Sexual Satisfaction Among Newlywed Conservative Christians: the Role of Sexual Anxiety, Sexual Assertiveness, Sexual Communication, and Religious Coping

Home , Sexual guilt

Sexual Satisfaction among Newlywed Conservative Christians: The Role of Sexual Anxiety, Sexual Assertiveness, Sexual Communication, and Religious Coping

Jessica M. Johnston-York, M.A.

A Dissertation

Counseling Psychology

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Approved

Sheila Garos, Ph.D. Chair of Committee

Susan S. Hendrick, Ph.D.

Steven Richards, Ph.D.

Jessica L. Alquist, Ph.D.

Clyde Hendrick, Ph.D.

Mark Sheridan, Ph.D. Dean of the Graduate School

August, 2019

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Acknowledgments

As one of my idols in the field of psychology, Carl Rogers, stated, “the only person who is educated is the one who has learned how to learn and change.” The path to earning my Ph.D. in Counseling Psychology has certainly taught me that there is no finish line in the pursuit of learning. I am indebted to several individuals who have helped foster my personal and professional growth over the last five years. In particular, I am very grateful to have received much guidance from the members of my dissertation committee: Dr. Sheila Garos, Dr. Susan

Hendrick, Dr. Steven Richards, and Dr. Jessica Alquist. I would also like to extend a special thanks to Dr. Clyde Hendrick for his willingness to join my dissertation committee on short notice. I truly appreciate Dr. Garos for always supporting me and my research in human sexuality. I owe much thanks to the entire staff at the TTU Student Counseling Center for my development as a therapist. I would also like to thank John Schumacher and Emily Branscome who both assisted me in interpreting the data for my dissertation. I really appreciate the support of my labmates, Jackie Caston, Emily Branscome, Maggie Piper, and Matt Sharkey, and our lab’s research assistant, Samantha Villareal. Additionally, thank you to my Counseling

Psychology cohort: Jackie Caston, Alexis Arevalo, Stephanie Van Horn, Cecilia Bess, Tyler

Bradstreet, and Nina MacLean. Pursuing a Ph.D. is a long, challenging process, but I felt very welcomed and supported since my interview at Texas Tech University thanks to these individuals. I would be remiss not to thank my family; Mom, Dad, Jen, Mike, and Joe: I would not have had the courage and confidence to choose this route if not for you all. To my pets,

Clementine and Eva, I appreciate your cuddles as I worked on this document. And finally, to my husband Tyler, I am truly lucky to have your never-ending love and support. Thanks for taking the risk in moving to Lubbock, for marrying me, and for making our lives an adventure.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ...... ii Abstract ...... v List of Tables ...... vi List of Figures ...... vii 1. Introduction ...... 1 Sexual Satisfaction ...... 1 Religiosity and Religious Fundamentalism ...... 4 Sexual Assertiveness ...... 5 Sexual Guilt and Sexual Anxiety ...... 6 Religious Coping ...... 9 Sexual Communication ...... 10 Purpose and Significance of the Study ...... 11 Limitation in Past Research ...... 12 Research Questions and Hypotheses ...... 12 2. Method ...... 15 Power Analysis ...... 15 Participants ...... 15 Design ...... 15 Procedure ...... 16 Measures ...... 17 3. Results ...... 21 Descriptive Information about Measured Variables ...... 21 Missing Data and Data Cleaning Procedures...... 22 Conditional Process Modeling ...... 22 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) ...... 25 Hierarchical Multiple Regression ...... 26 4. Discussion...... 28 Limitations ...... 36 Future Directions ...... 37 Implications...... 39 5. References ...... 40

iii

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

6. Appendices ...... 53 A: Extended Literature Review ...... 53 B: Tables ...... 83 C: Figures ...... 85 D: Demographic Measure ...... 91 E: Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS) ...... 93 F: The Revised 12-Item Religious Fundamentalism Scale (RF Scale)...... 95 G: The Sexual Assertiveness Subscale of the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire ...... 97 H: The Sexual Anxiety Subscale of the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire ...... 98 I: The Brief Religious Coping Measure (Brief RCOPE) ...... 99 J: Sexual Self-Disclosure Questionnaire (SSDQ) ...... 100

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Abstract Conservative Christians are often underprepared for the initiation of a sexual relationship in marriage due to receiving negative messages about sex and sexuality (Brotherson, 2004; Ellison,

2011) as well as limited or no sexual experience prior to marriage (Beck et al., 1991; Davidson et al., 2004). In addition, religious orthodoxy and rigidity is related to more impaired sexual functioning among married couples (Purcell, 1984). Given that conservative Christians prohibit divorce (Francoeur, 2001), these individuals may continue to suffer in their relationship unless they rely on coping mechanisms, social support, or psychotherapy. There has historically been a lack of focus on marital sexual experiences in the literature (Christopher & Sprecher, 2000), despite the prevalence of sexual dysfunctions among married couples (Laumann et al., 1994).

Past research examining religiosity and sexual satisfaction has yielded inconsistent results, likely due to the variable definitions used for religiosity (Davidson et al., 1995; Davidson et al., 2004;

Laumann et al., 1994; Purcell, 1984; Simpson & Ramberg, 1992). The present study examined factors that impact sexual satisfaction among a total of 111 adult newlywed Christian men and women recruited through MTurk. It was determined that sexual anxiety and sexual assertiveness did not significantly mediate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, and sexual communication did not moderate this relationship. Religious coping moderated this relationship such that individuals who reported higher levels of religious fundamentalism with greater religious coping experienced greater sexual satisfaction. Contrary to expectations, gender did not have an effect on religious fundamentalism, sexual anxiety, or sexual assertiveness. Finally, negative religious coping more strongly predicted sexual satisfaction than positive religious coping. Theoretical and therapeutic implications of these results are considered, and recommendations for future studies were made with regard to the unanticipated positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

List of Tables

1. Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations ...... 83

2. Summary of steps for hierarchical regression analysis for predicting sexual satisfaction from positive religious coping and negative religious coping (N= 111) ...... 84

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

List of Figures

1. Mediation of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by sexual anxiety ...... 85

2. Mediation of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by sexual assertiveness ...... 86

3. Moderation of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by sexual communication ...... 87

4. Moderation of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by religious coping ...... 88

5. Simple slopes for the moderation of the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by religious coping ...... 89

6. Simple slopes for the moderation of the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by positive religious coping ...... 90

vii

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Chapter One

Introduction

Sexual satisfaction is defined as the overall sense of satisfaction with regard to the quality of a sexual relationship (Hudson, Harrison, & Crosscup, 1981). There is a large body of research supporting the positive association between sexual satisfaction and relationship satisfaction

(Christopher & Sprecher, 2000; del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes, Santos-Iglesias, & Sierra, 2014;

Lawrance & Byers, 1995; McNulty, Wenner, & Fisher, 2014). Greater sexual satisfaction is also associated with several benefits of health and well-being, including reduced sexual guilt and sexual anxiety, higher sexual assertiveness, greater sexual knowledge, and greater ability to communicate one’s sexual needs and fantasies to one’s partner (del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al.,

2014; Snell, Fisher, & Walters, 1993). Sexual satisfaction is also positively related to sexual functioning, including more frequent experiences of orgasm, greater desire and arousal, and greater sexual frequency and variety of sexual behaviors (del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014;

Klapilová, Brody, Krejčová, Husárová, & Binter, 2015; Yabiku & Gager, 2009). Low sexual satisfaction can be detrimental to marital satisfaction and stability (Ashdown, Hackathorn, &

Clark, 2011), and there are several negative experiences that can reduce sexual satisfaction, particularly among married conservative Christians (del Mar Sanchez Fuentes et al., 2014;

Masters & Johnson, 1970; Purcell, 1984). Conservative Christians are defined as someone who

“professes Christ as savior,” “has a personal relationship with Christ,” and “has made a subsequent life commitment to live for Christ,” while being “actively engaged in a conservative

Christian lifestyle” (Gil, 1990, p. 630).

One theory used to conceptualize sexual satisfaction within close relationships is the interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction (IEMSS; Lawrance & Byers, 1995).

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

According to IEMSS, one’s experience of sexual satisfaction is impacted by four domains in a sexual relationship: 1) the balance between sexual rewards and costs, 2) the comparison between the expected and perceived sexual rewards and costs, 3) the perceived equality between sexual rewards and costs among partners, and 4) the perceived quality of all other non-sexual aspects of the close relationship (Byers & MacNeil, 2006; Lawrance & Byers, 1995). This model suggests that sexual satisfaction is greater when individuals perceive the rewards of a sexual relationship to be greater than the costs (Lawrance & Byers, 1995). Some of the possible sexual costs in a sexual relationship include anxiety, embarrassment, and pain (Byers & MacNeil, 2006). Of particular interest in the present study was the experience of sexual anxiety, an experience that negatively impacts one’s overall sexual satisfaction. Furthermore, sexual satisfaction has been found to be higher when other qualities of the dyadic relationship are improved including increased sexual communication to better understand the sexual rewards and costs of being involved with one’s sexual partner (MacNeil & Byers, 2009).

In addition, sexual behaviors and sexual communication can be best interpreted through the lens of sexual script theory. According to Gagnon and Simon (1973), sexual script theory explores the internal and interpersonal experience of creating meaning in one’s sexual experiences. This may involve developing a “script” for approved sexual behaviors, negotiating roles in sexual encounters, and understanding the influence of culture on sexuality (Simon &

Gagnon, 1984). The present study intended to specifically examine changes in sexual scripts for married conservative Christian individuals. Many conservative Christians have lived their lives before marriage with a script for enacting sexual behavior. Specifically, these scripts may outline that sexual behavior should be avoided or endured with discomfort knowing that one is sinning

(Bassett et al., 2002). This script must be rewritten after marriage and takes intentional effort to

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 change. Individuals may have “cognitive” sexual scripts (see MacNeil & Byers, 2009) indicating that they are accepting of sexuality within the context of marriage, although conservative

Christians may continue to experience guilt when enacting this script. MacNeil and Byers (2009) predicted that such a conflict between one’s cognitive and performative sexual scripts would negatively impact sexual satisfaction, although this has not been examined among religious individuals. The purpose of the present study was to determine how this conflict may impact married conservative Christians as well as to better understand factors that influence sexual adjustment in this population.

Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, and Michaels (1994) found that married couples were more likely to report being sexually satisfied compared to cohabiting couples or dating couples.

However, studies have also shown that sexual and marital satisfaction tends to decline as relationship duration increases (Christopher & Sprecher, 2000). It is possible that relatively higher rates of relationship satisfaction obscure the experience of sexual satisfaction in these studies, particularly because the IEMSS theory of sexual satisfaction states that non-sexual aspects of the relationship tend to influence overall sexual satisfaction (Lawrance & Byers,

1995). In addition, past research on sexual satisfaction has often relied on measures that focus exclusively on achievement of orgasm or other physiological experiences (e.g., Rosen et al.,

1997; Rosen et al., 2000) as opposed to subjective experiences. The present study used a more inclusive measure of satisfaction within the context of a sexual relationship, which may be more helpful in understanding the complexity of sexual satisfaction among married individuals.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 other studies have reported a negative relationship between high or conservative religiosity and sexual functioning and satisfaction (Laumann et al., 1994; Purcell, 1984; Simpson & Ramberg,

1992). Furthermore, religiosity appears to be related to reduced sexual behavior, particularly premarital sexual behavior, among Protestants and Catholics (Davidson et al., 2004). There is a need to examine if there is a similar effect of religiosity on sexual satisfaction among more conservative Christian identifying individuals, particularly given the inconsistency of past research regarding the sexual experiences of this population.

Religiosity and Religious Fundamentalism

Past research often has relied on church attendance (e.g., Ashdown et al., 2011; Davidson et al., 2004) or religious affiliation (e.g., Adamczyk & Hayes, 2012) as a measurement of religiosity and spirituality, which may not completely encompass this concept. This variability or incompleteness in measuring religiosity could have contributed to the conflicting results in past research on the relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction (see Davidson et al.,

1995; del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014; Hackathorn et al., 2016). More accurate definitions of conservative religiosity, such as religious fundamentalism, have been developed to target the specific nature of one’s spiritual and religious beliefs rather than simply one’s religious behaviors.

Religious fundamentalism is a more conservative measure of religiosity that refers to the belief that one’s religious principles and teachings provide a universal truth that should be followed exactly (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992). Religious fundamentalism among Christians can be composed of several elements, including a resistance to modernity, a belief in the second coming of Jesus Christ, and a belief that the Bible was written without error (Hood, Hill, &

Williamson, 2005). Additionally, religions with fundamentalist beliefs often include rules and

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 restrictions regarding sexual behavior (Emerson & Hartman, 2006). Religious fundamentalism has been linked with conservative sexual attitudes (Ahrold & Meston, 2010; Bassett et al, 1999) and sexual negativism or erotophobia, particularly regarding premarital sexual behavior (Bassett et al., 1999). Although religious fundamentalism is negatively correlated with sexual desire in women (Woo et al., 2012), the impact of fundamentalist beliefs on satisfaction within a sexual relationship in men and women has not been explored. Given that sexual desire and sexual satisfaction are both components of healthy sexual functioning (Rosen et al., 1997; Rosen et al.,

2000), it is likely that religious fundamentalism could also negatively impact sexual satisfaction.

Sexual Assertiveness

Sexual assertiveness, or one’s ability to get one’s sexual needs met (Hurlbert, 1991), is considered one component of sexual self-efficacy or confidence in sexual situations (Rosenthal,

Moore, & Flynn, 1991). According to social learning theory, individuals feel more confident about their ability to perform a behavior that they have had previous knowledge of or exposure to before enacting (Bandura, 1992). Given that young adults (Weinstein, Walsh, & Ward, 2008) and religious individuals (Valenti, 2009) have less accurate sexual health knowledge as well as fewer sexual experiences (Beck, Cole, & Hammond, 1991; Davidson et al., 2004), this population may have difficulty asserting their needs in sexual scenarios. Additionally, exposure to negative messages about sexuality within one’s religious community (Brotherson, 2004;

Ellison, 2011; Valenti, 2009) could negatively impact one’s confidence in sexual encounters

(Masters & Johnson, 1970).

Sexual assertiveness has a number of personal and relationship benefits, including greater sexual arousal and desire (Santos-Iglesias, Sierra, & Vallejo-Medina, 2013) and greater relationship satisfaction and sexual communication (Greene & Faulkner, 2005). Sexual

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 assertiveness, particularly among women, also appears to be related to experiences of sexual satisfaction (del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014; Haavio-Mannila & Kontula, 1997; Hurlbert,

Apt, & Rabehl, 1993; Ménard & Offman, 2009). Rather than simply discussing one’s sexual needs, a sexually assertive individual takes action to ensure that their needs are understood and respected by a sexual partner (Ménard & Offman, 2009).

In addition, religiosity is negatively correlated with sexual assertiveness in women

(Curtin, Ward, Merriwether, & Caruthers, 2011). Past studies have shown a small but significant effect of gender on sexual assertiveness, with men typically being more sexually assertive than women (Ménard & Offman, 2009). In a study of 71 Canadian adults, there was also a small effect size of sexual assertiveness (d= -.13) and sexual satisfaction (d= .16), indicating that though men experienced greater sexual assertiveness, women experienced greater sexual satisfaction in this sample (Ménard & Offman, 2009). This effect of gender may be greater among conservative Christians, as fundamentalist values promote a more submissive role for women (Kaylor, 2010). Further, women tend to identify more religiously than men (Hvidtjørn,

Hjelmborg, Skytthe, Christensen, & Hvidt, 2014), and women’s premarital sexual behavior is influenced to a greater degree by fundamentalist beliefs as compared to men’s (Farmer, Trapnell,

& Meston, 2009).

Sexual Guilt and Sexual Anxiety

Many religions including Christianity emphasize negative sexual beliefs that foster guilt and anxiety related to sexual matters (Ellison, 2011). Sexual guilt, or the expectancy of self- punishment due to violating sexual standards, can also negatively impact one’s sexual experiences and is related to greater religiosity (Cowden & Bradshaw, 2007; Gunderson &

McCary, 1979; Murray, Ciarrocchi & Murray-Swank, 2007). In a sample of married evangelical

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Christian couples, sexual guilt was negatively related to sexual satisfaction and sexual desire

(Derflinger, 1997). Furthermore, sex guilt mediated the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual desire among a sample of Canadian women (Woo et al., 2012).

Religiosity and feeling alienated from God has been found to be related to increased sexual guilt and shame (Murray et al., 2007). In addition, more frequent church attendance predicted increased sexual guilt (Gunderson & McCary, 1979). Furthermore, intrinsic religiosity was negatively correlated with sexual guilt in a sample of fundamentalist Protestants (Cowden &

Bradshaw, 2007). Sexual guilt related to premarital sex is a common experience for religious young adults (Beale, Maynard, & Bigler, 2016). Moreover, a study including a sample of southern Baptists found that the majority of participants reported regretting engaging in premarital sex (Rosenbaum & Weathersbee, 2013). Conservative Christians also tended to experience sexual guilt when engaging in sexual fantasies (Gil, 1990).

Sexual anxiety, defined as discomfort with one’s sexual experiences, is also related to reduced sexual satisfaction (Brassard, Dupuy, Bergeron, & Shaver, 2015) and reduced emotional and physical sexual satisfaction (Davis et al., 2006). In addition, sexual anxiety is related to reduced sexual behavior in men and women (Burger & Inderbitzen, 1985). Among a sample of married conservative religious individuals, sexual anxiety was also positively correlated with religious rigidity (Purcell, 1984). Sexual anxiety can further impair sexual satisfaction and functioning if individuals experiencing sexual guilt or anxiety are reluctant to communicate with their sexual partners about their experience (Babin, 2013).

Past research often examines sexual guilt and sexual anxiety as interchangeable constructs, both of which are predictive of reduced sexual satisfaction, fewer sexual experiences, and more sexual dysfunctions (Janda & O’Grady, 1980; Snell et al., 1993). In fact, sexual

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 anxiety, fear, and guilt were categorized similarly in a meta-analysis on gender differences in sexual attitudes and experiences (Oliver & Hyde, 1993). Although sexual guilt and sexual anxiety are correlated (Janda & O’Grady, 1980), measures for sexual guilt typically focus on sexual attitudes (e.g., “sex relations before marriage are wrong and immoral”; Mosher, 1988), but scale items for sexual anxiety focus more on sexual behaviors (e.g., rating the degree to which one experiences anxiety “when you have intercourse with a loved one”; Hoon &

Chambless, 1998). Given that the focus of the present study was on sexual experiences within marriage rather than sexual attitudes, a measure of sexual anxiety was used.

