phenomenological tradition (e.g., Fischer & Alapack, 1987), my goal is to understand the experience of the adolescent and what he or she might define as problematic within the area of sexual decision making. As a researcher, I expanded the potential domain of teenagers' responses by asking questions such that all areas of sexual behavior and experience were included, thus allowing adolescents to define their own areas of concern. However, this is a study of cognitive components of sexual decision making as experienced by adolescents. Although the realm of teenage sexuality is quite large, the subsequent review of literature includes primarily topics of gender identity, cognitive moral decision making, and sexual decision making. This includes a discussion on the interaction of decision making with the variable of gender. GENDER IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT Recent feminist theorists (e.g., Chodorow, 1978; Dinnerstein, 1976; Miller, 1976) have elaborated a theory of gender and personality development. Chodorow (1978) posits that feminine and masculine personality development begins in early object relations between mother and infant. Gender differences are rooted in family structure and are based on the sexual division of labor in most cultures which dictates that primary caretakers of both male and female infants be women. The pattern of infant interaction with mother and relative non-interaction with father serves to reproduce itself, such that, in most cases, an infant female develops the capacity to nurture as an adult and a male develops the capacity to function autonomously out- side the home in the economic world. Both men and women are then equipped to take on their instrumental and expressive roles, respec- tively, as defined by their culture. Chodorow believes gender identity development begins in develop- ing early object relations by forming attachments to and later separation/individuation from mother (e.g., Mahler, Pine, & Bergman, 1975). An infant boy must develop a sense of maleness by denying his early attachment to and identification with his mother, in order to become "not like mother." At first this is a subtle interactional process. Later, he may learn this by being overtly corrected when performing actions that are stereotypically feminine and by being reinforced when performing actions characteristic of being like a male. Also, due to fathers' predominant emotional and/or physical absence from so many homes, young boys have little or no early expo- sure to male role models. Thus, a boy is socialized to behave in accordance with his mother's idealized image of what a man should be. This idealized image is shaped by popular media and other cultural forces. In order A)? - to become like a man, a boy must deny his primary relational bond with mother and emulate an abstract notion of how father is. "This is the beginning of the development of ego boundaries that are fixed and firm--barriers that rigidly separate self from other, that circum- scribe not only his relationships with others but his connection to his inner emotional life as well" (Rubin, 1983, p. 56). Therefore, his personality is founded in separateness. The result is an identity formation that Chodorow labels self within the self. Gilligan (1982) labels this construct self as separate. Because a girl is nurtured by a person of the same gender, she never has to reject the primary mother-infant bond. Mother actively maintains the relationship, perhaps in a redintegration of her fantasy or experience with her own mother. Female gender identity development is more easily accomplished through the presence of a direct model of femaleness. However, this development has a much different result. Ego boundaries between self and other are more diffuse and include bonds of relationships. While this boundary diffusion permits females more access to their inner emotional life, maintaining separation becomes more problematic (Rubin, 1983). Thus, as girls are socialized to develop a capacity to nurture, they deve10p an identity as self in relationship to other (Chodorow, 1978) or continuous with other. Gilligan (1982) labels this sslf as connected. This theory has been very influential in recent research on the psychology of women. However, despite enormous popular support, the resulting empirical research is equivocal. For example, Gilligan, ll Langdale, Lyons and Murphy (1982) found gender differences in cogni- tive moral development, based on Chodorow's object relations theory of personality development. However using the same methodology and a similar sample, Walker (1986) concluded there are no gender differ- ences in cognitive moral orientations. A more detailed description of these and other studies on gender differences in cognitive moral development follows. GENDER ISSUES IN COGNITIVE MORAL DEVELOPMENT One of the most prominent theorists in the area of cognitive moral development is Lawrence Kohlberg. His theory was based on a 1958 study of 84 boys from 10 to 16 years of age who were followed over 20 years using an interview method (Gilligan, 1982). The dev- elopmental stage theory includes three levels of morality (with two stages at each level): (1) premoral or preconventional, (2) morality of conventional (social) rule conformity, and (3) morality of self— accepted (universal) principles or postconventional. Particularly at issue are two findings using earlier versions of Kohlbergs' interview methodology. First, women and other population subgroups not included in his research sample rarely score at the post conventional level (e.g., see review by Gilligan, 1982, p. 18). Second, men developed to a significantly higher level of moral rea- soning than did women (e.g., Kohlberg & Kramer, 1969). Many womens' moral development arrested at Stage 3 (conventional level), "mutual interpersonal expectations, relationships, and conformity" (Walker, 1984, p. 678). 12 Gilligan (1982) published an articulate critique of an under- lying bias of Kohlberg's research in her book In a Difference Voice. In Gilligan's reply to her critics, she states that in conducting some of the research upon which the book was based, she was seeking to discover whether something had been missed by the practice of leaving out girls and women at the theory- building state of research in developmental psychology--that is, whether Piaget's [1965] and Kohlberg's [1969] descrip- tions of moral development, Erikson's [1958] description of identity development, Offer's [1969] description of adoles- cent development, Levinson's [1978] and Vaillant's [1977] descriptions of adult development, as well as more general accounts of human personality and motivation, contained a consistent conceptual and observational bias, reflected in and extended by their choice of all male research samples (Kerber, Greeno, Maccoby, Luria, Stack, & Gilligan, 1986, p. 325). Gilligan's (1982) book presents results of three studies on moral decision making: (1) a college student study (25 male and female Harvard students); (2) an abortion decision study (Gilligan, 1977; 29 women, ages 15 to 33, who were considering an abortion); and (3) 3 rights and responsibilities study (Gilligan, Langdale, Lyons, and Murphy, 1982). The first two studies provided rich qualitative inter- view data in which a "different voice" was clearly elaborated. There was an orientation toward moral decision making and a definition of morality that was based on an ethic of responsibility and caring in addition to the ethic of abstract principles of justice and rights described in Kohlberg's theory. The study of rights and responsibilities was a development of quantitative methodology designed to test the hypothesized existence of what Gilligan labeled a different voice (Gilligan, Langdale, Lyons, 8 Murphy, 1982). The sample was comprised of 144 males and females 5 matched for age, intelligence, education, occupation, and social class. Participants' ages ranged from 6 to 60; they were all from intelligent, well educated families. A subsample of 36 participants were interviewed more intensively to determine conceptions of self and morality. Based on the results with this subgroup, Lyons (1982) developed a coding manual to categorize semi-structured interview data of spontaneous real life moral dilemmas into the two moral orienta- tions: justice/rights and responsibility/caring. (The interview methodology and coding manual were used in this study and are des- cribed in detail in Chapter 3, Methods.) In a final report to the National Institute of Education, Gilligan, et al. (1982) concluded, "(1) that these different concep- tions of self [self as separate and self as connected] and morality [justice/rights and responsibility/caring] exist in individuals across the life cycle; and (2) that they are significantly related to gender. These results provide the empirical basis for an expanded theory of moral development that is equitable in its representation of the perspectives of both males and females." The Gilligan, et al. (1982) rights and responsibility study used a very small sample of middle to upper middle class, intelligent, verbal white adolescents (n = 11). Despite this small sample size, Gilligan, et al. did obtain gender differences across the life span (childhood, ages 8-11; adolescence, ages 15-22; and adulthood, ages 27-60). These preliminary results suggest that both children and adults utilize both justice/rights and responsibility/caring l4 orientations in solving moral dilemmas. For example, the authors report 36% of males (3 = 6) used all considerations of justice/rights moral orientation; approximately the same percentage of females (37%, n = 6) used all considerations of responsibility/caring moral orienta- tion. (This is confusing, however, since it would indicate a sample size of 27 males when in fact there were 72 in the entire sample and 18 in the subsample.) There were no males using all responsibility and caring and no females using all rights and justice considerations. From such data, Gilligan, et al., concluded there was a significant percentage of the total number of subjects who had a distinct moral orientation. As a result of a qualitative analysis of these three studies, Gilligan (1982) hypothesized that there are two lines of moral development, resulting in differing moral orientations if one is favored. One "voice" is that proposed by Kohlberg--justice and rights. For the "different voice," Gilligan hypothesized three levels of orientation toward responsibility and caring in moral development: (1) orientation to individual survival, (2) goodness of self- sacrifice, and (3) the morality of nonviolence. Subsequently, Gilligan backed off this linear developmental hypothesis, indicating that they did not yet have the type of data that would support this view (Lyons & Gilligan, 1984). Gilligan's (1982) book prompted a great debate in the literature. The first issue was whether or not Kohlberg's cognitive moral develop- mental theory and research methodology is biased in terms of gender. Gibbs, Arnold, and Burkhart (1984) conducted a study using Kohlberg's methodology on 177 males and females aged 11-21 years. They found no gender differences in moral development. In a meta-analysis of 79 studies of gender differences in moral reasoning, Walker (1984) con- cluded that "sex differences are nonsignificant and that the moral reasoning of males and females is more alike than different" (p. 677). Scnne of Kohlberg's data was reanalyzed with a new scoring manual (Ccflby, Kohlberg, Gibbs, Candee, Hewer, Kaufman, Lieberman, Power, & Speicher-Dubin, in press) deemphasizing content and scoring the rea- s<>ning process. This correction eliminated some of the previously f<>und gender differences. [Before publication this manual was revised again (Colby & Kohlberg, in press).] Walker's (1984) study prompted several responses. Baumrind ( 1986) criticized his statistical method and his reasoning of elimina- tit1g from the meta-analysis those studies using the old scoring method or- failing to control for education. Haan (1985, cited in Kerber, et al.., 1986) reported a study that used the new scoring manual, con- tlfolled for education and social class, and found statitistically significant gender differences using Kohlberg's method. In response tC’ his critics Walker (1986) reanalyzed his data, updated his review, arid again reported that "there are no consistent sex differences in IIICtral reasoning" (p. 522). In a Different 22123 (Gilligan, 1982) was discussed in an inter- disciplinary forum of women researchers, Kerber, Greeno, Maccoby, Luria, Stack, and Gilligan, (1986). Kerber agreed with Gilligan that "little boys face a psychic task of separation that little girls do 15 methodology on 177 males and females aged 11-21 years. They found no gender differences in moral development. In a meta-analysis of 79 studies of gender differences in moral reasoning, Walker (1984) con- cluded that "sex differences are nonsignificant and that the moral reasoning of males and females is more alike than different" (p. 677). Some of Kohlberg's data was reanalyzed with a new scoring manual (Colby, Kohlberg, Gibbs, Candee, Hewer, Kaufman, Lieberman, Power, 8 Speicher-Dubin, in press) deemphasizing content and scoring the rea- soning process. This correction eliminated some of the previously found gender differences. [Before publication this manual was revised again (Colby & Kohlberg, in press).] Walker's (1984) study prompted several responses. Baumrind (1986) criticized his statistical method and his reasoning of elimina- ting from the meta-analysis those studies using the old scoring method or failing to control for education. Haan (1985, cited in Kerber, et al., 1986) reported a study that used the new scoring manual, con- trolled for education and social class, and found statitistically significant gender differences using Kohlberg's method. In response to his critics Walker (1986) reanalyzed his data, updated his review, and again reported that "there are no consistent sex differences in moral reasoning" (p. 522). I3 3 Different Voice (Gilligan, 1982) was discussed in an inter- disciplinary forum of women researchers, Kerber, Greeno, Maccoby, Luria, Stack, and Gilligan, (1986). Kerber agreed with Gilligan that "little boys face a psychic task of separation that little girls do 16 not" (p. 309), but she pointed out that theoretical underpinnings of this theory, which separate girls from boys developmentally, is rooted in the sexual division of labor, a situation that benefits the patriarchy. Greeno and Maccoby (Kerber, et al., 1986), representing the discipline of psychology, suggested that Gilligan attacked a "straw man" of gender differences, citing the Walker (1984) meta-analysis. They also point out that Gilligan does not report her data. Regarding the latter point, I agree with these researchers. It is often diffi- cult to evaluate the quality of Gilligan's quantitative work and therefore of her conclusions because the method, analysis, and results indicating gender differences are not presented clearly. However, this does not invalidate the compelling qualitative data that she presents. Luria, another woman in this interdisciplinary forum (Kerber, et al., 1986), criticized Gilligan's methodology. In particular, Luria pointed to the fact that in her book Gilligan gave no information on the coding scheme that was used and that she combined disparate sam- ples (e.g., women in an abortion study and Harvard students) in coming to her conclusions. Last, Stack (Kerber, et al., 1986) pointed out that gender is also constructed by race, social class, culture, caste, and consciousness; gender is not universal. Therefore, studies of white, upper middle class, highly educated people cannot form the basis of a theory on gender. Gilligan (Kerby, et al., 1986), the last writer in the forum, responded to each of the criticisms. She cited research, published 17 after her book was released, that explains some of the methodological details (Johnston, 1985; Langdale, 1983; Lyons, 1982; Lyons, 1983). Three of these are doctoral dissertations which are not easily obtained. Most of the rest of her responses are clarifications of what she was saying and what she was not saying. She summarizes her work as follows: These studies and others confirm and refine the "different voice" hypothesis by demonstrating that (1) the justice and care perspectives are distinct orientations that organize people's thinking about moral problems in different ways; (2) boys and men who resemble those most studied by developmental psychologists tend to define and resolve moral problems within the justice framework, although they introduce considerations of care; and (3) the focus on care in moral reasoning, although not characteristic of all women, is characteristically a female phenomenon in the advantaged populations that have been studied. These findings provide an empirical explanation for the equation of moral judgment with justice reasoning in theories derived from studies of males; but they also explain why the study of women's moral thinking changes the definition of the moral domain (pp. 330-331). Indeed, her work is often a projective for whatever issue one cares to take up (e.g., separatism, social class, race, feminist "bias" against males). Those who criticize her work seem to agree with some aspects and disagree with other aspects. The quality that makes a good pro- jective is ambiguity or lack of clarity. After considerable study, it seems Gilligan, et al. (1982) sup- port their views with data, however, they sometimes fail to state exactly what conclusions are not supported by their data, thus demon- strating some insensitivity to important issues (e.g., Gilligan, 1977; Gilligan, 1982; Gilligan, et al., 1982; Lyons & Gilligan, 1984 [including presentations by Johnston and Langdale]; Lyons, 1982; 18 Lyons, 1983). In addition, statistics in her unpublished study (Gilligan, et al., 1982) are very difficult to decipher, despite a vssry simple Chi square design. For example, tables and text do not aciequately define what scores on her quantitative instrument form (liscrete ordinal level Chi square categories. Walker, de Vries, and Trevethan (1987) conducted a research study tliat examined both Kohlberg's moral stage and Gilligan's moral orien- taition models. He used Lyon's (1982) method for identifying moral Ot'ientation through examining participants' spontaneous real life um)ral dilemmas, followed by questions that would enable him to code irlterviews with Kohlberg's most recent manual for identifying stages C’f nmral development using hypothetical moral dilemmas. Subjects were 8() Canadian nuclear family triads--a well-educated group. There were 8() mothers, 80 fathers and 80 children in grades 1, 4, 7, and 10. The Cllildren were evenly divided across the variables of grade in school arid gender. Racial composition of the sample was not given. In contrast to Gilligan's results, Walker, et al. (1987) found that few individuals showed consistent use of a particular moral Orientation across dilemmas. In addition, researchers coded the spon- taneous real life dilemmas for content, dividing them into two categories--personal and impersonal. Personal dilemmas were about relationships with important others; impersonal dilemmas did not involve relationships or involved only strangers or insignificant others. They found that significantly more females than males told personal dilemmas and males told more impersonal dilemmas than women. 19 However, when they analyzed moral orientations while controlling for content, there were no gender differences. In other words, Walker, et al. concluded that dilemma content accounts for gender difference found in moral orientation. In summary, research on gender differences in cognitive moral dev- elopment is equivocal. There is a clear need to conduct studies with larger numbers of participants (e.g., Walker, et al., 1987) across the lifespan that include adequate representation of minority groups and working class people. Authors and researchers all seem to agree, however, that there are two moral orientations and they may have different developmental components. Since Gilligan, et al. (1982) found that moral orientation is related to self descriptions (identity), personality theorists have also taken up the debate. Franz and White (1985) have extended Erikson's theory to include both individuation and attachment. The "developmental pathway for attachment parallels and interacts with the pathway of identity described by Erikson" (p. 151). They propose the following: ...[A] double helix in which two separate but interconnected strands of psychological individual and attachment ascend in a spiral representing the life-cycle. Each stage represents an intrapsychic deveIOpmental change in both individuation and attachment; experiences in any one realm will have ramifications for the other. Like the twisted strands making up a rope, tension on one strand will put the other (Franz & White, 1985, p. 159). Based on a meta-analysis of moral development research, Lifton (1985) concluded that gender differences, when they occur, do so only in the cognitive moral development studies. He designed a study to 20 separate sex, gender, moral development, and personality development. The study was conducted with two samples (169 college students and 151 adults) using Kohlberg's hypothetical dilemma interview method, his own moral character template (personalogical model), the California Personality Inventory, and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Results of this research indicated that (1) there were no sex differences in moral development in either model (Kohlberg or Lifton); (2) there was a gender difference in the Kohlberg cognitive moral development model favoring masculine persons and no gender difference in the Lifton personalogical model; and (3) that "indivi- dual differences in moral development parallel individual differences in personality development” (p. 218). Deaux (1984) in her "...analysis of a decade's research on gen- der," concluded that "the focus is not on how men and women differ, but on how people think they differ. Further advances in under- standing gender will depend on more process-oriented approaches..." (p. 105). "Traditionally, sexual behavior has been viewed as a moral issue" (Juhasz & Sonnenshein-Schneider, 1987, p. 579). Cognitive moral decision making and the hypothesized gender related personality component discussed above in terms of gender can now be linked to sexual decision making. GENDER AND SEXUAL DECISION MAKING Gender role and identity socialization is a very important aspect of development, in general, and sexual development, specifically. For example, if one's self image is very dependent on sex stereotyped ways of being male or female, one would lose part of a range of possible 21 behaviors in which one might engage (Bem & Lenney, 1976). In fact, Ickes and Barnes (1978) and Rainwater (1969) have found that increased verbal communication and sexual satisfaction are negatively correlated with stereotypic roles. Internalized forces of gender socialization are very strong. Many theoretical, clinical, and research articles on male and female development describe gender differences. Following are some excerpts from articles concluding that females are more relationally defined than males, demonstrating gender differences that may exist within the realm of adolescent sexuality: (3) the degree of commitment to the relationship influences females more than males (Lewis, 1973). (b) the virgin adolescent, herself, is torn in [different] directions; the pressures of her peers, male and female, to dispense with the useless hymen; [and] to be good and to please her parents ... by remaining virgi- nal until marriage... (Lieberman, 1973, p. 277). (c) the female is acquiescent to the sexual demands of her partner because her sense of belonging (relatedness) [to partner] is threatened if she refuses (Mitchell, 1972, p. 451). (d) Revelation of loss of virginity is a negative charac- teristic for adolescent females but a positive one for adolescent males. . . When coitus occurs for males it does so in patterns which have been worked out in the course of both socialization and fantasy. Adolescent males, far more than adolescent females, report coitus as being frequent, involving 3 or more partners, and as being essentially devoid of any but the most transitory and superficial emotional overtones (Berger & Simon, 1975, p. 210). Other clinical and theoretical articles describe nonsexual rea- sons adolescents offer for engaging in sexual behavior. Most of these authors did not attempt to relate these reasons to gender. Seiden *5 22 (1975) cites status, popularity, and esteem. Marmor (1969) lists: a technique for obtaining love (he places teenage promiscuity in this category), a defense against loneliness, a way of overcoming inferi- or'ity feelings, a demonstration of power, manifestations of hostility or" contempt (teenage boys), and a defense against anxiety. Coley ( 1973) adds: self affirmation, excitement, stimulation, or influence oxrer others. Dormont (1973) mentions two circumstances in which sexual activity can serve as a positive coping mechanism in couple rezlationships for nonsexual difficulties: "a person will lead his/her pairtner to sexual relations at a time when the partner is in a period C>f stress or adversity, with the intended purpose of sexual activity besing to help sustain the partner until the difficulty subsides" or f<>r couples whose relationships are in trouble, "sexual relations for Cx>nflicted couples frequently are positive and fulfilling" (p. 63). An unpublished study of late adolescents (Simon, Gagnon, Carns, El.ias, & Walshok, 1968) cited by Seiden (1975, p. 215) indicated that 3574 of males and 2374 of females [sic.] reported that they engaged in 'Wleterosexual activity more often than they wanted to ... [in order to] please others rather than themselves." Although the adolescents overwhelmingly reported that they enjoyed sex most or some of the time, 40-50% of females and 20-25% of males "reported experiencing intercourse as something they did for reasons other than sex most or some of the time." Another survey study of 405 high school students (Elias & Elias, 1975) included questions about the reasoning of those who chose not to it 23 engage in various sexual activities. Reasons that teens gave for not engaging in heavy petting were (1) "you felt it wrong or immoral" (boys 56%, girls 79%); (2) "you never met anyone you wanted to do it with" (boys 15%, girls 32%); (3) "your partner didn't want to do it" (boys 48%, girls 17%); (4) "fear of parental disapproval" (boys 33%, girls 47%). The most common reasons given for not engaging in sexual intercourse was "fear of pregnancy" (boys 70%, girls 69%). Other reasons were very similar to the heavy petting results; feeling it was wrong or immoral was the second most frequently endorsed. Some other reasons were lack of opportunity, fear of damaging reputation, or too shy. Only a few articles have been written about the sexual decision making process of adolescents. Juhasz and Sonnenshein-Schneider (1980) wrote a theoretical article on components and skills involved in this decision making process. They defined three basic components: (a) cognitive (both informational and analytic compe- tence), (b) socialization influences (especially values), and (c) situational variables (current needs, levels of self esteem, and stress). "Superimposed on this framework are the following: (1) the aspects of self which are basic to the individual, (2) his/her ability to convey ideas and feelings and to empathize and receive accurately the messages sent, (3) the values which the individual holds and the ability to evaluate their relative importance, (4) problem-solving skills in terms of collecting all available evidence and considering possible options, weighing and evaluating the outcome of each and finally (5) arriving at a decision" (p. 747). The authors cite the K 24 developmental aspects that inhibit the effective use of this model. Most important is the lack of communication that characterizes adoles- cent sexual activity (Kirkendall, 1976). "Either one must assume or guess the partner's feelings and needs or ignore them in the decision making" (Juhasz & Sonnenshein-Schneider, 1980, p. 749). In fact, Elkind (1969) discusses the frequent failure of adolescents to dif- ferentiate their own concerns from those of others, which further complicates the picture. A more recent research based study by Juhasz and Sonnenshein- Schneider (1987) reported a gender difference in considerations that influenced sexual decision making. In a survey of 500 teenagers, they found that males scored significantly higher than females on items indicating that sexual intercourse provided self enhancement. In addition males were more likely to be "oriented toward sexual impulse gratification" (p. 584). Last, males were more influenced by the probable consequences of childbearing than were females. On the other hand, females showed significantly more concern with "family establishment competence and external morality" (p. 584). Maskay and Juhasz (1983) designed a seven step sexual decision model based on very logical rational steps derived from theory. How- ever, other adolescent decision making theorists concluded that the model must include an adolescent developmental base (Miller-Tiedeman, 1979) and that the process of obtaining adult level decision making competency "is not a linear process but rather a stop and go, up and down journey with periods of stagnation interspersed with rapid 25 acceleration and wild fluctuation" (p. 103). In sexual decision making where the stakes are high, this seems likely. In other words, the developmental process is likely not a linear and logical one. However, advocating adolescent's rights based on reviews of research, Melton (1983) concludes that adolescents "cannot be distinguished from adults on the ground of competence in decision making alone" (p. 100). GENDER AND ADOLESCENT SEXUALITY IN DELINQUENTS Because this study has a sample of adolescents identified as juvenile delinquents, a brief overview of gender and sexuality within this population follows. Pertinent literature on male juvenile offen- ders falls into two major categories, prostitution and sexual offen- ders. In other words, the focus of the literature is on acts which are illegal in this society. Literature on male prostitution is quite limited. In his three-year study of 98 male prostitutes, Allen (1980) concludes there are four major classifications of male prostitutes: "full-time street and bar hustlers; full-time call boys or kept boys; part-time hustlers, usually students or employed; and peer- delinquents, who used prostitution and homosexuality as an extension of other delinquent acts (e.g., assault and robbery)" (p. 399). Literature on male sexual offenders is also quite limited. In a review of literature, Groth (1977) characterized courts and juvenile agencies as reluctant to view juvenile sex offenses as a serious problem. Prior to the recent emergence of rape and incest as social problems, it was not uncommon for male juvenile sexual offenders to be diagnosed as "Adolescent Adjustment Reaction" or for their sexual 26 assaultive behavior to be relegated to the realm of normative sexual curiously or experimentation (Groth & Loredo, 1981). Now that sexual crimes are taken more seriously, the male offender is also being studied. For instance, Longo (1982) found that 47% of a small sample (n = 17) of adolescent male sexual offenders had themselves been molested as children. A recent unpublished study (Lafond, Thomas, & Stark; cited in Longo, 1982) of adolescent males committed to a correctional institution indicated that approximately 10% of the sam- ple were there for sexual offenses. In addition, one third of these males had a history of at least one sexual offense. In summary, the sexuality of males in a population socially defined as deviant seems to be characterized in part by disregard for the law primarily in a way that is often mixed with violence, both as victims and as perpet- rators. Literature that describes the sexuality of the female adolescent offender is minimal and focuses primarily on prostitution (e.g., Brown, 1979). Actually, however, there is a gender related bias“ operating in the evaluation of the sexuality of juvenile delinquent girls, who have a reputation for being promiscuous or engaging in high frequencies of sexual intercourse with numerous partners. While these behaviors are considered deviant for girls, they are less often con- sidered to be so for boys. An early study (Hathaway & Monachesi, 1963) illustrates this bias. The researchers developed numerous rating scales, one of which was level of delinquency. The description of the highest level was as follows, "This classification is used to denote those who committed 27 repeated offenses such as auto theft, burglary, grand larceny, holdup with a gun, gross immoral conduct (girls) [sic.], accompanied by less serious offenses..." (p. 23). In addition, a special rating greater than the most maladapted level of the school conduct scale was created "exclusively for girls with a history of illegitimate pregnancy or forced marriage" (p. 22). Over time the attitudes underlying the biases have changed quite a bit. In a labeling theory analysis, Briedis (1975) described the community response to premarital sex and pregnancy as "marginal deviance." Biases are still present, but they are less overt. Mannarino and March (1978) found that institutionalized female juvenile delinquents fell into two groups, one of which was a group found guilty of sexual delinquency. These girls were found to be more stereotypically feminine than the those incarcerated for nonsexual offenses. Research related to adolescent sexuality in delinquent samples can be critiqued from the perspective of labeling theory. Leonard (1982) concluded that most criminal justice researchers seek to explain why certain people or groups of people commit criminal actions. Labeling theory "assumes that most people have committed deviant acts and examines why society officially brands some peOple, and not others, criminal" (p. 66). In addition, labeling theorists suggest that being labeled a juvenile delinquent can encourage a teenager to act in accordance with that label. 28 In summary, males and females who are labeled juvenile delin- quents are thought to be very sexually active as a group. Also, they seem to represent an extreme polarization of gender role socializa- tion. For this reason, they will be of special interest in this study of gender and adolescent sexual decision making processes. However, since gender differences are hypothesized to occur in both the general population and the delinquent population, it is unlikely that the sexual decision cognitive orientation of samples from these populations will differ. Gender is the primary focus of this study. Therefore, the nature of similarities and differences between these two populations will be exploratory. SUMMARY AND HYPOTHESES In conclusion, what is known about adolescent cognitive sexual decision making at this time is minimal and primarily theoretical. On the basis of a survey study, Elias and Elias (1975) concluded that "the personal value system (especially for the female) of the indivi- dual was a major factor in decision-making regarding sexual acti- vities" (p. 97). In addition, there is evidence indicating that there are two orientations taken in making a moral decision. One orientation is based on an abstract system of rights and justice, and the other is based on a contextual system of responsibility and caring. The research on whether these two orientations are gender related is equi- vocal. In Gilligan's, et al. (1982) study of an advantaged popula- tion, males more often utilized a justice/rights orientation and 29 females a responsibility/caring orientation. There is some evidence indicating that this finding may be an artifact of the moral dilemma content (Walker, et al., 1987) and gender differences may lie in the area of identity or personality development, not moral development (Lifton, 1985). Many nonsexual reasons for engaging in or choosing not to engage in sexual activity can be categorized in either of these two orienta- tions. For example, a girl who feels pressured by her partner to engage in sexual activity may decide to do so in order to maintain the relationship (responsibility and caring orientation). On the other hand, she may decide to engage in sexual activity because of there exists a standard within her peer group to do so (justice and rights orientation). Therefore, a study of adolescents' descriptions of their own decision making processes in real life sexual dilemmas was made in order to understand what is important to teenagers in their efforts to make fulfilling decisions and to shed light on possible gender dif- ferences in sexual decision making. Study hypotheses were: (1) Adolescents use two orientations of cognitive reasoning (justice/rights and responsibility/caring) in making deci- sions about whether or not to engage in sexual behavior; (2) Orientations of cognitive reasoning are gender related. Females are more likely to use the reSponsibility and caring orientation than are males. 30 (3) Gender difference in cognitive reasoning orientation is related to personality or identity and, therefore, is simi- lar across dilemmas. Thus, the moral orientation utilized in a spontaneously generated real life dilemma is associated with the type of reasoning used in a sexual dilemma. These hypotheses were tested using the method of Gilligan, et al., 1982, on two samples of adolescents, high school students and group home residents, that had adequate representations of teenagers across the socioeconomic classes and ethnic/racial minority group members. In addition, theoretical assumptions and biases were set aside for the purpose of conducting a qualitative analysis of the inter- views. In keeping with qualitative research methodology, the results emerged from the data. Therefore, this portion of the study had no a priori hypotheses. CHAPTER 3 METHODS DATA COLLECTION Recruitment This study was done in the context of a larger study, partially funded by the Department of Psychiatry at Michigan State University. The purpose of the larger study was to study juvenile delinquency and cognitive moral development. This provided an excellent opportunity to study sexual decision making in a special population of delinquent adolescents who are known as a group to be sexually active. There were two groups of participants for the study: high school students and adolescent group home residents. Initially, I limited partici- pants to those between the ages of 15 and 17. Later in recruitment 14 year olds were included in both samples. One participant turned 18 during the study. Procedures for selecting each of the samples were slightly different and, therefore, are described separately. High School Students. High school students were randomly selected from a high school district in an urban community in the Midwest. The particular district was chosen because of the wide variety of students in terms of racial minority groups and socio- economic classes. The number of minority high school students sampled was increased over the actual prOportion in the population in order to 31 32 obtain a large enough number of minority participants to examine racial differences from and similarities to white participants. To sample in this way, I submitted a research proposal to three different school district committees. The project was approved with the following stipulations made by the school district: In order to protect the rights of students and their parents or guardians, no names and addresses will be accessible to the researchers. Instead the Office of Research and Evaluation will draw the sample, according to your specifi- cations. This office will bill you for that task. Upon receipt from you of the requisite number of information packets, this office will mail the packets to those students drawn as part of the sample. All postage will be paid by you O The information packets will carry no identifying code of any kind. The list of names drawn in the sample will be destroyed immediately. Upon receipt of the information packet, the student and his/her parents or guardians, should they choose to take part in the study, will contact you. The Office of Research and Evaluation will have no further involvement in the study. The first random sample drawn by the school district was com- prised of 50 girls and 50 boys. An information packet was sent to these 100 students according to the outlined procedure. The packet consisted of (1) a one page letter to the parents and teenagers intro- ducing the researchers and project; (2) a three page document with instructions and a detailed description of the research procedure, including measures to be taken to insure confidentiality; (3) two informed consent forms (one for the participant to keep and one to be returned); (4) a two page demographic questionnaire; and (5) a self- addressed postage paid envelope. 33 The teenagers were offered a $10 incentive to encourage partici- pation. Potential participants were instructed to return a signed consent form and a completed questionnaire in an enclosed enve10pe. The comprehensive nature of the packet was suggested by the University Committee for Research Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS). Because of the sensitivity parents and teenagers might have about some of the measures and interviews (sexuality and juvenile delinquency), I was encouraged to disclose completely the form and content of the research procedure. A more complete description of the informed consent pro- cedure appears in the corresponding section below. The response rate to this mailing of 100 packets was 8%. Follow up letters sent to all 100 students produced only 2 additional persons asking for another packet. These people did not participate in the end. The follow up strategy was abandoned. Instead, an additional incentive drawing for three $20 prizes was offered. A new recruitment packet that was shorter and easier to read was used. The procedure was resubmitted to and approved by UCRIHS. Copies of the second recruitment packet for high school students are in Appendix A. The second recruitment packet yielded a response rate of 14.7% volunteer to participants, i.e., 59 responses to 400 packets mailed. These packets were sent out in three mailings. Of all the students who volunteered, 5 could not be reached by phone, 4 did not show for their appointments, and 2 cancelled stating they had decided not to participate. The final percentage of high school students volunteer- ing, including both recruitment procedures, was 13.4% (67 responses to 34 500 packets mailed). A total of 46 high school students were inter- viewed. Parents and students sampled who did not want to participate were urged to say why on the consent form. This form was then mailed back anonymously. Eleven forms from the 500 packets (2.2%) were returned saying they did not consent to participation. Some of the parents' comments were: "We don't have time for this." "My son did not wish to participate. I did not mind either way." "This study would have been too uncomfortable for us, but I do appreciate what you are doing." Some of the students' comments were: "I'm not social with strangers." "This would interfere with my work and my homework. Sorry!!" "There are just too many things going on this time of year. Sorry." "Just not interested." After volunteers returned signed consent forms, they were con- tacted by phone to set up research appointments. One volunteer did not have a phone. I wrote him a letter, suggesting possible interview times. He did not respond to my letter. Participants were interviewed at Michigan State University. I did not want transportation difficulties to be a barrier to participa- tion. Therefore I asked volunteers how they would get to appoint- ments, offering assistance when appropriate. Group Home Residents. Group home residents were recruited through a system of adolescent group homes in the Midwest. The organization, which was funded privately from collections and dona- tions, accepted adolescents from all socioeconomic classes. Primary referral sources were Juvenile Court, the Department of Social 35 Services, and mental health agencies. The system had a total of six facilities which provided different levels of restriction and types of treatment interventions for adolescents. The most restrictive set- tings were two locked facilities, one each for girls and boys. The least restrictive settings were two homes designed to prepare resi- dents for independent living (girls and boys). The other two homes, both for boys, had levels of restriction in between these two extremes. All teenagers were engaged in a treatment program that included psychotherapy with agency therapists. The group home system was developed, staffed, and funded by people with a Christian background. I explored this characteristic with administrative and support staff to determine if it would have an impact on study results. Teenagers were required to attend church once a week. Other religious activities were optional. Teenagers were assured that confidentiality in the study extended to therapists and group home personnel. As a group, this sample did not appear to be religious. No pro-religious comments were made by any of the participants. The only spontaneous comments were complaints by two of the residents about the church requirement. There was some additional evidence of religious rebellion. A total of 4 group home teenagers, when selecting their own participant number, requested to have the number 666. This is a number mentioned in the New Testament as being a symbol for the anti-Christ. I concluded the effect of the Christian foundation in the group home system would be none to minimal. 36 Gaining access to the group home was attained by obtaining the top administrator's informal consent; submitting a research proposal to a designated administrator, and then meeting with three administra- tors. They not only approved the project, but also offered staff cooperation in dealing with some of the anticipated problems in working with this particular population. Subsequent meetings with participating staff were held at intervals to explain the project, answer questions, and outline their roles. In addition, letters communicating the status of data collection and results of the meet- ings were sent. One of the therapists expressed concern because nearly all poten- tial female participants were incest survivors. The therapist was worried about the impact a sexual interview might have on the therapy process. Therapists were assured that participants' right to choose not to participate at all or in part would be honored and that I would be sensitive in my relationships with the adolescents. Therapists were informed that many teenagers benefit from discussing important issues with a competent and empathic interviewer, and they were encouraged to look upon participation as an opportunity for growth. Recruitment was conducted in two parts because parents and chil- dren were not living together. First, parents or legal guardians were sent recruitment letters, explaining the study. They were asked to return a signed informed consent form in an enclosed self-addressed, stamped envelope. A copy of the letter and form sent to parents/ guardians is in Appendix B. 37 Therapists were then told which parents or guardians were being contacted. They telephoned parents/legal guardians to encourage them to return signed return consent forms so that their children might participate in the study. Of 39 parents/legal guardians send recruit- ment letters, 23 (59%) consented. In addition, 4 parents returned forms stating they did not want their children to participate. Some comments were: I feel that we have been through enough and too many people know about our personal life now. We feel that with the amount of therapy already being offered on our daughter's behalf, that it is enough therapy without additional outside discussions. Because the children have had sexual troubles with the step- father, we don't think it is a good thing to do. After I received signed consent forms from the parents/legal guardians, recruitment packets were sent to the teenagers. Packets similar to those sent to high school students were adapted for use with this sample. This included additional assurances that participa- tion would not have an impact on their treatment and results would be confidential from group home staff as well as others. In addition, the teenagers were informed that if they had questions about the study, they could either talk with their therapist or call me to discuss these concerns. A sample of the recruitment packet for group home residents is in Appendix C. Of 23 group home residents whose parents consented to parti- cipation, 14 teenagers actually participated. This is a total of 35.9% of 39 families contacted and 60.9% of teenagers contacted. No 38 group home residents returned forms indicating the reasons they chose not to participate. Several teenagers with parental approval did not participate because they were unavailable. A number of parents consented to participation, but the residents were discharged suddenly from the system before research interviews could be conducted. Adolescents who ran away one or more times were among those discharged. Staff did not think these incidents were in response to this study except in one case. A resident scheduled for an appointment on two different occa- sions ran away the day of the scheduled interviews. When staff talked with him about it, he admitted he was anxious about the interview. Staff reminded him of his right to decline participation in all or part of the study. He did participate, but refused to do some por- tions of the procedure. Lack of cooperation by potential participants affected data col- lection procedure in another home. In probing staff, I learned that a group norm not to participate in the study existed, one participant was believed to be responsible for persuading others not to c00perate. When volunteers returned their consent forms, interviews were scheduled through therapists to avoid scheduling interviews at the same time as planned activities. Each teenager was then called to confirm an interview time. Interviews took place in the group home in a room where we would not be overheard or interrupted. 