<%BANNER%>

How Parenting Style and Religiosity Affect the Timing of Jewish Adolescents' Sexual Debut


PAGE 1

HOW PARENTING STYLE AND RELIGIOSITY AFFECT THE TIMING OF JEWISH ADOLESCENTS SEXUAL DEBUT By ROBERT ETZKIN A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2004

PAGE 2

Copyright 2004 by Robert Etzkin

PAGE 3

I would like to dedicate this paper to th e many people who contributed to my upbringing as a Jewish adolescent. I feel very fortunate to have been constantly surrounded by an extraordinarily strong web of support and I am forever thankful for the many people who have provided me with infinite amounts of love, encouragement, and guidance.

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the many people who have contributed to my success and development as a student and as a person. First, I would like to thank Dr. Rose Barnett for being my thesis chair and providing me hours (and years) of guidance and direction with my study and for putting equal as much time and energy into support of my graduate school experience. I would also like to extend gratitude to my other committee members Dr. Suzanna Smith, and Dr. Stuart Schwartz for their continued support, insight, and constant belief in me and in my work. It was invaluable to me to have all three of my committee members continued support. I would also like to thank Janice Col for helping to make my statistics make sense. Most importantly I would like to thank my family. I owe my parents more than anything I could ever repay them for everything they have given me. I am forever grateful for all of the encouragement, guidance, love, and opportunities they have provided for me my whole life. More now, than ever before, do I appreciate all of the times I was pushed to succeed, and all of the times I was allowed to fail. I love you. I would also like to thank my brother Josh. His trailblazing efforts and thick footprints through high school, college, and graduate school left me an easy path to follow and shoes impossible to fill. He set a high standard of excellence academically, and as a person morally and ethically, that undoubtedly has contributed to my development and success as a student and as a person. iv

PAGE 5

In addition, I would like to express my gratitude to my extended family members: Uncle Al, Aunt Bunny, Cousin Brian, and Cousin David. I feel like one of the luckiest people in the world to have had the opportunity to grow up with all of them less than one mile away. This closeness provided me a great amount of support, a great amount of love, and a great amount of opportunities to have two additional brothers that were always there for me. Furthermore, I would like to thank my step-father Mark Rosenfield for accepting me into his family and for all of the support, wisdom and new experiences he has provided me. Also, I would like to thank my grandmothers Mitzi Goelman and Paula Etzkin for their love, support, and constant reinforcement of my Jewish background. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to my best friend Benjamin Kaplan. Going to the same schools for sixteen years and having almost identical hobbies and interests provided us with countless memories and experiences that I look forward to reminiscing about upon his safe arrival back to the States from medical school in Israel. If ever there was one motto that got me through tough times, helped me overcome challenges, and helped me maintain a positive outlook to the future it was this: Everything will work out for the best. --My Grandma Mitzi Goelman v

PAGE 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................ix ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................xiv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 Introductory Background Statement.............................................................................1 Parenting Style.......................................................................................................2 Religiosity..............................................................................................................6 Statement of the Problem..............................................................................................7 Research Questions.......................................................................................................8 Primary Research Questions..................................................................................8 Secondary Research Questions..............................................................................8 Significance of the Study..............................................................................................8 Delimitations.................................................................................................................9 Definition of Terms......................................................................................................9 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE.....................................................................................11 Introduction.................................................................................................................11 The Problem................................................................................................................11 Parental Communication and Parenting Style............................................................13 Parental Communication.....................................................................................13 Parenting Style.....................................................................................................15 Religiosity...................................................................................................................17 Religious Affiliation............................................................................................17 Religious Service Attendance..............................................................................19 Community Religiosity.......................................................................................20 Other Factors.......................................................................................................21 Family Structure..................................................................................................21 Academics...........................................................................................................26 Gender.................................................................................................................27 Peers....................................................................................................................28 Summary.....................................................................................................................28 vi

PAGE 7

3 METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................31 Population and Sample...............................................................................................31 Settings.......................................................................................................................32 Research Design and Subject Recruitment.................................................................33 Instrumentation...........................................................................................................33 Personal Information...........................................................................................34 Parenting Style.....................................................................................................36 Religiosity............................................................................................................37 Statistical Analysis......................................................................................................41 Primary Research Questions................................................................................41 Secondary Research Questions............................................................................42 Additional Results...............................................................................................43 4 RESULTS...................................................................................................................44 Descriptive Results.....................................................................................................44 Gender.................................................................................................................45 Religious Classification.......................................................................................45 Sexual Intercourse...............................................................................................46 Marriage..............................................................................................................46 Parenting Style.....................................................................................................46 Overall Religiosity Score....................................................................................55 Analysis of Research Questions.................................................................................56 Primary Research Questions................................................................................56 Religiosity............................................................................................................68 Virgins.................................................................................................................70 Summary.....................................................................................................................73 5 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................74 Findings......................................................................................................................74 Descriptive Results.....................................................................................................74 Primary Research Questions................................................................................75 Secondary Research Questions............................................................................76 Parenting Style............................................................................................................76 Religiosity...................................................................................................................80 Gender.........................................................................................................................88 Summary.....................................................................................................................88 Limitations..................................................................................................................88 Implications for Practice.............................................................................................89 Recommendations for Future Research......................................................................93 APPENDIX A INTERNAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL LETTERS.........................................96 vii

PAGE 8

B INFORMED CONSENT FORM................................................................................98 C SURVEY INSTRUMENT........................................................................................100 D RELIGIOSITY INDEX GUIDE...............................................................................106 E ADDITIONAL TABLES OF RESULTS.................................................................110 LIST OF REFERENCES.................................................................................................131 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH...........................................................................................140 viii

PAGE 9

LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1 Participant gender.....................................................................................................45 4-2 Participant Classification of Judaism.......................................................................45 4-3 Participant experience of sex....................................................................................46 4-4 Respondents selection of parents parenting style..................................................51 4-5 Influence of parents parenting style on decision to have, or not to have sex..........51 4-6 Non-virgin respondents score on the Sum Religious Affiliation Index..................53 4-7 Non-virgin respondents scores on the Sum Religious Attendance Index...............54 4-8 Non-virgin respondents score on the Sum Community Religiosity Index.............55 4-9 Non-virgin respondents scores on the overall Sum Religiosity Index.....................56 4-10 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among parenting styles..........................57 4-11 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among parenting styles ANOVA...........57 4-12 Post-hoc evaluation of significant differences of mean age of sexual debut between parenting styles..........................................................................................58 4-13 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Sum Religiosity Index.........................................................................................................................60 4-14 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Sum Religious Index ANOVA.........................................................................................................61 4-15 Post-hoc evaluation of significant differences of mean age of sexual debut between levels of Sum Religiosity Index.................................................................62 4-16 Comparison of age of sexual debut among levels of the Religious Affiliation Index.........................................................................................................................63 4-17 Comparison of age of sexual debut among scores on Religious Affiliation Index ANOVA...................................................................................................................63 ix

PAGE 10

4-18 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Religious Attendance Index.........................................................................................................................64 4-19 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Religious Attendance Index ANOVA.........................................................................................................64 4-20 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Community Religiosity Index......................................................................................................65 4-21 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Community Religiosity Index ANOVA.......................................................................................66 4-22 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut by gender................................................66 4-23 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut by gender ANOVA................................67 E-1 Age at first date......................................................................................................111 E-2 Age at first serious relationship..............................................................................111 E-3 Parental discussion of sex......................................................................................111 E-4 Frequency of sexual discussion..............................................................................112 E-5 Depth of sexual discussion.....................................................................................112 E-6 Number of topics covered in parental sexual discussion.......................................112 E-7 Sexual discussion included abstinence...................................................................112 E-8 Sexual discussion included safe sex.......................................................................113 E-9 Sexual discussion included physical development.................................................113 E-10 Sexual discussion included emotion-based intimacy.............................................113 E-11 Sexual discussion included consequences..............................................................113 E-12 Age at first sexual discussion.................................................................................114 E-13 Respondents characterization of own familys level of observance at age of reference point........................................................................................................114 E-14 Respondents characterization of affiliation to Judaism at age of reference point.115 E-15 Frequency of religious service attendance at age of reference point.....................115 E-16 Attendance to Hebrew school/Sunday school at age of reference point................115 x

PAGE 11

E-17 School Type............................................................................................................115 E-18 Percentage of respondents that had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah..........................................116 E-19 Level of respondent involvement in Jewish youth group at age of reference point........................................................................................................................116 E-20 Proportion of respondents who grew up in communities that had Jewish Community Centers and if they were a member....................................................116 E-21 Respondents assessment of the level of their commumitys religiosity...............116 E-22 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first date ANOVA........117 E-23 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first serious relationship ANOVA.................................................................................................................117 E-24 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first sexual discussion with parent ANOVA..............................................................................................117 E-25 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among frequencies of sexual discussions ANOVA..............................................................................................117 E-26 Post-hoc evaluations of significant differences between mean age of sexual debut between frequencies of sexual discussion....................................................118 E-27 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of depth of sexual discussions ANOVA..............................................................................................118 E-28 Post-hoc evaluations of significant differences between mean age of sexual debut between levels of depth of sexual discussion...............................................119 E-29 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among classifications of Judaism ANOVA.................................................................................................................119 E-30 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationship between mean age of sexual debut among classifications of Judaism.................................................................120 E-31 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious affiliation ANOVA.................................................................................................................120 E-32 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationship between mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious affiliation.............................................................121 E-33 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious service attendance ANOVA...............................................................................................121 E-34 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Hebrew school attendance ANOVA...............................................................................................122 xi

PAGE 12

E-35 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious service.................................................................122 E-36 Post-hoc evaluations of significant relationships between mean age of sexual debut among levels of Hebrew school attendance.................................................123 E-37 Comparion of mean age of sexual debut among primary school types ANOVA..123 E-38 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of involvement in Jewish youth groups ANOVA...........................................................................................123 E-39 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut among levels of involvement in Jewish youth groups...........................................124 E-40 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among Jewish Community Center members and non-members ANOVA....................................................................124 E-41 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut among Jewish Community Center members and non-members............................125 E-42 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of community religiosity ANOVA................................................................................................125 E-43 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut among levels of community religiosity..................................................................126 E-44 Frequency of restrictions on age at first date Chi-Square......................................126 E-45 Frequency of ages at first serious relationship Chi-Square....................................127 E-46 Frequency of if parents discussed sex Chi-Square.................................................127 E-47 Frequency of frequency of sexual discussion Chi-Square.....................................127 E-48 Frequency of levels of depth of sexual discussion Chi-Square..............................127 E-49 Frequency of ages at first sexual discussion Chi-Square.......................................128 E-50 Mean of number topics covered in sexual discussion............................................128 E-51 Frequency of parents parenting style Chi-Square.................................................128 E-52 Frequency of levels influence believed that parents parenting style had on decision not to have sex Chi-Square......................................................................128 E-53 Frequency of classifications of Judaism Chi-Square.............................................129 E-54 Frequency of levels of affiliation to Judaism Chi-Square......................................129 xii

PAGE 13

E-55 Frequency of frequency of religious service attendance Chi-Square.....................129 E-56 Frequency of frequency of Hebrew school attendance Chi-Square.......................129 E-57 Frequency of primary school type Chi-Square......................................................129 E-58 Frequency of Bar/Bat Mitzvah Chi-Square............................................................130 E-59 Frequency of levels of involvement in a Jewish youth group Chi-Square.............130 E-60 Frequency of respondents communities having Jewish Community Centers and if they were members Chi-Square...................................................................130 E-61 Frequency of levels of community religiosity Chi-Square....................................130 xiii

PAGE 14

Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science HOW PARENTING STYLE AND RELIGIOSITY AFFECT THE TIMING OF JEWISH ADOLESCENTS SEXUAL DEBUT By Robert Etzkin May 2004 Chair: Rosemary V. Barnett Major Department: Family, Youth, and Community Sciences The purpose of my study is to assess whether or not parenting style has an effect on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts. To examine parenting style, Baumrinds classification of parenting styles was used (1978). The study will also examine whether religiosity affects the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts. One hundred sixty-eight research participants between the ages of 18 and 22 from a large university in the Southeast participated in my study. A survey instrument was created, revised, test-piloted, edited and then administered at three fraternities and two sororities to examine parenting style and religiosity. The demographic portion of the survey requested information related to gender, age, religious beliefs, intercourse, and marriage. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, frequency chi square tests, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA); while post hoc results were determined through Tukeys honestly significant difference. xiv

PAGE 15

Results showed that authoritative parenting provides a delay in the age of sexual debut for Jewish adolescents. All other parenting styles had mean ages less then the overall mean age of sexual debut, 17.10 years old, with indifferent parenting having the earliest. Results also showed that differing levels of religiosity have significant differences in their mean ages of sexual debut. Differences were found when comparing no substantial religiosity to minimal religiosity, and when comparing minimal religiosity to high religiosity. The findings suggest that both parenting style and religiosity independently affect the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. The study has implications for understanding two of the many factors that may affect the timing of a Jewish adolescents sexual debut, and may help parents protect their adolescent from the negative effects associated with early sexual debut such as low academic achievement. Recommendations for future research include exploring the effects of family structure and peer networks to understand fully the many factors that affect the timing of adolescents sexual debut. xv

PAGE 16

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This chapter will introduce the main concepts of investigation in this study including, but not limited to the following: adolescence, parenting styles, religiosity, and other factors. It also will state the main research problem to be investigated, as well as the primary and secondary research questions to be answered through the study. The assumptions, delimitations, limitations, and main definitions also will be described. Introductory Background Statement Adolescence is a transition period: biologically, psychologically, socially, and economically. It is an exciting time in life that includes many positive situations laced in potential and also many negative situations where the consequences might not seem so evident. Adolescents become interested in sex and become biologically capable of reproduction. In addition, adolescents begin to develop complex cognitive abilities, their lives become more sophisticated and complicated, and they receive a taste of autonomy as they gain an ability to make their own decisions. In the United States, adolescents mature into adulthood and gain the right to work, to get married, and to vote (Arnett, 1994). And eventually, adolescents are expected to be able to support themselves financially. In most societies, adolescence is a time of growing up and of moving from the immaturity of childhood into the maturity of adulthood (Steinberg, 1999). There are many activities across societies that have been socially constructed to be adult behaviors. For example, in the United States, one is not allowed to legally consume alcohol until the age of 21. This law might partially aim to ensure that drinking alcohol 1

PAGE 17

2 remains exclusively an adult behavior. Other adult behaviors might include driving a motor vehicle, smoking, and engaging in sexual intercourse. Some might believe that these behaviors are more appropriate for adults because they all have potentially serious and dangerous consequences. Driving can result in serious injury or death to ones self and/or others (The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 2003). Smoking has been scientifically proven to be hazardous to ones health and others around the smoker (United States Surgeon General, 2003). Finally, engaging in sexual intercourse can spread diseases and can initiate reproduction (Fores, Tschann & Marin, 2002). Therefore, engaging in sexual intercourse as an adolescent can be considered a risk-related behavior. It is important to note that while sexual intercourse can occur between members of the same sex or opposite sex, this study will examine adolescents sexual debut in the context of heterosexual relationships. Parenting Style A childs family, as the most influential socializing agent of a young child, provides a foundation for what is, and what is not, acceptable within the family and outside the home in society. Children watch, imitate and learn from their parents. Therefore, parenting style, or how a parent establishes and enforces rules and boundaries for their child(ren), becomes very important. Parents can be strict, loose or inconsistent with their rules, and they can set realistic, unrealistic or inconsistent goals for their children. It is possible that different parenting styles may affect child outcomes differently. There are many ways to characterize parents behavior toward their children. This study will utilize an approach that comes from the work of psychologist Diana Baumrind (1996, 1978). According to her theory, two aspects of a parents behavior toward the

PAGE 18

3 adolescent are critical: parental responsiveness and parental demandingness (Maccoby & Martin, 1983). Parental responsiveness refers to the degree to which a parent responds to their childs needs in an accepting and supportive manner. Parental demandingness is the extent to which a parent expects and demands mature, responsible behavior from their child. Parental responsiveness and parental demandingness are basically independent of each other. In other words, it is possible for a parent to be very demanding without being responsive and at the same time it is possible for a parent to be very responsive without being demanding. Therefore, various combinations of these dimensions can be examined. For example, a parent who is very responsive but not at all demanding is labeled permissive, whereas one who is equally responsive but also very demanding is labeled authoritative. Parents who are very demanding but not responsive are labeled authoritarian; parents who are neither demanding nor responsive are labeled indifferent. These are the four general parenting patterns as developed by Baumrind (1996, 1978). These four parenting styles will now be broken down further in order to gain a more complete understanding of the general characteristics of parents within each style, and their varied expectations of children and adolescents, affect child outcomes according to Baumrind. Permissive parents behave in an accepting and passive way concerning issues of discipline. They tend to place relatively few demands on their child, giving the child a high degree of freedom to act as he or she wishes. Permissive parents are more likely to believe that control is an infringement on their childs freedom that may interfere with their childs healthy development. Instead of actively shaping their childs behavior,

PAGE 19

4 permissive parents are more likely to view themselves as resources that their child may choose to use (Berk, 2000). Authoritative parents are warm but firm. They set standards for their childs conduct that are consistent with their childs developing needs and capabilities. They place a high value on the development of autonomy and self-direction but assume the ultimate responsibility for their childs behavior. Authoritative parents deal with their child in a rational, issue-oriented manner, frequently engaging in discussion and explanation with their children over matters of discipline (Berk, 2000). Authoritarian parents place a high value on obedience and conformity. They tend to favor more punitive, absolute, and forceful disciplinary measures. Verbal communication is not usually on an equal level in authoritarian households, because the underlying belief of authoritarian parents is that their child should accept without question all of the rules and standards established by the parents. They usually do not encourage independent behavior and, instead, place a good amount of importance on restricting their childs autonomy (Berk, 2000). Indifferent parents try to do whatever is necessary to minimize the time and energy they must devote to interacting with their child. In extreme cases, indifferent parents may be considered neglectful in legal terms. They know little about their childs activities and whereabouts, show little interest in their childs experiences at school or with friends, rarely converse with their child, and rarely consider their childs opinion when making decisions. Rather than raising their child according to a set of beliefs about what is good for their childs development (as do the other three parenting types), indifferent parents

PAGE 20

5 are parent centered and structure their home life primarily around their own needs and interests (Berk, 2000). The organization process proposed by Baumrind provides a useful way of summarizing and examining some of the relations between parenting practices and adolescent development. In general, adolescents who have been raised in authoritative households are overall far better off than their peers who have been reared in authoritarian, permissive, or indifferent homes. Adolescents raised in authoritative homes are more responsible, more self-assured, more adaptive, more creative, more curious, more socially skilled, and more successful in school. Adolescents raised in authoritarian homes, in contrast, are more dependent, more passive, less socially adept, less self-assured, and less intellectually curious. Adolescents raised in permissive households are often less mature, more irresponsible, more conforming to their peers, and less able to assume positions of leadership. Adolescents raised in indifferent homes are often impulsive and more likely to be involved in delinquent behavior and in premature experiments with sex, drugs, and alcohol (Fuligni & Eccles, 1993; Kurdeck & Fine, 1994; Lamborn et al., 1991; Pulkkinen, 1982; Steinberg et al., 1994). Furthermore, although occasional exceptions to these general patterns have been found, the evidence linking authoritative parenting and healthy adolescent development is remarkably strong, and has been found in studies throughout a wide range of ethnic, regional, and socioeconomic groups (Dornbusch et al., 1987; Shucksmith, Hendry, & Glendinning, 1995; Steinberg et al., 1994; Weiss & Schwartz, 1996). This study will refer to Baumrinds classifications of parenting styles throughout in order to have a clear understanding of the different ways that parents interact with their child(ren).

PAGE 21

6 Religiosity Religious beliefs, like moral and political beliefs, also become more abstract, more formatted, and more independent during adolescence. This may be seen as a result of the cognitive development of adolescents. As adolescents become increasingly capable of thinking in more complex ways, they begin to form their own system of beliefs, rather than relying solely on the teachings of their parents (Fowler, 1981). Three aspects of religiosity can affect an adolescents timing of sexual debut: affiliation, attendance, and community religiosity. Some believe that the type of religious affiliation is less important than actually being affiliated. For example, there is not a strong difference found between adolescents who are affiliated as Christians and adolescents who are affiliated as Jewish. However, there is a major difference between those adolescents who are affiliated as either Christian or Jewish compared to those adolescents who are not affiliated at all (Rostosky, 2003). An exception could appear if religions that differ more than Christianity and Judaism were compared, but because Jewish adolescents are the group being examined and Christianity is the major religion of the United States, the conclusion drawn remains valid. Religious service attendance has been found to have a circular relationship with timing of sexual debut. The more frequently adolescents attend religious services the more likely they are to delay sexual debut. Similarly, the earlier an adolescents sexual debut, the less likely he or she is to attend religious services (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). The community the adolescent lives in may also affect the timing of sexual debut. For example, if an adolescent grows up in a highly religious community, the social norms of their community might include abstinence from premarital sex; teens may never consider having sex before marriage. In contrast, if an adolescent grows up in a

PAGE 22

7 community where religion is never even talked about or is only minimally visible, it may seem more socially acceptable to have premarital sex. Some, but not all, research suggests that, overall, religious adolescents are significantly less likely than their peers to engage in premarital sexual intercourse, and somewhat less likely to engage in delinquent behavior, such as drug use; they are also less depressed (Benson, Donahue, & Erickson, 1989; Donahue, 1994; Litchfield, Thomas, & Li, 1997; Wright, Frost, & Wisecarver, 1993). While religiosity, parenting style, and family structure may play a role in the timing of adolescent sexual debut, it is important to mention that an adolescents peers may also affect the timing of sexual debut. As a parents role in their adolescents life diminishes, the adolescents peers become increasingly influential. Whereas acquaintances or members of an adolescents social circle of friends may have little influence, the peers that the adolescent believes to be their close friends, particularly their best friends, hold a high level of trust and power. The complexity of the many levels that peers can exist on makes the task of attempting to decipher the mutual influences of adolescent peers a very difficult task. Due to the power that peers may have in affecting adolescents decision making, it is important to consider whether peers affect the timing of sexual debut. Statement of the Problem This study assesses whether or not parenting style has an effect on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts. It also examines the effect that the four parenting styles (permissive, authoritative, authoritarian, and indifferent) have on the age of sexual debut. The study also examines whether religiosity affects the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts.

PAGE 23

8 Research Questions The primary research questions focus on the main area of interest, parenting style among Jewish families and its impact on adolescent sexual debut. The secondary research questions focus on an additional area of interest, religiosity for Jewish adolescents and its impact on sexual debut. The final area of study examines differences in sexual debut between male and female Jewish adolescents. Primary Research Questions 1. Is there a difference in the timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents raised with different parenting styles? 2. Do any of the four parenting styles positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts? 3. Do any of the four parenting styles negatively affect (expediate) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts? Secondary Research Questions 1. Is there a difference in the timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents with different levels of religiosity? 2. Do any of the three aspects of religiosity positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut? 3. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut between male and female Jewish adolescents? Significance of the Study Many studies have been done on the timing of adolescent sexual debuts (Noell & Biglan, 1995; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999; Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). Studies have also examined the timing of sexual debut among racial and ethnic minorities (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993; Gillmore, Archibald, Morrison, Wilsdon, Wells, Hoppe, Nahom, & Murowchick, 2002; Upchurch, Aneshensel, Sucoff, Levy-Storms, 1999). However, there is only a small collection of studies on the timing of adolescents sexual

PAGE 24

9 debut among religious minorities (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993; Reed & Myers, 1991; Thornton & Camburn, 1989). Furthermore, there is an absence of literature specifically pertaining to Jewish adolescents sexual debut. There is a need to bridge this gap in order to provide parents of Jewish adolescents research-based information on the impact of parenting styles on Jewish adolescent sexual debut. Delimitations Data were collected during the fall semester of 2003. Participants who volunteered had to have approximately ten to fifteen minutes of free time to complete the survey. Participants belonged to a single type of historically Jewish student organizations at a large university in the Southeastern United States. Limitations All subjects could choose not to participate in the study. Both genders may not be equally represented in the study. Students may not have answered all of the questions, causing incomplete data. The topic of adolescent sexual debut may be considered personal and may cause respondents to not always be truthful in all of their responses. A small convenience sample of Jewish fraternity and sorority members was used; therefore results cannot be generalized. Assumptions Students participating in the study accurately remember their sexual debut. Students participating in the study are accurately reporting on their sexual debut. Convenience sampling will provide significant results. Definition of Terms Adolescence refers to the transition between childhood and adulthood (Steinberg, 1999).

PAGE 25

10 Authoritarian parenting refers to a style of child rearing in which a parent is very demanding but not responsive (Baumrind, 1996, 1978). Authoritative parenting refers to a style of child rearing in which a parent is responsive but also very demanding (Baumrind, 1996, 1978). Bar/Bat Mitzvah is the religious ceremony in Judaism marking the young persons transition to adulthood (Steinberg, 1999). Community religiosity refers to the level of a communitys overall religious involvement and proscription of religious norms (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). Family structure is the form ones family takes on in respect to parents and siblings (Moore & Chase-Lansdale, 2001). Indifferent parenting refers to a style of child rearing in which a parent is neither demanding nor responsive (Baumrind, 1996, 1978). J.C.C. refers to the Jewish Community Center, an organization that began in 1854 to provide support for Jewish immigrants. These are now all across North America and provide many services such as day camps, fine and performing arts, nursery schools, athletics, services to the elderly, and informal education, all while still helping Jews settle into communities ( www.jcca.org 2004). Parental demandingness refers to the extent to which the parent expects and demands mature, responsible behavior from the child (Baumrind, 1996, 1978). Parental responsiveness refers to the degree to which a parent responds to their childs needs in an accepting, supportive manner (Baumrind, 1996, 1978). Parenting style refers to how a parent establishes and enforces rules and boundaries for their child(ren) (Steinberg, 1999). Permissive parenting refers to a style of child rearing in which a parent is very responsive but not at all demanding (Baumrind, 1996, 1978). Religiosity is the sum of ones religious involvement, religious attendance, and affection toward ones religion (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). Sexual debut refers to the first experience of sexual intercourse (Calhoun & Friel, 2001).