Cognitive dissonance theory can be used to demonstrate how individuals cope with sexual guilt, discomfort, or anxiety. Humans are psychologically motivated to reduce dissonance, or discomfort, which is experienced when one’s actions are not aligned with one’s thoughts or beliefs (Festinger, 1957). For example, a religious individual whose spiritual and moral beliefs prohibit premarital sex may experience discomfort or guilt if they were to engage in premarital sexual behaviors (Gunderson & McCary, 1979). To reduce their experience of dissonance, such an individual is likely to either change one’s thoughts, change one’s behaviors, or form a new perspective that justifies one’s behavior (Festinger, 1957). However, Festinger (1957) argues that such decisions are rarely so simplistic and that it is common for individuals to experience dissonance related to a wide variety of behaviors. Thus, a religious individual may continue to utilize a “cognitive” sexual script and experience sexual anxiety even after they have gotten married and sexual behavior is now considered permissible. Individuals feeling conflicted between their religious beliefs and sexual behaviors may respond by changing their beliefs

(Vasilenko & Lefkowitz, 2014) or limiting their sexual activity (Ribner & Rosenbaum, 2005;

Rosenbaum, 2009). Finally, religious individuals could develop coping mechanisms, such as

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 communicating with their partner about their sexual experiences (Starks, Cottle, Boden, Hill, &

Howell, 2010), viewing their sexuality in a marital relationship as sanctified by God (Mahoney

& Hernandez, 2009; Murray-Swank et al., 2005), or seeking support in their religious community through religious coping.

Religious Coping

Religious coping is often used by religious individuals to cope with stress and health- related concerns (Pargament, Smith, Koenig, & Perez, 1998). Religious coping mechanisms can have both positive and negative effects on an individual (Pargament, Feuille, & Burdzy, 2011).

For example, asking forgiveness for one’s sins is considered a positive religious coping mechanism, whereas wondering whether one has been abandoned by God is a negative religious coping mechanism (Pargament et al., 2011). The use of positive religious coping mechanisms is related to more positive religious changes (Pargament et al., 1998) as well as more positive psychological adjustment to stressors (Ano & Vasconcelles, 2005). Negative religious coping, on the other hand, is related to poorer health outcomes (Pargament, Koenig, & Perez, 2000).

These studies indicate that positive religious coping in comparison to negative religious coping may be considered a healthy coping mechanism for religious individuals experiencing psychological stress. This effect may be even stronger in women, as women tend to identify as more religious and use religious coping to a greater degree than men (Hvidtjørn, Hjelmborg,

Skytthe, Christensen, & Hvidt, 2014). Although religious coping is related to marital adjustment

(Pollard, Riggs, & Hook, 2014), research is limited in examining the utility of religious coping in sexual situations. For example, positive religious coping was demonstrated to effectively help individuals cope with experiences of sexual assault (Ahrens, Abeling, Ahmad, & Hinman, 2010).

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

However, religious coping has not been examined in relation to concerns with sexual satisfaction.

Symbolic interactionism, or the theory that behavior is shaped by one’s symbolic worldview, has been used to better understand the role of meaning making in helping married couples cope with distress (Schramm, Marshall, Harris, & Lee, 2005). Religious fundamentalism is also shaped by symbolic meaning (Hood et al., 2005), and fundamentalist individuals may adjust better to problems experienced early in marriage if they are able to use their religious beliefs to make meaning of and cope with their experiences. Coyle and Erdberg (1969) recommend using the Bible when working with fundamentalist psychotherapy clients who experience anxiety regarding sexual concerns, stating that this can help encourage sexual enjoyment. Religious coping could be one method of making meaning out of sexual problems in marriage.

Sexual Communication

Sexual communication may be another method of facilitating sexual adjustment

(MacNeil & Byers, 1997). Sexual communication can be defined as discussion between sexual partners about preferences in sexual behaviors (Byers, 2011) and includes both verbal and nonverbal forms of communication (Babin, 2013). Such communication can occur before, during, or after engaging in a sexual act and involves topics such as providing sexual consent, discussing contraceptive use, reporting sexual likes, and dislikes and discussing sexual pleasure

(Babin, 2013; Byers, 2011). Past research has demonstrated the positive relationship between sexual communication and sexual satisfaction (Byers, 2011; del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al.,

2014; Starks et al., 2010). Sexual communication apprehension, or feeling discomfort or anxiety about communicating with a sexual partner about one’s sexual preferences, has been found to be

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 negatively correlated with both verbal and nonverbal sexual communication and sexual satisfaction (Babin, 2013). Further, Byers’ (2011) review of research in sexual satisfaction noted the importance of sexual communication, specifically that couples who disclosed their sexual preferences to their partners enjoyed greater sexual satisfaction and fewer sexual problems.

Religious individuals who have been discouraged from discussing sexuality may feel underprepared for marital sexuality and struggle to discuss their sexual needs and concerns with their spouse (Shalev, Baum, & Itzhaki, 2013; Starks et al., 2010). Sexual embarrassment is negatively correlated with sexual self-disclosure, whereas sexual awareness and sexual courage were both positively correlated with sexual self-disclosure (Çelik & Arici, 2014). Although women experience more sexual embarrassment, there are no significant gender differences in sexual self-disclosure (Çelik & Arici, 2014). Further, inhibited sexual communication mediated the relationship between sexual anxiety and physical sexual satisfaction in a sample of unmarried

American adults (Davis et al., 2006). It is possible that sexual communication could be a helpful coping mechanism for both men and women experiencing sexual concerns.

Purpose and Significance of the Study

Conservative Christian individuals may experience greater difficulties with sexual adjustment due to lack of sexual knowledge, limited premarital sexual experience, and exposure to messages promoting sexual negativity (Ellison, 2011; Rosenbaum & Weathersbee, 2013;

Weinstein et al., 2008). Although marriage is often viewed as a sanctified and appropriate context for sexuality, many married individuals may struggle with this transition. Given that many religious individuals experience sexual dysfunctions and reduced sexual satisfaction

(Laumann et al., 1994) and that divorce is prohibited or discouraged in this population

(Francoeur, 2001), it is important to examine factors that facilitate coping and adjustment for

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 conservative Christians. Past research has yielded mixed results regarding the connection between religiosity and sexual satisfaction (Davidson et al., 1995; Davidson et al., 2004; del Mar

Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014; Laumann et al., 1994; Purcell, 1984). Thus, the present study addressed this concern by examining one specific component of religiosity, religious fundamentalism, as it relates to sexual adjustment in recently married conservative Christian individuals.

Limitations in Past Research

The present study intended to address several limitations in the literature on sexual satisfaction among religious individuals. Rather than using a convenience sample of college students as is common among studies examining religiosity and sexual satisfaction (e.g.,

Davidson et al., 2004), participants were recruited using a representative sample online in order to focus on experiences within a marital relationship. In addition, the terms “newlywed” and

“recently married” are fairly ambiguous, and there is a wide variation in past research regarding how these terms are defined (Hall & Adam, 2011; Hamblin & Blood, 1956; Moen, Bradford,

Lee, Harris, & Stewart, 2015; Orathinkal & Vansteenwegen, 2006; Schramm et al., 2005). The present study defined “newlywed” as those married for less than one year, as this is the most inclusive and specific use of the term (Hall & Adam, 2011).

Research Questions and Hypotheses

The present study aimed to address the following research questions:

1. How does religious fundamentalism impact sexual anxiety, sexual assertiveness, and

sexual satisfaction among conservative Christian married adults?

2. What do religious individuals do post-wedding to facilitate sexual adjustment in

marriage?

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

These research questions were tested using the following hypotheses:

1. The negative relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction

will be mediated by sexual anxiety, such that greater religious fundamentalism will

predict greater sexual anxiety, which in turn will predict lower sexual satisfaction.

2. The negative relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction

will be mediated by sexual assertiveness, such that greater religious fundamentalism

will predict lower sexual assertiveness, which in turn will predict lower sexual

satisfaction.

3. Sexual communication will moderate the negative relationship between religious

fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, such that individuals high in religious

fundamentalism who engage in more sexual communication with their partner will

experience greater sexual satisfaction compared to those who engage in less sexual

communication.

4. Religious coping will moderate the negative relationship between religious

fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, such that individuals high in religious

fundamentalism who engage in more religious coping will experience greater sexual

satisfaction compared to those who engage in less religious coping.

5. Gender will have a significant effect on these relationships such that women will

experience greater religious fundamentalism and sexual anxiety and less sexual

assertiveness in comparison to men.

6. Positive religious coping will more strongly predict sexual satisfaction than negative

religious coping, such that individuals who engage in more positive religious coping

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 will experience greater sexual satisfaction than those who engage in more negative religious coping.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Chapter Two

Method

Power Analysis

Using an a priori power analysis in the G*Power program (Faul, Erdfelder, Buchner, &

Lang, 2009), it was determined that a minimum sample size of 100 participants was required for a regression-based model with three predictor variables to achieve a small effect size (f2= .10) with sufficient power (0.80) and significance level (α= .05). A small effect size was expected, given that a small to medium effect size was found in previous studies on sexual satisfaction in married couples (Birnie-Porter & Hunt, 2015), on women’s experience of sexual guilt, sexual assertiveness, and sexual satisfaction (Brassard et al., 2015), and on the relationship between sexual guilt and religious fundamentalism in Euro-Canadian women (Woo et al., 2012).

Participants

A total of 267 adult newlywed Christian men and women were recruited via Amazon

Mechanical Turk (MTurk), with 111 participants included in the final analyses. Inclusionary criteria included being sexually active, defined as engaging in sexual behavior with a partner that may or may not include penile-vaginal intercourse, a minimum age of 18, being married less than one year (as suggested in Hall & Adams, 2011), and having a Christian religious affiliation

(e.g., Protestant, Roman Catholic, Mormon/LDS, Evangelical). Participants who completed the study on MTurk were compensated with $0.25.

Design

This study utilized an online correlation design, a type of quantitative descriptive field design. This design was best suited to understand the strength and direction of the relationships between religious fundamentalism, sexual anxiety, sexual assertiveness, religious coping, sexual

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 communication, and sexual satisfaction. A correlation design is also appropriate for analyses that determined the proportion of variance that religious fundamentalism, sexual anxiety, and sexual assertiveness contributed to sexual satisfaction, and moderation involving religious coping and sexual communication could be tested using this design. The quantitative descriptive field design tends to be higher in external validity in comparison to other research designs (Heppner,

Kivlighan, & Wampold, 2008).

Procedure

Approval from the university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) was obtained prior to data collection. Participants were recruited via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk). MTurk allows registered users to complete simple, brief tasks using a computer in exchange for minimal compensation. This service is often used by social scientists seeking to recruit a more diverse sample of participants (Paolacci, Chandler, & Ipeirotis, 2010), and there is evidence of good reliability among data collected via MTurk (Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011).

Additionally, there is evidence to support the use of online data collection for sexual health outcomes in a religious sample (Francis & Meyerson, 2017). All recruitment materials instructed potential participants to complete an online survey using Qualtrics.

After consenting to be involved in the study, participants were directed to a series of demographic questions including age, gender, race/ethnicity, religious affiliation, and sexual orientation. Participants who were not sexually active were excluded from the analyses. To control for potential confounds, participants answered questions regarding their current living arrangements (e.g., alone, with spouse/sexual partner), their child status (e.g., no child[ren], child[ren] with previous sexual partner, child[ren] with current sexual partner), if they engaged in premarital sex (e.g., with current partner, with previous partner), and their relationship status

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

(e.g., married-first marriage, remarried). The survey then led participants to a series of measures designed to assess religious fundamentalism, sexual anxiety, sexual assertiveness, religious coping, sexual communication, and sexual satisfaction. Participants completed the religious fundamentalism scale first, and measures relating to sexuality were placed at the end of the survey in order to promote completion. After completing the survey, participants were debriefed with more information regarding the purpose of the survey and provided with relevant community resources.

Measures

Demographic measure. In addition to general demographic information, the demographic questionnaire included additional variables in order to control for potential confounds, such as premarital sexual experience. Although the measures in this study relied on self-report data, past studies have demonstrated the reliability of self-report measures for studying sexual behaviors (Durant & Carey, 2002; Sieving et al., 2005).

Sexual Satisfaction. The Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS; Hudson et al., 1981) is a 25- item measure of dissatisfaction within a sexual relationship. Sample items include “sex is fun for my partner and me” and “I feel that our sex is dirty and disgusting (reverse-scored).” Items are rated on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1= rarely or none of the time to 7= most or all of the time (Hudson et al., 1981). Typically, high scores indicate the presence of sexual problem; however, to increase ease of interpretability, items were scored such that higher scores were indicative of greater sexual satisfaction (Mark, Herbenick, Fortenberry, Sanders, & Reece,

2014). The ISS has demonstrated evidence for validity with the Global Measure of Sexual

Satisfaction (GMSEX; Lawrance & Byers, 1995) and the Index of Marital Satisfaction (Hudson

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 et al., 1981), as well as adequate internal consistency reliability among a sample of adults with and without interpersonal problems (α= 0.92; Hudson, 1998).

Religious Fundamentalism. The Revised 12-Item Religious Fundamentalism Scale (RF

Scale; Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 2004) measures the degree to which one holds a set of religious beliefs that are considered a basic, inherent truth and is based on the original 20-item Religious

Fundamentalism Scale (RF Scale; Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992). Sample items include “no single book of religious teachings contains all the intrinsic, fundamental truths about life

(reverse-scored)” and “to lead the best, most meaningful life, one must belong to the one, fundamentally true religion” (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 2004). Items are rated on a Likert scale ranging from -4 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree), with higher scores indicating greater religious fundamentalism (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 2004). Mennonites and other fundamentalist Christian religions (e.g., Baptists, Evangelicals, Pentecostals) tended to score higher on the RF Scale in comparison to Jewish individuals and those with no religious affiliation (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992). The RF Scale displayed high internal consistency reliability among a sample of undergraduate students (α= 0.91) and their parents (α= 0.92)

(Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 2004). In addition, the RF Scale was moderately correlated with right-wing authoritarianism (r= 0.72-0.79) and church attendance (r= 0.62-0.64) (Altemeyer &

Hunsberger, 2004).

Sexual Assertiveness. The Sexual Assertiveness subscale of the Multidimensional

Sexuality Questionnaire (MSQ; Snell et al., 1993) was used to measure one component of sexual self-efficacy: sexual assertiveness, or the tendency to assert one’s needs or desires within a sexual relationship (Snell et al., 1993). The Sexual Assertiveness subscale of the MSQ is a 5- item measure rated on a Likert-type scale ranging from 0= not at all characteristic of me to 4=

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 very characteristic of me, with higher scores indicating greater sexual assertiveness. Sample items include “I am very assertive about the sexual aspects of my life” and “I am not very direct about voicing my sexual preferences (reverse-scored)” (Snell et al., 1993). There is evidence for good internal consistency reliability among undergraduate men and women (α= 0.77) (Snell et al., 1993). The Sexual Assertiveness subscale of the MSQ also demonstrated evidence of good convergent validity with the Sexual Awareness Questionnaire (Snell, Fisher, & Miller, 1991) and the Snell and Papini (1989) Sexuality Scale (Snell et al., 1993).

Sexual Anxiety. Sexual anxiety was assessed using the Sexual Anxiety subscale of the

Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire (MSQ; Snell et al., 1993), which includes 5 items used to measure tension, anxiety, or discomfort within a sexual relationship (Snell et al., 1993).

Items are rated on a Likert-type scale ranging from 0= not at all characteristic of me to 4= very characteristic of me, with higher scores indicating greater sexual anxiety (Snell et al., 1993).

Sample items include “I feel anxious when I think about the sexual aspects of my life” and “I usually worry about the sexual aspects of my life” (Snell et al., 1993). There is evidence for good internal reliability in a sample of college students (α= 0.83) and convergent validity with two measures of sexuality (Snell et al., 1993).

Religious Coping. The Brief Religious Coping Measure (Brief RCOPE; Pargament et al.,

2011) includes 14 items from the original RCOPE measure, which contains 21 subscales and 105 items (Pargament et al., 2000). Items are scored on a Likert-type scale to determine the degree to which individuals engaged in a form of coping ranging from 0= not at all to 3= a great deal, with higher scores indicating greater frequency of engaging in religious coping for a negative life event (Pargament et al., 2000). The Brief RCOPE contains 2 subscales: positive religious coping

(e.g., “sought God’s love and care”) and negative religious coping (e.g., “wondered whether my

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 church had abandoned me”) (Pargament et al., 2011). The Brief RCOPE displayed evidence of adequate internal consistency reliability in a variety of samples, including Catholic middle school students and adults living in the northeastern United States (Pargament et al., 2011).

Median Cronbach’s alpha (α) for the positive subscale of the Brief RCOPE was 0.92, and median alpha for the negative subscale was 0.81 (Pargament et al., 2011). In addition, both subscales of the Brief RCOPE demonstrated good validity with measures of spiritual well-being and mental health (Pargament et al., 2011).

Sexual Communication. Sexual communication was measured using the Sexual Self-

Disclosure Questionnaire (Byers & Demmons, 1999), a 12-item questionnaire used to measure the degree to which individuals have disclosed their sexual likes and dislikes with their sexual partner. Sample items include “how much have you told your partner about the way(s) you like being kissed?” and “how much have you told your partner about the way(s) you don’t like receiving oral sex?” (Byers & Demmons, 1999). Items are scored on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1= nothing at all to 7= everything, with higher scores indicating greater sexual self- disclosure (Byers & Demmons, 1999). There is evidence of good internal consistency reliability for the Sexual Self-Disclosure Questionnaire among a sample of Canadian men (α= 0.94) and women (α= 0.92; MacNeil & Byers, 2009). The Sexual Self-Disclosure Questionnaire is also correlated with a measure of sexual communication satisfaction (Byers & Demmons, 1999).

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Chapter Three

Results

Descriptive Information about Measured Variables

Data were collected from 111 newlywed adults through MTurk, after removing participants that did not meet the inclusionary criteria for the study (N= 157). Age of participants ranged from 18 to 69 (M= 31.1, SD= 8.35). Regarding race, participants identified as

Caucasian/White (68.5%), African American/Black (12.6%), Asian (12.6%), and

Hispanic/Latino(a) (6.3%). In terms of religious affiliation, Protestant Christians were the most represented group (52.3%), followed closely by Roman Catholics (27.0%), and Evangelical

Christians (17.1%).