39 Procedures for Minimizing Potential Risks and Informed Consent Measures were taken to minimize potential risks to participants. Major risks fell into two categories: (1) answering questions about or spontaneous discussion of unlawful behavior, and (2) potential emergence of emotionally laden experiences. To minimize potential legal risks, participants chose four digit numbers at the beginning of the interviews. They were asked to choose their own numbers to further assure them that confidentiality was being maintained. All measures, audiotapes, and notes were identified only by participant numbers. After data collection, names and addresses were no longer linked in any way with the data. Because audiotapes might possibly be utilized to identify participants by voiceprint, interviews were transcribed as quickly as possible and then erased. In addition, any potential identifying information that emerged during interviews was changed during transcription (e.g., names, towns, schools). To minimize potential risk associated with the emergence of emotionally laden experiences, I maintained clinical sensitivity toward participants throughout the process so that I might detect any negative affect. In cases where anxious or depressed feelings emerged or there seemed to be reluctance to talk, I reminded participants that they could discontinue participation if they wished. In less extreme situations, I sometimes said that we could talk about why it was difficult for them to talk. Often in sexual history interviews, the interviewee is assured that the interviewer has talked with many 40 peOple about these very same things. I further assured some teenagers in this way when apprOpriate. Two female high school participants talked about having been victims of physical violence with their boyfriends, and two female group home participants talked about incest situations. In all cases, after their interviews participants were assured that the perpetra- tors' actions were illegal and wrong. The former two girls were urged to talk with trusted others about their situations. Incest survivors both stated they were talking with their therapists about the occur- rences. The informed consent procedure began with the recruitment packet in which there was a brief description of the project and information about the confidentiality of responses. The packet contained an informed consent form to be signed both by the parent/guardian and the participant. Group home residents and their parents/legal guardians were assured that services the teenagers received would be the same whether or not they decided to participate. All were encouraged to call if they wanted any further information. A number of parents did. No information was kept from parents or potential participants. After return of informed consent forms, when research interviews were scheduled, participants were asked if they had any questions. When participants arrived for their interview appointments, they were again briefed on project procedures and their rights and respon- sibilities. After data collection, participants were asked one last time if they had any responses, questions or comments as a result of their participation in the research. I told them that copies of study 41 results would be mailed to the addresses I have on file with their consent forms when the study was completed. They then were thanked for their participation. Data Collection High School Students. Interviews were conducted at Michigan State University. After obtaining informed consent, I had a shOrt period of just talking to establish rapport. A total of four instru- ments were used for this dissertation: a short demographic interview, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) (Short Form) or Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R) (Short Form), Real Life Dilemma Interview, and Sexual Dilemma Interview. Three additional measures were administered as a part of the larger study. A brief description of procedures used with each instrument follows in the section entitled Measures. All in all, these proce- dures took 2 to 2-1/2 hours to complete. If participants could not read (as estimated during the administration of the vocabulary portion of the intelligence test and/or by asking), I read the pencil and paper measures to them. Frequent breaks were offered. Group Home Residents. Prior to interviewing group home resi- dents, brief notes were taken from their agency files which included length of time in the facility, presenting problems, psychiatric diagnoses (if listed), brief family histories, and WISC-R scores (when available). Parental permissions were obtained for access to the files. The remaining data were collected from participants at the 42 group home facility in a room that assured that we would not be overheard or interrupted. Procedures followed were exactly the same except that the WISC-R or WAIS-R test was not done if a score was on file. Measures The Demographic Interview. A short interview was conducted to obtain basic demographic information such as gender, race, socio- economic status (SES), and age. Participant's parental educational and occupational status was obtained to estimate social class, using the two-factor index of social position (Hollingshead & Redlich, 1958). Although this classification index was developed in another era, it was updated and continues to represent adequately families' status in society as measured by parents' level of knowledge and opportunity or ability to influence the culture through their occupa- tional endeavors. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) gg Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WATS-R). For participants under age 17, the WISC-R short form (Kaufman, 1976) was administered. This consisted of a battery of four subtests: Vocabulary, Arithmetic, Block Design and Picture Arrangement. This short form incorporated both verbal and performance measures and provided an overall IQ score with a standard error of estimate of 5. A similar battery of the WAIS-R was administered to participants over 17. Real Life Dilemma Interview (Lyons é Gilligan, 1984). The inter- view protocol and technique called for open ended questions directed 43 by a guiding hypothesis. First, I explained the exploratory nature of the study, emphasizing that there are no right or wrong answers. I offered participants an opportunity to look over interview questions before we began. Each participant was then asked to describe a real life moral situation in which he or she couldn't decide what was the right thing to do. Applying the research method suggested by Lyons and Gilligan (1984), I probed in a non-directive way to elicit con- siderations of the conflicts and of the resolutions, as well as aspects of the ways the participants evaluated what they actually did. Other questions were asked to clarify the subjects' cognitive moral decision making processes. The complete interview protocol is Appendix D. Sexual Dilemma Interview (adapted from Lyons é Gilligan, 1984). This portion of the interview (see Appendix D) is an adaptation of the Real Life Dilemma interview. Each participant was asked to think of situations in which he or she might have engaged in sexual behavior but couldn't decide what was the right thing to do or what he or she wanted to do. The same series of questions, designed to probe the reasoning used in the decision making process, was asked. Other Measures. Subsequently, three additional measures were administered as a part of the larger study: Rest's (1979) Defining Issues Test; the Elliot, Huizinga, Knowles and Canter (1983) Self Report Delinquency measure; and the Pearson, Reinhart, Donelson, Strommen and Barnes (1986) Relationship Self Identity Questionnaire. 44 Transcription Interview audiotapes were transcribed by three undergraduate stu- dents and a professional secretary. In all cases, transcribers were given instructions. They were asked to maintain the confidentiality of interviews, to change all identifying information (e.g., names, places, schools), and to render transcripts as closely as possible to what they heard on the tapes. With regard to the latter, typists were asked to punctuate by interpreting breaks between thoughts when indi- cated by changes in voice inflection or short pauses. This was to facilitate coding. They were also told to put in sighs, laughs, pauses, and so on, where apprOpriate. Last, they were asked to tran- scribe verbatim both the participants' and the interviewers' words, although stammers or repeated false starts such as "uh" or er could be eliminated. When they could not hear or understand, they left a blank line. I then completed the blanks when I checked their work to correct any misunderstandings or errors. During transcription, one tape was lost. Part of another inter- view was lost when the tape recorder broke in the middle of the interview. IEE QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS Training 13 the Lyons and Gilliggg (1984) Research Method The purpose of this section is to explain training procedures, both my training by Lyons and Gilligan (1984) and also that of coders who were trained by me to code data for this study. Actual coding 45 procedures will be described in the next section--Description of the Coding Process. My Training. The quantitative coding system and manual were develOped by Lyons (1982) as her doctoral thesis, entitled, "Modes of Moral Choice: Identifying Justice and Care in Judgments of Actual Moral Dilemmas." I attended a seminar entitled, "WorkshOp for Research and Data Analysis," in June of 1984, at Harvard University. The workshop was taught by Nona Lyons, Carol Gilligan, and other peOple who were involved in research using this method. Course parti- cipants read Lyons (1983) and Gilligan (1982) in preparation for the course. In addition, we read the Research Handbook and the Coding Manual, produced for this seminar. During the course of the seminar, we refined interviewing technique and learned to code interview transcripts. The Coders' Training. For this research, undergraduate students were interviewed, and six were selected to be coders. They received academic credit during their three quarters of participation. One student left the university before coding began. Thus, it was neces- sary for me to be one of the coders. Preparation of undergraduate coders included understanding the theory, learning the method, and achieving reliability. This entire educational process took 20 weeks. Lyons (1982) states, "Especially important for categorizing the data are: (1) understand- ing the conceptualization of two different modes of moral judgment-- justice and care--that shape the way a person can construe, resolve, and evaluate moral choice; and (2) understanding the unique 46 perspective towards others embodied within each conception of morality" (p. 126). Coders' were required to read Gilligan (1982), Lyons (1983), Chodorow (1974, 1976), workshop materials, and additional articles relating more specifically to the study. We discussed the readings in class. In addition, I taught basic concepts of reliability, validity, and interviewing, as well as specific applications in this study. So that students coders would understand the entire method, they inter- viewed each other and conducted two practice interviews with under- graduate students. (They did not interview any participants in the study.) Then I taught the coding procedures. A percent agreement relia- bility of 70% was set. While coders achieved reliability with one another, we also compared our results with those of Gilligan's group and examined their reasoning in order to achieve some reliability with them. The main problem we had as a group was one shared by participants in the Harvard workshop--that is, distinguishing between (a) "Care of Self," a responsibility/caring orientation category, and (b) "General Effects to Self," a justice/rights orientation category. After rereading workshop notes and Gilligan (1982), I-had a meeting with Dr. Lyons in Cambridge (December, 1985) to discuss this problem. The results of this discussion were conveyed to coders with more explicit guidelines for coding. Resolution of this difficulty is described in 47 Appendix E--Distinguishing "Care of Self" from "General Effect to Self": An Example of Categorization. There was a 2-quarter (20 week) delay between achievement of reliability among coders and commencement of coding of interviews. Coders met periodically to keep the material fresh. After data was transcribed, we coded four interviews as a group to ensure reliability within and across pairs. Then interviews were distributed among three coder pairs. Memoranda were written to clarify any concerns that emerged. Coders were urged to call me if they ran into unresolved problems. After completing the coding, I read over several results of each coder pair as an informal reliability check. Coding Procedures Two coders coded each participant's interview. Coding procedures (Lyons, 1982) involved three major steps: (1) identifying dilemma components, (2) chunking components or content analysis, and (3) categorizing data. Step 1: Identifying Dilemma Components. Coders were instructed first to read over an interview protocol to get a sense of the person and the dilemma. Then two coders identified the main components of the dilemma which include the following (Lyons, 1982, p. 128): (1) The Situation: Statement of the event(s) that led to (the) conflict presented in response to the question, "...Have you ever been in a situation where you were faced with a moral conflict and had to make a decision but you weren't sure what was the right thing to do?" (2) The Conflict: Statement of the conflict for the individual, that is, what becomes a "problem" for the individual--usually found in response to "What was the conflict for you in that situation?" 48 (3) Any Elaboration 2f the Conflict: Statements elaborating conflict issues usually presented prior to a statement of the resolution. (4) The Decision/Resolution: Statement of what the indivi- dual did/how decided to resolve the problem or how will resolve.... (5) Evaluation of the Resolution: Statement usually in response to—"How did you know it was the right [or wrong] thing to do?" After marking components of the dilemma, coders checked with one another to make sure they identified components in the same way. Step EL Identifying Considerations. The second step entailed "chunking" components. Coders sought to identify distinct thoughts or considerations in three different aspects of a dilemma. The following is an excerpt from Lyons' (1982, p. 128) coding manual: (A) The Construction Sf the Problem: Statements of considerations in the "conflict," what became a problem for the person--already identified in Step 1. Considerations may be found in [the] following parts of the dilemma: the situation, the conflict, or the elaboration of the conflict. Considerations of the "problem" are usually presented prior to any statement of the resolution. (B) The Resolution gf the Conflict: Statements of considerations in arriving at the choice or the action taken to resolve the problem, usually found following the "decision" part of the dilemma, and to the question, "When you were thinking about what to do, what kinds of things did you consider?" (C) The Evaluation 2: the Resolution: Considerations in the evaluation of the resolution, usually found in response to "How did/do you know it was the right [or wrong] thing to do?" After each coder chunked dilemma components into distinct and unique thoughts or considerations, the pair came together for discussion 49 again. A percent agreement reliability was calculated: the total number of considerations agreed upon as individual thoughts, divided by the total number of considerations. This figure is called Reliability A in this study. Then coders came to a consensus on the chunks or considerations, such that they approached Step 3 with the same considerations. Step 2i Categorizing the Considerations. Independently, coders placed each of the considerations into one of the categories listed in Table 1 (Lyons, 1982, p. 192). The coding sheet is in Appendix F. After considerations were categorized, raters again computed percent agreement reliability: the number of considerations coded exactly the same, divided by the total number of codable considerations. This reliability figure was called Reliability B. From this coding scheme, a final summary ratio of total respon- sibility oriented considerations to the total number of codable consi- derations (responsibility/caring divided by responsibility/caring + justice/rights). This number is called the Real Life Dilemma Ratio for the first interview and the Sexual Dilemma Ratio for the second. A ratio of 1.00 indicates a person used all responsibility and caring considerations; a ratio of 0 indicates a person used all justice and rights considerations. As a final subjective coding check, coders were asked to recall the entire interview protocol, comparing ratio numbers with their subjective sense of a person's cognitive moral orientation. The formulas used to calculate reliabilities and dilemma ratio scores are shown in Table 2. 50 Table 1 Categories for Considerations in the Real Life Dilemma Interview Coding Method (Lyons, 1982) The Construction 2f the Problem Considerations of Response (Care) 1. 2. 3. V14> General effects to others (unelaborated). Maintenance or restoration of relationships; or response to another considering independence. Welfare/well-being of another or the avoidance of conflict; or the alleviation of another's burden/hurt/suffering (physical or psychological). Primacy of the situation over the principle. Considers care of self; care of self vs./and care of others. Consideration of Rights (Justice) 1. U19 General effects to the self (unelaborated including "trouble"; "how decide"). Obligations, duty or commitment. Standards, rules or principles for self or society; or, considers fairness, that is, how one would like to be treated if other's place. Primacy of the principle over the situation. Considers that others have their own contexts. 51 Table 1 (Continued) The Resolution gf the Problem/Conflict Considerations of Response (Care) 1. 2. 3. General effects to others (unelaborated). Maintenance or restoration of relationships; or response to another considering independence. Welfare/well-being of another or the avoidance of conflict; or the alleviation of another's burden/hurt/suffering (physical or psychological). Primacy of the situation over the principle. Considers care of self; care of self vs./and care of others. Consideration of Rights (Justice) 1. 2. 3. Mb General effects to the self (unelaborated including ”trouble"; "how decide"). Obligations, duty or commitment. Standards, rules or principles for self or society; or, considers fairness, that is, how one would like to be treated if other's place. Primacy of the principle over the situation. Considers that others have their own contexts. The Evaluation 2f the Resolution 1. Considerations of Response: What happened/how worked out; or whether relationships maintained/ restored. Considerations of Rights: How decided/thought about/justified; or whether values/standards/ principles maintained. 52 Table 2 Formulas Used to Calculate Reliabilities and Dilemma Ratio Scores Chunking Reliability: Reliability A = 100 X Number of_Considerations in Exact Agreement Total Number of Considerations Categorization Reliability: Reliability B = 100 X Considerations Categorized in Exact Agreement Total Number of Codable Considerations Real Life = 100 X Number of Responsibility & Caring Considerations Dilemma Ratio Total Number of Codable Considerations Sexual = 100 X Number of Responsibility &_Caring Considerations Dilemma Ratio Total Number of Codable Considerations Students coded each interview blind (unaware of gender, race, official delinquency status, and other attributes of participants). They first coded the Real Life Dilemma and then the Sexual Dilemma. In addition, they were asked to answer certain questions about the 53 interview. For example, "From which sample do you think this inter- view came?"; "What was the participant's gender?" Data Analysis Quantitative analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) (Nie, Hull, Jenkins, Steinbrenner, Bent, 1970). These included standard descriptive statistics, such as frequency distributions, means and standard devia- tions; Chi square analyses; analysis of variance; and correlational analyses. A decision level (alpha) for determining statistical signi- ficance was set at p < .05. THE QUALITATIVE METHOD 9: ANALYSIS Background 22 Qualitative Research Methodology Since many psychologists are not familiar with qualitative research methodology, it is a responsibility of qualitative researchers to make methods and assumptions explicit so that a skep- tical reader may understand results to be reliable and valid, although these terms do not exactly transfer to the realm of qualitative metho- dology. First, it may be helpful to distinguish between the three terms--method, methodology, and epistemology. Harding (1987) asserted that these terms are related in important ways. She also made dis- tinctions among them: A research method is a technique for (or way of proceeding in) gathering evidence. (p. 2) A methodology is a theory of how research does or should proceed; it includes accounts of how "the gen- eral structure of theory finds its application in par- ticular scientific disciplines" (Caws, 1967, p. 339). (p. 3) 54 An Epistemology is a theory of knowledge. It answers questions about who can be a "knower"...; what tests beliefs must pass in order to be legitimated as know- ledge...; what kinds of things can be known..., and so on. (p. 3) Qualitative and quantitative research represent two different methodo- logies. For example, "(s)tudies do not build on other studies, not in the sense that they take up where the others leave off, but in the sense that better informed and better conceptualized, they plunge more deeply into the same things" (Geertz, 1983, p. 55). Underlying metho- dology, qualitative research has a different epistemology--a different way of knowing. And different methods emerge from the methodologies. In other words qualitative differs from quantitative methodology in the following areas: underlying assumptions, research methods, goals of the research, communication of results, and evaluation of research. Qualitative methodology has been used extensively in the fields of anthropology, sociology, women's studies, and education. Partici- pant observation, field methods, and interview studies are the most common methods used in qualitative research methodology. Psychology, however, has traditionally been more aligned with natural science's quantitative methodology which embraces a linear, causal, deductive approach to knowledge. Phenomenological psychology is an exception. Wolman (1973) defines phenomenology as (1) The science of the subjective processes by which pheno- mena are presented. It deals with mental processes and concentrates on the ideal, essential elements of experi- ences. (2) The investigation of occurrences or phenomena as 55 they happen directly in experience without interpretation. (p. 278) Because the tOpic of phenomenological research inquiry is experience, the experiencer or research participant is the "knower." Accordingly, researchers use interview methods that enable them to explore peoples' experiences of different phenomena. They then analyze participants' protocols to elaborate the structure and meaning of the particular phenomena studied. These phenomenological researchers use primarily works of exis- tential philosophers (e.g., Husserl and Heidigger) to justify and explain their philosophy of science differences to mainstream psycho- logists who, for most part, value knowledge obtained using quanti- tative methodology. Phenomenological psychologists do not usually discuss their research methods in terms of a qualitative methodo- logical tradition. They do, however, use a theory and analysis of how research should proceed that places them within the qualitative tradi- tions as elaborated by other disciplines. In explaining and justify- ing qualitative methodology and methods, I will refer to authors from both the younger tradition of phenomenology and from the more established tradition of sociology. Sociological theorists do borrow from other disciplines in their work. Among psychologists, a primary issue in the debate of the worth of qualitative methodology is the credibility and usefulness of results. Researchers favoring both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, are genuinely concerned that only high quality research be entered into the canon of the field. Researchers using qualitative 56 methods, however, are in a minority. Thus, it is incumbent upon the qualitative researcher to give her or his readers background informa- tion on the methodology and epistemology. One way to accomplish this is to consider theoretical concepts as explained by three prominent qualitative methodologists: Grounded Theogy (Glaser é Strauss, 1967): The theorist seeks to produce a rich set of analytic propositions that identify and relate many diverse themes rather than establishing the relation between a few key variables, decided in advance. Theory is generated in two main ways. First, through constant comparison of the data the researcher develops conceptual categories and identifies their pr0perties. Second, additional data are collected using theoretical sampling, where new observations are made in order to pursue analytically relevant concerns rather than to establish the frequency or distribution of phenomena. The impetus behind theoretical sampling is thus the elaboration rather than the verification of theory (Emerson, 1983, p. 96). Analytic Induction: The researcher is committed to form a perfect relation between data and explanation. When encountering a "negative case"--evidence contradicting the current explanation--the researcher must transform it into a confirming case by revising the definition of either the explaining or the explained phenomenon. The researcher is enjoined to seek negative cases and the resulting Opportunity to modify the explanation. There is no methodological value in piling up data of a sort already determined to be consistent with the theory. Quantification, therefore, plays no logical role (Katz, 1983, p. 130). Interactional Strategy Analysis (Lofland, 1976): The goal is to develop theoretical prepositions that are 'grounded' in or reflect 'intimate familiarity' with the setting or events under study. Theory is grounded when it grows out of, and is directly relevant to, activities occurring in the setting under study....Such concepts are best develOped from [interview] data if the researcher avoids a premature commitment to any theory, a priori concept, or system for classifying field data (Emerson, 1983, p.94). 57 In summary, the goal of qualitative research is elaboration, not verification. The results are best communicated by giving a "thick description" (Geertz, 1983) of the phenomenon under study. One cannot make causal statements, but rather the work communicates all the intricacies of a moment in a process under study. Qualitative research methods have been and continue to be written about at great length. Ironically, authors conclude that there is no one method or set of methods that might be recommended. For example, "To say that the researcher creates her method as [slhe works may seem unbecoming, yet we are discussing this very point. Method is seen by the ... researcher as emerging from operations--from strategic deci- sions, instrumental actions, and analytic processes--which go on throughout the entire research enterprise" (Schatzman & Strauss, 1973, p. 7). Also, Colaizzi (1978) wrote, "Each particular psychological phenomenon, in conjunction with the particular aims and objectives of a particular researcher, evokes a particular method....There is no single method or procedure." However there are certain suggestions made to increase the fidelity (Colaizzi, 1978), the credibility or "ring of truth" (Schatzman & Strauss, 1973), or the veracity of results (Emerson, 1983). Probably the most complete discussion of the methodological issues occurs in Katz's (1983) discussion of the four R's as used in field methods: Representativeness, Reactivity, Reliability, and Replicability. Representativeness. "Analytic research rests the external validity of a study on its internal variety. The more differences 58 discovered within the data, the greater the number of possible negative cases, and thus the more broadly valid the resulting theory. Given the strategy of exploiting internal variety in order to warrant generalizability, the ideal site [or sample] is one that is both in a period of historical change and has the most differentiated members" (Katz, 1983, p. 134). Reactivity. Katz's discussion of reactivity is more a critique of highly controlled quantitative methods. "(T)he use of fixed methods to combat reactivity paradoxically exacerbates the problem.... Analytic field methods ... minimize the risk that members will act 'artificially' as research subjects" (Katz, 1983, p. 138). This relates to Lofland's view of research being formed with the parti- cipant, the researcher, and their interactions, all affecting the results. The burden is on the researcher to minimize demand characteris- tics by creating an atmosphere in which participants feel as natural- istic as possible. "Subjects" are engaged as co-participants with the researcher in conducting an inquiry. They are the experts. At the same time, the researcher must be aware of and note how her or his presence might alter the observations. This, too, is considered to be data. In addition, the researcher is permitted to change an approach to minimize her or his impact. In this way, "it lets [the partici- pants] shape an identity for the researcher that itself provides valuable substantive data" (Katz, 1983, p. 138). 59 Reliability. Most measures of reliability used to evaluate quantitative research (e.g., interrater agreement and test-retest) are not applicable to qualitative research. "By definition, so long as a researcher's encounters with the data are governed by preset coding rules, they cannot be exploited to develop qualifications in substan- tive analytic categories. But qualitative research is not necessarily 'impressionistic.' The search for negative cases leads the qualita- tive researcher to a holistic analysis that binds prOposition and data into an intricate network" (Katz, 1983, p. 140). Because standard quantitative methods for assessing results can- not be used, other methods must be developed to convince the reader that researcher's observations and resulting formulations are cred- ible. One mandate is that results in all cases be grounded in the data. Geertz (1983) wrote that his goal is "to keep the analysis of symbolic forms as closely tied ... to concrete social events and occasions, the public world of common life, and to organize it in such a way that the connections between theoretical formulations and des- criptive interpretation were unobscured by appeals to dark sciences" (p. 58-59). Colaizzi (1978) recommends a seven step method as a guideline for promoting and ensuring rigor in the analysis of interview data. (1) Read an interview protocol to get a sense of it. (2) Extract signi- ficant statements from the protocol, eliminating repetitions. (3) Formulate meanings with creative insight that go from what partici- pant's say to what they mean. In carrying out this step one must "never sever all connection with the original protocol....The 60 researcher must go beyond what is given in the original data and at the same time, stay with it" (p. 59). (4) After repeating steps one through three for all protocols, organize the "formulated meanings into clusters of themes....Refer these clusters back to the original protocols in order to validate them" (p. 59). (5) Inevitably the clusters of themes may not work or there may be inconsistencies. The researcher must work with the data until it all fits together. "[Slhe must refuse the temptation of ignoring data or themes which don't fit, or of prematurely generating a theory which would merely conceptual- abstractly eliminate the discordance of [the] data findings thus far" (p. 61). (6) Formulate a complete description. (7) Validate the formulation by returning to the original participants to obtain their feedback on the research results. "Any relevant new data that emerges from these interviews must be worked into the final product of the research" (p. 62). There is some debate in the sociological literature with Colaizzi's Step 7, called member validation in sociological terms, being used as validation of the data or results. Bloor (1983) makes the point that member validation interviews, cannot be treated as a test of validity. Some of the reasons are: differences in purpose of researcher and participant; discrepancies in structure of lay and professional accounts; level of participants'interest in the endeavor being sometimes limited; tensions created by requiring the participant to enter into the researcher's frame; and lack of agreement between participants' descriptions of their world. He argues that member 61 validation results instead be considered additional data with the consequent "opportunity for the extension of the [researcher's] origi- nal analysis" (Bloor, 1983, p. 172). The method used for data collection in this research takes into account issues of representativeness and reactivity. Participants represented a wide variety of backgrounds. An effort was made to have each participant feel as though he or she was the expert and co- participant in the inquiry. There is one aspect of data collection that needs to be con- sidered with regard to the quality of interview data used in the qualitative analysis. It is often emphasized that phenomenologi- cal or qualitative researchers should be aware of any preconceptions or biases that might affect either data collection or analysis. These biases should be bracketed or put aside in order to assure that parti- cipants are free to discuss their experiences from their own frame- work, not that of the researcher. On one hand, I did attempt to bracket my biases. However, although the interview protocol used in the Lyons and Gilligan (1984) method is semi-structured and therefore open-ended in ways, the protocol does have some structure. This structure limited the sc0pe of possible interview responses to areas defined by characteristic elements of the dilemma: description of the situation, elaboration of the conflict, resolution of the con- flict, and evaluation of the decision. The quantitative method thus structured results of the qualitative analysis of the sexual decision to be primarily cognitive in quality with no particular emphasis on affect or other possible components of the experience. 62 Qualitative Data Analysis Qualitative methodologists (e.g., Colaizzi, 1978) emphasize that a specific method of analysis emerges from a particular study. How- ever, basic elements of qualitative interview methodology designed to ensure rigor or credibility were performed during the analysis, including Colaizzi's steps 1-6. Step 7, member validation, was not carried out because measures used to assure anonymity of participants did not permit recontacting participants. Therefore, this study has a missing layer of data that would have enriched results, but validity of results was not compromised (Bloor, 1983). Following is a descrip- tion of steps in the method used in this dissertation to analyze qualitative data. Becoming Familiar with the Interview. Interview proto- cols were read to get a sense of themes and general meaning in each. Reducing the Protocol. Each verbatim interview transcript was reduced. A phenomenological reduction of an interview permits the researcher to change verbatim interview data in order to work more efficiently. In this study, participant's exact language was retained with the following exceptions: (a) narratives were slightly rearranged so that statements on one topic appeared together in the text; (b) unnecessary and redundant phrases were eliminated (e.g., repetitive use of " you know"); (o) my words (as an interviewer asking a question) were sometimes worked into the participants' sentences in order to enhance readability; and (d) certain phrases that might potentially identify a participant were changed in order to protect 63 confidentiality while retaining a participant's original sense. None of these changes altered the meaning or substantive content of the interviews. Interviews that did not have any dilemma content were eliminated (e.g., I haven't every been in a situation like that at all). Two participants elaborated more than one dilemma. Fifty interview reduc- tions formed the data set for qualitative analysis. These sexual dilemma interview protocols appear in Appendix G. Identifyigg Themes. A theme is defined in The Random House Dictionary as "a subject that forms the underlying idea of a discourse or discussion." Thematic analysis of each interview resulted in a number of ways of analyzing the data. For the qualitative analysis presented in this study, 10 interviews were selected as representative of the total set. Each interview was examined in a global way by asking the question, "Why was this situation or decision important to this person?" Or, "what was the developmental meaning of the situation to the participant?" A number of criteria within interviews helped in identification of an overall theme for an interview. For example, a participant (a) talked first about that theme, (b) talked several times about that theme, (c) used the theme very heavily in the evaluation of their decision, (d) identified the theme explicitly as the most important contributor to the decision, or (e) talked about that particular theme with the greatest level of affect. 64 After identifying the major theme of the ten interviews, there were six mutually exclusive themes. Themes were designated in experience-near terms in order to keep the analysis grounded in the interview data. Experience-near terminology is that language the teenagers used themselves. Resolving the Thematic Inconsistencies. I then attempted to categorize all 50 interview protocols into the six-theme structure. Two interviews did not fit, and a seventh theme emerged that charac- terized them both. Naming the seven themes in experience-near terms was a constant back and forth process--gaining a subjective sense of the data and choosing a phrase to name a theme, then returning to check the label against the remainder of the interviews categorized in that theme. Because there can be no negative cases within a theme, slight revisions often occurred until an experience-near theme accur- ately described all interviews categorized within it. Describing the Themes. The term used to designate the charac- teristics of a theme (subtheme) is marker. Each marker highlighted one topic or quality that emerged in either all or most of the narra- tives categorized in a theme. Markers for each theme were named in experience-near terms. I examined interviews representative of each of theme to identify clusters of markers that characterized the theme. An interview need not have exhibited all subtheme markers to be clas- sified within a theme, but it had to exhibit most. Markers that were missing from an interview were absent because of lack of participant's elaboration or because that particular marker was not as important for him or her. However, no data within any interviews of a theme 65 contradicted the marker. Markers were not exclusive to a theme in that the same marker may emerge in the context of another theme. In summary, there were seven mutually exclusive themes, each of which was characterized by a set of markers or subthemes. The same back and forth procedure used to resolve inconsistencies in themes was used to resolve inconsistencies in identifying and naming markers--going from the data to choosing an experience-near descriptive phrase and checking back to the data again. After all inconsistencies were resolved, supporting data was sought for each marker within each interview categorized in a theme. I checked back and forth, sometimes to search out additional or clearer instances of a marker within the data and sometimes to rename the marker to better characterize all of the instances. The final structure was found to accurately reflect the data, while at the same time the data had formed the structure. The resul- tant structure used all the data; there were no negative instances that contradicted the themes or markers. The thematic structure was simple yet contributed to an understanding of a complex event--the process of sexual decision making in adolescence. The themes, mar- kers, and theoretical meanings are described in Chapter 5, The Qualitative Analysis. In summary, the issues of representativeness and participant demand characteristics were minimized during recruitment and data collection through selection of a diverse sample and good interview technique. Rigor (reliability) was ensured at the level of analysis 66 first by bracketing and setting aside theoretical biases by the researcher. The structure that emerged from the data was checked by returning to the original interviews, refining and revising the struc- ture, and again checking it with the data. There being a demonstrated fidelity to the data set, simplicity and elegance of results, and no negative cases, the analysis was terminated. CHAPTER 4 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, INTERVIEW TERRAIN, AND QUANTITATIVE RESULTS SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Data collection occurred during the academic year 1985-86. A total of 46 high school students and 16 group home residents were interviewed (Ne60). Because these two groups had only one statis- tically significant difference (racial composition) on any variable measured (both independent and dependent), the following summary of descriptive statistics are not reported separately for the two groups. A discussion of the racial difference between the two groups follows the sample description. Gender composition of the sample was approximately equal. Mean age of teenagers was 15.6 years (SD = .98). Socioeconomic status, measured by the Hollingshead and Redlich (1958) two factor scale, was skewed toward lower classes. The mean of social class ratings was 3.7 (SE = 1.67). Both the mean and mode of students' grade level in school was 10, although they ranged from 7th to 12th grades. A sum- mary of frequency distributions of these variables is listed in Table 3. Intelligent quotient scores for the sample included estimates of Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale, measured by four subtests of the WISC-R or WAIS-R, depending on the participant's age. There was a wide range of scores with means that fell slightly below average on 67 68 Table 3 Descriptive Statistics for Demographic Variables Demographic Variable Frequency Percent of Total (N = 60) Sample High School 46 77. Group Home 14 23 Gender Female 31 52 Male 29 48 Race Caucasian 36 60 Minority 24 40 Breakdown gf Minority Participants Black 14 Hispanic 4 Native American 1 Asian American 1 Mixed Heritage 4 Age'3 14 7 12 15 25 42 16 16 27 17 11 18 18 1 2 Socioeconomic Statusb I 2 3 II 6 10 III 15 25 IV 25 42 V 12 20 a Mean Age = 15.6, SD = .98. b Mean Socioeconomic Status = 3.7, SD = 1.67. 