PAGE 26

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Introduction This chapter will present a literature review on adolescence and sexual debut. The review will include the following topics: parental communication and parenting style, religiosity, and other potential risk factors associated with early sexual debut. The chapter will conclude with a summary linking these areas together to set a research rationale for the present study. The Problem Human sexual activity is inherently related to many of the social and public health concerns and challenges in the United States today (Calhoun & Friel, 2001; Di Mauro, 1995). Adolescent sexual behavior has long been treated within the framework of the sociology of deviant behavior (Reiss, 1967), and for some researchers early adolescent sexual activity is viewed as another case of problem behavior (Jessor & Jessor, 1983; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997). These concerns stem from the potential risks surrounding adolescent sexual activity, which include early unintended pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases (Calhoun & Friel, 2001), and a high cost to society (Haurin & Mott, 1990). Public costs associated with welfare and other target programs have been well documented (Haurin & Mott, 1990; Hofferth, 1987; Moore & Burt, 1982). Costs to the individual in the form of lower educational and economic prospects and poor health have also been established (Haurin & Mott, 1990; Hofferth & Moore, 1979; Strobino, Grason, & Minkovitz, 2002). 11

PAGE 27

12 Of the 12 million cases of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) that are estimated to occur annually, adolescents account for one-quarter of those infected (Moore, 1992), and STDs have been increasing among adolescents since the 1970s (Center for Disease Control, 1992). According to the Center for Disease Control (1992), the cumulative number of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) cases among adolescents between 13 and 19 years old increased from 127 in January 1987 to 789 in December 1991 (Luster & Small, 1994), but declined to 402 in 2002 (CDC, 2004). Recently, the estimated number of AIDS cases diagnosed for adolescents (13-19) declined substantially through 1999, but the rate of decline slowed between 1999 and 2000. The number of adolescent AIDS cases diagnosed in 2000 was still 1.4 % lower than that in 1999 (CDC, 2001). While teenagers continue to contribute to the nations sexually transmitted disease problem, the same cannot be said about teenage pregnancy. In the United States the birth rate for teenagers declined steadily throughout the 1990s, falling from 62.1 births per 1,000 teenagers 15-19 years old in 1991 to 48.5 in 2000, a reduction of 22 percent. The birth rates for adolescents ages 15-19 years old and 15-17 years old in 2000 were at all-time lows (Center for Disease Control, 2002), and continue to decline (CDC, 2004). However, the problem remains that adolescents are beginning to have sex at younger ages and are therefore continuing to make themselves vulnerable to potential pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. Well over half, 60.5%, of high school seniors report that they have had sex (Brener et al., 2001). The age of sexual debut has been steadily declining, the number of sexual partners before age 18 has been increasing, and only one in five adolescents remain virgins by the time they turn twenty years old

PAGE 28

13 (Calhoun & Friel, 2001; Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994). The young adolescent is usually unprepared for difficult relationship decisions associated with close intimacy (Day, 1992), and because of their undeveloped decision-making process, they may not be able to realize the potential health and economic costs of their actions. Given these recent trends, adolescent sexuality continues to be an important area of research. Parental Communication and Parenting Style Parental Communication Communication of parental values is one of the primary means by which parents socialize their children. Regarding sexual activity, parents can directly reduce the risks their children face by doing such things as encouraging their adolescents to avoid unprotected intercourse and by monitoring their childrens comings and goings (Luster & Small, 1994). In view of this, it would seem that sex education in the family might be an important intervention for delaying the transition to sexual activity (Moore, Peterson, Furstenberg, 1986). Despite the widespread belief that parents should be the primary source of information about sexuality, in practice they usually are not (Abrams et al., 1990; Ansuini et al., 1996; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999; Rosenthal & Smith, 1995). Even when parents do communicate with their children about sexuality, they focus on issues relating to physical development and sexual safety rather than more psychological, relationship-based topics, or those which might be considered personal, such as practicing safe sex and emotion-based intimacy (Baldwin & Baranoski, 1990; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999; Rosenthal et al., 1997). Most parents find the task of providing sex education for their children daunting and one for which they feel ill-equipped (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999; Rosenthal et al.1997). Numerous researchers have reported that few

PAGE 29

14 parents provide a detailed sex education and many do not broach the topic at all (Furstenberg, 1976; Inazu & Fox, 1980; Kahn et al., 1985). There is a clear gap between what parents know they should do and what parents are actually doing. Meschke and Silbereisen (1999) reported that Jessor, Costa, Jessor, & Donovan (1983) found that poor communication with parents and lack of parental support predicted early initiation of adolescent sexual activity. By contrast, delayed debut is associated with high levels of parental monitoring and open parent-child communication about sexual issues (Levin, Xu, & Bartkowski, 2002). Communication is perceived as the principal method through which sexual knowledge and attitudes are transmitted (Pick & Palos, 1995). Therefore, parental communication about sexual issues is a key measure of family involvement in adolescents lives. The discussion of sex seems to have the effect of delaying sexual activity primarily among the daughters of traditional parents (Moore, Peterson, & Furstenberg, 1986), and other researchers have concluded parental communication decreases sexual activity (Inazu & Fox, 1980; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997). However, findings on this topic have been mixed. Some researchers have found no consistent effects of parental communication (Miller & Moore, 1990). Regardless of the findings of a few studies, some researchers still believe that parents need to learn how to provide the right amount of the right information at the right time, whether it concerns academic achievement or sexual development (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999). One reason parents fail as sex educators may be their biased sexual communication patterns. Parents, especially mothers, tend to tailor their communications to be gender-appropriate (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999), thus leaving feminine issues a blur in boys minds and masculine issue a blur in girls minds. Girls receive more information than

PAGE 30

15 boys do about such topics as menstruation, abortion, pregnancy, and dealing with sexual pressure, and less information on such topics as masturbation and wet dreams (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999). In addition, researchers have repeatedly reported that parents are less likely to discuss sex with sons than with daughters (Freeman, Rickels, Huggins, Mudd, Garcia, & Dickens, 1980; Kahn et al, 1985; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999). However, different things may work for boys than for girls and vice versa. For example, among daughters of traditional parents, the incidence of sexual activity is lower when the parents discuss sex and/or television programming with sexual content with their daughters. Moreover, the more that parents discuss decisions with their daughters, the lower the incidence of sexual activity among daughters with traditional parents. In addition, among sons, a tendency on the part of traditional parents to listen to their sons and discuss decisions is related to a lower probability of sexual activity. However, the discussion of sex per se is associated with a greater likelihood that sons were sexually experienced (Moore, Peterson, & Furstenberg, 1986). This clearly illustrates a possible discrepancy between what the effective communication tools are for sons and what they are for daughters. Parenting Style Parents who use less power-oriented (inductive or authoritative) means of control tend to have children who exhibit more socially appropriate behavior on a number of indicators (Miller, McCoy, Olson, & Wallace, 1986). Parenting styles may also play a larger role in determining adolescents ages of sexual debut. Parental monitoring and harsh discipline consistently have been shown to affect other minor deviant behaviors that are highly correlated with early sexual intercourse (Simons, Johnson & Conger, 1996; Whitbeck et al., 1999). Styles vary by parent; however some parenting styles seem

PAGE 31

16 to be more successful than others. For example, teens who view their parents as over controlling exhibit a greater number of sexual risk-taking behaviors (Barber, 1992; Rogers 1999). Sexual intercourse is most likely to occur among adolescents who have the most autonomy (the least parental control) to date whom they want, to date at an early age, and to control their own dating activities (where to go, when to come home, etc.) (Miller, McCoy, Olson & Wallace, 1986). Parents can significantly reduce the likelihood that their daughters will become pregnant by carefully supervising who they date, where they go, and their arrival time back home (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Miller, McCoy, Olson & Wallace, 1986). High levels of parental supervision (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985) and a close relationship between adolescents and their parents significantly predicted the later timing of adolescent sexual activity (Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997). However, the amount of monitoring and controlling can play a role too. Excessive strictness and restricting rules might increase the risk of having sexually permissive children (Miller, McCoy, Olson & Wallace, 1986). Past studies suggest that parents who use a highly controlling, authoritarian approach are least effective in producing subsequent internalization of parental values (Baumrind, 1996, 1973, 1971; Hoffman, 1975, 1970; Miller, McCoy, Olson, & Wallace, 1986). In the case of adolescent sexual behavior, parenting styles that maximize child compliance in the present might not be as effective in the future when adolescents are older and away from their parents immediate supervision (Miller, McCoy, Olson & Wallace, 1986). It should also be noted that the parenting style that adolescents perceive their parents to have might differ from the actual parenting style that a parent uses. Closer parent-child relationships are associated with delayed sexual debut

PAGE 32

17 but not pregnancy experience (Moore & Chase-Lansdale; Resnick et al., 1997). It is more important if this close parent-child relationship is characterized as close by the child rather than by the parent. Adolescents who perceive their parents as being supportive and emotionally close report less sexual risk-taking behaviors (Luster & Small, 1994; Rogers, 1999). Furthermore, a close parent-child relationship is not only important because of all of the positive effects, but also because there are less negative effects. For example, poor parent-child relationships have greater effects on timing of first intercourse than do positive parent-child relationships (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). Positive parental communication and monitoring are protective factors for all adolescents academically, emotionally, and sexually. Adolescent sexual activity has many costs to the individuals involved, their families, and society. Parental discussion of sexual issues with their adolescent may provide a delay in the onset of their adolescents sexual debut (Inazu & Fox, 1980; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997). Religiosity Religious Affiliation Religious institutions still play a substantial role in determining and reinforcing values in American society (Studer & Thornton, 1987). For many individuals, religious values are the source of moral proscriptions or general limitations and the teachings of the churches are therefore likely to play a role in the formation of individual attitudes, values, and decisions (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). In terms of adolescent sexual debut, religiosity may represent an important protective factor against risk among adolescents (Coie & Watt, 1993). Many adolescents may not engage in risk-related behavior due to their religious beliefs and the proscriptions of their faith (Cochran & Beeghley, 1991;

PAGE 33

18 Jessor, 1993; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985). Recent reviews suggest that religiosity is associated with the delay of adolescent sexual debut (Rostosky & Galliher, 2000). The type of religion that one adheres to appears not to be very significant. Religious participation is more important in determining sexual attitudes and behavior than is religious affiliation (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). Furthermore, church attendance and adherence to religious teachings are probably more important in understanding sexual behavior than is the type of religion to which one belongs (Inazu & Fox, 1980; Zelnik et al., 1981). Thornton and Camburn (1989) found that the effects of attendance on sexuality do not appear to depend greatly on religious affiliation and the effects of premarital sexual attitudes on attendance at religious services are fairly similar across major religious traditions. The religion that one adheres to and the frequency of attendance to religious services serve two separate purposes. Whereas religious affiliation may set the context for developing sexual values, greater frequency of church attendance can reinforce the conservative influence of these values on adolescent sexual behavior (Mott, 1984; Studer & Thornton, 1987). Religious motivation may play a factor in an adolescents age of sexual debut. Zaleski and Schiaffnio (2000) assert that those who attend church and participate in religion based upon their master motive or religion that shapes their everyday actions have more frequent church attendance (Allport & Ross, 1967), as well as more conservative sexual attitudes (Reed & Meyers, 1991). In contrast, those who use their religion for outside ends, such as security, solace, status, and self-justification are likely to have more liberal sexual attitudes (Reed & Meyers, 1991).

PAGE 34

19 Church attendance and religious importance are likely to produce less permissive attitudes and less engagement in premarital sex, while the acceptance of premarital sex is likely to reduce religious participation. Both of these mechanisms would lead to a negative correlation between religious involvement and premarital sex (Thornton & Camburn, 1989) but would not show which one is a cause or which one is an effect. Regardless of which is the cause, most literature agrees that it is those without a religious affiliation at all that would be the most likely to accept and engage in premarital intercourse (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). Nevertheless, it is difficult to tease out the relationship among such interrelated issues as religious beliefs, conservative values, adherence to a code of ethics, or fear of committing sin (Day, 1992). Religious Service Attendance Individuals who attend church frequently and who value religion in their lives are probably more likely than others to develop sexual attitudes and behavior that are consistent with religious teachings. Involvement in religious institutions would also enhance the chances of young people for making friends with peers who have restrictive attitudes toward premarital sex (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). Adolescents who strongly identify with religious teachings and traditions are less likely to engage in risk-related behaviors, such as sexual activity (Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000). Thus religion may serve as an important social referent for adolescents decisions to abstain from sexual relations (Cochran & Beeghley, 1991). Thornton and Camburn (1989) found that differences in behavior across religions are generally modest in magnitude and usually statistically insignificant, with the only statistically significant coefficient being the negative impact of Jewish identification on ever having had sex. The same study found that the mothers of Jewish and unaligned

PAGE 35

20 young people are more permissive in their parenting styles than the mothers of those who identify as fundamentalist or Baptist. Mothers seem to be a focal point of research about how religiosity affects an adolescents sexual debut. Also, it has been reported that the effect of mothers religious practices increased from the later grade levels, perhaps as children became more personally aware of their parents religious beliefs (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). Community Religiosity The communitys religiosity may also affect the age of an adolescents sexual debut. The psychic, social, and economic costs that adolescent women attach to early nonmarital pregnancy appear to be evaluated on the parameters characterizing their immediate environment (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). In a study of social context and adolescent behavior, a group of researchers examined the impact of a community on the transition to sexual activity. They reported that the level of religiosity characterizing a community, as indicated by both the prevalence of religious adherents and the orthodoxy of local religious organizations, also may influence adolescent sexual and contraceptive behaviors. Furthermore, because organized religions place great value on marriage and family formation (Thornton & Camburn, 1989), nonmarital sexual activity, both in general and among adolescents in particular, is more likely to be proscribed in religious than in less religious communities (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). The same study found that the level of social disintegration characterizing the community, the communitys socioeconomic status, and its population composition all play significant roles in determining the timing of the transition to sexual activity. Furthermore, they concluded that community religiosity exercises significant effects on both intercourse and contraceptive behavior (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993).

PAGE 36

21 Other Factors A central task for teenagers has always been to establish a sense of identity, in which the sexual self needs to be integrated as a core element (Erikson, 1968). Today, issues related to sexuality are still highly salient; in 10 th grade (16 years old) a substantial number of young people are either sexually active or contemplating becoming so (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999). Using the 8 th grade as a comparison group, transition to 9 th grade increased the likelihood of becoming sexually active by two times, and beginning 10 th grade by three times (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). For nearly 20 years, it has been noted that drug use, smoking, and alcohol consumption are often strongly associated with early sexual behavior (Jessor, Jessor, Costa, & Donovan, 1983). The most robust and researched predictor of early adolescent intercourse has been adolescent participation in other adult-like or deviant behavior (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). Furthermore, this is consistent with studies concerned with numbers of sex partners (Noell & Biglan, 1995). An additional study found that sexual risk-taking behavior was correlated with other problem behaviors in adolescence such as cigarette smoking, use of alcohol and other drugs, antisocial behavior, and academic failure (Luster & Small, 1994). This web comprised of various factors that combine to affect adolescents and their decision making is not limited to only parenting style and religiosity. Factors such as family structure, academic achievement, gender, and peers may also play a role in affecting the timing of an adolescents sexual debut. Family Structure Although not examined in this study, another major factor that may affect the timing of adolescent sexual debut is family structure. Adolescence is the crucial time in which individuals establish lifestyles and behavioral patterns that have profound effects

PAGE 37

22 on adult health (Di Mauro, 1995). Home environment and family members help to form adolescents sexual beliefs and expression through social learning, role modeling, social control, and supervision (Elkins & Peterson, 1993; Maccoby & Martin, 1983, Thornton & Camburn, 1987), with teens living with both biological parents identified as having the optimal opportunity for overall wellbeing (Elkins & Peterson, 1993; Maccoby & Martin, 1983; Upchurch et al., 2001). Having two biological parents present in a household is assumed to provide more adult supervision of children (Haurin & Mott, 1990; Newcomer & Udry, 1987). With respect to sexual activity, teens living with both biological parents have lower risk than those living in other situations (Flewelling & Baumann, 1990; Upchurch et al., 2001, Upchurch et al., 1999). One explanation is that adolescents in two-parent households have fewer opportunities to engage in sexual activity because of greater parental supervision and monitoring than adolescents in single-parent families (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Millier, Forehand & Kotchick, 1999; Moore & Chase-Lansdale, 2001; Thompson, Hanson & McLanahan, 1994). Another explanation suggests that the instability brought on by marital disruption and subsequent transitions accounts for the earlier sexual activity in single-parent households (Moore & Chase-Lansdale, 2001; Wu & Martinson, 1993). Children in a married household receive more monitoring, time, and attention compared with children in single-parent and cohabiting households (Moore & Chase-Lansdale, 2001). In addition, greater conflict and less warm relationships between parents during and after divorce adversely affect parenting and youth psychological development, resulting in a variety of problematic behaviors including early sexual debut and pregnancy (Chase-Lansdale & Cherlin, 1995; Peterson & Zill, 1986). However, despite

PAGE 38

23 the history of marital disruption, stepfamilies seem to be more of a protective factor than a risk factor. Girls in single-parent families had earlier ages of sexual debut, whereas girls in stepfamilies were not significantly different from those in intact biological families. This could mean that a stepfamily has the potential to serve as a protective factor, whereas many times people may view stepfamilies as a risk factor, because they are not comprised of the natural or birth parents (Calhoun & Friel, 2001). Mothers. Mothers alone may play a large role in the timing of their adolescent daughters age of sexual debut. Adolescents, particularly girls, who have close relationships with their mothers, are likely to be less sexually active than adolescent girls who do not have close relationships with their mothers (Calhoun & Friel, 2001; Hofferth, 1987). For boys, having a biological father in the home slows the transition into sexual intercourse at each age and having a biological father present is critical in reducing the chance of making the actual sexual transition (Day, 1992). In addition, numerous other studies have highlighted the connection between a fathers absence and/or single parenting and early sexual behavior of children (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Miller, McCoy & Olson, 1988). Research has found that girls from single-parent families were found to be more likely to become sexually active at an earlier age than those who grew up in two-parent families (Kinnaird & Girrad, 1986; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997; Miller & Bingham, 1989; Newcomer & Udry, 1985; Zelnick et al., 1981). Similarly, adolescents in single-parent families tend to become sexually active earlier than adolescents in two-parent families (Forste & Heaton, 1998; Miller& Moore, 1990; Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt & Conger, 1999). However, the effect of having a single-parent family may depend on

PAGE 39

24 whether there was ever a marriage before. Teenagers living in households with mothers who were single as a result of a marital disruption were more likely to experience earlier sexual debut than girls living in married-parent households. In addition, teenagers with mothers who were single as a result of a marital disruption had a greater risk of pregnancy than teenagers in single-mother, never-married households (Moore & Chase-Lansdale, 2001). Nevertheless, many studies (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Kantner & Zelnik, 1978; Moore & Furstenberg, 1986; Newcomer & Udry, 1987) have found the marital status of the parents to be related to coital initiation rates, with lower rates related to two-parent homes (Udry & Billy, 1987). Although there is evidence that warm, supportive, and communicative parents delay sexual experience among their offspring (Inazu & Fox, 1980; Zelnik, Kantner & Ford, 1981) there is also evidence that levels of closeness and communication with parents have little or no effect on adolescent sexual activity (Newcomer & Udry, 1983, Whitbeck et al., 1999). It is possible that the effects of parenting on adolescent sexuality are largely indirect through their influence on childrens emotional states (Whitbeck, Conger, & Kao, 1993) or the childs affiliation with deviant peers (Whitbeck et al., 1999; Whitbeck & Simons, 1994). Siblings. As socialized agents, older siblings may set standards of conduct or serve as role models for younger siblings. And, in the role of confidante, older siblings are more likely than parents to offer support without judgment or to be critical but non-punitive in times of adolescent crisis (Haurin & Mott, 1990). Therefore, an adolescents older sibling may have a greater effect on an adolescents age of sexual debut than the adolescents parents. So, it may seem reasonable to expect that having a large number of

PAGE 40

25 sexually active siblings and friends would be associated with stronger and more pervasive pressures to conform (East, Felice & Morgan, 1993). Research has shown that adolescent sibling pairs have displayed correlated ages at sexual onset and extent of sexual permissiveness (Haurin & Mott; Rodgers & Rowe, 1993; Rowe, Rodgers, Meseck-Bushey & St. John, 1989). In addition, for both white boys and white girls, there are significant and substantively meaningful direct linkages between the ages of sexual initiation of older and younger siblings (Haurin & Mott, 1990). East, Felice, and Morgan (1993) found that siblings attitudes regarding sexual permissiveness and levels of sexual activity are related. Younger siblings may be protective factors. Sexual intercourse may be less common among adolescents who have many younger siblings. In addition, the adolescents who held the most conservative sexual attitudes had more siblings, especially more younger siblings (East, Felice, & Morgan, 1993; Miller, Igginson, McCoy & Olson, 1987). Furthermore, Rodgers and Rowe (1993) found, in studying random sibling pairs within families, that younger siblings had systematically higher levels of sexual activity at a given age than their older siblings, even when controlling for various genetic, developmental, and historical effects (East, Felice & Morgan, 1993). One other major factor is whether or not the sibling relationship is same-sex or opposite-sex. The greater the familiarity with and perceived similarity to another person, the more likely their behavior and attitudes provide content and validation of the adolescents emerging adult identity. Therefore, on the basis of the similarity principle, I anticipate a higher correlation in age at first sexual intercourse between same-sex than opposite-sex sibling pairs (Haurin & Mott, 1990). East, Felice & Morgan (1993) found

PAGE 41

26 that having an adolescent childbearing sister has a stronger effect on permissive sexual attitudes and non-virgin status than does having many sexually active sisters. They also found that when compared to girls with only non-childbearing adolescent sisters, girls with an adolescent childbearing sister have more permissive sexual attitudes, have more positive intentions for future sexual activity, and are more likely to be non-virgins. It should be emphasized that sibling effects still seem to take a backstage position in relation to more fundamental family background factors such as the presence of both parents in the home and regular church attendance when it comes to predicting the timing of first intercourse (Haurin & Mott; 1990). Academics An adolescents mother may play a role in their age of sexual debut outside of their parental monitoring, supervision and parenting style. The mothers educational attainment has also been found to contribute to delaying adolescent sexual debut. Higher parental education has been associated with later initiation of adolescent intercourse (Furstenberg et al., 1987; Heaton & Jacobson, 1994; Leigh et al., 1988). In addition, previous findings suggest a positive association between parental education and age of sexual debut (Miller, 1998) for boys in some studies (e.g., Ku, Sonenstein, & Pleck, 1993) but only for girls in other studies (e.g. Bearman & Bruckner, 2001). In addition, it has been found that highly educated mothers, mothers who are married to and living with the fathers, and mothers who were less sexually active as adolescents have daughters with reduced probability of coital transition (Udry & Billy, 1987). Brewster (1994) reported that adolescent females whose mothers attended college were more likely to delay sexual debut. However, it has also been found that parent education was not associated with the virginity status of boys or girls (Feldman et al., 1995). Educational aspirations and

PAGE 42

27 school involvement are also important protective factors for adolescents. Adolescents who have aspirations for college are more apt to delay becoming sexually active (Donovan & Jessor, 1985; Hofferth & Hayes, 1987). Similarly, adolescents who are highly involved in extracurricular activities at school with conventional peers may be more likely to delay intercourse (Miller & Olson, 1988). However, there may be differences among males and females concerning the actual effects of academics on an adolescents sexual debut. Gender Luster and Small (1994) found some factors that were associated with sexual risk taking were the same and some were different for females and for males. Factors associated with sexual risk taking among females include low GPA, frequent alcohol consumption, low levels of parental monitoring, and a lack of communication about birth control with mothers. For males, sexual risk taking was associated with low GPA, frequent alcohol consumption, suicidal ideations, low levels of parental support, and a history of sexual abuse. In addition, males are often said to experience strong peer pressure to engage in coitus (Udry & Billy, 1987). This may be true due to the popular societal framework of an adolescent male becoming a man when he experiences sexual debut. Another gender difference can be found related to after-school activities. It has been reported that time spent in school-related activities and homework delay the transition to sexual activity longer for girls than for boys (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). This is strong evidence toward high schools providing just as many team sport opportunities for girls as for boys. However, while team sports can help build self-esteem, having high levels of self-esteem may actually be a risk factor. Both an external locus of control and higher levels of self-esteem predicted an early transition to

PAGE 43

28 intercourse. Perhaps these young women are confident and more forward in their approach to boys (Day, 1992). Peers As one would expect, peers become increasingly more influential as adolescents get older (Treboux & Busch-Rossnagel, 1990). Adolescents in general begin to care more about how others view them, and strive to be accepted. Their peers perception of them becomes more important. One example is the adolescents peers perception of whether or not he/she is sexually active. Peers perceptions of adolescents sexual activity may lead to comments like, You havent done it yet! Whats the matter with you? This is one clear way of communicating sexual expectations among the adolescents peers. Peers influence each others sexual behavior indirectly through everyday communication and directly through communication of sexual expectations among friends (Rodgers & Rowe, 1993). In order to gain acceptance among their peers, adolescents usually attempt to act appropriately in the eyes of their peers (Hartup, 1991; Hollingshead, 1975). With respect to sexual activity, adolescents might sometimes make decisions that meet their peers expectations in order to gain acceptance or remain accepted, thereby empowering their peers in the timing of their sexual debut. Summary This chapter discussed the important findings surrounding adolescent sexual debut. It reported that the birth rate for teenagers as well as the number of AIDS cases reported among teenagers is declining. This chapter also reported on research of parenting style and parental communication, finding that the authoritative parenting style is most likely to produce positive child outcomes and that parental communication of sexual topics has been found to have both positive effects and no effect at all on the timing of adolescents

PAGE 44

29 sexual debut. However, parental communication about sexual issues is still a key measure of family involvement in adolescents lives and therefore will be examined in this study. Furthermore, this chapter reported on the positive effects that an adolescents religiosity (including religious affiliation, religious service attendance, and community religiosity) have been found to have on the timing of their sexual debut. The factors of parenting style and religiosity are the focus of this study, as it aims to examine whether either one affects the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. Although other factors may have minor influences (e.g., the suppressing effects of pro-social activities for girls), the important predictors seem to be opportunity, attitudes that fit societal views of sexuality (e.g., MTV, commercials, popular songs, and television programming), and participation in other adult-like behaviors (e.g., alcohol use and deviant peers) (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). The first predictor, opportunity, comes from a lack of parental supervision and monitoring (parenting style). In addition, opportunity may arise from a family structure where there is only one parent present. The second predictor, attitudes that fit societal views of sexuality, can come from any one of the many media outlets that are geared toward adolescents. In addition, their communitys or societys views of sexuality are shaped by their own religiosity, their parents religiosity and their communitys religiosity. An adolescents view of society is partially shaped by their religious involvement and attendance. The third predictor, other adult-like behaviors, can come from a breakdown or lack of any one of the following: parental communication and parenting style, family structure, religiosity, academics, peers and other societal factors. There are many factors that can affect the timing of an adolescents sexual debut. This study will focus on examining parenting

PAGE 45

30 style and religiosity (independently) and whether they affect the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut.

PAGE 46

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY The following study was designed to examine the effects of parenting styles and religiosity on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts. It will investigate whether a specific parenting style, as categorized by Baumrind (1996, 1978), has a larger impact on timing of sexual debut than others. The study will also explore whether a Jewish adolescents religiosity affects the timing of their sexual debut. Finally, the study will examine whether there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents by gender. This chapter will cover the population and sample, setting, research design and subject recruitment, instrumentation, and statistical analysis for the present study. The information in these sections will describe all procedures, methods, and analyses for the study that will work toward the studys goal to determine whether or not parenting style and/or religiosity affect the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. Population and Sample The population is Jewish students at a large university in the Southeast United States. Potential participants were located and identified through the Universitys predominantly and/or historically Jewish fraternities and sororities on campus. According to their presidents, these fraternities and sororities consist of a majority of Jewish students. This university publishes demographic statistics every academic year. For the academic year of 2002-2003, the gender demographics were fifty-two percent female, 31

PAGE 47

32 and forty-eight percent male. Approximately twenty-three percent of the members of this universitys student body are minorities with seven percent of the student population consisting of African-American students, almost ten percent Hispanic students, and almost seven percent Asian American or Pacific Islander students. Seventy-two percent of enrolled students are undergraduates, twenty-one percent are graduate students and seven percent are in professional degree programs (including dentistry, law, medicine, pharmacy, and veterinary medicine). In addition, out of the total of approximately 46,000 total students at this university, about 6,000 are Jewish (13%), with about 5,000 Jewish undergraduates and 1,000 Jewish graduate students. The sample for my study consisted of a group of Jewish undergraduate students who elected to participate in my study after I introduced and explained the study. The final sample was 168 individuals. Settings The study was conducted at a large university in the Southeast. The participants were informed of the study at their weekly chapter meetings in their respective fraternity or sorority house. The study was conducted in a reserved room during the hours of chapter meetings in September and October of 2003. The participants were briefed on the topic, benefits/risks, expected length of completion, and who to contact with questions or concerns. They were then given a consent form to sign. Once a participant signed and dated the Informed Consent form, they were given the survey. Confidentiality was ensured through the anonymous format of the survey. Participants were never asked for their name on the instrument. In addition, participants gave the completed surveys to the research assistants face down. Numbers were later assigned for data analysis after the surveys had been randomly mixed.

PAGE 48

33 Research Design and Subject Recruitment This study is a cross-sectional study and the unit of analysis is the individual. Recruitment of subjects occurred through the selected fraternities and sororities. The samples were limited to those fraternity and sorority members that were present at their weekly chapter meeting that week and who consented to participate. The primary researcher gave the participants an introduction to the topic, a list of all of the benefits and risks, the expected length of completion, and who to contact with questions or concerns. Furthermore, potential participants were informed that if they would like to be notified of the results of the study to write their e-mail addresses down after they completed the survey. No respondents did this. Although the surveys were administered on different days across two months, this study is still a cross-sectional study because the surveys were not given as a pre-test/post-test. Students who participated on different days were not the same as students who participated on the first day, thus allowing the study to still be labeled as cross-sectional. Instrumentation The survey instrumentation (Appendix C) consisted of twenty-five items which were broken up into a personal information section and two content sections. I revised the instrument three times over two months after careful examination and lengthy discussion with my committee. The first revision came after it was pilot-tested with three professors at the same large Southeastern university. The second revision followed a pilot-test of two graduate students at the same university, and the third and final revision occurred after a follow-up committee meeting. Changes were made accordingly.

PAGE 49

34 The two subject sections are parenting style and religiosity. Due to the complex nature of these individual items in this instrument, they will be discussed for further understanding of this study. Personal Information The first background item asked for the participants sex. The results from this item were used in the analysis of gender differences. This was followed by the question, "Do you consider yourself Jewish? This item eliminated any discrepancy between who was Jewish and who was not Jewish. Using the phrase, do you consider yourself, eliminated any written rules or religious laws as the sole classification for membership. Respondents who declared themselves Not Jewish were excluded from this study (N=2). The third introductory question asked participants whether they had sexual intercourse, and the answers were, Yes, and I was ___ years old the first time, and No, I have not and I am currently ___ years old. The answer to this item provided the individual with their specific reference point. The directions after item three explained that if the participants answer was Yes for item three, then the number (age) would be considered the reference point for the remainder of the survey. If the answer was No for item four, then the participants current age would be considered their reference point for the remainder of the survey. The term reference point was used throughout the survey to clearly create a time frame regarding sexual debut for respondents to use while completing the survey. The concept of Reference point, was used for two main reasons. First, it was used as a phrase to unify those who had experienced their sexual debut and those who had not. For example, if every item asked the participant to describe any dating

PAGE 50

35 restrictions that were present at the time of their sexual debut, the item would have clearly excluded those who had not experienced their sexual debut. By making their current age the reference point for respondents who had not experienced their sexual debut every item could be answered by both types of respondents. Second, the concept of reference point was used to help participants answer questions that could possibly require them to remember back many years and recall the feelings and situations of that time in their life. In addition, because the study examined factors (parenting style and religiosity) that affect an adolescents sexual debut, it was important to be able to examine these factors with a perspective that is based on a very specific time. For example, presenting a question that asks to describe a relationship with a sibling now could have yielded a different answer when asked to describe a relationship with a sibling at ones reference point, a time potentially in ones past. Clearly, questions that examined factors at a respondents reference point are much more relevant regarding adolescent sexual debut than questions that consider a respondents current status. Item four asked the participant to fill in the blank with their reference point. By writing it down, participants became more accustomed to associating that number with the term reference point throughout the duration of the survey administration. Furthermore, by having written this number (age) on the front page, respondents could easily refer back to this item on the first page. The Personal Information section concluded with item five asking, Are you or were you married at the age of your reference point? This question helped in the analysis determining whether Jewish adolescents were consistent with Judaisms proscriptions against premarital sex.