Participants reported that they had been married between 0 and 12 months. The majority of participants identified as heterosexual (99.1%). Approximately one-third of participants had engaged in premarital sexual intercourse with previous sexual partners not including their partner

(29.7%), and 28.8% had never engaged in premarital sex. Approximately 21% engaged in premarital sex with their current partner only, and 19.8% engaged in premarital sex with both their previous partner(s) and their current partner. Most participants lived with their spouse only

(66.7%); 18.0% reported living with their spouse and children, and 10.8% lived with their spouse and other family members. Additionally, the majority of participants reported that they did not have children (62.2%). A total of 17.1% of participants reported having at least one child from a previous relationship; 16.2% reported that they have at least one child with their current sexual partner, and 4.5% reported that they have children with both their current as well as previous partners. Finally, 98.2% of the participants reported currently engaging in vaginal intercourse.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s alphas were calculated for measures used in the study and are presented in Table 1. Each of the measures demonstrated adequate reliability values that were comparable to those reported in the literature. It was determined that there were no violations of the assumptions of regression (i.e., normality, linearity, and homoscedasticity,

Hayes (2013)) by examining scatterplots, histograms, and P-P plots.

Missing Data and Data Cleaning Procedures

Missing data were handled using available item analysis (AIA), according to the recommendations of Parent (2013). Cases were removed if more than 10% of data were missing for a given measure. A single case was excluded from the analysis for surpassing this cutoff.

Cases were also excluded from the analyses for not meeting inclusionary criteria or due to insufficient completion of measures (N= 156).

Conditional Process Modeling

Conditional Process Modeling was used to assess mediation, using the PROCESS macro developed by Hayes (2013). Additionally, bootstrap sampling distribution with 95% confidence interval and a sample of 5000 was used in this analysis. This method has been shown to more accurately test mediation than the traditional Baron and Kenny (1986) method (Hayes, 2013).

Model 4, the simple mediation model, was used to determine if religious fundamentalism scores predicted sexual anxiety and if sexual anxiety predicted reported sexual satisfaction (see Figure

1). The first hypothesis was not supported. Sexual anxiety did not significantly mediate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, B= 0.08, SE = 0.05, p =

0.14. Additionally, religious fundamentalism scores did not significantly predict sexual anxiety,

B= -0.11, SE = 0.07, p = 0.14; however, sexual anxiety did predict sexual satisfaction, B = -0.71,

SE = 0.08, p < 0.01. The direct effect of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction (c’) was

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 significant (B = 0.21, SE = 0.06, p < 0.01), as was the total effect of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction (c) (B = 0.29, SE = 0.08, p < 0.01). Contrary to expectations, the results demonstrated a positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction.

However, the indirect effect from religious fundamentalism to sexual satisfaction by way of sexual anxiety was not statistically different from zero (B = 0.08, 95% Bootstrapped SE = 0.06,

95% CI (-0.02, 0.19)) (see Figure 3).

Hypothesis 2 stated that the negative relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction would be mediated by sexual assertiveness. Contrary to expectations this hypothesis was not supported. Specifically, Hayes (2013) PROCESS Model 4 for simple mediation was used to assess this relationship (see Figure 2). Religious fundamentalism did not significantly predict sexual assertiveness, B= -0.01, SE = 0.06, p = 0.91. In addition, sexual assertiveness did not significantly predict sexual satisfaction, B= 0.22, SE = 0.13, p = 0.10.

Furthermore, the direct effect (B= 0.29, SE = 0.13, p < 0.01) and total effect (B= 0.29, SE = 0.08, p < 0.01) of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction were both significant. However, the indirect mediational effect of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction through sexual assertiveness was not significant, B = -0.00, 95% Bootstrapped SE = 0.02, 95% CI (-0.05, 0.04).

Moderation was also assessed using Conditional Process Modeling. Contrary to expectations for Hypothesis 3, sexual communication did not act as a moderator for the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction in this sample (see Figure

3). The simple effect of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction was not significant, B=

0.40, t(107)= 1.69, p= 0.09. However, the simple effect of sexual communication on sexual satisfaction was significant, B= 0.30, t(107)= 3.47, p < 0.01. The interaction between religious

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 fundamentalism and sexual communication did not significantly predict sexual satisfaction, B= -

0.02, t(107)= -0.51, p= 0.61.

Finally, Hayes (2013) PROCESS Model 1 for simple moderation was used to assess

Hypothesis 4, which stated that the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction would be moderated by religious coping. The simple effect of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction was not significant, B= -0.08, t(107)= -0.40, p= 0.69.

However, the simple effect of religious coping was significant, B= -0.45, t(107)= -2.63, p = 0.01, as was the interaction between religious fundamentalism and religious coping B= 0.28, t(107)=

2.09, p = 0.04, demonstrating support for Hypothesis 4 (see Figure 4). Specifically, the conditional effect of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction was significant at the mean level of religious coping (B= 0.33, SE = 0.08, p < 0.01) and one standard deviation above the mean level of religious coping (B= 0.52, SE = 0.12, p < 0.01). However, the effect of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction was not significant at one standard deviation below the mean level of religious coping, B= 0.14, SE= 0.12, p= 0.24. This is unsurprising given that individuals who are higher in religious fundamentalism would be expected to engage in more religious coping behaviors as compared to those reported less religiosity. The simple slopes for this analysis are displayed in Figure 5. For low religious coping, there was not a significant relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction. For average levels of religious coping, every one-unit increase in religious fundamentalism was related to 0.33-unit increase in sexual satisfaction. Finally, for high religious coping, every one-unit increase in religious fundamentalism was related to 0.52-unit increase in sexual satisfaction. For average and high levels of religious coping, there was a positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

To better understand the relative role of positive religious coping and negative religious coping as a moderator in the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, separate mean values for the positive religious coping subscale and negative religious coping subscale were calculated. Although the simple effects of religious fundamentalism (B= -0.19, t(107)= -0.19, p= 0.39) and positive religious coping (B= -0.04, t(107)= -0.04, p= 0.82) on sexual satisfaction were not significant, the interaction between religious fundamentalism and positive religious coping significantly predicted sexual satisfaction, B= 0.22, t(107)= 2.36, p = 0.02. Further, this relationship was significant at the mean level of positive religious coping (B= 0.24, SE = 0.09, p = 0.01) and one standard deviation above the mean level of positive religious coping (B= 0.43, SE = 0.11, p < 0.01) but not at one standard deviation below the mean (B= 0.06, SE= 0.13, p= 0.67). The analysis of simple slopes is demonstrated in Figure 6. In contrast, when negative religious coping was examined as a moderator, the simple effect of religious fundamentalism on sexual satisfaction was not significant (B= 0.16, t(107)= 1.54, p= 0.13); however, the simple effect of negative religious coping on sexual satisfaction was statistically significant, B= -0.54, t(107)= -0.54, p < 0.01. The interaction of religious fundamentalism and negative religious coping did not significantly predict sexual satisfaction, t(107)= 0.07, p = 0.44.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

To assess the effect of gender on sexual anxiety, sexual assertiveness, and religious fundamentalism, a series of one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) were computed. Using this method to compare several group means avoids the higher risk of familywise error prevalent when using multiple t-tests (Field, 2009). Contrary to the predictions of Hypothesis 5 which stated that gender would have an effect on the predictor variables, gender did not have a

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 significant effect on religious fundamentalism (F(2, 108)= 2.01, p = 0.14), sexual anxiety (F(2,

108)= 1.31, p = 0.27), or sexual assertiveness (F(2, 108)= 1.96, p = 0.15). However, after assessing the role of gender further using additional one-way ANOVA analyses, there was evidence to suggest that gender had a significant effect on sexual satisfaction (F(2, 108)= 4.59, p

= 0.03). Specifically, Bonferroni pairwise comparisons were used to measure the mean difference between groups, determining that the mean value of sexual satisfaction was higher among women (M= 5.47) in comparison to men (M= 4.93).

Hierarchical Multiple Regression

Hierarchical multiple regression was used to test Hypothesis 6, which stated that positive religious coping would more strongly predict sexual satisfaction compared to negative religious coping. The regression model included demographic variables with causal priority and confounding variables in step 1, including age, race/ethnicity, gender, religious affiliation, length of time sexually active, political ideology, child status, current living arrangements, length of marriage, and engagement in pre-marital sex. Positive religious coping and negative religious coping were entered separately in step 2 (see Table 2). The length of time participants had engaged in sexual intercourse in months was the only variable entered in step 1 that significantly predicted sexual satisfaction, B = 0.01, SE = 0.00, p = 0.03. Hypothesis 6 was partially supported. The regression model demonstrated that both positive religious coping (B = 0.51, SE

= 0.19, p = 0.01) and negative religious coping (B = -0.71, SE = 0.19, p < 0.01) significantly predicted sexual satisfaction. Contrary to expectations, negative religious coping (B = -0.71) more strongly predicted sexual satisfaction than positive religious coping (B = 0.51). The direction of these relationships was as anticipated, with positive religious coping positively

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 predicting sexual satisfaction, and negative religious coping negatively predicting sexual satisfaction.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Chapter Four

Discussion

The results of this study demonstrated partial support for the six research hypotheses.

Several factors that were expected to impact the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction among newlywed conservative Christian individuals were examined, including sexual anxiety, sexual assertiveness, sexual communication, and religious coping. Of these factors, only religious coping was found to have a significant impact on this relationship.

Hypotheses 1 was not supported. Sexual anxiety did not significantly mediate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction. Contrary to expectations, religious fundamentalism positively predicted sexual satisfaction. In addition, a negative relationship between sexual anxiety and sexual satisfaction was found, and there was no support for a relationship existing between sexual anxiety and religious fundamentalism. It is possible that sexual anxiety did not significantly mediate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction because the perceived sexual costs were not greater than the expected sexual costs, or the perceived sexual rewards could have negated any perceived sexual costs. According to the Interpersonal Exchange Model of Sexual Satisfaction (IEMSS), the experience of sexual satisfaction depends on perceived sexual rewards outweighing sexual costs (Lawrance & Byers, 1995). Further, it is possible that the sanctification of sexuality in marriage (see Hernandez et al., 2011; Mahoney & Hernandez, 2009) could alleviate the experience of sexual guilt that is typically associated with premarital sex among religious individuals (Hackathorn et al., 2016; Mosher & Cross, 1971). Perhaps religious fundamentalism was not related to sexual anxiety among this sample of newlyweds conservative Christians due to the justification of sexual experiences as acceptable within the context of marriage.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Regarding Hypothesis 2, sexual assertiveness did not significantly mediate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction. Additionally, no significant relationship was found between sexual assertiveness and sexual satisfaction or religious fundamentalism. This finding is contrary to expectations given past evidence that supports the positive relationship between sexual assertiveness and sexual satisfaction (Ménard

& Offman, 2009; Santos-Iglesias et al., 2013). More research is needed to better understand the relationship between sexual assertiveness and religiosity.

In addition, it was anticipated that sexual communication would moderate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by reducing conflict between one’s cognitive and performative sexual scripts, allowing individuals to communicate with their partner about their sexual likes and dislikes to illuminate the sexual costs (e.g., sexual pain or anxiety) and rewards (e.g., sexual pleasure) within the relationship (MacNeil & Byers,

2009). Although sexual communication independently predicted sexual satisfaction, Hypothesis

3 was not supported. Sexual communication did not significantly moderate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction and was unrelated to religious fundamentalism. Thus, sexual communication may be an effective method of improving sexual satisfaction, but religious fundamentalism does not appear to differentially predict sexual satisfaction at varying levels of sexual communication. While a previous study demonstrated that there is not a relationship between religiosity and level of general comfort among parents discussing sexual topics with their adolescent children (Farringdon, Holgate, McIntyre, &

Bulsara, 2014), more research is needed to understand the degree of comfort between highly religious married partners when discussing sexual issues.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

There was support for Hypothesis 4, demonstrating that religious coping significantly moderated the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction.

Specifically, religious fundamentalism significantly predicted sexual satisfaction at the average level of religious coping as well as one standard deviation above the mean level of religious coping. In other words, individuals reporting higher levels of religious fundamentalism as well as average and higher levels of religious coping experienced greater sexual satisfaction than individuals with higher religious fundamentalism who reported lower levels of religious coping.

Research has demonstrated that sexual satisfaction is higher when other non-sexual aspects of the relationship are improved (Byers & MacNeil, 2006; Lawrance & Byers, 1995). It appears that religious coping helps facilitate sexual satisfaction among conservative Christian married individuals, and it is possible that engaging in religious coping together as a couple could act as a mechanism of bonding and connection which is related to higher sexual satisfaction. Past research has demonstrated evidence that religious fundamentalism is associated with religious coping strategies that help buffer the effects of stress (Phillips & Ano, 2015), and it looks as if these coping mechanisms are also related to sexual satisfaction.

To better understand the relative role of positive religious coping and negative religious coping on the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, separate subscale scores were calculated, and a simple moderation analysis was performed. The analysis demonstrated that the interaction between religious fundamentalism and positive religious coping was significant, but the interaction between religious fundamentalism and negative religious coping was not significant. Specifically, positive religious coping moderated the relationship such that individuals who were higher in religious fundamentalism and utilized more positive religious coping strategies experienced greater sexual satisfaction as compared to individuals

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 who reported greater religious fundamentalism and less positive religious coping. However, the conditional effect of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction was not significant at varying levels of negative religious coping.

Contrary to expectations for Hypothesis 5, gender did not have a significant effect on sexual anxiety, sexual assertiveness, or religious fundamentalism. Past studies have reported conflicting results regarding gender differences in sexual anxiety. For example, Janda and

O’Grady (1980) found that women experienced greater sexual anxiety than men, but another study reported no such differences in sexual anxiety (Snell et al., 1993). The effect of gender on sexual anxiety should be explored further in future studies. Likewise, there has been mixed evidence for gender differences in sexual assertiveness. For example, one study reported that although men displayed higher initiation sexual assertiveness, there were no gender differences in refusal sexual assertiveness (Santos-Iglesias et al., 2013). It is possible that using a more nuanced measure of sexual assertiveness could have yielded different results. Finally, although past research has demonstrated support for women exhibiting greater religiosity than men

(Hvidtjørn et al., 2014; Sullins, 2006), one research study reported that there were no gender differences in religious fundamentalism (Helm, Berecz, & Nelson, 2001). The results of this study may reveal important differences in beliefs between men and women depending on how religiosity is defined.

After exploring the role of gender further on the remaining predictor and outcome variables using separate one-way ANOVA analyses, it was determined that gender had a significant effect on sexual satisfaction, with women reporting significantly greater sexual satisfaction than men. It was expected that gender would not have a significant effect on sexual satisfaction, as several previous studies have reported no gender differences in sexual satisfaction

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

(Fallis, Rehman, & Purdon, 2014; Hudson et al., 1981; Oliver & Hyde, 1993; Snell et al., 1993;

Young et al., 1998). The finding that women reported greater sexual satisfaction than men was particularly unanticipated given that past research on sexual satisfaction has primarily demonstrated either a nonexistent relationship (Fallis, Rehman, & Purdon, 2014; Hudson et al.,

1981; Oliver & Hyde, 1993; Snell et al., 1993; Young et al., 1998) or that men reported greater sexual satisfaction in comparison to women (Mark, Garcia, & Fisher, 2015). However, Ménard and Offman (2009) reported in their study that while men reported greater sexual assertiveness, women experienced greater sexual satisfaction.

Finally, there was partial support for Hypothesis 6. Specifically, both positive religious coping and negative religious coping significantly predicted sexual satisfaction when controlling for confounding variables, including age, race/ethnicity, gender, religious affiliation, length of time sexually active, political ideology, child status, current living arrangements, length of marriage, and engagement in pre-marital sex. However, negative religious coping appeared to have a greater and detrimental effect on sexual satisfaction in comparison to positive religious coping. Past research has demonstrated evidence that negative religious coping is more predictive of negative outcomes, and positive religious coping is more predictive of positive outcomes (Pargament et al., 1998; Pargament et al., 2000). For example, one study found that negative religious coping is more strongly associated with grief in comparison to positive religious coping, and positive religious coping appears to more strongly predict personal growth than negative religious coping (Lord, Collison, Gramling, & Weisskittle, 2015). Another study found that negative religious coping is associated with hypersexuality, although positive religious coping is not significantly related to hypersexuality (Giordano & Cecil, 2014).

Although the finding that negative religious coping more strongly predicted sexual satisfaction is

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 contrary to expectations, the idea that “bad is stronger than good” has been demonstrated over the years in research on a variety of psychological constructs (Baumeister, Bratslavsky,

Finkenauer, & Vohs, 2001, p. 323). For example, negative interactions impact marriage satisfaction more strongly than positive interactions, and receiving bad social support is more influential than receiving good social support (Baumeister et al., 2001). This effect may certainly be the case when considering the differential impact of positive and negative religious coping on sexual satisfaction among conservative Christian newlyweds.

Although past research on the relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction has more frequently reported a negative relationship (Laumann et al., 1994; Purcell, 1984; Simpson

& Ramberg, 1992) or a non-existent relationship (Davidson et al., 1995; Davidson et al., 2004), the present study demonstrated a small, positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction. Notably, it was found that the belief that the purpose of sex is for procreation significantly moderated the positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, such that individuals high in religious fundamentalism experienced greater sexual satisfaction when they more highly endorsed the statement that the purpose of sex is for procreation as compared to those high in religious fundamentalism but less endorsing of procreation being the purpose of sex. It appears that religious fundamentalism is related to greater sexual satisfaction among newlywed conservative Christians who view their sexual relationship as a sacred act that helps create their family. Given that one of the primary roles of conservative Christian women is being a mother (Kaylor, 2010), this could help provide context to the finding that women experienced greater sexual satisfaction than men in this sample, as these women may believe that their sexual relationship helps fulfill an important spiritual role.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Although greater religiosity is related to increased marital adjustment (Lopez, Riggs,

Pollard, & Hook, 2011; Schramm, Marshall, Harris, & Lee, 2012) and marital satisfaction

(Olson, Marshall, Goddard, & Schramm, 2015), it was expected that religious fundamentalism would be negatively correlated with sexual satisfaction given past research examining conservative measures of religiosity such as religious rigidity (Purcell, 1984). Given that the sample focused on newlyweds, it is unsurprising that sexual satisfaction was relatively high.

Further, research examining the relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction has typically focused on unmarried individuals (Davidson et al., 2004; del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014;) or involved samples of combined unmarried and married individuals (Davidson et al.,

1995). It is possible that religious fundamentalism uniquely relates to sexual satisfaction in comparison to other measures of religiosity, and it is likely that the positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction would differ between unmarried and married individuals.