69 all three measures. No persons scored in the mentally retarded range on the Full Scale estimate. A summary of intelligence quotient stat- istics appears in Table 4. Table 4 Intelligence Quotient Estimates Measured by WISC-R or WAIS-R (N = 60) Standard Test Score Mean Deviation Mode Range Verbal 94.9 12.8 85 67-126 Performance 98.9 14.5 100 54-135 Full Scale 96.7 11.7 94 72-124 Analyses of correlations among demographic variables were performed to determine whether there were any significant relation- ships between pairs of variables that might bear on the results. There were two significant correlations: (1) Sample with Race and (2) Full Scale IQ with Age. Results are listed in Table 5. (1) Sample with Race (£_= -.29, p_<.05). This point biserial correlation indicates that there were more minority participants in the high school sample than in the group home sample. Since the variable of minority status had no relationship to any of the 70 Table 5 Relationships Among Sample Descriptive Variables: Pearson Product Moment Correlations (N = 60) Gender Race Sample Age Full Scale IQ a Gender --- b Race -.04 --- c Sample .10 -.29* --- Age -.13 -.12 -.O7 --- Full Scale IQ .09 -.08 -.02 -.34** --- Social Class -.11 .02 -.02 -.04 -.17 a Gender: (1) = female, (2) = male. b Race: (1) = Caucasian, (2) = minority. c Sample: (1) = high school, (2) = group home. *p < .05. **p < .01. dependent measures, this group difference was not considered to have an impact on further quantitative results. A Chi square analysis of minority status by sample group appears in Table 6. I attributed the difference in group composition between minority and white participants to two factors: (a) there were very few minority females in the group home system, and (b) minority males were segregated in one particular home. After interviewing two males at 71 Table 6 a Chi Square Analysis : Race with Sample (N = 60) Caucasian Minority Row Totals High School 24 22 46 Group Home 12 2 14 Column Totals 36 24 6O a Chi square = 5.03, f = 1, p < .05. this home, two others declined to participate even though their parents had given permission. One of the boys from this home who I did interview was particularly anxious during and after the inter- views. He was described by staff as an informal group leader. The group home staff indicated that he may have established a group perception that participation was not good or fun or cool, thus inhi- biting other boys from volunteering. (2) Full Scale IQ with Age (5 = -.34, p < .01). This second significant correlation indicates that older participants tended to have lower IQ estimated scores. Full scale IQ was also significantly 72 related to the type of IQ test used (E? .31, p < .05). In other words, participants who completed the WAIS-R (g = 14) tended to score lower on the intelligence quotient estimate than did those who were administered the WISC-R subtests (g = 46). Perhaps the WAIS-R short form is not as accurate for 17 year olds as is the well-researched WISC-R short form. The partial correlation between Full Scale IQ and Age, controlling for effects of the test used, was not significant (5 = .20). Therefore, the significant correlation between Age and Full Scale IQ is an artifact of the test used. In addition, although Age and Full Scale IQ were related to one another, these two variables were not related to anything else in the study, including other demo- graphic variables. INTERVIEW TERRAIN Introduction This section provides the reader with an overview of the content of the sexual dilemmas prior to reporting the quantitative results. Following is a description of (3) interviews with no sexual dilemma elaborated, (b) dilemma situations, and (c) other interview variables. Interviews with N3 Sexual Dilemma Elaborated Two participants' interviews were lost during data collection and transcription. Participants were both high school students, one male and one female. Forty-three of the 58 remaining participants (74%) elaborated codable sexual dilemmas. This was a total of 73% of the high school sample and 79% of the group home sample. Twelve of the 73 remaining 15 participants did not elaborate a sexual dilemma at all; two talked about general dilemmas or issues; and one told about a dilemma with only three codable responses. I attempted to explore the reasons no dilemmas were elaborated with this group of 12 participants (8 boys and 4 girls). There were four basic types of responses: (1) I Just Don't Do That, (2) I Don't Want to Talk About It, (3) I Can't Think of a Situation, and (4) I've Got My Mind Made Up. I Just Don't 29 That. Three girls stated they didn't have an Opportunity. Following are excerpts from their interviews. The first is a girl who was in a group home situation for two years; the second, a middle class minority high school girl; the last, a girl who was in special education classes for years. I can't think of a situation. Basically, I don't do sexual things.... I haven't really had any situations 'cause I haven't been out there since I was like fourteen. I've been in these group home places, so I don't really have to think of all that stuff. (#6149) I can't think of any situations. I haven't been in a lot of situations like that. In fact, I haven't had hardly any. My dad didn't want me to start that serious thing until after high school. So, I haven't really been in any sort of situation like that. (#3521) This is hard for me talk about. I have never talked with anybody about it before. The only thing I know is that you should never go out with an older person if you're still young. I haven't ever been in any situations. I think I'm a little too young for this. I don't quite want to know anything until I'm 18. I don't want to go out on dates and all that. (#1968) I Don't Want £2 Talk About IE. Two boys acknowledged sexual dilemmas, but they chose not to talk about them. 74 Yeah. I have been in situations many times, and I don't want to talk about it. It's my business; that's all. (#6664) I never thought about it. I just did it. There are situa- tions where I couldn't decide, but I don't want to think about it. (#3798) I Can't Think gf g Situation. Five males said they just couldn't think of a situation when they couldn't decide what to do. These boys were all 14 and 15 years old. Following are a few examples: I don't know any situations, not really. I can't think of any. Not even a while back. (#1001) I can't really think of any situations. I'm really sorry I couldn't think of anything. I hope it's not going to ruin your research. (#1016) No, I've never been in a situation like that. I have a girlfriend, and we kiss a lot and hold hands in school. That's it. There hasn't been any situations where I shouldn't. (#8000) I've Got My Mind Made Up. The last two teenagers said they had been in sexual situations, but either had their mind made up what to do prior to the situation or had a decision rule on which to rely that was not exactly related to sexual limits. These two people were both young (ages 14 and 15), minority participants. I know what my feelings are, and I go with my feelings. It's mostly about teenage pregnancy. I'm not really ready to take care of a kid. It would be bad. I'm just a kid myself. (#3241) The only decision I can think of is whether or not I want to be with somebody. Then it's easy. If I do, I can be with them. If I don't, I don't. Like what is this kid like? He's got a reputation if he's nice. Or sometimes I just sit and talk and figure somebody out. Then I can pretty much tell what the outcome is gonna be. It's whatever feels right at the time, wherever I happen to be. (#6879) 75 The majority of the participants who did not elaborate a sexual dilemma were male. This might be attributed to the fact that the interviewer was female. Dilemma Situations A total of 43 participants elaborated codable dilemmas in which they related specific situations. There were an additional seven sexual dilemma interviews in which participants elaborated general dilemmas, more than one sexual dilemma, or a specific dilemma with only three codable considerations. These 50 general or specific situations included dilemmas about whether to engage in intercourse (3 = 34), kissing and touching behaviors (E = 10), and unusual dilemmas (e.g., incest, group sex, and commitment) (g = 6). Intercourse. Thirty-four of the 50 situations involved a deci- sion whether or not to have heterosexual intercourse. Nineteen were first intercourse situations. In these 19 situations, five teenagers decided to engage in the intercourse activity. A few short examples of these situations follow. There was a situation where I didn't know if I wanted to because of the chance of getting pregnant. (#5116) Before Jim, I did have a relationship with Harry, but we never got that far. Maybe kissing and hanging onto hands...just going out and doing things. Besides that, there was only Jim. It was the first time. (#4682) It was the first time I ever had sex. It was a neat experi- ence. It wasn't really a decision. I knew what I wanted to do and was going to do it. But I wasn't sure. (#1123). The other 14 teenagers in first intercourse situations chose not to proceed at that time. Here are a few examples. 76 Like with my first real boyfriend. I was in the ninth grade, and he was pushing to have sex. I just didn't want to. (#7220) When John and I first started seeing each other, he wanted to have intercourse. I really didn't know what to do. It was one time when my friend, Cindy, and I were sleeping out in the back yard in a tent. During the middle of the night her boyfriend came over, and he brought John with him. Her boyfriend had to leave because Cindy got sick and went in the house. So John and I were in the tent all by ourselves. It was sooooo hard. It was a tough time to resist. He kept saying, "Come on. Come on." And I was just going back and forth. But I couldn't. It was just hard to say no 'cause I wanted to as much as he did. (#5402) Someone wanted me to do it. She was pretty. It was just like she was there, and I was there. I wanted to do it in some ways, but I just couldn't. I'm sort Of shy. (#3257) Five teenagers, all of whom were minority participants, clearly had previous intercourse experiences. Two examples follow: One time there was a guy I knew from school. We had the same friends, but I didn't really know him well. He never really spoke to me because he really liked me, and he didn't know how to approach me. Well, I was at this party, and he saw me. I took him home, and we talked. Then it seemed like he wanted me to have sex with him. It was in my head, "Yeah. Yeah." I wanted to. But then again I didn't. (#7593) Well, there's this one girl. We had an Opportunity to do it. I wasn't so sure about it, but she was, I guess. I had been trying for weeks, and all of a sudden I had an Oppor- tunity. It was strange! She was intoxicated, let me put it that way. Otherwise, there'd be no game and there'd be no anything. She would have just said, "NO." All of a sudden it was her turning and saying, "Yes!! Let's!" SO the ques- tion was why did she want to do it. I was kind of worried whether she was all right. I mean, was she doing this on her own, or was she just drunk? I didn't want her to wake up tomorrow and say, "I did this! You did this?!" I really didn't want that because it wasn't something I'd enjoy having then. (#6000) For five teenagers, it was difficult to tell whether or not they had had previous intercourse experiences. Following are two examples: 77 When you meet a guy, you wonder what's gonna become Of it. You just don't want it tO become a one night thing. I think it's a matter Of deciding how much you like somebody and how they feel about you. You're not just with all different peOple. There was a guy I used to see. We used to date Off and on, and we went together for a long time. I wasn't sure whether I wanted to be with him sexually because he was really a different kind Of a person. He sort Of had like two personalities. He would change so much. (#2311) My girlfriend wanted tO go to bed, and I wanted to. I said, "Well, do you have protection?" (#0017) Kissing and Touching. There were 10 situations that were within the kissing and petting range Of behavior. Following are two examples: It was during junior high. Steve was a year Older than I was. We'd hold hands and all Of that. The boyfriend and girlfriend thing. He would walk me to my class. Then I fell in love with him. At least I thought we were in love, but I found out differently later. I had never kissed a boy before and he would ask me, "When can I kiss you?" And I would always turn around and ignore his question or pretend I didn't hear it. I'd make an excuse that I had to leave for somewhere. For a long time, he didn't get it. Sometimes he'd get mad at me, but not so bad that he might pound on the desk or anything. (#6666) Well, it's when you meet some girl and you're not sure whether to go, or how far to go, or whether you should even go anywhere with her. It's kind Of when you have a block and you don't know what to do. There was one time when this happened. I was worried because I didn't want to get like a weird response, or make her nervous, or just didn't want her to be uncomfortable. It was hard to judge her reaction. I was aroused, but if she would have been, I would have gotten signs or something. SO, I considered whether to make a move or not to. I knew I was safe if I didn't. But if I did, I might be getting into something where I don't know what I'm doing. (#2222) Four Of the 10 kissing/touching situations did not include dilemmas about sexual limits per se, but centered around the concept Of public display Of affection. 78 It was when I wanted to kiss my boyfriend in school. It was a conflict because everyone was around. (#6639) I was standing with my friend, and Michael came up to me and started holding my hand. I snatched my hand from him, and then he was trying to get me to give him a hug. Then I just pushed him Off me and walked away. I really don't like to do kiss or hug in public. (#2121) Unusual Dilemmas. Six interview dilemmas were about situations that occur less frequently in teenage populations: (1) Incest and Child Sexual Abuse, (2) Group Sex, and (3) Commitment. (1) Incest and Child Sexual Abuse. Two of the situations des- cribed were incestuous, one brother-sister and one stepfather-daughter. Both of these participants were white girls, living in a group home. There were other incest survivors in the group home sample, both male and female, but they did not talk about their incest experiences. One time when we moved from Kansas, my mom and step-dad got a divorce. Me and my brother were really close. We always hung around and did things together. He's three years Older than me. I was nine, and he was twelve. We were sitting in bed, watching TV, and he said, "Have you heard of brothers and sisters having sex?" And I said, "Yeah," but I really hadn't. SO, he said, "You want to try it?" (#1309) But now that I think about it, there was a time when I was eight years old. My stepfather wanted me to sleep with him. I was scared, and I didn't know what to do. (#0666) One of the incest survivors also described a situation in which a man attempted to "help" her, a runaway teenager, by becoming her adviser in setting up a business of prostitution. I was on the road with a truck driver. He told me that if I was ever gonna make it, I was gonna have to go into prosti- tution. I didn't want to do it, that wasn't even my last resort, 'cause I would never do that. But I just said, "Yeah, yeah, I know." So, he asked me if I had ever done it before, and I said no. And he said since I didn't know, that he'd tell me the prices. And he said, "Will you give 79 me head?" And I said, "No, I don't want to." And he said, "Well, then you can get out Of the truck." And I got out. You just don't go sleeping around with peOple you don't know. And truck drivers are almost always dirty. It's kind of gross. (#1309) (2) Group Sex. The first group sex referred was what is commonly called a gang bang. Another boy related a dilemma in which he was invited to join in an orgy, another type of group sex situation. One time when I had run away, I was out with some boys that I knew. They were going to give me a place to stay. Then one night, we had all gotten drunk. My boyfriend asked me if I would go to bed with some of his friends. He said, "If you don't, I'm not going to give you a place to stay." And I said, "Well, that's pretty boge." Well, I needed a place to stay, but I really didn't want to go to bed with all of his friends. (#1309) There was another time I'd like to talk about. It's kind of sick really. I'm in a club, and one of the guys threw a party. It was kind of a surprise party so none of us knew what he was going to do. When we got there, there was about thirty girls. We knew then that what he had planned was basically an orgy. There were about eighteen guys. We didn't know any of the girls. There was a lot of, "Hi. How you doin'? Let's get on the floor." Basically, we all sat down and talked about it. (#7777) (3) Commitment. One dilemma involved whether or not to break a commitment to a steady girlfriend by being sexual with his best friend's girlfriend. Two months ago I was going with a girl, Marie. I liked her, and she liked me. We had plans and everything. Her parents had a cabin on a river. My girlfriend and her family had just left for a weekend at the cabin and I was still in town. My best friend, Jerry, and his girlfriend, Tammy, came over to my house and we were all just messing around. Then Jerry had to leave. Tammy said that she wanted to stay around a little longer and that she would catch up to him later. SO he left, and Tammy and I started messing around, watching TV and everything. She just started saying a bunch of stuff. I had to choose to do what she wanted me to do or just leave her alone. (#0007) 80 Other Interview Variables Participants were asked whether or not they chose to engage in the activity about which they talked. A clear majority (62%) of the teenagers chose not to. In addition, participants were asked whether they thought what they did was the right or wrong thing for them to do. Eighty percent reported that they felt they had done the right thing. When asked to define morality, only 64% of the teenagers gave a definition. Of those who gave both a definition and a sexual dilem- ma, 72% felt that the dilemma was a moral problem. These statistics and Others relevant to the interview terrain are summarized in Table 7. None of these interview variables correlated significantly with any of the descriptive variables (sample, gender, race, age, IQ, or social class). However, in examining relationships among interview variables, I found that those teenagers who chose 225 to engage in the sexual activity were significantly more likely to feel that they had done the right thing (E = .64, p < .001). Given the total number of correlations run on these data, there is a possibility that this one significant result might be due to chance alone. However, the cor- relation is high and it makes sense that teenagers who are pushing their own boundaries, trying new behaviors, might be more likely to feel some regret or ambivalence for having done so than those who have in a sense made a decision to stay the same. 81 Table 7 a Description of the Sexual Dilemma Interviews Descriptor Frequency Percent Did the participant elaborate a specific codable dilemma (N = 60)? Yes 43 72 No 15 25 Was the dilemma about intercourse? (E = 44) Yes 34 77 No 10 23 Did the participant choose to engage in the sexual activity? (3 = 45) Yes 17 38 No 28 62 Did the participant feel he or she made the right decision? (2 = 44) Yes 35 80 NO 5 11 Yes and NO 4 9 Did the participant define morality? (g = 59) Yes 38 64 No 21 36 Did the participant view his or her sexual decision as a moral problem? (3 = 29) Yes 21 72 NO 8 28 a Total sample E.= 60. Subsequent gs differ according to whether interviews could be rated for a variable. 82 THE QUANTITATIVE RESULTS Reliabiligy Two interviews were conducted with each participant: a Real Life Dilemma (RLD) and a Sexual Dilemma (SXD). Each coder pair calculated two reliability values (percent agreement) for each interview that was coded. The first reliability figure, Reliability A, pertains to chunking the interview protocol into considerations or distinct thoughts. The second, Reliability B, was pertains to categorizing each of the considerations into the distinct moral orientation categories. All three coder pairs had similar reliability figures. The percent agreement reliability values were averaged across coders for each of four reliability calculations. Results are summarized in Table 8. In coding both dilemmas, chunking data was more reliable Table 8 Percent Agreement Reliability Results for Coding of Interview Data Reliability A Reliability B Chunking Categorizing Real Life Dilemma (g = 58) 76.7 67.8 Sexual Dilemma (g = 43) 79.1 64.2 than categorizing data. This is the Opposite of results reported in the Gilligan, et al., (1982) study of rights and responsibilities: 83 Reliability A values for two pairs of coders were 75% and 76%, and Reliability B values were 84% and 78%. Interview protocols were identified using only participant num- bers. In other words, a coder was not informed of whether a partici- pant was male or female, high school student or group home resident. However, during interviews participants often said something that would make their gender or sample group known to the coder. Coders were aware of study hypotheses. Therefore, I cautioned them to put aside any expectations or biases they might have, and approach the coding process Openly and reliably. As one check on coding bias, after the coders finished each protocol, I asked them to rate the gender and sample of each participant. The Pearson correlation between actual gender and rating of gender was 5 = .67 (p < .001). The correlation between actual sample and rated sample was £’= .75 (p < .001). These figures indicate that coders knew gender and sample of participants in many cases. Descriptive Statistics Statistical analyses were performed on the Real Life Dilemma and Sexual Dilemma Ratio Scores. A ratio score is Obtained by dividing the number of responses coded as Responsibility/Caring by the total number of codable responses and multiplying this ratio by 100. There- fore, a person who had all responsibility and caring responses would have a score Of 100; one who had all justice and rights responses would have a score of 0. The mean score of the Real Life Dilemmas was 84 52.8 (SD = 29.1), and the mean score of the Sexual Dilemmas was 45.1 (SD = 27.2). In both cases scores were distributed across the range. In a more detailed analysis of the mean occurrence of specific coding categories, I found considerations of justice and rights were primary in all three parts of the sexual dilemma (conflict, reso- lution, and evaluation). However, considerations of "Effects to Self" and "Care of Self" were most important when actually making the deci- sion. At the same time, standards became somewhat less important in the resolution. A summary of the mean number of occurrences for each category in both the Real Life Dilemmas and the Sexual Dilemmas is shown in Table 9. A rank order presentation of the four most commonly used categories in the Sexual Dilemmas is shown in Table 10. Another interesting finding discovered in coding is that most considerations placed in the category "Considers care of self; care of self vs./and care of others" were actually just "Care of Self." NO teenagers weighed their own self care against or with the care of others, with the exception of considerations in some dilemmas about welfare of a potential infant when talking about the effect that pregnancy might have on the participant's own life. For the sexual dilemma, use of the Care of Self category cor- related significantly with female gender (5 = .40, p < .01). NO other categories were significantly correlated with any descriptive vari- ables (sample, race, social class, IQ, age). Again, because of the large number of correlational analyses run, this single significant result must be interpreted very cautiously. Qualitative analyses of the data, however, support a finding that girls were more likely to 85 Table 9 Mean Number of Responses for Coding Categories in Real Life and Sexual Dilemmas a Real Life Dilemma Sexual Dilemma Categories are abbreviated. characterization. See Appendix F for complete Coding Category (3 = 58) (3 = 43) The Conflict 1. General effects to others .12 .14 2. Maintenance of relationships .64 .49 3. Welfare of other, avoid conflict .48 .12 4. Primacy of situation over principle .05 .02 5. Considers care of self‘ .62 .72 6. General effects to self .86 .77 7. Obligation, duty or commitment .05 .02 8. Standards, rules, fairness .67 .81 9. Primacy of principle over situation .02 .00 10. Considers others have own context .03 .00 The Resolution 11. General effects to others .12 .12 12. Maintenance of relationships .48 .40 13. Welfare of other, avoid conflict .21 .16 14. Primacy of situation over principle .05 .02 15. Considers care of self .60 .70 16. General effects to self 1.22 .78 17. Obligation, duty or commitment .03 .05 18. Standards, rules, fairness .31 .58 19. Primacy of principle over situation .00 .02 20. Considers others have own context .03 .02 Evaluation 21. Considerations of responsibility .95 .79 22. Consideration of rights 1.31 1.35 Totals Responsibility (Caring) 4.45 3.67 Justice (Rights) 4.40 4.44 a 86 Table 10 Most Commonly Used Categories in Sexual Dilemmas a In Descending Rank Order Rank Conflict Resolution Evaluation 1 Standards, rules Effects to self Rights 2 Effects to self Care of self Responsibilities 3 Care of self Standards, rules 4 Maintenance of Maintenance Of Relationships Relationships a Categories are abbreviated.‘ See Appendix F for complete characterization. use Care of Self reasoning (e.g., withdrawing from the activity because of fear of being used or ending the relationship because of pressure by partner to engage in intercourse prematurely). Hypotheses Testing Hypothesis 1 was supported. Adolescents used two types of reasoning (responsibility/caring and justice/rights) in making deci- sions about whether or not to engage in sexual behavior. There was a substantial presence of both types of reasoning in their sexual dilem- mas as measured by Lyons' (1982) methodology and as indicated by 87 the frequency distribution of Sexual Dilemma Ratio Scores listed in Table 11. Hypothesis 2 was not supported. There was no significant asso- ciation between gender and reasoning orientation (justice/rights and responsibility/caring). The correlation between the Sexual Dilemma Ratio and Gender (female = 1, male = 2) was 5 = -.20, (p = .10, p = 43). In accordance with the Gilligan, et al., (1982) method, a Chi square analysis was conducted. A Chi square statistic has more power with small samples. Subjects' Sexual Dilemma Ratio scores were sorted into five groups: exclusively responsibility/caring (SXD ' 86 to Table 11 Ranges of Sexual Dilemma Ratio Scores: Frequency Distribution Sexual Dilemma Frequency Percent Ratio Score (3 = 43) Frequency 0 - 15 6 14 16 - 40 16 37 41 - 60 11 26 61 - 85 6 14 86 - 100 4 9 88 100), predominantly responsibility/caring (SXD = 61 to 80), balanced between responsibility/caring and justice/rights (SXD = 41 to 60), predominantly justice/rights (SXD = 16 to 40), and exclusively justice rights (SXD = 0 to 15). A Chi square analysis was run: Ratio Group with Gender. This result was also not statistically significant (Chi square = 6.51, 2; = 4, p = .16). Hypothesis 3 that reasoning orientation is related to an under- lying identity factor, leading to similarities in use of reasoning orientations across situations, was supported. The type of reasoning used in the Sexual Dilemma was significantly associated with the type of reasoning used in the Real Life Dilemma. The Pearson correlation is 5 = .47 (2 < .01). Post Hoc Analyses To test whether there were differences in the reasoning orienta- tion used between the group home residents and the high school stu- dents, a Pearson correlation between Sample and Sexual Dilemma Ratio was run with a nonsignificant result of E = -.17 (high school = 1, group home = 2). Explorations were conducted using correlational analyses in order to determine whether the Sexual Dilemma Ratio Scores were related to any of the other sample variables (race, social class, age, and IQ). There were no statistically significant relationships. The correla- tions between sample description variables and Sexual Dilemma Ratio are listed in Table 12. 89 Table 12 Pearson Correlations: Sexual Dilemma Ratio with Sample Variables Variable Correlation a \ Gender -.20 b Race .08 Social Class .12 Age .12 Full Scale IQ -.21 c Sample .17 a Gender: (1) = female; (2) = male. b Race: (1) = Caucasian; (2) = minority. c Sample: (1) = High School; (2) = Group Home. CHAPTER 5 THE QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS: SEVEN THEMATIC MEANINGS OF ADOLESCENT SEXUAL DILEMMAS Qualitative analysis of sexual dilemma interviews resulted in a number of ways of viewing the data. The specific method of analysis appears in Chapter 3--Methods. Results, derived by examining each interview in a global way, are presented in this chapter. Results include a content structure of seven major themes incorporating all interview protocols in which either a general or specific dilemma was elaborated (g = 50). In this study the interview was semi-structured by the quantita- tive method. To review, the major questions asked of each teenager during an interview were, "Have you ever been in a situation where you had the Opportunity to engage in a sexual behavior and weren't sure what was the right thing to do or what you wanted to do? What was the situation? What was the conflict for you or what made it hard to decide? What did you consider when trying to decide or what went through your mind? Did you think that what you did was the right or wrong thing for you to do?" In asking only these particular questions, the teenagers were therefore asked to relate a problematic decision situation, thus one that represented a challenge to them in some way. A challenge is an Opportunity for growth, therefore, responses have an underlying 90 91 thematic meaning about an area of development presented to the girl or boy in the particular situation. Themes answer the question, "Why was this sexual situation or decision important to this person?" It is important to remember that the teenagers are ESE talking about situa- tions that involved both easy decisions and satisfactory results. Each person was asked to elaborate only one sexual dilemma. Even though a person might derive the same meaning from sexual events over time, future contexts will change and so will the person. As a result Of these changes, the meaning is likely to change as well. Therefore, when placing a narrative into one of the themes, it is important to keep in mind that the narrative was classified, not the person. Seven major themes emerged from the data describing the mean- ings of sexual dilemmas, decisions, and situations for the teenagers. A description of each theme is organized around presentation of markers of the theme. A marker is a phrase or sentence that charac- terizes what is more or less a subtheme within the overall theme. The themes and their markers are named in experience-near termi- nology--words that the teenagers used (in most cases) or might use if they had been more able to reflect on their experiences. A summary presentation of themes and their markers appears in Table 13. This summary provides the reader with an overview prior to examining each of seven themes in detail. If there is a gender difference for markers within a theme, the theme is designated with its number and an M for males and an E for females (e.g., Theme 2F). 92 Table 13 Summary of Themes and Markers in Sexual Dilemma Interviews Theme 1: Although I cared about him, I felt differently-~I didn't want to. 1-1: I liked him a lot and I like being with him. 1-2: It was like he was pushing me. 1-3: I wasn't really ready. 1-4: So, I said no. 1-5: It was right for me. I don't have any regrets. Theme 2: It was my first time. Female 2-1F: We share that special feeling between us. 2-2F: I could stop right now and say, "No, we can't do it anymore." 2-3F: So, we did it. 2-4F: I know I'm too young, but I love him so. Male 2-1M: It's your reputation. 2-2M: I didn't know what to do. 2-3M: I felt all these urges. 2-4M: I didn't really want to get tied down at the moment. 2-5M: So, I just did it. 2-6M: My life really changed. Theme 3: Keeping the relationship was more important than doing what I wanted. Female 3-1F: He wanted to have sex and I didn't. 3-2F: And I said, "Yeah," because I trusted him. 3-3F: When you really like someone, you really can't say no. 3-4F: The decision was wrong for me; the trust was broken. Male 3-1M: I wanted to do it in some ways, but I just couldn't. 3-2M: We weren't really ready. 3-3M: I liked her and I wanted to keep seeing her. 3-4M: So, I told myself not to do it. It was the right thing to do. 93 Table 13 (Continued) Theme I wanted trust and respect, not shame and guilt. 4-1: Myself was pulling me one way and somebody else was pulling me the other. 4-2 Before you jump, think about it. 4-3: I didn't have any remorse at all--I felt right with myself. Theme I'm not ready for a baby. I'm just a kid myself. 5-1: My girlfriend wanted to go to bed and I wanted to. 5-2: I said, "Well, do you have protection?" 5-3: I don't want to be a father; I just ain't ready. Theme I felt violated. 6-1: How could he or she do something like that? 6-2: It still kind of gets me down. 6-3: How I felt about my decision depended upon how well I kept track of my values. Theme Even though I wasn't sure it was right for her, I wanted to and we did. 7-1: I didn't want her to regret it. 7-2: We did it anyway--it was mainly because I was horny. In the following sections for each of seven themes one or more complete interviews are presented as examples to help the reader view the dilemma as a whole. Each example is followed by an elaboration of markers that characterize either all or most interviews placed within 94 a theme. The markers will be illustrated by additional excerpts. These markers are labeled in experience-near terms used by partici- pants to illustrate how they were derived from the data. Each theme is then summarized in more theoretical and psychological terms. A final table summarizes the seven themes, interviews classified within each theme, and their psychological interpretations. THEME 1: ALTHOUGH l CARED FOR HIM, l FELT DIFFERENTLY--l DIDN'T WANT IQ Introduction and Example Sixteen girls related narratives that were placed in the theme, "Although I cared for him, I felt differently--and I didn't want to." Following is an example of a complete interview. This is hard to talk about it. I talk about it, to a certain extent, with my best friend, but not everything! This is nothing you'd go tell grandma! (laughs). I used to have this boyfriend. We were together for over a year. He was a big person, really big, and overpowering on me. And he even became a friend Of the family because he was over a lot. My mom and dad trusted him real well. And I trusted him real well. But one time, after a football game, we went out. And then he just wanted to keep going. He just wanted to go a little bit too far, farther than I wanted to go. He started yelling at me, "Aw, come on! It'll be real nice. It'll be real good." No thank you. Like I'm a Christian and to Christians it's kind of sacred until marriage. That's kind of what I hope to do. It's just what I've always been told when I was growing up. Like on TV shows and on HBO. But it was very tempting, I'll say that. You could go back to your best friend and say, "Guess what?!" But I wouldn't want to do that either. I would be afraid of what she thought. Or maybe my friends would go around talking about me or something like that. It can get spread around that you're terrible. SO, I thought, "Naw. I'm 16 years Old. I've got lots Of time left. I can wait--perhaps." And we had been together for a year by then. We were real friend- ly, you know. Any time somebody needed help or support or anything, one or the other was always there. So we got to 95 be real close. I wanted to keep being his friend. I thought he'd be real upset with me if I didn't do it. But I just told him, "Listen, this is the way it is. This is the way it's gonna be." I considered all kinds of things. It only takes once and you can have a baby. I said, "No, that's not what I want." I want kids. I want lots of kids, but not until I'm about 24 and I get through with college. Now is not the time to start even trying. I just don't need the extra reSponsi- bilities of little kids. My own especially! And I thought about how I'd feel; I'd have no self respect after that. And then I thought about what mom and dad would think of me. They would have been really upset, or maybe disappointed is a better word. They look down at you and give you that face. I just didn't need that look again. SO, we didn't do it. He got a little upset with me. I said, "Well, listen, if that's the way you feel about it, I can give you some money, say bye-bye, and you can head up to the red light district, and I will leave." And he gave me kind of a sad look. And I thought, "Fine." But then he came back and said, "Okay, maybe later." We kind of talked about it, and everything was Okay for a while. Then the same situation happened again a little bit later. It's a real tough situation, I can tell you that because I was afraid what he would say. But then I thought, I shouldn't worry about it. But I kind of did because I didn't want him to be mad at me. I really liked him. Everything turned out okay for a while. But we only lasted about 6 more months, and then I said, "Bye." I didn't need that pressure all the time. It was right for me. I don't have any regrets. (#1178) Markers Marker 1-1: I Liked Him A Lot and I Liked Being With Him (#2486). The first marker of Theme 1 (Although I cared, I felt differently-~I didn't want to) is that the girls stated they valued their relationships with their boyfriends. Some examples are, "He was a sweet person, really nice" (#1968); and "We both really cared about each other" (#2068). In addition, some girls stated they wanted to please their part- ners (e.g., "It would make him a lot happier if I did it" (#6666). In 96 fewer cases, girls made statements indicating there was almost a blur- ring of boundaries between self and other. For example, "I didn't know if I was doing it for myself or doing it for him. Just to make him happy" (#7523). Marker 1-2: lg Was Like Mg Was Pushing MS (#6666). In most Theme 1 interviews girls felt pressure to say ygg in that boys said quite directly, sometimes more than once, that they wanted to engage in the sexual activity in question. Some examples are: "It was soooo hard. It was a tough time to resist. He kept saying, 'Come on. Come on.'" (#5402); and "He kept asking me if I would have sex with him....I didn't need that pressure on me, the pressure of, 'If you love me, you will.'" (#2068). In addition, girls expressed some fears of conflict or actual conflict in the relationship. "I was really scared he was gonna put up a fight or something" (#3354). "He didn't want to stop, so I yelled at him" (#2012). One girl had trouble saying no directly. Her reluctance to talk made communication difficult which was probably frustrating for her partner: I had never kissed a boy before and he would ask me, "When can I kiss you?" And I would always turn around and like ignore his question or pretend I didn't hear it. I'd make an excuse that I had to leave for somewhere. For a long time, he didn't get it. Sometimes he'd get mad at me, but not so bad that he might pound on the desk or anything. (#6666) Marker 1-3: l Wasn't Really Ready. The response, "I wasn't really ready," came up many times in Theme 1. When questioned about what not being ready meant or what it might take for them to be ready, 97 girls responded that it was either a matter of how much she cared for him, he for her, or both. In each case, after a girl evaluated the relationship some question remained about its quality. This doubt prevented her from taking the next step in a sexual progression. Some questions girls expressed were: "I began to wonder if that's all he thought of in the relationship" (#2068); "I did have some thought that I didn't love him. I was still a virgin, and I didn't want to lose my virginity. I want to save that for somebody special" (#2012); "I like my boyfriend a lot, but I just want to make sure it's with the right person" (#2120); "I wasn't sure I wanted him to be the first guy" (#3354); "I didn't know exactly how he felt either. Sometimes you feel like they're just using you" (#5402). In their evaluations Of these situations, some girls indicated that boys probably did not care as much as they expressed verbally. For example, He used to always tell me he loved me, but guys use to tell me that. I don't take it seriously. It's just more like a line to them, you know. You just say, 'Right.' SO I didn't ever believe him, and I didn't love him. I guess he's too young to know what real love is. It would have just been a lie. I'm glad I didn't fall for it. (#3421) It seems that up to a certain point anything goes sexually with a particular boy, and then the brakes go on. The "I wasn't really ready" response communicates an inner feeling that really refers to the nature of the relationship. The feeling is a mixture Of standards and relationship specific considerations. In other words, this occurred at different levels of sexual activity for different girls (e.g., kissing, petting, intercourse) and at different levels in each 98 relationship according to a girl's evaluation of the relationship at that point in time. For example, "You think about it; you make your decision where you draw the line. Everybody draws their line some- place" (#2120); and "Even though I had already had sex with one other person, it didn't seem right" (#7523). Prior to that level of sexual activity being reached, an evaluation does not occur. One insightful girl talked about "a conflict within [her] inner self." Before in relationships I had a man hunter instinct. I did not care up until last year if I was friends or not. I wanted a physical sort of relationship. Kissing and making out, I really enjoyed all that. That's all the boys wanted, and that's all that happened....But that isn't all there is to a guy. Guys aren't just there to have fun with. They are there for companionship, too. So, in this relationship I was beginning to realize, "Hey, wait a minute. The rest of my life is going to be dependent on this. What if some- thing happens?" I had always given kisses away, even to someone I didn't really care about, just because I thought it was fun. But then I got to the point where it was time to grow up. So, in my own self I thought, "You can't do this anymore." (#2068) Marker 1-4: So, I Said! "No". In all 16 narratives, girls decided not to engage in the sexual activities. Marker l:5: lE M35 glggl Egg Mg. l Don't ngg Apy Regrets. In all 16 cases, the girls positively evaluated their decision to say no for two different reasons. Both reasons relate to their observation of the outcome of the relationship over time. Some girls said they did engage in intercourse at a later time after boys had shown some level of caring by staying in the relation- ship, even though the girls said pg to the particular sexual activity elaborated in a dilemma. Following is an example: 99 So, John and I ended up doing it, but it wasn't for a while after that....I gained his respect from it. He ended up showing me how much he cared for respecting that and staying with me until I was ready. (#5402) The other outcome that supported the girls' decisions to say 23 was that relationships did not last. Some girls ended relationships themselves because Of continued pressure, e.g., "SO, I ran right out 'of that one--not just the actual question, but the whole relationship" (#2068). Or the boy left the relationship, for example, I think it was the right thing to do because it wasn't too long after that he went into the Navy. Then I really didn't see much of him. I think my instincts were great because I wouldn't have stayed with him. It saved me a lot of problems. (#2311) One can infer from some narratives that to have said yes to the sexual activity would have resulted in an unpleasant inner experience for them, perhaps even a loss or injury to the self. For example, "I'm glad I didn't do it because it would have changed me in a nega- tive way. Since I didn't, it helped me to learn" (#2012); and "I considered how I would feel if something happened between us and he went around and told all his friends that I didn't mean anything to him" (#2311). Theme 1 Summary : Differentiation pf Self 5: Separate from Self Mg Connected lg Partner In each case, the overall sense of Theme 1, "Although I cared, I felt differently--I didn't want to," is that a relationship with a partner was primary in sexual decision making and the evaluation of a decision. Saying pp in the context of pressure to say yes indicates 100 that a girl is learning to evaluate the nature of an intimate rela- tionship and then set limits accordingly. She is differentiating her own needs from those of a boy or a partnership. Values, standards, and non-partner relationships play a part in the sexual decision, but only in that they provide definition for the self as separate. The main focus is on withdrawal from the self as connected to partner identity to protect oneself from some potential emotional hurt or loss. This focus also characterizes the Care Of Self category in Lyon's (1982) coding scheme. Given the large number of girls' inter- views (3 = 16) categorized in this theme, the significant correlation indicating an association between Care of Self and female gender is probably not due to sampling error. THEME g: ll WAS My FIRST TIME Introduction Six boys' and one girl's interviews were classified within this "It Was My First Time" theme. Primary markers that lead to categori- zation of an interview in this theme are that (1) it is the first time the teenager has every engaged in that particular activity and (2) the person expresses some ambivalence during the evaluation or resolution of the dilemma indicating that he or she felt ready to engage in the activity on one hand and not ready on the other. The remaining markers of the first time theme varied according to gender. 101 Theme 2 Female: Ag Example Because there is only one female interview in this category, some care must be exercised in drawing conclusions. The complete interview will be followed by a summary of the markers. There was a situation where I didn't know if I wanted to because of the chance of getting pregnant. I didn't want to have a baby, and there was always that chance. I'm too young, and I want to have a career. I want to get going in life before I have that big a responsibility. It would be too much for me. And it's not fair for me to kill the baby, to kill a life just because it was my mistake of doing something wrong. And I would have felt really bad if he would have left me after we did that. That was very special to me. It wasn't just like, "Oh, wow. I did it!" And also, having my parents find out. They would get upset. They would lose respect in me. And his mom, I always want them to think good of me. I don't want them to think, "She's a slut," or something. I'd be embarrassed every time I talked to her. So, I knew we couldn't do it at home. We had to go somewhere else. If they didn't find out, it wouldn't hurt them. The good point of that was that I did love him. It just made me feel like I had him. It wasn't having sex; it was really making love. I mean that's why I can say it. That's the best thing you can have. You know, if I was older I could say it's part of life. That's how everybody does it. But with a teenager I don't think it should be a part of life. But that is how I feel with him. I could stop right now and say, "No, we can't do it anymore." But I think we share that special feeling between both of us. I think we are able to have sex knowing that we love each other. I know I'm too young, but I love him so. I'm not saying it's right just because I love him, but I still do it. I did consider waiting 'cause I've always just thought you should wait to make sure he's my husband. I think I was just brought up that way. You never do it until you get married. I can still recall my grandma telling me this story about a girl who had a boyfriend. They were engaged to be married in two months, and she was pregnant. And he died. That always scared me. This was kind of hard to talk about. (#5116) 102 Theme ZE‘ Markers Marker 2-1F: Mg Share That Special Feeling Between Hg. The nature of the relationship is primary in her decision making process. There is an emphasis on relationship and not sexual pleasure: "It wasn't having sex; it was really making love;" and "it just made me feel like I had him." Marker 2-2F: l Could StOp Right Now and Say, "N0, M3 Can't 23 ll Anymore". This girl felt as though she had some control over the level of future sexual activities, that her partner would be sensitive to her needs. Marker 2-3F: So We Did It. She chose to go ahead and engage in the sexual activity. Marker 2-4F: l Know I'm Too Young; But I Love Him 80. One of the markers that characterizes this theme as a developmental milestone or transition is that she expresses some dissonance about her deci- sion. She is clear about the reasons that she opposes having inter- course. She feels too young. Nevertheless, she chooses to push through to what she feels is a more advanced level of development. For example, "You know, if I was older I could say it's part of life....But with a teenager I don't think it should be a part of life." For most part, however, She feels positive about her decision. 103 Theme 3: Summary: A DeveIOpmental Milestone for Self 53 Connected lg Partner For this girl, the first time happened in the context of a rela- tionship which she felt was characterized by love. That love out- weighed other values and concerns which were also very alive for her. Her security within the relationship and her feeling that he would be sensitive and understanding enabled her to keep those aspects of self alive while also being in relationship to partner. In other words, She felt her partner would mirror her self as separate concerns such that moving forward in the development of self as connected to other was not as problematic. lhggg 3 Mile: Mp Example The Six boys' interviews placed in Theme 2, "It was my first time," had different markers than did the girl's interview. Two boys' interviews involved intercourse situations; four interviews were about kissing. Following is an example of a complete interview from a male participant which was placed in Theme 2. It was the first time I ever had sex. It was a neat experi- ence. It wasn't really a decision. I knew what I wanted to do and was going to do it. But I wasn't sure. It was like, "Oh, my god!! What am I supposed to do?! I've never done this before." (laughs) So, it was sort of, "Play it by ear." I mean, I didn't sit back and think, "Well, I should do this first and then do that." I had known about sex for a while, and I sort of knew what to do. But then again I didn't know, 'cause I had never done it. It's like you shouldn't be driving in Chicago without directions. Or you've got directions, but you've never driven. Well, it worked out fine; I heard no complaints (laughs). I had a couple Of particular fears. It's kind of strange talking to you about it, you being a female. But one was that it wouldn't stay up for as long as it was supposed to 104 stay up. And that would be really embarrassing! And ano- ther fear was that ”Oh, my God! What if I don't do this right? Is she gonna think I'm weird or something?" And my other one was, "What if something happens and she gets pregnant? What am I gonna do? How am I gonna explain this one to mom?" If they ever found out they'd skin me. I knew that my parents wouldn't approve of it, even though I didn't care. My morals on sex are not the same as my parents. They're really loose. Not loose enough to the point where you go out on some other guy, or you go out on some other girl, or you have sex with some guy's wife, or like that. Not that much. I think a lot of it was peer pressure, too. It's like, "Well, if you don't get laid by this year, you'll be weird or something like that!" It's your reputation. But I think it is an all right thing to do. I don't think the reason I did it was right though. It was a little hurdle you have to jump. I wanted to jump that hurdle and get it over with. At the time I was just getting into puberty, and I felt all these urges, and I just needed to take the unknown out of it. I didn't like the feeling Of not knowing, so I did something about it. I don't know if I was ready for it mentally. (#1123) Theme 3M: Markers Marker 2M-1: It's Your Reputation (#1123). In most narratives in this theme, peer pressure was a very important impetus to over- coming resistance to passing over a first time milestone. Particu- larly relevant was meeting or surpassing internalized or external standards of male performance. Following are some examples: I got sick of everybody razzing me. I don't like to be teased. So I just did it. (#5689) ...I didn't want my friends to think I was a freak or a fag or something. You see, most of the people I hang around with are boys and they always talk about girls. Most of the time instead of joining them, I just stand back and listen and laugh about what they are talking about. If they thought I was a fag, they wouldn't want to hang around me and they would talk about me. They might even lie and say, 'Yeah, I saw him last night around the corner at the gay bar. Don't hang around him; he's a faggot" (#1570). 