Texting, sexting, and attachment in college students’ romantic relationships

Abstract

In this study, we explored how texting and sexting practices are related to attachment in college students’ (n = 744) committed romantic relationships. Participants completed a survey containing questions about their texting and sexting practices and attachment styles with relationship partners. Results showed that texting and sexting are relatively common in young adult romantic relationships, and texting and sexting are both significantly related to attachment style. However, whereas text messaging was more common among those with secure attachments (i.e., those with less attachment avoidance), sexting (both texts and pictures) was more common among those with insecure attachments, particularly those with higher attachment avoidance. Whereas anxious attachment predicted variance in sending sex text messages only, attachment avoidance contributed unique variance in sending both sex texts and pictures. This relationship was moderated by gender—avoidant men were more likely than avoidant women to send sex text and picture messages to relationship partners.

Introduction

In this fast-changing landscape of interpersonal communication, mobile technologies are increasingly being used to forge and sustain social relationships (Gross, 2004, Lenhart et al., 2010, Lewis and Fabos, 2005, Licoppe, 2004, Van Kleemput, 2010). More specifically, text messaging is beginning to dominate the landscape of interpersonal communication, having surpassed voice calls in popularity, especially among teenagers and young adults (Lenhart et al., 2010, Nielsen Online, 2009). Although some researchers have focused on the positive aspects of these new technologies in the facilitation of social relationships (Lewis and Fabos, 2005, Licoppe, 2004), numerous media accounts have portrayed the impact of these technologies in a negative light. For example, reporters have suggested that a “texting craze” has gripped the US (Visco, 2008). More recent media reports have been even more distressing, suggesting that sexting (sending sexually explicit messages via text or picture messages) is “shockingly common among teens” (CBS News, 2009). And these headlines have not escaped the attention of local authorities, who, in some cases have charged teens with criminal possession and distribution of child pornography for possessing or forwarding nude pictures (Brunker, 2009).

Although a great amount of attention (often negative) has been devoted to texting and sexting, there has been relatively little discussion about the normality of these behaviors within the current climate of interpersonal relationships. Clearly, texting is popular: 72% of all teens report that they use text messaging, and those that are text messaging report sending approximately 3000 texts per month (Lenhart et al., 2010). However, studies examining the social and psychological characteristics of those who engage in texting are just beginning to emerge (Ishii, 2006, Jin and Peña, 2010, Pierce, 2009, Reid and Reid, 2010). Sexting appears to be relatively less common: a recent survey of sexting behaviors revealed that 20% of teens (13–19) and 31% of young adults (20–26) have sent or posted sexually explicit picture messages (The National Campaign, 2008). Policymakers have just recently begun to address the pervasiveness and severity of this issue among minors. For example, the California State Senate has recently passed a no-sexting bill (SB919) that allows for expulsion of students who engage in sexting on school property or on the way to or from school (Lee, 2011). However, there have been few empirical studies that have examined either the prevalence of sexting in adults or the psychological or social characteristics of adults who send sex messages. The only known study on the latter topic is a very recent study by Weisskirch and Delevi (2011). These researchers examined sexting as it relates to attachment characteristics, which is a promising line of inquiry that has shed some light on the motivations behind sexting. However, due to their limited sample size and the few men that were involved in the study (n = 22), the generalizability of their results is limited.

Early attempts to define and delineate attachment styles were based on infants’ attachment to their primary caregivers (Ainsworth et al., 1978), but an increasingly wide body of research has examined the concept of attachment with regard to adult relationships (Brennan et al., 1998, Bartholomew and Horowitz, 1991, Hazan and Shaver, 1987, Mikulincer and Shaver, 2003, Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007). Within this research, attachment was originally defined categorically—individuals were described as secure, anxious, or avoidant based on their response patterns (Ainsworth et al., 1978, Hazan and Shaver, 1987). In contemporary research, a model based on the two orthogonal dimensions of anxiety and avoidance (Brennan et al., 1998) is most widely used.

Within the context of romantic relationships, those who exhibit anxious attachment demonstrate both an intense desire for closeness and an intense fear of abandonment or separation. Anxiously attached individuals are also likely to seek approval from others and feel distressed when their needs for proximity to their partners are unmet. Meanwhile, those who exhibit avoidant attachment have a fear of dependence, self-disclosure, and intimacy, choosing to be self-reliant and independent, even within the context of close relationships. According to Mikulincer and Shaver, 2003, Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007, these different attachment styles give rise to different relationship strategies. Highly anxious individuals tend to employ “hyperactivating” strategies, or attempts to draw their partner closer, in response to their fears of losing their partner’s interest. Meanwhile, highly avoidant individuals employ “deactivating” strategies, or attempts to distance themselves from partners so that they are neither dependent on nor relied upon for emotional support.