The unanticipated positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction could also provide evidence for the experience of the sanctification of sexuality, wherein all aspects of life, including sexuality, can be imbued with sacred meaning and spiritual significance (Murray-Swank et al., 2005). Religious fundamentalists believe that there is only one true avenue for finding meaning, and personal relationships are only considered meaningful if interpreted and legitimized through a sacred text (Hood et al., 2005). Thus, it is understandable that the experience of sexual satisfaction among newlywed conservative Christians would be dependent on their religious beliefs. In past research examining the relationship between sanctification of sexuality and sexual satisfaction, the relationship between global religiousness and sexual satisfaction was non-significant but positive (Murray-Swank et al., 2005), and this

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 could possibly help contextualize the positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction found in this study.

In addition, the sacred bed phenomenon can be understood as premarital sexual behaviors that were once considered inappropriate and even sinful being relabeled after marriage as appropriate or even holy (Hackathorn et al., 2016). Hackathorn et al. (2016) also stated that this helps protect sexual satisfaction from the negative effects of sexual guilt experienced both in the past and during marriage. It is possible that those with higher in religious fundamentalist beliefs who hold “absolute values” regarding spirituality would be more adept at this relabeling process of accepting previously unacceptable behaviors once married (Hood et al., 2005, p. 41). Some religious teachings view sexual behaviors as definitively unique within the context of marriage

(Ashdown et al., 2011), and this certainly appears to be the case among more fundamentalist individuals. It appears that married religious fundamentalist individuals do not suffer from cognitive dissonance for engaging in sexual behaviors in marriage and thus may have been better prepared for sexual adjustment in marriage than anticipated. Past research on the sacred bed phenomenon has indicated that sexual guilt mediated the relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction among unmarried but not married individuals (Hackathorn et al., 2016).

Future research should examine if the positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction is mediated by sanctification of sexuality.

Finally, although this positive relationship was not anticipated, it is also possible that this outcome could have resulted from important differences in the sample used in this study, as the

Religious Fundamentalism (RF) scale was originally normed using Canadian samples

(Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992; Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 2004). Past studies on religious fundamentalism that have recruited American participants have yielded notably different mean

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 scale scores when using scale items ranging from 1 to 9. For example, Phillips and Ano (2015) reported a mean score of 4.86 among a sample of American college undergraduate students.

Another study that recruited adults from 15 different American cities reported a mean scale score of 6.04 (Young, Willer, & Keltner, 2013). When the RF Scale items in the present study were calculated on a scale ranging from 1 to 9, the mean score was 5.53, which is slightly higher than the neutral score of 5.00. It is possible that the small, positive relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction would be stronger among participants reporting higher degrees of religious fundamentalism and possibly non-significant among individuals reporting lower fundamentalist beliefs. Further, it is unclear how the sample used in the present study compares to other samples of newlyweds in regard to levels of religious fundamentalism, and future research could help illuminate how results may differ among a similar sample with greater fundamentalist beliefs.

Limitations

The results of this study should be considered in light of several limitations. First, the results of this study are based on correlational rather than causal relationships. Thus, it is unclear if religious coping causes an increase in sexual satisfaction. An experimental design would be more appropriate for determining casual relationships, and a longitudinal design could help illuminate change over time. Further, given use of cross-sectional data, it is unclear if participants’ use of religious coping existed prior to marriage or if participants developed religious coping mechanisms after they got married to adjust to sexual changes in their relationship.

Additionally, although participants recruited through MTurk are typically considered to be representative of the general population (Buhrmester et al., 2011; Dworkin, Hessel, Gliske, &

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Rudi, 2016; Goodman, Cryder, & Cheema, 2013), there is also evidence to suggest that MTurk may provide fewer participants who identify as Catholic and evangelical Christian (Lewis,

Mockabee, Djupe, & Wu, 2015). Given that evangelical Christians report greater religious fundamentalist beliefs compared to other Christian affiliations (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 2004), it is possible that the individuals in this study could have differed from the population of conservative Christians. Future studies may wish to compare reported levels of religious fundamentalism across a range of Christian affiliations through different recruitment methods to better understand how these differences could relate to varying experiences of sexual satisfaction.

Future Directions

Participants in this study appeared to be resilient to sexual adjustment in marriage, with positive religious coping being associated with greater sexual satisfaction among those with greater religious fundamentalist beliefs. In general, married individuals report experiencing greater sexual satisfaction than cohabiting or dating individuals (Mark et al., 2015), yet sexual satisfaction has been shown to deteriorate after the first year of the relationship (Schmiedeberg &

Schroder, 2016). To better understand how religious coping relates to changes in sexual satisfaction among married individuals over time, future research could extend these findings by using a longitudinal design to measure these variables at three points in time: 6 months prior to marriage, 6 months after getting married, and one year into marriage. Additionally, to better understand the role of the sanctification of sexuality in marriage, future studies could compare these results with unmarried individuals across the same time periods. This comparison would allow researchers to understand the role of religious coping in managing experiences of sexual anxiety while engaging in premarital sex among conservative Christian individuals.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Future studies could also use an experimental design involving the development of a positive religious coping intervention for couples therapy in order to examine how the use of positive religious coping affects sexual satisfaction in comparison to a control group that does not receive such an intervention. Based on the results of the present study, individuals with greater religious fundamentalist beliefs would likely benefit more from such an intervention in comparison to those with lower in fundamentalist beliefs. There is a need for culturally-sensitive interventions in sex therapy (Hall & Graham, 2014), and better understanding the factors that impact sexual satisfaction among religious fundamentalist individuals could encourage more research exploring the needs of diverse client identities within couples and sex therapy.

Given the unanticipated non-significant relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual communication, it would be beneficial to better understand the nature of sexual communication among conservative Christian individuals. It is possible that such individuals may experience greater sexual communication apprehension (Babin, 2013) or sexual embarrassment (Çelik & Arici, 2014) that could impair productive conversations about sexual likes and dislikes. Research in this area could help researchers and clinicians develop interventions for premarital counseling and couples therapy that could help this population become more comfortable communicating with their spouse about their sexual needs.

Additionally, a multitrait-multimethod matrix (Campbell & Fiske, 1959) could be used in future studies to better understand the complex constructs of religiosity and sexuality examined in this study. For example, in addition to a self-report measure, sexual communication could also be measured through direct observation in which raters observe live interactions between married couples and code for the quality of communication regarding sexual likes and dislikes. Religious coping could similarly be measured by directly observing the coping skills specifically used by

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 individuals, the extent to which couples engaging in these coping strategies together as a couple, as well as measuring the extent to which one partner’s use of religious coping corresponds to improvements in another partner’s experience of sexual satisfaction. Hendrick (1990) also encouraged replication involving variation of the procedural variables, which could also help strengthen support for the findings in this study.

Implications

Based on the results of this study, it appears that newlywed conservative Christian individuals do not appear to suffer with regard to sexual satisfaction. Moreover, greater religious coping among those with more religious fundamentalist beliefs appears to be positively related to greater sexual satisfaction. Such individuals appear to use their faith as a source of strength to help cope with sexual concerns. Given that approximately 70.3% of participants reported engaging in premarital sex, it is possible that this strategy is developed prior to marriage to help conservative Christian individuals adjust to anticipated concerns regarding changes in their sexual relationship.

Religious coping was the only coping strategy in this study related to sexual satisfaction among individuals with greater religious fundamentalist beliefs. There was not support for sexual communication, sexual anxiety, and sexual assertiveness as mechanisms that impact the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction. The results of this study demonstrate the importance of culturally-sensitive therapeutic interventions. Given that positive religious coping appears to be well-suited for managing sexual satisfaction in this population, it may be beneficial for psychotherapists working with conservative Christian individuals and couples to incorporate interventions in which religion and spirituality are perceived as a strength and source of support or coping for sexual concerns.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

References

Adamczyk, A., & Hayes, B. E. (2012). Religion and sexual behaviors: Understanding the influence of Islamic cultures and religious affiliation for explaining sex outside of marriage. American Sociological Review, 77(5), 723-746.

Ahrens, C. E., Abeling, S., Ahmad, S., & Hinman, J. (2010). Spirituality and well-being: The relationship between religious coping and recovering from sexual assault. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(7), 1242-1263.

Ahrold, T. K., & Meston, C. M. (2010). Ethnic differences in sexual attitudes of U.S. college students: Gender, acculturation, and religiosity factors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39(1), 190-202.

Allport, G. W., & Ross, J. M. (1967). Personal religious orientation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5(4), 432-443.

Altemeyer, B., & Hunsberger, B. (1992). Authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, quest, and prejudice. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 2(2), 113-133.

Altemeyer, B., & Hunsberger, B. (2004). A revised religious fundamentalism scale: The short and sweet of it. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 14(1), 47-54.

Andersen, B. L., Cyranowski, J. M., & Espindle, D. (1999). Men’s sexual self-schema. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(4), 645-661.

Ano, G. G., & Vasconcelles, E. B. (2005). Religious coping and psychological adjustment to stress: A meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61(4), 461-480.

Ashdown, B. K., Hackathorn, J., & Clark, E. M. (2011). In and out of the bedroom: Sexual satisfaction in the marital relationship. Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, 2(1), 40-57.

Babin, E. A. (2013). An examination of predictors of nonverbal and verbal communication of pleasure during sex and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 270-292.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1992). Exercise of personal agency through the self-efficacy mechanism. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.), Self-efficacy: Thought control of action (pp. 3-38). Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere.

Barnett, M. D., & Melugin, P. R. (2016). Reported sexual pleasure among heterosexual men and women: An empirical investigation. Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 62-68.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.

Bassett, R. L., Mowat, G., Ferriter, T., Perry, M., Hutchinson, E., Campbell, J., …Santiago, P. (2002). Why do Christian college students abstain from premarital sexual intercourse? Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 21(2), 121-132.

Bassett, R. L., Smith, H. L., Newell, R. J., & Richards, A. H. (1999). Thou shalt not like sex: Taking another look at religiousness and sexual attitudes. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 18(3), 205-216.

Batson, C. D. (1976). Religion as prosocial: Agent or double agent? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 15(1), 29-45.

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323-370.

Beale, K.S., Maynard, E., Bigler, M.O. (2016, November). The intersection of religion and sex: Sex guilt resiliency among Baptists, Catholics, and Latter-day Saints. Paper presented at the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality, Phoenix, AZ.

Birnie-Porter, C., & Hunt, M. (2015). Does relationship status matter for sexual satisfaction? The roles of intimacy and attachment avoidance in sexual satisfaction across five types of ongoing sexual relationships. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 24(2), 174-183.

Brassard, A. B., Dupuy, E., Bergeron, S., & Shaver, P. R. (2015). Attachment insecurities and women’s sexual function and satisfaction: The mediating roles of sexual self-esteem, sexual anxiety, and sexual assertiveness. The Journal of Sex Research, 52(1), 110-119.

Brotherson, L. M. (2004). And they were not ashamed: Strengthening marriage through sexual fulfillment. Boise, ID: Inspire Book.

Browne, K. (2005). Snowball sampling: Using social networks to research non-heterosexual women. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 47-60.

Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives of Psychological Science, 6(1), 3-5.

Burger, J. M., & Inderbitzen, H. M. (1985). Predicting contraceptive behavior among college students: The role of communication, knowledge, sexual anxiety, and self-esteem. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 14(4), 343-350.

Byers, E. S. (2005). Relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction: A longitudinal study of individuals in long-term relationships. The Journal of Sex Research, 42(2), 113-118.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Byers, E. S. (2011). Beyond the birds and the bees and was it good for you?: Thirty years of research on sexual communication. Canadian Psychology, 52(1), 20-28.

Byers, E. S., & Demmons, S. (1999). Sexual satisfaction and sexual self-disclosure within dating relationships. The Journal of Sex Research, 36(2), 180-189.

Byers, E. S., & MacNeil, S. (2006). Further validation of the interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 32, 53-69.

Call, V., Sprecher, S., & Schwartz, P. (1995). The incidence and frequency of marital sex in a national sample. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57(3), 639-652.

Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105.

Cecil, H., & Pinkerton, S. D. (1998). Reliability and validity of a self-efficacy instrument for protective sexual behaviors. Journal of American College Health, 47(3), 113-121.

Çelik, E., & Arici, N. (2014). Using a structural equation model to examine factors affecting married individuals’ sexual embarrassment. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(5), 1700-1707.

Christopher, F. S., & Sprecher, S. (2000). Sexuality in marriage, dating, and other relationships: A decade review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 999-1017.

Cowden, C. R., & Bradshaw, S. D. (2007). Religiosity and sexual concerns. International Journal of Sexual Health, 19(1), 15-23.

Coyle, F. A., & Erdberg, P. (1969). A liberalizing approach to maladaptive fundamentalist hyperreligiosity. Psychotherapy: Therapy, Research, and Practice, 6(2), 140-142.

Curtin, N., Ward, L. M., Merriwether, A., & Caruthers, A. (2011). Femininity ideology and sexual health in young women: A focus on sexual knowledge, embodiment, and agency. International Journal of Sexual Health, 23(1), 48-62.

Davidson, J. K., Darling, C. A., & Norton, L. (1995). Religiosity and the sexuality of women: Sexual behavior and sexual satisfaction revisited. The Journal of Sex Research, 32(3), 235-243.

Davidson, J. K., Moore, N. B., & Ullstrup, K. M. (2004). Religiosity and sexual responsibility: Relationships of choice. American Journal of Health Behavior, 28(4), 335-346.

Davis, D., Shaver, P. R., Widaman, K. F., Vernon, M. L., Follette, W. C., & Beitz, K. (2006). “I can’t get no satisfaction”: Insecure attachment, inhibited sexual communication, and sexual dissatisfaction. Personal Relationships, 13, 465-483.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes, M., Santos-Iglesias, P., & Sierra, J. C. (2014). A systematic review of sexual satisfaction. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 14, 67-75.

Derflinger, J. R. (1997). Sex guilt among evangelical Christians in the 1990s: An examination of gender differences and salient correlates of sex guilt among married couples. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58, 5111.

Durant, L. E., & Carey, M. P. (2002). Reliability of retrospective self-reports of sexual and non- sexual health behaviors among women. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 28(4), 331- 338.

Dworkin, J., Hessel, H., Gliske, K., Rudi, J. H. (2016). A comparison of three online recruitment strategies for engaging parents. Family Relations, 65, 550-561.

Ellison, D. M. (2011). Religious negativism and fantasy guilt. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 19(1), 101-107.

Emerson, M. O., & Hartman, D. (2006). The rise of religious fundamentalism. Annual Review of Sociology, 32, 127-144.

Fallis, E. E., Rehman, U. S., & Purdon, C. (2014). Perceptions of partner sexual satisfaction in heterosexual committed relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 541-550.

Farmer, M. A., Trapnell, P. D., & Meston, C. M. (2009). The relation between sexual behavior and religiosity subtypes: A test of the secularization hypothesis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 852-865.

Farringdon, F., Holgate, C., McIntyre, F., & Bulsara, M. (2014). A level of discomfort! Exploring the relationship between maternal sexual health knowledge, religiosity, and comfort discussing sexual health issues with adolescents. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 11, 95-103.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G∗Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160.

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using SPSS (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Francis, H., & Meyerson, B. (2017). If you build it, they will come: Feasibility of sexual health research among individuals married within the Latter Day Saint faith. Sexuality and Culture, 21(1), 49-61.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Francoeur, R. T. (2001). Challenging collective religious/social beliefs about sex, marriage, and family. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 26(4), 281-290.

Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.

Gil, V. E. (1990). Sexual fantasy experiences and guilt among conservative Christians: An exploratory study. The Journal of Sex Research, 27(4), 629-638.

Giordano, A. L., & Cecil, A. L. (2014). Religious coping, spirituality, and hypersexual behavior among college students. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 21, 225-239.

Goodman, J. K., Cryder, C. E., & Cheema, A. (2013). Data collection in a flat world: The strengths and weaknesses of Mechanical Turk samples. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 213-224.

Greene, K., & Faulkner, S. L. (2005). Gender, belief in the sexual double standard, and sexual talk in heterosexual dating relationships. Sex Roles, 53(3/4), 239-251.

Gunderson, M. P., & McCary, J. L. (1979). Sexual guilt and religion. The Family Coordinator, 28(3), 353-357.

Haavio-Mannila, E., & Kontula, O. (1997). Correlates of increased sexual satisfaction. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 26(4), 399-419.

Hackathorn, J. M., Ashdown, B. K., & Rife, S. C. (2016). The sacred bed: Sex guilt mediates religiosity and satisfaction for unmarried people. Sexuality and Culture, 20, 153-172.

Hall, K. S. K., & Graham, C. A. (2014). Culturally sensitive sex therapy: The need for shared meanings in the treatment of sexual problems. In Y. M. Binik & K. S. K. Hall (Eds.), Principles and practices of sex therapy (5th ed.) (pp. 334-358). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Hall, S. S., & Adams, R. (2011). Newlyweds’ unexpected adjustments to marriage. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 39(4), 375-387.

Hamblin, R. L., & Blood, R. O. (1956). Pre-marital experience and the wife’s sexual adjustment. Social Problems, 4(2), 122-130.

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Helm, H. W., Berecz, J. M., & Nelson, E. A. (2001). Religious fundamentalism and gender differences. Pastoral Psychology, 50(1), 25-37.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Hendrick, C. (1990). Replications, strict replications, and conceptual replications: Are they important? Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5(4), 41-49.

Heppner, P. P., & Kivlighan, D. M., Wampold, B. E. (2008). Research design in counseling. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.

Hernandez, K. M., Mahoney, A., & Pargament, K. I. (2011). Sanctification of sexuality: Implications for newlyweds’ marital and sexual quality. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(5), 775-780.

Higgins, J. A., Mullinax, M., Trussell, J., Davidson, J. K., & Moore, N. B., (2011). Sexual satisfaction and sexual health among university students in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 101(9), 1643-1654.

Higgins, J. A., Trussell, J., Moore, N. B., & Davidson, J. K. (2010). Young adult sexual health: Current and prior sexual behaviors among non-Hispanic White U.S. college students. Sex Health, 7(1), 1-18.

Hood, R. W., Hill, P. C., & Williamson, W. P. (2005). The psychology of religious fundamentalism. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Hoon, E. F., & Chambless, D. (1998). Sexual Arousability Inventory (SAI) and Sexual Arousability Inventory-Expanded (SAI-E). In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman. G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.)., Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 71-74). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Horne, S., & Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J. (2006). The Female Sexual Subjectivity Inventory: Development and validation of a multidimensional inventory for late adolescents and emerging adults. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 125-138.