105 I considered about the next day, what I would tell all my friends about this. That's just boys talking. Any guy, he's gonna go to school and just tell everybody. The girl can go to school if she want to, all right. Everybody at the school be looking at her all strange and saying, 'That's the one. She's a slut. Yeah, I heard about her.’ He's gonna tell. And I think the girl know he gonna tell. And he gonna bust like never before. Especially to his friends; make him look macho. SO he gonna go and tell everything, fine details, and make the details stretch a little bit. Make it worse than he done did. It's called boy talk. (#6917) Marker 2-2M: l Didn't Know What lg 2g (#5689). Sometimes boys experienced some concern about their performance prior to the sexual act. For example, "I was scared. I had never kissed a girl before.... I get nervous when I try new things" (#5689). Marker 2-3M: l Felt All These Urges (#1123). Some boys mentioned that physical press was another reason why they decided to "jump the hurdle" (#1123). For example, "I guess I did it because otherwise I would be thinking about it really a lot afterwards. I mean this is getting too personal; you know how it is" (#1313); and "It felt so good. I just couldn't stOp. I just had to stay....I just couldn't help myself" (#6917). Marker 2-4M: l Didn't Really Want lg Get Tied Down Ag the Moment (#1212). Most boys considering their first kiss mentioned their partners, but they were either ambivalent about being involved or felt that a kiss might jeopardize their relationship in some way. In other words, when relationship was mentioned, it was a constraint to kissing rather than a motivation. One boy mentioned the relationship only in the context of his male peers' standard: "But she was my girlfriend. 106 PeOple tell me when you're going together, you're supposed to kiss” (#5171). In interviews elaborating intercourse situations, there is an absence of narrative indicating there is a relationship with a girl. Absence of data does not necessarily indicate that relationships or feelings of caring are absent. It does mean that relationships are not figural for boys, or not the focus of their thoughts or feelings during their decision making process. In order to speculate about the nature of relational feelings or thoughts for males in intercourse situations, I examined other narra- tives about intercourse not classified in this category. Boys said they sometimes told girls they cared or they loved them, although they weren't sure. In their own way, they may have meant it. Subse- quently, however, they found that they didn't care as much as they thought or the nature of relationships changed in a negative way after intercourse occurred. Some boys were confused about just what love is and what love has to do with sex. Two examples follow. I went out with a girl for a year. We thought it was love. I confronted her with the Situation that I really wanted to have sex. It took about six more months before we finally decided to do it. But then it seemed like after we had sex, we kind of saw that we weren't really in love. We ended up breaking up a while after that. (#7777) I don't really know if me and my girlfriend are in love, but we say to each other we love each other. If we were or we weren't in love it would be the same thing though. (#0023) Marker 2-5M: Sg l Just Did lg (#5689). All the boys chose to engage in the sexual activity. 107 Marker 2-6M: My Life Really Changed. When some boys evaluated their decision to say ygg they felt some dissonance as if they had one foot in the past develOpmental space and one in the future. For example in transition between latency and adolescence one boy described his first kiss, "After a while it kind of broke a line between whether girls were anything important or whether they weren't important" (#5171). In other cases, sexual activity became known to parents, and the outcome of a situation became much more important to the boys than the sexual event itself. For example: I was pretty happy until about two weeks later, I found out I had mono from that little girl. Then I was mad and I hated her. I beat her up. I was really mad 'cause I had to stay home from school. I couldn't see my friends. But later I knew I shouldn't have done it because she gave me that nasty mono stuff. Plus I got my butt whupped. It wasn't worth it. (#5689) In the short run, it was a real mess. They took me out of my foster home and put me in the group home. But in the long run, it was the right thing. I got to get some experience of living other places and more how to be on my own. I was getting older and it was about time for me to get out from under my foster mother's wing. Also, I met my real family again and got reacquainted with them. I can see my sister more often, too. So, there were a lot of good points to it. (#6917) Theme lM Summary: g DevelOpmental Milestone for Male Gender Identity, Self gg Separate For boys, the first time is problematic when it is a rite of passage, primarily toward develOpment of male gender identity. In other words, a decision and subsequent act contribute to develOpment of self as separate identity. A decision does not appear to con- 108 contribute to develOpment of an identity of self as connected to partner, although sometimes a decision does contribute to development of an identity of self as connected to male peers. As will be discussed in Theme 3, "Keeping the relationship was more important than doing what I wanted," this rite of passage may lay the groundwork for boys to continue their self as connected to partner development in future intimate relationships. THEME 3: KEEPING THE RELATIONSHIP WAS MORE IMPORTANT THAN DOING WHAT 2 WANTED The interviews characterized by Theme 3, "Keeping the rela- tionship was more important than doing what I wanted," exhibited a gender difference in that girls (g = 4) did not want to engage in the behavior, but decided to anyway. Most boys (g = 5) did want to engage in the behavior, but decided not to. In addition, girls negatively evaluated their decisions; boys positively evaluated theirs. In all cases, however, there was a desire to maintain relationships which overrode their desire to engage or not to engage in sexual behavior. lgggg 2 Female: Mg Example Of four girls whose interviews were classified in Theme 3, one was pregnant, one became pregnant subsequent to the described situa- tion, and two related narratives describing incest situations. In one interview (#0666) describing incest, a girl described two types of situations: (1) a specific incident in which she said gg to sexual activity with her stepfather and (2) general feelings related to incidents when She was unable to say gg. Therefore, even though I 109 placed the former portion of this interview in Theme 1, "Although I cared, I felt differently," I have categorized the latter portion of the interview in Theme 3. Following is an example of one girls' interview. At the time I was pregnant. Michael was seeing this other girl. He came over late one night. I think he was kind of drunk. Before he got there I was trying to make the deci- sion on whether I just wanted to cut everything off with him or keep him around for mental support. When he got there we talked, but we didn't talk about anything that I wanted. And he wanted to have sex, and I didn't. I wanted to say no because I figured that the more sex we had, the more feel- ings I would have for him, and then him not having the same feelings for me. But after I told him no, he gave me the cold shoulder. So then, I changed my mind. I guess I didn't want him to say, "Fine, then," and leave and be angry with me and not speak to me anymore. I figured maybe when the baby gets here that we'd have a chance to be back together, maybe he would consider having a future with me and the baby, but it wasn't true. So, it was knowing what I wanted to do, but wanting to satisfy him, too. I was kind of in a crossbind. I cried, and he wondered why. I don't remember telling him why. So I just put him in consideration. That's what I did. I just considered how he felt, and I put my feelings in the back of my mind. It wasn't really the right thing for me to do because it didn't change anything anyway. (#1202) Theme ll: Markers Marker 3-1F: Mg Wanted lg Have Sex and l Didn't (#1202). In all cases, girls whose interviews were in the theme, "Keeping the Relationship Was More Important Than Doing What I Wanted," clearly stated that they did not really want to engage in the sexual activity. One girl said, "I was nine and (my brother) was twelve....I kind of knew it was wrong. Well, I didn't think it was really, really, really wrong; but I knew it wasn't quite right" (#1309). The other incest 110 survivor stated, "There was a time when I was eight years old. My stepfather wanted me to sleep with him....I was scared; I knew it would hurt. I would bleed. I didn't know what to do" (#0666). The girl in the following example waited six months before finally saying Les- I wanted to say gg, but then I thought, "Well, we're gonna have to end up doing this sooner or later." Nothing really went through my head except, "Well, I better hurry up and get this over with 'cause I can't stall forever" (#4682). Marker 3-2F: And l Said, 'Yeah,' Because l Trusted Him (#1309). In two interviews that described incestuous situations, girls men- tioned trust. In the other two interviews, girls expressed a wish or hope they would be together with their boyfriends in a committed long- term relationship, a wish characterized by an implicit trust. Exam- ples are, "But it was like if that's what he wants to do, then it must not be bad because he wants to do it" (#1309); and "He always told me we were gonna get married...I knew there was some kind of protection, or whatever they say to use. But Jim just said, 'If it happens, I'm gonna stay with you. But then it did happen. Now it's like what he said a few days ago, 'It's not that I don't want the baby; it's just that we don't get along" (#4682). All four girls were disappointed. For example, "I trusted this man and he hurt me" (#0666); Marker 3-3F: When You Really Like Someone, You Really Can't Say N2 (#4682). Girls all valued their relationships very much and in material and psychological ways were dependent upon the boys/men. Therefore, as one girl put it, "I just considered how he felt, and I lll put my feelings in the back of my mind" (#1202). Other examples are, "At the time I thought it was the right thing because my brother wanted it. We were going through a really hard time. I thought maybe if I didn't, he might pull away from me" (#1309); and "If I made him wait a little bit longer, he might just decide to dump me....I thought I'd better say ygg or I ain't gonna have a boyfriend any more" (#4682). In other words, in light of expressed trust, these girls put aside their own thoughts and feelings to be sensitive to the perceived needs or desires of the boys/men. Marker 3F-4: The Decision Was Wrong For Me; The Trust Was Broken. Three of four girls felt at the time of their interviews that their decisions had not been good for them. This was based on per- ceived outcome of their situation. In one incest situation, there was recognition of broken trust (#0666). The other incest survivor stated, I don't think it was right either just because these kinds of things aren't supposed to happen between families.... Also, I think it has brought on a lot of problems for me now. I've been having sex a lot. My therapist said that this experience probably caused it because having sex at too early an age can either make you afraid to have .cp 2 sex or it'll make you have it a lot. I think it made me have it too much. (#1309) Both girls who described incest situations were living in the group home setting, away from perpetrators. In addition, in the case of the brother-sister incest situation, the girl was subsequently victimized by her stepfather. Both participants related specific situations in which they had greater control than they did in 112 subsequent events in which their perceived circumstances did not support their saying gg to their stepfathers. In two pregnancy related interviews, evaluation of the decisions was based on whether or not the relationship was maintained. For example, "It wasn't really the right thing for me to do because it didn't change things anyway" (#1202). The other girl was somewhat ambivalent about her decision, but in the long run felt positive about it because as a result, she maintained her relationship with her boyfriend somewhat longer. This was despite the fact that she stated that she did not love him. The relationship deteriorated such that at the end, her boyfriend was physically violent toward her. However, she still cared and felt She would always maintain her relationship with him in the form of her soon-to-be-delivered child. I don't think it was the right thing to do because I think he liked me just a little more than I liked him. I felt uncomfortable being around him because I know he loved me, but I just liked him. But I do think it was the right thing to do. If I would have kept stalling and stalling and stalling, he would end up finding someone else. And then that someone else would have gave it to him and he would have stayed with her. So, I'm just glad that we didn't jump into it, or we would have been broken up a long time ago. And I knew it would be like that. I'm just glad it took me time (to say ygg). .., I'll always remember Jim. If I was to pick anyone I went with, he'd be the only guy I'd want to have something of his to remember. That's why I really don't regret it. I'll always have something that's attached to him. I mean we might have our differences, but otherwise I'll always be able to look at my kid and see him. I'd rather have some- thing of him than nothing at all. (#4682) 113 Theme 3: Summary: Relinquishing gl Self Mg Separate Identity lg Self gg Connected lg Partner Identity These four girls all relinquish their own self as separate iden- tity in favor of an identity which is self in relationship to other. In three narratives in which the hurt is acknowledged, there is a sense that they recognize there was a loss of a trusted fantasy and an injury to the self. With the help of therapy, incest survivors are expressing and exploring associated feelings. The other girls, both single mothers, will likely continue their self in relation to other orientation in an identity somewhat enmeshed with those of their children. Theme 3 Male: gg Example Boys' interviews in this theme were characterized by different markers than girls' interviews. Following is a complete interview. I used to live across the street from this girl, Jenny, who babysat a lot. Their phone didn't work a lot, the TV only got one Station, there wasn't no radio or nothing. So I used to go over there all the time. Like we started liking each other. Then one day, I went over there, and she put the kids to bed early. We had the house to ourselves. We really could have done anything we wanted. And then I thought, "Let me see what she wants to do." And in case she wants to do something, I said to myself, "Let me go home and get some records to play." So I went home. And when I went home I thought I could call up my friend--we're real close. Sometimes I ask him a reason why or why not I should do such and such a thing. He never tells me ygg or gg. He always says, "I don't know what you're gonna do because I'm not in that situation." But I didn't call him because I knew what he was gonna say anyway: "It's up to you." So, I went back over there and put some records on. At first we was talking to some of her friends on the phone and they was acting all stupid and crazy. "Where the kids 114 at?" they said, trying to make like something was happening between us. Sometimes peOple go around saying I'm gonna have sex with Jenny. That has happened, people saying that about us. So when we confronted them about it, they go, "Well, we just lying about that." I said, "It's none Of your business what we do. If we gonna have sex, that's between us and you just butt out." So, if I do, it's not like I'm gonna go broadcast it to the world, and it's not like she gonna go broadcast it. Sometimes I do tell my best friend; sometimes I don't. There's times you do and times you don't. Anyway, after she got off the phone, I could have made a move. And if she responded, we could have been making out for a while. Nothing dramatic because my mom knew I was over there. And my little brother, sometimes my sister, sometimes my big brother, they know I'm over there, and they like to pick and play and come over knocking on the windows and things. It's just if we wanted to, we could have. But, we both kept under control listening to some of my records, playing monOpoly. It wasn't really a conflict. If we wanted to do it, we could have been kissing and making out. We just decided we didn't want to at that time. If you go ahead and do it, sometimes you regret it. Like with us, we liked each other then, but now were close friends. So, I'm really glad we didn't because sometimes when I do things with girls, we end up breaking up. So, I considered my friendship; would it just go down the drain. I didn't feel as close to Jenny then as I do now. It wasn't the right time because we had only knew each other for a couple of months then. I really wasn't ready for it. I guess it isn't really me that has to be ready, but its if the girl wants to. Like some boys I know, they bug a girl until she finally says yes. That boy, he just keep asking, and asking, and asking. I don't do that. Like we have a conversation over the phone, and then face to face, and we talk about it. And I always tell her, "It's up to you." Some girls say, "Yeah." And like some girls have to think about it. And some girls say "NO, but let me think about it." And then there are some girls who say, "Maybe." And then it really depends on where I am at the time, if we have it or not--like if we're at her house, my house, or a friend's house. I had a lot of choices in that problem. Whatever you pick, it all depends on the outcome. This had a good outcome. And sometimes I think about the consequences of doing it. Like my sister, she's got a baby. And one time a girl played a trick on me. She got mad at me, and called my house, and told my mom that she was pregnant by me. She was 115 just playing a joke. But I really wouldn't want to have a baby because I'm too young. (#1770) Theme 3M: Markers Marker 3-1M: l Wanted £2.22.l£ lg Some Ways, But l Just Couldn't (#2221). Boys' interviews in Theme 3, "Keeping the relationship was more important than doing what I wanted," usually expressed some desire to engage in sexual activity at issue with girls.. As in Theme 1, "Although I cared...I didn't want to,” these boys seem to be progres- sing along a continuUm of more and more serious levels of sexual activity with girls, and then they put on the brakes. For example, one boy talked about a time when he was aroused, and ...You're not sure whether to go or how far to go or whether you should even go anywhere with her. It's kind of when you have a block and you don't know what to do. (#2222) Another boy who wanted to kiss his girlfriend said, "I wanted to Show my love" (#3846). Marker 3-2M: Mg Weren't Really Ready. Boys, especially those who were more sexually experienced than their partners, were sensitive to the direct or indirect messages they were getting from their girl- friends. Whether girls had indicated their willingness to engage in sexual activity or not, boys were sensitive to possible indications that their partners might not actually be "ready." For example, "When you get vibes from a person, the vibes tell you whether to back off or not....I don't think she really wanted to go farther, at least not at the time" (#2222). The boy in the interview example stated he 116 communicated verbally with girls, "Like we have a conversation over the phone and then face to face, and we talk about it" (#1770). Less sexually experienced boys are able to stop their forward progression of sexual activity, but they aren't able to articulate reasons as well as the experienced boys. For example, one boys ended his interview by saying, "I thought it was the right thing to do to say gg to myself; I don't really know why." All boys whose interviews are categorized in this theme expressed concern that conflict or loss of relationship would occur as a result of further sexual activity. For inexperienced boys, lack of readiness in a relationship or by a girl was likely communicated to him or sensed by him at a more uncon- scious level. One boy admitted that he was not ready, thus avoiding a situation in which opportunity for intercourse would present itself: "I thought it over and then decided that the best thing for both of us was if we just waited" (#0001). Marker 3-3M: l Liked Her and l Wanted lg Keep Seeing Her (#0001). In interviews categorized in Theme 3, the boys expressed some fear that engaging in the sexual activity in question would have negative repercussions in the relationship. For example, even though a girl expressed a desire to have intercourse, one boy stated, Maybe she could have got upset or maybe both our feelings coulda got hurt. If I would have done it, she woulda probably been mad and wouldn't talk to me or I wouldn't have said nothing to her....And one of us could have felt he or she didn't care. (#3257) 117 Another boy who was sensitive to the feelings of his partner, stated that, as a rule, he evaluated himself according to whether or not the girl enjoyed the experience. I wouldn't want to do it with her if she really didn't want to....she would probably regret it. Then I might regret it, too. Then I just wouldn't feel good about it. I would have felt kind of guilty if I forced her into it. I wanted to feel good about myself. So, I'm glad I backed off. When you do it, if a girl feels good about it, then you feel good. (#2222) Marker 3-4M: §g l Told Myself Not $2.22 It....It Was the Right Thing lg lg (#3257). All boys' interviews in Theme 3 indicated they decided not to engage in the sexual activity. In addition, they all positively evaluated their decision to say gg. Theme 2M Summary: Relinquishing gl Self gg Separate lg Self Ag Connected lg Partner Boys' interviews in Theme 3 indicated that they were learning to be sensitive to relational factors and/or to feelings of their part- ners. The more sexually experienced a boy was in comparison with his partner, the more clearly this sensitivity was stated. Less sexually experienced boys told of situations that were vague or not logical in their reasoning (e.g., "Someone wanted me to do it....Maybe she could have got upset." #3257), as if they weren't clear themselves on why they wanted to say no. Nonetheless, at some point in the interviews, they expressed a fear of losing the relationship. These boys could have been sensing lack of readiness within relationships (their own, their own as projected onto their girlfriends, and/or their girl- friend's). They felt that abstaining from the sexual activity allowed 118 a relationship to continue to deve10p, thus developing further their self as connected to partner aspect of identity or their ability to take the perspective of their partners. THEME g: l WANT TRUST AND RESPECT, NOT SHAME AND GUILT Introduction and Example There were both males' and females' interviews in Theme 4. The hallmark of this theme is a processing of values, standards, and some relationships other than those with their partners. There was only one area in which a gender difference appeared--peer pressure. There were two types of situations: those found more commonly among teenagers and those quite unusual for teenagers. Common situations described were public display of affection, intercourse, and kissing. Unusual situations were those in which (a) a girl whose boyfriend was trying to coerce her into having sex with a group of boys, (b) a boy who had the Opportunity to be sexual with his best friend's girlfriend, and (c) a male invited to a prearranged orgy. Following is an example of a complete interview: There is another time I would like to talk about. It's kind of sick really. I'm in a club, and one of the guys threw a party. It was kind of a surprise party so none of knew what he was going to do. When we got there there was about thirty girls. We knew then that what he had planned was basically an orgy. There were about eighteen guys. We didn't know any of the girls. There was a lot of, "Hi. How you doin'? Let's get on the floor." Basically, we all sat down and talked about it. We all kind of agreed. About ten of us left 'cause it was kind of sick, really, to have sex with someone you don't know at all. They could have a disease or something. There's been a lot of talk about AIDS and herpes and things. That kind of thing is in the back of your mind all the time if you kind 119 of stop and think about it. There are posters all over school on VD. Everything kind of flashes in your mind. And we didn't know the girls' background or anything. The guy who threw the party knew the girls, but they were strangers to us. I also considered how I would feel. It would have been kind of like opening yourself up to someone you don't even know. "Here I am." And you don't even know how they think. I would have felt insecure. Very insecure. You know, kind of like spilling your guts to a person. You don't know how they're gonna react. The danger side was real heavy. The lighter side was the pleasure side. There was sort of a pull. "Yeah. Let's do it!" But then it was like a flash of what my parents taught me, "Before you jump, think about it." So, I thought about it and then it was like, "Let's get out of here." The guys who stayed, maybe six of them, were trapped there with over thirty girls. They seemed like they were in conflict about whether to stay, too. They might have wanted to leave, too, but once we left, they were trapped. Now they all talk about it like, "Oh, we had the best time in the world." And we all just kind of looked at them and go, "How'd you do?" Sometimes when those hormones start surging, I think , "God, why didn't I stay?" But it's like, I didn't. It's over. Just forget about it. But I think I did the right thing because once I got in the car, I didn't have any remorse at all. I was comfortable with myself. It's like how you were raised to have certain beliefs. Having your parents talk to you, friends, teachers, grandparents, everybody. They all have basically the same kind of beliefs. Some are a little different, but basically the same. I felt right with myself. (#7777) Theme g: Markers Marker 4-1: Myself Was Pulling Mg One Way and Somebody Else Was Pulling Mg the Other (#1234). In all cases in Theme 4, "I want trust " there was clearly an opportunity to engage in sexual and respect..., activity in that there was a willing partner. The willingness ranged from (1) a desire to show caring within the relationship (e.g., "It 120 was basically whether we were going to express our feelings in front of a group..." #6287); through (2) feeling some pressure or seduction by a potential partner (e.g., "But Tammy was so good looking. She was sitting there asking me. It's not everyday that some good looking girl's gonna come up to you and ask you to" #0007); to (3) being coerced by a partner who is in a position of power (e.g., a runaway teenager said, My boyfriend asked me if I would go to bed with some of his friends. He said, "If you don't, I'm not going to give you a place to stay....Well, I needed a place to stay, but I really didn't want to go to bed with all his friends. (#1309) Marker 4-2: Before You Jump, Think About ll (#7777). Problema- tic sexual situations motivated these teenagers to turn primarily to standards and values that prevailed as major factors influencing their decisions. The situations seemed to challenge their standards or values, either as reflected by peers, parents, and/or other authority figures or as internalized in some unelaborated way. Relationships with partners were not a major consideration. In addition, rela- tionships with others were a consideration only in the form of risking conflict as a result of violating standards of others. Peer pressure, parental standards, and internalized standards of unknown origin are discussed below. Peer Pressure. When girls mentioned general peer pressure, it was a constraint to engaging in sexual activity. For example, "That can give me a bad reputation by doing that stuff. At our school you get talked about. People would probably think you're a whore or 121 something like that" (#2121). For boys, on the other hand, peer pressure was always a motivating factor that was on the side of saying ygg to sexual activity. Some examples are, "You look around and think, 'It's no big deal.‘ Everybody is doing it all around you” (#6633); and "I considered doing it because of what I heard from my friends (laughs). What it's like. I figured it must be pretty fun" (#2050). Parental Standards. Parental values and standards were always considered as a constraint to engaging in sexual activity. In most interviews in this theme, teenagers ended up agreeing with their parents' advice or values. For example, one girl explained why she wanted to make sure she didn't get pregnant, "I don't want my mother to be ashamed of me. I know she regrets having a child so young. I don't want to be like that" (#0012). Other examples are, "I didn't do it 'cause it was wrong. Everybody else said it was wrong. 'Like my parents, they said, 'Don't do it!'" (#1234); and "But my parents have always said, and my grandparents, 'You wait 'til you get married.'" (#2050). In sorting through peer and parental standards, one boy decided that his parents' values were out of date and it was acceptable for him to kiss his girlfriend. But basically my mom thought I was too young right then to do that, compared to the times when she started dating and things like that. Her morals are different. 80 I wanted to continue to do what I wanted. Yet, I wanted to do what my mom wanted me to do 'cause I don't like fights. I get a lecture that's about two hours long about why I shouldn't and what she did when she was young. 122 But also I pretty much trust her. I try to do what my parents say because I respect them as parents. They're close to you and they try to advise you until you are old enough to make your own major decisions. They actually give you experiences to back you up. They tell you what they did when they were younger to give you an idea of what's right and wrong. They have good experiences and bad experiences. They share that with you to help you make better decisions than they did. ...Years ago kissing could mean you're engaged or you're supposed to be engaged in a couple of weeks. But now, like they say, "It's the eighties." ...So, I decided it's right in my mind. I don't really think I'm hurting anybody. I'm able to handle the responsibility and things that come along with kissing. (#6633) Unelaborated Internalized Standards. The sentence that best characterizes the underlying feeling associated with internalized standards is, "It's just not right" (#1309). Three teenagers who talked about strongly held values not necessarily attributed to others were those that elaborated unusual situations of an orgy, infidelity, and gang bang. These events were not likely to have been the topic of peer or parental discussion since the probability of occurrence was so small. Nonetheless, despite pressures to the contrary, teenagers all said a clear no to participating. Two examples follow: And just for my own self respect. They probably wouldn't have respected me either. Respect means if they ask you something like can I have some privacy, then they give it to you. Or not calling people names or putting them down. Giving them their own space, not hurting them. (#1309) I had a responsibility to my girlfriend. We were going steady....I had in mind that I'd keep my word with that commitment. It's kind of like a promise and I don't break promises. (#0007) 123 Marker 4-3: l Didn't Have ggy Remorse gl_All--l Felt Right With Myself (#7777). All teenagers' whose interviews that were classified in Theme 4 positively evaluated their decision. In their evaluations some teenagers mentioned that trust or respect were important considerations. Other adolescents mentioned that they were glad they said gg because they avoided guilt. For example, I think it was the right thing to do because we were not disrespecting of each of us. We were respecting other people. People have different feelings of what is right and wrong. We respected them as adults. (#6287) You know, I wasn't sure if we'd feel guilty because both of us would be betraying our parents. They trusted us. (#2050) I'm glad I didn't do it because my boyfriend would have thought he could take advantage of me anytime. He'd think, "Well, she did it this time, she'll do it next time, too." (#1309) I didn't feel sorry then, and I don't feel sorry now. (#1234) Theme g Summary: Identification With Others and Internalization gl Values and Standards lg DeveIOpment gl Self gg Separate Identily Girls and boys whose interviews were categorized in Theme 4, "I want trust and respect, not shame and guilt," processed values and standards in deciding about a situation that posed some challenge to those values and standards. In some cases, adolescents' current values were reaffirmed; in other cases, teenagers clarified or shifted their values. There was usually no expressed threat of positive or negative change in relationships with partners. Therefore, the develOpmental challenge and growth was primarily for self as separate. 124 THEME 2: I'M NOT READY FOR A BABY. I'M JUST g KID MYSELF Introduction and Example Four boys' interviews were classified in this theme, one of which was actually a hypothetical situation, not a specific dilemma. They all were very short because the issue of pregnancy was virtually the only consideration. Following is an example of a complete interview: There have been times when I think about it, but I wasn't really worried about it. I knew I was gonna do it, but I just kind of thought about it. For example, three days ago my girlfriend came over to my house after school. It wasn't really too difficult. See, she's taking the pill, and that's the only thing that we had. And I don't really know if she's really taking it as she tells me. But I believe her, even though I've never really seen it. I hOpe they work 'cause if they don't, we're in trouble! They say there's nothing that's 100 percent foolproof, you know. If she got pregnant, there would be responsibilities. A kid would be a hassle at my age. I'm still in high school and everything. It's 'cause of all the time you gotta spend with kids and stuff. I wouldn't have time for that. But I wanted to do it, 'cause I like to and I know she likes to do it and just knowing you did it. And well, I don't really know if me and my girlfriend are in love, but we say to each other we love each other. If we were or weren't in love, it would be the same thing though. (#0023) Theme 2: Markers Marker 5-1: My Girlfriend Wanted lg lg lg Bed and l Wanted lg (#0017). In all boys' interviews there was an Opportunity to have intercourse in the form of willing partners and apprOpriate places. These boys expressed no particular standards or values Opposing inter- COUI’SB . 125 Marker 5-2: l Said, "Well, 2g You Have Protection?" (#0017). Two boys decided to engage in sexual intercourse because their girl- friends said they were taking birth control pills. "She said she was on the pill" (#0017). Two other boys did not mention whether or not they explored or would explore the Option of birth control with their partners. No boys mentioned themselves as being providers of birth control. Marker 5-3: l Don't Want lg_§g g Father; l Just Ain't Ready (#6521). Three boys used the phrase, "I'm not ready," or "We aren't ready," in their narratives. For most part, this referred to their perception that they would be unable to support a family economically. For example, "I want to wait until I get old (laughs). Like I want to have a job and a way to support her" (#6521). There was also a flavor of the resentment these boys might feel were they placed prematurely in the difficult position of having to provide for a baby--emotionally and/or economically. For example, "It just wouldn't be right to a baby or to us or to anybody" (#0017). One boy who had a history of chaotic family relations and drug abuse identified very strongly with the fantasized child of a pregnancy, not wanting him to have a child- hood like his. And I don't like when I see kids out on the street getting dope. If you have a kid and then you just abandon it, that's most likely what will happen. But if you don't abandon it, you can teach it about drugs at home. Then if he wants to try anything, have him come to you and try it at home. That way he's with somebody he knows when he does it and he doesn't get mixed up with any bad stuff. And if something goes wrong, you can take him to the hospital. But out on the street, like the first time I tried cocaine, I couldn't handle it. I laid in the gutter for two and a half days. (#1515) 126 Identity The primary characteristic of the boys' interviews in Theme 5, "I'm not ready for a baby; I'm just a kid myself," was that the concern they expressed about avoiding pregnancy was virtually the only constraint to engaging in intercourse with their girlfriends. They all felt that they were not yet able to assume the role of fatherhood, especially in providing for a child economically and/or emotionally. In addition, some boys expressed awareness that being thrust into that role would curtail regular activities of adolescence and therefore prematurely foreclose their childhood development. THEME g: l FELT VIOLATED Introduction and Example There were only two interviews classified in Theme 6, "I felt violated," therefore, the markers are less well-articulated. Although the interviews had important differences, the two teenagers were similar in that they both felt as if they had been violated or exploited. One person said a clear gg to the sexual activity and her partner did not honor her preference. The other person was over- whelmed by the situation, made no clear decision, and acted impul- sively against his own value system. He felt as though he was seduced and exploited by his partner who was two years older. One interview was with a girl and the other with a boy, but no conclusions were 127 drawn about gender differences. Following is an example of a complete interview. Well I used to like this guy Tim. Tim's best friend, Mark, was seeing a girl named Tara. We all went to a movie once. So me and Tim were holding hands, and then we started kiss- ing. Then he wanted to touch me, and I didn't want him to. I told him, no I didn't want to 'cause it was like our first date or something like that. Then he kind of said, "Okay." But then he started doing it again. And I told him, "No." I told him like three times and he couldn't get the message. So finally I just said it loud, "NO!!!!" I started yelling at him. So he got mad and walked out of the movie. 80 I told Mark, "It doesn't bother me. I'm fine. If he can't accept it, then that's his problem." Mark agreed and said, "I think he was out of line." You see, at church we've always been brought up not to let other people take advantage of you, like touching and stuff like that, when you're not ready for any relationship. I wasn't ready for a relationship. I mean, a first date is different than when you're engaged. I think something big jumped in there somewhere. It has to do with how long you've been together. It wasn't really a conflict, but you see I really liked him a whole lot. But then he said, "Do you love me? Do you love me?" All this junk! I mean, I hate that. I said, "That makes me ill!" I didn't know if he really cared or not then. That just sort of made my image of him go down the drain when he said that. I mean we had known each other about six months before we went out. It was the first date, and he was saying that! If he really cared, then he would have understood my decision. And he would have respected it. I felt a little like crying 'cause it was like, "How could he do something like that?" I was hurt that he wouldn't respect my decision. And I was really mad and upset at the same time. I almost felt like slapping him to vent my anger. What a jerk! Before he left, I also thought about walking out to get away from the problem. I just needed a minute to think about it. And I sort of considered what it would be like in the long run. Would he try to take advantage of me in a different circumstance? So, I just said, "NO! Leave me alone!" After we talked, Mark and Tara went out and talked to Tim. They all came back in, and we watched the rest of the movie, but Tim sat on the Opposite side of me, way far at the end of the row. Mark and Tara were just there to comfort me and to help me. I tried watching the rest of the movie, but that didn't work too well. 128 Even though it put a damper on my relationship with Tim, I think it was the right thing to do because Tara is not a Christian. I was setting a good example for her. And Mark goes to my church. He'd get a really bad idea about me if he saw me doing something like that. I'd feel really guilty. And it wasn't the right place or the time for him to be doing that. I mean, a movie theater! Other peOple would like to enjoy the movie. (#3602) Marker 6-1: How Could Mg [or She] 2g Something Like That? (#2993). The primary marker characterizing interviews in Theme 6, "I was violated," is the person felt betrayed or exploited after the fact. For example, "I felt a little like crying....I was hurt that he wouldn't respect my decision. And I was really mad and upset at the same time" (#3602); and "But then I also feel that her being a senior and wanting to get it from a sophomore is kind of being bad on her part....That'S like me being in high school and going to the junior high and getting someone" (#1000). Marker 6-2: But ll Still Kind gl Gets Mg Down (#1000). In the context of a sexual dilemma interview, these teenagers expressed_ feelings about events as if they were still very alive for them: "I feel like an asshole when I talk about it cause there was no purpose for it at all. It was definitely the wrong thing to do" (#1000). There was an emotional intensity to the experiences that was difficult for teenagers to integrate, e.g., "Mark and Tara were just there to comfort me and to help me. I tried watching the rest of the movie, but that didn't work too well" (#3602). 129 Marker 6-3: How l Felt About My Decision Depended Upon How Well l Kept Track gl My Values. The girl who said gg felt unequivocally that she had decided the right way for her. She was very clear on her own Christian value system that certain behavior was inappropriate. This value was Strong enough that "even though it put a damper" on her relationship, she was never ambivalent about her decision. Rather, she felt betrayed and angry about his lack of sensitivity to her limits. The boy's interview had a very different quality. First, the interview was very long, listing in great detail many considerations. It is obvious that he was very confused and overwhelmed by the sexual situation itself--and perhaps the situation was further compounded by his being the star of the show that night. He admits at one point, the excessive thought processing he experienced at the time was designed to keep his thoughts off the decision or situation at hand. There is clearly an obsessive quality, for example: And I remember, this is not a joke, I seriously started thinking about the Baltimore Orioles and the Pittsburgh Pirate World Series. I thought, "All of a sudden, Baltimore put away three in a row, and then Pittsburgh coming back and winning the series." So, a lot of stuff went through my mind. (#1000) There were a number of phrases running though this boys' protocol that indicate he was not really consciously making a decision or that he didn't feel in control of the situation. For example, "Then I was on top of her. Then I guess I kissed her....I don't know how it happened but...I ended up in Judy's room with her...If she started doing something I was lost..." 130 It wasn't until the next morning that he considered some of his more strongly held values that were clouded by his threatening desire to go ahead and engage in intercourse, "And there was no love. And if something would have happened there was no responsibility. And to tell you the truth, that wasn't the girl I wanted to have the first time." In other words he avoided making a decision, had intercourse impul- sively, and then felt and continued to feel both exPloited and guilty. Theme g Summary: Maintaining the Integrity gl Self gg Separate Boundaries Interviews in Theme 6, "I felt violated," were characterized by teenagers experiences of their self boundaries, as defined by values and standards, having been invaded or overwhelmed. So much affect was generated that the experience was difficult for the teenagers to inte- grate. The teenager who was not able to keep in touch with his self as separate identity evaluated his decision negatively; the teenager who was clear about her self as separate identity (eSpecially her values) evaluated her decision positively. THEME Z: l WANTED l9 ENJOY MYSELF EVEN THOUGH ll MAY NOT HAVE BEEN RIGHT FOR HER (#7777) Introduction and Example Two interviews classified in this theme were both with boys who were in group homes. The following complete interview was with a boy who had a history of having been sexually abused by his father. Well, there's this one girl. We had an opportunity to do it. I wasn't so sure about it, but she was, I guess. I had been trying for weeks, and all of a sudden I had an 131 Opportunity. It was strange! She was intoxicated, let me put it that way. Otherwise, there'd be no game and there'd be no anything. She would have just said, "NO." All of a sudden it was her turning and saying, "Yes!! Let's!" So the question was why did she want to do it. I was kind of worried whether she was all right. I mean, was she doing this on her own or was she just drunk? I didn't want her to wake up tomorrow and say, "I did this! You did this?!" I really didn't want that because it wasn't something I'd enjoy having then. But, on the other hand, her body was pulling me the other way. I was really wanting her. So then I started thinking about what I was going to do and how long I'd be enjoying myself. It all depends, you know. Sometimes I don't last, it could be a second or two. Sometimes it could be an hour or three. So I went ahead and did it. I think it was the right thing to do because I really enjoyed myself. (#6000) Theme 1 Markers Marker 7-1: l Didn't Want Her lg Regret ll. In both narratives within this theme, boys expressed some doubt that their girlfriends really wanted to engage in sexual intercourse. For example, "Like when you're over at your girlfriends's house, her parents are upstairs... and one thing leads to another....I knew it wasn't right because her parents trust her" (#7171). Marker 7-2: Mg Did ll Anyway--ll Was Mainly Because l Was Horny (#1111). In both interviews classified in Theme 7, boys focused on their potential enjoyment and chose to engage in the intercourse activity anyway. One boy expressed his reaction: "Afterwards, I started feeling a little guilty about doing right under her parent's feet, but I really didn't think about it" (#7171). 