PAGE 51

36 Parenting Style The first subject section, items six through fifteen, examined parenting style. Items six and seven inquired about dating. Item six asked how old the respondent was when he/she was first allowed to date, while item seven asked if there were rules or restrictions on the age at which they could first date. Dating restrictions are one way in which form that parenting style is displayed. Item eight asked their first serious relationship. All three of these items helped to examine the level of parental demandingness. A major part of parenting style affecting an adolescents sexual debut was sexual discussion with their parent(s). Not only was whether or not a discussion ever occurred important but so was the gender of the parent that held the discussion (Meschke, Bartholomae, & Zentall, 2000). Therefore, item nine asked, Did your parents discuss sex with you before your reference point? The respondent had the following choices: Yes they both did, Yes, my same-sex parent did, Yes, my opposite sex parent did, and No, not at all. In addition, many more factors may affect the timing of an adolescents sexual debut such as: the frequency of parental sexual discussions, how in-depth the discussion is, the topics covered, and the age at first discussion. The next item aimed to determine the frequency of sexual discussions between the parent and the adolescent. Responses to frequency were, A one-time thing, More than once, Part of an on-going dialogue of sexual topics, Daily, and Does not apply. Item eleven examined how in-depth their sex discussion was if one occurred. The respondent had five choices that ranged from Very in-depth to Not at all. Another important aspect of parent/adolescent sexual discussions was the topics that were covered. Participants were asked to check all of the topics that were included during the sexual discussion(s)

PAGE 52

37 with their parent(s). The choices were, Physical development, Abstinence, Safe sex, Emotion-based intimacy, and Consequences. The final item with regards to parent/adolescent sexual discussion asked, If a sexual discussion occurred, how old were you at the first discussion? All of these sexual discussion items were important because if a parent discusses sex with their adolescent, the information is probably accurate and could lead to the adolescent making more informed decisions. This section concluded with the definition of the four major parenting styles according to psychologist Diana Baumrind (1996, 1978). The definitions of each parenting style were defined in terms of parental responsiveness and parental demandingness. These two terms are defined immediately preceding the four definitions of parenting styles. Item fourteen then asked, Which parenting style is the closet to the way you were raised up to your reference point? The respondent had choices of the four major parenting styles, Permissive, Authoritarian, Indifferent, and Authoritative. This item was specifically used to examine if a relationship existed between an adolescents perceived parenting style and their age of sexual debut. Item fifteen examined the respondents belief about the influence of parenting style on their decision to have sexual intercourse for the first time. The choices ranged from Very strong influence to No influence at all. This question was specifically examined to see whether a relationship existed between an adolescents perceived level of parental influence on sexual debut and age of sexual debut. Analyses of this entire section helped determine whether or not parenting style affects the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts. Religiosity The second subject section, items sixteen through twenty-five, examined religiosity from a Jewish standpoint. The items in this section inquired about the participants

PAGE 53

38 religious affiliation and attendance, and their communitys religiosity. Each of these three sections was one-third of the Sum Religiosity Index (Appendix D) which was used to represent the respondents overall level of religiosity. The Sum Religiosity Index consisted of three sections with varying amounts of items. In order to weight the three sections equally, each section (affiliation, attendance, and community religiosity) was scored individually and translated into a percentage. The three religiosity sections were then combined to create one overall religiosity score. Item sixteen asked the respondent to classify the division of Judaism that they believe they belong to. The respondent had four choices: Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or Other please explain. This was important because the division of Judaism an adolescent believes they belong to may affect the timing of their sexual debut. This item was examined independently of the religiosity index and was explored for statistical significance by frequencies and a chi-square test. This item was excluded from the religiosity index due to its subjective nature. A person belonging to any classification of Judaism can have a religiosity of any level. For example, a respondent who classified themselves as Orthodox can have a high, moderate, or low level of religiosity similar to someone who classified themselves as Conservative. The index began with two items (seventeen and eighteen) that focused on affiliation to Judaism. The first item with respect to affiliation asked the respondent to characterize their familys practice of religion. Their responses ranged from Very strongly observant, to Not observant at all. The last item about religious affiliation asked the respondent how he/she would rate his/her affiliation to Judaism at the age of their reference point. Affiliation was described as meaning how much one feels a part of

PAGE 54

39 or how much one identifies with any certain group. The choices included Very strongly affiliated, Moderately affiliated, Somewhat affiliated, Minimally affiliated, and Not affiliated at all. The next four items, nineteen through twenty-two, focused on religious attendance. The first two items asked about frequency of attendance at religious services and Hebrew school. Hebrew school is often started in 3rd grade and its primary purpose (in most synagogues) is to familiarize children with the Hebrew language and to form the basis for Bar/Bat Mitzvah training. The item specifically pertaining to religious service attendance asked the respondent to choose which answer was closest to the frequency of their religious service attendance at the time of their reference point. Responses included, weekly or almost weekly, monthly or almost monthly, a few times per year, only on High Holidays, and not at all. The next item, twenty-one, asked the participant to characterize the school he/she attended at the age of their reference point. Their choices were, Private and Jewish, Private and religious but not Jewish, Private and non-religious, and Public. The next item asked whether or not the respondent had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah. A Bar Mitzvah is for a boy and a Bat Mitzvah is for a girl. The actual Hebrew translation of Bar is son of, while Bat means daughter of. When combined with the word mitzvah it simply translates to son/daughter of the commandments. This traditional ceremony is described by some as a coming of age ceremony, and the definition literally means that Judaism now looks upon that child as an adult. In the past, Jewish girls were not allowed to have a Bat Mitzvah. It is only in the past two generations that it has become more acceptable for women to go through the coming of age ceremony once

PAGE 55

40 reserved for boys becoming men. Orthodox (Jewish) girls are currently still forbidden to have a Bat Mitzvah and are not even counted for a quorum in any religious service. Whether or not an adolescent experienced this ceremony is sometimes decided by their attendance to religious services, with less religious service attendance not emphasizing the ceremony as much, and limiting the amount of exposure to the ceremony when compared to an adolescent with a greater religious service attendance. The third section of religiosity, community religiosity, had a few different aspects. The first item, twenty-three, asked about the level of involvement of the adolescent in a Jewish youth group. It asked, Were you a member of a Jewish youth group? and gives some common examples. Any adolescent who is in involved in a religious-based youth group might be seen as more affiliated toward that religion than those who are not members of youth groups. In addition, it is a variable in community religiosity too, because one might be less likely to be involved in a religious youth group in a less religious community where less opportunities are available compared to communities that are more religious, where many more opportunities to participate in a religious youth group may exist. The next two items, twenty-four and twenty-five, also focused solely on the adolescents community religiosity. Item twenty-four asked if there was a Jewish Community Center in their community and if there was the respondent a member. Jewish Community Centers (J.C.C.s) are very popular across the United States and Canada. There are eleven in the state of Florida and over 230 J.C.C.s across the United States and Canada. These community centers provide a multitude of services to the community and usually provide year-round programming specifically aimed at

PAGE 56

41 adolescents. Whether or not a J.C.C. is present in a community may help in determining a communitys religiosity because a more religious community is more likely to have a demand for a J.C.C. than a community that is not religious at all. The final item, twenty-five, asked the participant to consider their Jewish community at their reference point. It asked, How would you rate your Jewish communitys religiosity up until your reference point? Following, was the range of responses: Very religious, Moderately religious, Somewhat religious, Minimally religious, and Not religious at all. The survey concluded with a note thanking each respondent for their time and explaining that their completion of the survey helped to contribute to the understanding of the experiences of Jewish youth. Statistical Analysis Data analysis included basic descriptive statistics of all the items. Frequencies were run on each item to provide the basic descriptive statistics. Next, the data set was split into two groups for analytical purposes. The first group consisted of those respondents who answered Yes to having had sex (n=121). The second group consisted of those respondents who answered No to having had sex (n=47). Dividing the two groups allowed for analyses of just those respondents who have experienced their sexual debut and the factors that affected the timing of their sexual debut. The division also allows for description of characteristics of the virgin group. Primary Research Questions In order to investigate the primary research question, which asks if parenting style affects the timing of a Jewish adolescents sexual debut, ANOVAs were calculated for the Yes group to determine the mean age of sexual debut by parenting style. In addition, the answer to primary research question two, which asks if any parenting style

PAGE 57

42 positively affected (delayed) the timing of a Jewish adolescents sexual debut, should be found by exploring whether a relationship exists between each parenting style and the mean age of sexual debut (p < .05). This will help in determining whether, for those have had sex, any of the four parenting styles positively affected (delayed) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts, and whether any of the four parenting styles negatively affected (expedited) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts. Secondary Research Questions In order to determine if there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents who had different levels of religiosity, the two separate data sets were again used to isolate those who had actually experienced their sexual debut. The Yes group data set was used to compare the respondents Sum Religiosity Index score with their age of sexual debut and additionally used to determine whether any of the three aspects of religiosity positively affected (delayed) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. One-way ANOVAs were used again to determine if there were differences in the mean age of sexual debut between and within these groups (p < .05). Finally, to explore the third secondary research question which simply asks if there is a difference in timing of sexual debut for Jewish adolescents between genders, a Crosstabs procedure was run. Statistical differences (p <. 05) between males and females and among different ages of reference points, parenting styles, and religiosity were evaluated using Crosstabs to help determine if there a difference in timing of sexual debut among male and female Jewish adolescents. In addition, a chi-square test was run to evaluate whether there were differences in age of sexual debut by gender.

PAGE 58

43 Additional Results Additional significant relationships (p<.05) were explored through oneway ANOVAs that were run for each item for the data set that only included those who had sexual intercourse (Yes dataset, n=121). Furthermore, all respondents who said they had not had sexual intercourse (No dataset, N= 47) were considered to have had a delay in timing of sexual debut because all respondents were 18 years old or older, and the mean age of sexual debut for those who had sex was 17.10 years old. In order to formulate protective factors that might have contributed to these delays in timing of sexual debut frequency tests were run on each item for the No data set. It was assumed that if one type of response were selected by a clear majority of respondents, this choice may have represented a protective factor. All of these statistical analyses were completed utilizing SPSS (version 12.0).

PAGE 59

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS The primary purpose of this study was to examine how parenting style and religiosity affect the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. It explored current college students analysis of different aspects of their parents rules and communicative actions. It also examined three aspects of religiosity: religious attendance, religious affiliation, and community religiosity, in terms of age of sexual debut. Finally, this study observed differences in age of sexual debut by gender. Results for all of these questions will be discussed in this chapter. The chapter concludes with additional significant results that were not directly related to primary or secondary research questions. Descriptive Results Before discussing the analyses of each research question which was outlined in Chapter 1, a brief description of the participant population will be discussed. The demographic characteristics of the research participants consisted of exactly 170 respondents. However, two respondents replied that they were not Jewish and were therefore excluded from the survey data, leaving a sample size of approximately 170 (n = 168). A complete breakdown of the demographic characteristics of the study can be examined in tables throughout this chapter. In addition, respondents who reported they had sexual intercourse will be referred to as non-virgins, while respondents who have not will be referred to as virgins. 44

PAGE 60

45 Gender Men made up more than half of the population (53.0%), or 89 of the 168 respondents, and females composed a little less than half (47.0%), or 79 of the 168 respondents. The gender breakdown of this study was consistent with the assumptions created during data collection. Due to data collection occurring at three fraternity houses, compared to only two sorority houses, a majority-male gender breakdown was expected. However, if the number of responses at each house were equal, then males would have made up 60% and females 40% of the participants. The higher than expected female percentage is accounted for by an overall higher female willingness to participate in the study, as an approximately equal opportunity for all house members was available at each house. Table 4-1. Participant gender. Gender Frequency Valid Percent Male 89 53.0 Female 79 47.0 Total 168 100.0 Religious Classification All of the study participants were Jewish, due to the nature of the study. Half were Conservative (50.0%), followed by Reform (45.2%), Orthodox (2.4%), and Other (2.4%) (Table 4-2). Table 4-2. Participant Classification of Judaism. Classification Frequency Valid Percent Orthodox 4 2.4 Conservative 84 50.0 Reform 76 45.2 Other 4 2.4 Total 168 100.0

PAGE 61

46 Sexual Intercourse In this study, 121 of 168 (72.0%) respondents reported having previously had sex before the administration of the survey, while 47 (28.0%) of 168 respondents reported not having had sexual intercourse. All 168 (100.0%) of respondents answered this question. The mean age of sexual debut (for those who reported having previously had sex) was 17.10 years (SD= .148). Table 4-3. Participant experience of sex. Frequency Valid Percent Yes, has had sex 121 72.0 No, has NOT had sex 47 28.0 Total 168 100.0 Marriage All 168 (100.0%) of the respondents answered the question about their current marital status. All replied that they were currently not, and have not been, married. Parenting Style Age at first date and first serious relationship. This section of the survey asked questions that helped provide depth into the background of respondents parent(s) parenting style. These specific questions include items about the timing of other events, which might be related to the timing of sexual debut, such as first date and first serious relationship. The sample reported the following ages at the time of first date: 26 of 168 (15.5%) reported 12 years old or younger 19 of 168 (11.3%) reported 13 years old, 30 of 168 (17.9%) reported 14 years old, 53 of 168 (31.5%) reported 15 years old, 25 of 168 (14.9%) reported 16 years old, 5 of 168 (3.0%) reported 17 years old, and equally 5 of 168 (3.0%) respondents reported 18 years old. Five respondents (3.0%) responded that they had not yet been on a first date (Table E-1).

PAGE 62

47 Furthermore, when asked if there was a restriction on the age at which they could first date, a vast majority 95.8% (161 of 168) reported there were no restrictions on the age at which they could first date, while only 7 (4.2%) responded they did have restrictions on the age at which they could first date. When respondents were questioned on the age at the time of what they would consider their first serious relationship, only a small percentage (3.6%) said they were 13 years old, 14 or 15 years old comprised 19.6%, 16 years old made up 35.1%, 17 years old was the response for 11.3%, and having their first serious relationship at legal adult age of 18 was 13.1%. In addition, 29 (17.3%) of 168 respondents said they had not yet been in a serious relationship. Parental sexual communication. Parenting style is not just made up of rules, restrictions, and demands, but there is also the very important aspect of parental communication and responsiveness. For this study, it was important to examine parental communication about sex. Respondents were asked if their parent(s) ever discussed sex with them, which parent did, how often a sexual discussion occurred, how in-depth the discussion(s) was, what topics were covered, and how old they were when the first sexual discussion occurred. When respondents were asked whether their parents discussed sex with them before their reference point, nearly half 83 of 168, or 49.4%, said both parents discussed with them, nearly one fourth (24.4%) said only their same sex parent discussed sex with them, and 4 (2.4%) said only their opposite sex parent discussed sex with them. Almost one-fourth (23.8%) of the respondents said that neither parent discussed sex with them before their reference point (E-3). When asked about the frequency of a sexual discussion, 35 (20.8%) said their discussion was a one-time thing, the most frequent reply was that the discussions were

PAGE 63

48 more than once (34.5%), the next most frequent response was the sexual discussions were part of an on-going dialogue (21.4%), and only 1 (.6%) respondent said their discussions occurred daily. This question did not apply to 38 (22.6%) of the 168 respondents according to their responses. If those respondents who replied that the question did not apply to them are disregarded and only those who actually had a sexual discussion are taken into account the percentage breakdowns are as follows: 27% discussion was a one-time thing, 45% discussions were more than once, 27% discussions were part of an on-going dialogue, and 1% said discussions occurred daily (Table E-4). When asked about the depth of the sexual discussion (Table E-5) almost half (46.4 %) of all respondents said their sexual discussion was either very in-depth or in-depth, while almost a third, 58 of 168 respondents (30.3%), said their sexual discussion was not in-depth or not in-depth at all. This question did not apply to 39 of the 168 respondents (23.2%) according to their responses. If those respondents who replied that the question did not apply to them are disregarded and only those who had a sexual discussion are calculated, the percentage breakdowns are as follows: 60% very in-depth or in-depth and 40% not in-depth or not in-depth at all. So, for those parents who did discuss sex with their adolescent, more than half had discussions that were in-depth, or very in-depth. If a sexual discussion occurred, respondents were also asked about the content (Table E-6). They were allowed to select as many of the following topics as were applicable: physical development, abstinence, safe sex, emotion-based intimacy, and consequences. The number of topics discussed created a nearly equal distribution with only one topic being covered for 12 of 168 respondents (7.1%), only two topics being covered for 28 respondents (16.7%), three topics were covered for 27 respondents

PAGE 64

49 (16.1%), four topics were covered for 28 respondents (16.7%), and all five topics were covered for 33 respondents (19.6%). This question was not answered by 40 (23.8%) of 168 respondents because it did not apply to them or for other reasons. If those respondents who did not answer the question are disregarded and only those who had a sexual discussion are taken into account, the percentage breakdowns are as follows: only one topic, 9.4%; only two topics, 21.9%; three topics, 21.1%; four topics, 21.9%; and all five topics were covered for 25.8%. The topic of physical development (Table E-7) was covered for 68 (40.5%) of 168 respondents. When we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer this question, of the remaining respondents who said that they discussed at least one of the five topics, 53.8% had discussed physical development. The topic of abstinence (Table E-8) was covered for 70 of the 168 respondents (41.7%). When we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer this question, for the remaining respondents who reported that they had discussed at least one of the five topics, 54.7% said that abstinence was a topic. The topic of safe sex (Table E-9) was covered for 115 (68.5%), and when we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer this question, of the remaining respondents, 89.8% had safe sex as a topic of discussion. The topic of emotion-based intimacy (Table E-10) was covered for 66 (39.3%), and when we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer this question, for the remaining respondents who responded that they had at least one of the five topics, 51.6% had emotion-based intimacy as a topic within their sexual discussion. The topic of consequences (Table E-11) was covered for 107 (63.7%), and when we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer this question, for the remaining respondents who

PAGE 65

50 responded that they had at least one of the five topics, 83.6% had consequences as a topic within their sexual discussion. Also of interest was the age at which this first sexual discussion occurred (Table E-12). According to respondents, 20 had their first sexual discussion before 10 years old (12.0%), 18 had their first sexual discussion at 10 or 11 years old (10.7%), 22 had their first sexual discussion at 12 years old (13.1%), 36 had their first sexual discussion at 13 years old (21.4%), 21 had their first sexual discussion at 14 or 15 years old (12.5%), while 10 had their first sexual discussion at 16 or 17 years old (6.0%). This question was not answered by 41 (24.4 %) of 168 respondents. If those respondents who did not answer the question are disregarded and only those who had a sexual discussion are taken into account, the percentage breakdowns are as follows: First sexual discussion before 10 years old, 15.7%; first sexual discussion at 10 or 11 years old, 14.2%; first sexual discussion at 12 years old, 17.3%; first sexual discussion at 13 years old, 28.3%; first sexual discussion at 14 or 15 years old, 16.5%; first sexual discussion at 16 or 17 years old, 7.9%. Based on Baumrinds (1996, 1978) four classifications of parenting styles, respondents were next asked to classify the parenting style that best described their parent(s) at the time of their sexual debut (Table 4-4). According to respondents, 77 believed their parents parenting style to be permissive (45.8%), 63 believed their parents parenting style to be authoritative (37.5%), 16 believed their parents parenting style to be authoritarian (9.5%), while 12 believed their parents parenting style to be indifferent (7.1%). When respondents were asked how much the parenting style that they were raised with influenced their decision to have sexual intercourse for the first time

PAGE 66

51 (Table 4-5), 14 (8.3%) responded that their parents parenting style had a very strong influence on their decision, 33 (19.6%) responded that their parents parenting style had a strong influence on their decision, 54 (32.1%) responded that their parents parenting style had at least some influence on their decision, 43 (25.6%) said their parents parenting style had very little influence at all on their decision, while 24 (14.3%) said their parents parenting style had no effect at all on their decision. Table 4-4. Respondents selection of parents parenting style. Frequency Valid Percent Permissive 77 45.8 Authoritarian 16 9.5 Indifferent 12 7.1 Authoritative 63 37.5 Total 168 100.0 Table 4-5. Influence of parents parenting style on decision to have, or not to have sex. Frequency Valid Percent Very strong influence 14 8.3 Strong influence 33 19.6 Some influence 54 32.1 Very little influence 43 25.6 No influence at all 24 14.3 Total 168 100.0 Religiosity Religiosity is the other major factor that this study aims to explore. The following sections will examine respondents answers to questions regarding religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity. Each section will be examined by (a) frequencies and proportions for each question, and (b) frequencies and proportions on the religiosity index of those respondents who reportedly have had their sexual debut. Following an examination of each of the three individual religiosity components (affiliation, attendance, and community religiosity), the overall religiosity index

PAGE 67

52 (Appendix D) will be examined for frequencies and proportions to explore levels of religiosity for those respondents who reported they have had a sexual debut (N=121). Religious affiliation. Respondents were asked how they would characterize their familys practice of religion (Table E-13). To this question, only 2 of 168 said their familys practice of religion was very observant (1.2%), 24 said their familys practice of religion was moderately observant (14.3%), 90 said their familys practice of religion was somewhat observant (53.6%), 50 said their familys practice of religion was not very observant (29.8%), and 2 said their familys practice of religion was not observant at all (1.2%). Respondents were then asked how they would rate their affiliation to Judaism up to their reference point (Table E-14). On this item, 40 said they were very strongly affiliated to Judaism (23.8%), 66 said they were strongly affiliated to Judaism (39.3%), 38 said they were somewhat affiliated to Judaism (22.6%), 24 said they were not very affiliated or not affiliated at all to Judaism (14.3%). Overall, these two items were rated using a Religious Affiliation Index (Appendix D) created for this study in order to gain a sum religious affiliation score for respondents who reported having had a sexual debut. The Index found that 10 of 121 respondents scored a highest religious affiliation (8.3%), 12 scored a high religious affiliation (9.9%), 41 scored a moderate religious affiliation (33.9%), 25 scored a minimal religious affiliation (20.7%), and 33 scored a not very religious at all religious affiliation (27.3%).

PAGE 68

53 Table 4-6. Non-virgin respondents score on the Sum Religious Affiliation Index Frequency Valid Percent Not very religious 33 27.3 Minimal religious affiliation 25 20.7 Moderate religious affiliation 41 33.9 High religious affiliation 12 9.9 Highest religious affiliation 10 8.3 Total 121 100.0 Religious attendance. Respondents were asked how often they attended religious services at their reference point (Table E-15). Nineteen of 168 respondents reported that they attended weekly or almost weekly (11.3%), 28 said they attend monthly or almost monthly (16.7%), 69 said they attended a few times per year (41.1%), 45 said they attended only on the High Holidays (26.8%), and 7 said they did not attend at all (4.2%). Respondents were then asked if they regularly (at least once per week) attended a Hebrew School or Sunday School at the age of their reference point (Table E-16). According to respondents, 44 said yes (26.2%), 110 said they did not at the age of their reference point but did up to a different age (65.5%), and 14 said they did not attend a Hebrew School or Sunday School at all (8.3%). The study also aimed not only to explore religious schooling, but primary school background as well. Respondents were asked to characterize the primary school that they attended at the age of their reference point (Table E-17). To this question, 12 of 168 respondents reported their primary school was private and Jewish (7.1%), 7 reported their primary school was private and religious but not Jewish (4.2%), 14 said their primary school was private and non-religious (8.3%), and 135 said their primary school was public (80.4%). The last item in the religious attendance component asks the respondent if they had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah (Table E-18). According to respondents, 150 of 168

PAGE 69

54 respondents reported that they had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah (89.3%), while 18 reported that they had not (10.7%). Overall, these four questions were rated using a Religious Attendance Index (Appendix D) created for this study to gain a sum religious attendance score for those respondents who had reported having had a sexual debut. The Index found that 4 of 121 respondents scored highest religious attendance (3.3%), 8 scored high religious attendance (6.6%), 27 scored moderate religious attendance (22.3%), 69 scored minimal religious attendance (57.0%), and 13 scored no substantial religious attendance (10.7%). Table 4-7. Non-virgin respondents scores on the Sum Religious Attendance Index. Frequency Valid Percent No substantial religious attendance 13 10.7 Minimal religious attendance 69 57.0 Moderate religious attendance 27 22.3 High religious attendance 8 6.6 Highest religious attendance 4 3.3 Total 121 100.0 Community religiosity. Respondents were asked if they were involved in a Jewish youth group (Table E-19). To this question, 37 of 168 respondents stated that they were highly involved in a Jewish youth group (33.0%), 10 were moderately involved (6.0%), 28 were somewhat involved (16.7%), 36 were only slightly involved (21.4%), and 57 were not involved at all in a Jewish youth group (33.9%). Next, respondents were asked whether their community had a Jewish Community Center (Table E-20). Results showed that 149 of 168 respondents reported their community did have a J.C.C (88.7%) while 19 reported that their communities did not (11.3%). Of those 149 respondents that grew up in communities that did have a J.C.C., 84 were members (56.4%) and 65 were not members (43.6%). The final item on the instrument asked respondents to characterize their Jewish community at the time of their reference point (Table E-21). To

PAGE 70

55 this question, 6 characterized their community as very religious (3.6%), 69 thought their community was moderately religious (41.1%), 53 said their community was somewhat religious (31.5%), 25 said their community was minimally religious (14.9%), while 14 said their community was not religious at all (8.3%). In addition, 1 (.6%) respondent did not answer this question. Overall, these three questions were rated using a Community Religiosity Index (Appendix D) created for this study to gain a sum community religiosity score for those respondents who reported having had a sexual debut (Table 4-8). The Index found that 7 of 121 respondents scored a highest community religiosity (5.7%), 17 scored a high community religiosity (14.0%), 22 scored a moderate community religiosity (18.2%), 56 scored a minimal community religiosity (46.3%), and 19 scored a no substantial community religiosity (15.7%). Table 4-8. Non-virgin respondents score on the Sum Community Religiosity Index. Frequency Valid Percent No substantial community religiosity 19 15.7 Minimal community religiosity 56 46.3 Moderate community religiosity 22 18.2 High community religiosity 17 14.0 Highest community religiosity 7 5.7 Total 121 100.0 Overall Religiosity Score Overall, the three sections of religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity were rated using a specific index for each variable. Each index then was weighted equally (33%) and calculated to form an overall Sum Religiosity Index (S.R.I.) (Appendix D). This index was used to help calculate the effects that religiosity may have had on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. For this study, the S.R.I. found that of the 121 respondents who reportedly had their sexual debut,

PAGE 71

56 14 scored a high religiosity (12.4%), 21 scored a moderate religiosity (17.4%), 51 scored a minimal religiosity (42.1%), and 34 scored a no substantial religiosity (28.1%). These results will be analyzed further in the next section, which specifically examines results for each primary and secondary research question stated in Chapter 1. Table 4-9. Non-virgin respondents scores on the overall Sum Religiosity Index. Frequency Valid Percent No substantial religiosity 34 28.1 Minimal religiosity 51 42.1 Moderate religiosity 21 17.4 High religiosity 15 12.4 Total 121 100.0 Analysis of Research Questions Primary Research Questions Primary research question 1. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents raised with different parenting styles? The purpose of this question was to explore and compare the mean age of sexual debut for each of the four parenting styles (Table 4-10). For those respondents who responded that they have experienced their sexual debut (n=121), 51 classified their parents parenting style as Permissive (41.1%), 48 classified their parents parenting style as Authoritative (39.7%), 13 classified their parents parenting style as Authoritarian (10.7%), and 9 classified their parents parenting style as Indifferent (7.4%). The mean age of sexual debut for each parenting style is as follows: Authoritative--17.73 years old (SD=1.38), Permissive--16.88 years old (1.64), Authoritarian--16.69 years old (1.44), and Indifferent--15.56 years old (1.74). The overall mean age of sexual debut for all respondents who reported having already experienced their sexual debut was 17.10 years old (SD=1.63).

PAGE 72

57 Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of parenting style on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant relationship (f=6.42, p<.001) among parenting styles with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-11). Tukeys Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test was used to test all possible pairwise comparisons between parenting styles and the mean ages of each parenting style (Table 4-12). HSD is the most conservative of the post-hoc tests in that it is the most likely to accept the null hypothesis of no group differences (U.C.L.A., 2004). Two significant relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut between parenting styles. The first was between permissive and authoritative parenting styles (p<.05) (Table 4-12). The second was between indifferent and authoritative parenting styles (p<.05) (Table 4-12). Table 4-10. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among parenting styles. N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Permissive 51 16.88 1.64 .23 Authoritarian 13 16.69 1.44 .40 Indifferent 9 15.55 1.74 .58 Authoritative 48 17.73 1.38 .20 Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15 Table 4-11. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among parenting styles ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degress of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 45.05 3 15.02 6.42 .00(*) Within Groups 273.77 117 2.34 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 73

58 Table 4-12. Post-hoc evaluation of significant differences of mean age of sexual debut between parenting styles. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Parenting Style (I) Parenting Style (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standard Error Sig. Permissive Authoritarian .19 .48 .98 Indifferent 1.33 .55 .08 Authoritative -.83 .31 .03(*) Authoritarian Permissive -.19 .48 .98 Indifferent 1.14 .66 .32 Authoritative -1.04 .48 .14 Indifferent Permissive -1.33 .55 .08 Authoritarian -1.14 .66 .32 Authoritative -2.17 .56 .00(*) Authoritative Permissive .85 .308 .03(*) Authoritarian 1.04 .48 .14 Indifferent 2.17 .56 .00(*) Note. p<.05 = Primary research question 2. Do any of the four parenting styles positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts? The purpose of this question was to explore and compare the mean age of sexual debut for each of the four parenting styles (Table 4-10) and to identify which, if any, parenting style has a positive effect on the mean age of sexual debut. To do this, a comparison of mean ages of sexual debut across parenting styles was generated through a oneway ANOVA test (p<.05) and each mean was compared to that of the overall mean of sexual debut for the study, 17.10 years old (Table 4-10). Authoritative is the only parenting style that has a mean, 17.73 years old, greater than the overall mean of sexual debut for the study, 17.10 years old. Furthermore, as mentioned above, significant statistical differences in the means of sexual debut were found for permissive (p<.05) and indifferent (p<.05) parenting styles when compared to the authoritative parenting style (Table 4-12). It should be noted that, according to the survey instrument, the permissive

PAGE 74

59 and indifferent parenting styles both lack parental demandingness, which the instrument defines, as parent(s)/guardian(s) setting high standards and insisting that their children meet them. Therefore, it may be a single characteristic within a parenting style rather than an overall parenting style that affects the mean age of sexual debut. Primary research question 3. Do any of the four parenting styles negatively affect (expedite) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts? The purpose of this question was to explore and compare the mean age of sexual debut for each of the four parenting styles (Table 4-10) and to identify which, if any parenting style negatively affects (expedites) the mean age of sexual debut. To do this, a comparison of means of sexual debut among parenting styles was generated through a oneway ANOVA test (p<.05) and each mean was compared to that of the overall mean of sexual debut for the study, 17.10 years old (Table 4-11). Three out of the four parenting styles had negative effects on sexual debut and generated means of sexual debut less than the overall mean of sexual debut for this study. They were permissive (16.88), authoritarian (16.69), and indifferent (15.56) parenting styles. The two parenting styles that have the greatest negative effect, when computing difference of means (overall mean mean of parenting style), are authoritarian and indifferent (Table 4-12). It should be noted that, according to Baumrind (1996, 1978), the authoritarian and indifferent parenting styles both lack parental responsiveness, which the instrument defines as parent(s)/guardian(s) engaging in open discussions and having verbal give and take with their children. Secondary Research Questions Secondary research question 1. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents who had different levels of religiosity?