Hudson, W. W. (1998). Index of Sexual Satisfaction. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman. G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.)., Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 512-513). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hudson, W. W., Harrison, D. F., & Crosscup, P. C. (1981). A short form scale to measure sexual discord in dyadic relationships. The Journal of Sex Research, 17(2), 157-174.

Hurlbert, D. F. (1991). The role of assertiveness in female sexuality: A comparative study between sexually assertive and sexually nonassertive women. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 17(3), 183-190.

Hurlbert, D. F., Apt, C., & Rabehl, S. M. (1993). Key variables to understanding female sexual satisfaction: An examination of women in nondistressed marriages. Journal of Sex &Marital Therapy, 19(2), 154-165.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Hvidtjørn, D., Hjelmborg, J., Skytthe, A., Christensen, K., & Hvidt, N. C. (2014). Religiousness and religious coping in a secular society: The gender perspective. Journal of Religious Health, 53, 1329-1341.

Janda, L. H., & O’Grady, K. E. (1980). Development of a sex anxiety inventory. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48(2), 169-175.

Jones, S. L., & Hostler, H. R. (2002). Sexual script theory: An integrative exploration of the possibilities and limits of sexual self-definition. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 30(2), 120-130.

Kaplan, H. S. (1974). The new sex therapy. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Kaylor, B. T. (2010). Gracious submission: The Southern Baptist Convention’s press portrayals of women. Journal of Gender Studies, 19(4), 335-348.

Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W., & Martin, C. E., (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders Company.

Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., & Gebhard, P. H. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Klapilová, K., Brody, S., Krejčová, L., Husárová, B., & Binter, J. (2015). Sexual satisfaction, sexual compatibility, and relationship adjustment in couples: The role of sexual behaviors, orgasm, and men’s discernment of women’s intercourse orgasm. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 12, 667-675.

Knafo, D., & Jaffe, Y. (1984). Sexual fantasizing in males and females. Journal of Research in Personality, 18(4), 451-462.

Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Lawrance, K., & Byers, E. S. (1995). Sexual satisfaction in long-term heterosexual relationships: The interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 2, 267- 285.

Lewis, A. R., Mockabee, S. T., Djupe, P. A., & Wu, J. S. (2015). The (non) religion of Mechanical Turk workers. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, 54(2), 419-428.

Libman, E., Rothenberg, I., Fichten, C. S., & Amsel, R. (1985). The SSES-E: A measure of sexual self-efficacy in erectile functioning. The Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 11(4), 233-247.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Lopez, J. L., Riggs, S. A., Pollard, S. E., & Hook, J. N. (2011). Religious commitment, adult attachment, and marital adjustment in newly married couples. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(2), 301-309.

Lord, B. D., Collison, E. A., Gramling, S. E., & Weisskittle, R. (2015). Development of a short- form of the RCOPE for use with bereaved college students. Journal of Religious Health, 54, 1302-1218.

MacNeil, S., & Byers, E. S. (1997). The relationships between sexual problems, communication, and sexual satisfaction. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 6(4), 277-283.

MacNeil, S., & Byers, E. S. (2009). Role of sexual self-disclosure in the sexual satisfaction of long-term heterosexual couples. The Journal of Sex Research, 46(1), 3-14.

Mahoney, A., & Hernandez, K. M. (2009, April). Sex through a sacred lens: The longitudinal effects of the sanctification of marital sexuality. Paper presented at the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies, New York, NY.

Mark, K. P., Garcia, J. R., & Fisher, H. E. (2015). Perceived emotional and sexual satisfaction across sexual relationship contexts: Gender and sexual orientation differences and similarities. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 24(2), 120-130.

Mark, K. P., Herbenick, D., Fortenberry, J. D., Sanders, S. & Reece, M. (2014). A psychometric comparison of three scales and a single-item measure to assess sexual satisfaction. The Journal of Sex Research, 51(2), 159-169.

Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1970). Human sexual inadequacy. Toronto; New York: Bantam Books.

McNulty, J. K., Wenner, C. A., & Fisher, T. D. (2014). Longitudinal associations among relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and frequency of sex in early marriage. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(1), 85-97.

Ménard, A. D., & Offman, A. (2009). The interrelationships between sexual self-esteem, sexual assertiveness, and sexual satisfaction. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 18(1- 2), 35-45.

Meston, C., & Trapnell, P. (2005). Development and validation of a five-factor sexual satisfaction and distress scale for women: The Sexual Satisfaction Scale for Women (SSS-W). Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2, 66-81.

Moen, D., Bradford, K., Lee, T. R., Harris, V. W., & Stewart, J. W. (2015). After the honeymoon: The evolution of problem issues in Utah LDS marriages. Marriage and Family Review, 51(5), 396-417.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Morokoff, P. J., & Heiman, J. R. (1980). Effects of erotic stimuli on sexually functional and dysfunctional women: Multiple measures before and after sex therapy. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 18(2), 127-137.

Mosher, D. L. (1965). Interaction of fear and guilt in inhibiting unacceptable behavior. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 29(2), 161-167.

Mosher, D. L. (1966). The development and multitrait-multimethod matrix analysis of three measures of three aspects of guilt. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 30, 35-39.

Mosher, D. L. (1988). Revised Mosher Guilt Inventory. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, S. L. Davis (Eds.), Sexuality-related measures: A compendium (pp. 152-155). Ann Arbor, MI: Department of Health & Safety Education.

Mosher, D. L., & Cross, H. J. (1971). Sex guilt and premarital sexual experiences of college students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36(1), 27-32.

Murray, K. M., Ciarrocchi, J. W., & Murray-Swank, N. A. (2007). Spirituality, religiosity, shame, and guilt as predictors of sexual attitudes and experiences. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 35(3), 222-234.

Murray-Swank, N. A., Pargament, K. I., & Mahoney, A. (2005). At the crossroads of sexuality and spirituality: The sanctification of sex by college students. The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 15(3), 199-219.

Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114(1), 29-51.

Olson, J. R., Marshall, J. P., Goddard, H. W., & Schramm, D. G. (2015). Shared religious beliefs, prayer, and forgiveness as predictors of marital satisfaction. Family Relations, 64, 519-533.

Orathinkal, J., & Vansteenwegen, A. (2006). Religiosity and marital satisfaction. Contemporary Family Therapy, 28, 497-504.

Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(5), 411-419.

Parent, M.C. (2013). Handling item-level missing data: Simpler is just as good. The Counseling Psychologist, 41(4), 568-600.

Parenteau, S. C. (2015). Religious coping and substance use: The moderating role of sex. Journal of Religion and Health, 56(2), 380-387.

Pargament, K., Feuille, M., & Burdzy, D. (2011). The Brief RCOPE: Current psychometric status of a short measure of religious coping. Religions, 2, 51-76.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Pargament, K. I., Koenig, H. G., & Perez, L. M. (2000). The many methods of religious coping: Development and initial validation of the RCOPE. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56(4), 519-543.

Pargament, K. I., Smith, B. W., Koenig, H. G., & Perez, L. (1998). Patterns of positive and negative religious coping with major life stressors. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, 37(4), 710-724.

Phillips, R. E., & Ano, G. G. (2015). A re-examination of religious fundamentalism: Positive implications for coping. Mental Health, Religion, and Culture, 18(4), 299-311.

Pollard, S. E., Riggs, S. A., & Hook, J. N. (2014). Mutual influences in adult romantic attachment, religious coping, and marital adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(5), 615-624.

Purcell, S. L. (1984). An empirical study of the relationship between religious orthodoxy (defined as religious rigidity and religious closed-mindedness) and marital sexual functioning. Dissertation Abstracts International, 1695.

Purnine, D. M., & Carey, M. P. (1997). Interpersonal communication and sexual adjustment: The role of understanding and agreement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(6), 1017-1025.

Rassin, E., & Koster, E. (2003). The correlation between thought-action fusion and religiosity in a normal sample. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41, 361-368.

Reissing, E. D., Laliberté, G. M., & Davis, H. J. (2005). Young women’s sexual adjustment: The role of sexual self-schema, sexual self-efficacy, sexual aversion, and body attitudes. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 14(3-4), 77-85.

Renauld, C. A., & Byers, E. S. (2001). Positive and negative sexual cognitions: Subjective experience and relationships to sexual adjustment. The Journal of Sex Research, 38(3), 252-262.

Ribner, D. S., & Rosenbaum, T. Y. (2005). Evaluation and treatment of unconsummated marriages among orthodox Jewish couples. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 31, 341- 353.

Rosen, R. C., Riley, A., Wagner, G., Osterloh, I. H., Kirkpatrick, J., & Mishra, A. (1997). The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): A multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction. Urology, 49(6), 822-830.

Rosen, R., Brown, C., Heiman, J., Leiblum, S., Meston, C., Shabsigh, R., … D’Agostino, R. (2000). The Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI): A multidimensional self-report instrument for the assessment of female sexual function. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 26, 191-208.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Rosenbaum, J. E., & Weathersbee, B. (2013). True love waits: Do Southern Baptists? Premarital sexual behavior among newly married Southern Baptist Sunday school students. Journal of Religious Health, 52, 263-275.

Rosenbaum, T. Y. (2009). Applying theories of social exchange and symbolic interaction in the treatment of unconsummated marriage/relationship. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 24(1), 38-46.

Rosenthal, D., Moore, S., & Flynn, I. (1991). Adolescent self-efficacy, self-esteem, and sexual risk-taking. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 77-88.

Santos-Iglesias, P., Sierra, J. C., & Vallejo-Medina, P. (2013). Predictors of sexual assertiveness: The role of sexual desire, arousal, attitudes, and partner abuse. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1043-1052.

Schmiedeberg, C., & Schroder, J. (2016). Does sexual satisfaction change with relationship duration? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 99-107.

Schramm, D. G., Marshall, J. P., Harris, V. W., & Lee, T. R. (2005). After “I do”: The newlywed transition. Marriage and Family Review, 38(1), 45-67.

Schramm, D. G., Marshall, J. P., Harris, V. W., & Lee, T. R. (2012). Religiosity, homogamy, and marital adjustment: An examination of newlyweds in first marriages and remarriages. Journal of Family Issues, 33(2), 246-268.

Shafran, R., & Rachman, S. (2004). Thought-action fusion: A review. Journal of Behavior Therapy, 35, 87-107.

Shalev, O., Baum, N., Itzhaki, H. (2013). “There’s a man in my bed”: The first experience of sex among modern-Orthodox newlyweds in Israel. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 39, 40-55.

Siev, J., & Cohen, A. B. (2007). Is thought-action fusion related to religiosity? Differences between Christians and Jews. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45, 829-837.

Sieving, R., Hellerstedt, W., McNeely, C., Fee, R., Snyder, J., & Resnick, M. (2005). Reliability of self-reported contraceptive use and sexual behaviors among adolescent girls. The Journal of Sex Research, 42(2), 159-166.

Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1984). Sexual scripts. Society, 22(1), 53-60.

Simpson, W. S., & Ramberg, J. A. (1992). The influence of religion on sexuality: Implications for sex therapy. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 56(4), 155-165.

Snell, W. E., Fisher, T. D., & Miller, R. S. (1991). Development of the Sexual Awareness Questionnaire: Components, reliability, and validity. Annals of Sex Research, 4, 65-92.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Snell, W. E., Fisher, T. D., & Walters, A. S. (1993). The Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire: An objective self-report measure of psychological tendencies associated with human sexuality. Annals of Sex Research, 6, 27-55.

Snell, W. E., & Papini, D. R. (1989). The Sexuality Scale: An instrument to measure sexual- esteem, sexual-depression, and sexual-preoccupation. Journal of Sex Research, 26, 256- 263.

Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38(1), 15-28.

Starks, J., Cottle, N., Boden, J., & Hill, K., & Howell, D. (2010, November). Current sexual security among individuals who reported virginity prior to marriage. Poster presented at the National Council on Family Relations, Minneapolis, MN.

Sullins, D. P. (2006). Gender and religion: Deconstructing universality, constructing complexity. American Journal of Sociology, 112(3), 838-880.

Valenti, J. (2009). The purity myth. Berkeley, CA: Seal Press.

Vasilenko, S. A., & Lefkowitz, E. S. (2014). Changes in religiosity after first intercourse in the transition to adulthood. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 6(4), 310-315.

Weinstein, E., & Rosen, E. (1991). The development of adolescent sexual intimacy: Implications for counseling. Adolescence, 26(102), 331-338.

Weinstein, R. B., Walsh, J. L., & Ward, L. M. (2008). Testing a new measure of sexual health knowledge and its connections to students’ sex education, communication, confidence, and condom use. International Journal of Sexual Health, 20(3), 212-221.

Williams, J. C. (2011). Battling a “sex-saturated society”: The abstinence movement and the politics of sex education. Sexualities, 14(4), 416-443.

Woo, J. S. T., Morshedian, N., Brotto, L. A., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2012). Sex guilt mediates the relationship between religiosity and sexual desire in east Asian and Euro-Canadian college-aged women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 1485-1495.

Yabiku, S. T., & Gager, C. T. (2009). Sexual frequency and the stability of marital and cohabiting unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71(4), 983-1000.

Young, M., Denny, G., Luquis, R., & Young, T. (1998). Correlates of sexual satisfaction in marriage. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 7(2), 115-127.

Young, O. A., Willer, R., Keltner, D. (2013). “Thou shalt not kill”: Religious fundamentalism, conservatism, and rule-based moral processing. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 5(2), 110-115.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Zimmerman, R. S., Cupp, P. K., Donohew, L., Sione´an, C. K., Feist-Price, S., & Helme, D. (2008). Effects of a school-based, theory-driven HIV and pregnancy prevention curriculum. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 40(1), 42-51.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix A

Extended Literature Review

The focus of the present study is to explore the complex and often problematic sexual experiences within conservative Christian marriages. Many individuals with Christian beliefs may view the wedding night and the marital sexual relationship as sacred and sanctified

(Mahoney & Hernandez, 2009; Murray-Swank et al., 2005). In contrast, it is common to experience sexual guilt (Mosher & Cross, 1971), regret over engaging in premarital sex

(Rosenbaum & Weathersbee, 2013), and a lack of sexual knowledge (Weinstein et al., 2008) prior to marriage. Conservative Christians are defined as someone who “professes Christ as savior,” “has a personal relationship with Christ,” and “has made a subsequent life commitment to live for Christ,” while being “actively engaged in a conservative Christian lifestyle” (Gil,

1990, p. 630). These individuals may experience difficulty with sexual adjustment in marriage.

There is evidence of a positive correlation between religiosity and sexual adjustment problems among first married and remarried individuals (Orathinkal & Vansteenwegen, 2006). A study in Belgium that included a community sample of 787 married adults found a significant relationship between religiosity and sexual adjustment problems in marriage regardless of relationship length (Orathinkal & Vansteenwegen, 2006). In addition, the effect of gender on sexual adjustment problems was not significant, indicating that there is no difference in the experience of sexual difficulties in men and women (Orathinkal & Vansteenwegen, 2006).

However, the authors used a 4-item measure of religiosity, which may have limited the scope of the study (Orathinkal & Vansteenwegen, 2006), and this study may have limited generalizability to an American population.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Past research on sexual satisfaction among married Christian individuals has yielded inconsistent results. Although many studies have failed to find a link between religiosity and sexual satisfaction (Davidson et al., 1995; Davidson et al., 2004), other studies have outlined a negative relationship between high religiosity or religious fundamentalism and sexual functioning and satisfaction (Laumann et al., 1994; Purcell, 1984; Simpson & Ramberg, 1992).

However, religiosity appears to be related to a decrease in sexual behavior, particularly premarital sexual behavior (Davidson et al., 2004). A study including 535 undergraduate women found that individuals who attended church services weekly were less likely to engage in sexual intercourse than individuals who attended services monthly or yearly, and these participants cited their religious and spiritual beliefs as reasons to avoid engaging in sexual behaviors (Davidson et al., 2004). Further, participants that attended weekly church services experienced more guilt regarding past and current sexual intercourse experiences; however, there was no significant effect of religiosity on experience of sexual satisfaction (Davidson et al., 2004). However, the participants included in this study identified as Mainline Protestant or Catholic, as individuals identifying with another Christian denomination (e.g., Baptist, Fundamentalist) were removed from the analyses due to the small sample size (Davidson et al., 2004). There is a need to examine if there is a similar effect of religiosity on sexual satisfaction and sexual guilt or anxiety among more conservative Christian identifying individuals, particularly given the inconsistency of past research regarding the sexual experiences of this population.

Simpson and Ramberg (1992) reviewed six of their clinical cases involving the use of sex therapy, reporting that individuals who had a more religious upbringing were likely to experience sexual dysfunctions as adults. More religious individuals tended to be initially more resistant to treatment and less sexually knowledgeable or aware of their sexuality (Simpson & Ramberg,

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

1992). Purcell (1984) found a relationship between religious orthodoxy (composed of religious rigidity and religious closemindedness) and sexual functioning in marriage. This dissertation study included 217 Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish married individuals residing in three regions of the United States who were recruited through a religious leader in their place of worship

(Purcell, 1984). The study included an overall measure of marital sexual functioning as well as five positive subscales (e.g., sexual frequency, sexual pleasure) and five negative subscales (e.g., sexual anxiety, sexual guilt) of marital sexual functioning that were developed for the study

(Purcell, 1984). Results indicated that all positive measures of marital sexual functioning were negatively correlated with religious rigidity, and all negative measures of marital sexual functioning were positively correlated with religious rigidity (Purcell, 1984). All marital sexual functioning measures were statistically correlated with religious closemindedness with the exception of the sexual anxiety and sexual shame negative subscales (Purcell, 1984). These results demonstrated the negative effect of conservative religious ideology on sexual functioning in married couples; however, these results may have limited generalizability, as the measures developed for the study may not be comparable to more updated and empirically sound measures of conservative religiosity and sexual functioning (Purcell, 1984). The present study aims to further examine the relationship between these constructs.

There has historically been a lack of focus on marital sexual experiences in the literature

(Christopher & Sprecher, 2000), despite the prevalence of sexual dysfunctions among married couples (Laumann et al., 1994). According to the National Health and Social Life Survey, roughly half of the married participants reported that they were not extremely physically or emotionally satisfied with their sexual relationship (Laumann et al., 1994). Furthermore, experiences of sexual dysfunction among married individuals were common in this sample; for

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 example, 30.2% of married men reported that they climaxed too early, and 21.9% of married women reported that they were unable to orgasm with their partner (Laumann et al., 1994).