132 Theme 1 Summary: Predominance gl Self gg Sgparate Over Possible Repercussions lg Relationship lg Partner Interviews in Theme 7, "I wanted to enjoy myself even though it may not be right for her," were both characterized by some sensitivity to their girlfriends' feelings or standards that might be contrary to engaging in intercourse at that time. However, they both chose to let their self as separate identities predominate in decision making, despite potential for repercussions in their relationships. CONCLUSION In Table 14, a summary of themes in experience-near and theoreti- cal terms as well as their frequencies by gender are presented. Examining these data in another way, I find that in growth of self as separate in adolescent development, there is often a gender dif- ference. Girls say gg to sexual activity in withdrawing from a relationship that seems to promise only loss or some injury to their selves. Boys say ygg to sexual activity to consolidate their male gender identity, particularly as this relates to gaining sexual experience in a the standard of maleness in adolescent male culture. In develOpment of self as connected, a girl says ygg to sexual activi- ty, but only when she feels her self as separate concerns are both clear and also are mirrored or taken seriously by her partner. On the other hand, boys say gg to sexual activity when their own self as separate and male identities are secure, both in the present and the future (e.g., avoiding pregnancy). They can then be more receptive to 133 Table 14 Summary of the Qualitative Analysis: Themes, Frequencies, and Theoretical Meanings Theme in Experience Frequencies Theoretical Meaning Near Terms for Identity Development Girls Boys Although I cared about 16 Differentiation of self him, I didn't want to. as separate from self as connected to partner. It was my first time. 1 A developmental mile- stone for self as connected to partner. 0 A developmental mile- stone for male gender identity, self as separate. Keeping the relation- 4 Relinquishing of self Ship was more important as separate to self than doing what I as connected to wanted. partner. I want trust and res- 4 Identification with pect, not shame and guilt. others and internali- zation of values and standards in develOp- ment of self as separate. 134 Table 14 (Continued) Theme in Experience Frequencies Theoretical Meaning Near Terms for Identity Development Girls Boys I'm not ready for a 0 4 Fear of premature fore- baby. I'm just a kid closure of development myself. of self identity. I felt violated. Maintaining the 1 1 integrity of self as separate boundaries. I wanted to enjoy my- 0 2 Predominance of self self even though it as separate over pos- may not have been sible repercussions in right for her. relationship with partner. issues of relationship and can more easily take the perspectives Of their partners. Last, there are a number of situations that present a challenge to identity development in that they are particularly difficult to integrate. In these situations, there is a power differential between partners of the sexual relationship, and a teenager may have become a victim or perpetrator of unwanted sexual activity. These situations are when self boundaries are overwhelmed, when girls sacrifice them- selves to a relationship, or when a boy engages in sexual activity 135 without regard to the relationship or the partner. In most cases victims are girls, and perpetrators are boys. There is evidence in this analysis that two lines of develOpment, self as separate and self as connected, create a dialectic tension within the self and between genders. For example, girls' withdrawal from sexual activity may help sensitize their boyfriends to issues of relationship, while boys' withdrawal from sexual activity mirrors girls' self as separate concerns. In addition, adolescents who have gone too far toward self as separate or toward self as connected find their life situations changed in terms of level of unintegrated affect (e.g., feeling guilty or exploited) or external repercussions (e.g., pregnancy). From this point, they may pick up the developmental challenge, or they may continue to repeat their experiences with dif- ferent partners. CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION In the quantitative analysis, I found that (1) adolescents used both responsibility/caring and justice/rights orientations in their sexual dilemmas; (2) there was a Significant relationship between the orientation of reasoning (responsibility/caring or justice/rights) used in a spontaneous real life dilemma and that used in a sexual dilemma; and (3) there was no significant relationship between gender and reasoning orientation (justice/rights or responsibility/caring) used in a sexual dilemma. In addition, there were no statistically significant relationships between the reasoning orientation and race, social class, age, or intelligence. Lastly, there were no significant differences between group home residents and high school students in decision making orientation (justice/rights or responsibility/caring). The qualitative thematic analysis, on the other hand, revealed very clear gender differences in the content and meanings of sexual dilemmas. The seven theoretical themes were (1) differentiation of self as separate from self as connected to partner (girls); (2) a developmental milestone for self in relation to partner (girls) and a developmental milestone for self as separate (boys); (3) relinquishing of self as separate to self as connected to partner (girls say gg, boys say yes); (4) identification with others and internalization of 136 137 values and standards in development of self as separate (boys and girls); (5) fear of premature foreclosure of development of self identity (boys); (6) maintaining the integrity of self as separate boundaries (boys and girls); (7) predominance of self as separate over possible repercussions in relationship with partner (boys). In growth of self as separate, requiring withdrawal from their relational identity, girls say gg to sexual activity within relation- ships that seems to promise loss or emotional injury. Boys, say ygg to sexual activity to consolidate their male gender identity and gain sexual experience. When relationship with a partner is considered, it is a constraint to sexual activity. In development of self as sepa- rate, both girls and boys also sometimes consider and internalize their values in relation to those of their peers, parents, and other authority figures. In development of self as connected, the gender difference is in the opposite direction. Girls can say ygg when they have a clear sense of their self as separate identities and their concerns are taken seriously by their partners. Boys say gg to sexual activity only when the self as separate identity is secure, in particular male gender identity, both in the present and the future. This security allows boys to be more receptive to their partners' needs and the needs of their relationships. Three themes also emerged that describe situations that present a challenge to identity develOpment: (1) when self boundaries are overwhelmed (boys and girls), (2) when one sacrifices oneself to the relationship (girls), and (3) when one engages in sexual activity 138 without regard to the relationship or the partner (boys). In these situations there were power differentials within sexual relationships. In most cases girls were victims and boys were perpetrators of unwanted sexual activity. Following is a discussion of these findings in relation to theory and existing research. This is followed by a summary of strengths and weaknesses of methodology and methods. Finally, the research will be discussed in terms of implications for future research. IMPLICATION 9: RESULTS FOR DEVELOPMENTAL THEORY Cognitive Moral Orientation The absence of quantitative gender differences in decision making orientation in this adolescent study supports recent research by Walker, et al. (1987). They found that when controlling for dilemma content, there were no gender differences. Given that sexual dilemmas are usually personal dilemmas, the content was fairly homogeneous in this study. With the restriction of age range, however, conclusions cannot be drawn for older or younger populations. Identity and Personality Development: Chodorow The significant correlation between decision making orientation in a real life dilemma and a sexual dilemma provides some support for Lifton's (1985) assertion that there is an underlying personality factor accounting for the orientation. In addition, the qualitative results provide support for Chodorow's (1974, 1978) theoretical 139 assertions that personality development is different for males than females. Girls arrive at adolescence more developed in their selves as connected to partners. The primary task of adolescence, as illustrated in sexual decision making is to learn to evaluate the nature of a relationship and withdraw when necessary. Withdrawal provides greater definition and growth to self as separate. Boys enter adolescence less well develOped in the area of self in relation to sexual partner. On the other hand, boys mention relation- ships with their male peers as being very important. They engage in sexual behavior to attain a peer standard for sexual activity and so they can talk with one another about their experiences. The develOp- mental tasks are more complex in that they involve consolidation of male gender identity, solidifying male peer relationships, and accumu- lating sexual experiences. It is likely that these three areas con- tribute to the develOpment of one another. It is only after this development that they begin to take an interest in maintaining their relationship with their partners. The two lines of develOpment, self as separate and self as con- nected, are reciprocal across sexes. They create a dialectic tension between males and females in that develOpment of one (e.g., self as separate) promotes development of the other (e.g., self in relation) in their partner. While promoting development, this tension makes relationships very problematic, much as Chodorow (1976) asserts in her article, "Oedipal assymetries and heterosexual knots" and Rubin (1983) in her book, Intimate Strangers. For example, while boys are 140 developing their sense of male gender identity by gaining sexual experience, they are not very invested in the heterosexual relation- ship. Girls, sensing the lack of investment, say gg to the sexual activity. What is right for girls is frustrating for boys. A tension also occurs within the self when one has gone too far in a certain direction, creating a challenge for development. For a boy, this is in the direction of self as separate, taking his own needs into account without being sensitive to the needs of his partner or the relationship. For a girl, this is in the direction of self as connected, relinquishing her needs to those of her partner or the relationship. These teenagers find their life situations changed in terms of unintegrated affect (e.g., feeling guilty or exploited) or external life repercussions (e.g, pregnancy). Lykes (1985) critiques the current literature on self in relation to others because "the dyadic relationship, defined as key to women's self understanding, is described independently of the social totality in which it grounded" (p. 272). The social totality to which she refers is one in which males have more economic and social power than women. The results of this study indicate that girls are more likely to be victims in these problematic sexual situations, indicating that even in adolescence there is a power differential within the hetero- sexual relationship. Other Identity Theorists: Kaplan, Erikson, Jacobson Marcia (1980) defines identity as "a self structure--an internal, self-constructed dynamic organization of drives, abilities, beliefs, 141 and individual history" (p. 159). Most psychoanalytic adolescent identity theorists describe adolescence as a "farewell to childhood" (Kaplan, 1984; Jacobson, 1964). The complex task of an adolescent is to internalize parental standards by identifying with them at the same time that they are differentiating from them, in preparation for their roles as adults. Clearly, the identification and differentiation aspects of iden- tity development are important in sexual decision making (e.g., Theme 4). However, these data support the assertion of Franz and White (1985) in their critique of Erikson that there is also a line of development, in both males and females, that reflects the process of interpersonal attachments. The results of this study support the identity research of Hodgson (1977) who reported that "men were more advanced intrapersonal identity issues, while women were further advanced in interpersonal areas as well as being further along in the achievement of intimacy than men" (Marcia, 1980, p. 179). This finding is particularly high- lighted in this research because it is primarily a study of hetero- sexual relations. Both conceptions of identity, self as separate and self in rela- tion to other, appear in different words in the existential critique of Erikson by Knowles (1986) who maintains that Erikson's adolescent stage of identity develOpment is actually intertwined with the young adult stage of intimacy. "Knowles reminds us that committed, loving relations involve a rhythm of forgetting and remembering oneself" 142 (Fischer & Alapack, 1987, p. 103). In this research, the emphasis seems to be on remembering oneself for both girls and boys. Girls, however, seem to remember from a position of being connected. This is not the case for many boys who do not really succeed in forgetting themselves, or losing their selves as separate identities in favor of relational identities with their partners. SEXUAL DECISION MAKING RESEARCH The results in the qualitative portion of this study support the survey report by Juhazs and Sonnenshein-Schneider (1987). There is a gender difference in males experience self enhancement through sexual activity and they are more likely to be concerned about being parents. Females are concerned with external standards, however, this is because standards provide definition to the self as separate for the withdrawal from tenuous relationships. I could not detect a theme for females, however, which Juhazs and Sonnenshein-Schneider label "family establishment competence." Another finding which supports previous research (e.g., Simon, Gagnon, Carns, Elias, & Walshok, 1968) is that teenagers often engage in sex for nonsexual reasons. Those reasons center around building identity, both in self as separate and self in relationship to other. This study brings new meaning to the phrase, safe sex. Safety is not only in the realm of staying free from disease and pregnancy. It also means safety in terms of not being hurt within heterosexual relation- ships because these relationships are problematic for adolescents. Most teenagers approach the combination of sexual union and caring 143 connection quite cautiously and wisely. These data support Melton's (1983) summary of research indicating that teenagers are capable of making competent decisions. Boys and girls have a sense of what each others' experiences are, and act accordingly. For example, when girls sense that their heterosexual relationships are not solid, they say gg to sexual activity. In fact, they were, in the final outcome, correct in their assessments. Another area of research supported by these findings is male adolescent sexuality. In an interview study of 1177 college students, Carns (1973) found: Males have intercourse for homosocial purposes. They begin intercourse early in non-love relationships, and report the occurrence of first intercourse to their friends soon after it takes place. This reporting is done for the sake of the ego gratification which comes from same sex peer approval of their transition in social status from virgin to nonvirgin. ... Females ... begin intercourse later, in love relation- ships. (Kallen & Stephenson, 1982) Subsequent research of first intercourse experiences had similar findings of gender differences in a "perceived emotional relationship with the first intercourse partner" (Kallen & Stephenson, 1982). Kallen, Moore, and Stephenson (1980) found in their study of college students that "78% of women report that their first intercourse experience took place in the context of a love relationship. For the men, on the other hand, involvement in a relationship which includes (or leads to) coitus requires new learning about emotional commitment and expressiveness" (p. 1312). These samples were different in that subjects were older and better educated. But they were recalling 144 their first intercourse experience; many probably occurred during the high school years. Berger and Simon (1975) hypothesized that male adolescent sexual behavior is a reflection of "a sexual Style--which integrates the new physical and social roles and the new sexual feelings and experiences with the learned behaviors, attitudes, and evaluations of the preadolescent period" (p. 202), when "the organizing metaphors of masculine identity, richly infused with physical elements, aggression..., and dominance, are experimented with in largely non- sexual ways" (pp. 201-202). They associate the heightened sense of autonomy within sexual relationships that most adolescent boys experience in part with their first sexual experiences (especially experiences of orgasm) having through masturbation--they were alone. Girls' first sexual experiences, on the other hand, can also be asso- ciated with their contemporary socialization in that they are in relation to their partners. METHODOLOGY Strengths The strong point of this research is the combination of an exist- ing quantitative method with a qualitative analysis of the same data. Where the former was not sensitive to gender differences in the data, the latter was. In general, there were no significant gender dif- ferences in responsibility and caring orientation. However, girls engaged in responsibility and caring orientation cognition toward their partners much more than did boys. Boys told of responsibility 145 and caring cognitions related to their male peers much more than did females. In addition, the qualitative analysis revealed issues of process or interaction between decision making orientations in a way that the quantitative method could not. The most important strength of the qualitative analysis is that it allowed the voices of the adolescents themselves to be heard. They described their own experiences and what was problematic for them, not what we, as adults, find problematic about adolescent sexuality. Basing sexual education programs or material (for schools, parents, and teenagers) on adolescent reality may have a better chance of suc- ceeding both in making the teenagers' sexual develOpment more fulfil- ling and also in ameliorating some of the difficult issues related to teenage sexuality that adults define as problematic (e.g., pregnancy). For example, the results of this study indicate that female teenagers are very concerned with issues of relationship and that male teenagers are concerned with consolidating their male identities. Sexual educa- tion programs Should these major concerns, helping teenagers learn to evaluate the nature of their relationships and to feel secure in their gender identities. Generalizability In terms of demographic characteristics, the sample is represen- tative of the general population with the exception of having included a larger number of minority group participants. An increased minority sample was sought to assure enough participants to elucidate any racial similarities or differences. I sampled for a larger pr0portion 146 of minority participants and assured working class participation to address the criticism that only advantaged populations have been stu- died using the Gilligan, et al., (1982) method. One weakness of the research, however, is a probable volunteer bias. Clippinger (1980) defines volunteer bias as "the failure of a researcher to achieve the cooperation of the entire group of indivi- duals in the particular sample which has been selected" (p. 83). The response rate for the high school students was only 13%. This is a common criticism of studies in the area of childhood sexuality. There is clearly a certain subset of parents and/or children who are anxious enough about sexuality that they would choose not to volunteer. Rosenthal and Rosnow (1975) summarize some of the characteristics of those who tend to volunteer: better educated, higher socioeconomic class, higher IQ, more arousal-seeking, more unconventional (especially in sexual studieS), more creative, and lower in guilt about sex. It is difficult to tell exactly in what way volunteer bias affected the sample in this study. Volunteer bias did not seem to be in terms of participants' SES, IQ, or educational level. Also, a significant number of teenagers who were anxious about sexuality and not willing to talk about it did volunteer for this research. In addition, a number of survivors of child sexual abuse were included in the sample. Therefore, characteristics of volunteer bias are not due completely to the sensitivity of sexuality as a research topic. From the comments that some teenagers and parents made about why they would not consent to participate, it seems that lack of time and investment 147 in research were factors in the low response rate. All in all, I feel the sample is fairly representative of the adolescent population at large and the results are generalizable. There was, however, a complete absence of any homosexual situa- tions in these interviews. This is likely due both to volunteer bias and to difficulty of the coming out process in adolescence. In terms of volunteer bias, teenagers who had awareness of homosexual desires may repress it (Malyon, 1981). They might be anxious then about participating in a study in which those feelings might become conscious. To avoid their coming out process, other gay adolescents suppress their same-sex desires in an attempt to assimilate into a heterosexual orientation (Malyon, 1981). Homosexual orientation emerges later in adulthood for these adolescents. Last, many teenagers are simply unaware of the possibility of a homosexual orientation until later in their development. In order to come out, adolescents must have posi- tive feelings about being gay, and they then must integrate this new aspect of sexual identity into the rest of their identity (Sullivan & Schneider, 1987). These tasks are difficult to do in a society that rejects of homosexuality. Reliability Percent agreement reliability results in this study differed from those of Gilligan's, et al., (1982). Reliability A (chunking) figures for both the Sexual and Real Life Dilemmas were slightly higher in this study than in Gilligan's. However, the more important 148 Reliability B (categorization) figure was lower. Categorization leads to the final ratio scores. Reliability B figures were 68% and 64% for the real life dilemmas and the sexual dilemmas, respectively. Lyons characterized her coding system as being in the beginning stages of development (Lyons 6 Gilligan, 1984). Nunnally (1978) set reliability standards for instruments used in the early stages of research at .70. That number was the standard set for this study in reaching reliability prior to beginning coding. The reasons for lower reliability figures in this study as com- pared to the Gilligan group reliability (approximately .80) are three- fold. First, at the beginning of training, it was emphasized that we would not achieve coding reliability with their group by the end of the seminar. Accordingly, I did extend the training program with my coders over 20 weeks, but the possibility exists that our coding was not reliable with and consequently not as reliable as that of Gilligan's coders who have worked with one another for a longer period of time. Another more likely reason for lower reliability figures is that participants in this study were slightly below average intelligence, predominantly working class, and for most part clearly less verbal than participants in Gilligan's study. I suggest this is more likely because it also explains our higher chunking reliability. Distinct thoughts were easier to identify because they were less elaborated, but they were more difficult to code for the same reason. 149 Last, the average number of considerations for sexual dilemmas was smaller than for real life dilemmas. In addition, it is likely that participants in this study were less reflective on their experi- ences, in general, than those in Gilligan's study, resulting in fewer codable considerations. It is more likely that reliability will be underestimated in interviews with fewer responses (Hartman, 1977). Each consideration found not in agreement lowers the reliability by a large increment. For example, if a coder pair codes 2 of 4 considera- tions differently, their percent agreement reliability for that inter- view is 50%. There are two reasons that the percent agreement Reliability B figures for this research underestimate the reliability of the final Real Life and Sexual Dilemma Ratio Scores (responsibility and caring responses/total responses). (1) The Ratio Scores are reflec- tive of moral orientation. Reliability 8 is reflective of the accu- racy of the coding method, not moral orientation. For example, if one coder placed a consideration in "avoidance of conflict" and the other ' it would be scored as a miss even in "maintaining the relationship,‘ though both are categories in the responsibility and caring orienta- tion. (2) When considerations were categorized differently, coder pairs came to a final consensus on the actual meaning and category of a consideration. The final Ratio Score is a reflection of this con- sensus. Therefore, Real Life Dilemma and Sexual Dilemma Ratio Scores are more reliable than the percent agreement reliability results would suggest. 150 I agree with Gilligan, et al., (1982) that calculation of reli- ability for the purpose of develOping the coding system needs to be stringent. I also agree that two coders who place a consideration in different categories should talk and come to an agreement on the meaning of the consideration and, therefore, in which category it belongs, so that there is final agreement. It is also important to track the "mistakes" in coding so that clarity in coding can be improved. I disagree, however, with the choice of percent agreement reliability as being optimal as the final reliability figure (Reliability C) for the Ratio Scores. Reliability C could be calcu- lated in one of two ways. (a) Three coder pair agreement/disagreement possibilities exist in this method: (1) Exact agreement on specific category (Reliability 8), (2) Agreement on moral orientation (voice) but disagreement on specific category, and (3) disagreement on moral orientation (voice) and, therefore, on specific category. A percent agreement method adding numbers 1 and 2 and dividing by the total number of codable considerations would more accurately reflect the reliability of the Ratio Scores. (b) A preferable method is a simple Pearson product moment correlation of the two coders' initial dilemma Ratio Scores. This reliability estimate would avoid some of the pitfalls of percent agreement reliability (e.g., small number of considerations underestimates reliability, Hartman, 1977). 151 Another issue that might possibly affect reliability of results is that coders were able to guess the gender and sample of the parti- cipant from the interview protocol in many cases. This might have been damaging to the credibility of significant results indicating a gender or sample difference in Ratio Scores. However, there were no statistically significant differences. This brings up an interesting procedural point. On one hand, the research method is designed to keep participants' experiences or cognitions in their real life con- texts. A solution to the possible knowledge bias is to remove all hints of gender by (1) placing he/she or him/her whenever a pronoun is mentioned, (2) using gender neutral terms, (3) changing any sex stereotyped activities or nouns to be gender neutral, and so on. I chose not to do remove all gendered words or phrases because one risks removing the participants from their contexts. Instead, I instructed the coders to bracket their biases. In a related issue, the Real Life and Sexual Dilemmas for each participant were coded at the same time. Interviews were identified by participants' number, therefore, coders could have been influenced in their coding of the second interview by their impression of the orientation of the first interview. Walker, et al., (1987) identified multiple interviews by each participant with different numbers in order to avoid this possible knowledge bias. I did not follow this procedure, in part, because of my bias that one can consciously strive not to be influenced by theoretical hypotheses. In addition, keeping the two interviews for each participant together allowed coders to have a more complete sense of the 152 participants which in turn allowed them to grasp the participants' meanings more completely. As dictated by method, participants were often asked to define words (e.g., responsibility, morality and trust) because peOple define these words differently. In a method that separates the two dilemmas, this type of information given in one dilemma would have been unavailable in coding the second dilemma. Also, in this research the two dilemmas were sometimes related. In our training (Lyons 6 Gilligan, 1984), we were encouraged to read a protocol completely through in order to be more grounded in the person's perspective or experience. It is a trade off. To have coded the interviews blind might have increased reliability in terms of potential knowledge bias. However, it is my opinion that this gain might have been at the expense of gaining a sense of the participant and how he or she uses certain words which, in turn, might have resulted in lower Reliability B scores (categorization). In summary, it is not likely that knowledge of gender, sample, and another dilemma orientation significantly reduced the reliability of results; it is more likely that knowledge of a participant's context and meaning enhanced coder reliability. Fidelity The term reliability is not exactly applicable to qualitative methodology, as explained in Chapter 3--Methods. Another term, fidelity (to data and participants' experiences), is more appropriate. Fidelity is ensured at two levels--in the collection and analysis of data. 153 Some skeptics of the qualitative research interview method might ask is the data accurate? Did participants recall their actual experiences? Indeed, there is likely some error, one source of which lies "in the existentialist insight that instead of the past deter- mining the character of the present, the present significantly reshapes the past as we reconstruct our biographies in an effort to bring them into greater congruence with our current identities, roles, situations, and available vocabularies" (Gagnon & Simon, 1973, p. 13). Therefore, while the reconstruction may not be an accurate rendition of what occurred at the time of the actual situation, the situation communicated is a reflection both of that person's current identity in relation to an event she or he related and also the context of the interpersonal relationship with me as researcher. For example, some girls spoke of relationships which involved abuse. A few of those girls, chose to tell about episodes in which they said gg, thereby not allowing themselves to be abused. This might have been a social desirability bias, but it may also be a reflection of the growth process that had occurred over time since the abusive events took place. On the other hand, boys were, in general, more reluctant or anxious to talk about their sexual situations than were girls. It is likely in both cases that this is related to my being a woman inter- viewer. For the most part, however, participants were made to feel com- fortable and assured that they were the experts, so that they would be more likely to share any experiences. The interpersonal relationship 154 between researcher and participant was unique in that there was no ongoing relationship. The one session data collection procedure may have made the adolescents feel less vulnerable because they would not have to see me again. The fact that girls shared incest situations and both girls and boys shared some very moving experiences, attests to the comfort most adolescents felt while being interviewed. In fact, they seemed to welcome the opportunity to share meaningful experiences with a trustworthy, nonjudgmental listener, albeit a stranger. With regard to the analysis of data, theoretical biases were bracketed prior to analysis so that results would emerge from the data, rather than a theoretical structure being imposed upon the data. Quality is then evaluated in terms of how well the results fit or describe the data. Colaizzi's steps 1 through 6 were followed to ensure fidelity to the data, including a continual back and forth checking from the raw data to the theoretical structures and back again as the themes and markers emerged. The resulting structure is one that is an exact fit with the data; there are no negative cases and no interviews which cannot be placed in one of the mutually exclu- sive themes. One step that would have enhanced the richness of the data and perhaps assured greater fidelity is to add a member validation inter- view in which the researcher would return to each subject after the analysis is complete, describe the results, and get participants' feedback. 155 IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH The results of this study support Fischer and Alapack (1987) who call for phenomenological research of adolescence. There is clearly a need for more qualitative research. Qualitative methodologists (e.g., Emerson) cite the need to study people in their actual contexts, or in such a way that no important aSpect of their life contexts (e.g., sexual orientation, racial or ethnic background, and social class) are excluded from the participant-researcher dialogues. From such research we are much more likely to develop sexual education programs that are geared toward the needs of teenagers, enabling them to have more fulfilling and responsible sexual experi- ences. This study provides ample support for the notion that many of the reasons teenagers decide to engage or not to engage in sexual behavior are nonsexual. Programs and policies meant to assist young women and men more toward a 'healthy, successful' adulthood need to take into account the central importance of interacting biologi- cal, social, historical, cohort, psychological, familial, economic and political factors which together shape adoles- cent sexual behaviors. (Chilman, 1983, p. 272) From a phenomenological perspective, Fischer and Alapack (1987) state, "Sexuality is at once personal/bodily/interpersonal/Societal" (p. 101). Therefore, sexual education should be integrated with "personal and interpersonal longings, family values, and so on....Per- haps they could see that sexuality is inextricably intertwined with the rest of daily life, part of the fabric of existence...." (P. 101). The marked gender differences that emerged from the qualitative analysis suggest that sexual education programs might be more 156 effectively conducted in sex-segregated settings for most of the program. The issues that were problematic for girls and boys were often different. Separate classes might promote more frank discussion about issues relevant specifically to males or females. Some classes might then be held in mixed groups to promote mutual understanding. A specific idea for a more general phenomenological study of adolescent sexuality is interviewing teenagers about "moments in [their] lives that they experience as involving sexuality" (Fischer & Alapack, 1987, p. 100). In addition, teenagers could be interviewed about a progression of sexual decisions or experiences to conceptu- alize development over time more clearly, as well as to elaborate interactive links of the double helix model of development (Franz & White, 1985) that occur between self as connected and self as separate in sexual partnerships, personality, and identity. Pencil and paper measures have an advantage in providing con- venience for the researcher in terms of time and credibility (in main- stream psychology) based on quantitative results. However, the inter- view format provides an excellent opportunity for adolescents to share thoughts and experiences on a deeper level. Taking time to establish rapport and help teenagers to explore their feelings and experiences provides a different type of results. Future research might also provide interviewers of the same sex as the participants to overcome the relative discomfort males experience in talking to a female researcher about their sexual decisions. Another area of future research is elaborating adolescent iden- tity or cognitive moral development. The Gilligan, et al. (1982) 157 method needs refinement. For example, there are two voices and there are gender differences in their use, but the current quantitative method did not Show the gender difference that emerged against the backdrop of heterosexual versus homosocial relations. There is a need to track the sequence of or relationships between responses elaborate the interaction of the two strands of the double helix--self as connected and self as separate. The latter has been studied more thoroughly in psychology. The relationship orientation needs more elaboration. However, in this study, it seems that the "Care of Self" category for girls serves as a bridge between the justice rights voice and the responsibility/caring voice. These find- ings might well be researched from the perspective of a dual theory of ego structure development using both object relations and self psycho- logy (e.g., Kohut). Are the two strands of the double helix funda- mentally related with one another? Or, do they proceed somewhat independently? All of these are fascinating research questions, but one question remains. What do the teenagers want to know? That is where I began this study. Gilligan said (Lyons & Gilligan, 1984), in a research feedback meeting teenagers studied longitudinally stated the questions or topics that they would have liked to have considered, but that were not discussed during the course of their research participation. §gg was one of their responses. Feminist methodological literature suggests that we as researchers have great power in deciding the questions to be asked. 158 In addition, as adults, we have power over children. Ideally, researchers should not be higher in status or social/economic power than those people they study (Harding, 1987). Because adolescents cannot research themselves, as researchers we must be cautious to choose our questions well. Future research questions should not always be what we believe is a problem for teenagers or what we think is the next logical research step. Rather, the questions should come from areas of adolescent experience about which the teenagers them- selves wonder. APPENDIX A 160 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY ' EAST FEE HALL EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ‘ 48824 February 2, 1986 Dear High School Student and Parents, The purpose of this letter is to invite you to participate in a research project. This study is being conducted by Floyd Westendorp, M.D., of the Department of Psychiatry and Mary Roberson, M.A., of the Department of Psychology both at Michigan State University. We are conducting this study to find out (1) how teenagers make decisions and (2) how they feel about social problems and relationships. The Lansing School District has cooperated with us by mailing out this packet to you, thereby keeping your parents’ and your names and addresses confidential. To encourage students to participate, we are offering to pay you for your time. We will pay $10 to each student who consents to participate. In addition, we will enter each of the 60 parti- cipant’s names into a drawing for 3 awards of an additional $20. In other words, you have a l in 20 chance of winning an extra $20. Also, to involve parents, who must also give their consent, Mary Roberson will be conducting an evening presentation and discussion group for parents of teens who participate in the research. The topic of discussion will be "The difficulties parents have as their adolescents face decisions of greater consequence: Understanding teenage decision making."~ This pre— sentation will be held in February or March of 1986. As a part of this study, we are studying the area of sexual decision making because it is topic of growing concern to both teenagers and adults. We won't be asking about sexual behavior itself, but rather the process of making decisions. In addition, we touch on the area of juvenile delinquency. Once we have collected all the information from you, your name will not appear on any of it. The results will be kept confidential by assigning a number to the data for identification purposes. We are looking for students between the ages of 15 and 17. The research will be conducted at Michigan State University and takes about 2 or 2-1/2 hours. We can schedule during the even- ing, right after school, or on the weekend during the months of December through February. For those who don’t drive, we are willing to help with transportation home if you can just get a ride to campus. 161 We feel this is an important study and hope you will help us by deciding to participate. If you would like to, please com- plete the attached consent form and the form requesting your name, address, and phone number so that we can call and schedule a research appointment. Note that your parents must give their permission for you to take part. (If for some reason, you won't be participating, we would appreciate your filling out the bottom of the consent form which asks why. You do not have to identify yourself and it will help us understand who is not deciding to be a part of the study and why.) In either case, mail the form back in the enclosed postage paid business reply envelope. If you have any questions or want more information on exactly what will happen during the research, please feel free to call Mary Roberson at 355-4456. This phone call does not obli- gate you to participate. We are most happy to respond to any concerns you or your parents may have. Sincerely, Z ; Floy W stendorp, M.D. Profes or of PZEEEEEZTy Z M. K. Roberson, M. A. Doctoral Student, Department of Psychology P.S. For those of you who decide to participate, please send your form back as soon as possible. We only have enough money to pay a certain number of students. We think we have estimated about right in how many packets we sent out, so that if you volunteer you have a good chance of being able to participate. But if more people volunteer than we thought, we will have to take first come, first serve. If you send a form back, we will call you and let you know one way or the other. Thanks a lot! 162 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY ' EAST FEE HALL EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ‘ 48824 INFORMED CONS ENT FORM Exploring Real Life Dilemmas 1. I have read the attached description of the real life dilemma study, the requirements of participation, and the confidentiality guarantee the researchers have made. 2. I understand that my participation in this research is voluntary and that I may choose not to participate. 3. I understand that if I participate I may refuse to answer any question that I find too personal or objec- tionable. I also understand that I am free to discon- tinue my participation in the study at any time without penalty. 4. It is my understanding that if at any time I have questions, I am free to ask. 5. I understand that my participation in the study does not guarantee any beneficial results to me. 6. I AGREE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS STUDY. Signature of Teenager Date Signature of Parent or Guardian Date I DO NOT CONSENT TO PARTICIPATION IN THIS STUDY. YOU NEED NOT IDENTIFY YOURSELF. Mark One: Parent ___ Youth To help us understand why people do not agree to participate, please write briefly the reason you decided not to consent. 163 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION TO SCHEDULE A RESEARCH APPOINTMENT NAME: First and Last ADDRESS Number and Street City and Zip Code PHONE NUMBER When is a good time to call? Just mail this and the consent form back in the enclosed addressed stamped business reply envelope. APPENDIX B 164 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY CLINICAL CENTER 0 PSYCHIATRY CLINICS EAST LANSING 0 MICHIGAN 0 «824-1316 BIO! WEST FEE HALL April 8, 1986 Dear parent or legal guardian, The Wedgewood Acres staff has mailed you this packet so that we can ask you to give permission for your child to take part in a research project. This study is being conducted by Floyd Westendorp, M.D., of the Department of Psychiatry and Mary Roberson, M.A., of the Department of Psychology both at Michigan State University. We are conducting this study to find out (a) how adolescents go about making decisions and (b) how they feel about social problems and relationships. As a part of this study, we are studying the area of sexual decision making because it is a topic of growing concern to both adults and teenagers. We will also touch on the area of juvenile delinquency. Once we have collected all the information from your child, his or her name will not appear on any of it. The results will be kept confidential by assigning a number to the data for identification purposes. To encourage teenagers to participate, we are offering to pay your child for his or her time. We will pay $10 to those who consent to participate. In addition, we enter each of the 60 participants names in a drawing for 3 awards of an additional $20. We want you to know your child will receive the same services from the Wedgewood Acres program no matter what your decision about allowing them to be part of the study. To provide an incentive for you to give your consent, Mary Roberson will be conducting an evening presentation and discussion group for parents of teens who participate in the research. The topic of this optional discussion will be "The difficulties parents have as their adolescents face real life moral dilemmas of greater consequence: Understanding teenage decision making." This presentation will be held in April or May of this year. To give consent, all you need to do is sign the enclosed consent form and return it in the self addressed, stamped envelope. If for any reason you have any additional questions or MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity [institution 165 want further information on what the research entails, please feel free to call Mary Roberson at 517/355-4456. You may call collect. We will be happy to respond to any concerns you might have. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Sincerely! Wéstendor a1 Student, Department of Psychology MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 166 CLINICAL CENTER 0 PSYCHIATRY CLINICS EAST LANSING 0 MICHIGAN 0 48824-1316 3101 WEST FEE I-IALI. INFORMED CONSENT FORM Exploring Real Life Dilemmas l. I have read the attached description of the real life dilemma study, the requirements of participation, and the confidentiality guarantees the researchers have made. 2. I understand that my child’s participation in this research is voluntary and that he or she may choose not to partici- pate. Further, I understand that my child will receive the same services from Wedgewood Acres whether or not I decide to give my consent for participation in the study. 3. I understand that my child may refuse to answer any question that he or she finds too personal or objectionable. I also understand that he or she is free to discontinue participa- tion in the study at any time without penalty. 