PAGE 75

60 The purpose of this question was to determine if Jewish adolescents level of religiosity affected their age of sexual debut. To do this, the three sections of religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity were rated using a specific index for each factor (Appendix D). Each index then was weighted equally (1/3, .33%) and calculated to form an overall Sum Religiosity Index (Appendix D). This sum index was then used to help calculate the effects that overall religiosity may have had on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. A oneway ANOVA (p<.05) was run to compare means of sexual debut among different levels of overall religiosity based on the created Sum Religiosity Index. The five possible levels of overall religiosity were as follows: highest religiosity, high religiosity, moderate religiosity, minimal religiosity, and no substantial religiosity. No respondents fell into the highest religiosity category. When compared to the overall mean age of sexual debut, 17.10 years old, mathematical differences were found among the four remaining levels of overall religiosity. The mean ages of sexual debut were as follows: high overall religiosity, 16.53 years old; moderate overall religiosity, 17.00 years old; minimal overall religiosity, 18.00 years old; and no substantial overall religiosity, 16.06 years old. Table 4-13. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Sum Religiosity Index. N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error No substantial religiosity 34 16.06 1.30 .22 Minimal religiosity 51 18.00 1.20 .17 Moderate religiosity 21 17.00 1.79 .39 High religiosity 15 16.53 1.77 .46 Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15 Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of overall religiosity on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant

PAGE 76

61 relationship (f=6.42, p<.001) among different levels of religiosity with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-14). Tukeys Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test was used to test all possible pairwise comparisons between overall levels of religiosity and the means of each parenting style (Table 4-15). Two significant relationships were found for mean differences in age of sexual debut among levels of overall religiosity. The first one was between no substantial overall religiosity and minimal overall religiosity (p<.05). The second was between minimal overall religiosity and high overall religiosity (p<.05) (Table 4-15). Table 4-14. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Sum Religious Index ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 83.19 3 27.73 13.77 .000(*) Within Groups 235.62 117 2.01 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 =*.

PAGE 77

62 Table 4-15. Post-hoc evaluation of significant differences of mean age of sexual debut between levels of Sum Religiosity Index. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Sum Religiosity Score (I) Sum Religiosity Score (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standard Error Sig. No substantial religiosity Minimal religiosity -1.94 .31 .00(*) Moderate religiosity -.94 .39 .11 High religiosity -.47 .44 1.00 Minimal religiosity No substantial religiosity 1.94 .31 .00(*) Moderate religiosity 1.00 .37 .05(*) High religiosity 1.47 .42 .00(*) Moderate religiosity No substantial religiosity .94 .39 .11 Minimal religiosity -1.00 .37 .05(*) High religiosity .47 .48 1.00 High religiosity No substantial religiosity .47 .44 1.00 Minimal religiosity -1.47 .42 .00(*) Moderate religiosity -.47 .48 1.00 Note. p<.05 = Secondary research question 2. Do any of the three aspects of religiosity positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut? The purpose of this question was to explore and compare the mean age of sexual debut for each of the four levels of overall religiosity (Table 4-13) and to identify which, if any of the three variables of overall religiosity has a positive effect on the mean age of sexual debut. The three variables examined were religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity. To do this, the three components of religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity were rated using a specific index for each factor. Religious affiliation. When the first component, religious affiliation, was compared to the overall mean age of sexual debut of 17.10 years old, two levels of religious affiliation positively affected (delayed) the timing of sexual debut (Table 4-16). They were minimal religious affiliation with a mean age of 17.24 years old and moderate

PAGE 78

63 religious affiliation with a mean age of 18.12 years old. The two extreme levels of religious affiliation provided mean ages of sexual debut farthest from the overall mean (overall mean age of sexual debut mean age of sexual debut for each level of religious affiliation). The mean age for not very religious was 16.12 and on the other end, the mean age for highest religious affiliation was 16.10. However, the mean for high religious affiliation (16.83) was a lot closer to the overall mean age. Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of religious affiliation on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant relationship (f=10.68, p<.001) among different levels of religious affiliation with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-17). Table 4-16. Comparison of age of sexual debut among levels of the Religious Affiliation Index. N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Not very religious 33 16.12 1.45 .25 Minimal religious affiliation 25 17.24 1.36 .27 Moderate religious affiliation 41 18.12 1.31 .20 High religious affiliation 12 16.83 1.19 .34 Highest religious affiliation 10 16.10 2.02 .64 Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15 Table 4-17. Comparison of age of sexual debut among scores on Religious Affiliation Index ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 85.78 4 21.44 10.68 .00(*) Within Groups 233.03 116 2.01 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *. Religious attendance. When religious attendance was compared to the overall mean age of sexual debut of 17.10 years old, three levels of religious attendance positively affected (delayed) the timing of sexual debut (Table 4-18). They were minimal

PAGE 79

64 religious attendance with a mean age of 17.23, moderate religious attendance with a mean age of 17.33, and high religious attendance with a mean age of 17.25. Once again, as was the case with religious affiliation, the two extremes of religious attendance provided the largest negative effect in difference (overall mean age mean age of each level of religious attendance) of mean age of sexual debut. No substantial religious attendance had a mean age of 16.69 years old and highest religious attendance had a mean age of 14.24 years old. Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of religious attendance on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant relationship (f=3.87, p<.01) among different levels of religious attendance with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-19). We can, therefore, conclude that there are differences in group means, indicating that the independent variable, religious attendance, has an effect on the dependent variable mean age of sexual debut. Table 4-18. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Religious Attendance Index. N Mean Standard Deviation Standard Error No substantial religious attendance 13 16.69 1.89 .52 Minimal religious attendance 69 17.23 1.5 .18 Moderate religious attendance 27 17.33 1.39 .27 High religious attendance 8 17.25 1.49 .53 Highest religious attendance 4 14.25 2.50 1.25 Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15 Table 4-19. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Religious Attendance Index ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 37.50 4 9.38 3.87 .01(*) Within Groups 281.31 116 2.43 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 80

65 Community religiosity. When community religiosity was compared to the overall mean age of sexual debut of 17.10 years old, two levels of community religiosity positively affected (delayed) the timing of sexual debut (Table 4-20). They were minimal community religiosity with a mean age of 17.16 years old and high community religiosity with a mean age of 17.65 years old. It should be noted that the moderate community religiosity, the level in between minimal and high community religiosity, had a mean age of 17.05. In addition, consistent with the results of religious affiliation and religious attendance, the two extremes of levels of community religiosity provided the largest negative difference (overall mean age mean age of each level of community religiosity) from the overall mean age of sexual debut. No substantial community religiosity had a mean age of 16.84 years old and highest community religiosity had a mean age of 16.14 years old. Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of community religiosity on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the lack of a significant relationship (f=1.236), at the p<.05 level, among different levels of community religiosity with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-21). It cannot be concluded, therefore, that there are differences in group means, indicating that the independent variable, level of community religiosity, did not have a significant effect on the dependent variable mean age of sexual debut. Table 4-20. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Community Religiosity Index. N Mean Standard Deviation Std. Error No substantial community religiosity 19 16.84 1.12 .26 Minimal community religiosity 56 17.16 1.73 .23 Moderate community religiosity 22 17.05 1.65 .35 High community religiosity 17 17.65 1.27 .31 Highest community religiosity 7 16.14 2.41 .91 Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15

PAGE 81

66 Table 4-21. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Community Religiosity Index ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 13.04 4 3.26 1.24 .30 Within Groups 305.77 116 2.6 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *. Secondary research question 3. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents of different gender? The purpose of this question is to investigate whether male and female Jewish adolescents have differences in the timing of their sexual debut. When compared to the overall mean age of sexual debut, 17.10 years old, neither males nor females had mean ages of sexual debut far from the overall mean age. Males had a mean age of sexual debut of 17.16 years old and females had a mean age of sexual debut of 17.00 years old. Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of gender on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the lack of a significant relationship (f=.283), at the p<.05 level, between genders with respect to mean age of sexual debut. It cannot be concluded, therefore, that there are differences in group means, indicating that the independent variable, gender, may not have had an effect on the dependent variable mean age of sexual debut. Table 4-22. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut by gender. N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Male 74 17.16 1.80 .21 Female 47 17.00 1.34 .19 Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15

PAGE 82

67 Table 4-23. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut by gender ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups .76 1 .76 .28 .60 Within Groups 318.05 119 2.67 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *. Additional Results Additional significant relationships (p<.05) were explored through oneway ANOVAs that were run for each item for the data set that only included those who had sexual intercourse (Yes dataset, n=121). Parenting Style A significant relationship (f=4.95, p<.05) was found between age at first date and mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-22). In addition, a significant relationship (f=6.07, p<.05) was found between age of first serious relationship and mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-23). Furthermore, a significant relationship (f=2.44, p<.05) was found for age of first sexual discussion when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-24). Therefore, all three, age of first date, age of first serious relationship, and age of first sexual discussion, had an effect on the timing of sexual debut. However, due to one or more ages having two or less responses, post-hoc tests were unable to be run on any of the three items. Frequency of sexual discussion (f=3.36, p<.05) and how in-depth the sexual discussion was (f=3.18, p<.05) also provided a significant relationship when comparing mean ages of sexual debut. For frequency of sexual discussion, Tukeys HSD test yielded a significant relationship between the mean age of sexual debut for those who had only one sexual discussion and those respondents who had more than one sexual discussion.

PAGE 83

68 Tukeys HSD test yielded a significant difference in mean age of sexual debut between those respondents who had a very in-depth sexual discussion(s) and those respondents who had an in-depth sexual discussion(s). Religiosity A significant relationship (f=10.20, p<.05) was found among different classifications of Judaism when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-29). Tukeys HSD test yielded two significant relationships (Table E-30). They were found when comparing both Reform and Conservative independently to Orthodox (p<.05). In addition, another significant relationship (f=18.04, p<.01) was found among levels of observance when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-30). However, due to one or more of the levels of observance having two or less responses, I could not run post-hoc tests on this item to make pairwise comparisons. The level of religious affiliation also yielded a significant relationship (f=11.31, p<.01) when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-31). Specific significant pairwise relationships were discovered using Tukeys HSD test (Table E-32). Significant relationships were found among every level of affiliation when each was compared pairwise with not very affiliated (p<.05). An additional significant relationship (p<.05) was found between very strongly affiliated and moderately affiliated. Religious service attendance (f=7.37, p<.05, Table E-33) and Hebrew School attendance (f=7.25, p<.05, Table E-34) also yielded significant relationships when comparing mean ages of sexual debut. For religious service attendance, Tukeys HSD test only yielded one significant pairwise relationship (p<.05) (Table E-35). It was between those respondents who attended religious services a few times per year compared to those respondents who only attended religious services during the High

PAGE 84

69 Holidays. For Hebrew school attendance, significant pairwise relationships (p<.05) were found between those respondents who attended Hebrew school up to their reference point and those respondents who did not attend Hebrew school at the age of their reference point but did attend Hebrew school up to an age younger than their reference point (Table E-36). Primary school type also yielded a significant relationship (f=3.28, p<.05) when comparing mean ages of sexual debut. However, post-hoc test results showed no significant pairwise relationships (Table E-37). Community religiosity was also examined using oneway ANOVA to explore effects on the mean age of sexual debut (Table E-38). For involvement in a Jewish youth group, a significant relationship (f=4.91, p<.05) was found when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-39). Post-hoc tests (Tukeys HSD) showed two significant pairwise relationships (p<.05, Table E-40). The first one was between those respondents who said they were not involved at all and those respondents who said they were only slightly involved. The second significant relationship was found between those respondents were only slightly involved in a Jewish youth group and those respondents who were somewhat involved in a Jewish youth group. Exploring membership to a Jewish Community Center (J.C.C.), a significant relationship (f=7.39, p<.05) was found when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-41). Tukeys HSD test yielded one significant pairwise relationship (p<.05) is between those respondents who had a J.C.C. in their community and were not members and those respondents who had a J.C.C. in their community and were members (Table E-42). Finally, when examining the levels of how respondents characterized the religiosity of their community, another significant relationship (f=6.33, p<.05) was found when comparing the mean ages of sexual debut

PAGE 85

70 (Table E-43). Two significant pairwise relationships (p<.05) were found when post-hoc (Tukeys HSD) tests were run (Table E-44). The first one was between those respondents who classified their community as minimally religious and those respondents who classified their community as moderately religious. The second significant relationship was between those respondents who classified their community as moderately religious and those respondents who classified their community as not religious at all. Virgins All respondents who said they had not had sexual intercourse (No dataset, N= 47) were considered to have had a delay in timing of sexual debut because all respondents were 18 years old or older, and the mean age of sexual debut for those who had sex was 17.10 years old. In order to formulate protective factors that might have contributed to these delays in timing of sexual debuts, frequency tests were run on each item for the No data set along with Chi-Square Tests. If a majority of virgins had selected one type of response, this might provide clues leading to the discovery of a protective factor for early sexual debut. A statistically significant relationship (p<.05) was found using a Chi-Square Test between the number of respondents who had restrictions on the age they could first date (n=3) and the number of respondents who had no restrictions on the age they could first date (n=44) (Table E-44). Another significant relationship (p<.05) was found using the same method among the responses for age at first serious relationship, with 24 respondents claiming to never have been in what they would consider a serious relationship (Table E-45). In addition, significant relationships were found among responses regarding whether any parent discussed sex with them prior to their reference

PAGE 86

71 point (p<.05, Table E-46), the frequency of sexual discussions prior to their reference point (p<.05, Table E-47), and for how in-depth the sexual discussions prior to the respondents reference point (p<.05, Table E-48), which for virgins would be their current age. An additional significant relationship (p<.05) was found among age at first sexual discussion (Table E-49). For those virgins who had a sexual discussion (n=35), all but 6 had the discussion at age 13 or younger (29). When examining how many of the five sexual topics were discussed for the virgins (n=47), an average of almost three topics (u=2.81, SD=1.95) were discussed (Table E-50), indicating that discussing at least three topics may be a protective factor in the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. It is important to identify, if possible, a parenting style that a majority of virgins (n=47) had. A significant relationship (p<.05) was found among responses, with permissive being chosen by 26 (55.3%) and authoritative being chosen by 15 (31.9%). It should be noted that both of these parenting styles (according to the survey instrument (Baumrind, 1996, 1978) posses the quality of parental responsiveness, which is defined in the survey as a parent(s)/guardian(s) engaging in open discussions and having verbal give and take with their children (Table E-51). Finally, a significant relationship (p<.05) was found among responses to the question that asks how much influence do you believe your parents parenting style had on your decisions to have (in this case to not have) sex (Table E-52). When examining religiosity, many more statistically significant relationships appeared (p<.05). The first significant relationship was found among classifications of Judaism (p<.01, Table E-53). Conservative (N=23, 48.9%) and Reform (N=20, 42.3%) made up the majority of the virgin respondents. The next significant relationship (p<.01)

PAGE 87

72 was found within respondents classifying the strength of their affiliation to Judaism (Table E-54). A clear majority (78.7%) of respondents were only somewhat affiliated or not very affiliated at all. These two groups comprised 37 out of the total 47 virgin respondents. When asked about their religious service attendance, 33 (70.2%) of the 47 virgin respondents said they attended synagogue at least a few times per year. In addition, a Chi-Square Test displayed a significant statistical relationship (p<.05) for religious service attendance (Table E-55). Furthermore, with respect to Hebrew school attendance, 46 (97.9%) out of the 47 virgin respondents said they attended Hebrew school up to a certain age. The Chi-Square test also conveyed yet another statistically significant relationship (p<.05, Table E-56). The same test showed significant relationships for primary school type (Table E-57) and whether or not the respondent had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah (Table E-58). For primary school type, a vast majority (80.9%) or 38 out of the 37 virgin respondents said they went to public school. Similarly, a clear majority (89.4%) said they have had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah, making up 42 out of the 47 virgin respondents. A statistically significant relationship (p<.05) was found using a Chi-Square Test for the final three items. They were: level of involvement in a Jewish youth group (Table E-59), whether or not the respondents community had a Jewish Community Center and if they were a member (Table E-60), and how the respondent would rate their communitys religiosity (Table E-61). The most common responses to level of involvement in a Jewish youth group were the two extremes. Highly involved comprised 38.3% and not involved at all comprised 29.8%. However, if we were to combine the top

PAGE 88

73 three levels of involvement in a Jewish youth group, we would see that almost 60% (N=28, 59.6%) of the virgin respondents (N=47) were at least somewhat involved in a Jewish youth group. In addition, when looking at whether or not there was a Jewish Community Center in the respondents city in which they grew up, 41 (87.2%) out of the 47 virgin respondents said there was a J.C.C. in their city. Out of those 41 virgin respondents who had a J.C.C. in their city, 20 (48.8%) were members and 21 (51.2%) were not. When asked to characterize their communitys religiosity, a vast majority (87.0%) of the virgin respondents claimed their communitys religiosity to be at least somewhat religious. Summary This chapter has provided descriptive results for all items of the instrument: gender, religious classification, sexual intercourse, marriage, parenting style, religiosity, religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity. In addition, this chapter focused on results related to the primary and secondary research questions stated in Chapter 1. This chapter concluded with additional information on results that were found to be statistically significant for items that were not directly related to the primary or secondary research questions. The following chapter will discuss in-depth the results related to the primary and secondary research questions.

PAGE 89

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION Findings This study was designed to examine the effects of parenting style on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. It explored four classifications of parenting styles (Baumrind, 1996, 1978) to determine whether a specific parenting style affected the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. Each parenting style was examined for positive (delay) and negative (early) relationships compared to the overall mean age of sexual debut, which for this study was 17.10 (SD=1.63) years old. Furthermore, this study examined the effects of religiosity on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. Religiosity was comprised of three components: religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity. Each component was measured as an independent index and then equally compiled into a Sum Religiosity Index (Appendix D), which was used to explore whether religiosity affects the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. The study also explored each independent index to determine whether any isolated aspect of religiosity affects the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. Finally, the timing of sexual debut for Jewish adolescents was examined by comparing mean ages of sexual debut between genders. Descriptive Results The participant population provides a background of factors that may affect the timing of a Jewish adolescents sexual debut. More than half of the population was male 74

PAGE 90

75 (53.0%), which possibly occurred because data collection took place at three fraternity houses compared to only two sorority houses. Participants classifications of Judaism yielded a population comprised of basically two groups. Conservative and Reform Judaism were the classifications for over 95% of respondents. In order to make broad generalizations about the timing of sexual debut for Jewish adolescents across all sects of Judaism, a near equal distribution would have been necessary. However, because the only two non-Jewish respondents were not counted in data collection, all respondents were Jewish (N=168) and research questions can therefore still be answered about the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. This study focuses on the timing of sexual debut and in order to examine factors that contributed to respondents either having sex or not having sex It was important to separate those respondents who had experienced their sexual debut (non virgins, N=121) from those who had not (virgins, N=47) and examine each group separately. Finally, although every sect of Judaism, is opposed to premarital sex, regardless of the different ways they portray it, all respondents (N=168) reported that they were currently not, and have not been married. This means that 121 (72.0%) out of 168 respondents acted against Judaisms common fiber of opposition to premarital sex. Primary Research Questions 1. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents raised with different parenting styles? 2. Do any of the four parenting styles positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts? 3. Do any of the four parenting styles negatively affect (expediate) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debuts?

PAGE 91

76 Secondary Research Questions 1. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents who had different levels of religiosity? 2. Do any of the three aspects of religiosity positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut? 3. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents of different gender? Oneway ANOVAs (p<.05) were used to analyze and answer each of these research questions. The group of interest used to analyze the research questions was only those respondents who reported having experienced their sexual debut (N=121). This group was isolated for exploration because each research question asks about the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, thereby limiting research to those respondents who have actually experienced their sexual debut. The other group (n=47), respondents who have not experienced their sexual debut, was analyzed using Chi-square tests for frequencies. Because the mean age of sexual debut for those respondents who had experienced their sexual debut was 17.10 years old, and all respondents were 18 years old or older, then those respondents who had not experienced their sexual debut are considered to have a delay in the timing of their sexual debut when compared to the mean age of sexual debut. This population of virgins was, therefore, examined for factors that may have contributed positively to the delaying of sexual debut. Parenting Style In order to determine effects that parenting style may have had on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, the survey (Appendix D) defined four parenting styles according to Baumrind (1996, 1978) and defined each one. Respondents were then asked to classify which of the four parenting styles was closest to the way they were reared, up

PAGE 92

77 to the age of their reference point. As previously mentioned, to examine sexual debut the data set must be limited to only those respondents who reported having had experienced their sexual debut (N=121). The mean age of sexual debut for each parenting style is as follows: Indifferent 15.56 (SD=1.74), Authoritarian 16.69 (SD=1.44), Permissive 16.88 (SD=1.64), and Authoritative 17.73 (SD=1.38). Clearly, there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among parenting styles. Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of parenting style on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant relationship (f=6.42, p<.01) among parenting styles with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-11). This study can conclude that parenting style does, in fact, have an effect on Jewish adolescents timing of sexual debut. This finding is consistent with previous findings for adolescents that differences in levels of parental demandingness and parental responsiveness (the two factors that Baumrind (1996, 1978)) uses to classify parenting styles) may affect adolescent outcomes (Baldwin & Baranoski; Levin, Xu, Bartkowski, 2002; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999; Rosenthal et al., 1990). Additionally, two significant relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut among parenting styles. The first relationship was between permissive and authoritative parenting styles (p<.05) (Table 4-12). The second relationship was between indifferent and authoritative parenting styles (p<.05) (Table 4-12). Authoritative parenting style, which produced the highest mean age of sexual debut (17.73), according to Baumrind (1996, 1978), is high on both parental responsiveness and parental demandingness. Both indifferent and permissive parenting styles are low on parental demandingness. It is, possible that Jewish adolescents whose parents set high standards for them and insist that

PAGE 93

78 their children meet them, may have a later sexual debut than those Jewish adolescents whose parents do not. Authoritative parenting has often been cited as the most effective means of parenting in respect to child outcomes (Luster & Small, 1994; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997; Rodgers, 1999; Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). Adolescents reared in authoritative homes are more responsible, more self-assured, more adaptive, more creative, more curious, more socially skilled, and more successful in school than adolescents reared in non-authoritative homes (Fuligni & Eccles, 1993; Kurdeck & Fine, 1994; Lamborn et al., 1991; Pulkkinen, 1982; Steinberg et al., 1994). These parents are described as warm but firm and maintain standards for their childs conduct by forming expectations that are consistent with their childs developing needs and capabilities (Berk, 2000). In terms of timing of sexual debut, an authoritative parent would, not only have expectations of their adolescent about not having sex at a young age, but also would communicate openly with them about their sexual expectations (parental demandingness). Furthermore, an authoritative parent would openly discuss sex with their adolescent at a young age, and as they grew. In addition, the discussions would be in-depth and cover age-appropriate topics (parental responsiveness). When looking for one or more parenting styles that may negatively affect (expedite) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, the mean age of sexual debut for this study must be examined. For all respondents who reported having experienced their sexual debut, the mean age of sexual debut was 17.10 years old (SD= 1.63). While permissive (u=16.88) and authoritarian (16.69) both had mean ages of sexual debut less than the overall mean age of 17.10, the difference between each parenting style mean and

PAGE 94

79 the overall mean is only .22 and .41 respectively. When those differences are translated into months, the difference between the mean ages of sexual debut for permissive and authoritarian parenting styles compared to the mean age of sexual debut is less than three months earlier for permissive and less than five months earlier for authoritarian. The largest difference appears when the indifferent parenting style is examined. The mean age of sexual debut for respondents who reported their parents having an indifferent parenting style was 15.56 years old (SD=1.74). Indifferent parents minimize the time and energy they devote to interacting with their child. They know little about their childs activities and whereabouts, show little interest in their childs experiences at school or with friends, rarely converse with their child, and rarely consider their childs opinion when making decisions (Berk, 2000). While Baumrind classifies the indifferent parenting style as being low on parental demandingness and low on parental responsiveness (1996, 1978), it has also been well documented that adolescents with indifferent parents are not as likely to encounter positive child outcomes as adolescents of other parenting styles (Luster & Small, 1994; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997; Rodgers, 1999; Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). This studys finding of adolescents with indifferent parents having an early sexual debut is consistent with other studies findings, assuming that an early sexual debut is considered a negative outcome. With parents who are not demanding and not responsive, the adolescent has the power and many opportunities to make decisions on their own; and it has been found that sexual intercourse is most likely to occur among adolescents who have the most autonomy (the least parental control) to date whom they want, to date at an early age, and to control their own dating activities (where to go, when to come home, etc.) (Miller, McCoy, Olson &

PAGE 95

80 Wallace, 1986). Furthermore, adolescents raised in indifferent homes are often impulsive and more likely to be involved in delinquent behavior and in premature experiments with sex, drugs, and alcohol (Fuligni & Eccles, 1993; Kurdeck & Fine, 1994; Lamborn et al., 1991; Pulkkinen, 1982; Steinberg et al., 1994). This studys findings are consistent with previous research, not only for the indifferent parenting style having the worst outcome, but as well for the authoritative parenting style having the best outcome. Religiosity In order to determine the effects that religiosity may have had on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, the Sum Religiosity Index (SRI) (Appendix D) was used to compare the mean age of sexual debut for each level of overall religiosity. As described in previous chapters, the SRI is an overall score made up of three parts that all were rated equally: religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity. Also, as described in previous chapters, the SRI was intended to have five levels; however no respondents scored in the highest religiosity level. Therefore, the four remaining levels of overall religiosity are: no substantial religiosity, minimal religiosity, moderate religiosity, and high religiosity. No substantial religiosity, produced a mean age of sexual debut of 16.06 years old (SD=1.0); minimal religiosity produced a mean age of sexual debut of 18.00 years old (SD=1.20); moderate religiosity produced a mean age of sexual debut of 17.00 (SD=1.79); and high religiosity produced a mean age of sexual debut of 16.53 (SD=1.77). Clearly, there is a difference in timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut among levels of religiosity. This finding is consistent with previous research that found religiosity affects the likelihood that an adolescent will engage in risk-related behaviors, such as sexual activity (Wilcox, Rostosky, Randall, & Wright, 2001; Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000).

PAGE 96

81 Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of overall religiosity on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant relationship (f=13.77, p<.01) among levels of overall religiosity with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-14). It therefore can be concluded that Jewish adolescents religiosity can affect the timing of their sexual debut. Thus, religion may serve as an important social referent for adolescents decisions to abstain from sexual relations (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991). Additionally, two significant relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut among levels of overall religiosity. The first relationship was between no substantial religiosity and minimal religiosity (p<.05) (Table 4-15). It appears from these that even a little religiosity delays sexual debut, compared to no religiosity. The second relationship was between minimal overall religiosity and high overall religiosity (p<.05) (Table 4-15). If we look at these significant relationships together, we see that both, the low extreme (no substantial religiosity) and the high extreme (high religiosity), have the earliest mean ages of sexual debut and that these relationships are significant when compared to minimal religiosity, which had the highest mean age of sexual debut at 18.00 years of age. Extremes at either end seem to produce a negative outcome in terms of timing of sexual debut. While many studies find that strong religiosity is associated with a delay in the timing of sexual debut (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985; Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000), this study suggests that a high level of religiosity may not produce a positive outcome. In other words, excessive religiosity may not serve as a protective factor in terms of timing of sexual debut. It is therefore possible that Jewish adolescents who have even minimal

PAGE 97

82 or moderate levels of overall religiosity may have the best chance at a positive outcome and a later sexual debut than those Jewish adolescents who have either extremely high or non-existent religiosity. When looking for one aspect of overall religiosity that may have positively affected (delayed) the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, we must look at the different levels for each aspect. This study examined whether: (a) different levels of religious affiliation produce a delay in the timing of sexual debut, (b) different levels of religious attendance produce a delay in the timing of sexual debut, and (c) different levels of community religiosity produce a delay in the timing of sexual debut. To explore each aspect, the created index for each was examined by analyzing and comparing the mean ages of sexual debut for each level. Religious affiliation. The results from the Religious Affiliation Index (Appendix D) were explored to determine the effects of religious affiliation on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. The mean ages of sexual debut were examined for each of the five levels of religious affiliation. The five levels and their reported means are: Not very religious, 16.12 years old (SD=1.45); Minimal religious affiliation, 17.24 (SD=1.36); Moderate religious affiliation, 18.12 (SD= 1.31); High religious affiliation, 16.83 (SD=1.19); and Highest religious affiliation, 16.10 (SD=2.02). Clearly, there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among different levels of religious affiliation, with minimal religious affiliation and moderate religious affiliation positively affecting (delaying) the timing of sexual debut. It has been reported that many adolescents may not engage in risk-related behavior due to their religious beliefs and the proscriptions of their faith (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting,

PAGE 98

83 1992; Woodroof, 1985), and this is consistent with the findings of this study. It is possible that the level of affiliation a Jewish adolescent feels toward Judaism will affect the timing of their sexual debut. This presents a challenge to parents, to keep Judaism a priority in post Bar/Bat Mitzvah years, which is usually dominated by the emergence of stronger peer relationships (Treboux & Busch-Rossnagel, 1990). A oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) determined the impact of religious affiliation on the mean age of sexual debut, indicating the presence of a significant relationship (f=10.68, p<.01) among levels of religious affiliation with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-17). This study can conclude that religious affiliation does, in fact, have an effect on Jewish adolescents timing of sexual debut. Four significant relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut among levels of religious affiliation. The first three relationships were all found among not very religious, high religious affiliation and highest religious affiliation when each was compared pair-wise to moderate religious affiliation (p<.05). The fourth relationship was between not very religious and minimal religious affiliation (p<.05). If these significant relationships are examined together, both findings indicate that the low extreme (not very religious) and the high extreme (highest religious affiliation), have the lowest mean ages of sexual debut and that these relationships are significant when compared to moderate religious affiliation which had the highest mean age of sexual debut at 18.12 years of age. Extreme religious affiliation, on either end, seems to produce the most negative outcome in terms of timing of sexual debut. This finding is similar to that of overall religiosity. As mentioned before many studies find that strong religiosity, of which religious affiliation is a component, is associated with a delay in the timing of sexual debut

PAGE 99

84 (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985; Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000). This study found, however, that an extremely high level of religious affiliation may not produce the same positive outcome. In other words, the highest levels of religious affiliation may not serve as a protective factor in terms of timing of sexual debut. It is possible that Jewish adolescents who have moderate levels of religious affiliation may have a better chance of later sexual debut than those Jewish adolescents who have either extremely high or not very religious affiliations. Previous research agrees with the fact that adolescents with moderate religious affiliation are more likely to have positive outcomes than adolescents who are not very religious (Coie et al., 1993). However, this studys finding of an early sexual debut for those Jewish adolescents who had extremely high religious affiliation seems to be unique. Religious attendance. To determine the effects of religious attendance on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, I will explore the results from the Religious Attendance Index (Appendix D). I will closely examine the mean ages of sexual debut for each of the five levels of religious attendance. The five levels and their means are: No substantial religious attendance, 16.19 (SD=1.88); Minimal religious attendance, 17.23 (SD=1.51); Moderate religious attendance, 17.33 (SD=1.39); High religious attendance, 17.25 (SD=1.49); and Highest religious attendance, 14.25 (SD=2.50). Clearly, there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among different levels of religious attendance, with three middle levels (minimal religious attendance, moderate religious attendance, and high religious attendance) positively affecting (delaying) the timing of sexual debut.