Renauld and Byers (2001) considered better sexual adjustment to be composed of greater sexual experience, higher sexual satisfaction, fewer sexual problems or dysfunctions, and reduced sexual anxiety. Many couples identify sex as one of the early challenges in adjusting to marriage, particularly if the couple has not lived together or engaged in a sexual relationship before marriage

(Hall & Adams, 2011). In a phenomenological qualitative study including 21 married couples from a community sample, Hall and Adams (2011) found six emerging themes regarding unexpected adjustments to marriage: “little things” (e.g., routines), competing loyalties, letdowns (e.g., not enough affection), serious responsibility, relationship roles, and sex. Regarding the theme of sex, participants noted that they had anticipated more frequent sexual encounters in marriage and reported that they experienced difficulties associated with differences in sexual desire between partners (Hall & Adams, 2011). Without proper sexual awareness or experience, many participants experienced an adjustment as their sexual expectations were not aligned with commonly reported norms for sexual activity (Hall & Adams, 2011).

Religious individuals, particularly conservative Christians, may be at increased risk for sexual adjustment problems in marriage due to this lack of sexual experience or knowledge before marriage. For example, religiously conservative individuals are less likely than non-religious individuals to engage in premarital sex (Farmer et al., 2009). Farmer et al. (2009) collected data from 1,303 American undergraduate college students to examine the relationship between various measures of religiosity and the frequency and variety of sexual behaviors. The authors examined several subcategories of religiosity, including intrinsic religiosity, fundamentalism, spirituality, and paranormal/new age beliefs (Farmer et al., 2009). Results indicated that fundamentalism was

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 negatively correlated with the majority of sexual behaviors in women, although fundamentalism was negatively correlated with only 3 of the 26 included sexual behaviors in men (Farmer et al.,

2009). Although there was no effect of religious affiliation on sexual behavior among men, fundamentalist women engaged in fewer sexual behaviors in comparison to nonreligious women

(Farmer et al., 2009). Farmer et al.’s (2009) study is particularly notable because it is the first and only published study to examine the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual behavior (Farmer et al., 2009), yet it is currently unknown how religious fundamentalism relates to sexuality in marriage.

In addition, conservative Christians who do engage in premarital sexual behaviors may not always have positive experiences, which would likely impact their view of sexuality in future romantic relationships. One study examined premarital sexual behaviors and sex education among a sample of 151 individuals married less than 5 years who were recruited from two Southern

Baptist churches in the southern United States (Rosenbaum & Weathersbee, 2013). Although premarital sexual experiences were common, 82.7% of the participants who engaged in premarital sex reported that they regretted these experiences (Rosenbaum & Weathersbee, 2013). In addition, these participants reported that their sexual expectations and standards were largely shaped by their parents and their church, but participants reported receiving more information about sexuality from their peers as opposed to other sources such as their school, parents, or church (Rosenbaum

& Weathersbee, 2013). Relying on peers for sexual education could limit the accuracy of information received, leaving conservative Christian young adults ill-prepared for sexual experiences in marriage.

Individuals with less sexual experience may also be less self-aware regarding their sexuality and subsequently experience less pleasure from sexual behaviors (Barnett & Melugin,

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

2016). Barnett and Melugin (2016) recruited 861 American undergraduate students from a large southern university and found that there was a significant difference in reported sexual pleasure, with individuals who had not engaged in a specific sexual behavior anticipating less sexual pleasure than that reported by individuals who had engaged in the behavior. It is possible that viewing sexual behaviors as less desirable or pleasurable could have further increased sexual avoidance among individuals who have decided to postpone sexual behavior until after marriage due to their religious beliefs, which in turn could impact sexual expectations in the future after marriage.

Hamblin and Blood (1956) examined the effect of premarital sexual experiences on women’s experience of orgasm in marriage among Kinsey’s (1953) data sample of 1,693 married women. A positive association was found between less premarital sexual experience and orgasm infrequency among married women, which the authors believed could be related to moral beliefs that prohibited premarital sex carrying over into one’s marriage (Hamblin & Blood, 1956). In particular, Catholic women demonstrated sexual inhibition prior to marriage as well as lower orgasm frequency in marriage, and Protestant women yielded inconsistent results (Hamblin &

Blood, 1956).

Sexual satisfaction among religious individuals could also be negatively impacted by negative sexual attitudes. Conservative religious individuals are often exposed to negative sexual attitudes, such as viewing sex as “dirty” or “bad,” leading to a lack of understanding about sexuality and reluctance to discuss sexual matters (Brotherson, 2004). In a study of 205 undergraduate men and women attending a Christian university, participants endorsing more fundamentalist beliefs tended to report more negative sexual attitudes or erotophobia (Bassett et al., 1999). Although conservative Christian individuals may have been told that sexual behavior is

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 acceptable in marriage, a lack of awareness of their own bodies and sexual preferences may leave them underprepared for sexuality in marriage. However, this effect depended on the context of the sexual behavior (Bassett et al., 1999). Specifically, religious participants tended to be more accepting of a variety of sexual behaviors within a marital relationship as opposed to a premarital relationship (Bassett et al., 1999).

For individuals who have been exposed to negative messages about sexuality, positively reframing marital sexuality may help ease this transition. Religious individuals who view sexuality as a sanctified and important component of a marital relationship tend to enjoy greater sexual satisfaction (Hernandez et al., 2011; Murray-Swank et al., 2005). Using a “moderately religious and conservative” sample of 151 unmarried undergraduate students, the authors found that perceiving sexual intercourse as sacred in nature was positively related to more frequent sexual activity (Murray-Swank et al., 2005). Among a subset of individuals in this sample who reported being in a loving relationship (N= 65), perceiving sex as sacred was related to greater sexual satisfaction, less sexual guilt and nervousness, and more sexual pleasure (Murray-Swank et al.,

2005). Furthermore, a study using a sample of 83 individuals married between 4 to 18 months found that viewing sexuality as sanctified was positively associated with greater marital and sexual satisfaction (Hernandez et al., 2011).

The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction among conservative Christian married adults. In order to better understand this relationship and the process of sexual adjustment in marriage, several constructs will be explored, including sexual assertiveness, sexual anxiety, religious coping, and sexual communication.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Sexual Satisfaction

Sexual satisfaction, or the overall sense of satisfaction regarding the quality of a sexual dyadic relationship (Hudson et al., 1981), is an important component of any sexual relationship and has been shown to be highly correlated with marital and relationship satisfaction

(Christopher & Sprecher, 2000; del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014; Lawrance & Byers, 1995;

McNulty et al., 2014). A literature review of research on sexual satisfaction uncovered several levels of factors relating to sexual satisfaction, including the microsystem (e.g., sexual attitudes, sexual thoughts, sexual guilt), mesosystem (e.g., relationship factors, sexual functioning, sexual communication, performance anxiety), and macrosystem (e.g., religion and spirituality) (del Mar

Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014). Specifically, reduced sexual guilt, higher sexual assertiveness, greater desire and arousal, and greater sexual frequency and variety of sexual behaviors were reported to be positively correlated with greater sexual satisfaction (del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014). Sexual satisfaction was also related to greater marital stability, more frequent sexual activity, more frequent experiences of orgasm, and greater sexual knowledge and ability to communicate sexual needs and fantasies to one’s partner (Byers, 2005; del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014; Klapilová et al., 2015; Yabiku & Gager, 2009).

Sexual satisfaction is associated with a myriad of relationship and health outcomes, including increased self-esteem, reduced sexual guilt, and greater relationship stability and intimacy (Higgins, Mullinax, Trussell, Davidson, & Moore, 2011). Moreover, research has consistently provided evidence for the positive correlation between relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction (Lawrance & Byers, 1995). If individuals are getting their relationship needs met, it is likely that they will also be getting their sexual needs satisfied. Additionally, evidence suggests that relationship satisfaction and sexual satisfaction change concurrently and

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 bidirectionally for individuals in long-term relationships (Byers, 2005). Laumann et al. (1994) also found that married individuals were most likely to report being sexually satisfied as compared to cohabiting or dating individuals. However, studies have also shown that sexual and marital satisfaction tended to decline as relationship duration increased (Christopher & Sprecher,

2000). It is possible that relatively higher rates of relationship satisfaction obscure the experience of sexual satisfaction in these studies.

One theory used to conceptualize sexual satisfaction within close relationships is the interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction (IEMSS; Lawrance & Byers, 1995).

According to IEMSS, one’s experience of sexual satisfaction is impacted by four domains in a sexual relationship: 1) the balance between sexual rewards (e.g., sexual pleasure) and sexual costs (e.g., sexual pain, sexual anxiety), 2) the comparison between the expected and perceived sexual rewards and costs, 3) the perceived equality between sexual rewards and costs, and 4) the perceived quality of all other non-sexual aspects of the close relationship (Byers & MacNeil,

2006; Lawrance & Byers, 1995). This model suggests that sexual satisfaction is greater when individuals perceive the rewards of a sexual relationship to be greater than the costs (Lawrance

& Byers, 1995). Some of the possible sexual costs in a sexual relationship include anxiety, embarrassment, and pain (Byers & MacNeil, 2006). Of particular interest in the present study is the experience of sexual anxiety, an experience which would negatively impact one’s overall sexual satisfaction.

Sexual satisfaction is composed of objective and subjective experiences of one’s sexual relationship, including sexual frequency and orgasm frequency (Lawrance & Byers, 1995;

Young, Denny, Luquis, & Young, 1998). Within the context of a marital relationship, sexual satisfaction has been shown to be related to more frequent sexual activity and experience of

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 orgasm as well as greater frequency of partner’s orgasm (Young et al., 1998). Further, sexual satisfaction is negatively correlated with experiences of sexual problems and dysfunctions (del

Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014; MacNeil & Byers, 1997). Experiences of religious orthodoxy are often connected with sexual dysfunction in men and women (Kaplan, 1974; Masters &

Johnson, 1970). Among a sample of religious participants, roughly 28.4% of men experienced premature ejaculation, and 33.4% of women experienced low sexual desire (Laumann et al.,

1994).

Measures of sexual satisfaction and functioning often include items regarding one’s experience of sexual fantasies, which are considered a normal part of healthy sexual functioning

(Libman, Rothenberg, Fichten, & Amsel, 1985; Meston & Trapnell, 2005). Sex fantasies are considered a normal sexual experience among men and women (Knafo & Jaffe, 1984), and sex therapists often encourage clients to develop and explore sexual fantasies as one method of addressing concerns with sexual desire (Morokoff & Heiman, 1980). This may be challenging among conservative Christian individuals, who are often discouraged from thinking about sex

(Gil, 1990). These individuals may also be experiencing thought-action fusion (TAF), or believing that one’s cognitions are responsible for one’s own and others’ behaviors (Shafran &

Rachman, 2004). There are two types of TAF: likelihood TAF, that experiencing frequent, intrusive thoughts about an event will make it more likely that the event will occur, and moral

TAF, or that thinking a morally unacceptable thought is the same as engaging in the equivalent morally unacceptable behavior (Shafran & Rachman, 2004). Moral TAF is common among conservative Christians (Siev & Cohen, 2007), and Protestants and Catholics experience moral

TAF more frequently than other religious groups (Rassin & Koster, 2003). It is possible that experiences of moral TAF may lead conservative Christian individuals to avoid thinking about

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 sex and sexual fantasies to prevent themselves from engaging in morally unacceptable behavior, which could impair satisfaction with their sexual experiences.

Past research on sexual satisfaction often relies on measures that focus exclusively on achievement of orgasm or other physiological experiences, such as the International Index of

Erectile Function (IIEF; Rosen et al., 1997) and the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI; Rosen et al., 2000), as opposed to subjective experiences. The present study will use a more inclusive measure of satisfaction within the context of a sexual relationship: The Index of Sexual

Satisfaction (ISS; Hudson et al., 1981). The ISS may be more helpful in understanding the complexity of sexual satisfaction among married individuals. According to a recent review on sexual satisfaction research, the ISS is the most commonly used measure of sexual satisfaction, present in approximately 12.2% of studies on the subject (del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014).

In addition, a meta-analysis of 177 sources found that there were no gender differences in experience of sexual satisfaction (Oliver & Hyde, 1993), although another review of the literature reported mixed results (del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014). Given the discrepancy in past research, this study will control for gender.

MacNeil and Byers (2009) also stated that the relationship between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction functions through two pathways, instrumental and expressive, that are conceptualized using the IEMSS and sexual script theory. An instrumental pathway demonstrates that sexual self-disclosure is used to inform a partner about one’s sexual likes and dislikes in order to primarily engage in preferred sexual behavior, and the expressive pathway views sexual self-disclosure as a way to enhance emotional intimacy and connection in a sexual relationship

(MacNeil & Byers, 2009). The instrumental pathway demonstrates the IEMSS by showing how communication about one’s sexual rewards and costs is related to increased sexual satisfaction

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

(MacNeil & Byers, 2009). Sexual communication, specifically through sexual self-disclosure in one’s marital relationship, may be an important protective factor among individuals who may otherwise suffer from sexual dissatisfaction.

Sexual behaviors and sexual communication can be best interpreted through the lens of sexual script theory. According to Gagnon and Simon (1973), sexual script theory explores the internal and interpersonal experience of creating meaning in one’s sexual experiences. This may involve developing a “script” for approved sexual behaviors, negotiating roles in sexual encounters, and understanding the influence of culture on sexuality (Simon & Gagnon, 1984).

Jones and Hostler (2002) discussed the utility of helping Christian clients rewrite restrictive sexual scripts to facilitate sexual satisfaction. Religious individuals have lived their lives before marriage with a script for enacting sexual behavior; namely, sexual behavior should be avoided or endured with discomfort knowing that one is sinning. This script must be rewritten after marriage and takes intentional effort to change. Individuals may have “cognitive” sexual scripts

(MacNeil & Byers, 2009) indicating that they are accepting of sexuality within the context of marriage; however, conservative Christians may continue to experience guilt when enacting this script. MacNeil and Byers (2009) predicted that such a conflict between one’s cognitive and performative sexual scripts would negatively impact sexual satisfaction.

Past research into sexual guilt experienced in marriage has demonstrated evidence of the sacred bed phenomenon whereby sex is not associated with guilt due to the sanctity of the marital union, though individuals engaging in premarital sex suffer from sexual guilt related to their religiously illicit behavior (Hackathorn et al., 2016). Using a sample of 100 married and

136 unmarried American adults, it was demonstrated that sexual guilt mediated the relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction among the unmarried participants but not the married

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 participants (Hackathorn et al., 2016). However, research has not explored at what point in the marital relationship that individuals no longer experience sexual guilt or anxiety, and it is likely that this experience does not immediately dissipate on the wedding night.

Religiosity and Religious Fundamentalism

In past research, religiosity, or the relative importance and role of religion in one’s life, was measured in terms of the frequency with which one attended religious services or engaged in prayer (Cowden & Bradshaw, 2007). However, more accurate measures of religiosity have been developed to target the specific nature of one’s spiritual and religious beliefs rather than simply one’s religious behaviors. Allport and Ross (1967) conceptualized religiosity as being divided into two categories: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic religiosity, or experiencing religion as a primary motivator or internal experience, involves fully living one’s religion as a private experience (Cowden & Bradshaw, 2007). Extrinsic religiosity involves practicing a religion for secondary benefits such as social support or status (Cowden & Bradshaw, 2007). Quest religiosity was later conceptualized as experiencing one’s religious identity as a journey, involving constant questioning and exploration (Batson, 1976).

A more conservative measure of religiosity, religious fundamentalism is defined as the belief that one’s religious principles and teachings provide a universal truth that should be followed exactly, and includes scale items such as “to lead the best, most meaningful life, one must follow the one, true religion” (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992). Religious fundamentalism among Christians can be composed of several elements, including a resistance to modernity, a belief in the second coming of Jesus Christ, and a belief that the Bible was written without error

(Hood et al., 2005). Further, religions with fundamentalist beliefs often include rules and restrictions regarding sexual behavior (Emerson & Hartman, 2006). Religious fundamentalism

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 has been linked with prejudiced beliefs (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 1992), conservative sexual attitudes (Ahrold & Meston, 2010; Bassett et al, 1999) and sexual negativism, particularly regarding premarital sexual behavior (Bassett et al., 1999). However, previous research on religious fundamentalism and sexuality has not examined the impact of fundamentalist beliefs on satisfaction within a sexual relationship.

Past research often relied on church attendance (Ashdown et al., 2011; Davidson et al.,

2004) or religious affiliation (Adamczyk & Hayes, 2012) as a measurement of religiosity and spirituality, which may not completely encompass this concept. This variability or incompleteness in measuring religiosity could lead to conflicting results (del Mar Sanchez-

Fuentes et al., 2014; Hackathorn et al., 2016). Although Davidson et al. (1995) found that there was not a relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction, and increased specificity in measuring these constructs may yield different results.

There have been conflicting results in the past regarding the relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction (del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014). Although some studies have shown that religiosity is not related to experiences of sexual satisfaction (e.g., Davidson et al., 1995), others have found a negative relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction

(e.g., Derflinger, 1997). A study composed of 805 female nurses found that frequency of church attendance was not significantly related to either psychological or physiological sexual satisfaction (Davidson et al., 1995). On the other hand, a dissertation study including 531 married evangelical Christian couples found that sex guilt predicted less frequent experiences of orgasm, fewer sexual encounters, lower sexual desire, and less sexual satisfaction; however, sex guilt was not related to experiences of sexual dysfunction (Derflinger, 1997).

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

In addition, Catholics tend to have sex less frequently than other religious denominations, including Protestant Christians, Baptists, and Mormons (Call, Sprecher, & Schwartz, 1995).

Furthermore, Masters and Johnson (1970) identified the relationship between religious orthodoxy and sexual dysfunction in men and women using several clinical case examples. In addition, religious orthodoxy and religious rigidity is related to more impaired sexual functioning among married couples (Purcell, 1984). A study including 365 undergraduate students from a community college and a historically Black university found that both intrinsic and extrinsic religiosity have been shown to be correlated with sexual concerns such as sexual guilt (Cowden

& Bradshaw, 2007). In addition, fundamentalist Protestant participants in this sample experienced more sexual concerns and sexual guilt in comparison to participants with no religious affiliation (Cowden & Bradshaw, 2007).

Low religiosity appears to be related to higher levels of sexual satisfaction among college students (Higgins, Trussell, Moore, & Davidson, 2010). A study including a community sample of 167 married participants found that religiosity was not statistically correlated with sexual satisfaction in men and women (Ashdown et al., 2011). However, the authors measured religiosity according to church attendance and noted that results may vary if a more specific measure of religious beliefs was used (Ashdown et al., 2011). This provides evidence for the need to examine religious fundamentalism in relation to sexual satisfaction to better understand the relationship between religiosity and sexual satisfaction and functioning.