4. It is my understanding that if at any time my child has any questions, he or she is free to ask. 5. I understand that participation in the study does not guarantee any beneficial results to my child. 6. I GIVE MY CONSENT FOR MY CHILD TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS STUDY. FURTHER, I GIVE MY CONSENT FOR THE RESEARCHERS TO HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION IN MY CHILD'S FILE AT WEDGEWOOD ACRES CHRISTIAN GROUP HOME. THIS INFORMATION AND ALL DATA COL- LECTED WILL BE IDENTIFIED ONLY WITH A NUMBER AND WILL NOT APPEAR LINKED WITH ANY NAMES. Signature of Parent or Legal Guardian Date Child's Name: (please print) I DO NOT CONSENT TO PARTICIPATION IN THIS STUDY. YOU NEED NOT IDENTIFY YOURSELF. To help us understand why people do not agree to participate, please write briefly the reason you decided not to consent. PLEASE RETURN IN THE STAMPED ENVELOPE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MSU is on Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution APPENDIX C 168 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY - HEALTH CENTER EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ' 48824 March 1986 Dear teenager, The purpose of this letter is to invite you to participate in a research project. This study is being conducted by Floyd Westendorp, M.D., of the Department of Psychiatry and Mary Roberson, M.A., of the Department of Psychology both at Michigan State University. We are conducting this study to find out (1) how teenagers make decisions and (2) how they feel about social problems and relationships. To encourage you to participate, we are offering to pay you for your time. We will pay $10 to each person who consents to participate. In addition, we will enter each of the 60 parti- cipant’s names into a drawing for 3 awards of an additional $20. In other words, you have a l in 20 chance of winning an extra $20. As a part of this study, we are studying the area of sexual decision making because it is topic of growing concern to both teenagers and adults. We won’t be asking you about sexual behavior itself, but rather the process of making decisions. In addition, we touch on the area of juvenile delinquency. Once we have collected all the information from you, your name will not appear on any of it. The results will be kept confidential by assigning a num ber to the data for identification purposes. We will not share this information with anyone. In addition, we want you to know that you will receive the same services from the Wedgewood Acres program no matter whether you participate or not. We are looking for teenagers between the ages of 15 and 17. The research will be conducted at Wedgewood Acres or your home and takes about 2 or 2-1/2 hours. We can schedule during the evening, right after school or work, or on the weekend during the months of March and April. We feel this is an important study and hope you will help us by deciding to participate. To fulfill legal require- ments, we sent a separate but similar packet to your parent(s) or legal guradian to ask their permission for you to participate. Your parent or guardian has already signed a form giving you permission to take part. If you would like to, please complete the attached consent form and the form requesting your name, address, and phone number so that we can call and schedule a research appointment. (If for some reason, you won’t be partici- 169 pating, we would appreciate your filling out the bottom of the consent form which asks why. You do not have to identify your- self and it will help us understand who is not deciding to be a part of the study and why.) In either case, mail the form back in the enclosed postage paid business reply envelope. Your social worker is willing to help you with any questions you have about this letter. Or if you have any further questions or want more information on exactly what will happen during the research, please feel free to call Mary Roberson at 517/355-4456. You may call collect. This phone call does not obligate you to participate. We are most happy to respond to any questions or concerns you may have. Sincerely, . ~,- t Via; LL)“ “(Eyre/I Floyd Westendorp, M. D. Professor of Psychiatry .../{%fi¢. flZj/éZ:-Aeu\._a Ma y . Roberson, M. A. D toral Student, D partment of Psychology 170 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY ° EAST FEE HALL EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ' 48824 INFORMED CONS ENT FORM Exploring Real Life Dilemmas 1. I have read the attached description of the real life dilemma study, the requirements of participation, and the confidentiality guarantee the researchers have made. 2. I understand that my participation in this research is voluntary and that I may choose not to participate. Further I understand I will receive the same services from Wedgewood Acres whether or not I decide to participate. 3. I understand that if I participate I may refuse to answer any question that I find too personal or objec- tionable. I also understand that I am free to discon- tinue my participation in the study at any time without penalty. 4. It is my understanding that if at any time I have questions, I am free to ask. 5. I understand that my participation in the study does not guarantee any beneficial results to me. 6. I AGREE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS STUDY. Signature of Teenager Date ON FILE Signature of Parent or Guardian Date I DO NOT CONSENT TO PARTICIPATION IN THIS STUDY. YOU NEED NOT IDENTIFY YOURSELF. To help us understand why people do not agree to participate, please write briefly the reason you decided not to consent. 171 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION TO SCHEDULE A RESEARCH APPOINTMENT NAME: First and Last ADDRESS Number and Street City and Zip Code PHONE NUMBER When is a good time to call? Just mail this and the consent form back in the enclosed addressed stamped business reply envelope. APPENDIX D 172 THE INTERVIEW PROTOCOL REAL LIFE MORAL DILEMMA AND SEXUAL DILEMMA This protocol was adapted from "The contribution of women's thought to developmental theory," Final Report to the National Insti- tute of Education by C. Gilligan, C Langdale, N. Lyons, and J. Murphy. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1982. Copyright, 1983. Reprinted by permission. In every case, I presented to the interviewee the purpose of the interview: to understand how people think about morality, real-life moral decisions and sexual decisions. Participants were told that the interview was not a test; it was an effort to learn more about how people think about decisions. There were no hidden purposes. The participant was informed that if any time he or she became uncomfort- able for some reason, the interview could be terminated. The partici- pant had the opportunity, if he or she liked, to look over the set of interview questions that would be asked. I explained to participants that I was willing to rephrase ques- tions if they didn't understand them, but that the questions were quite general and it was my job to find out what they think. So I would try to keep the rephrasing general, too, and that they were to give me the answer that came to mind. I emphasized that there were no right or wrong answers. 173 THE REAL LIFE DILEMMA PROTOCOL Introduction 3 Looking back over the past year, what stays with you? Self Concept (Transition: Having talked briefly about your life in the past year, now I would like to ask how you think about yourself). a. How would you describe yourself to yourself? b. Is the way you see yourself now different from the way you saw yourself in the past? How? What led to the change? Moral Conflict and Choice All people have had the experience of being in situations where they had to make a decision but weren't sure what was the right thing to do. Have you ever faced a moral dilemma? Or have you ever been in a situation where you were faced with a moral con- flict and had to make a decision but you weren't sure what was the right thing to do? a. Construction 2£_the Problem (1) What was the situation? (2) What was the conflict for you in that situation? Was there anything else that was a conflict for you in that situation? Anything else? (and so on until subject says no) b. Resolution 2: the Problem (1) In thinking about what to do, what did you consider? Why? Was there anything else you considered in trying to decide what to do? Anything else? Etc. a from W. Perry, Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years, 1968: 174 The Decision/Choice (1) What did you decide to do? (2) What happened? Evaluation pf the Resolution (1) Do you think that was the right thing to do? Why or why not? Anything else? (2) (If it was a while ago) When you think back about the decision now, do you think about it in a different way? How? What led to the change? (3) Do you consider this situation you've described as a moral problem? Concept of Morality a. What does morality mean to you? What makes something a moral problem for you? What does responsibility mean to you? When responsibility to oneself and to others conflict, how should one choose? Have you ever been responsible for someone? Are there times when you felt you didn't want to be respon- sibile for someone else? 175 THE SEXUAL DILEMMA PROTOCOL* 1. Sexual Decision and Choice I would now like to ask you if you have ever been in a situation where you could engage in a sexual behavior of some sort and weren't sure what was the right thing to do or what you wanted to do. By any sexual behavior, I mean a wide variety of behaviors such as kissing, holding hands, petting, touching genitals, oral sex, intercourse, masturbation or any other behavior you feel is sexual. You might have had the opportunity to do this behavior alone, with another boy, or with another girl, a man, or a woman. 30, can you think of a situation when you weren't sure what was the right thing to do or what you wanted to do? a. Construction of the Situation (1) What was the situation? (2) Was there a conflict for you in that situation? Was there anything else that a conflict for you in that situation? Anything else (and so on until partici- pant says no)? b. Resolution 2£_the Situation (1) In thinking about what to do, what did you consider? Why? Was there anything else you considered in trying to decide what to do? Anything else? Etc. c. The Decision/Choice (1) What did you decide to do? (2) What happened? d. Evaluation g£_the Resolution (1) Do you think that was the right thing to do? Why or why not. Are the any other reasons? Etc. (2) (If it was a while ago) When you think back about the decision now, do you think about it in a different way? How? What led to the change? (3) Do you consider this situation you've described as a moral problem? * Adapted from Gilligan, Langdale, Lyons, and Murphy (1982). Copyright, 1983. Reprinted by permission. APPENDIX E 176 DISTINGUISHING "CARE OF SELF" FROM "GENERAL EFFECTS T0 SELF": AN EXAMPLE OF CATEGORIZATION In order to help the reader understand important aspects of the categorization process, I will discuss the most problematic categories to distinguish from one another: ”Care of Self” within the Responsibility mode and ”General Effects to Self" within the Rights mode. What makes this differentiation difficult is that the categories are both oriented toward the self. A tendency some people express when learning this theory and method is that the Responsibility and Caring mode is concerned with relationships and the Justice and Rights mode is not. This is not the case. Morality in both modes are connected to relationships with others. There is, however, a different way of understanding and communicating about relationships (Lyons & Gilligan, 1984). The Coding Manual (Lyons, 1982) lists special markers of both orientations. Table 15 is a summary of these markers. Lyons also describes each of the two categories under discussion, Care of Self and General Effects to Self, in her manual. For the Care of Self category, Lyons (1982) states, "And...in what is probably a development shift, (she) considers care of the self as well as others' (p. 140). "Similarly, in what is probably an issue marking change and development or possibly transition for this 177 TablelS Special Markers of the Response/Care and Justice/Rights Categories Adapted and Excerpted from the Coding Manual (Lyons, 1982) Response/Care Justice/Rights 12 What Becomes 2_Problem There is a context specific per- spective within a narrative of events...a specific person (or peo- ple located in real time and in a real place. There is a hesitancy to place the problem in an abstract category. There is a special problem per- ceiving the problem of the other. One characterizes one's activities One considers a specific situation of conflict as an example of a more general case. There is a search for the 'right' answer. There is a concern that one should stand up for what is right. in moral choice as one's responsibility. Ig_Resolution‘2£_the Conflict The emphasis is on the necessity to act, not on how to decide or how to justify one's decision. Communication with others is impor- tant, both as a process and a goal. It is important to see the conse- quences of choice. $2 the Evaluation 2£_the Resolution There is no immediate way to know that a good choice/action/resolu- tion has been made. One only knows intuitively...or through communications with others. The evaluation is framed in terms of one's responsibility. There is a characterization of oneself as selfish. One thinks through, decides, and chooses the right thing to do. There is an ordering of priorities ...relationships may have to be ordered into some hierarchy of obligations. One weighs or balances the con- flicting claims of individuals. There is a generalizability of one's choice. There is an eschewing of emotions. It was not a moral problem. 178 orientation, care of self can become a moral issue. It is especially when care of self is pitted against caring for others that conflict occurs for this orientation" (p. 141). An example she lists is "You have to look after yourself first and this very important.... I should do what I felt I needed and I should do something for myself more than just doing something for the family” (p. 145). There was an addi- tional example given in the seminar (Lyons & Gilligan, 1984): "Because I feel a lot better that I didn't....I felt better about myself letting her go, knowing that I wasn't hurting anybody by let- ting her go, but I would be hurting somebody if I failed her" (Casebook, Lyons & Gilligan, 1984, p. 25). Lyons explained further that the emphasis is on the other or on the self as still embedded within a relationship. The issue is the disentangling of self from other. Care of self uses nurturing words. Nurturing is often turned from others to self. For the General Effects to Self category Lyons stated that the emphasis is on the self. The self is primary (Lyons & Gilligan, 1984). General Effects to Self, a Justice/Rights category, is des- cribed in the Coding Manual (Lyons, 1982) as being ”simply for the self in some unelaborated way, for example, 'that I might get in trouble,‘ or for making a judgment, again in some unelaborated way” (p. 139). The example from a transcript that she lists in the Manual is, "Well, that example of those kids that wanted to on Halloween wax windows. I knew it wasn't really right. (Interviewer: Did you consider consequences?) Yeah, getting in trouble” (p. 143). 179 Both the workshop participants and the undergraduate coders for this project had difficulty distinguishing these two categories when they appear in actual transcripts of dilemmas. In particular it is the ”Care of Self" portion of the Response/Care category, not the ”Care of Self vs/and Care of Others” portion. I had an additional discussion with Lyons (1985) to try to come to some resolution. Lyons emphasized similar points about coding ”Care of Self” that indicated it was a nurturing of self, either physically or emotionally, and that the differentiation could only be made by looking at the surrounding text to look for additional markers of the orientation. To further clarify the ”Care of Self” category, I consulted Gilligan (1982). In her bodk, Gilligan talks about three levels of Responsibility and Caring moral development. Care of Self is the first. Subsequently, she made the decision that her data did not apply to a developmental stage theory (Lyons & Gilligan, 1984). Nonetheless, her statements regarding this "level” of development are illuminating. The concern is pragmatic and the issue is survival. The woman focuses on taking care of herself because she feels that she is all alone...other people influence the decision only through their power to affect its consequences...The self, which is the sole object of concern, is constrained by a lack of power that stems from feeling disconnected and thus, in effect, all alone. The wish to do a lot of things is constantly belied by the limitations of what has in fact been done. Relationships are for the most part disappoint- ing...As a result, women in some instances deliberately choose isolation to protect themselves against hurt (p. 75). Susan, as an example from her abortion study, stated, "I really didn't think anything except that I didn't want it....I didn't want it, I wasn't ready for it, and next year will be my last year and I want to go to school....There is no right decision. I didn't want it" (p. 75). 180 Gilligan (1982) thus places ”Care of Self” in the responsibility and caring voice. And this category often included withdrawal from a relationship and/or a sense that there is really no conflict, no choice; one's survival was at stake. My dilemma at this point had to do with a certain conflict between Lyon's statement that ”Care of Self; Care of Self vs./and Care of Others" might possibly represent a developmental shift toward a more expanded moral consideration and Gilligan's earlier view that "Care of Self” represents the lowest level of development in the Responsibility and Caring voice. My resolution was to instruct coders to use the description of Care of Self as elaborated by Gilligan (1982) and the special markers of the orientations (Lyons, 1982). The coders were asked in particular to check whether the participant was referring to his or her particular context; using survival or nurturing language (both physical and emotional); and speaking of the self as in relationship to other in order to code a response in the Care of Self category. This was somewhat problematic in the theme of pregnancy because teenagers used the exact same words as did Gilligan (1982) (quoted above) when giving an example from her abortion study: ”I'm not ready. No way. I wouldn't be able to finish school. I couldn't handle it,” and so on. The teenagers communicated a lack of conflict or choice and a withdrawal from a potential relationship that would be very detrimental to their lives. A decision was made before coding commenced that we would consider a potential baby as a real relation? ship and not abstract, even though the teenagers had not yet conceived 181 or perhaps even have had intercourse. The few instances of ”Care of Self and Care of Others“ fall in the theme of pregnancy in which the teenager considers the same survival issues listed above, but he or she also considers the welfare of the potential baby. This Care of Self conceptualization contrasted with the category of General Effects to Self in which one looked for abstract statements such as, "I might get in trouble if I get caught;” the use of words that reflect more of a choice or conflict; or the clear reference to self as not embedded in a relationship. An example from the theme of pregnancy that falls in this category is one girl's concern that pregnancy would mean restrictions in her diet and stretch marks on her stomach. The concerns are about herself, not for the welfare of the baby or any influence the baby might have on her life in the future. The differentiation between these two categories applied to many of the responses made by participants in this study. APPENDIX F 183 Subject NO. Coder CODING SHEET Spontaneous Sexual DilemlnaA'l A. The Construction at the mu.- Categorizing Reliability +or— Considerations of Response (Care) 1. General others to others (unelaborated) 2. histenence or restoration of relationships: or P]. response to another considering interdependence —— J. Welfare/vall-Ueing of another or the avoidance P2 of conflict; or the alleviation of another's __ herden/hnrt/snifering (physical or psychological) . 4. Primacy oi the 'aitnetion over the principle' P3 5. Considers care of self; care of self. vs./and —" care of others P4 Consideratins oi lights (Justice) P5 6. Couralelfoctstothesalthnelahore including 'cm'; 'bv decide") P6 7. Obligations. duty or t-itlenta — 8. Stadards. rules or principles for sell or - P7 society: or considers fairness. cut is. how —— aesonldliketobetreatedifinother'splece P8 9. My of the 'principle over the situation' 10. Considers that others have their own contests I. no Resolution of the Robles/Conflict Considerations of Response (Cara) ll. dental eitacta to others (Inelahorated) R1 12. thintenance or restoration of relationships; or response to another casidsring interdependence R2 13. Ueltare/well-heing of another or the avoidance of tunict: or the alleviation of another's burdenlhnrt/eutfaring (physical or psychological) R3 R4 R5 l4. Pri-cy or the “situation over the principle' ls. Considers care of self: care or salt vs./and care o! others Considerations of liahts (Justice) R6 16. General effects to the sol: (unelaborated including 'tronhle': ”how decide”) R7 17. Obligations. duty or co-itnents , _- 18. Standards. rules or principles for self or R8 society; or considers fairness, tut is. how —— one would like to he treated it in other's place 19. Prieecy ot the 'principle over the situation' 20. Cusiders that others have their own contexts c. The tvalnetion o! the lesolotion 21. Considerations of Response: What happened! has worked out; or whether relationships were untamed/restored 12. Cusideratioas of lights: Bow decided/thank shoot/Justified; or whether valoeslstndardsl 24. Don't [how E E S8532! 25. m: 26. m: SUMMARY: Res/Car Just/Rights ' RATIO: Res/Car _ .- _ 1 Problem _ ___ Total Responses Resolution. _ __ Reliability A (Chunking) - _ Evaluation __. _ Reliability 3 (Categorizing) - _ TOTALS __ _ GRAND TOTAL * ® 1982 by None Lyons. All Rights Reserved. APPENDIX C 184 REDUCTION OF INTERVIEW DATA #0001, MALE, AGE 14. I was with this girl once. She wanted to go to her house. I said I didn't know because I was only about twelve. I was real nervous so I just went home. I wasn't sure. It would have been my first time and I was scared. I didn't know what to do. If I would have done it, I'd get in trouble because my family would have found out. I don't like to get in trouble 'cause then I get grounded and I can't do anything. Then I wouldn't have ever been able to see the girl anymore. I liked her, and I just wanted to keep seeing her. So, I just couldn't decide. Something telling me one thing; trying to pull me one way--because it would have made her feel happy or something. And then there was something else trying to pull me the other way. So I just said, "Hold it!" I thought it over and then decided that the best thing for both of us was if we just waited. #0007, MALE, AGE 15. Two months ago I was going with a girl, Marie. I liked her, and she liked me. We had plans and everything. Her parents had a cabin on a river. My girlfriend and her family had just left for a weekend at the cabin and I was still in town. My best friend, Jerry, and his girlfriend, Tammy, came over to my house and we were all just messing around. Then Jerry had to leave. Tammy said that she wanted to stay around a little longer and that she would catch up to him later. So he left, and Tammy and I started messing around, watching TV and everything. She just started saying a bunch of stuff. I had to choose to do what she wanted me to do or just leave her alone. I had a responsibility to my girlfriend. We were going steady. If you ask somebody to go steady with you, it means steady. It means not to mess around with other girls. I made a commitment when I asked her to go steady with me. I had in mind that I'd keep my word with that commitment. It's kind of like a promise, and I don't break promises. So, I could be truthful to Marie. Then I'd feel good about being able to control myself and keeping my promise. I decided not to do anything with Tammy. I feel like that was the right thing to do because I like to have people trust me and be able to say, "Now there's a person who keeps his promise. There's a person you can trust." But Tammy was so good looking. She was sitting there asking me. It's not everyday that some good looking girl's gonna come up to you and ask you to. So, I thought if I was to do what she said, I'd have fun and maybe Marie wouldn't find out about it. We could keep it quiet. But she was my best friend's girlfriend, not mine. I wouldn't have wanted to lose a good friendship for something like that. 185 #0012, FEMALE, AGE 16. I'm embarrassed. It was whether or not to sleep with my boyfriend. It came down to whether or not I wanted it 'cause I could get in trouble. I mean, I could get pregnant. I don't want a kid right now. I think I'm too young. That's the main reason. I don't want my mother to be ashamed of me. I know she regrets having a child so young. I don't want to be like that. So, it was partly what my mother would say, and anybody else. I don't want people to think wrong things about me. I just don't like the attention. I don't want people to know what I do. #0017, MALE, AGE 16. My girlfriend wanted to go to bed, and I wanted to. I said, "Well, do you have protection?" She said she was on the pill. And my friends, they all said it was okay. So, I just decided to try it. The only thing I was really worried about was having a baby 'cause neither one of us would be ready. We don't have that much responsibility to take care of a kid, or have a job to support it, or have it be raised up right. It just wouldn't be right to a baby or to us or to anybody. #0023, MALE, AGE 16. There have been times when I think about it, but I wasn't really worried about it. I knew I was gonna do it, but I just kind of thought about it. For example, three days ago my girlfriend came over to my house after school. It wasn't really too difficult. See, she's taking the pill, and that's the only thing that we had. And I don't really know if she's really taking it as she tells me. But I believe her, even though I've never really seen it. I hope they work 'cause if they don't, we're in trouble! They say there's nothing that's 100 percent foolproof, you know. If she got pregnant, there would be responsibilities. A kid would be a hassle at my age. I'm still in high school and everything. It's 'cause of all the time you gotta spend with kids and stuff. I wouldn't have time for that. But I wanted to do it, 'cause I like to and I know she likes to do it and just knowing you did it. And well, I don't really know if me and my girlfriend are in love, but we say to each other we love each other. If we were or weren't in love, it would be the same thing though. #0666, FEMALE, AGE 14. I've been in situations, but not where I couldn't handle it. I mostly know what I want to do. But now that I think about it, there was a time when I was eight years old. My stepfather wanted me to sleep with him. I was scared, and I didn't know what to do. He told me daddy's are supposed to love their little girls like that. But I was scared; I knew it would hurt. I would bleed. I didn't know what to do. Finally, I told him no. I was too scared. I just wasn't ready for it. It was just instinct. I don't think about it too often anymore. I try to block it out of my mind. I was tired of all the hassle, so I just gave up. I figured no justice was gonna be done to my stepfather, so I just washed my hands of the whole mess. I just gave up. Now I'm in family therapy. Last week was the most hectic family meeting I ever had! We cried. I was really hurt- ing inside because he was right there in that room with us. I 186 had to tell him what he did to me in front of him. That really hurt because I trusted this man, and he hurt me. #1000, MALE, AGE 16. It was when I was a sophomore. The school was having a talent show that year. I was the master of ceremonies. Judy was a senior, and she was in the show. That's how we met. We just talked at rehearsals and stuff. 0n the last night of the performance, I was in this little back room where the costumes were, getting psyched up to go on stage and perform. It was pitch dark, and I could just sit there and relax, get all my thoughts together. And then Judy came in and said, "Oh, don't worry!! You'll be great tonight." Then she leaned over and gave me a kiss on the cheek. The next thing I knew, I got hit with a pom pom, an old pom pom they stored in the basement that our cheerleaders used to use. I threw one back at her, and the next thing you know, we just started having this pom pom fight. It was to get relaxed, I guess, to break some tension. Then we were wrestling--not really wrestling. I just whipped away the pom poms and threw her on the couch that I was sitting on, and then I was on top of her. Then I guess I kissed her. Then we both thought, "WhoaI!" It was shocking because that was the first kiss. It broke everything because we knew we had something more. It was something more than just liking or puppy love. Something a little more affectionate. That broke the tension; it was easy after that. So the show went on. But that night after the show, a bunch of us ended up at Judy's house. Her parents were in Arizona, and she said, "My parents are gone. Let's go over to my house!" So about eight of us went. There was music and we ate burgers and stuff. It lasted until about 4:00 a.m. One of the girls was staying all night at Judy's, and I don't understand how it hap- pened, but Sarah ended up in her parents' room. And I ended up in Judy's room with her! And I thought, "wait a minute; some- thing's weird!" This was my first time that I was actually in a girl's bedroom. "A sophomore in high school; this could lead to something," I thought. I was tired so I planned on sleeping, but she started doing some things--getting me all crazy and getting me going. Then things just kept going and going and going. Like I said, it was the first time. I had a girlfriend before but then it was holding hands. But here I was, I had already kissed this girl numerous times that night; now it's 4:00 a.m. and in her bedroom. I didn't know what to do. If she started doing something, I was lost. The only thing I could think of was, "I'm gonna mess up! I'm gonna do something and embarrass myself! She is gonna laugh and gonna go back to school and things will be over between us. I'm gonna end up making a fool out of myself tonight." I was totally inexperienced! And she was a senior. I kept wondering, "What would a senior be doing with a sophomore?" I kind of figured she had done this before, but I found out later she hadn't either. But I didn't know that. 187 A lot of things were going through my mind. For one thing, my parents didn't even know where I was. All I told them was, "I'm heading off to Judy's 'cause she's gonna keep the party going at her house." So they thought I'd be home in about an hour or two, and I wasn't. And of course my friends and talk kept running through my mind; a lot of talk happens, which is all it is, is talk. Typical teen- age talk like, "Shoot! I went to Mary's last Friday, and what we did!! That was our thirty-second time, of course." And then someone says, "Oh, you count?!" And they go, "Oh, first I started, and then I got her shirt off, and she just started yanking at my body!" It's like, "Oh really? Bet you liked that, didn't you?!" I have some friends that talk. Like in a movie when I'm with Larry. I'm sitting with him, and there's no action. But when I get up and leave for some reason and come back, he says, "Me and that girl over there were staring at each other the whole time you were gone!" I was like, "Right, Larry! Nothing happens until I'm not around. I believe you." Or we go to the beach, and I lay there the whole time, and here are all these gorgeous women laying around, and nothing happens. Then I go in the water and come back, and he goes, "Me and that girl over there in the white bikini been staring at each other for the last ten minutes!" It's like, "Oh, sure! You weren't staring at each other while I was laying here for two hours!" So, it's just talk. Personally, I feel some people can't really talk about it. They are uneasy when you're discussing it with them. They want to keep it personal. They have really gone through it. That's how I feel. I feel it should be a personal thing between you and whoever you were with. And if they want people to know, then they'll tell people they want to know. But to me I'll keep it to myself, or something like this research or my other counselor. I'm not gonna tell my parents 'cause it's none of their business. So I thought, what does this mean now? That I'm gonna be just like them? When I get done, am I gonna go around telling peOple? But it comes down to moral values. How do you feel about it? And personally, I feel it's a personal thing. So, I'm not plan- ning on talking. I wasn't going to be like Larry and lie about things. I'll just keep it to myself. And I remember, this is not a joke, I seriously started thinking about the Baltimore Orioles and the Pittsburgh Pirate World Series. It was just to get everything, anything, off my mind. I thought, "All of a sudden, Baltimore put away three in a row, and then Pittsburgh coming back and winning the series." So, a lot of stuff went through my mind. I went ahead and did it, but I feel dumb about it. I felt real bad!! I don't like to talk about it because the only reason we did have the intercourse was because her parents were gone; no one would know except us. It was just 'cause it was there. We only knew each other for the time to do a production of a show. And there was no love. And if something would have happened, there was no responsibility. We didn't think about that. Here I am, a sophomore in high school. I was probably between my paper 188 route and getting another job. School was the most important thing. That's what I had to have all my time for, so I can get accepted to college later on. If she would have gotten pregnant, no matter what job I could have got, I couldn't support no baby and some girl! And to tell you the truth, that wasn't the girl I wanted to have the first time. I still feel bad about it, and I felt real bad in the morning and probably for two or three days. But then I thought, ”Well, it's not the end. Your life can go on." But it still kind of gets me down. I feel like an asshole when I talk about it 'cause there was no purpose for it at all. It was definitely the wrong thing to do. It was totally wrong. But then I also feel that her being a senior and wanting to get it from a sophomore is kind of being bad on her part. I talk to her still. I see her at places once in a while. She's gradu- ated, and we've gone out a couple of times. Nothing major--just as friends. She's really nice. But still being a senior and wanting a saphomore. If I was her, I'd be embarrassed, to tell you the truth. 'Cause that's like me being in high school and going to the junior high and getting someone. I feel that's showing that you don't have a lot of respect for yourself. But she also feels the same way now because in the morning, I came downstairs. She was sitting at this little table drinking a coke, and she was crying. She was going, "I'm only seventeen, and I promised I wasn't gonna have anything until I was married and very settled down." That was a real low blow to me 'cause I'm thinking, "Oh no!! What did I do?!" So it was pretty bad for both of us, I guess. #1001, MALE, AGE 14. I don't know any situations, not really. I can't think of any. Not even a while back. #1016, MALE, AGE 15. I can't really think of any situations. I'm really sorry I couldn't think of anything. I hope it's not going to ruin your research. #1123, MALE, AGE 16. It was the first time I ever had sex. It was a neat experience. It wasn't really a decision. I knew what I wanted to do and was going to do it. But I wasn't sure. It was like, ”Oh, my god!! What am I supposed to do?! I've never done this before." (laughs) So, it was sort of, "Play it by ear.” I mean, I didn't sit back and think, "Well, I should do this first and then do that." I had known about sex for a while, and I sort of knew what to do. But then again I didn't know, 'cause I had never done it. It's like you shouldn't be driving in Chicago without directions. Or you've got directions, but you've never driven. Well, it worked out fine; I heard no complaints (laughs). I had a couple of particular fears. It's kind of strange talking to you about it, you being a female. But one one that it wouldn't stay up for as long as it was supposed to stay up. And that would be really embarrassing! And another fear was that "Oh, my God! What if I don't do this right? Is she gonna think I'm weird or something?" And my other one was, "What if something happens and she gets pregnant? What am I gonna do? How am I gonna explain this one to mom?" If they ever found out they'd skin me. I knew that my parents wouldn't approve of it, even though I didn't care. My morals on sex are not the same as my parents. They're really loose. Not loose enough to the point where you go out on some other guy, or you go out on some other girl, or you have sex with some guy's wife, or like that. Not that much. I think a lot of it was peer pressure, too. It's like, "Well, if you don't get laid by this year, you'll be weird or something like that!" It's your reputation. But I think it is an all right thing to do. I don't think the reason I did it was right though. It was a little hurdle you have to jump. I wanted to jump that hurdle and get it over with. At the time I was just getting into puberty, and I felt all these urges, and I just needed to take the unknown out of it. I didn't like the feeling of not knowing, so I did something about it. I don't know if I was ready for it mentally. #1178 FEMALE, AGE 16. This is hard to talk about it. I talk about it, to a certain extent, with my best friend, but not everything! This is nothing you'd go tell grandma! (laughs). I used to have this boyfriend. We were together for over a year. He was a big person, really big, and overpowering on me. And he even became a friend of the family because he was over a lot. My mom and dad trusted him real well. And I trusted him real well. But one time, after a football game, we went out. And then he just wanted to keep going. He just wanted to go a little bit too far, farther than I wanted to go. He started yelling at me, "Aw, come on! It'll be real nice. It'll be real good." No thank you. Like I'm a Catholic, and to Catholics it's kind of sacred until marriage. That's kind of what I hope to do. It's just what I've always been told when I was growing up. Like on TV shows and on HBO. But it was very tempting, I'll say that. You could go back to your best friend and say, "Guess what?!" But I wouldn't want to do that either. I would be afraid of what she thought. Or maybe my friends would go around talking about me or something like that. It can get spread around that you're terrible. So, I thought, "Naw. I'm 16 years old. I've got lots of time left. I can wait--perhaps. "And we had been together for a year by then. We were real friendly, you know. Any time somebody needed help or support or anything, one or the other was always there. So we got to be real close. I wanted to keep being his friend. I thought he'd be real upset with me if I didn't do it. But I just told him, "Listen, this is the way it is. This is the way it's gonna be." I considered all kinds of things. It only takes once and you can have a baby. I said, "No, that's not what I want." I want kids. I want lots of kids, but not until I'm about 24 and I get through with college. Now is not the time to start even trying. I just don't need the extra responsibilities of little kids. My own especially! And I thought about how I'd feel; I'd have no self respect after that. And then I thought about what mom and dad would think of me. They would have been really upset, or maybe 190 disappointed is a better word. They look down at you and give you that face. I just didn't need that look again. So, we didn't do it. He got a little upset with me. I said, "Well, listen, if that's the way you feel about it, I can give you some money, say bye-bye, and you can head up to the red light district, and I will leave." And he gave me kind of a sad look. And I thought, "Fine." But then he came back and said, "Okay, maybe later." We kind of talked about it, and everything was okay for a while. Then the same situation happened again a little bit later. It's a real tough situation, I can tell you that because I was afraid what he would say. But then I thought, I shouldn't worry about it. But I kind of did because I didn't want him to be mad at me. I really liked him. Everything turned out okay for a while. But we only lasted about 6 more months, and then I said, "Bye." I didn't need that pressure all the time. It was right for me. I don't have any regrets. #1202, FEMALE, AGE 18. At the time I was pregnant. Michael was seeing this other girl. He came over late one night. I think he was kind of drunk. Before he got there I was trying to make the decision on whether I just wanted to cut everything off with him or keep him around for mental support. When he got there we talked, but we didn't talk about anything that I wanted. And he wanted to have sex, and I didn't. I wanted to say no because I figured that the more sex we had, the more feelings I would have for him, and then him not having the same feelings for me. But after I told him no, he gave me the cold shoulder. 