PAGE 100

85 A oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of religious attendance on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant relationship (f=3.87, p<.01) among levels of religious attendance with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-19). It can be concluded that religious attendance does have an effect on Jewish adolescents timing of sexual debut. Additionally, three significant relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut among levels of religious attendance. All three relationships were found in comparison to highest religious attendance (p<.05). Minimal, moderate, and high religious attendance all produced significant relationships when compared independently and pair-wise to highest religious attendance. If these significant relationships are examined together, both the low extreme (no substantial religious attendance) and the high extreme (highest religious attendance), have the earliest mean ages of sexual debut and the relationship between the high extreme, highest religious attendance, and the middle of the five levels, moderate religious attendance (which had the highest mean age of sexual debut (17.33)), have a significant relationship. It appears that extreme religious attendance, on either the low end or the high end, seems to produce the most negative outcome in terms of timing of sexual debut. This finding is similar to and supports the prior finding related to overall religiosity and religious affiliation. As mentioned earlier, many studies find that strong religiosity, of which religious attendance is a component of, provides a delay in the timing of sexual debut (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985; Zaleskit & Schiaffino, 2000). This study found that to be true, but also suggests that the highest levels of religious attendance may not delay sexual debut. It is possible that Jewish adolescents who have moderate levels of

PAGE 101

86 religious attendance may have a better chance of later sexual debut than those Jewish adolescents who have either very high or low levels of religious attendance. While previous research has showed that low religious service attendance is associated with early sexual debut (Zaleski and Schiaffnio, 2000), this studys finding of extremely high levels of religious attendance not producing the same positive effects as moderate levels of religious attendance seem to be unique. Community religiosity. To determine the effects of community religiosity on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, this study explored the results from the Community Religiosity Index (Appendix D). The mean ages of sexual debut were closely examined for each of the five levels of community religiosity. The five levels and their means are: No substantial community religiosity, 16.84 (SD=1.12); Minimal community religiosity, 17.16 (SD=1.73); Moderate community religiosity, 17.05 (SD=1.65); High community religiosity, 17.65 (SD=1.27); and Highest community religiosity, 16.14 (SD=2.41). Clearly, there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among different levels of community religiosity, with high community religiosity positively affecting (delaying) the timing of sexual debut. This finding is consistent with previous research that found that adolescents who grow up in communities with higher levels of religiosity are more likely to delay having sex than those who grow up in less religious communities (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). This could be due to the theory that non-marital sexual activity, both in general and among adolescents in particular, is more likely to be proscribed in religious than in less religious communities (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993).

PAGE 102

87 Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of community religiosity on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the lack of a significant relationship (f=1.24) among levels of community religiosity with respect to mean age of sexual debut at the p<.05 level. It cannot be concluded, therefore, that community religiosity has an effect on Jewish adolescents timing of sexual debut. However, a simple examination of the mean ages of sexual debut for each of the five levels of community religiosity found consistent results with each of the other sections of religiosity. If mean ages of sexual debut are examined, both the low extreme (no substantial community religiosity) and the high extreme (highest community religiosity) have the earliest mean ages of sexual debut (16.84 and 16.14, respectively). Extreme community religiosity, on either the low end or the high end, seems to produce the most negative outcome in terms of timing of sexual debut. This analysis is similar to that of overall religiosity, religious affiliation, and religious attendance. As mentioned earlier, many studies find that strong religiosity, of which community religiosity is a component, delays the timing of sexual debut (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985; Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000). This study found that to be true, but also suggests that the highest levels of community religiosity may not serve as a protective factor in terms of timing of sexual debut. It is possible that Jewish adolescents who have moderate levels of community religiosity have a better chance of a positive outcome and a later sexual debut than those Jewish adolescents who have either extremely high levels or no substantial community religiosity. While previous research found that low community religiosity is associated with early sexual debut (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993), this studys finding that the

PAGE 103

88 highest levels of community religiosity does not produce the same positive effects as moderate levels of community religiosity, seem to be unique. Gender In order to determine the effects of gender on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, the mean age of sexual debut was calculated for both genders. The mean age of male respondents (N=74) was 17.16 years old (SD=1.80) and the mean age of female respondents (N=47) was 17.00 (SD=1.34). However, in reality, this difference is a matter of about a month and was not statistically significant. A oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of gender on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the lack of a significant relationship (f=.283) among levels of community religiosity with respect to mean age of sexual debut at the p<.05 level. It cannot be concluded that gender has an effect on Jewish adolescents timing of sexual debut. This is consistent with the previous analysis of mean ages of sexual debut by gender. Summary Overall, the findings from this study provide valuable information regarding Jewish adolescents. It is important to emphasize the main findings of this study regarding parenting style and religiosity. This study found significant differences in the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut among different parenting styles and among different levels of religiosity. In addition, my study has provided insight into the lives of Jewish adolescents, the way they were reared, and the decisions that they made as adolescents. Limitations The limitations associated with this present study include All subjects could choose not to participate in the study.

PAGE 104

89 Both genders were not equally represented in the study. The topic of adolescent sexual debut may be considered personal and may inhibit response accuracy. Results are subject to errors in memory recall about sexual debut and ages of parental conversations about sex. Results may be skewed to do small sample size. Each fraternity and sorority house at which data were collected allowed the study to be conducted at their house under the condition that it was voluntary. This may have contributed to the total number or respondents not being as high as possible. There was potential for many more participants, as each fraternity and sorority house has over 100 active members. In addition, the study was conducted at three fraternity houses and two sorority houses contributing to a slightly uneven gender distribution. Furthermore, the study focused on adolescent and sexual topics and personal information. This may have caused some respondents to not be as forthcoming and may have caused respondents to not always be truthful in all of their responses. Finally, respondents (N=121) were asked to remember their decisions and their surrounding environment at the age of their sexual debut, which could have been as much as 7 years before the survey; and to recall conversations with parents about sex, possibly as much as 10 years before the survey. This delay could introduce some inaccuracy in reporting. Implications for Practice The present study has essential implications for Jewish parents, adolescents, communities, and youth workers. Many findings of this study suggest ways that Jewish parents can protect their adolescents against an early sexual debut, such as controlling the age that their child can first date, the age at which they first discuss sex with their child, the topics that they cover, and, most importantly, their overall parenting style.

PAGE 105

90 Many previous studies show that an authoritative parenting style provides the most likely chances of positive child outcomes in various areas such as academic achievement. This study has shown similar findings in terms of the timing of sexual debut, with authoritative parenting apparently delaying sexual debut. If Jewish parents want to help their adolescents postpone sexual debut then they must be warm but firm. They must set standards for their adolescents conduct, but also form expectations that are consistent with their adolescents developing needs and capabilities. Furthermore, Jewish parents must place a high value on the development of autonomy and self-direction of their adolescent, but also assume the ultimate responsibility for their adolescents behavior. Finally, Jewish parents must deal with their child in a rational, issue-oriented manner, frequently engaging in age-appropriate discussions and explanations with their children about sexual topics. In summary, Jewish parents must be consistently and realistically demanding of their adolescents as well as responsive and openly communicative in order to be able to protect against early sexual debut. Jewish adolescents are faced with unique challenges such as preparing for and achieving their Bar/Bat Mitzvah; however, they also face the same challenges as other adolescents, i.e. academics, peer pressure, and the transition to greater autonomy and decision making. While adolescents cannot control their parents parenting style, adolescents can begin to form their own religious beliefs and behaviors. This study shows that, overall, religiosity does have an effect on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, and, more specifically, religious affiliation and religious attendance affect the timing of their sexual debut. It has been reported that many adolescents may not engage in risk-related behavior due to their religious beliefs and the proscriptions of their

PAGE 106

91 faith (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985). With an early sexual debut considered a risk-related behavior, the finding of this study is consistent with other research. This means that, fostered in the proper manner by their parents and/or community, a Jewish adolescents affiliation to Judaism can serve as a protective factor not only in terms of sexual debut but against other deviant behaviors. Furthermore, individuals who attend their religious institution frequently and who value religion in their lives are more likely than others to develop sexual attitudes and behavior that are consistent with religious teachings (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). While each sect of Judaism teaches their opposition to premarital sex differently, it is, nonetheless, a consistent fiber across Judaism. This means that, if fostered in the proper manner by their parents and/or community, a Jewish adolescents attendance to a synagogue can serve as a protective factor in terms of their age of sexual debut. Finally, while this study did not find significant results in terms of community religiosity and mean age of sexual debut, other studies have (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993; Thornton & Camburn, 1989). In addition, because organized religions such as Judaism place great value on marriage and family formation (Thornton & Camburn, 1989), nonmarital sexual activity, both in general and among adolescents in particular, is more likely to be proscribed in religious than in less religious communities (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). Youth groups, Jewish or not, provide opportunities for adolescents to serve their community, leadership and social opportunities, and, most importantly, give them less time to be participating in deviant behavior. Community centers, Jewish or not, provide an opportunity for adolescents to socialize, participate in community-wide programs, and

PAGE 107

92 most importantly, to be in a supervised environment where they are less likely to have the opportunity to participate in deviant behavior. Furthermore, this study examined the effect of community religiosity on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut through the use of a religiosity index, and did not examine the effect that any single aspect of community religiosity may have had. Therefore, while not evident in this study, it is still possible that if a community has a Jewish Youth group and a Jewish Community Center, a Jewish adolescents involvement in either or both can serve as a protective factor in terms of the age of their sexual debut by proscribing values against premarital sex. This study also has implications for Jewish communities. As mentioned in Chapter 2, the level of religiosity characterizing a community (as indicated by both the prevalence of religious adherents and the orthodoxy of local religious organization) also may influence adolescent sexual and contraceptive behaviors (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). In addition, it has been concluded that community religiosity exercises significant effects on both intercourse and contraceptive behavior (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). Because an adolescents religious community can have an influence on their sexual behaviors, it is the responsibility of each Jewish community and the institutions and agencies that support them, to serve as a protective factor and a positive influence. The face of many Jewish communities is their Jewish Community Center (J.C.C.) and there are many. Across the United States and Canada there are over 350 J.C.C.s that provide services to people of all ages and backgrounds that could be utilized to protect against early sexual debut. As J.C.C.s work to serve members of all backgrounds, most J.C.C.s have specialized departments that are divided by ages. It is possible that through the J.C.C.s programs geared specifically to teens/adolescents, that they are fostering

PAGE 108

93 rules, boundaries, and demands consistent with the Jewish adolescents parents. Thus, the J.C.C. can serve as an additional monitor of adolescent behavior. A J.C.C. can support the optimal authoritative parenting style by remaining demanding and equally responsive to the needs of Jewish adolescents and thereby also becoming a protective factor against Jewish adolescents having early sexual debuts. Recommendations for Future Research To more fully explore the effects that parenting style and religiosity have on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, future studies may be elaborated in several ways. First, future studies on the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut may focus on a representative and large data set. This would allow for the data to be analyzed in different ways, which are not possible with a small data set, and could possibly yield detailed and expansive results. Second, future studies may attempt to explore other factors than parenting style and religiosity that may affect the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. One such factor is family structure, including parents, divorce, siblings with age and gender differences, and additional family members in the house. Other factors that can be examined are peers, academic achievement, and educational attainment of the Jewish adolescents parents. Sexual debut is a rainbow of interwoven factors, each of which can affect another and an adolescents sexual debut. It is difficult to remove one factor affecting sexual debut and isolate it without wondering how every other factor may interact with it as well. Finally, a study that examines current adolescents (middle school and high school students) may provide an accurate picture of contemporary youth issues. This would eliminate the need to ask college students to remember back seven years and attempt to report accurately about decisions they made and their surrounding home environment almost a decade ago.

PAGE 109

94 This study is one of the first to specifically examine Jewish adolescents sexual debut. After determining that parenting style and religiosity both independently affect the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut, it is imperative to disseminate these results through different outlets to allow Jewish parents, Jewish religious leaders, and Jewish community leaders the best opportunity to protect Jewish adolescents from an early sexual debut. Some researchers recommend that parents need to learn how to provide the right amount of the right information at the right time, whether it concerns academic achievement or sexual development (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999). This is where a Jewish Community Center comes in. To be most effective, Jewish parents, Jewish religious leaders, and Jewish community leaders need to know how to approach, discuss, and facilitate a sexual conversation, all of which can occur within the walls of a J.C.C. and can be administered by educated and trained Jewish professionals. Finally, providing this information directly to Jewish adolescents would create an educational forum based on facts that will help shape their decision making and allow Jewish adolescents to communicate openly and knowingly about sexual topics with their parents and their peers. Still, parents need to take the initiative by clearly vocalizing their expectations of their adolescents sexual behavior and by openly communicating age-appropriate sexual topics in an on-going dialogue that allows for verbal give and take. As adolescents become interested in sex and become biologically capable of reproduction, the need to educate them on sexual topics becomes more and more important. Adolescence is an exciting time in life that includes many positive situations full of potential and also many negative situations where the consequences might not seem so evident to the young person. Sexual intercourse is one of those situations where the

PAGE 110

95 consequences may not be apparent. This study has shown that both parenting style and religiosity affect the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut. And, as adolescents begin to develop, their lives become more sophisticated and complicated, and they receive a taste of autonomy as they gain an ability to make their own decisions, hopefully the decision on when to have sex is based on education provided by their parents and the consequences are clear.

PAGE 111

APPENDIX A INTERNAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL LETTERS

PAGE 112

1. TITLE OF PROTOCOL: Factors Affecting the Timing of Jewish Adolescents Sexual Debut 2. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR(s): (Robby Etzkin, Bachelors Degree of Human Resource Development, Teaching Assistant, Family, Youth, and Community Sciences, 121 NW 25 th Street, Gainesville, FL 32607, (352) 271-5636, RobbyEtzkin@hotmail.com) 3. SUPERVISOR (IF PI IS STUDENT): (Dr. Rose Barnett, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Family, Youth, and Community Sciences, 3041 McCarty Hall PO Box 110310, Gainesville, FL 32611-0310, (352) 392-2201 ext. 257, rvbarnett@ufl.edu (352) 392-8196) 4. DATES OF PROPOSED PROTOCOL: From: April 9, 2003 To: November 30, 2003 5. SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR THE PROTOCOL: None 6. SCIENTIFIC PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGATION: To determine if parenting style and/or certain Jewish practices such as religious service attendance or religious school attendance, affect the timing that Jewish adolescents first have intercourse. 7. DESCRIBE THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY IN NON-TECHNICAL LANGUAGE. The Principal Investigator will introduce himself and his topic and then will ask participants to consent and to complete a survey. See attached survey entitled, Factors Affecting the Timing of Jewish Adolescents Sexual Debut. 8. POTENTIAL BENEFITS AND ANTICIPATED RISK. No more than minimal risk 9. DESCRIBE HOW PARTICIPANT(S) WILL BE RECRUITED, THE NUMBER AND AGE OF THE PARTICIPANTS, AND PROPOSED COMPENSATION (if any): Participants will be recruited through four University of Florida organizations. They are Alpha Epsilon Phi and Delta Phi Epsilon sororities and Alpha Epsilon Pi and Tau Epsilon Phi fraternities. The Principal Investigator is seeking at least 50 participants from each organization for a sum of over 200. All participants will be eighteen years of age or older. Added max per pi 500 and signed 10. DESCRIBE THE INFORMED CONSENT PROCESS. INCLUDE A COPY OF THE INFORMED CONSENT DOCUMENT (if applicable). Each participant will be given a copy of the informed consent form prior to his or her involvement in the study. Participants will return a signed copy before receiving a survey. See attached Informed Consent form. _________________________ _________________________ Principal Investigator's Signature Supervisors Signature I approve this protocol for submission to the UFIRB: _______________________ ________ Dept. Chair/Center Director Date 97

PAGE 113

APPENDIX B INFORMED CONSENT FORM

PAGE 114

Informed Consent Protocol Title: Factors Affecting the Timing of Jewish Adolescents Sexual Debut Please read this consent document carefully before you decide to participate in this study. Purpose of the Research Study: The purpose of this study is to examine specific factors that may affect the age at which Jewish adolescents first have intercourse. What you will be asked to do in this study: Following a brief introduction you will be asked to consent to and to complete a short survey. The nature of the questions will include topics such as sexual history and religiosity. An example of a sexual history questions is, Have you had sexual intercourse? and an example of religiosity question is, Did you have a Bar or Bat Mitzvah? You do not have to answer any questions that you do not wish to. Time Required: 15 minutes Risks and Benefits: No more than minimal risks and there are no direct benefits to the individual. However, participating fraternities and sororities will be acknowledged in all publications including the thesis and all future journal publications Compensation: none Confidentiality: Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. Voluntary Participation: Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. Right to Withdraw from the Study: You have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence. Whom to contact if you have questions about the study: Robby Etzkin, Graduate Student, Department of Family, Youth, and Community Sciences, 3041 McCarty Hall, PO Box 110310, Gainesville, FL 32611-0310, (352) 392-2201 Rose Barnett, Ph.D., Department of Family, Youth, and Community Sciences, 3041 McCarty Hall, PO Box 110310, Gainesville, FL 32611-0310, (352) 392-2201 ext. 257 Whom to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study: UFIRB Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, (352) 392-0433 Agreement: I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the procedure and I have received a copy of this description. _________________________________ _________________________________ Participant Signature Date Principal Investigator Date 99

PAGE 115

APPENDIX C SURVEY INSTRUMENT

PAGE 116

Factors Affecting the Timing of Jewish Adolescents Sexual Debut Please circle the answer that most accurately describes you or fill in the blanks. Personal Information 1. What is your sex? A. Male B. Female 2. Do you consider yourself Jewish? A. Yes B. No, please STOP and return this survey to the facilitator, thank you for your time. 3. Have you had sexual intercourse? A. Yes, I was __ years old the first time. B. No, I have not, and I am currently ______ years old. If you answered Yes for question 3, then the number (age) you filled in will be considered your reference point for the remainder of the survey. If you answered No for question 4, then your current age will be considered your reference point for the remainder of the survey. 4. Please fill in the blank. My reference point is ___. 5. Are you or were you married at the age of your reference point? A. Yes B. No 101

PAGE 117

102 Parenting Style 6. How old were you when you went on your first date? A. I was _____ years old. B. I have not been on a date. 7. Were there rules or restrictions on the age at which you could first date? A. Yes, I was not allowed to date until I was ____ years old. B. No, I was not restricted. 8. How old were you when you began what you would consider your first serious relationship? A. I was _____ years old B. I have not been in what I consider a serious relationship 9. Did your parent(s)/guardian(s) discuss sex with you before your reference point? A. Yes, they both did. B. Yes, my same-sex parent did only C. Yes, my opposite-sex parent did only. D. No, not at all. 10. If a sexual discussion occurred was it: A. A one-time thing B. More than once C. Part of an on-going dialogue of sexual topics D. Daily E. Does not apply 11. If a sexual discussion occurred, how in-depth was the dialogue? A. Very in-depth B. In-depth C. Not in-depth D. Not in-depth at all E. Does not apply 12. If a sexual discussion occurred, please check all of the topics that were discussed during the sexual discussion(s) with your parent(s). Physical development Abstinence Safe sex Emotion-based Intimacy Consequences 13. If a sexual discussion occurred, how old were you at the first discussion? I was _____ years old.

PAGE 118

103 For this study: ---Responsive will refer to parent(s)/guardian(s) engaging in open discussions and having verbal give and take with their children. ---Demanding will refer to parent(s)/guardian(s) setting high standards and insisting that their children meet them. The following definitions of parenting styles will be used for this study. Permissive: responsive but not demanding Authoritarian: demanding but not responsive Indifferent: neither demanding nor responsive Authoritative: demanding and responsive 14. Which parenting style is the closest to the way you were raised up to your reference point? A. Permissive B. Authoritarian C. Indifferent D. Authoritative 15. How much did the parenting style that you were raised with influence your decision to have sexual intercourse for the first time? A. Very strong influence B. Strong influence C. Some influence D. Very little influence E. No influence at all Religiosity 16. How would you characterize your Jewish upbringing? A. Orthodox B. Conservative C. Reform D. Other, please name __________________ 17. How would you characterize your familys practice of religion? A. Very strongly observant B. Strongly observant C. Somewhat observant D. Minimally observant E. Not observant at all

PAGE 119

104 18. How would you rate your affiliation to Judaism up to your reference point? Affiliation can mean how much one feels a part of any group. A. Very strongly affiliated B. Moderately affiliated C. Somewhat affiliated D. Not very affiliated E. Not affiliated at all 19. How often do you or did you attend synagogue for religious services at your reference point? A. Weekly or almost weekly B. Monthly or almost monthly C. A few times per year D. Only on High Holidays E. Not at all 20. Did you regularly (at least once per week) attend a Hebrew School or Sunday School at the age of your reference point? A. Yes B. No, but I did regularly attend until I was ____ years old. C. No, I did not attend at all. 21. How would you characterize the school you attended at the age of your reference point? A. Private and Jewish B. Private and religious but not Jewish C. Private and non-religious D. Public 22. Did you have a Bar or Bat Mitzvah? A. Yes B. No 23. Were you involved in a Jewish youth group? For example, BBYO, USY, etc. A. Yes, I was highly involved. B. Yes, I was moderately involved. C. Yes, I was somewhat involved. D. Yes, I was only slightly involved. E. No, I was not involved at all. 24. Did your community have a Jewish Community Center (JCC)? A. Yes, but I was not a member. B. Yes, and I was a member. C. No, it did not.

PAGE 120

105 25. How would you characterize your Jewish community at the time of your reference point? A. Very religious B. Moderately religious C. Somewhat religious D. Minimally religious E. Not religious at all Thank you for your time. Your completion of this survey has helped contribute to our understanding of the experiences of Jewish youth. Thank you once again.

PAGE 121

APPENDIX D RELIGIOSITY INDEX GUIDE

PAGE 122

Religiosity Index Guide 3 Aspects: Religious Affiliation, Religious Attendance, and Community Religiosity All three aspects will equal each other in order to obtain an overall religiosity score. This cumulative score will serve to explore the research question: Does religiosity affect the timing of Jewish adolescents sexual debut? This new variable will be called relig sum and will be made up of three additional variables: rel aff sum, rel att sum, and com rel sum. Each of the three sub-variables will be scaled differently due to the different number of questions in each of their respective sections. The breakdown will be as follows: Religious Affiliation will cover survey questions 17 and 18. Both questions will be weighted equally. For question 17: Respondents will receive 10 points for A. very strongly observant, 7 points for B. moderately observant, 4 points for C. somewhat observant, 1 point for D. not very observant, and 0 points for E. not observant at all. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. For question 18: Respondents will receive 10 points for A. very strongly affiliated, 7 points for B. moderately affiliated, 4 points for C. somewhat affiliated, 1 point for D. not very affiliated, and 0 points for E. not affiliated at all. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. The sum total of scores for the sub variable religious affiliation will total to 20 points. The scale for assessing the sum score will be as follows: 20-17 highest religious affiliation 16-14 high religious affiliation 13-11 moderate religious affiliation 10-8 minimal religious affiliation 7-0 not very religiously affiliated This religious affiliation sum score will then be calculated into a proportion out of 20. For example, a high religious affiliation score of 15 will be transformed into an overall score of .75 (15/20) for calculating overall religiosity. This proportion will make up 1/3 of the overall religiosity score. 107

PAGE 123

108 Religious Attendance will cover survey questions 19, 20, 21, & 22. All questions will be weighted equally. For question 19: Respondents will receive 10 points for A. weekly or almost weekly, 7 points for B. monthly or almost monthly, 4 points for C. a few times per year, 1 point for D. only on high holidays, and 0 points for E. not at all. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. For question 20: Respondents will receive 10 points for A. yes, 5 points for B. no, but I did regularly attend until a different age, and 0 points for C. no, I did not attend at all. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. For question 21: Respondents will receive 10 points for A. private and Jewish, 5 points for B. Private and religious but not Jewish, 0 points for C. private and non-religious, and 0 points for D. Public. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. For question 22: Respondents will receive 10 points for A. Yes and 0 points for B. no. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. The sum total of scores for the sub variable religious affiliation will total to 40 points. The scale for assessing the sum score will be as follows: 40-34 highest religious attendance 33-28 high religious attendance 27-22 moderate religious attendance 21-15 minimal religious attendance 14-0 no substantial religious attendance This religious attendance sum score will then be calculated into a proportion out of 40. For example, a high religious attendance score of 30 will be transformed into an overall score of .75 (30/40) for calculating overall religiosity. This proportion will make up 1/3 of the overall religiosity score.