More actively religious individuals tended to engage in less frequent sexual behavior than those who are less religiously active (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948; Kinsey, Pomeroy,

Martin, & Gebhard, 1953). Additionally, more conservative Christians (e.g., Fundamentalists,

Baptists, Pentecostals, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses) are less likely to engage in premarital

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 sex than other Protestant Christians (Beck et al., 1991). It is reported that fundamentalist women, in particular, are least likely to engage in premarital sexual behaviors (Farmer et al., 2009).

Religious fundamentalism, in comparison to other constructs measuring religious belief, has also been related to experiences of sexual guilt in women (Woo, Morshedian, Brotto, & Gorzalka,

2012). A study comparing 178 White women and 361 East Asian women attending a Canadian university found that sexual guilt mediated the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual desire in both samples (Woo et al., 2012).

Conservative or negative attitudes regarding sexuality are common among religious individuals, oftentimes resulting in sexual guilt or shame that leads to decreased interest or arousal (Ellison, 2011). These individuals also appear to be less likely to fantasize about sex, which in turn predicts lower sexual satisfaction and increased sexual problems (Ellison, 2011).

Conservative Christians, in particular, tend to experience sexual guilt when engaging in sexual fantasies (Gil, 1990). However, religious individuals who found to be able to develop healthy sexual scripts, including experiencing less sexual guilt and greater sexual self-esteem, tended to enjoy greater sexual satisfaction and frequency (Starks et al., 2010). One study comparing three samples of Baptist, Catholic, and Mormon/LDS college students reported that their participants engaged in a variety of coping mechanisms for sexual guilt related to premarital sexual activity, and these strategies tended to vary in terms of their effectiveness (Beale et al., 2016). The purpose of the present study is to examine additional coping strategies for experiences of sexual anxiety among fundamentalist Christians who may otherwise experience reduced sexual satisfaction.

Finally, a study on femininity ideology and sexual health including 397 undergraduate women found that religiosity was negatively correlated to both sexual knowledge and sexual

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 assertiveness (Curtin et al., 2011). Additionally, a common theme reported in a mixed methods study that included married Mormon/LDS individuals was the lack of sexual knowledge (Starks et al., 2010). Abstinence-only education, which is supported by many in the evangelical

Christian community, often contains negative messages about sexuality and avoids instruction regarding sexual pleasure within a committed relationship like marriage (Valenti, 2009). This indicates that young, religious adults, particularly those who have not engaged in premarital sex, may be underprepared for sexual relationships due to a lack of awareness of their bodies and sexual functioning as well as reduced ability to negotiate their sexual needs with a partner upon marriage.

Sexual Assertiveness and Sexual Self-Efficacy

Sexual self-efficacy is best defined as one’s confidence in sexual situations (Rosenthal et al., 1991) and is best understood in the context of Bandura’s social learning theory (1977).

According to Bandura (1992), individuals feel more confident about their ability to perform a behavior that they have had previous knowledge of or exposure to before enacting. Higher sexual self-efficacy is related to greater sexual adjustment, increased frequency of sexual intercourse, and reduced sexual dysfunction (Reissing et al., 2005). Using a sample of 107 young Canadian women, one study revealed a positive correlation between sexual self-efficacy and sexual adjustment (i.e., sexual desire, arousal, orgasm, and satisfaction) in women (Reissing et al.,

2005). However, this study did not further examine relationships between sexual self-efficacy and each component of women’s sexual adjustment, such as sexual satisfaction (Reissing et al.,

2005).

Research on sexual self-efficacy often focuses on specific domains of sexual confidence, such as condom use self-efficacy (Cecil & Pinkerton, 1998), self-efficacy in receiving sexual

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 pleasure (Horne & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2006), and refusal self-efficacy (Zimmerman et al., 2008).

A common measure of sexual self-efficacy includes three factors: one’s ability to say no, one’s ability to get one’s sexual needs met, and one’s confidence in being able to take sexual precautions (Rosenthal et al., 1991). Sexual assertiveness, or one’s ability to get one’s sexual needs met (Hurlbert, 1991), is considered one component of sexual self-efficacy that is of particular interest in the present study. In a study of 3,374 Spanish men and women, sexual assertiveness was correlated with higher sexual arousal and desire as well as more positive attitudes towards sexuality and sexual fantasies (Santos-Iglesias et al., 2013). Furthermore, in a sample of 698 dating couples, sexual assertiveness and sexual communication were related to greater relationship satisfaction (Greene & Faulkner, 2005). There may also be important gender differences in sexual assertiveness. Haavio-Mannila and Kontula (1997) believed that experiences of reduced sexual satisfaction among women in their sample could be due to relatively lower levels of sexual assertiveness in comparison to men.

Sexual assertiveness, particularly among women, appears to be related to experiences of sexual satisfaction (del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014; Haavio-Mannila & Kontula, 1997;

Hurlbert, Apt, & Rabehl, 1993; Ménard & Offman, 2009). For example, a study including 71

Canadian adults from a community sample revealed that sexual assertiveness mediated the relationship between sexual self-esteem and sexual satisfaction and that sexual assertiveness and sexual satisfaction were strongly correlated (Ménard & Offman, 2009). This study also emphasized the difference between sexual communication and sexual assertiveness. Rather than simply discussing one’s sexual needs, a sexually assertive individual takes action to ensure that one’s needs are understood and respected by a sexual partner (Ménard & Offman, 2009).

Individuals who may struggle to assert their sexual needs may achieve sexual satisfaction if they

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 are able to simply communicate their sexual preferences to an accommodating partner. There is evidence supporting a relationship between sexual communication and sexual self-esteem, a similar construct to sexual self-efficacy defined as an individual’s acceptance of their identity as a sexual being (Babin, 2013). Specifically, both verbal and nonverbal forms of sexual communication were positively correlated with sexual self-esteem and sexual satisfaction in a sample of 207 adults composed of undergraduate students and community members (Babin,

2013).

Developing a healthy experience of sexual self-efficacy and sexual assertiveness can be particularly relevant among adolescents and young adults, as these individuals begin establishing a sense of their identity and begin engaging in sexual relationships (Weinstein & Rosen, 1991).

Negative experiences related to sexuality during this time have the potential to impact future sexual relationships (Weinstein & Rosen, 1991). In the conservative Christian community, adolescents and young adults are often the focus in warnings and precautions against engaging in sexual behaviors, particularly premarital sexual intercourse (Rosenbaum & Weathersbee, 2013;

Valenti, 2009; Williams, 2011). The Purity Movement, which became popular among evangelical Christians in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, has been known to use scare tactics to caution young men and women against engaging in sexual activity prior to marriage, such as framing young women who have engaged in premarital sex as “damaged goods” that are no longer desirable (Valenti, 2009). Religious negativism and upbringing in a conservative religious environment tend to discourage sexual exploration and are related to experiences of sexual guilt and anxiety (Ellison, 2011). In addition, negative messages about sexuality and premarital sex as a sinful act may push conflicted young Christian adults away from the church (Beale et al., 2016).

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

In sum, young adults are exposed to several factors that may impact the development of healthy sexual self-efficacy and assertiveness, including lack of knowledge of sexual health

(Weinstein et al., 2008) and exposure to negative messages about sexuality (Brotherson, 2004;

Ellison, 2011; Valenti, 2009). The present study will focus more on the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual assertiveness, which has not been explored in the previous literature on religiosity, sexual self-efficacy, and sexual assertiveness.

Sexual Guilt and Sexual Anxiety

Sex guilt, or the expectancy of self-punishment due to violating sexual standards, can also negatively impact one’s sexual experience and is related to higher religiosity (Cowden &

Bradshaw, 2007; Murray et al., 2007). For example, a study including 176 graduate and undergraduate students from a Catholic university found that church attendance was related to engaging in fewer sexual behaviors, lower sexually permissive attitudes, and greater sexual guilt

(Murray et al., 2007). In addition, there is extensive research on the relationship between sexual satisfaction and sexual anxiety, defined as discomfort with one’s sexual experiences (Brassard et al., 2015). In a sample of 556 French Canadian undergraduate women, sexual anxiety was negatively correlated with sexual satisfaction and sexual functioning, including sex drive, arousal, and satisfaction with orgasm (Brassard et al., 2015). Inhibited sexual anxiety also predicted lower emotional and physical sexual satisfaction in a sample of 1,989 unmarried men and women (Davis et al., 2006). In addition, sexual anxiety and sexual communication were positively correlated with a variety of sexual behaviors (e.g., kissing, sexual intercourse) in a study of 188 undergraduate men and women (Burger & Inderbitzen, 1985).

Past research often examines sexual guilt and sexual anxiety as interchangeable constructs, both of which are predictive of lower sexual satisfaction, fewer sexual experiences,

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 and more sexual dysfunctions (Janda & O’Grady, 1980; Snell, Fisher, & Walters, 1993). Janda and O’Grady (1980) noted the difficulty of distinguishing sexual guilt from sexual anxiety, reporting that they did not view sexual guilt and sexual anxiety as two entirely independent constructs but rather as similar experiences that negatively impact sexuality. In creating a measure on sexual anxiety, these authors sought to differentiate these constructs by defining sexual guilt according to Mosher (1965), that is, as expectancy of self-punishment and concern regarding violating one’s own internal standards. Sexual anxiety was defined as concern over what others will think about one’s own sexual behaviors (Janda & O’Grady, 1980). In this way, a scale on sexual anxiety may better target the experience of religiously conservative individuals, who may fear judgment or retribution from a spiritual being or religious community based on their sexual behaviors. Furthermore, there have been some measurement differences in sexual guilt and sexual anxiety such that scale items for sexual guilt focus on sexual attitudes (e.g., “sex relations before marriage are wrong and immoral”; Mosher, 1988), and scale items for sexual anxiety focus more on sexual behaviors (e.g., rating the degree to which one experiences anxiety

“when you have intercourse with a loved one”; Hoon & Chambless, 1998). Despite these differences, measures of sexual anxiety tend to be correlated with measures of sexual guilt

(Janda & O’Grady, 1980).

Sexual anxiety can further impair sexual satisfaction and functioning if individuals experiencing sexual guilt or anxiety are reluctant to communicate with their sexual partners about this experience. Sexual communication apprehension, or feeling discomfort or anxiety about communicating with a sexual partner about one’s sexual preferences, is negatively correlated with both verbal and nonverbal sexual communication and sexual satisfaction (Babin,

2013). Additionally, sexual communication apprehension is negatively associated with sexual

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 self-esteem (Babin, 2013), indicating that experiencing anxiety about discussing sexual topics is related to a general discomfort or lack of confidence with oneself as a sexual being.

Furthermore, many religions include negative sexual beliefs that foster guilt and anxiety related to sexual matters (Ellison, 2011). Rather than simply feeling guilty about engaging in a sexual behavior that is not approved of, many conservative Christians also experience sexual guilt related to sexual fantasies (Ellison, 2011). Because sexual fantasies are an important component of sexual satisfaction and healthy sexual functioning (Ellison, 2011; Kaplan, 1974), avoidance of sexual thoughts could be problematic. Experiencing sex guilt or anxiety before, during, or after sex could prevent individuals from focusing on their sexual experience in the moment. Sex therapists often use techniques to increase mindfulness during sex and caution against the risks of not being cognitively present during sex, which is related to a number of sexual dysfunctions (Kaplan, 1974).

(Festinger, 1957). For example, a religious individual whose spiritual and moral beliefs prohibit premarital sex may experience discomfort or guilt if they were to engage in premarital sexual behaviors. To reduce their experience of dissonance, this individual is likely to change one’s thoughts, change one’s behaviors, or form a new perspective that justifies one’s behavior

(Festinger, 1957). However, Festinger (1957) argues that such decisions are rarely so simplistic and that it is common for individuals to experience dissonance related to a wide variety of behaviors. Thus, a religious individual may continue to experience sexual anxiety even after they have gotten married and sexual behavior is now considered permissible. Beale et al. (2016)

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 reported that many university students who identify as Baptist, Catholic, or Mormon/LDS have developed both positive and negative methods of coping with sexual guilt related to engaging in premarital sex. Likewise, there may be some methods of coping that are more helpful than others in reducing experiences of dissonance related to sexual behavior in marriage.

Individuals feeling conflicted between their religious beliefs and sexual behaviors may also respond by changing their beliefs. A longitudinal study demonstrated that many religious college students who engaged in premarital sex ultimately changed their religious beliefs to be more aligned with their behaviors (Vasilenko & Lefkowitz, 2014). A total of 434 college men and women were recruited, revealing that church attendance and importance of religiosity was significantly reduced 12 months post-intercourse (Vasilenko & Lefkowitz, 2014). It is possible that sexual guilt or cognitive dissonance related to engaging in premarital sex was related to the decline in religiosity, as there was no change in religiosity in the 12 months preceding sexual activity (Vasilenko & Lefkowitz, 2014). Religious individuals experiencing cognitive dissonance related to their sexuality could also choose to change their behaviors. For example, sex therapists who have treated couples in unconsummated marriages have acknowledged the existence of highly religious beliefs (Ribner & Rosenbaum, 2005; Rosenbaum, 2009). Other conservative

Christian individuals could choose to cope with this dilemma by reducing or avoiding certain sexual behaviors, as traditional Christian beliefs encouraged sexual relations solely for procreation (Francoeur, 2001).

Finally, religious individuals could manage cognitive dissonance by evaluating their religious beliefs and sexual behaviors in a new, more adaptive way. Religious individuals may experience less sexual anxiety when engaging in specific sexual behaviors that are deemed as acceptable. For example, most religious individuals reported that they considered penile-vaginal

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 intercourse as a normal and appropriate sexual activity among married adults, though a minority of religious individuals endorsed approval for either unmarried or married couples engaging in anal sex (Bassett et al., 1999). Such individuals could also learn to view sex more positively, such as viewing their sexuality in a marital relationship as sanctified by God (Mahoney &

Hernandez, 2009; Murray-Swank et al., 2005) or seeking support within their religious community.

Religious Coping

Religious coping is often used by religious individuals to cope with stress and health- related concerns (Pargament et al., 1998). Religious coping mechanisms can have both positive and negative effects on an individual (Pargament et al., 2011). For example, asking forgiveness for one’s sins is considered a positive religious coping mechanism, whereas wondering whether one has been abandoned by God is a negative religious coping mechanism (Pargament et al.,

2011). The use of positive religious coping mechanisms has been found to correlate positively with more positive religious changes (Pargament et al., 1998) as well as more positive psychological adjustment to stressors (Ano & Vasconcelles, 2005). Negative religious coping, on the other hand, is related to poorer health outcomes (Pargament et al., 2000).

In addition, positive religious coping is negatively correlated with substance use, whereas negative religious coping is associated with greater substance use in men (Parenteau, 2015).

Ahrens et al. (2010) also found that positive religious coping facilitated healing to a greater degree than negative religious coping among sexual assault survivors. In addition, positive religious coping may be more impactful than negative religious coping. Positive religious coping was positively correlated with marital adjustment among a sample of 81 heterosexual married couples, and negative religious coping was not significantly related (Pollard et al., 2014). These

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 results indicate that positive religious coping in comparison to negative religious coping may considered a healthy coping mechanism for religious individuals experiencing psychological stress. This effect may be even stronger in women, as women tend to identify as more religious and use religious coping to a greater degree than men (Hvidtjørn et al., 2014). However, religious coping has not been examined in relation to concerns with sexual satisfaction.

Symbolic interactionism, or the theory that behavior is shaped by one’s symbolic worldview, has been used to better understand the role of meaning making in helping marital couples cope with distress (Schramm et al., 2005). Religious fundamentalism is also shaped by symbolic meaning (Hood et al., 2005), and fundamentalist individuals may adjust better to problems experienced early in marriage if they are able to use their religious beliefs to make meaning of and cope with their experiences. Coyle and Erdberg (1969) recommend using the

Bible when working with fundamentalist psychotherapy clients who experience anxiety regarding sexual concerns, stating that this can help encourage sexual enjoyment. Religious coping could be one method of making meaning out of sexual problems in marriage.

Sexual Communication

Sexual communication may be another method of facilitating sexual adjustment

(MacNeil & Byers, 1997). Sexual communication can be defined as discussion between sexual partners about preferences in sexual behaviors (Byers, 2011) and includes both verbal and nonverbal forms of communication (Babin, 2013). Such communication can occur before, during, or after engaging in a sexual act and involves topics such as providing sexual consent, discussing contraceptive use, and reporting sexual likes and dislikes and discussing sexual pleasure (Babin, 2013; Byers, 2011).

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Past research has demonstrated the positive relationship between sexual communication and sexual satisfaction (Byers, 2011; del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014; Starks et al., 2010).

Starks et al. (2010) explored sexual adjustment among Mormon married couples, finding that sexual communication was positively correlated with sexual satisfaction and sexual frequency.

Further, Byers’ (2011) review of research in sexual satisfaction noted the importance of sexual communication, specifically that couples who disclosed their sexual preferences to their partners enjoyed higher sexual satisfaction and fewer sexual problems. However, even couples in long- term relationships were often reluctant to discuss their sexual interests; individuals reported that they knew only 62% of their partner’s likes and 26% of their partner’s dislikes (Byers, 2011).

In addition, one study found a relationship between men’s understanding of their women partner’s sexual preferences and couple sexual adjustment (Purnine & Carey, 1997). Seventy-six heterosexual married or cohabiting couples completed measures of sexual satisfaction, dyadic adjustment, and sexual behavior preferences (Purnine & Carey, 1997). Sexual satisfaction among men and women was positively correlated with partner agreement on preferred sexual behaviors as well as men’s understanding of their partner’s sexual preferences (Purnine & Carey, 1997).

One study on sexual adjustment in which the majority of participants identified as

Mormon/LDS found that sexual communication was positively correlated with sexual satisfaction

(Starks et al., 2010). A total of 597 heterosexual couples who had been married an average of 12 years were recruited in a mixed methods study examining how individuals transitioned from premarital sexual abstinence to sexual activity in marriage (Starks et al., 2010). The emerging themes in the qualitative portion of the study overlapped with the latent variables in a structural equation model that predicted sexual security (Starks et al., 2010). Specifically, individuals who experienced healthy sexual scripts regarding their sexuality and their body, experienced emotional

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019 safety with their partners, and were able to communicate about their sexual preferences tended to experience greater sexual satisfaction, more frequent sexual activity, and perceived themselves and their partner as more capable of providing sexual pleasure (Starks et al., 2010). Although these results are quite promising in demonstrating how religious individuals navigate sexual adjustment in marriage, it is currently unknown what this process may look like for religious individuals from different Christian faith communities in their first year of marriage. Although sex communication was the strongest predictor of sexual security (e.g., sexual satisfaction, frequency, perceived ability and perceived partner ability; Starks et al., 2010), other methods of improving sexual satisfaction such as religious coping have not yet been investigated.