80 then, I changed my mind. I guess I didn't want him to say, "Fine, then," and leave and be angry with me and not speak to me anymore. I figured maybe when the baby gets here that we'd have a chance to be back together, maybe he would consider having a future with me and the baby, but it wasn't true. So, it was knowing what I wanted to do, but wanting to satisfy him, too. I was kind of in a crossbind. I cried, and he wondered why. I don't remember telling him why. So I just put him in consideration. That's what I did. I just considered how he felt, and I put my feelings in the back of my mind. It wasn't really the right thing for me to do because it didn't change anything anyway. #1234, MALE, AGE 15. I've never had anything to do with nothing like that. I think I'd like to be a virgin until I'm 21. I tell everybody that cause that's the way I feel, and people say you're dumb, and I say, "No, I'm smart." There was once when I was about nine or ten. Myself was pulling me one way, and somebody else was pulling me the other way. It was a "no win" situation. Some people might have done it for peer pressure, but I didn't. People have friends that just want to make them do stuff. Every- body else was doing it because if you did it, you were somebody. Most people don't know how to say no, but I know who to say no to. I didn't do it 'cause it was wrong. Everybody else besides my friends said it was wrong. Like my parents, they said, "Don't do it!" I kinda wanted to do it. You know, hormones. People 191 get real crazy. But I didn't. Now I know it was the right thing not to do it because everybody's getting pregnant. I didn't feel sorry back then, and I don't feel sorry now. #1309, FEMALE, AGE 15. THREE DILEMMAS. A) B) One time when we moved from Kansas, my mom and step-dad got a divorce. Me and my brother were really close. We always hung around and did things together. He's three years older than me. I was nine, and he was twelve. We were sitting in bed, watching TV, and he said, "Have you heard of brothers and sisters having sex?" And I said, "Yeah," but I really hadn't. So, he said, "You want to try it?" And I said, "Yeah," because I trusted him. We always did things together, and he never lied to me or any- thing. And if.he did, he was just joking around. I could tell him things and he wouldn't tell anybody. And he could do the same with me. And if I asked him to do something and he said he would, he did. I trusted him to be there when I needed him. We didn't really do anything; there was some feeling and stuff like that. But for a minute, I didn't know what I wanted to do. I didn't know what he was gonna do or if it was going to continue. I wondered if this was gonna be going on every night. Will he keep asking me this? But he didn't. And I thought, "What would my mom think?" Me and my mom are really close. I thought maybe that might hurt her. But I decided to go ahead and not tell my mom. I thought, "One time won't hurt. Just to try it." I had never been in that situation before. I really didn't know what happened when you had sex. I was more curious than scared. I kind of knew it was wrong. Well, I don't think it was really, really, really wrong, but I knew it wasn't quite right. It's just that brothers and sisters don't do that. But it was like, "If that's what he wants to do, then it must not be bad because he wants to do it." But he didn't really think it was okay. Anyway, he asked me to go wash up and stuff, and he washed up, too. Then we got back into the bed, and it just started out. He touched me, and I touched him. Then a few minutes later he said, "I don't think we should be doing this." I don't think it was right either just because these kind of things aren't supposed to happen between families. I was taught that by my mom, my step- dad, and sex education and stuff like that. Also, I think it has brought on a lot of problems for me now. I've been having sex a lot. My therapist said that this experience probably caused it because having sex at too early an age can either make you afraid to have sex or it'll make you have it a lot. And I think it made me have too much. At the time I thought it was the right thing because my brother wanted it. We were going through a really hard time. I thought maybe if I didn't, he might pull away from me. I was on the road with a truck driver. He told me that if I was ever gonna make it, I was gonna have to go into prostitution. I didn't want to do it, that wasn't even my last resort, 'cause I would never do that. But I just said, "Yeah, yeah, I know." So, he asked me if I had ever done it before, and I said no. And he seat, and she tells me to come back there. So I went. We started making out and everything. All of a sudden she wanted to have sex and all this other stuff. And I told her, "No. I don't have a job, no money to support the family or nothing if we have kids. I'm just not ready for kids." And I don't believe in abortion. That's the stupidest thing you can do. That's killing a human. I mean I've tried to kill enough peOple. I could never do it. If I did, I'd regret it the rest of my life. I'd be feeling really guilty. If I ever had a kid and somebody killed it, I'd either kill them or kill myself, one of the two. And I don't like when I see kids out on the streets getting dope. If you have a kid and then you just abandon it, that's most likely what will happen. But if you don't abandon it, you can teach it about drugs at home. Then if he wants to try anything, have him come to you and try it at home. That way he's with somebody he knows when he does it, and he doesn't get mixed up with any bad stuff. And if something goes wrong, you can take him to the hospital. But out on the street, like the first time I tried cocaine, I couldn't handle it. I laid in the gutter for two and a half days. Anyway, I just thought, "forget it." I just kept saying, "No," and it turned out to be no. We sat in the car and talked for a while, and got an understanding about it. #1570, MALE, AGE 15. It happened last.Friday night. I was in the mood for dancing, but I didn't ask any girl to dance. So I just sat there, and sat there, and looked at the dance floor. Final- ly, this girl came up to me asking me if I wanted to dance. So, first we were fast dancing, and then a slow song came on. We slow danced, and then we were talking. I got her phone number, and after that she was getting ready to leave. I said goodbye to her, and then she said, "Oh, wop. Don't I get a kiss goodbye?" So I said, "I don't know." Then she leaned over and gave me a kiss and I gave her a kiss goodbye. I couldn't decide, mainly because we were in a public setting. There were lots of people around. Some people might think "He's cool, he's kissed that girl in public!" Then they would think I was fun or cool to be around. So, the first thing that went through my mind was my friends. What would they do in a situation like this? But I finally thought I'd better decide myself because sometimes I rely too much on my-friends. At that point, I was relying on them in my mind. So, I said to myself, "My friends aren't around. This is me. This is my business." That's one reason I was glad we kissed. The other is that I didn't want my friends to think I was a freak or a fag or something. You see, most of the people I hang around with are boys, and they always talk about girls. Most of the time instead of joining them, I just stand back and listen and laugh about what they are talking about. If they thought I was a fag, they wouldn't want to hang around me, and they would talk about me. They might even lie and say, "Yeah, I saw him last night around the corner at the gay bar. I don't hang around him; he's a faggot." I'm also glad I did it because it made her feel good about herself, like she accomplished some- thing. I like to make people feel good around me.’ 193 said since I didn't know, that he'd tell me the prices. And he said, "Will you give me head?" And I said, "No, I don't want to." And he said, "Well, then you can get out of the truck." And I got out. You don't just go around sleeping with people you don't know. And truck drivers are almost always dirty. It's kind of gross. C) One time when I had runvaway, I was out with some boys that I knew. They were going to give me a place to stay. Then one night, we had all gotten drunk. My boyfriend asked me if I would go to bed with some of his friends. He said, "If you don't, I'm not going to give you a place to stay." And I said, "Well, that's pretty boge." Well, I needed a place to stay, but I really didn't want to go to bed with all of his friends. It's just not right. I didn't even know some of them. And just for my own self respect. They probably wouldn't have respected me either. Respect means if they ask you something like, "Can I have some privacy?" then they give it to you. Or not calling people names or putting them down. Giving them their own space, not hurting them. Also, with all the diseases going around. I didn't know these boys. I didn't know if they had herpes or whatever. And I didn't have no protection so I wouldn't get pregnant. I was only fourteen, you know. You can't take care of a baby when you are fourteen. It's not very nice going through pregnancy. It's an uncomfortable situation. I'd have to get all new clothes 'cause I'd be getting bigger and bigger. Like you get back pains and stretch marks. And there are certain restric- tions you gotta have. I'm glad I didn't do it because my boy- friend would have thought he could take advantage of me anytime. He'd think, "Well, she did it this time, she'll do it next time, too." #1313 MALE, AGE 15. It was on my first date, whether I should kiss her when I took her home or not. I didn't know if she might not have any respect for me afterwards. Would she want to talk to me anymore, or go out on another date, or go to another movie, or anything? Or go out to the mall or lunch. It turns out she wanted to kiss me but I didn't know that. We talked it over afterward and she said she thought it was okay. The first prob- lem was that her big brother was there. He was something like a marine, about twice my size. He could squash me like a bug. If he saw me kiss her, he probably would have beat the heck out of me; And her mother and father were in the front room. That had something to do with it 'cause I don't know if they would want me to or not. So, we just went over to my house. We lived next door to each other, and we did it on our porch. Then I wondered if it would go any further than that because I didn't really want to get tied down at that moment. I guess I did it because otherwise I would be thinking about it really a lot afterwards. I mean this is getting too personal; you know how it is. And it was a little bit, if I wouldn't have kissed her, the guys in school would razz me a lot. I wouldn't want that to happen. ’VISIS, MALE, AGE 15. We went to the movies, then for a burger, and then to the beach. All of sudden, Michelle goes in the back 194 But then some people might think you're nasty--kissing in public. I like everybody that's around me to think good things about me. It's the way I was brought up, from my mom. When I'm out in public with my mom, my grandmother, aunt or uncle, the first thing I get rated for is my elbow on the table. Also, I didn't know her that well. I like to get to know the other person before I have any kissing contact or any other kind of contact. It's better to be friends before you become lovers because that way the love relationship can last longer. And then when the love relationship is gone, you can still be friends. And now that I think about it, her parents might have walked in; we would have both gotten in trouble. Then they wouldn't want her coming out here no more because this is a place for boys to pick up girls. And another reason was because her dad might have grabbed me and then like started beating me up (laughs). #1770, MALE, AGE 16. I used to live across the street from this girl, Jenny, who babysat a lot. Their phone didn't work a lot, the TV only got one station, there wasn't no radio or nothing. So I used to go over there all the time. Like we started liking each other. Then one day, I went over there, and she put the kids to bed early. We had the house to ourselves. We really could have done anything we wanted. And then I thought, "Let me see what she wants to do." And in case she wants to do some- thing, I said to myself, "Let me go home and get some records to play." So I went home. And when I went home I thought I could call up my friend--we're real close. Sometimes I ask him a reason why or why not I should do such and such a thing. He never tells me yes or no. He always says, "I don't know what you're gonna do because I'm not in that situation." But I didn't call him because I knew what he was gonna say anyway: "It's up to you." So, I went back over there and put some records on. At first we was talking to some of her friends on the phone and they was acting all stupid and crazy. "Where the kids at?" they said, trying to make like something was happening between us. Sometimes people go around saying I'm gonna have sex with Jenny. That has happened, people saying that about us. So when we con- fronted them about it, they go, "Well, we just lying about that." I said, "It's none of your business what we do. If we gonna have sex, that's between us and you just butt out." So, if I do, it's not like I'm gonna go broadcast it to the world, and it's not like she gonna go broadcast it. Sometimes I do tell my best friend; sometimes I don't. There's times you do and times you don't. Anyway, after she got off the phone, I could have made a move. And if she responded, we could have been making out for a while.‘ Nothing dramatic because my mom knew I was over there. And my little brother, sometimes my sister, sometimes my big brother, they know I'm over there, and they like to pick and play and come over knocking on the windows and things. It's just if we wanted to, we could have. But, we both kept under control listening to some of my records, playing monopoly. It wasn't really a conflict. If we wanted to do it, we could have been 195 kissing and making out. We just decided we didn't want to at that time. If you go ahead and do it, sometimes you regret it. Like with us, we liked each other then, but now were close friends. So, I'm really glad we didn't because sometimes when I do things with girls, we end up breaking up. So, I considered my friendship; would it just go down the drain. I didn't feel as close to Jenny then as I do now. It wasn't the right time because we had only knew each other for a couple of months then. I really wasn't ready for it. I guess it isn't really me that has to be ready, but its if the girl wants to. Like some boys I know, they bug a girl until she finally says yes. That boy, he just keep asking, and asking, and asking. I don't do that. Like we have a conver- sation over the phone, and then face to face, and we talk about it. And I always tell her, "It's up to you." Some girls say, "Yeah." And like some girls have to think about it. And some girls say "No, but let me think about it." And then there are some girls who say, "Maybe." And then it really depends on where I am at the time, if we have it or not--like if we're at her house, my house, or a friend's house. I had a lot of choices in that problem. Whatever you pick, it all depends on the outcome. This had a good outcome. And sometimes I think about the consequences of doing it. Like my sister, she's got a baby. And one time a girl played a trick on me. She got mad at me, and called my house, and told my mom that she was pregnant by me. She was just playing a joke. But I really wouldn't want to have a baby because I'm too young. #1968, FEMALE, AGE 17. That's a good question for me 'cause I've had sex so many times. There was only one time I said no to a person. That was the time when he wanted me to do it in school with him. My God--in school!! I was going with the guy and was going to a different school. I was in this group home at the time. I said, "No. I'm not going to do it in school!" So he asked me to run with him so that we could do it. So, that's what I did. He was really a sweet person, really nice, but I'm not gonna have sex in school because there is no place in the world where we could do it in the first place 'cause everybody would watch us. Me, naked, doing things? I wouldn't mind if they see me kissing a guy, but to see me undressed. I don't like that. Even nobody in the group home sees me undress. And guys, only if I'm going with them. That's the only time. And if I'm going with him, that's our business. What I do with him is nobody else's. And also what if the principal would have come up. I would have been destined to be kicked out of school! They don't understand that in the group home. They just put you on level one. They don't care. Level one is a thing where you stay in during the whole day and you just go to work. If you run, if you get kicked out of school, you stay on level one all day long, and you get in a lot of trouble. And if I ever got pregnant, I'd have to say no to having the baby because I'm not ready to have no children. I can't put up with 196 having a kid cause first of all, I'm in a group home. Second, I'm not even sure if I could handle having a kid because of what I've been through with my family. Plus I, for one, do not feel like it's acceptable to do it in school because there is no place. You would have to do it on the floor. The floors are dirty; it's not sanitary. You could get sick. And I was wondering if the guy wanted to use me to have sex with him 'cause when he's around his friends, he'd talk to me and stuff, but it's like we don't do nothing. We held hands, but he'd never kiss me in front of his friends. But when either his friends left or we left, then he'd talk to me, he'd kiss me and give me hugs. That's how I felt, like he was using me. #1969, FEMALE, AGE 15. This is hard for me talk about. I have never talked with anybody about it before. The only thing I know is that you should never go out with an older person if you're still young. I haven't ever been in any situations. I think I'm a little too young for this. I don't quite want to know anything until I'm 18. I don't want to go out on dates and all that. #1989, MALE, AGE 15. No, I've never had any situations. #2012, FEMALE, AGE 17. I had a boyfriend once. We went together for a few months, and then we broke up. Later we got back together and went to a friend's house in a bedroom. He had just broken up with a girl he had gone with for two years, before we went together. I was just trying to comfort him, but I guess he took it the wrong way. We had been messing around, and we were turned on. He wanted me to have intercourse and I didn't want to. He didn't want to stop, so I yelled at him. He apologized, and then we talked. I told him it wasn't right, and he said he knew. And we were friends after that. I did have some thought that I didn't love him. I was still a virgin, and I didn't want to lose my virginity. I want to save that for somebody special. I wasn't emotionally ready. I didn't love him. It wouldn't have been right, especially because I was just trying to comfort him. I suppose I thought about getting pregnant. I wasn't ready for a baby. But I knew that I wasn't really going to do anything, so that didn't really lock in my mind. I knew he wasn't the right guy and that we would never stay together. And we were at my friend's house. It should be more private. I would have felt dumb. So, all in all I knew I was unsure. If I'm unsure, that's the way I know. If I have any second thoughts, I know it's wrong. I'm glad I didn't do it because it would have changed me in a negative way. Since I didn't, it helped me to learn. #2050, MALE, AGE 16. The decision was whether to have inter- course with my girlfriend or not. It wasn't easy at all to love. And it was the first time for both of us. There'd still be like diseases and stuff. I never, never want to have a disease. But I knew there was like not very much of a chance of that she would 197 have one, you know. So that wasn't a big one. But pregnancy was big because she didn't have any protection, and neither did I. Her parents really liked me. If she got pregnant, that'd really betray their trust in me. The same with my mom. She trusts me never to do that. Besides, I think I'm too young to be a father, and I think she's too young to be a mother. It's like a kid taking care of a kid. I don't think either one of us would be mature enough. We might think so, but I know that's not right. So does she. I considered doing it because of what I heard from my friends (laughs). What it's like. I figured, it must be pretty fun. Plus, we were really close, so it was like if we did it, it would mean something, too. It wouldn't be just for fun, you know. But my parents have always said, and my grandparents, "You wait 'til you get married. It's a lot more special than it is when you're not because you're together for like the rest of your life. At least we hope you are!" So I wanted to wait until I was married or engaged. So, I didn't really know how we'd feel after we did it. You know, I wasn't sure if we'd feel guilty because both of us would be betraying our parents. They trusted us. #2068, FEMALE, AGE 15. It was a situation with a person. We both really cared about each other. And he kept asking me if I would have sex with him. Of course, we had done kissing, making out, but nothing extremely heavy. It was just like jumping into something. We had only known each other for three months, and already he was asking me this. I began to wonder if that's all he thought of in the relationship. 80 I ran right out of that one-~not just the actual question, but the whole relationship. I didn't need that pressure on me, the pressure of, "If you love me, you will." If that's all he wanted, even if he said he didn't, I knew that he would not be right. He could go somewhere else for that. Even if I said, "No," nothing would ever be the same again. I knew that I had to get out of there as fast as I could because he would be adding on the pressure more and more and maybe spreading stories. I didn't feel I needed to be a part of it anymore. It was because we weren't friends. My parents told me about themselves. They have been married for 19 years now. For the first five my dad was extremely good looking, and he's not now. My mom, I guess she didn't used to be, but she is now. She goes to the fitness center all the time now and she's really thin. She said it was just a physical thing at first, and I knew that wasn't the kind of relationship that I wanted. I want a friend, someone to talk to. Also, I am extremely close to my mom, almost forcibly close. Not really, though. I appreciate her caring, but sometimes she gets on my nerves. Anyway, being so close to my parents, they know when I'm lying. There's no way if they ever ask me that I could say I hadn't done it. And I knew they would be extremely disap- pointed. I was brought up in a Christian background. My parents do not believe in premarital sex. The funny part about it is that I know that both of them engaged in premarital sex--not with 198 each other, but separately. I mean it's my choice, and I have to live with it, face the consequences of what I do. But they would be upset because they thought they had brought me up not to do that. I knew they were right. I knew they wouldn't tell me something, just because. They had their reasons, whatever they were at the time. So, if I-would have had sex with him, I would have been faced with the guilt of my parents. I would probably have to tell them 'cause we're so close. They say it's my deci- sion, and I have to live with it. But still I knew if I did I would feel so guilty. If you're going to feel guilty, it must not be all that great for you to do. Another thing was a conflict within my inner self. In relation- ships before, I had a man hunter instinct. I did not care up until last year if I was friends or not. I wanted a physical sort of relationship. Kissing and making out, I really enjoyed all that. That's all the boys wanted, and that's all that hap- pened. A lot of the girls I know would have said, "Sure," because they are a lot like I used to be. They really enjoy the physical. But that isn't all there is to a guy. Guys aren't just there to have fun with. They are there for companionship, too. So, in this relationShip I was beginning to realize, "Hey, wait a minute. The rest of my life is going to be dependent on this. What if something happens?" I had always given kisses away, even to someone I didn't really care about, just because I thought it was fUn. But then I got to the point where it was time to grow up. So, in my own self I thought, "You can't do this anymore." I considered talking to my mother about it because, of course, she really liked him. I knew this might change her ideas and get her to see more on my side what I was going through. She really understands me and knows how I am. She knows me better than any- body else. Not any more, not now, because she's changed an awful lot. But then she knew me enough to know what I was going through. I did tell her, and she helped me out. I broke up with him, mostly because I trusted her. I knew she wouldn't have me do something stupid. And I considered talking about it with my very best friend, but I didn't think she'd really understand. I've known her for three years now. We met over at Birmingham Junior High where we kind of grew up together. She was someone who I was compatible to because she was extremely different from me. I had fun, and I trusted her not to gab it all around. I knew she wouldn't. She knows that I wouldn't do it, and that's why I trusted her. But she has never had the type of relationships that I've had, so I wasn't quite sure if she'd understand. I asked her what she'd do in this situation and tried to describe it as best I could. "What if you love this person ..." I'd give her examples so she could sort of feel it out. It was still hard, but she did help me out a little. #2120, FEMALE, AGE 16. I'm kind of embarrassed. I just don't feel right thinking about some stuff. Well, I guess no one is ever going to know that I talked to you. I just don't know how to. Well, my boyfriend, he's not pushy. He never makes me do some- thing I don't want to do. I'm still young, and I don't think I want to push things, but sometimes you wonder how far you should go. I think that when the times comes that you're ready, it will be with the right person. I like my boyfriend a lot, but I just want to make sure it's with the right person. We talk about it sometimes. He wants to wait, too, because he's going to college next year. I don't know if we will break up by then or not. I don't want to go into it and, then by next summer, be broken up. That's the main thing, so I already had it kind of decided. I think you have it in your mind ahead of time what your decision is going to be anyway. You think about it, you make your deci- sion where you draw the line. Everybody draws their line some- place. And then there is peer pressure. I don't let it get to me. If people want to think what they think, then they can. I think the pressure with teenagers is that you're missing out on something if you don't have sexual, you know. Like drinking and stuff. Like everyone thinks that every weekend you get wasted. I don't do that. Then there's always pressure that you're not having as much fun as everyone else. It's always there. You can't get rid of it. You just have to find your space with all your friends at school but also with your parents because you can't do everything they say either. There's no way you can be a perfect child. You have to find some in between. That's the conflict because you don't know where it is. That's how a lot of guys think about it. Like I have a girl- friend. She doesn't understand how guys think about her. They have an idea about her, and they all think like that. I wouldn't want to be thought of like that. I don't think my boyfriend would talk like a lot of guys do. They talk about their encoun- ters to everybody in the locker room or whatever. There's a double standard, I guess you'd call it. Like if your boyfriend or some other guy told everybody that a girl is real straight 'cause she won't give it to them or something, then they'll think, "Oh my gosh. She's straight. You don't want to go out with her. She's boring." But then they'll say you did, and they make everyone think you're a slut. You can't win either way. I'm just lucky because my boyfriend isn't like that. He doesn't talk about me, at least I don't think he does. He's really nice, good looking, and plays football. #2121, FEMALE, AGE 15. I was standing with my friend, and Michael came up to me and started holding my hand. I snatched my hand from him, and then he was trying to get me to give him a hug. Then I just pushed him off me and walked away. I really don't like to do kiss or hug in public. That can give me a bad reputa- tion by doing that stuff. At our school you get talked about. People would probably think you're a whore or something like that. Also, if some boy's around me, their girl is probably gonna think I'm trying to take the guy from them. But I'm not. We're just friends. Most of the girls I know are always fighting 200 over a boy. It's not worth getting kicked out of school over that. Besides, I didn't really like him, although it wouldn't have made a difference if I did. #2222, MALE, AGE 16. Well, it's when you meet some girl and you're not sure whether to go, or how far to go, or whether you should even go anywhere with her. It's kind of when you have a block and you don't know what to do. There was one time when this happened. I was worried because I didn't want to get like a weird response, or make her nervous, or just didn't want her to be uncomfortable. It was hard to judge her reaction. I was aroused, but if she would have been, I would have gotten signs or something. So, I considered whether to make a move or not to. I knew I was safe if I didn't. But if I did, I might be getting into something where I don't know what I'm doing. One thing is that I surely didn't want to get her pregnant 'cause I don't need a kid. It would be kind of irresponsible at my age. You have to go through lots of emotional problems in being a parent. You have certain values, and they tell you, "When you get vibes from a person, the vibes tell you whether to back off or not. With different girls it's different. If the vibes tell you to play it cool, that's what you do." That's what happened in this case. I don't think she really wanted to go farther, at least not at the time. I wouldn't want to do it with her if she really didn't want to. It's because she really wouldn't want to, and she'd feel uncomfortable, and she would probably regret it. Then I might regret it, too. Then I just wouldn't feel good about it. I would have felt kind of guilty if I forced her into it. I wanted to feel good about myself. So, I'm glad I backed off. When you do it, if a girl feels good about it, then you feel good. #2311, FEMALE, AGE 17. When you meet a guy, you wonder what's gonna become of it. You just don't want it to become a one night thing. I think it's a matter of deciding how much you like somebody and how they feel about you. You're not just with all different people. There was a guy I used to see. We used to date off and on, and we went together for a long time. I wasn't sure whether I wanted to be with him sexually because he was really a different kind of a person. He sort of had like two personalities. He would change so much. I wasn't sure if he really liked me. I didn't want to be used, I considered how I would feel if something happened between us and he went around and told all his friends that I didn't mean anything to him. My parents didn't like him, which made it difficult. If I was gonna be seeing him a lot, he wouldn't be able to come over to my house. We'd always have to sneak around. _I didn't want the kind of a relationship. I considered at one point being sexual, because I did care for him a lot and I wanted to be with him. But I decided not to be with him for a while. I think it was the right thing to do because it wasn't too long after that that he went into the Navy. Then I really didn't see much of him. I think my instincts were great because I wouldn't 201 have stayed with him. It saved me a lot of problems. For one, because I wasn't with him, he didn't have anybody to tell because it never happened. A lot of his friends were my friends. And if my parents would have ever found out, it would have probably really hurt my mom because she didn't like him at all. #2486, FEMALE, AGE 15. It was whether to hug and kiss or not. From what I learned, if you kiss or hug somebody, things could go on and go on, and then that could be wrong. It could lead to other things where like, me being a girl, I could get pregnant or something like that. I know I'm too young to have children. But then again, I was thinking, "But I feel good when he hugs me or kisses me." I liked him a lot, and I liked being with him. I thought, "Well, maybe I can show the person that I care for him a little bit. I mean, you don't have to go all the way." But maybe I don't like him as much as I think I do. I was having doubts about him. I was trying to decide how much I liked him cause I don't want nobody I don't really like all over me or hugging me or kissing me. So, I just thought of it as friendly kiss or a friendly hug and tried not to think about nothin' sexual. I tried not to take it so seriously. Because it wasn't really nothin' to me; it wasn't all that important. So then we just talked and laughed. #3241, MALE, AGE 15. I know what my feelings are, and I go with my feelings. It's mostly about teenage pregnancy. I'm not really ready to take care of a kid. It would be bad. I'm just a kid myself. #3257, MALE, AGE 15. Someone wanted me to do it. She was pretty. It was just like she was there, and I was there. I wanted to do it in some ways, but I just couldn't. I'm sort of shy. Maybe she could have got upset, or maybe both our feelings could of got hurt. If I would have done it, she would of probably been mad and wouldn't talk to me, or I wouldn't have said nothing to her. Like I would of felt guilty 'cause if we would of seen each other at school, we probably would have just looked at each other and kept on with our business. And one of us could have felt he or she didn't care. Seemed like the other side was stronger, so I told myself not to do it. Besides, if we would of went all the way, anything could happen. She could of got pregnant. That would be bad because I don't have a job. I couldn't take care of her and a baby. rAnd my mom and pop would probably put me out of the house. I'm really too young to have a job, and I'd have nowhere else to go. Or we could of got caught. And my mom said if I was ever caught doing something like that, she'd probably send me to a private military school. I wasn't ready for that!! I'd miss all my friends and have no freedom. I thought it was the right thing to do to say, "No," to myself; I don't really know why. #3354, FEMALE, 15. Me and my boyfriend just broke up a couple of weeks ago. But like within the first 3 or 4 months we were going together, he wanted to have sex...intercourse. And I didn't want to. I wasn't ready. I was only 15 years old. I wasn't sure I 202 wanted him to be the first guy. That's the big thing. Everybody talks about waitin' 'til they're married to be a virgin. Now- adays, sex is so casual. I mean not with me, but you hear everybody talking about it. I had a feeling that I would not wait until I was married. I mean hardly anybody does. I like to be like everybody else. I can say that about myself. Since everybody else was doing it, I figured my time would come some- time. But I was against doing something for everybody else at that time. Like usually I'll just go ahead and do anything for everybody else. But not within sex. It's more like when its about how people dress or whatever. But I also kind of felt bad, like I should do it, because here's my boyfriend. It's just the fact that he wanted to and I didn't that made me feel bad. I wasn't pleasing him or whatever. Another thing licensidered was my reputation, if somebody found out. Well, it wouldn't have been so bad because we were going together for a long time and people expect that kind of thing. But it was really the fact that I was afraid he was going to use me. I really was. I was afraid we were going to do that, and he was gonna just leave me next week or something, just like I was nobody. I'm sure everybody's afraid of that. I know a lot of people that have had that happen to them. Most of my friends. So, I said, "No." He understood. It was really surprising to me. I was really scared he was gonna put up a fight or some- thing. We just talked about it. I told him how I felt about it, that I wasn't ready. He decided when the time came, the time came. And that was it. #3421, FEMALE, AGE 16. Like my ex-boyfriend, Terry, we had been going together for about a month. We didn't do no more than kiss. I just liked him like that. But then after a month had went by, he started asking me did I have sexual relationships. My girl friend said, "Go on. Tell him yeah. Just play around with him." So I thought about it, and I said, "Yeah." I was just playing around with him. I didn't like him that much to sleep with him because I didn't have no kind of feelings for him. I just liked him 'cause he was a good friend. He used to always tell me he loved me, but guys use to tell me that. I don't take it serious- ly. It's just more like a line to them, you know. You just say, "Right." So I didn't ever believe him, and I didn't love him. I guess he's too young to know what real love is. It would just have been a lie. I'm glad I didn't fall for it. So he just kept asking me and me asking me until I just started disliking him anyway. Then I knew it wasn't right. Like one time we had all went to the skating rink together and everybody was out on the dance floor. I was just sitting down over where he was dancing. When he finished, he came over and sat down next to me. We was just talking and holding hands, and he wanted to kiss and stuff. But that's not me. I think that is something that needs privacy. So then he asked me to go outside with him because he had his own car. And my friend was always saying, "It ain't gonna hurt nothin'. Go ahead." Like this time, she was saying "Go on." I don't know what kind of friend she is, now that I think of it. But then I was thinking, "If I don't, she might not be my friend no more. Or with him it was if I don't he might wanna break up or he might go and do it with some other girl. And if I had of done it when I didn't really want to, I probably would of ended up disliking him. I wanted us to conti- nue being friends. I didn't want to end up hating him. And I probably would have been pregnant and I didn't want that. My mom said, "Mistakes happen," and I wasn't taking nothin'. I don't know if he was. I considered my future. I wouldn't be able to go to school as regular. And I would have to worry about how am I going to give my baby this, how am I gonna give my baby that? If it gets sick, what am I'gonna do? How am I gonna do anything about that? My mom always told us you have to find some way to support you and the baby. I'm still in school. It's hard to find jobs, especially ones that you can try to keep your baby up and you up and keep up with high school. I wasn't ready for that. My mom would probably think, and I would, too, that I pretty much had my dream and my future would be gone. It would just be gone. My sister was there, and she was telling me that same thing, "Mom don't want us doing nothing like that." My mom had always taught us that it's just not right. I knew she would never tell us nothin' wrong. It was right to say no, because she said it was right. Plus I already knew it was right. So, I told him "No." He didn't get mad or nothing. I'm glad I didn't do it cause if I did, it would have been for no reason except to prove it to somebody else. I would feel guilty now. It would really bother me. Anyway, he's moved to the East now. My aunt says he still asks about me. #3521, FEMALE, AGE 15. I can't think of any situations. I haven't been in a lot of situations like that. In fact, I haven't hardly any. My dad didn't want me to start that serious thing until after high school. So, I haven't really been in any sort of situation like that. . #3602, FEMALE, AGE 15. Well I used to like this guy Tim. Tim's best friend, Mark, was seeing a girl named Tara. We all went to a movie once. 80 me and Tim were holding hands, and then we started kissing. Then he wanted to touch me! and I didn't want him to. I told him, no I didn't want to 'cause it was like our first date or something like that. Then he kind of said, "Okay." But then he started doing it again. And I told him, "No." I told him like three times and he couldn't get the message. So finally I just said it loud, "N01!!!" I started yelling at him. So he got mad and walked out of the movie. .80 I told Mark, "It doesn't bother me. I'm fine. If he can't accept it, then that's his problem." Mark agreed and said, "I think he was out of line." You see, at church we've always been brought up not to let other people take advantage of you, like touching and stuff like that, when you're not ready for any relationship. I wasn't ready for a relationship. I mean, a first date is different than when you're engaged. I think something big jumped in there somewhere. It 204 has to do with how long you've been together. It wasn't really a conflict, but you see I really liked him a whole lot. But then he said, "Do you love me? Do you love me?" All this junk! I mean, I hate that. I said, "That makes me ill!" I didn't know if he really cared or not then. That just sort of made my image of him go down the drain when he said that. I mean we had known each other about six months before we went out. It was the first date, and he was saying that! If he really cared, then he would have understood my decision. And he would have respected it. I felt a little like crying 'cause it was like, "How could he do something like that?" I was hurt that he wouldn't respect my decision. And I was really mad and upset at the same time. I almost felt like slapping him to vent my anger. What a jerk! Before he left, I also thought about walking out to get away from the problem. I just needed a minute to think about it. And I sort of considered what it would be like in the long run. Would he try to take advantage of me in a different circumstance? So, I just said, "NO! Leave me alone!" After we talked, Mark and Tara went out and talked to Tim. They all came back in, and we watched the rest of the movie, but Tim sat on the opposite side of me, way far at the end of the row. Mark and Tara were just there to comfort me and to help me. I tried watching the rest of the movie, but that didn't work too well. Even though it put a damper on my relationship with Tim, I think it was the right thing to do because Tara is not a Christian. I was setting a good example for her. And Mark goes to my church. He'd get a really bad idea about me if he saw me doing something like that. I'd feel really guilty. And it wasn't the right place or the time for him to be doing that. I mean, a movie theater. Other people would like to enjoy the movie. #3798, MALE, AGE 15. I never thought about it. I just did it. There are situations where I couldn't decide, but I don't want to think about it. #3846, MALE, AGE 15. There have definitely been times where I've had sexual touchings. I don't know whether it was that I actually consciously thought about whether I was doing the right thing or the wrong thing. I guess in some ways I thought it was wrong because of my age or something. What I'm thinking of right now was about a time with an ex-girlfriend of mine. I was her first boyfriend. It was in the Spring, a beautiful day. A marvelous Spring day. The snow was melting, and it was nice and warm. We both were in light jackets, and a lot of that was in my head. I was really a nice setting. We were out walking around in the field behind our property. We picked out a nice little spot, and we decided to kiss. She had never kissed anybody before. There wasn't really any conflict for he in that situation. I don't think that there is much of stqong conflict in any situation. It wasn't really my decision as much as it was hers because I had been kissing a long time. I had had preVious girlfriends. I had done a lot of things. We were really, really close. I liked her a lot. Later on, we actually set a date and a time for marriage five years ahead. It still hurts me to this day to think of her. It was love, it was definitely love. I wanted to show my love, but she was going to be late to get picked up. I didn't want her to get in trouble. #4682, FEMALE, AGE 16. Before Jim, I did have a relationship with Harry, but we never got that far. Maybe kissing and hanging onto hands...just going out and doing things. Besides that, there was only Jim. The first time, though, Jim and I were just trying, it didn't really work out. So I may have said, "No," and then we gave it a little more time. It was 'cause I thought he might be one of them guys who just wants to get you and then drop you. A lot of girls were telling me that a guy will do that to you and then break up with you. So I figured, I'm gonna be sure me and Jim are going together a while, and I'll see if that's what he wants from me. "You know, just wait 'til I get to know you just a little bit better and we'll grow into it." And he was more for it than I was. I think we were just more scared of getting caught by his parents than anything. Not having sex, but just making out. I was worried his parents weren't going to like me. So, we needed to be somewhere where we weren't gonna get caught and just spend some time. But finally the way he was talking, I really didn't think about it. I will admit that. It took me and Jim a long time. We went together for a year. It took us a half a year to even kiss. And then we'd be talking about how we'd be together for-a long time, talking about having kids. He always told me we were gonna get married. I wasn't into marriage or nothing, but he was the kind of person I thought I would spend the rest of my life with. Even though when you find someone when you're young, you usually aren't together for that long. I knew we'd be together for some amount of time. Nothing went through my head to say no. We'd been together six months, and I just said, "Why not?" I wanted to say "No," but then I thought, "Well, we're gonna have to end up doing this sooner or later." I made him wait quite a while. If I made him wait a little bit longer, he might just decide to dump me. Every time we started doing something, we always talked first. I mean it's not like he just did it, he always asked me first. And I'd say, "Well . . ." Then one day I felt bad because I kept saying no, no, no, no. And I thought I'd better say, "Yes," or I ain't gonna have a boyfriend anymore. I'm just glad he wasn't that kind of guy who would say forget it afterward. Sometimes I would stall. We both smoke so I'd light up a cigarette and say, "Just a minute." But then I would say, "Is the door closed?" and all this other crap. I don't think he knew I was stalling, but I knew I was. I was also scared to do anything with him because he was a new person to me. He was scared, too. You know, I wasn't his first one, but he was my first one. He was just as much scared because I was a new person. It was new for both of us; we didn't really now what we were doing. But it got to a point that I guess we did, sooner or later. But now I regret it. I'm just glad we waited as long as we did. I would probably have been pregnant a long time ago. I knew there was some kind of protection, or whatever they say to use. But Jim just said, "If it happens, I'm gonna stay with you. If it happens, it happens." But then it did happen. Now it's like what he said a few days ago, "It's not that I don't want the baby; it's just that we don't get along." I don't blame him for that. But it's not my fault we don't get along. It's more likely his fault. I know I've done some bad things to him in the past. He never really done anything bad to me at first. When we first went together, it was more like I did. And I feel like he's trying to pay me back now. And then I just said to him, "When can this ever quit?" But otherwise nothing went though my head but, "Well, I better hurry up and get this over with 'cause I can't stall forever." I don't think it was the right thing to do because I think he liked me just a little more than I liked him. I felt uncomfortable being around him because I know he loved me, but I just liked him. But I do think it was the right thing to do. If I would have kept stalling and stalling and stalling, he would end up finding someone else. And then that someone else would have gave it to him and he would have stayed with her. So, I'm just glad that we didn't jump into it, or we would have been broken up a long time ago. And I knew it would be like that. I'm just glad it took me time. On the other hand, I'm still glad I did it. When you reallytlike someone, you really can't say no. I knew if I said no again, I was afraid he'd just say, "Well, good bye." I'll always remember Jim. If I was to pick anyone I went with, he'd be the only guy I'd want to have something of his to remember. That's why I really don't regret it. I'll always have something that's attached to him. I mean we might have our differences, but otherwise I'll always be able to look at my kid and see him. I'd rather have something of him than nothing at all. The situation is gonna be a lot harder, a lot harder, because my case worker says we're gonna end up in court. Jim's parents don't think the baby is Jim's. Jim knows it is his, but he's not the kind of person who could talk to his parents. He can't sit down and say, "I know it's mine." That's why I call her and try to talk to his mom myself. She didn't tell me that she didn't think it was mine, but in the way she was talking, that's what she thinks. So it'll probably be court, and there's gonna be blood tests. It's gonna be harder on me seeing his family and my family going against each other. I don't want their family hating their granddaughter. That's why I wasn't going to press charges against him when he hit me in the head. My mom wanted to, but I talked her out of it. I didn't want to see Jim in jail. I mean I would hate it if they would put me in jail. And 'cause his parents are gonna hate me. I mean, they dislike me as it is. They'll hate me if I put their son away. There's a lot of things. A lot of decisions. The first thing that went through my head was, "Yes, press charges," because he made me so mad. But after I thought about it for a while, it'd be worse on my side with the baby coming. He wouldn't want anything to do LUI with it. They kind of sound like that now, but when the baby's born, their decisions will change. When they see it, they might want to spend time with it. I doubt Jim will, but I know his mom will. #5116, FEMALE, AGE 17. There was a situation where I didn't know if I wanted to because of the chance of getting pregnant. I didn't want to have a baby, and there was always that chance. I'm too young, and I want to have a career. I want to get going in life before I have that big a responsibility. It would be too much for me. And it's not fair for me to kill the baby, to kill a life just because it was my mistake of doing something wrong. And I would have felt really bad if he would have left me after we did that. That was very special to me. It wasn't just like, "Oh, wow. I did it!" And also, having my parents find out. They would get upset. They would lose respect in me. And his mom, I always want them to think good of me. I don't want them to think, "She's a slut," or something. I'd be embarrassed every time I talked to her. So, I knew we couldn't do it at home. We had to go somewhere else. If they didn't find out, it wouldn't hurt them. ' The good point of that was that I did love him. It just made me feel like I had him. It wasn't having sex; it was really making love. I mean that's why I can say it. That's the best thing you can have. You know, if I was older I could say it's part of life. That's how everybody does it. But with a teenager I don't think it should be a part of life. But that is how I feel with him. I could stop right now and say, "No, we can't do it any- more." But I think we share that special feeling between both of us. I think we are able to have sex knowing that we love each other. I know I'm too young, but I love him so. I'm not saying it's right just because I love him, but I still do it. I did consider waiting 'cause I've always just thought you should wait to make sure he's my husband. I think I was just brought up that way. You never do it until you get married. I can still recall my grandma telling me this story about a girl who had a boyfriend. They were engaged to be married in two months, and she was pregnant. And he died. That always scared me. This was kind of hard to talk about. #5171, MALE, AGE 14. It was my first girlfriend, kissing. It was a conflict probably because I was young. I was in fourth or fifth grade, and it didn't seem right timing. After a while, it seemed okay. My friends, they don't like peer pressure, people telling you to go ahead and people not telling you shouldn't look good or other people saying, "Oh yeah. She likes you." They're your friends, and you trust them. Most of the time it was my deci- sion. But if you're going to do something wrong against what your friends say, you make them think you don't care about them. Then you'll lose their friendship. Back then it was that boys didn't think of girls as someone to kiss. Girls were a piece of dirt. You know when you're a little kid, girls weren't nothing yet. So it was during recess. The boys were chasing this girl 208 around, and they wanted me to go and kiss her. Then they were chasing me around saying, "Go on, Jake." And I was running around, parading around, trying to get away from her and every- thing. There were too many people who were watching. It would have been embarrassing. They'd spread it around, how you kiss. Then peOple might turning words around and pretty soon you'd get words like, "Oh, you can't kiss worth nothing." Something that would go against you. But she was my girlfriend. People told me when you're going together, you're supposed to kiss. So I thought it wouldn't be so bad to kiss her. It looked like there wasn't gonna be any- thing wrong with it or that my lips were gonna fall off or anything. It all came out when I went over and put everything together, why they were chasing me. So I stopped running, and I kissed her. I walked with her for the rest of the hour. PeOple followed us all over the place; there was a crowd. We just walked and talked and held hands until the hour went, and then we had to go to different classes. At the time, I didn't think I'd done the right thing because you weren't supposed to kiss girls. But now I see it differently. It all turned out for the better. I went with her for a year in sixth grade. I still see her now; she goes to Knox High School. I had her in a class first semes- ter. After a while it kind of broke the line between whether girls were anything important or whether