PAGE 124

109 Community Religiosity will cover survey questions 23, 24, & 25. All questions will be weighted equally. For question 23: Respondents will receive 10 points for A. yes, I was highly involved, 7 points for B. yes, I was moderately involved, 4 points for C. yes, I was somewhat involved, 1 point for D. yes, I was only slightly involved, and 0 points for E. no, I was not involved. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. For question 24: Respondents will receive 10 points for B. Yes, and I was a member, 5 points for A. yes, but I was not a member, and 0 points for C. no, it did not. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. For question 25: Respondents will receive 10 points for A. very religious, 7 points for B. moderately religious, 4 points for C. somewhat religious, 1 point for D. minimally religious, and 0 points for E. not religious at all. The maximum score received will be ten and the minimum will be zero. The sum total of scores for the sub variable religious affiliation will total to 30 points. The scale for assessing the sum score will be as follows: 30-26 highest community religiosity 25-21 high community religiosity 20-16 moderate community religiosity 15-11 minimal community religiosity 10-0 no substantial community religiosity This community religiosity sum score will then be calculated into a proportion out of 30. For example, a high religious attendance score of 24 will be transformed into an overall score of .80 (24/30) for calculating overall religiosity. This proportion will make up 1/3 of the overall religiosity score. OVERALL RELIGIOSITY will take the proportion from each of the three variables above and add them together, then divide that number by 3 (the number of variables involved). This new proportion will be the overall religiosity number. This new number will be assessed as follows: 1.0 .85 highest religiosity .84 .70 high religiosity .69 .55 moderate religiosity .54 .40 minimal religiosity .39 .00 no substantial religiosity

PAGE 125

APPENDIX E ADDITIONAL TABLES OF RESULTS

PAGE 126

Table E-1. Age at first date. Age (Years) Frequency Valid Percent Have not been on date 5 3.0 10.00 3 1.8 11.00 6 3.6 12.00 17 10.1 13.00 19 11.3 14.00 30 17.9 15.00 53 31.5 16.00 25 14.9 17.00 5 3.0 18.00 5 3.0 Total 168 100.0 Table E-2. Age at first serious relationship. Age (Years) Frequency Valid Percent Never been in one 29 17.3 13.00 6 3.6 14.00 13 7.7 15.00 20 11.9 16.00 59 35.1 17.00 19 11.3 18.00 15 8.9 19.00 4 2.4 20.00 1 .6 21.00 2 1.2 Total 168 100.0 Table E-3. Parental discussion of sex. Frequency Valid Percent Yes both parents discussed sex 83 49.4 Yes, only same sex parent discussed sex 41 24.4 Yes, only opposite sex parent discussed sex 4 2.4 No, neither parent discussed sex 40 23.8 Total 168 100.0 111

PAGE 127

112 Table E-4. Frequency of sexual discussion. How Often did Parents discuss Sex Frequency Valid Percent A one-time thing 35 20.8 More than once 58 34.5 On-going dialogue 36 21.4 Daily 1 .6 Does not apply 38 22.6 Total 168 100.0 Table E-5. Depth of sexual discussion. Level of Depth Frequency Valid Percent Very in-depth 15 8.9 In-depth 63 37.5 Not in-depth 39 23.2 Not in-depth at all 12 7.1 Does not apply 39 23.2 Total 168 100.0 Table E-6. Number of topics covered in parental sexual discussion. Number of Topics Covered Frequency Valid Percent 0 topics covered 40 23.8 1 topic covered 12 7.1 2 topics covered 28 16.7 3 topics covered 27 16.1 4 topics covered 28 16.7 5 topics covered 33 19.6 Total 168 100.0 Table E-7. Sexual discussion included abstinence. Frequency Valid Percent No, did NOT discuss abstinence 98 58.3 Yes, discussed abstinence 70 41.7 Total 168 100.0

PAGE 128

113 Table E-8. Sexual discussion included safe sex. Frequency Valid Percent No, did NOT discuss safe sex 53 31.5 Yes, discussed safe sex 115 68.5 Total 168 100.0 Table E-9. Sexual discussion included physical development. Frequency Valid Percent No, did NOT discuss physical development 100 59.5 Yes, discussed physical development 68 40.5 Total 168 100.0 Table E-10. Sexual discussion included emotion-based intimacy. Frequency Valid Percent No, did NOT discuss emotion-based intimacy 102 60.7 Yes, discussed emotion-based intimacy 66 39.3 Total 168 100.0 Table E-11. Sexual discussion included consequences. Frequency Valid Percent No, did NOT discuss consequences 61 36.3 Yes, discussed consequences 107 63.7 Total 168 100.0

PAGE 129

114 Table E-12. Age at first sexual discussion. Age (Years) Frequency Valid Percent No discussion occurred 41 24.0 4.00 2 1.2 5.00 5 3.0 6.00 4 2.4 7.00 2 1.2 8.00 3 1.8 9.00 4 2.4 10.00 11 6.6 11.00 7 4.2 12.00 22 13.2 13.00 36 21.6 14.00 9 5.4 15.00 12 7.2 16.00 5 3.0 17.00 5 3.0 Total 168 100.0 Table E-13. Respondents characterization of own familys level of observance at age of reference point. Frequency Valid Percent Very strongly observant 2 1.2 Moderately observant 24 14.3 Somewhat observant 90 53.6 Not very observant 50 29.8 Not observant at all 2 1.2 Total 168 100.0

PAGE 130

115 Table E-14. Respondents characterization of affiliation to Judaism at age of reference point. Frequency Valid Percent Very strongly affiliated 40 23.8 Strongly affiliated 66 39.3 Somewhat affiliated 38 22.6 Not very affiliated 20 11.9 Not affiliated at all 4 2.4 Total 168 100.0 Table E-15. Frequency of religious service attendance at age of reference point. Frequency Valid Percent Weekly or almost weekly 19 11.3 Monthly or almost monthly 28 16.7 A few times per year 69 41.1 Only on High Holidays 45 26.8 Not at all 7 4.2 Total 168 100.0 Table E-16. Attendance to Hebrew school/Sunday school at age of reference point. Frequency Valid Percent Yes 44 26.2 No, but attended until another age 110 65.5 No, did not attend at all 14 8.3 Total 168 100.0 Note. The term another age refers to an age different to that of the respondents reference point. Table E-17. School Type. Frequency Valid Percent Private and Jewish 12 7.1 Private and religious but not Jewish 7 4.2 Private and non-religious 14 8.3 Public 135 80.4 Total 168 100.0

PAGE 131

116 Table E-18. Percentage of respondents that had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah. Frequency Valid Percent Yes, had bar/bat mitzvah 150 89.3 No, did NOT have bar/bat mitzvah 18 10.7 Total 168 100.0 Table E-19. Level of respondent involvement in Jewish youth group at age of reference point. Frequency Valid Percent Highly involved 37 22.0 Moderately involved 10 6.0 Somewhat involved 28 16.7 Only slightly involved 36 21.4 Not involved at all 57 33.9 Total 168 100.0 Table E-20. Proportion of respondents who grew up in communities that had Jewish Community Centers and if they were a member. Frequency Valid Percent Yes, but I was not a member 65 38.7 Yes, and I was a member 84 50.0 No, it did not 19 11.3 Total 168 100.0 Table E-21. Respondents assessment of the level of their commumitys religiosity. Frequency Valid Percent Very religious 6 3.6 Moderately religious 69 41.3 Somewhat religious 53 31.7 Minimally religious 25 15.0 Not religious at all 14 8.4 Total 167 100.0

PAGE 132

117 Table E-22. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first date ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 91.24 9 10.1 4.9 .00(*) Within Groups 227.5 111 2.05 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-23. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first serious relationship ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 105.18 9 11.69 6.07 .00(*) Within Groups 213.63 111 1.93 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-24. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first sexual discussion with parent ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 72.87 13 5.61 2.44 .01(*) Within Groups 245.94 107 2.30 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-25. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among frequencies of sexual discussions ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 25.27 3 8.42 3.36 .02(*) Within Groups 293.54 117 2.51 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 133

118 Table E-26. Post-hoc evaluations of significant differences between mean age of sexual debut between frequencies of sexual discussion. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Frequency of Sexual Discussion (I) Frequency of Sexual Discussion (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standard Error Sig. One-time More than once -1.19 .39 .02(*) On-going dialogue -.63 .44 .50 Does not apply -.99 .43 .10 More than once One-time 1.19 .39 .02(*) On-going dialogue .57 .41 .51 Does not apply .20 .39 .95 On-going dialogue One-time .63 .44 .50 More than once -.57 .41 .51 Does not apply -.36 .44 .84 Does not apply One-time .99 .43 .10 More than once -.20 .39 .95 On-going dialogue .36 .44 .84 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-27. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of depth of sexual discussions ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 31.54 4 7.89 3.18 .02(*) Within Groups 287.27 116 2.48 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 134

119 Table E-28. Post-hoc evaluations of significant differences between mean age of sexual debut between levels of depth of sexual discussion. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Depth of sexual discussion (I) Depth of sexual discussion (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standard Error Sig. Very in-depth In-depth -1.48 .53 .05(*) Not in-depth -1.04 .56 .35 Not in-depth at all -.1000 .69 1.00 Does not apply -1.36 .56 .12 In-depth Very in-depth 1.48 .53 .05(*) Not in-depth .44 .38 .77 Not in-depth at all 1.38 .55 .10 Does not apply .12 .38 1.0 Not in-depth Very in-depth 1.04 .56 .35 In-depth -.44 .38 .77 Not in-depth at all .94 .58 .49 Does not apply -.32 .42 .94 Not in-depth at all Very in-depth .10 .69 1.00 In-depth -1.38 .55 .10 Not in-depth -.94 .58 .49 Does not apply -1.26 .58 .20 Does not apply Very in-depth 1.36 .56 .12 In-depth -.12 .38 1.0 Not in-depth .32 .42 .94 Not in-depth at all 1.26 .58 .20 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-29. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among classifications of Judaism ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 66.10 3 22.03 10.20 .00(*) Within Groups 252.71 117 2.16 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 135

120 Table E-30. Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationship between mean age of sexual debut among classifications of Judaism. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Type of Judaism (I) Type of Judaism (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standard Error Sig. Orthodox Conservative -3.29 1.06 .01(*) Reform -1.98 1.06 .25 Other -1.50 1.47 .74 Conservative Orthodox 3.29 1.06 .01(*) Reform 1.30 .27 .00(*) Other 1.79 1.06 .33 Reform Orthodox 1.98 1.06 .25 Conservative -1.30 .27 .00(*) Other .48 1.06 .97 Other Orthodox 1.50 1.47 .74 Conservative -1.79 1.06 .33 Reform -.48 1.06 .97 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-31. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious affiliation ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 89.44 4 22.36 11.31 .00(*) Within Groups 229.37 116 1.98 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 136

121 Table E-32. Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationship between mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious affiliation. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Affiliation to Judaism (I) Affiliation to Judaism (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standarad Error Sig. Very strongly affiliated Moderately affiliated -1.22 .36 .01(*) Somewhat affiliated -.73 .39 .34 Not very affiliated 1.26 .45 .05(*) Not affiliated at all -1.41 .87 .48 Moderately affiliated Very strongly affiliated 1.22 .36 .01(*) Somewhat affiliated .49 .33 .57 Not very affiliated 2.48 .39 .00(*) Not affiliated at all -.19 .84 1.0 Somewhat affiliated Very strongly affiliated .73 .39 .34 Moderately affiliated -.49 .33 .57 Not very affiliated 1.99 .42 .00(*) Not affiliated at all -.67 .85 .93 Not very affiliated Very strongly affiliated -1.26 .45 .05(*) Moderately affiliated -2.48 .39 .00(*) Somewhat affiliated -1.99 .42 .00(*) Not affiliated at all -2.67 .88 .02(*) Not affiliated at all Very strongly affiliated 1.4 .87 .48 Moderately affiliated .19 .84 1.0 Somewhat affiliated .68 .85 .93 Not very affiliated 2.67 .88 .02(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-33. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious service attendance ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 64.59 4 16.15 7.37 .00(*) Within Groups 254.22 116 2.19 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 137

122 Table E-34. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Hebrew school attendance ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 34.90 2 17.4549 7.25 .00(*) Within Groups 283.91 118 2.41 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-35. Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious service. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Religious Service Attendance (I) Religious Service Attendance (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standa rd Error Sig. Weekly or almost weekly Monthly or almost monthly -.13 .53 1.0 A few times per year -.94 .460 .25 Only on high holidays .71 .48 .57 Not at all 1.17 .85 .64 Monthly or almost monthly Weekly or almost weekly .13 .53 1.0 A few times per year -.81 .40 .26 Only on high holidays .85 .42 .27 Not at all 1.3 .81 .50 A few times per year Weekly or almost weekly .94 .460 .25 Monthly or almost monthly .81 .40 .26 Only on high holidays 1.66 .33 .00(*) Not at all 2.11 .77 .05 Only on high holidays Weekly or almost weekly -.72 .48 .57 Monthly or almost monthly -.85 .42 .27 A few times per year -1.66 .33 .00(*) Not at all .46 .78 .98 Not at all Weekly or almost weekly -1.17 .85 .64 Monthly or almost monthly -1.30 .81 .50 A few times per year -2.11 .77 .05 Only on high holidays -.46 .78 .98 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 138

123 Table E-36 Post-hoc evaluations of significant relationships between mean age of sexual debut among levels of Hebrew school attendance. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Hebrew School Attendance (I) Hebrew School Attendance (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standard Error Sig. Attended at age of reference point Did NOT attend at reference point but did up to a certain age -1.12 .32 .00(*) Did NOT attend at all -.05 .51 1.0 Did NOT attend at reference point but did up to a certain age Attended at age of reference point 1.12 .32 .00(*) Did NOT attend at all 1.07 .47 .06 Did NOT attend at all Attended at age of reference point .05 .51 1. Did NOT attend at ref. point but did up to a certain age -1.07 .47 .06 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-37. Comparion of mean age of sexual debut among primary school types ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 24.70 3 8.23 3.28 .02(*) Within Groups 294.11 117 2.51 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-38. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of involvement in Jewish youth groups ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 46.20 4 11.55 4.91 .00(*) Within Groups 272.62 116 2.35 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 139

124 Table E-39. Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut among levels of involvement in Jewish youth groups. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Involvement in Jewish Youth Group (I) Involvement in Jewish Youth Group (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standard Error Sig. Highly involved Moderately involved -.66 .678 .87 Somewhat involved .39 .49 .93 Slightly involved -.98 .45 .19 Not involved at all .49 .42 .77 Moderately involved Highly involved .66 .68 .87 Somewhat involved 1.05 .67 .52 Slightly involved -.32 .64 .99 Not involved at all 1.16 .62 .35 Somewhat involved Highly involved -.39 .49 .93 Moderately involved -1.05 .67 .52 Slightly involved -1.37 .43 .02(*) Not involved at all .11 .41 1.0 Slightly involved Highly involved .98 .45 .19 Moderately involved .32 .64 .99 Somewhat involved 1.37 .43 .02(*) Not involved at all 1.47 .36 .00(*) Not involved at all Highly involved -.49 .42 .77 Moderately involved -1.16 .62 .35 Somewhat involved -.19 .41 1.0 Slightly involved -1.47 .36 .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-40. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among Jewish Community Center members and non-members ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 35.50 2 17.75 7.34 .00(*) Within Groups 283.31 118 2.40 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 140

125 Table E-41. Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut among Jewish Community Center members and non-members. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Community has J.C.C. (I) Community has J.C.C. (J) Mean Diff. (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Yes, but I was NOT a member Yes, and I was a member -1.11 .30 .00(*) No, it did not -.12 .49 .97 Yes, and I was a member Yes, but I was NOT a member 1.11 .30 .00(*) No, it did not .99 .47 .09 No, it did not Yes, but I was NOT a member .12 .49 .97 Yes, and I was a member -.99 .47 .09 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-42. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of community religiosity ANOVA. Sum of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 57.13 4 14.28 6.33 .00 Within Groups 261.68 116 2.26 Total 318.81 120 Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 141

126 Table E-43. Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut among levels of community religiosity. Dependent Variable: reference point Tukey HSD Religiosity of Jewish Community (I) Religiosity of Jewish Community (J) Mean Difference (I-J) Standard Error Sig. Very religious Moderately religious -2.38 .89 .07 Somewhat religious -1.88 .91 .24 Minimally religious -.81 .93 .91 Not religious at all -.92 .97 .88 Moderately religious Very religious 2.38 .89 .07 Somewhat religious .50 .33 .57 Minimally religious 1.57 .39 .00(*) Not religious at all 1.46 .48 .02(*) Somewhat religious Very religious 1.88 .91 .24 Moderately religious -.50 .33 .57 Minimally religious 1.07 .42 .09 Not religious at all .96 .51 .32 Minimally religious Very religious .81 .93 .91 Moderately religious -1.57 .39 .00(*) Somewhat religious -1.07 .42 .09 Not religious at all -.11 .54 1.00 Not religious at all Very religious .92 .97 .88 Moderately religious -1.46 .48 .02(*) Somewhat religious -.96 .51 .32 Minimally religious .11 .54 1.00 Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-44. Frequency of restrictions on age at first date Chi-Square. Rules at First Date Chi-Square 35.77 Degrees of Freedom 1 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 142

127 Table E-45. Frequency of ages at first serious relationship Chi-Square. Age at First Serious Relationship Chi-Square 71.64 Degrees of Freedom 7 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-46. Frequency of if parents discussed sex Chi-Square. Parents Discuss Sex Chi-Square 13.51 Degrees of Freedom 3 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-47. Frequency of frequency of sexual discussion Chi-Square. Frequency of Sexual Discussion Chi-Square 13.11 Degrees of Freedom 4 Asymp. Sig. .01(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-48. Frequency of levels of depth of sexual discussion Chi-Square. Depth of Sexual Discussion Chi-Square 19.28 Degrees of Freedom 4 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 143

128 Table E-49. Frequency of ages at first sexual discussion Chi-Square. Age at First Discussion Chi-Square 36.17 Degrees of Freedom 14 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-50. Mean of number topics covered in sexual discussion. N Mean Std. Dev. Topics Included 47 2.8085 1.95201 Table E-51. Frequency of parents parenting style Chi-Square. Parenting Style Chi-Square 31.21 Degrees of Freedom 3 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-52. Frequency of levels influence believed that parents parenting style had on decision not to have sex Chi-Square. Influence of Parenting Style Chi-Square(a) 12.68 Degrees of Freedom 4 Asymp. Sig. .01(*) Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 144

129 Table E-53. Frequency of classifications of Judaism Chi-Square. Type of Judaism Chi-Square(a) 32.75 Degrees of Freedom 3 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-54. Frequency of levels of affiliation to Judaism Chi-Square. Affiliation to Judaism Chi-Square(a) 31.62 Degrees of Freedom 4 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-55. Frequency of frequency of religious service attendance Chi-Square. Religious Service Attendance Chi-Square(a) 25.38 Degrees of Freedom 5 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-56. Frequency of frequency of Hebrew school attendance Chi-Square. Hebrew School Attendance Chi-Square(a) 42.17 Degrees of Freedom 2 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-57. Frequency of primary school type Chi-Square. Primary School Type Chi-Square(a) 78.87 Degrees of Freedom 3 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 145

130 Table E-58. Frequency of Bar/Bat Mitzvah Chi-Square. Bar/Bat mitzvah Chi-Square(a) 29.13 Degrees of Freedom 1 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-59. Frequency of levels of involvement in a Jewish youth group Chi-Square. Involvement in Jewish Youth Group Chi-Square(a) 17.15 Degrees of Freedom 4 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-60. Frequency of respondents communities having Jewish Community Centers and if they were members Chi-Square. Community has J.C.C. Chi-Square(a) 8.98 Degrees of Freedom 2 Asymp. Sig. .01(*) Note. p<.05 = *. Table E-61. Frequency of levels of community religiosity Chi-Square. Religiosity of Jewish Community Chi-Square(a) 32.04 Degrees of Freedom 4 Asymp. Sig. .00(*) Note. p<.05 = *.

PAGE 146

131 LIST OF REFERENCES Abrams, J. (1990). The parent's guide to teenage sex and pregnancy [Review of Book]. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 105 (18), p2222. Allport, G. W., & Rosa, J. M. (1967). Pe rsonal religious orient ation and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5 423-443. Ansuini, C.G., & Fidder-Woite, J. (1996). The source, accuracy, and impact of initial sexuality information on lifetime wellness. Adolescence, 31 (122), p283. Arnett, J. (2002). Are college students adults? Their concep tions of the transition to adulthood. Journal of Adult Development, 1, 213-224. Baldwin, S. & Baranoski, M.V. (1990). Family interactions and sex education in the home. Adolescence, 25 (99), p573. Barber, B. (1992). Family, personalit y, and adolescent problem behavior. Journal of Marriage and the Family 54, 69-79. Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monographs 4 (Whole no. 1). Baumrind, D. (1973). The development of inst rumental competence through socialization. In A. Pick (Ed.), Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology (Vol. 7). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Baumrind, D. (1978). Parental disciplinary patt erns and social competence in children. Youth and Society, 9, 239-276. Barumind, D. (1996). The discip line controversy revisited. Family Relations, 45 4, 405. Bearman, P., & Bruckner, H. (2001). Promisi ng the future: Virginity pledges and first intercourse. American Journal of Sociology, 106 (4), 859. Benson, P., Donahue, M., & Erickson, J. (1989). Adolescence and religion: Review of the literature from 1970-1986. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion 1, 153-181. Berk, L. (2000). Child development : (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

PAGE 147

132 Brewster, K., Billy, J., & Gra dy, W. (1993). Social context an d adolescent behavior: The impact of community on the transition to sexual activity. Social Forces, 71, 713740. Calhoun, E., & Friel, L. (2001). Adolescent sexua lity: Disentangling the effects of family structure and family context. Journal of Marriage & the Family, 63 (3), 669. Cochran, J.K., & Beeghley, L. (1991). The influence of religion on attitudes toward Nonmarital sexuality: A preliminary a ssessment of reference group theory. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 30 (1), 45. Center for Disease Control. (2002). Web site: www.cdc.gov Retrieved: January, 2004. Chase-Lansdale, P.L., & Cherlin, A.J. (1995). The long-term effects of parental divorce on the mental health of young adults: A developmental perspective. Child Development, 66 (6), 1614. Coie, J., & Watt, N. F. (1993). The science of prevention: A conceptual framework and some directions for a national research. American Psychologist, 48 (10), 1013. Day, R.D. (1992). The transition to first inte rcourse among racially and culturally diverse youth. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54 749-762. Di Mauro, D. (1995). Executive summary. Sexuali ty research in th e United States: An assessment of the social and behavioral sciences. Web site: http://www.indiana.edu/-kinsey/SSRC/sexrealn.html Retrieved: November, 2002. Donahue, M. (1994). Positive youth development in religiously-based youth programs Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, San Diego. Donovan, J., & Jessor, R. (1985). Structure of problem behavior in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53 890-904. Dornbusch, S., Ritter, P., Liederman, P., Robe rts, D., & Fraleigh, M. (1987). The relation of parenting style to adol escent school performance. Child Development, 58, 12441257. East, P., Felice, M., & Morgan, M. ( 1993). Sisters and gi rlfriends sexual and childbearing behavior: Effects on early adolescent girls sexual outcomes. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 953-963. East, P.L., & Rook, K.S. (1992). Compensatory patterns of support among childrens peer relationships: A test using school frie nds, non-school frie nds, and siblings. Developmental Psychology, 28 168-172. Elkins, L.E., & Peterson, C. (1993). Ge nder differences in best friendships. Sex Roles 29 (7/8), 497.

PAGE 148

133 Erikson, E.H. (1968). Identity, youth, and crisis New York: Norton. Feldman, S., Rosenthal, D., Brown, N ., & Canning, R. (1995). Predicting sexual experience in adolescent boys from p eer rejection and acceptance during childhood. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 5, 387-411. Flewelling, R., & Baumann, K. (1990). Family stru cture as a predictor of initial substance use and sexual intercourse in early adolescence. Journal of Marriage and the Family 52 171-181. The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. (2003). Web site: www.fhp.state.fl.us Retrieved: October, 2003. Fores, E., Tschann, J.M., & Marin, B.V. (2002) Latina adolescents: Predicting intentions to have sex. Adolescence, 37 (148), 659. Forste, R.T., & Heaton, T.B. (1988). Init iation of sexual activity among female adolescents. Youth & Society 19 (3), 250. Fowler, J. (1981). Stages of faith New York: Harper & Row. Freeman, E.W., Rickels, K., Huggins, G.R., Mu dd, E.H., Garcia, C.R., & Dickens, H.O. (1980). Adolescent contraceptive use: Comp arisons of male and female attitudes and information. American Journal of Public Health 70 (8), 790. Fuligni, A., & Eccles, J. (1993). Perceive d parent-child rela tionships and early adolescents orientation toward peers. Developmental Psychology, 29, 622-632. Furstenberg, F.F., Jr. (1976). Unplanned parenthood: The social consequences of teenage childbearing New York: Free Press. Furstenberg, F.F., Jr., Morgan, F.P., Moor e, K.A., & Peterson, J.L. (1987). Race differences in the timing of adolescent intercourse. American Sociological Review, 52, 511-518. Gillmore, M.R., Archibald, M.E., Morris on, D.M., Wilsdon, A., Wells, E.A., Hoppe, M.J., Nahom, D., & Murowchick, E. (2002). Teen sexual behavior : Applicability of the theory of reasoned action. Journal of Marriage & the Family, 64 (4), 885. Hartup, W.W., & Overhauser, S. (1991). Friendship s. In R.M. Lerner, A.C. Petersen, & J. Brooks-Gunn (Eds.), Encyclopedia of adolescence (pp.378-384). New York: Garland. Haurin, R.J., & Mott, F.L. (1990). Adolescent activity in the family context: The impact of older siblings. Demography, 27, 537-557. Heaton, T.B., & Jacobson, C.K. (1994). Race differences in changing family demographics in the 1980s. Journal of Family Issues, 15 (2), 290.

PAGE 149

134 Hofferth, S.L. (1987). Social and economic consequences of teenage childbearing. In S. Hofferth & C. Hayes (Eds.), Risking the future: Adoles cent sexuality, pregnancy, and childbearing, (Vol. 2, pp.123-144). Washington DC: National Academy Press. Hofferth, S.L., Kahn, J.R., & Baldwin, W. (1987). Premarital sexual activity among U.S. teenage women over the past three decades. Family Planning Perspectives, 19 4653. Hofferth, S.L., & Moore, K.A. (1979). Earl y childbearing and later economic well-being. American Sociological Review, 55, 224-234. Hoffman, M.L. (1970). Moral Development. In P. Mussen (ed.), Carmichaels handbook of child psychology (Vol. 2, pp.313-319). New York: Wiley. Hoffman, M.L. (1975). Moral In ternalization, Parental Powe r, and the Nature of the Parent-Child Interaction. Developmental Psychology, 11 118-239. Hogan, D.P., & Kitagawa, E.M. (1985). The impact of social status, fa mily structure, and neighborhood on the fertility of black adolescents. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 825-855. Hollingshead, A. (1975). Elmtowns youth and Elmtown revisited New York: Wiley. (Original work published 1949) Inazu, J.K., & Fox, G.L. (1980). Maternal in fluence on the sexual behavior of teenage daughters. Journal of Family Issues, 1, 81-102. Jessor, R. (1992). Successful adolescent deve lopment among youth in high-risk settings. American Psychologist, 48 (2), 117. Jessor, R., Costa, F., Jessor, L., & Donova n, J. (1983). Time of first intercourse: A prospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44 608-626. The Jewish Community Center Association. (2003) Web site: www.jcca.org. Retrieved: April, 2003. Kahn, S., Zimmerman, G., Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Getzels, J. (1985). Relations between identity in young adulthood and intimacy in midlife. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1316-1322. Kantner, J.F., & Zelnik, M. (1978). Teen pregnancies rising. Science News 113 (6), 87. Kinnaird, K.L., & Girrad, M. (1986). Premarita l sexual behavior and attitudes toward marriage and divorce among young women as a function of their mothers marital status. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48 757-765. Ku, L., Sonenstein, F.L., & Pleck, J. (1993) Neighborhood, family, and work: Influences on the premarital behaviors of adolescent males. Social Forces, 72 479-503.

PAGE 150

135 Kurdeck, L., & Fine, M. (1994). Family accepta nce and family control as predictors of adjustment in young adolescents: Linear, curvilinear, or inte ractive effects. Child Development, 65, 1137-1146. Lamborn, S., Mounts, N., Steinberg, L., & Dor nbusch, S. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from aut horitative, authorit arian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62 1049-1065. Laumann E O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels S (1994). The social organization of sexuality : Sexual practices in the United States Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Leigh, B.C. (1989). Reasons for having and a voiding sex: Gender, se xual orientation and relationship to sexual behavior. Journal of Sex Research, 26, 199-209. Levin M.L., Xu, X., & Bartkowski, J.P. (2002). Seasonality of sexual debut. Journal of Marriage & the Family, 64 (4), 871. Litchfield, A., Thomas D., & Li B. (1997). Dime nsions of religiosity as mediators of the relations between parenting and adolescent deviant behavior. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12, 199-226. Luster, T., & Small, S. (1994). Factors asso ciated with sexual ri sk-taking behaviors among adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 622-632. Maccoby, E., & Martin, J. (1983). Socialization in th e context of the family: Parent-child interaction. In E.M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Socialization, personality, and social development (Vol.4, pp.12-25), New York, Wiley. Meschke, L.L., Bartholomae, S., & Zentall, S. R. (2000). Adolescent sexuality and parent-adolescent processes: Prom oting healthy teen choices. Family Relations 49 (2), 143. Meschke, L.L., & Silbereisen, R.K. (1997). Th e influence of puberty, family processes, and leisure activities on the timing of fi rst sexual experience in adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 20 (4), 403. Miller, B., & Bingham, R. (1989). Family confi guration in relation to the sexual behavior of female adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51 499-506. Miller, B.C., Higginson, R., McCoy, K., & Ols on, T.D. (1987). Family configuration and adolescent sexual attitudes and behavior. Population and Environment, 9, 111-123. Miller, B.C., McCoy, J.K., Olson, T.D., & Walla ce, C.M. (1986). Pare ntal discipline and control attempts in relation to adoles cent sexual attitudes and behavior. J ournal of Marriage and the Family, 48 503-512.

PAGE 151

136 Miller, B., & Moore, K. (1990). Adolescent se xual behavior, pregna ncy, and parenting: Research though the 1980s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 499-506. Miller, B.C., & Olson, T.D. (1988). Sexual atti tudes and behavior of high school students in relation to background and contextual factors. Journal of Sex Research, 24, 194200. Miller, K.S., Forehand, R., & Kotchick, B.A. (1999). Adolescent sexual behavior in two ethnic minority samples: The role of family variables. Journal of Marriage & the Family 61 (1), 85. Miller, S.A. (1998). Developmental Research Methods (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Moore, M. (1992). The family as portr ayed on prime-time television, 1947-1990: Structure and characteristics. Sex Roles, 26, 41-62. Moore, K.A., & Burt, M. R. (1982). Private crisis, public cost Washington DC: Urban Institute. Moore, M.R., & Chase-Lansdale, L. (2001) Sexual intercourse and pregnancy among African American girls in high-poverty neighborhoods: The role of family and perceived community environment. Journal of Marriage & the Family 63 (4), 1146. Moore, K.A., Peterson, J.L., & Furstenberg, F.F. (1984). Starting early: The antecedents of early premarital intercourse Paper presented at the 1984 annual meetings of the Population Association of America. Moore, K.A., Peterson, J.L., & Furstenberg, F.F. (1986). Parental attitudes and the occurrence of early sexual activity. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48 777782. Mott, F.L. (1984). The patterning of female teenag e sexual behaviors and attitudes Paper presented at the 1983 annual meeting of the American Public Health Association. Noell, J., & Biglan, A.W. (1995). Does sexual coercion play a role in the high-risk sexual behavior of adolesce nts and young adults. Journal of Behavioral Medicine 18 (6), 549. Netting, N.S. (1992). Sexuality in yout h culture: Identity and change. Adolescence 27 (108), 961. Newcomer, S. & Udry, J. (1985). Oral sex in an adolescent population. Archives of Sexaul Behavior 14 41-56. Newcomer, S., & Udry, J. (1987). Parental ma rital status effects on adolescent sexual behavior. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 235-240.

PAGE 152

137 Peterson, J.L., & Zill, N. (1986). Marital di sruption, parent-child relationships, and behavior problems in children. Journal of Marriage & the Family 48 (2), 295. Pick, S., & Palos, P.A. (1995). Impact of the family on the sex lives of adolescents. Adolescence 30 (119), 667. Pulkkinen, L. (1982). Self-control and continui ty from childhood to adolescence. In P. Baltes & O. Brim (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior (Vol. 4, pp.7-16). New York: Academic Press. Reed, L.A., & Meyers, L.S. (1991). A structural analysis of religious orientation and its relation to sexual attitudes. Educational & Psychologi cal Measurement, 51 (4), 943. Reiss, I.L. (1967). The social context of premarital sexual permissiveness New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Resnick, M., Bearman, P., Blum, R., Bauman, K., Harris, K., Jones, J., Tabor, J., Beuhring, T., Sieving, R., Shew, M., Ireland, M., Bearinger, L., & Udry, J. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 823-832. Rodgers, J., & Rowe, D. (1993). Social cont agion and adolescent sexual behavior: A developmental EMOSA model. Psychological Review, 100, 479-510. Rogers, K.B. (1999). Parenting processes re lated to sexual risk-taking behaviors of adolescent males and females. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 99-109. Rosenthal, D.A., & Smith, A. (1995). Adolescents perceptions of thei r risk environment. Journal of Adolescence, 18 (2), 229. Rosenthal, D.A., & Smith, A. ( 1997). Adolescent sexual timetables. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 26 (5), 619. Rosenthal, D.A., & Smith, A. (1998). Revisitin g sexual styles: Patterns of adolescents self-perceptions. Psychological Reports 83 (1), 65. Rosenthal, D.A., & Feldman, S. (1999). Persona l and social factors influencing age at First sexual intercourse. Archives of Sexual Behavior 28 (4), 319. Rotosky, S.S. Regnerus, M.D., Comer, W., & La urie, M. (2003). Coita l debut: The role of religiosity and sex attitudes in the Add Health Survey. Journal of Sex Research, 40 (4), 358. Rostosky, S.S., & Galliher, R.V. (2001). Sexua l behaviors and relationship qualities in late adolescent couples. Journal of Adolescence 23 (5), 583.