Sexual communication may be more approachable for individuals who are more comfortable with their sexuality. A study of 336 married adults in Istanbul found that sexual self- disclosure was negatively correlated with sexual embarrassment, whereas sexual awareness and sexual courage were both positively correlated with sexual self-disclosure (Çelik & Arici, 2014).

Although women in this sample experienced more sexual embarrassment, there were no significant gender differences in sexual self-disclosure (Çelik & Arici, 2014). Furthermore, inhibited sexual communication mediated the relationship between sexual anxiety and physical sexual satisfaction in a sample of unmarried American adults (Davis et al., 2006). It is possible that sexual communication could be a helpful coping mechanism for both men and women experiencing sexual concerns.

Current Problem and Focus of Study

Conservative Christians are often underprepared for the initiation of a sexual relationship in marriage due to receiving negative messages about sex and sexuality (Brotherson, 2004;

Ellison, 2011) as well as limited or no sexual experience prior to marriage (Beck et al., 1991;

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Davidson et al., 2004). Due to the strong positive relationship between sexual satisfaction and marital satisfaction (Lawrance & Byers, 1995; del Mar Sanchez-Fuentes et al., 2014), individuals who are experiencing sexual problems or sexual dissatisfaction are likely experiencing other non-sexual problems in their relationship. Moreover, sexual dysfunctions are common among

Protestant and Catholic men and women (Laumann et al., 1994). Given that conservative

Christians prohibit divorce (Francoeur, 2001), these individuals may continue to suffer in their relationship unless they rely on coping mechanisms, social support, or psychotherapy. The focus of the present study was to determine what protective factors may exist that help religiously conservative individuals with their sexual adjustment problems.

Limitations in Past Research

The terms “newlywed” and “recently married” are fairly ambiguous, and there is variation in the literature regarding how these terms are defined. For example, Hamblin and

Blood (1956) defined newlyweds as those in their first year of marriage, but another study including Mormon/LDS adults defined newly married as individuals in their first five years of marriage (Moen et al., 2015). Orathinkal and Vansteenwegen (2006) conducted a study on sexual adjustment in marriage, but their study included adults of any relationship length with a mean of

15 years married. Some studies have attempted to more narrowly define the newlywed period; for example, Schramm et al. (2005) examined individuals who had been married between 2 and

9 months. The present study defined “newlywed” as those married for less than one year, as this is the most inclusive and specific use of the term (Hall & Adam, 2011).

As stated previously, past research has often struggled to provide a distinction between sexual guilt and sexual anxiety, although both constructs are negatively correlated with sexual satisfaction (Brassard et al., 2015; Davis et al., 2006; Janda & O’Grady, 1980; Snell et al., 1993).

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Given that the focus of the present study was on sexual experiences within marriage rather than sexual attitudes, a measure of sexual anxiety was used to adequately explore how this construct relates to religiosity, specifically religious fundamentalism.

Research Questions and Hypotheses

The present study aimed to address the following research questions:

1. How does religious fundamentalism impact sexual anxiety, sexual assertiveness, and

sexual satisfaction among conservative Christian married adults?

2. What do religious individuals do post-wedding to facilitate sexual adjustment in

marriage?

These research questions were tested using the following hypotheses:

1. The negative relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction

will be mediated by sexual anxiety, such that greater religious fundamentalism will

predict greater sexual anxiety, which in turn will predict lower sexual satisfaction.

2. The negative relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction

will be mediated by sexual assertiveness, such that greater religious fundamentalism

will predict lower sexual assertiveness, which in turn will predict lower sexual

satisfaction.

3. Sexual communication will moderate the negative relationship between religious

fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, such that individuals high in religious

fundamentalism who engage in more sexual communication with their partner will

experience greater sexual satisfaction compared to those who engage in less sexual

communication.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

4. Religious coping will moderate the negative relationship between religious

fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction, such that individuals high in religious

fundamentalism who engage in more religious coping will experience greater sexual

satisfaction compared to those who engage in less religious coping.

5. Gender will have a significant effect on these relationships such that women will

experience greater religious fundamentalism and sexual anxiety and less sexual

assertiveness in comparison to men.

6. Positive religious coping will more strongly predict sexual satisfaction than negative

religious coping, such that individuals who engage in more positive religious coping

will experience greater sexual satisfaction than those who engage in more negative

religious coping.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix B

Table 1. Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations.

Measure 1 2 3 4 5 6 M SD α 1. RF 0.33** -0.14 -0.01 0.01 0.15 0.53 1.50 0.88 2. ISS 0.33** -0.66** 0.15 0.31** -0.18 5.26 1.33 0.96

3. SAn -0.14 -0.66** -0.13 -0.72 0.48** 1.14 1.18 0.95

4. SAs -0.01 0.15 -0.13 0.46** -0.03 2.26 0.93 0.86 5. SSDQ 0.01 0.31** -0.07 0.46** 0.23* 4.97 1.44 0.94 6. RCOPE 0.15 -0.18 0.48** -0.03 0.23* 1.49 0.68 0.90

Note. N = 111. Scores for the Religious Fundamentalism Scale (RF) range from -4 to 4, with higher scores indicating greater adherence to religious fundamentalist beliefs. Scores for the Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS) and the Sexual Self-Disclosure Questionnaire (SSDQ) range from 1 or 7, with higher scores indicating greater sexual satisfaction and greater sexual communication, respectively. Scores for the Sexual Anxiety subscale (SAn) and Sexual Assertiveness subscale (SAs) range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating greater discomfort within a sexual relationship and tendency to assert one’s needs or desires in a sexual relationship, respectively. Scores for the Brief RCOPE, the 14-item Brief Religious Coping Measure, range from 0 to 3, with higher scores indicating greater frequency of engaging in religious coping for a negative life event.

Note. *p < 0.05. **p < 0.01.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Table 2. Summary of steps for hierarchical regression analysis for predicting sexual satisfaction from positive religious coping and negative religious coping (N= 111).

(Step Entered) ΔR2 Variables Entered in Current Step B SE B Step 1 0.18 Age 0.01 0.02 Gender -0.08 0.26 Ethnicity -0.18 0.17 Religious Affiliation -0.13 0.10 Religious Affiliation Importance 0.20 0.17 Relationship Status 0.07 0.18 Sexually Active -0.73 0.95 Sexually Active Length 0.01* 0.00 Sexual Orientation 0.48 0.80 Political Ideology 0.00 0.15 Current Living Arrangements 0.01 0.26 Child Status -0.18 0.25 Pre-marital Sex 0.17 0.16 Marriage Length -0.03 0.05 Step 2 0.16** Positive Religious Coping 0.51** 0.19 Negative Religious Coping -0.71** 0.19 *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix C

Figure 1. Mediation of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by sexual anxiety. Total effect (c): b= 0.29, SE= 0.08, p < 0.01 Direct effect (c’): b= 0.21, SE= 0.06, p < 0.01 Indirect effect (ab): b= 0.08, Boot SE= 0.06, CI95% = -0.03 to 0.19 Note. **p < 0.01.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Figure 2. Mediation of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by sexual assertiveness. Total effect (c): b= 0.29, SE= 0.08, p < 0.01 Direct effect (c’): b= 0.29, SE= 0.08, p < 0.01 Indirect effect (ab): b= -0.00, Boot SE= 0.02, CI95% = -0.05 to 0.04 Note. **p < 0.01.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Figure 3. Moderation of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by sexual communication.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Figure 4. Moderation of religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by religious coping. Note. *p < 0.05.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

5 Low Religious Coping 4 High Religious Coping

3 Sexual Satisfaction Sexual

1 Low Religious High Religious Fundamentalism Fundamentalism

Figure 5. Simple slopes for the moderation of the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by religious coping.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

5 Low Positive Religious Coping 4 High Positive Religious Coping

3 Sexual Satisfaction Sexual 2

1 Low Religious High Religious Fundamentalism Fundamentalism

Figure 6. Simple slopes for the moderation of the relationship between religious fundamentalism and sexual satisfaction by positive religious coping.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix D

Demographic Information Sheet Age: ______

Gender (circle one): Male Female Transitioning Male-to-Female Transitioning Female- to-Male If not listed, please specify _____

Please select one response that you most identify with in each category:

Ethnicity Relationship Status White/Caucasian ______Single ______African American ______Dating ______Latino/Latina/Hispanic ______In a polyamorous/open relationship ______Asian American ______Partnered/engaged ______American Indian ______Married (first marriage) ______If not listed, please specify: ______Remarried ______Divorced ______Religious Affiliation Widowed ______Protestant Christian ______If not listed, please specify: ______Roman Catholic ______Evangelical Christian ______Political Ideology LDS/Mormon ______Very Conservative ______Jewish ______Conservative ______Muslim ______Moderate ______Hindu ______Liberal ______Buddhist ______Very Liberal ______No religious affiliation ______If not listed, please specify: ______Sexual Orientation Heterosexual/Straight ______Bisexual ______Lesbian/Gay ______If not listed, please specify ______

1) How important is your religious affiliation to your identity (select one)? 1 2 3 4 5 Very important Not very important

2) Are you currently in a sexual or romantic relationship? a) I am in an exclusive/monogamous relationship (that is, sexual activity only with each other) b) I am having sexual relationships with more than one person c) I am sexually active but don’t consider myself to be in a “sexual relationship” d) I am not currently sexually active with another person, but I have been sexually active in the past 91

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

e) I have never been sexually active

3) If you responded with “a” or “b” to the previous question, how long have you been in this romantic/sexual relationship(s)? ______

4) Do you currently engage in sexual intercourse? Yes______No______

5) How long have you engaged in sexual intercourse (i.e., penile-vaginal intercourse) (in months)? ______

6) What are your current living arrangements? a) Living alone b) Living with spouse/sexual partner c) Living with spouse/sexual partner and family members d) Living with spouse/sexual partner and children e) Living with roommate (non-relative)

7) Do you and/or your partner have child(ren)? a) No, we do not have child(ren) b) Yes, we have child(ren) from previous sexual partner(s) c) Yes, we have child(ren) with current sexual partner d) Yes, we have children from previous sexual partner(s) and current sexual partner

8) Have you engaged in premarital sex (i.e., penile-vaginal intercourse)? a) No, did not engage in sexual activity before marriage b) Yes, engaged in premarital sex with previous sexual partner(s) c) Yes, engaged in premarital sex with current sexual partner only d) Yes, engaged in premarital sex with previous sexual partner(s) and current sexual partner

9) The purpose of sexual intercourse is for procreation. a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Neutral d) Disagree e) Strongly Disagree

10) The purpose of sexual intercourse is for pleasure. a) Strongly Agree b) Agree c) Neutral d) Disagree e) Strongly Disagree

11) How long have you been married? ______

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix E Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS; Hudson, 1998) This questionnaire is designed to measure the degree of satisfaction you have in the sexual relationship with your partner. It is not a test, so there are no right or wrong answers. Answer each item as carefully and as accurately as you can by placing a number beside each one as follows. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 None of the A little of Some of the A good part Most of the All of the Very rarely time the time time of the time time time

1. I feel that my partner enjoys our sex life. 2. Our sex life is very exciting. 3. Sex is fun for my partner and me. 4. Sex with my partner has become a chore for me.* 5. I feel that our sex is dirty and disgusting.* 6. Our sex life is monotonous.* 7. When we have sex it is too rushed and hurriedly completed.* 8. I feel that my sex life is lacking in quality.* 9. My partner is sexually exciting. 10. I enjoy the sex techniques that my partner likes or uses. 11. I feel that my partner wants too much sex from me.* 12. I think that our sex is wonderful. 13. My partner dwells on sex too much.* 14. I try to avoid sexual contact with my partner.* 15. My partner is too rough or brutal when we have sex.* 16. My partner is a wonderful sex mate. 17. I feel that sex is a normal function of our relationship. 18. My partner does not want sex when I do.* 19. I feel that our sex life really adds a lot to our relationship. 20. My partner seems to avoid sexual contact with me.* 21. It is easy for me to get sexually excited by my partner. 22. I feel that my partner is sexually pleased with me. 93

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

23. My partner is very sensitive to my sexual needs and desires. 24. My partner does not satisfy me sexually.* 25. I feel that my sex life is boring.*

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix F The Revised 12-Item Religious Fundamentalism Scale (Altemeyer & Hunsberger, 2004) Instructions: This survey is part of an investigation of general public opinion concerning a variety of social issues. You will probably find that you agree with some of the statements and disagree with others to varying extents. Please indicate your reaction to each statement according to the following scale: Blacken the bubble labeled -4 if you very strongly disagree with the statement -3 if you strongly disagree with the statement -2 if you moderately disagree with the statement -1 if you slightly disagree with the statement

Blacken the bubble labeled +1 if you slightly agree with the statement +2 if you moderately agree with the statement +3 if you strongly agree with the statement +4 if you very strongly agree with the statement If you feel exactly and precisely neutral about an item, blacken the “0” bubble.

You may find that you sometimes have different reactions to different parts of a statement. For example, you may very strongly disagree (“-4”) with one idea in a statement, but slightly agree (“+1”) with another idea in the same item. When this happens, please combine your reactions, and indicate how you feel on balance (a “-3” in this case).

1. God has given mankind a complete, unfailing guide to happiness and salvation, which must be totally followed.

2. No single book of religious teachings contains all the intrinsic, fundamental truths about life.*

3. The basic cause of evil in this world is Satan, who is still constantly and ferociously fighting against God.

4. It is more important to be a good person than to believe in God and the right religion.*

5. There is a particular set of religious teachings in this world that are so true, you can’t go any “deeper” because they are the basic, bedrock message that God has given humanity.

6. When you get right down to it, there are basically only two kinds of people in the world: the Righteous, who will be rewarded by God, and the rest, who will not.

7. Scriptures may contain general truths, but they should NOT be considered completely, literally true from beginning to end.*

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

8. To lead the best, most meaningful life, one must belong to the one, fundamentally true religion.

9. “Satan” is just the name people give to their own bad impulses. There really is no such thing as a diabolical “Prince of Darkness” who tempts us.*

10. Whenever science and sacred scripture conflict, science is probably right.*

11. The fundamentals of God’s religion should never be tampered with or compromised with others’ beliefs.

12. All of the religions in the world have flaws and wrong teachings. There is no perfectly true, right religion.*

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix G The Sexual Assertiveness Subscale of the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire (Snell, Fisher, & Walters, 1993) Instructions: Listed below are several statements that concern the topic of sexual relationships. Please read each item carefully and decide to what extent it is characteristic of you. Some of the items refer to a specific sexual relationship. Whenever possible, answer the questions with your most recent partner in mind. If you have never had a sexual relationship, answer in terms of what you think your responses would most likely be. Then, for each statement fill in the response on the answer sheet that indicates how much it applies to you by using the following scale: A= Not at all characteristic of me (0) B= Slightly characteristic of me (1) C= Somewhat characteristic of me (2) D= Moderately characteristic of me (3) E= Very characteristic of me (4)

1. I am very assertive about the sexual aspects of my life.

2. I am not very direct about voicing my sexual preferences.*

3. I am somewhat passive about expressing my sexual desires.*

4. I do not hesitate to ask for what I want in a sexual relationship.

5. When it comes to sex, I usually ask for what I want.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix H The Sexual Anxiety Subscale of the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire (Snell, Fisher, & Walters, 1993) Instructions: Listed below are several statements that concern the topic of sexual relationships. Please read each item carefully and decide to what extent it is characteristic of you. Some of the items refer to a specific sexual relationship. Whenever possible, answer the questions with your most recent partner in mind. If you have never had a sexual relationship, answer in terms of what you think your responses would most likely be. Then, for each statement fill in the response on the answer sheet that indicates how much it applies to you by using the following scale: A= Not at all characteristic of me (0) B= Slightly characteristic of me (1) C= Somewhat characteristic of me (2) D= Moderately characteristic of me (3) E= Very characteristic of me (4)

1. I feel anxious when I think about the sexual aspects of my life.

2. I am worried about the sexual aspects of my life.

3. Thinking about the sexual aspects of my life leaves me with an uneasy feeling.

4. I usually worry about the sexual aspects of my life.

5. I feel nervous when I think about the sexual aspects of my life.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix I The Brief Religious Coping Measure (Brief RCOPE; Pargament, Feuille, & Berdzy, 2011) Instructions: The following items deal with ways you coped with the sexual concerns in your marriage. There are many ways to try to deal with problems. These items ask what you did to cope with this negative event. Obviously different people deal with things in different ways, but we are interested in how you tried to deal with it. Each item says something different about a particular way of coping. We want to know to what extent you did what the item says. How much or how frequently. Don’t answer on the basis of what worked or not—just whether or not you did it. Try to rate each item separately in your mind from the others. Make your answers as true FOR YOU as you can. 0 1 2 3 Not at all A great deal

1. Looked for a stronger connection with God.

2. Sought God’s love and care.

3. Sought help from God in letting go of my anger.

4. Tried to put my plans into action together with God.

5. Tried to see how God might be trying to strengthen me in this situation.

6. Asked forgiveness for my sins.

7. Focused on religion to stop worrying about my problems.

8. Wondered whether God had abandoned me.

9. Felt punished by God for my lack of devotion.

10. Wondered what I did for God to punish me.

11. Questioned God’s love for me.

12. Wondered whether my church had abandoned me.

13. Decided the devil made this happen.

14. Questioned the power of God.

Texas Tech University, Jessica M. Johnston-York, August 2019

Appendix J Sexual Self-Disclosure Questionnaire (Demmons & Byers, 1999) Instructions: In a relationship, partners may communicate with each other about what they like and dislike about their sexual interactions. Think of your sexual relationship with your partner. For each question below, select the number that best describes how much you communicated to your partner about your sexual likes and dislikes. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Nothing at all Everything

How much have you told your partner about: 1. a. The way(s) you like to be kissed?

b. The way(s) you don’t like being kissed?

2. a. The way(s) you like to be touched sexually?

b. The way(s) you don’t like being touched sexually?

3. a. The way(s) you like to have intercourse?

b. The way(s) you don’t like having intercourse?

4. a. The way(s) you like receiving oral sex?

b. The way(s) you don’t like receiving oral sex?

5. a. The way(s) you like giving oral sex?

b. The way(s) you don’t like giving oral sex?

6. a. What you like about the amount of variety in your sex life?

b. What you don’t like about the amount of variety in your sex life?

100