they weren't important. People were telling me, "Go ahead and do it."" Then when I didn't want to, they said, "No, go ahead and do it; there's no problem." Some of my other friends went out with girls before, and they said it was okay, even though I didn't think so, and other friends didn't think so either. So, I kissed her, and it wasn't any problem. That was probably what changed it right there. From then on it was okay to like girls. #5402, FEMALE, AGE 15. When John and I first started seeing each other, he wanted to have intercourse. I really didn't know what to do. It was one time when my friend, Cindy, and I were sleep- ing out in the back yard in a tent. During the middle of the night her boyfriend came over, and he brought John with him. Her boyfriend had to leave because Cindy got sick and went in the house. So John and I were in the tent all by ourselves. It was sooooo hard. It was a tough time to resist. He kept saying, "Come on. Come on." And I was just going back and forth. But I couldn't. It was just hard to say no 'cause I wanted to as much as he did. But for one thing a tent is not the right place for the first time. I didn't know exactly how he felt either. Some- times you feel like they're just using you. I guess for a while there I did feel like he was. I didn't want to let my parents down 'cause if they found out. Like my mom was pregnant with me when she was only sixteen. I couldn't handle that. I mean someday I would like to have a child, one child (laughs), but not for a long time. That was one big thing--getting pregnant. I was really scared. And also one reason I wanted to do it was show him how much I cared. I really felt like he didn't know. Sometimes he acted 209 like he knew how much I cared for him, and then other times it was like it meant nothing. I was scared he really didn't rea- lize. And like you're supposed to keep your virginity until you're married. I am not one of these traditional people though. I never want to get married. I mean going through as many divorces and marriages as I have...I mean as my mother has...most people would not doubt me one bit for not wanting to get married. So John and I ended up doing it, but it wasn't for a while after that. There were so many things going through my head, I can't even think of them. And I ended up doing what I wanted, and what was right for me which was to wait. Later on I talked to my mom about it. I gained his respect by waiting. He ended up showing me how much he cared for me by respecting what I wanted and by staying with me until I was ready. I still think it was the best thing to do. #5689, MALE, AGE 17. I was about 10 years old. This little girl came down the street. She looked good to me. She would always come up and make hits on me all the time. And I thought it was cool because she was twelve and I was ten. Older woman, I guess (laughs). But I didn't know whether to kiss her or not. I was scared. I had never kissed a girl before. I didn't know what to do. I get nervous when I try new things. I'd seen older people do it before, but I didn't know if I was supposed to kiss her yet or if I was supposed wait until I got old. Then my sister was razzing me. I got sick of everybody razzing me. I don't like to be teased. So I just did it. I said, "Shit. The worst thing she could do is spit on me." So I just went up and kissed her. We were out back and my dad caught us. He whupped my butt. He was really mad. I don't know why he was so mad. And he told her parents, and they came up and tried to whip my butt. I was pretty happy until about two weeks later, I found out I had mono from that little girl. Then I was mad, and I hated her. I beat her up. I was really mad 'cause I had to stay home from school. I couldn't see my friends. But later I knew I shouldn't have done it because she gave me that nasty mono stuff. Plus, I got my butt whupped. It wasn't worth it. #6000, MALE, AGE 16. Well, there's this one girl. We had an Opportunity to do it. I wasn't so sure about it, but she was, I guess. I had been trying for weeks, and all of a sudden I had an opportunity. It was strange! She was intoxicated, let me put it that way. Otherwise, there'd be no game and there'd be no any- thing. She would have just said, "No." All of a sudden it was her turning and saying, "Yes!! Let's!" So the question was why did she want to do it. I was kind of worried whether she was all right. I mean, was she doing this on her own or was she just drunk? I didn't want her to wake up tomorrow and say, "I did this! You did this?!" I really didn't want that because it wasn't something I'd enjoy having then. But, on the other hand, her body was pulling me the other way. I was really wanting her. So then I started thinking about what I was going to do and how long I'd be enjoying myself. It all depends, you know. Some- times I don't last, it could be a second or two. Sometimes it 210 could be an hour or three. So I went ahead and did it. I think it was the right thing to do because I really enjoyed myself. #6149, FEMALE, AGE 15. I can't think of a situation. Basically, I don't do sexual things. I've done it once, a year ago. But it wasn't like I was trying to decide anything. It wasn't any con- flict. I always know what I want to do, and I don't go with any guys. There's only been one guy my whole life. Usually by the time people are sixteen, the people I hang around with anyway, they're like at having done it with ten guys. They don't care. I don't get into girls that go like every week with a different guy. I don't like that. Why go out with a guy if it's just gonna be to go to bed with him? I don't think that's right. Anyway, I haven't really had any situations 'cause I haven't been out there since I was like fourteen. I've been in these group home places, so I don't really have to think of all that stuff. #6287, MALE, AGE 17. There was a time. My family did a lot of traveling. On one vacation, my girlfriend went with us. It was basically whether we were going to express our feelings in front of a group my mom was involved with. The conflict was, "Did we want to take the chance of people seeing us and then having them go back to my mom?" Then my mom would give me a hard time and would tell my father. I also considered whether it was approp- riate at the function I was at. At a church, for instance, I wouldn't consider that appropriate. The other side of the con- flict was whether we should save our feelings and express them later, not wondering about who saw me. I wanted to show my affection for her. It is something I look forward to. I decided to wait until I could get away from the big group of people to a smaller area with fewer people. Just postpone it a bit. I think it was the right thing to do because it was not disrespecting of each other. And we were respecting other people. People have different feelings of what is right and wrong. We respected them as adults. #6521, MALE, AGE 15. I've never had that. I guess if a girl asked me to have intercourse, it would be a hard decision. I guess I'd have to chose not to 'cause in case something happens, and she becomes pregnant. I don't want to be a father, at least not yet. I want to wait until I get old (laughs). Like I want to have a job and have a way to support her. I just ain't ready. I'd have to like the person.a lot. >Get to know them better, and I'd want to be around them most of the time. #6633, MALE, AGE 16. Well, this happened about a year and a half ago. I had a girlfriend, and I just kissed her. The next day my mom said, "You're not kissing your girlfriend, are you? I think you're too young for that." Then I didn't know whether I did the right thing or not. I didn't think it was any real big thing that would get me into any trouble or anything. But basically my mom thought I was too young right then to do that, compared to the times when she started dating and things like that. Her morals are a little different. So, I wanted to continue to do what I wanted. Yet, I wanted to do what my mom wanted me to do 211 'cause I don't like fights. I get a lecture that's about two hours long about why I shouldn't and what she did when she was young. But also I pretty much trust her. I try to do what my parents say because I respect them as parents. They're close to you, and they try to advise you until you are old enough to make your own major decisions. They actually give you experiences to back you up. They tell you what they did when they were younger to give you an idea of what's right and wrong. They have good experiences and bad experiences. They share that with you to help you make better decisions than they did. Like when they made a mistake. On the other side, all your friends-~peer pres- sure. You look around and think, "It's no big deal." Everybody is doing it all around you. Years ago kissing could mean you're engaged or you're supposed to be engaged in a couple of weeks. But now, like they say, "It's the eighties." I don't think a kiss is that serious as it was earlier. So, I decided it's right in my mind. I don't really think I'm hurting anybody. I'm able to handle the responsibility and things that come along with kissing. And my friends do it, younger people do it, older people... My mom doesn't bring it up anymore. Well, she brings it up once in a while, but she says, "You don't park the car every night and make out?" And I say, "No." She is just basi- cally curious. She is just drilling for information. #6639, FEMALE, AGE 17. It was when I wanted to kiss my boyfriend in school. It was a conflict because everyone was around. I don't know. I just think you should keep it private. It gets kind of embarrassing. I kind of wanted to do it 'cause it was just that I care about him too much. Too, too much! But I was also worried about what my teachers might think. He was a black guy, and some teachers didn't like him and me being together. I want them to think I'm a good person. Not out to do everything. Most of my teachers like me, and I want to keep it that way 'til I graduate. So, we didn't. I gave him a hug instead. I think it was the right thing to do because I don't think you should dis- play your affection in public. You can a little bit. Like a kiss on the cheek or a hug. But you shouldn't like getting into kissing (laughs). Sometimes it gets kind of gross, and it doesn't look right in public. You know, sometimes guys go down farther and farther until they just go too far. Just from one kiss. Then you just have to say, "No. Don't do this in public." And you just walk away. I've done that before. #6664, MALE, AGE 15. Yeah. I have been in situations many times, and I don't want to talk about it. It's my business; that's all. #6666. FEMALE, AGE 15. It was during junior high. Steve was a year older than I was. We'd hold hands and all of that. The boy- friend and girlfriend thing. He would walk me to my class. Then I fell in love with him. At least I thought we were in love, but I found out differently later. I had never kissed a boy before and he would ask me, "When can I kiss you?" And I would always turn around and ignore his question or pretend I didn't hear it. I'd make an excuse that I had to leave somewhere. For a long time, he didn't get it. Sometimes he'd get mad at me, but not so 212 bad that he might pound on the desk or anything. It was what he expected to do, you know. He had more experience and all. He was thirteen, and I was just twelve. He had had more relation- ships. He had so many girls. But I guess I wasn't really ready for it. First love and fiist guy, you know, is different. I didn't know what he'd do if I said no. And he was really very cute. It would make him a lot happier if I did it. It was really important to him. And it was something new for me, to show him love that way. But love can be expressed in different ways--holding hands or telling each other, instead of kissing. Just because he wanted to kiss and it makes him all happy, why did he act so badly toward me? Dang! He was making such a big deal out of it, and for me it wasn't THAT big a deal. I did it, but I told him, "If you don't understand what I feel then adios. Say goodbye." I didn't like doing something and then he wasn't interested in how I felt; it was like he was pushing me. For him it was like, "Kiss me and prove you love me." I guess I've always grown up with a choice. My parents taught me that. That's why I talked to him. I guess he was brought up different than I was. He finally understood, but it felt a little ridiculous for a while because he needed me to prove I loved him. If he couldn't understand that I loved him, that's his fault. I wasn't really ready. I would need to get to know him better, to understand him a little better. We went together for a little while, but he ended up going to another school. I was kind of depressed when he left, but I got over it. Now that we're in high school, he's back, and he's got a girl- friend now. He still likes me and looks at me. But he doesn't even say hello to me. I see him, and he acts like he don't even remember. We just play around. He's still cute, you know. #6879, FEMALE, AGE 14. The only decision I can think of is whether or not I want to be with somebody. Then it's easy. If I do, I can be with them. If I don't, I don't. Like what is this kid like? He's got a reputation if he's nice. Or sometimes I sit and just sit and talk and figure somebody out. Then I can pretty much tell what the outcome is gonna be. It's whatever feels right at the time, wherever I happen to be. I mean I'm not the kind of person, like my dad says, that flaunts myself or goes around kissing guys in the middle of football games. When it happens in public, it's usually someplace where not many people are gonna see. And not many people are gonna comment because it's none of their business to begin with. Like everything is social. That plays such a big part. It shouldn't, but if you date one boy one day then you date another boy another day, you are fast. I don't think you should be called that because how do you know if you're gonna like somebody if you don‘t date around. I mean if you're supposed to be devoted to this one person and you find out you don't like him, then you kind of gotta wait that through before you go on to somebody else. I have a habit of running my mouth and talking about people, but I'm sure I get my share done on me. As far as anything more than kissing, I'm not physically or men- tally ready for any of that bullcrap and all the business that goes along with it. Like the gossip and the talk afterwards. And there's the consequences. Besides I don't even want to. And I wouldn't try something that I knew I wouldn't have a chance of getting. It's because I don't want something that's a one night stand or that's an on and off thing. I want a relationship with a guy. I want to now somebody's gonna be there that I can call. I don't want to feel, "Oh, he's got ten girlfriends." If that's something he wants and the girls want that, fine. But that's not what I want. I'd just rather have somebody that I can talk to and have fun with. My parentagthink it's that we all go out and kissy, kissy, kissy, whatever. But I don't even want anything like that either. I want to do things like go to the mall, and laugh, and pick out clothes, or whatever. Somebody that's not going to cause any problems. And basically speaking, there aren't many guys that I would kiss. There's something the matter with everybody. - #6917, MALE, AGE 17. No, I've never been where I haven't known what to do. Oh yes, one time about a year and a half ago. I was over to this girl's house. I'd been there a long time, and I didn't know whether I should go home that night or stay there. That's when I messed up royally. That's how I got put in this group home. I was tricked, but after a while she told me the truth. It was like one o'clock in the morning. I could have gone home and just gotten in trouble. I got up a couple of times, out of bed and said, "I'm gonna go." But then I thought about and said, "Nah." I just couldn't make up my mind. It was either stay there and have my little fun. It was the first time I ever spent the night over at a girl's house. And I thought it might be the last time. Now I know better. Anyway, I really didn't want to leave. It felt so good. I just couldn't stop. I just had to stay. And she was saying, "Please, don't go, stay with me." This soft pretty voice. I just couldn't help myself. I was a sucker. She took her time to do this little thing. She took advantage of me. So I thought, "I might as well be nice and go ahead with it." And I considered about the next day, what I would tell all my friends about this. That's just boys talking. Any guy, he's gonna go to school and just tell everybody. The girl can go to school, if she wants to, all right. Everybody at the school be looking at her all strange and saying, "That's the one. She's a slut. Yeah, I heard about her." He's gonna tell.’ And I think the girl knows he's gonna tell. And he gonna bust like never before. Especially to his friends, make him look macho. So he gonna go and tell everything, fine details, and make the details stretch a little bit. Make it worse than he done did. It's called boy talk. The macho thing, it just comes naturally. Like in junior high, didn't nobody want to mess with me. I was bigger than all of them and could none of them beat me. And to keep my respect, I had to do things they would never dare do, like fight principals, and beat up teachers, and go over to girls', spending the night in her room with her mother downstairs. Wouldn't none of them try those things. So I did it, and I felt pretty good about that . 214 Or it was go home and get in trouble. I might get half way mur- dered if I would have gone home, but at least my foster mother would have known I came home. Instead she thought I had run away. I did consider her feelings for a little while, how wor- ried she would be about me. But then I thought, "She doesn't want me anyway." I also considered my brother sleeping in that cold basement all by himself. Anytime he was by himself, I would check on him to make sure he was still alive. I don't know why. Just being brotherly, I guess, 'cause he's my younger brother. So I decided to stay the whole night and the next morning, 'til about twelve o'clock. Then I went to lunch, and that's when I got caught. I was talking to the boys about what I just did. It was lot's of fun. Then security in the building caught me. In the short run, it was a real mess. They took me out of my foster home and put me in the group home. But in the long run, it was the right thing. I got to get some experience of living other places and more how to be on my own. I was getting older, and it was about time for me to get out from under my foster mother's wing. Also, I met my real family again and got reac- quainted with them. I can see my sister more often, too. So, there were a lot of good points to it. ' #7171, MALE, AGE 15. Well, I know it wasn't really sure it was the right thing to do, but I wanted to do it! So I did it anyway. Like when you're over at your girlfriend's house, her parents are upstairs, and you're downstairs, and one thing leads to another. And finally it comes down to doing it. I knew it wasn't right because for one thing, her parents trust her. Me and her were real close. Me and her parents were real close, too. So it kind of shook the water. I don't like breaking trust. And also I had to lie to my mom. I don't like to lie; I get this nagging feeling inside of me. But sometimes I don't want to get in trouble, so I will. Anyway, we did it anyway. It was mainly because I was horny! Also, we had a good relationship, an open and honest relationship, a loving relationship. It is just part of the relationship for me. Not a big part, but it is a part of it. Afterwards, I started feeling a little guilty about doing it right under her parent's feet, but I really didn't think about it before. #7220, FEMALE, AGE 16. There's a lot of guys that are very pushy towards the idea of having sex. Doing this, doing that. There's been a lot of times they try and talk you into it and I say, "No. No." 'Cause if they're gonna keep on trying to talk you into it, and you're saying, "No," then they obviously don't like you as much as they say they do. So it wouldn't be right. It would be completely the opposite. I think sex should happen out of love and not lust. That's what I believe, but things are different for different people. Like with my first real boyfriend. :I was in the ninth grade, and he was pushing to have sex. I just didn't want to. Then one time I got grounded and wasn't able to see him for a long time, so we ended up breaking up. Then about a month or two later, we started going together again, and he 215 started pushing again. Then we broke up after maybe four months. Then we started back together again a month or two later for another five months. And finally it came down to the fact that he wanted to do it. And I felt, "Oh, I'm really in love with this guy!" By this time, I was in tenth grade. I was kind of scared. You know how you feel the first time. But I was kind of saying, "Yeah. We can." I really liked him a lot. His sisters were my best friends, and I just figured, "Oh well, we're gonna stay together forever. So, what the hay!" Being so naive, that's what I thought. And I hadn't ever done it before, so there was the natural inter- est that everyone has. Like, ”What's it gonna be like?" A lot of my friends that I knew or maybe overheard someone talking in school, they say stuff like the first time it hurts. I was afraid of that too 'cause they made it sound like, "Oh! You're gonna die! And you'll scream." So I was kind of scared. Then all of a sudden, he said, "Ooop! I don't have a condom." And then I said, "Well, sorry, but no!" I felt kind of bad. But I shouldn't feel bad because it's my own personal body. If I don't want to have sex, I'm not going to. I don't want to have a kid. The idea of getting pregnant--my mom would kill me! When I'm going to get in trouble for something, I always make a joke. "Oh, my mom's gonna stab me! Oh, my God! I gotta get home." Me and my friends joke around like that. But if I got pregnant, my mom would be really mad. She says stuff like, "If you end up pregnant and you're young, you'd have an abortion." I think she just says that to kind of scare me or make me realize that being a kid, having a kid. Well, it's an adult thing to do; it's not really meant for kids. That's what she was trying to say. She'd really be disappointed, too. She had me when she was young. She was eighteen. She didn't want me to have to go through the problems that she bad. And I didn't want to have them. The idea of tenth grade and having a kid! So, I thought, "I don't even want to take that chance." Once I also thought, "It won't happen to me." But that's what everyone says that does and up pregnant. 80, that's why I didn't. Another thing was that I knew that in a couple of months he was going to move to Colorado to live for the summer. Then he was coming back. He said we'd still go together. "We can talk on the phone and write letters." But I kind of knew, "Oh right. That's not gonna happen." I knew it would be different. I'm not gonna just throw away my virginity for someone, to go down the drain like that! See I used to think, "Oh. I'm gonna wait 'till I get married. I'm not a virgin now, but that's what I wanted when I was younger. My mom always taught me, "Don't do that. Wait until you're married!" And I was probably thinking, too, what my friends would think. I didn't want anyone to think that I was a fast girl or anything. People'll think I'm a sleeze or something. A lot of people say, "Yeah, I'm a virgin," when they're really not. They just want you to think that they're innocent. But then I'd think, "That's 216 a business between two people, as long as they're gonna take the precaution to do the right thing. It's their business unless they're married and committing adultery. Then that's not right. But between two consenting adults, I think that's their business. What they do behind closed.doors is their business.' When I look back, a lot of people like my teachers and my mom said that I was kind of mature for my age. A lot of my friends kind of still acted like little kids and played little kid games and stuff like that. Tee bee and laugh all the time. And I just realized that that was kind of dumb. I didn't want to just follow along with the crowd. I wanted to be myself. I didn't want to try and be older and try to act like a little kid. You shouldn't act like you're twenty-five when actually you're just your age. I was probably trying to be older then, and'I wasn't really. I was just a ninth and tenth grader. But youAjust can't be the young little kid all your life. YOu have to grow older some time, and I felt that it was about time to start realizing that it was a big world out there. You gotta fit in right, or you won't fit in at all. #7523, FEMALE, AGE 15. Well, I was going with this guy, and he wanted to have sex with me. I didn't know if I was doing it for myself or doing it for him. Just to make him happy. I didn't want to make him upset. It's just the way I am. I like making people happy. But I wanted to make sure it was really right for me. I had to think about if I was ready or not. Being ready means if I can really handle the guy. Not let him get out of hand with it. There's some guys that just get so wild, it's pitiful. And I just had to make sure I was ready to handle what was coming up for me. I guess the only thing that really went through my mind was, "I hope I don't get pregnant." I'm not grown yet. I want to be able to take really good care of the kid at the time. I'd have to worry about getting a job, quitting school and stuff like that. I just wasn't ready for a kid. So, I just told him, "Not now. When we're ready. When I'm ready." That's basically what happened. Then I left his house. When I look back I think, "It' s not right for a little thirteen year old to have sex. I was too young.‘ #7593, FEMALE, AGE 17. One time there was a guy I knew from school. We had the same friends, but I didn't really know him well. He never really spoke to me because he really liked me, and he didn't know how to approach me. Well, I was at this party, and he saw me. I took him home, and we talked. Then it seemed like he wanted me to have sex with him. It was in my head, "Yeah. Yeah." I wanted to. But then again I didn't. One thing, it was really the first time we met. For some girls, they have sex with almost every boy they go with or even if they don't know him. But I don't feel comfortable doing that. Even though I had already had sex with one other person, it didn't seem right. But I was tempted by the physical feelings. He kissed me, and it was like, "Ahhh!" You know, this strange feeling. He was really good in gymnastics; he was ranked fifth in the nation. And I had 217 been looking at him a long time thinking, "Why doesn't he speak to me? Why does he do this?" And that night when he came up to me, I was really excited. When you want something for a long time and it's not there, then you can have it, and the temptation is greater. But he was talking about how he wanted us to go together and have a relationship. But to me, for a guy to approach me the way he did, even though he doesn't act like that anymore, it was like he was saying, "Oh, I just want to have sex with you and that was it." I wondered if maybe he might be telling the truth. But in my mind I was saying, "No, no, no, no." I just drew away. I was glad because for one, it turned out that after a while he started talking about all the girls he'd been with. I knew them all, and it felt strange. It kind of made me jealous. But I didn't know that at the time. Just later I thought, "Yeah, I'm glad I didn't." It might have also affected my reputation. It's important as a girl. PeOple know me. I had a good reputation until I became pregnant. People found out I was pregnant, and it spread around 'cause my boyfriend was in sports. After I had the miscarriage he felt all hateful towards me 'cause he didn't think people should have found out about it. Right now it doesn't bother me. I know people talk about me. It bothered me for a while, but after a while I didn't feel bad about it. I said, "I just made a #7777 mistake, and anybody can make the mistake I did." That was just it. , MALE, AGE 17. I went out with a girl for a year. We thought it was love. I confronted her with the situation that I really wanted to have sex. It took about six more months before we finally decided to do it. But then it seemed like after we had sex, we kind of saw that we weren't really in love. We ended up breaking up a while after that. But there was another time I'd like to talk about. It's kind of sick really. I'm in a club, and one of the guys threw a party. It was kind of a surprise party so none of knew what he was going to do. When we got there there was about thirty girls. We knew then that what he had planned was basically an orgy. There were about eighteen guys. We didn't know any of the girls.‘ There was a lot of, "Hi. How you doin'? Let's get on the floor." ' Basically, we all sat down and talked about it. We all kind of agreed. About ten of us left 'cause it was kind of sick, really, to have sex with someone you don't know at all. They could have a disease or something. There's been a lot of talk about AIDS and herpes and things. That kind of thing is in the back of your mind all the time if you kind of stop and think about it. There are posters all over school on VD. Everything kind of flashes in your mind. And we didn't know the girls' background or anything. The guy who threw the party knew the girls, but they were stran- gers to us. I also considered how I would feel. It would have been kind of like opening yourself up to someone you don't even know. "Here I am." And you don't even know how they think. I 218 would have felt insecure. Very insecure. You know, kind of like spilling your guts to a person. You don't know how they're gonna react. The danger side was real heavy. The lighter side was the pleasure side. There was sort of a pull. "Yeah. Let's do it!" But then it was like a flash of what my parents taught me, "Before you jump, think about it." So, I thought about it and then it was like, "Let's get out of here." The guys who stayed, maybe six of them, were trapped there with over thirty girls. They seemed like they were in conflict about whether to stay, too. They might have wanted to leave, too, but once we left, they were trapped. Now they all talk about it like, "Oh, we had the best time in the world." And we all just kind of looked at them and go, "How'd you do?" Sometimes when those hormones start surging, I think , "God, why didn't I stay?" But it's like, I didn't. It's over. Just forget about it. But I think I did the right thing because once I got in the car, I didn't have any remorse at all. I was comfortable with myself. It's like how you were raised to have certain beliefs. Having your parents talk to you, friends, teachers, grandparents, everybody. They all have basically the same kind of beliefs. Some are a little different, but basically the same. I felt right with myself. #8000, MALE, AGE 14. No, I've never been in a situation like that. I have a girlfriend, and we kiss a lot and hold hands in school. That's it. There hasn't been any situations where I shouldn't. LI ST OF REFERENCE S LIST OF REFERENCES Allen, D. M. (1980). Young ma1e prostitutes: A psychosocial study. Archives pf Sexual Behavior, 9(5), 399-426. Baldwin, W. H. (1982). Adolescent sexual and reproductive behavior. In P. W. Berman & E. R. Ramey (Eds.), Women: A develOpmental perspective. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Health Publication No. 81-2298. Baumrind, D. (1986). Sex differences in moral reasoning: Response to Walker's (1984) conclusion that there are none. Child Deve10pment, 21, 511-521. Beckstein, D. (1978). A2 annotated bibliography pf selected materials concerning men and family and planning. Clayton, M0: DOCHMC. Bem, S. L., & Lenney, E. (1976). Sex typing and the avoidance of cross-sex behavior. Journal pf Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 48-54. Berger, A. S., & Simon, W. (1975). Sexual behavior in adolescent males. Adolescent Psychiatry, 4, 199-210. Bloor, M. J. (1983). Notes on member validation. In R. M. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research. Boston: Little Brown. Briedes, C. (1975). Marginal deviants: Teenage girls experience community response to premarital sex and pregnancy. Social Problems, 23(4), 480-493. 219 220 Brown, M. E. (1979). Teenage prostitution. Adolescence, 14(56), 665-680. Carns, D. (1973). Talking about sex: Notes on first coitus and the double sexual standard. Journal pf Marriage and Family, 23(4), 677-688. Caw, P. (1967). Scientific method. In P. Edwards (Ed.), The encyclo- pedia pf philosophy. New York: Macmillan. Chilman, C. S. (1983). The development of adolescent sexuality. Journal pf Research and Development ip Education, 19(2), 16-26. Chodorow, N. (1974). Family structure and feminine personality. In M. Z. Rosaldo and L. Lamphere (Eds.), Women, Culture and Society. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Chodorow, N. (1976). Oedipal asymmetries and heterosexual knots. Social Problems, 22(4), 454-468. Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction pf mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology pf gender. Berkeley: University of California Press. Clippinger, J. A. (1980). Adolescent sexuality and volunteer bias. Corrections and Social Psychiatry and Journal pf Behavior Technology, Methods and Therapy, 26(2), 83-88. Colaizzi, P. F. (1978). Psychological research as the phenomenologist views it. In R. S. Valle and M. King (Eds.), Existential- phenomenological alternatives for psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. Colby, A., & Kohlberg, L. (Eds.) (in press). The measurement pf moral ipggment (Vols. 1-2). New York: Cambridge University Press. 221 Colby, A., Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J., Candee, D., Hewer, R., Kaufman, K., Lieberman, M., Power, C., & Speicher-Dubin, B. (in press). Assessing moral stages: A manual. New York: Cambridge University Press. Coley, S. B. (1973). Sexual activity as a cOping mechanism. Medical Aspects 91 Human Sexuality, 1(3), 40-61. Cutright, P. (1972). The teenage sexual revolution and the myth of an abstinent past. Family Planning Perspectives, 4(1), 24-31. Deaux, K. (1984). From individual differences to social categories: Analysis of a decade's research on gender. American Psychologist, 33(2), 105-116. DeMonteflores, C., and Schultz, S. J. (1978). Coming out: Similari- ties and differences for lesbians and gay men. Journal 91 Social Issues, 34, 59-72. Dinnerstein, D. (1976). The mermaid and the minatour. Sexual arrangements and human malaise. New York: Harper. Dormont, P. (1973). Commentary. Medical Aspects 21 Human Sexuality, 1(3), 63. Elias, J. E., & Elias, V. D. (1975). The sexual world of the adolescent. The Counseling Psychologist, 3(1), 92-97. Elkind, D. (1967). Conceptual orientation shifts in children and adolescents. Child Development, 31, 393-488. Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., Knowles, B. A., & Canter, R. J. (1983). The prevalence and incidence of delinquent behavior: 1976-1980. 222 National estimates of delinquent behavior by sex, race, social class and other selected variables. Project Report No. 26 for the National Youth Survey. Boulder, CO: Behavioral Research Institute. Emerson, R. M. (1983). Contemporary field research. Boston: Little Brown & Company. Erikson, E. (1958). Young man Luther. New York: W. W. Norton. Finkel, M. L., & Finkel, D. J. (1975). Sexual and contraceptive knowledge, attitudes, and behavior or male adolescents. Family Planning Perspectives, 1, 256-260. Finkel, M. L., & Finkel, D. J. (1983). Male adolescent sexual behavior, the forgotten partner: A review. Journal 21 School Health, 33(9), 544-547. Fischer, C. T., & Alapack, R. J. (1987). A phenomenological approach to adolescence. In V. B. VanHasselt and M. Hersen (Eds.), Handbook pi adolescent psychology. New York: Pergamon Press. Franz, C. E., & White, K. M. (1985). Individuation and attachment in personality development: Extending Erikson's theory. In A. J. Stewart and M. Brinton Lykes (Eds.), Gender and personality. Current perspectives pp theory and research. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Gagnon, J., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct. Aldine Press. Geertz, C. (1983). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In R. M. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research. Boston: Little Brown. 223 Gibbs, J. C., Arnold, K. D., & Burkhart, J. E. (1984). Sex differ- ences in the expression of moral judgment. Child Deve10pment, 3;, 1040-1043. Gilligan, C. (1977). In a different voice: Women's conceptions of self and morality. Harvard Educational Review, 41. Gilligan, C. (1982). 12 3 different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Gilligan, C., Langdale, S., Lyons, N., Murphy, J. M. (1982). The contribution of women's thought to developmental theory: The elimination of sex bias in moral develOpment research and education. Unpublished report submitted to National Institute of Education. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery pf grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine. Gochros, H. L. (1982). Social work and the sexual Oppression of youth. Journal pf Social Work and Human Sexuality, 1(1-2), 37-49. Groth, A. N. (1977). The adolescent sexual offender and his prey. International Journal pf Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 31, 249-254. Groth, A. N., & Loredo, C. M. (1981). The juvenile sexual offender: Guidelines for assessment. International Journal pf Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 33, 31-39. Haan, N. (1985). With regard to Walker (1984) on sex differences in moral reasoning. Mimeographed unpublished report, University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Human Development. 224 Hathaway, 8. R., & Monachesi, E. D. (1963). Adolescent personality and behavior. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Harding, S. (1987). Introduction. Is there a feminist method? In S. Harding (Ed.), Feminism and methodology. Social Science Issues. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Hartman, D. P. (1977). Considerations in the choice of interobserver reliability estimates. Journal pf Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 103-116. Hodgson, J. W. (1977). Sex differences in processes of identity and intimacy development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University. Hollingshead, A. B., & Redlich, F. C. (1958). Social class and mental illness.. New York: John Wiley & Sons. HOpkins, J. R. (1977). Sexual behavior in adolescence. Journal pf Social Issues, 33(2), 67-85. Ickes, W., & Barnes, R. D. (1978). Boys and girls together--and alienated. On enacting stereotyped sex roles in mixed-sex dyads. Journal pf Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 669-683. Jacobson, E. (1964). The self and the object world. New York: International Universities Press. Jessor, R., Costa, F., Jessor, L., & Donovan, J. E. (1983). Time of first intercourse: A prospective study. Journal pf Personality and Social Psychology, 44(3), 608-626. 225 Jessor, S. L., & Jessor, R. (1975). Transition from virginity to nonvirginity amount youth: A social-psychological study over time. Development Psychology, 11(4), 473-484. Johnston, K. (1985). Two moral orientations--Two problem solving strategies: Adolescent's solutions to dilemmas in fables. Ed.D. dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Education. Jorgensen, S. R. (1983). Beyond adolescent pregnancy research frontiers for early adolescent sexuality. Journal pf Epgly Adolescence, 3(1-2), 141-155. Juhasz, A. M., and Sonnenshein-Schneider, M. (1980). Adolescent sexual decision making: Components and skills. Adolescence, 13, 743-750. Juhasz, A. M., and Sonnenshein-Schneider, M. (1987). Adolescent sexuality: Values, morality and decision making. Adolescence, 33, 579-590. Kallen, D. J., Moore, D., and Stephenson, J. J. (1980). Coital experience and definition of masculinity and femininity by college students. Psychological Reports, 41, 1307-1313. Kallen, D. J., and Stephenson, J. J. (1982). Talking about sex revisited. Journal p1 Youth and Adolescence, 1(1), 11-23. Kaplan, L. J. (1984). Adolescence. The farewell pp childhood. New York: Simon and Schuster. Katchadourian, H. A. (1979). The terminology of sex and gender. In H. A. Katchadourian (Ed.), Human sexuality. A comparative and developmental perspective. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 226 Katz, J. (1983). A theory of qualitative methodology: The system of analytic fieldwork. In R. M. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research. Boston: Little Brown. Kaufman, A. S. (1976). A four test short form of the WISC-R. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1, 180-196. Kerber, L. K., Greeno, C. G., Maccoby, E. E., Luria, 2., Stack, C. B., and Gilligan, C. (1986). 1p 3 different voice: An interdisciplinary forum. Signs: Journal pf Women 1p Culture and Society, 11, 304-333. Kirkendall, L. (1976). Characteristics of sexual decision-making. Journal p1 Sex Research, 3, 201-211. Klein, R. (1983). Gender identity and sex-role stereotyping: Clinical issues in human sexuality. In C. C. Nadelson & D. C. Marcotte (Eds), Treatment interventions 1p human sexuality. New York: Plenum. Knowles, R. T. (1986). Human development and human possibility: Erikson 1p the light p1 Heidiger. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive develOpmental approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook pf Socialization. New York: Rand McNally. Kohlberg, L (1958). The development of modes of thinking and choices in years 10 to 16. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago. 227 Kohlberg, L., and Kramer, R. (1969). Continuities and discontinuities in childhood and adult moral development. Human Development, 13, 93-120. Lafond, M., Thomas, P., & Stark, W. D. (Cited in Longo, 1982). Group therapy with adolescent sexual offenders 12 A state juvenile correctional institute. Unpublished manuscript. Langdale, S. (1983). Moral orientation and moral development. The analysis of care and justice reasoning across different dilemmas in females and males from childhood through adolescence. Ed.D. dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Education. Leonard, E. B. (1982). Women, crime, and society. A critique f theoretical criminology. New York: Longman. Levinson, D. (1978). The seasons p1 A man's life. New York: Ballantine Books. Lewis, R. (1973). Parents and peers: Socialization agents in the coital behavior of young adults. The Journal pf Sex Research, 3(2), 156-170. Lieberman, F. (1973). Sex and adolescent girl: Liberation or exploitation? Clinical Social Work Journal, 1, 224-243. Lifton, P. D. (1985). Individual differences in moral development: The relation of sex, gender, and personality to morality. In A. J. Stewart and M. B. Lykes (Eds.), Gender and personality. Current perspectives pp theory and research. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Lofland, J. (1976). Doing social life: The qualitative study p1 human interaction 12_natural settingp. New York: Wiley. 228 Longo, R. E. (1982). Sexual learning and experience among adolescent sexual offenders. International Journal p1 Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 34(3), 235-241. Lykes, M. B. (1985). Gender and individualistic vs. collectivist notions about the self. In A. J. Stewart and M. B. Lykes (Eds.), Gender and personality. Current perspectives pp theory and research. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Lyons, N. (1982). Conceptions p1 self and morality and modes p1 moral choice: Identifying justice and care 1p judgment p1 actual moral dilemmas. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge. Lyons, N. (1983). Two perspectives: On self, relationships, and morality. Harvard Educational Review, 33, 125-145. Lyons, N., & Gilligan, C. (1984). Training workshOp. Real life moral conflict methodology. Cambridge, MA. Mahler, M. S., Pine, F., & Bergman, A. (1975). The ppychological birth pf the human infant: Symbiosis and individuation. New York: Basic Books. Malyon, A. K. (1981). The homosexual adolescent: Deve10pmental issues and social bias. Child Welfare, pg, 321-330. Mannarino, A. P., & Marsh, M. E. (1978). The relationship between sex role identification and juvenile delinquency in adolescent girls. Adolescence, 13, 643-652. 229 Marcia, James E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook p1 adolescent psychology. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Marmor, J. (1969). Sex for nonsexual reasons. Medical ASpects p1 Human Sexuality, 3(6), 8-21. Maskay, M. H. and Juhasz, A. M. (1983). The decision-making process model: Design and use for adolescent sexual decisions. Family Relations, 33, 111-116. Melton, G. B. (1983). Toward "personhood" for adolescents. Autonomy and privacy as values in public policy. American Psychologist, gg, 99-103. Miller, J. B. (1976). Toward 3 p33 psychology p1 ypppp. Boston: Beacon Press. Miller-Tiedeman, A. (1979). Creating the "I" power potential of decision making during secondary school education. Character Potential: A Record p1 Research, 3(2), 83-91. Mitchell, J. J. (1972) Some psychological dimensions of adolescent sexuality. Adolescence, 1(28), 447-458. Nadelson, C. C. (1983). Adolescent sexuality and pregnancy. In C. C. Nadelson & D. C. Marcotte (Ed.), Treatment interventions 1p human sexuality. New York: Plenum. Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., Bent, D. H., (1970). Statistical Packagp for the Social Sciences. New York: McGraw Hill. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill. 230 Offer, D. (1969). The psychological world p1 ppp teenager: A study p1 113 ppyp. New York: Basic Books. Oresky, D. & Ewing, E. (1978). Review and annotated bibliography of literature in male involvement in family planning. Arlington, VA: National Institute for Community Development, Inc. Pearson, J. A., Reinhart, M. A., Donelson, E., Strommen, E:, Barnes, C. (1986). The Relationship Self Identity Questionnaire. Unpublished study. Piaget, J. (1965). The moral judgment p1 the child. New York: Free Press. Rainwater, L. (1969). Sex in the culture of poverty. In C. B. Broderick & J. Bernard (Eds.), The individual, sexy and society. Baltimore: Johns HOpkins University Press. Rest, J. (1979). Deve10pment 13 judging moral issues. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rosenthal, R., and Rosnow, R. (1975). The volunteer subject. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Rubin, L. B. (1983). Intimate strangers. Men and women together. New York: Harper and Row. Schatzman, L. & Strauss, A. L. (1973). Field research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Seiden, A. M. (1975). Sex roles, sexuality, and the adolescent peer group. Adolescent Psychiatpy, 4, 211-225. Simkins, L. (1980). Teenage pregnancy and adolescent sexuality: A partially annotated bibliography. Catalog p1 selected docu- ments 13 psychology, 19, 38-39. 231 Simon, W., & Gagnon, J., Carns, D. E., Elias, J. E., & Walshok, M. L. (1968). Youth cultures and aspects of the socialization process. Unpublished marginals book, Indiana University, Institute for Sex Research and University of Illinois, Institute for Juvenile Research. (cited in Seiden, 1975). Sullivan, T., & Schneider, M. (1987). Deve10pment and identity issues in adolescent homosexuality. Child and Adolescent Social Work, 4(1), 13-24. Walker, L. J. (1984). Sex differences in the develOpment of moral reasoning. A critical review. Child Development, 33, 677-691. Walker, L. J. (1986). Sex differences in the development of moral reasoning: A rejoinder to Baumrind. Child Development, 31, 522- 526. Walker, L. J., de Vries, B., and Trevethan, S. D. (1987). Moral stages and moral orientations in real-life and hypothetical dilemmas. Child Development, 33, 842-858. Wolman, B. B. (Ed.) (1973). Dictionary p1 behavioral science. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Vadies, E., & Hale, D. (1977). Attitudes of adolescent males toward abortion, contraception, and sexuality. Social Work 1p Health Care, 3(2), 169-174. Vaillant, G. (1977). Adaptation pp life. Boston: Little Brown. 232 Zelnik, M., & Kantner, J. (1980). Sexual activity, contraceptive use, and pregnancy among metropolitan area teenagers, 1971-1979. Family Planning Perspectives, 13, 230-237. nxcumnn STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES 1|11111111111111111111111111111111"11111111111111 31293006047728