PAGE 153

138 Rowe, D., Rodgers, J., Meseck-Bushey, S., & St. John, C. (1989). Sexual behavior and nonsexual deviance: A sibling study of their relationship. Developmental Psychology 25, 61-69. Santelli, J., Robin, L ., Brener N., & Lowry, R. (2001). Timi ng of alcohol and other drug use and sexual risk behaviors among unmarried adolescents and young adults. Family Planning Perspectives, 33 (5), 200. Shucksmith, J., Hendry, L., & Glendinning, A. ( 1995). Models of parenting: Implications for adolescent well-being within di fferent types of family contexts. Journal of Adolescence 18, 253-270. Simons, R.L., Johnson, C., & Conger, R.D. (1996) Mothers parenting. In R.L. Simons & Associates (Eds.), Understanding differences between divorced and intact families (pp.45-63). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Steinberg, L. (1999). Adolescence (5th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill College. Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S., Darling, N., Mount s, N., & Dornbusch, S. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, a nd neglectful families. Child Development, 65 754-770. Strobino, D.M., Grason, H., & Minkovitz, C. (19 87). Charting a course for the future of womens health in the United States. Social Science & Medicine 54 (5), 839. Studer, M., & Thornton, A. (1987). Adolescen t religiosity and c ontraceptive usage. Journal of Marriage & the Family 49 (1), 117. Thomson, E., Hanson, T., & McLanahan, S. ( 1994). Family structure and child wellbeing: Economic resources vs. parental behaviors. Social Forces, 73, 221-242. Thornton, A.D., & Camburn, D. (1987). The influence of the family on premarital sexual attitudes and behavior. Demography, 24 323-340. Thornton, A., & Camburn, D. (1989). Religious participation and adolescent sexual behavior and attitudes. Journal of Marriage and the Family 51 641-653. Treboux, D., & Busch-Rossnagel, N. (1990). Soci al network influences on adolescent sexual attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Adolescent Research, 5 175-189. Tucker, C., Barber, B., & Eccles, J. ( 1997). Advice about life plans and personal problems in late adolesce nt sibling relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 26, 63-76. Udry, J., & Billy, J. (1987). Initia tion of coitus in early adolescence. American Sociological Review 52 841-855.

PAGE 154

139 University of California at Los Angeles Academic Technology Services: SPSS FAQ. (2003). SPSS FAQ: What does Cronbachs alpha mean? Retrieved January, 2004, from http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/spss/faq/alpha.html. Upchurch, D.M., Aneshensel, C.S., Suco ff, C. A., & Levy-Storms, L. (1999). Neighborhood and family contexts of adolescent sexual activity. Journal of Marriage & the Family 61 (4), 920. Upchurch, D.M., Aneshensel, C.S., Mudgal, J., & McNeely, C.S. et al. (2001). Sociocultural conexts of time to fi rst sex among Hispanic adolescents. Journal of Marriage & the Family 63 (4), 1158. Weiss, L., & Schwartz, J. (1996). The rela tionship between paren ting types and older adolescents personality, academic achievement, adjustment, and substance use. Child Development, 67 2101-2114. Whitbeck, L., Conger, R., & Kao, M. (1993). Minor deviant behavi ors and adolescent sexuality. Youth and Society 25 24-37. Whitbeck, L.B., Hoyt, D.R., & Conger, R.D. (1999). Perceived Parental Acceptance as a moderator of religious transmission among adolescent boys and girls. Journal of Marriage & the Family 61 (2), 362. Whitbeck, L.B., & Simons, R.L. (1994). The effects of divorced mothers dating behaviors and sexual attitudes on the se xual attitudes of their adolescents. Journal of Marriage & the Family 56 (3), 615. Whitbeck, L.B., Yoder, K.A., Hoyt, D.R., & Conger, R.D. (1999) Early adolescent sexual activity: A developmental study. Journal of Marriage & the Family 61 (4), 934. Woodroof, T.J. (1985). Premarital sexual behavior and religious adolescents. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 24 (4), 343. Wright, L., Frost, C., & Wisecarver, S. ( 1993). Church attendance, meaningfulness of religion, and depressive symp tomatology among adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 22 559-568. Wu, L., & Martinson, B.C. (1993). Family stru cture and the risk of a premarital birth. American Sociological Review 58 (2), 210. Zaleski, E.H., & Schiaffino, K.M. (2000). Re ligiosity and sexual risk-taking behavior during the transition to college. Journal of Adolescence 23 (2), 223. Zelnick, M., Kantner, J., & Ford, K. (1981). Sex and pregnancy in adolescence Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

PAGE 155

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Robert Benjamin Etzkin was born in Mansfield, Ohio (about 80 miles Southwest of Cleveland), and his family almost immediately moved south to Orlando, Florida. From the age of two months old all the way through his seven years of college, every year but one was spent in the state of Florida. Although the terrain through his schooling seemed similar, he attended a very diverse set of schools. He attended the Jewish Community Center (J.C.C.) of Greater Orlandos preschool which prepared him well for elementary school and provided him the beginnings of many lifelong friendships. Robby, as he was now called, breezed through elementary school at Spring Lake (Altamonte Springs, FL) and Wekiva (Longwood, FL) picking up first place in a county-wide math contest in 3rd grade. Throughout his elementary years, he also attended Sunday School and began attending Hebrew School in 3rd grade, both at his synagogue, Congregation Ohev Shalom. In addition, he still spent many days after school at the J.C.C. allowing him to continue those friendships from preschool, and keeping him out of harms way Middle school, the beginning of Robbys own adolescence, saw him continue to excel academically, while taking on many additional tasks. He again received county-wide honors, this time for his skills in percussion, and in addition, continued his attendance at Hebrew School, which resulted in a successful Bar Mitzvah in 1992. Robbys middle school experience ended at McLean Middle School in Fort Worth, Texas as his family had planned a permanent relocation. However, midway through his 8th grade year, his parents had made plans to divorce. Robby finished the school year in 140

PAGE 156

141 Texas with great grades and then made plans to move back to Orlando to rejoin his lifelong friends. High school provided many new experiences for Robby and many opportunities to expand his skills and talents. He continued to be honored for his skills in percussion, as he, and his best friend, Benjamin Kaplan, were named captains of the marching bands drum line at their high school during their junior and senior years. Robbys rise to the top was not immediate however. He entered Lake Brantley High School (Altamonte Springs, Florida) like every other freshman did, but for Robby he faced an additional challenge. He was the fourth Etzkin to attend Lake Brantley, and for the first time since elementary school, Robby was at the same school as his older brother and two older cousins. While the benefits of having older family members at school with him were great, the challenges formed by teachers expectations were somewhat overwhelming. Robby, struggled academically (by his standards) his ninth grade year, but recovered throughout the rest of his high school years to graduate with a 3.5 grade point average. However, the most unique thing about his high school career did not occur at Lake Brantley High, but rather at the Alexander Muss High School in Israel. Robby was awarded a scholarship, based on an essay and academic achievement, and finished his junior year of high school in Hod HaSharon, Israel. He participated in an American program that brings Jewish high school students from all over the United States together in Israel for a two-month study program. Abroad, he learned Israeli and Jewish history by actually traveling to the locations where history was made. This two month program challenged Robby by forcing him to become independent and to grow as a person far away from home. Robby

PAGE 157

142 did all of this while still completing his course work which he brought with him from the United States including preparing for and taking three Advanced Placement Exams. Robbys identity had been formed. He was now aware of his strengths and weaknesses and was ready to take on college. After graduating from Lake Brantley High School in 1997, he was awarded the Florida Academic Scholarship (currently named Bright Futures) and chose to follow in his brothers footsteps and attend the University of Florida. Robbys adjustment to U.F. was quick and painless, with his brother, older cousin and friends he had known since preschool all within a few miles of him. One week before his first day of college, he joined the University of Floridas marching bands drum line and was able to play alongside his brother, his best friend, Benjamin Kaplan, and his brothers best friend (and Bens brother), Jo Kaplan. The two sets of brothers had grown up together since Robby was in 2nd grade. Through the drum line, Robby made many new friends, and was guided through many new college experiences. By his sophomore year, Robby was ready to lead. He returned to the drum line for a second year and was named president of the drum line in just his sophomore year. He also interviewed for and received a position as a resident advisor in a dormitory at U.F., a position he held for three years in two different dorms (Hume Hall & Broward Hall), along with completing four years in the marching band. As his four years flew by, Robby was able to touch many peoples lives, but his proudest achievement was yet to come. In March of 2001, Robby not only found out that he was graduating from the University of Florida with honors, but that he had been accepted into U.F.s graduate school. After graduating with a Bachelor of Science degree in human resource development, Robby began his graduate student career in the department of Family, Youth, and Community

PAGE 158

143 Sciences and will graduate with his Masters degree in May of 2004. Robbys graduate school experience was not to be outdone by his undergraduate years, however. He moved off-campus for the first time and succeeded in trying out and becoming one of the University of Floridas mascots. His academics and his new time commitment to Gators athletics dominated his graduate school years and provided many invaluable memories and many more priceless pictures. After his graduation, Robby will be working as the Childrens Director and Assistant Camp Director at the Jewish Community Center of Richmond, Virginia, bringing him back to the same institution where he started. At 25 years old, he is now ready to give back to a place that gave so much to him.


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0004980/00001

Material Information

Title: How Parenting Style and Religiosity Affect the Timing of Jewish Adolescents' Sexual Debut
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0004980:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0004980/00001

Material Information

Title: How Parenting Style and Religiosity Affect the Timing of Jewish Adolescents' Sexual Debut
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0004980:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text











HOW PARENTING STYLE AND RELIGIOSITY AFFECT THE TIMING OF JEWISH
ADOLESCENTS' SEXUAL DEBUT

















By

ROBERT ETZKIN


A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2004
































Copyright 2004

by

Robert Etzkin





























I would like to dedicate this paper to the many people who contributed to my upbringing
as a Jewish adolescent. I feel very fortunate to have been constantly surrounded by an
extraordinarily strong web of support and I am forever thankful for the many people who
have provided me with infinite amounts of love, encouragement, and guidance.
















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank the many people who have contributed to my success and

development as a student and as a person. First, I would like to thank Dr. Rose Barnett

for being my thesis chair and providing me hours (and years) of guidance and direction

with my study and for putting equal as much time and energy into support of my graduate

school experience. I would also like to extend gratitude to my other committee members

Dr. Suzanna Smith, and Dr. Stuart Schwartz for their continued support, insight, and

constant belief in me and in my work. It was invaluable to me to have all three of my

committee members' continued support. I would also like to thank Janice Col for helping

to make my statistics make sense.

Most importantly I would like to thank my family. I owe my parents more than

anything I could ever repay them for everything they have given me. I am forever

grateful for all of the encouragement, guidance, love, and opportunities they have

provided for me my whole life. More now, than ever before, do I appreciate all of the

times I was pushed to succeed, and all of the times I was allowed to fail. I love you.

I would also like to thank my brother Josh. His trailblazing efforts and thick

footprints through high school, college, and graduate school left me an easy path to

follow and shoes impossible to fill. He set a high standard of excellence academically,

and as a person morally and ethically, that undoubtedly has contributed to my

development and success as a student and as a person.









In addition, I would like to express my gratitude to my extended family members:

Uncle Al, Aunt Bunny, Cousin Brian, and Cousin David. I feel like one of the luckiest

people in the world to have had the opportunity to grow up with all of them less than one

mile away. This closeness provided me a great amount of support, a great amount of

love, and a great amount of opportunities to have two additional "brothers" that were

always there for me. Furthermore, I would like to thank my step-father Mark Rosenfield

for accepting me into his family and for all of the support, wisdom and new experiences

he has provided me. Also, I would like to thank my grandmothers Mitzi Goelman and

Paula Etzkin for their love, support, and constant reinforcement of my Jewish

background. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to my best friend Benj amin

Kaplan. Going to the same schools for sixteen years and having almost identical hobbies

and interests provided us with countless memories and experiences that I look forward to

reminiscing about upon his safe arrival back to the States from medical school in Israel.

If ever there was one motto that got me through tough times, helped me overcome

challenges, and helped me maintain a positive outlook to the future it was this:

"Everything will work out for the best." --- My Grandma Mitzi Goelman





















TABLE OF CONTENTS


page


ACKNOWLEDGMENT S .............. .................... iv


LI ST OF T ABLE S ............. ..... .__ .............. ix....


AB STRAC T ................ .............. xiv


CHAPTER


1 INTRODUCTION ................. ...............1.......... ......


Introductory Background Statement ................. ...............1............ ....
Parenting Style............... ...............2..

Religiosity............... ...............
Statement of the Problem ................. ...............7................
Research Questions............... ...............8
Primary Research Questions............... ...............8
Secondary Research Questions............... ...............8
Significance of the Study ................. ...............8................
Delimitations ................. ...............9...............
Definition of Terms .............. ...............9.....


2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................. ......... ...............11. ....


Introducti on ................. ...............11.................
The Problem. ................. .. .......... .. ............ .............1

Parental Communication and Parenting Style ................ ............... ......... ...13
Parental Communication .............. ...............13....

Parenting Style............... ...............15.
Reli giosity ................... ...............17.......... .....

Religious Affiliation ................. ................. 17..............
Religious Service Attendance............... ...............1
Community Reli giosity .............. ...............20....
Other Factors .............. ...............21....

Family Structure .............. ...............2 1....
Academics .............. ...............26....
G ender .............. ...............27....
Peers .............. ...............28....

Summary ................. ...............28.......... ......












3 METHODOLOGY ................. ...............31.......... .....


Population and Sample ................. ...............31................
Settings .............. .. .. ....... .. ... ..........3
Research Design and Subj ect Recruitment .....__.....___ ........... ............3
Instrumentation ............. ...... ._ ...............33....
Personal Information .............. ...............3 4....

Parenting Style............... ...............36.
R eligiosity............... ..............3
Statistical Analysis................ ...............4
Primary Research Questions............... ...............4
Secondary Research Questions............... ...............4
Additional Results .............. ...............43....


4 RE SULT S .............. ...............44....


Descriptive Results ............. ......___ ...............44....
Gender ................ ... ...............45.

Religious Classification............... .............4
Sexual Intercourse .............. ...............46....

M marriage .............. ...............46....
Parenting Style............... ...............46.
Overall Religiosity Score .............. ...............55....
Analysis of Research Questions ................ ...._.._ ...............56. ....
Primary Research Questions............... ...............5
R eligiosity............... ..............6
V irgins ................. ...............70........ ......
Summary ................. ...............73........ ......


5 DI SCUS SSION ........._ ....... .__ ...............74....


Findings ............... ...............74....
Descriptive Results ........._ ....... .__ ...............74....
Primary Research Questions............... ...............7
Secondary Research Questions............... ...............7
Parenting Style............... ...............76.
Religiosity ................. ...............80.._._._.......
G ender. ................. ...............88........ ......
Summary ................. ...............88........ ......
Limitations ....__. .................. ........_.._.........88

Implications for Practice ................. ....._.._ ...............89......
Recommendations for Future Research ................. ........__. ........93.........


APPENDIX


A INTERNAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL LETTERS ................ ............... ...96












B INFORMED CONSENT FORM............... ...............98..


C SURVEY INSTRUMENT................ ..............10


D RELIGIOSITY INDEX GUIDE............... ...............106.


E ADDITIONAL TABLES OF RESULTS ................ ...............110........... ...


LI ST OF REFERENCE S ............. ............ ...............1 1...


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ............. ........... ...............140....






























































V111


















LIST OF TABLES


Table pg

4-1 Participant gender ................. ...............45........... ....

4-2 Participant Classification of Judaism. ................ ................ ......... ....__45

4-3 Participant experience of sex. ........._._. ...._... ...............46...

4-4 Respondents' selection of parents' parenting style. ........._.._.. .......__. ........._.51

4-5 Influence of parents' parenting style on decision to have, or not to have sex..........51

4-6 Non-virgin respondents' score on the Sum Religious Affiliation Index ........._.......53

4-7 Non-virgin respondents' scores on the Sum Religious Attendance Index. .............54

4-8 Non-virgin respondents' score on the Sum Community Religiosity Index. ............55

4-9 Non-virgin respondents scores on the overall Sum Religiosity Index. ....................56

4-10 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among parenting styles. .........__.............57

4-11 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among parenting styles ANOVA...........57

4-12 Post-hoc evaluation of significant differences of mean age of sexual debut
between parenting styles. ............. ...............58.....

4-13 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Sum Religiosity
Index ................. ...............60.................

4-14 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Sum Religious
Index ANOVA. ............. ...............61.....

4-15 Post-hoc evaluation of significant differences of mean age of sexual debut
between levels of Sum Religiosity Index. .............. ...............62....

4-16 Comparison of age of sexual debut among levels of the Religious Affiliation
Index ................. ...............63.................

4-17 Comparison of age of sexual debut among scores on Religious Affiliation Index
ANOVA. ............. ...............63.....











4-18 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Religious Attendance
Index. ............ ...... ._ ._ ...............64....

4-19 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Religious Attendance
Index ANOVA. ............. ...............64.....

4-20 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Community
Reli giosity Index. ............. ...............65.....

4-21 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Community
Religiosity Index ANOVA. .............. ...............66....

4-22 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut by gender ................. ............ .........66

4-23 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut by gender ANOVA. .............. .... .........._.67

E-1 Age at first date. ............ _...... __ ...............111.

E-2 Age at first serious relationship. ....__ ......_____ .......___ ...........1

E-3 Parental discussion of sex. ............ .....___.....__ ....... .....1

E-4 Frequency of sexual discussion. ......._..__ ......._._ ............... 112 ....

E-5 Depth of sexual discussion. ............ .....__ ...............112.

E-6 Number of topics covered in parental sexual discussion. ............__. ..............1 12

E-7 Sexual discussion included abstinence. ....__ ......_____ ..... ....___..........1

E-8 Sexual discussion included safe sex ................. .........__ ......113..... ...

E-9 Sexual discussion included physical development. ....._____ .... .. ...___...........113

E-10 Sexual discussion included emotion-based intimacy. ................ .....................113

E-11 Sexual discussion included consequences ................. ..............................113

E-12 Age at first sexual discussion ................. ...............114..............

E-13 Respondents' characterization of own family's level of observance at age of
reference point ................. ...............114................

E-14 Respondents' characterization of affiliation to Judaism at age of reference point. 115

E-15 Frequency of religious service attendance at age of reference point. ................... 115

E-16 Attendance to Hebrew school/Sunday school at age of reference point. ...............1 15











E-17 School Type ................. ...............115...............

E-18 Percentage of respondents that had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah ................. ................ ...1 16

E-19 Level of respondent involvement in Jewish youth group at age of reference
point ................. ...............116................

E-20 Proportion of respondents who grew up in communities that had Jewish
Community Centers and if they were a member ................. ................. .... 1 16

E-21 Respondents' assessment of the level of their community's religiosity. ..............1 16

E-22 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first date ANOVA........1 17

E-23 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first serious relationship
ANOVA. ................ ...............117......... ......

E-24 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among ages at first sexual discussion
with parent ANOVA. ................ ...............117................

E-25 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among frequencies of sexual
discussions ANOVA. ................ ...............117......... ......

E-26 Post-hoc evaluations of significant differences between mean age of sexual
debut between frequencies of sexual discussion. ................ .......... .............118

E-27 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of depth of sexual
discussions ANOVA. ................ ...............118......... ......

E-28 Post-hoc evaluations of significant differences between mean age of sexual
debut between levels of depth of sexual discussion ................. ......................1 19

E-29 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among classifications of Judaism
ANOVA. ................ ...............119......... ......

E-30 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationship between mean age of sexual
debut among classifications of Judaism. ................ ............ ...................120

E-3 1 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious aff61iation
ANOVA. ............. ...............120....

E-32 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationship between mean age of sexual
debut among levels of religious aff61iation ................. ............... ......... ...121

E-33 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of religious service
attendance ANOVA. ............. ...............121....

E-34 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Hebrew school
attendance ANOVA. ............. ...............122....










E-3 5 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between mean age of sexual
debut among levels of religious service. ................ ................ ......... .... 122

E-36 Post-hoc evaluations of significant relationships between mean age of sexual
debut among levels of Hebrew school attendance. ............. ......................2

E-37 Comparion of mean age of sexual debut among primary school types ANOVA. .123

E-3 8 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of involvement in Jewish
youth groups ANOVA. ............. ...............123....

E-39 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut
among levels of involvement in Jewish youth groups. ............. ..................... 124

E-40 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among Jewish Community Center
members and non-members ANOVA. .............. ...............124....

E-41 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut
among Jewish Community Center members and non-members. ................... ........125

E-42 Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of community
religiosity ANOVA. ............. ...............125....

E-43 Post-hoc evaluation of significant relationships between ages of sexual debut
among levels of community religiosity ................. ...............126........... ...

E-44 Frequency of restrictions on age at first date Chi-Square ................ ................. 126

E-45 Frequency of ages at first serious relationship Chi-Square ................. ................127

E-46 Frequency of if parents discussed sex Chi-Square ................. ................. .... 127

E-47 Frequency of frequency of sexual discussion Chi-Square. ............. ....................127

E-48 Frequency of levels of depth of sexual discussion Chi-Square. ................... ..........127

E-49 Frequency of ages at first sexual discussion Chi-Square. ............. .....................128

E-50 Mean of number topics covered in sexual discussion ................ .....................128

E-51 Frequency of parents' parenting style Chi-Square ................. ............ .........128

E-52 Frequency of levels influence believed that parents' parenting style had on
decision not to have sex Chi-Square. ............. ...............128....

E-53 Frequency of classifications of Judaism Chi-Square. ............. ......................129

E-54 Frequency of levels of affiliation to Judaism Chi-Square ................. ................. 129










E-55 Frequency of frequency of religious service attendance Chi-Square. ........._._.......129

E-56 Frequency of frequency of Hebrew school attendance Chi-Square. ...................... 129

E-57 Frequency of primary school type Chi-Square. ............. ...............129....

E-58 Frequency of Bar/Bat Mitzvah Chi-Square ................. .............................130

E-59 Frequency of levels of involvement in a Jewish youth group Chi-Square. ............130

E-60 Frequency of respondents' communities having Jewish Community Centers
and if they were members Chi-Square. ..........._.....___ .......___........13

E-61 Frequency of levels of community religiosity Chi-Square. ............. ...................130
















Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science

HOW PARENTING STYLE AND RELIGIOSITY AFFECT THE TIMING OF JEWISH
ADOLESCENTS' SEXUAL DEBUT

By

Robert Etzkin

May 2004

Chair: Rosemary V. Barnett
Major Department: Family, Youth, and Community Sciences

The purpose of my study is to assess whether or not parenting style has an effect on

the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts. To examine parenting style, Baumrind' s

classification of parenting styles was used (1978). The study will also examine whether

religiosity affects the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts.

One hundred sixty-eight research participants between the ages of 18 and 22 from a

large university in the Southeast participated in my study. A survey instrument was

created, revised, test-piloted, edited and then administered at three fraternities and two

sororities to examine parenting style and religiosity. The demographic portion of the

survey requested information related to gender, age, religious beliefs, intercourse, and

marriage. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, frequency chi square tests, and

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA); while post hoc results were determined through

Tukey's honestly significant difference.









Results showed that authoritative parenting provides a delay in the age of sexual

debut for Jewish adolescents. All other parenting styles had mean ages less then the

overall mean age of sexual debut, 17.10 years old, with indifferent parenting having the

earliest. Results also showed that differing levels of religiosity have significant

differences in their mean ages of sexual debut. Differences were found when comparing

no substantial religiosity to minimal religiosity, and when comparing minimal religiosity

to high religiosity. The findings suggest that both parenting style and religiosity

independently affect the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut. The study has

implications for understanding two of the many factors that may affect the timing of a

Jewish adolescent' s sexual debut, and may help parents protect their adolescent from the

negative effects associated with early sexual debut such as low academic achievement.

Recommendations for future research include exploring the effects of family structure

and peer networks to understand fully the many factors that affect the timing of

adolescents' sexual debut.















CHAPTER 1
INTTRODUCTION

This chapter will introduce the main concepts of investigation in this study

including, but not limited to the following: adolescence, parenting styles, religiosity, and

other factors. It also will state the main research problem to be investigated, as well as

the primary and secondary research questions to be answered through the study. The

assumptions, delimitations, limitations, and main definitions also will be described.

Introductory Background Statement

Adolescence is a transition period: biologically, psychologically, socially, and

economically. It is an exciting time in life that includes many positive situations laced in

potential and also many negative situations where the consequences might not seem so

evident. Adolescents become interested in sex and become biologically capable of

reproduction. In addition, adolescents begin to develop complex cognitive abilities, their

lives become more sophisticated and complicated, and they receive a taste of autonomy

as they gain an ability to make their own decisions. In the United States, adolescents

mature into adulthood and gain the right to work, to get married, and to vote (Arnett,

1994). And eventually, adolescents are expected to be able to support themselves

financially. In most societies, adolescence is a time of growing up and of moving from

the immaturity of childhood into the maturity of adulthood (Steinberg, 1999).

There are many activities across societies that have been socially constructed to be

adult behaviors. For example, in the United States, one is not allowed to legally consume

alcohol until the age of 21. This law might partially aim to ensure that drinking alcohol









remains exclusively an adult behavior. Other adult behaviors might include driving a

motor vehicle, smoking, and engaging in sexual intercourse. Some might believe that

these behaviors are more appropriate for adults because they all have potentially serious

and dangerous consequences. Driving can result in serious injury or death to one's self

and/or others (The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 2003).

Smoking has been scientifically proven to be hazardous to one's health and others around

the smoker (United States Surgeon General, 2003). Finally, engaging in sexual

intercourse can spread diseases and can initiate reproduction (Fores, Tschann & Marin,

2002). Therefore, engaging in sexual intercourse as an adolescent can be considered a

risk-related behavior. It is important to note that while sexual intercourse can occur

between members of the same sex or opposite sex, this study will examine adolescents'

sexual debut in the context of heterosexual relationships.

Parenting Style

A child's family, as the most influential socializing agent of a young child,

provides a foundation for what is, and what is not, acceptable within the family and

outside the home in society. Children watch, imitate and learn from their parents.

Therefore, parenting style, or how a parent establishes and enforces rules and boundaries

for their childrenn, becomes very important. Parents can be strict, loose or inconsistent

with their rules, and they can set realistic, unrealistic or inconsistent goals for their

children. It is possible that different parenting styles may affect child outcomes

differently .

There are many ways to characterize parents' behavior toward their children. This

study will utilize an approach that comes from the work of psychologist Diana Baumrind

(1996, 1978). According to her theory, two aspects of a parent' s behavior toward the










adolescent are critical: parental responsiveness and parental demandingness (Maccoby &

Martin, 1983). Parental responsiveness refers to the degree to which a parent responds to

their child's needs in an accepting and supportive manner. Parental demandingness is the

extent to which a parent expects and demands mature, responsible behavior from their

child.

Parental responsiveness and parental demandingness are basically independent of

each other. In other words, it is possible for a parent to be very demanding without being

responsive and at the same time it is possible for a parent to be very responsive without

being demanding. Therefore, various combinations of these dimensions can be

examined. For example, a parent who is very responsive but not at all demanding is

labeled permissive, whereas one who is equally responsive but also very demanding is

labeled authoritative. Parents who are very demanding but not responsive are labeled

authoritarian; parents who are neither demanding nor responsive are labeled indifferent.

These are the four general parenting patterns as developed by Baumrind (1996, 1978).

These four parenting styles will now be broken down further in order to gain a more

complete understanding of the general characteristics of parents within each style, and

their varied expectations of children and adolescents, affect child outcomes according to

Baumrind.

Permissive parents behave in an accepting and passive way concerning issues of

discipline. They tend to place relatively few demands on their child, giving the child a

high degree of freedom to act as he or she wishes. Permissive parents are more likely to

believe that control is an infringement on their child's freedom that may interfere with

their child's healthy development. Instead of actively shaping their child's behavior,










permissive parents are more likely to view themselves as resources that their child may

choose to use (Berk, 2000).

Authoritative parents are warm but firm. They set standards for their child's

conduct that are consistent with their child's developing needs and capabilities. They

place a high value on the development of autonomy and self-direction but assume the

ultimate responsibility for their child's behavior. Authoritative parents deal with their

child in a rational, issue-oriented manner, frequently engaging in discussion and

explanation with their children over matters of discipline (Berk, 2000).

Authoritarian parents place a high value on obedience and conformity. They tend

to favor more punitive, absolute, and forceful disciplinary measures. Verbal

communication is not usually on an equal level in authoritarian households, because the

underlying belief of authoritarian parents is that their child should accept without

question all of the rules and standards established by the parents. They usually do not

encourage independent behavior and, instead, place a good amount of importance on

restricting their child's autonomy (Berk, 2000).

Indifferent parents try to do whatever is necessary to minimize the time and energy

they must devote to interacting with their child. In extreme cases, indifferent parents may

be considered neglectful in legal terms. They know little about their child's activities and

whereabouts, show little interest in their child's experiences at school or with friends,

rarely converse with their child, and rarely consider their child's opinion when making

decisions. Rather than raising their child according to a set of beliefs about what is good

for their child's development (as do the other three parenting types), indifferent parents









are "parent centered" and structure their home life primarily around their own needs and

interests (Berk, 2000).