Although few known studies have examined the relationships between text messaging and relationship characteristics, specific directional predictions about text messaging and attachment can be made based on the existing communication literature. Research has shown that mobile phones support a connected presence, which would be useful in sustaining close, committed relationships (Licoppe, 2004). With regard to text messaging specifically, studies have shown that text messaging helps to strengthen bonds and foster intimacy, mainly within existing dyadic relationships (Hian et al., 2004, Ishii, 2006). However, texting is viewed by some as a less intimate form of communication than voice calls (Reid & Reid, 2010), and those who prefer voice calls to communicate with relationship partners tend to have higher levels of intimacy (Emmers-Sommer, 2004), love, and commitment, and lower levels of relational uncertainty (Jin & Peña, 2010). Thus, text messaging would probably be used less often among those with insecure attachment styles, either because of a need for greater certainty in their relationship (anxiously-attached individuals) or an aversion to intimacy within the relationship (avoidantly-attached individuals). In contrast, among those with secure relationship styles, text messages would likely be used more often, to sustain relationship bonds and foster intimacy.

With regard to sexting, recent work has shown a positive relationship between sexting behaviors and attachment anxiety within the context of relationships (Weisskirch & Delevi, 2011). Weisskirch and Delevi (2011) found that attachment anxiety was related to propositioning sex in messages, but this relationship was significant only among those in relationships, and attachment style did not relate significantly to any other sexting behaviors (e.g., sending a sexually suggestive text message or nude photo). In their conclusions, the authors hypothesized that anxiously-attached individuals might use sexting as a means to elicit a response or seek reassurance from their partners. This corresponds to research that suggests that anxiously-attached individuals may use sex to gain reassurance that their partner is emotionally invested in the relationship (Davis et al., 2004). However, because of the limited number of people in the study (N = 128), the even smaller proportion in relationships (58%), and the predominance of women in the sample (n = 106), it is not known whether the non-significant relationships found between anxious attachment and sexting behaviors are a result these sample limitations, or if the results are generalizable to larger, more representative samples of people who are in relationships. Thus, a goal of this study was to confirm this association between sexting behaviors (within relationships) and anxious attachment in a larger sample that includes more men.

Interestingly, there were no significant relations found between sexting and avoidant attachment in the Weisskirch and Delevi (2011) study. Attachment literature would suggest that sexting would be appealing to those with attachment avoidance, who may engage in more frequent sexual activity, especially casual sex (Brennan and Shaver, 1995, Feeney and Noller, 1990, Feeney et al., 1993, Gentzler and Kerns, 2004, Schmitt, 2005). Casual sex allows individuals to have sexual experiences without commitment or attachment. Those with secure attachments usually prefer to have sex within the context of committed relationships (Brennan & Shaver, 1995) as an expression of the emotional intimacy they feel for their partners (Tracy et al., 2003). However, those who are avoidantly attached do not necessarily associate physical and emotional intimacy (Gentzler and Kerns, 2004, Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007, Schachner and Shaver, 2004, Schmitt, 2005), which makes casual sex, an act devoid of emotional intimacy or attachment, more appealing. For those in committed relationships, sexting might be the sexual interaction that most closely resembles casual sex, because partners maintain a physical distance, and the interchange requires very little emotional attachment or intimacy. Therefore, sexting would allow individuals with avoidant attachments to engage in sexual acts with partners without investing either physical or emotional intimacy.

The non-significant relationships between sexting and avoidant attachment in the Weisskirch and Delevi (2011) study might be attributable to the gender distribution of the participants. In their study, only 22 of the total participants were men. It is very likely that gender plays a moderating role in the relationship between sexting and attachment because there appear to be gender differences in both attachment styles and the ways in which attachment relates to sexual behaviors. The differences between men and women that are most relevant to the present study relate to attachment avoidance and their attitudes toward casual sex and masturbation. More specifically, men tend to be more avoidant, have more positive views of casual sex and masturbation, and at least among college students, are more likely to agree to have casual sex than women (Bartholomew and Horowitz, 1991, Brennan et al., 1998, Clark and Hatfield, 1989, Peterson and Hyde, 2010). As mentioned, sexting, because it requires little emotional investment, could be considered a form of casual sex. Additionally, sexting, like other forms of cybersex, may include masturbation (Cooper & Griffin-Shelley, 2002). Considering these findings together, we expect the relations between sexting and attachment avoidance to be particularly strong for men.

In this study, we explored the relations between text messaging, sexting, and attachment styles within college students’ romantic relationships. Based on previous surveys of young adult samples in the US, we hypothesized that both texting and sexting would be relatively common in the relationships of young adults. Additionally, based on the attachment literature, we hypothesized texting and sexting frequency within relationships would be related to attachment style. More specifically, we expected anxious and avoidant attachment to be negatively related to sending text messages to relationship partners. For those with anxious attachments, text messages may be viewed as a less intimate form of communication than others (e.g., voice calls), and for those with avoidant attachments, text messages might be viewed as creating a connected presence, which these individuals would want to avoid. In contrast, we expected anxious and avoidant attachment to be positively related to sending sex messages to relationship partners. For anxiously-attached individuals sexting could be used as a hyperactivating strategy or a reassurance-seeking behavior (Weisskirch & Delevi, 2011), and for avoidantly-attached individuals, sexting could be used as a form of casual sex. As the definition of online sexual activity includes using either text or graphics for sexual purposes (Cooper & Griffin-Shelley, 2002), we included questions about both sexually explicit text and picture messages. However, because these actions require different kinds of self-disclosure (e.g., only picture messages involve disclosure of physical features), we analyzed them separately to determine if there were any differences in either frequency of the behavior or the relationship between these behaviors and attachment styles. Finally, we expected gender to moderate the relationship between attachment and sexting, especially for attachment avoidance.