The organization process proposed by Baumrind provides a useful way of

summarizing and examining some of the relations between parenting practices and

adolescent development. In general, adolescents who have been raised in authoritative

households are overall far better off than their peers who have been reared in

authoritarian, permissive, or indifferent homes. Adolescents raised in authoritative

homes are more responsible, more self-assured, more adaptive, more creative, more

curious, more socially skilled, and more successful in school. Adolescents raised in

authoritarian homes, in contrast, are more dependent, more passive, less socially adept,

less self-assured, and less intellectually curious. Adolescents raised in permissive

households are often less mature, more irresponsible, more conforming to their peers, and

less able to assume positions of leadership. Adolescents raised in indifferent homes are

often impulsive and more likely to be involved in delinquent behavior and in premature

experiments with sex, drugs, and alcohol (Fuligni & Eccles, 1993; Kurdeck & Fine,

1994; Lamborn et al., 1991; Pulkkinen, 1982; Steinberg et al., 1994). Furthermore,

although occasional exceptions to these general patterns have been found, the evidence

linking authoritative parenting and healthy adolescent development is remarkably strong,

and has been found in studies throughout a wide range of ethnic, regional, and

socioeconomic groups (Dornbusch et al., 1987; Shucksmith, Hendry, & Glendinning,

1995; Steinberg et al., 1994; Weiss & Schwartz, 1996). This study will refer to

Baumrind's classifications of parenting styles throughout in order to have a clear

understanding of the different ways that parents interact with their childrenn.










Religiosity

Religious beliefs, like moral and political beliefs, also become more abstract, more

formatted, and more independent during adolescence. This may be seen as a result of the

cognitive development of adolescents. As adolescents become increasingly capable of

thinking in more complex ways, they begin to form their own system of beliefs, rather

than relying solely on the teachings of their parents (Fowler, 1981). Three aspects of

religiosity can affect an adolescent' s timing of sexual debut: affiliation, attendance, and

community religiosity. Some believe that the type of religious affiliation is less

important than actually being affiliated. For example, there is not a strong difference

found between adolescents who are affiliated as Christians and adolescents who are

affiliated as Jewish. However, there is a maj or difference between those adolescents who

are affiliated as either Christian or Jewish compared to those adolescents who are not

affiliated at all (Rostosky, 2003). An exception could appear if religions that differ more

than Christianity and Judaism were compared, but because Jewish adolescents are the

group being examined and Christianity is the maj or religion of the United States, the

conclusion drawn remains valid. Religious service attendance has been found to have a

circular relationship with timing of sexual debut. The more frequently adolescents attend

religious services the more likely they are to delay sexual debut. Similarly, the earlier an

adolescent' s sexual debut, the less likely he or she is to attend religious services

(Thornton & Camburn, 1989).

The community the adolescent lives in may also affect the timing of sexual debut.

For example, if an adolescent grows up in a highly religious community, the social norms

of their community might include abstinence from premarital sex; teens may never

consider having sex before marriage. In contrast, if an adolescent grows up in a










community where religion is never even talked about or is only minimally visible, it may

seem more socially acceptable to have premarital sex. Some, but not all, research

suggests that, overall, religious adolescents are significantly less likely than their peers to

engage in premarital sexual intercourse, and somewhat less likely to engage in delinquent

behavior, such as drug use; they are also less depressed (Benson, Donahue, & Erickson,

1989; Donahue, 1994; Litchfield, Thomas, & Li, 1997; Wright, Frost, & Wisecarver,

1993).

While religiosity, parenting style, and family structure may play a role in the timing

of adolescent sexual debut, it is important to mention that an adolescent' s peers may also

affect the timing of sexual debut. As a parent' s role in their adolescent' s life diminishes,

the adolescent's peers become increasingly influential. Whereas acquaintances or

members of an adolescent' s social circle of friends may have little influence, the peers

that the adolescent believes to be their close friends, particularly their best friends, hold a

high level of trust and power. The complexity of the many levels that peers can exist on

makes the task of attempting to decipher the mutual influences of adolescent peers a very

difficult task. Due to the power that peers may have in affecting adolescents' decision

making, it is important to consider whether peers affect the timing of sexual debut.

Statement of the Problem

This study assesses whether or not parenting style has an effect on the timing of

Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts. It also examines the effect that the four parenting

styles (permissive, authoritative, authoritarian, and indifferent) have on the age of sexual

debut. The study also examines whether religiosity affects the timing of Jewish

adolescents' sexual debuts.










Research Questions

The primary research questions focus on the main area of interest, parenting style

among Jewish families and its impact on adolescent sexual debut. The secondary

research questions focus on an additional area of interest, religiosity for Jewish

adolescents and its impact on sexual debut. The final area of study examines differences

in sexual debut between male and female Jewish adolescents.

Primary Research Questions

1. Is there a difference in the timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents raised
with different parenting styles?

2. Do any of the four parenting styles positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish
adolescents' sexual debuts?

3. Do any of the four parenting styles negatively affect (expediate) the timing of
Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts?

Secondary Research Questions

1. Is there a difference in the timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents with
different levels of religiosity?

2. Do any of the three aspects of religiosity positively affect (delay) the timing of
Jewish adolescents' sexual debut?

3. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut between male and female Jewish
adolescents?

Significance of the Study

Many studies have been done on the timing of adolescent sexual debuts (Noell &

Biglan, 1995; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999; Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999).

Studies have also examined the timing of sexual debut among racial and ethnic minorities

(Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993; Gillmore, Archibald, Morrison, Wilsdon, Wells, Hoppe,

Nahom, & Murowchick, 2002; Upchurch, Aneshensel, Sucoff, Levy-Storms, 1999).

However, there is only a small collection of studies on the timing of adolescents' sexual









debut among religious minorities (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993; Reed & Myers, 1991;

Thomnton & Cambumn, 1989). Furthermore, there is an absence of literature specifically

pertaining to Jewish adolescents' sexual debut. There is a need to bridge this gap in order

to provide parents of Jewish adolescents research-based information on the impact of

parenting styles on Jewish adolescent sexual debut.

Delimitations

* Data were collected during the fall semester of 2003.

* Participants who volunteered had to have approximately ten to fifteen minutes of
free time to complete the survey.

* Participants belonged to a single type of historically Jewish student organizations at
a large university in the Southeastern United States.



Limitations

* All subj ects could choose not to participate in the study.

* Both genders may not be equally represented in the study.

* Students may not have answered all of the questions, causing incomplete data.

* The topic of adolescent sexual debut may be considered personal and may cause
respondents to not always be truthful in all of their responses.

* A small convenience sample of Jewish fraternity and sorority members was used;
therefore results cannot be generalized.

Assumptions

* Students participating in the study accurately remember their sexual debut.
* Students participating in the study are accurately reporting on their sexual debut.
* Convenience sampling will provide significant results.

Definition of Terms

* Adolescence refers to the transition between childhood and adulthood (Steinberg,
1999).









* Authoritarian parenting refers to a style of child rearing in which a parent is very
demanding but not responsive (Baumrind, 1996, 1978).

* Authoritative parenting refers to a style of child rearing in which a parent is
responsive but also very demanding (Baumrind, 1996, 1978).

* Bar/Bat Mitzvah is the religious ceremony in Judaism marking the young person's
transition to adulthood (Steinberg, 1999).

* Community religiosity refers to the level of a community's overall religious
involvement and proscription of religious norms (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993).

* Family structure is the form one's family takes on in respect to parents and siblings
(Moore & Chase-Lansdale, 2001).

* Indifferent parenting refers to a style of child rearing in which a parent is neither
demanding nor responsive (Baumrind, 1996, 1978).

* J.C.C. refers to the Jewish Communit Center, an o ganization that be an in 1854
to provide support for Jewish immigrants. These are now all across North America
and provide many services such as day camps, fine and performing arts, nursery
schools, athletics, services to the elderly, and informal education, all while still
helping Jews settle into communities (www.j cca.org, 2004).
*Parental demandinoness refers to the extent to which the parent expects and
demands mature, responsible behavior from the child (Baumrind, 1996, 1978).

* Parental responsiveness refers to the degree to which a parent responds to their
child's needs in an accepting, supportive manner (Baumrind, 1996, 1978).

* Parenting style refers to how a parent establishes and enforces rules and boundaries
for their children) (Steinberg, 1999).

* Permissive parenting refers to a style of child rearing in which a parent is very
responsive but not at all demanding (Baumrind, 1996, 1978).

* Religiosity is the sum of one's religious involvement, religious attendance, and
affection toward one's religion (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993).

* Sexual debut refers to the first experience of sexual intercourse (Calhoun & Friel,
2001).















CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Introduction

This chapter will present a literature review on adolescence and sexual debut. The

review will include the following topics: parental communication and parenting style,

religiosity, and other potential risk factors associated with early sexual debut. The

chapter will conclude with a summary linking these areas together to set a research

rationale for the present study.

The Problem

Human sexual activity is inherently related to many of the social and public health

concerns and challenges in the United States today (Calhoun & Friel, 2001; Di Mauro,

1995). Adolescent sexual behavior has long been treated within the framework of the

sociology of deviant behavior (Reiss, 1967), and for some researchers early adolescent

sexual activity is viewed as another case of problem behavior (Jessor & Jessor, 1983;

Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997). These concerns stem from the potential risks surrounding

adolescent sexual activity, which include early unintended pregnancies, sexually

transmitted diseases (Calhoun & Friel, 2001), and a high cost to society (Haurin & Mott,

1990). Public costs associated with welfare and other target programs have been well

documented (Haurin & Mott, 1990; Hofferth, 1987; Moore & Burt, 1982). Costs to the

individual in the form of lower educational and economic prospects and poor health have

also been established (Haurin & Mott, 1990; Hofferth & Moore, 1979; Strobino, Grason,

& Minkovitz, 2002).









Of the 12 million cases of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) that are estimated

to occur annually, adolescents account for one-quarter of those infected (Moore, 1992),

and STD's have been increasing among adolescents since the 1970's (Center for Disease

Control, 1992). According to the Center for Disease Control (1992), the cumulative

number of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) cases among adolescents

between 13 and 19 years old increased from 127 in January 1987 to 789 in December

1991 (Luster & Small, 1994), but declined to 402 in 2002 (CDC, 2004). Recently, the

estimated number of AIDS cases diagnosed for adolescents (13-19) declined substantially

through 1999, but the rate of decline slowed between 1999 and 2000. The number of

adolescent AIDS cases diagnosed in 2000 was still 1.4 % lower than that in 1999 (CDC,

2001).

While teenagers continue to contribute to the nation's sexually transmitted disease

problem, the same cannot be said about teenage pregnancy. In the United States the birth

rate for teenagers declined steadily throughout the 1990s, falling from 62. 1 births per

1,000 teenagers 15-19 years old in 1991 to 48.5 in 2000, a reduction of 22 percent. The

birth rates for adolescents ages 15-19 years old and 15-17 years old in 2000 were at all-

time lows (Center for Disease Control, 2002), and continue to decline (CDC, 2004).

However, the problem remains that adolescents are beginning to have sex at

younger ages and are therefore continuing to make themselves vulnerable to potential

pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. Well over half, 60.5%, of high school

seniors report that they have had sex (Brener et al., 2001). The age of sexual debut has

been steadily declining, the number of sexual partners before age 18 has been increasing,

and only one in five adolescents remain virgins by the time they turn twenty years old










(Calhoun & Friel, 2001; Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994). The young

adolescent is usually unprepared for difficult relationship decisions associated with close

intimacy (Day, 1992), and because of their undeveloped decision-making process, they

may not be able to realize the potential health and economic costs of their actions. Given

these recent trends, adolescent sexuality continues to be an important area of research.

Parental Communication and Parenting Style

Parental Communication

Communication of parental values is one of the primary means by which parents

socialize their children. Regarding sexual activity, parents can directly reduce the risks

their children face by doing such things as encouraging their adolescents to avoid

unprotected intercourse and by monitoring their children's comings and goings (Luster &

Small, 1994).

In view of this, it would seem that sex education in the family might be an

important intervention for delaying the transition to sexual activity (Moore, Peterson,

Furstenberg, 1986). Despite the widespread belief that parents should be the primary

source of information about sexuality, in practice they usually are not (Abrams et al.,

1990; Ansuini et al., 1996; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999; Rosenthal & Smith, 1995).

Even when parents do communicate with their children about sexuality, they focus on

issues relating to physical development and sexual safety rather than more psychological,

relationship-based topics, or those which might be considered personal, such as

practicing safe sex and emotion-based intimacy (Baldwin & Baranoski, 1990; Rosenthal

& Feldman, 1999; Rosenthal et al., 1997). Most parents find the task of providing sex

education for their children daunting and one for which they feel ill-equipped (Rosenthal

& Feldman, 1999; Rosenthal et al. 1997). Numerous researchers have reported that few










parents provide a detailed sex education and many do not broach the topic at all

(Furstenberg, 1976; Inazu & Fox, 1980; Kahn et al., 1985). There is a clear gap between

what parents know they should do and what parents are actually doing.

Meschke and Silbereisen (1999) reported that Jessor, Costa, Jessor, & Donovan

(1983) found that poor communication with parents and lack of parental support

predicted early initiation of adolescent sexual activity. By contrast, delayed debut is

associated with high levels of parental monitoring and open parent-child communication

about sexual issues (Levin, Xu, & Bartkowski, 2002). Communication is perceived as

the principal method through which sexual knowledge and attitudes are transmitted (Pick

& Palos, 1995). Therefore, parental communication about sexual issues is a key measure

of family involvement in adolescents' lives. The discussion of sex seems to have the

effect of delaying sexual activity primarily among the daughters of traditional parents

(Moore, Peterson, & Furstenberg, 1986), and other researchers have concluded parental

communication decreases sexual activity (Inazu & Fox, 1980; Meschke & Silbereisen,

1997). However, findings on this topic have been mixed. Some researchers have found

no consistent effects of parental communication (Miller & Moore, 1990). Regardless of

the findings of a few studies, some researchers still believe that parents need to learn how

to provide the right amount of the right information at the right time, whether it concerns

academic achievement or sexual development (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999).

One reason parents fail as sex educators may be their biased sexual communication

patterns. Parents, especially mothers, tend to tailor their communications to be gender-

appropriate (Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999), thus leaving feminine issues a blur in boys'

minds and masculine issue a blur in girls' minds. Girls receive more information than










boys do about such topics as menstruation, abortion, pregnancy, and dealing with sexual

pressure, and less information on such topics as masturbation and wet dreams (Rosenthal

& Feldman, 1999). In addition, researchers have repeatedly reported that parents are less

likely to discuss sex with sons than with daughters (Freeman, Rickels, Huggins, Mudd,

Garcia, & Dickens, 1980; Kahn et al, 1985; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999). However,

different things may work for boys than for girls and vice versa. For example, among

daughters of traditional parents, the incidence of sexual activity is lower when the parents

discuss sex and/or television programming with sexual content with their daughters.

Moreover, the more that parents discuss decisions with their daughters, the lower the

incidence of sexual activity among daughters with traditional parents. In addition, among

sons, a tendency on the part of traditional parents to listen to their sons and discuss

decisions is related to a lower probability of sexual activity. However, the discussion of

sex per se is associated with a greater likelihood that sons were sexually experienced

(Moore, Peterson, & Furstenberg, 1986). This clearly illustrates a possible discrepancy

between what the effective communication tools are for sons and what they are for

daughters.

Parenting Style

Parents who use less power-oriented ("inductive" or "authoritative") means of

control tend to have children who exhibit more socially appropriate behavior on a number

of indicators (Miller, McCoy, Olson, & Wallace, 1986). Parenting styles may also play a

larger role in determining adolescents' ages of sexual debut. Parental monitoring and

harsh discipline consistently have been shown to affect other minor deviant behaviors

that are highly correlated with early sexual intercourse (Simons, Johnson & Conger,

1996; Whitbeck et al., 1999). Styles vary by parent; however some parenting styles seem









to be more successful than others. For example, teens who view their parents as over

controlling exhibit a greater number of sexual risk-taking behaviors (Barber, 1992;

Rogers 1999). Sexual intercourse is most likely to occur among adolescents who have

the most autonomy (the least parental control) to date whom they want, to date at an early

age, and to control their own dating activities (where to go, when to come home, etc.)

(Miller, McCoy, Olson & Wallace, 1986).

Parents can significantly reduce the likelihood that their daughters will become

pregnant by carefully supervising who they date, where they go, and their arrival time

back home (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Miller, McCoy, Olson & Wallace, 1986). High

levels of parental supervision (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985) and a close relationship

between adolescents and their parents significantly predicted the later timing of

adolescent sexual activity (Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997). However, the amount of

monitoring and controlling can play a role too. Excessive strictness and restricting rules

might increase the risk of having sexually permissive children (Miller, McCoy, Olson &

Wallace, 1986). Past studies suggest that parents who use a highly controlling,

authoritarian approach are least effective in producing subsequent internalization of

parental values (Baumrind, 1996, 1973, 1971; Hoffman, 1975, 1970; Miller, McCoy,

Olson, & Wallace, 1986). In the case of adolescent sexual behavior, parenting styles that

maximize child compliance in the present might not be as effective in the future when

adolescents are older and away from their parents' immediate supervision (Miller,

McCoy, Olson & Wallace, 1986). It should also be noted that the parenting style that

adolescents perceive their parents to have might differ from the actual parenting style that

a parent uses. Closer parent-child relationships are associated with delayed sexual debut









but not pregnancy experience (Moore & Chase-Lansdale; Resnick et al., 1997). It is

more important if this close parent-child relationship is characterized as close by the child

rather than by the parent. Adolescents who perceive their parents as being supportive and

emotionally close report less sexual risk-taking behaviors (Luster & Small, 1994; Rogers,

1999). Furthermore, a close parent-child relationship is not only important because of all

of the positive effects, but also because there are less negative effects. For example, poor

parent-child relationships have greater effects on timing of first intercourse than do

positive parent-child relationships (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999).

Positive parental communication and monitoring are protective factors for all

adolescents academically, emotionally, and sexually. Adolescent sexual activity has

many costs to the individuals involved, their families, and society. Parental discussion of

sexual issues with their adolescent may provide a delay in the onset of their adolescent' s

sexual debut (Inazu & Fox, 1980; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997).

Religiosity

Religious Affiliation

Religious institutions still play a substantial role in determining and reinforcing

values in American society (Studer & Thornton, 1987). For many individuals, religious

values are the source of moral proscriptions or general limitations and the teachings of

the churches are therefore likely to play a role in the formation of individual attitudes,

values, and decisions (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). In terms of adolescent sexual debut,

religiosity may represent an important protective factor against risk among adolescents

(Coie & Watt, 1993). Many adolescents may not engage in risk-related behavior due to

their religious beliefs and the proscriptions of their faith (Cochran & Beeghley, 1991;









Jessor, 1993; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985). Recent reviews suggest that religiosity is

associated with the delay of adolescent sexual debut (Rostosky & Galliher, 2000).

The type of religion that one adheres to appears not to be very significant.

Religious participation is more important in determining sexual attitudes and behavior

than is religious affiliation (Thornton & Camburn, 1989). Furthermore, church

attendance and adherence to religious teachings are probably more important in

understanding sexual behavior than is the type of religion to which one belongs (Inazu &

Fox, 1980; Zelnik et al., 1981). Thornton and Camburn (1989) found that the effects of

attendance on sexuality do not appear to depend greatly on religious affiliation and the

effects of premarital sexual attitudes on attendance at religious services are fairly similar

across maj or religious traditions. The religion that one adheres to and the frequency of

attendance to religious services serve two separate purposes. Whereas religious

affiliation may set the context for developing sexual values, greater frequency of church

attendance can reinforce the conservative influence of these values on adolescent sexual

behavior (Mott, 1984; Studer & Thornton, 1987).

Religious motivation may play a factor in an adolescent' s age of sexual debut.

Zaleski and Schiaffnio (2000) assert that those who attend church and participate in

religion based upon their master motive or religion that shapes their everyday actions

have more frequent church attendance (Allport & Ross, 1967), as well as more

conservative sexual attitudes (Reed & Meyers, 1991). In contrast, those who use their

religion for outside ends, such as security, solace, status, and self-justification are likely

to have more liberal sexual attitudes (Reed & Meyers, 1991).









Church attendance and religious importance are likely to produce less permissive

attitudes and less engagement in premarital sex, while the acceptance of premarital sex is

likely to reduce religious participation. Both of these mechanisms would lead to a

negative correlation between religious involvement and premarital sex (Thornton &

Camburn, 1989) but would not show which one is a cause or which one is an effect.

Regardless of which is the cause, most literature agrees that it is those without a religious

affiliation at all that would be the most likely to accept and engage in premarital

intercourse (Thomnton & Cambumn, 1989). Nevertheless, it is difficult to tease out the

relationship among such interrelated issues as religious beliefs, conservative values,

adherence to a code of ethics, or fear of committing sin (Day, 1992).

Religious Service Attendance

Individuals who attend church frequently and who value religion in their lives are

probably more likely than others to develop sexual attitudes and behavior that are

consistent with religious teachings. Involvement in religious institutions would also

enhance the chances of young people for making friends with peers who have restrictive

attitudes toward premarital sex (Thomnton & Cambumn, 1989). Adolescents who strongly

identify with religious teachings and traditions are less likely to engage in risk-related

behaviors, such as sexual activity (Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000). Thus religion may serve

as an important social referent for adolescents' decisions to abstain from sexual relations

(Cochran & Beeghley, 1991).

Thomnton and Cambumn (1989) found that differences in behavior across religions

are generally modest in magnitude and usually statistically insignificant, with the only

statistically significant coefficient being the negative impact of Jewish identification on

ever having had sex. The same study found that the mothers of Jewish and unaligned










young people are more permissive in their parenting styles than the mothers of those who

identify as fundamentalist or Baptist. Mothers seem to be a focal point of research about

how religiosity affects an adolescent's sexual debut. Also, it has been reported that the

effect of mother' s religious practices increased from the later grade levels, perhaps as

children became more personally aware of their parents' religious beliefs (Whitbeck,

Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999).

Community Religiosity

The community's religiosity may also affect the age of an adolescent' s sexual

debut. The psychic, social, and economic costs that adolescent women attach to early

nonmarital pregnancy appear to be evaluated on the parameters characterizing their

immediate environment (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). In a study of social context

and adolescent behavior, a group of researchers examined the impact of a community on

the transition to sexual activity. They reported that the level of religiosity characterizing

a community, as indicated by both the prevalence of religious adherents and the

orthodoxy of local religious organizations, also may influence adolescent sexual and

contraceptive behaviors. Furthermore, because organized religions place great value on

marriage and family formation (Thornton & Camburn, 1989), nonmarital sexual activity,

both in general and among adolescents in particular, is more likely to be proscribed in

religious than in less religious communities (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993). The same

study found that the level of social disintegration characterizing the community, the

community's socioeconomic status, and its population composition all play significant

roles in determining the timing of the transition to sexual activity. Furthermore, they

concluded that community religiosity exercises significant effects on both intercourse and

contraceptive behavior (Brewster, Billy, & Grady, 1993).









Other Factors

A central task for teenagers has always been to establish a sense of identity, in

which the sexual self needs to be integrated as a core element (Erikson, 1968). Today,

issues related to sexuality are still highly salient; in 10th grade (16 years old) a substantial

number of young people are either sexually active or contemplating becoming so

(Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999). Using the 8th grade as a comparison group, transition to

9th grade increased the likelihood of becoming sexually active by two times, and

beginning 10th grade by three times (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). For

nearly 20 years, it has been noted that drug use, smoking, and alcohol consumption are

often strongly associated with early sexual behavior (Jessor, Jessor, Costa, & Donovan,

1983). The most robust and researched predictor of early adolescent intercourse has been

adolescent participation in other adult-like or deviant behavior (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt,

& Conger, 1999). Furthermore, this is consistent with studies concerned with numbers of

sex partners (Noell & Biglan, 1995). An additional study found that sexual risk-taking

behavior was correlated with other problem behaviors in adolescence such as cigarette

smoking, use of alcohol and other drugs, antisocial behavior, and academic failure

(Luster & Small, 1994). This web comprised of various factors that combine to affect

adolescents and their decision making is not limited to only parenting style and

religiosity. Factors such as family structure, academic achievement, gender, and peers

may also play a role in affecting the timing of an adolescent' s sexual debut.

Family Structure

Although not examined in this study, another maj or factor that may affect the

timing of adolescent sexual debut is family structure. Adolescence is the crucial time in

which individuals establish lifestyles and behavioral patterns that have profound effects









on adult health (Di Mauro, 1995). Home environment and family members help to form

adolescents' sexual beliefs and expression through social learning, role modeling, social

control, and supervision (Elkins & Peterson, 1993; Maccoby & Martin, 1983, Thornton &

Camburn, 1987), with teens living with both biological parents identified as having the

optimal opportunity for overall wellbeing (Elkins & Peterson, 1993; Maccoby & Martin,

1983; Upchurch et al., 2001). Having two biological parents present in a household is

assumed to provide more adult supervision of children (Haurin & Mott, 1990; Newcomer

& Udry, 1987). With respect to sexual activity, teens living with both biological parents

have lower risk than those living in other situations (Flewelling & Baumann, 1990;

Upchurch et al., 2001, Upchurch et al., 1999).

One explanation is that adolescents in two-parent households have fewer

opportunities to engage in sexual activity because of greater parental supervision and

monitoring than adolescents in single-parent families (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Millier,

Forehand & Kotchick, 1999; Moore & Chase-Lansdale, 2001; Thompson, Hanson &

McLanahan, 1994). Another explanation suggests that the instability brought on by

marital disruption and subsequent transitions accounts for the earlier sexual activity in

single-parent households (Moore & Chase-Lansdale, 2001; Wu & Martinson, 1993).

Children in a married household receive more monitoring, time, and attention compared

with children in single-parent and cohabiting households (Moore & Chase-Lansdale,

2001). In addition, greater conflict and less warm relationships between parents during

and after divorce adversely affect parenting and youth psychological development,

resulting in a variety of problematic behaviors including early sexual debut and

pregnancy (Chase-Lansdale & Cherlin, 1995; Peterson & Zill, 1986). However, despite









the history of marital disruption, stepfamilies seem to be more of a protective factor than

a risk factor. Girls in single-parent families had earlier ages of sexual debut, whereas

girls in stepfamilies were not significantly different from those in intact biological

families. This could mean that a stepfamily has the potential to serve as a protective

factor, whereas many times people may view stepfamilies as a risk factor, because they

are not comprised of the natural or birth parents (Calhoun & Friel, 2001).

Mothers. Mothers alone may play a large role in the timing of their adolescent

daughter' s age of sexual debut. Adolescents, particularly girls, who have close

relationships with their mothers, are likely to be less sexually active than adolescent girls

who do not have close relationships with their mothers (Calhoun & Friel, 2001; Hofferth,

1987). For boys, having a biological father in the home slows the transition into sexual

intercourse at each age and having a biological father present is critical in reducing the

chance of making the actual sexual transition (Day, 1992). In addition, numerous other

studies have highlighted the connection between a father' s absence and/or single

parenting and early sexual behavior of children (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Miller,

McCoy & Olson, 1988).

Research has found that girls from single-parent families were found to be more

likely to become sexually active at an earlier age than those who grew up in two-parent

families (Kinnaird & Girrad, 1986; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997; Miller & Bingham,

1989; Newcomer & Udry, 1985; Zelnick et al., 1981). Similarly, adolescents in single-

parent families tend to become sexually active earlier than adolescents in two-parent

families (Forste & Heaton, 1998; Miller& Moore, 1990; Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt &

Conger, 1999). However, the effect of having a single-parent family may depend on









whether there was ever a marriage before. Teenagers living in households with mothers

who were single as a result of a marital disruption were more likely to experience earlier

sexual debut than girls living in married-parent households. In addition, teenagers with

mothers who were single as a result of a marital disruption had a greater risk of

pregnancy than teenagers in single-mother, never-married households (Moore & Chase-

Lansdale, 2001). Nevertheless, many studies (Hogan & Kitagawa, 1985; Kantner &

Zelnik, 1978; Moore & Furstenberg, 1986; Newcomer & Udry, 1987) have found the

marital status of the parents to be related to coital initiation rates, with lower rates related

to two-parent homes (Udry & Billy, 1987).

Although there is evidence that warm, supportive, and communicative parents

delay sexual experience among their offspring (Inazu & Fox, 1980; Zelnik, Kantner &

Ford, 1981) there is also evidence that levels of closeness and communication with

parents have little or no effect on adolescent sexual activity (Newcomer & Udry, 1983,

Whitbeck et al., 1999). It is possible that the effects of parenting on adolescent sexuality

are largely indirect through their influence on children's emotional states (Whitbeck,

Conger, & Kao, 1993) or the child's affiliation with deviant peers (Whitbeck et al., 1999;

Whitbeck & Simons, 1994).

Siblings. As socialized agents, older siblings may set standards of conduct or serve

as role models for younger siblings. And, in the role of confidante, older siblings are

more likely than parents to offer support without judgment or to be critical but non-

punitive in times of adolescent crisis (Haurin & Mott, 1990). Therefore, an adolescent' s

older sibling may have a greater effect on an adolescent' s age of sexual debut than the

adolescent' s parents. So, it may seem reasonable to expect that having a large number of









sexually active siblings and friends would be associated with stronger and more pervasive

pressures to conform (East, Felice & Morgan, 1993). Research has shown that adolescent

sibling pairs have displayed correlated ages at sexual onset and extent of sexual

permissiveness (Haurin & Mott; Rodgers & Rowe, 1993; Rowe, Rodgers, Meseck-

Bushey & St. John, 1989). In addition, for both white boys and white girls, there are

significant and substantively meaningful direct linkages between the ages of sexual

initiation of older and younger siblings (Haurin & Mott, 1990). East, Felice, and

Morgan (1993) found that siblings' attitudes regarding sexual permissiveness and levels

of sexual activity are related.

Younger siblings may be protective factors. Sexual intercourse may be less

common among adolescents who have many younger siblings. In addition, the

adolescents who held the most conservative sexual attitudes had more siblings, especially

more younger siblings (East, Felice, & Morgan, 1993; Miller, Igginson, McCoy & Olson,

1987). Furthermore, Rodgers and Rowe (1993) found, in studying random sibling pairs

within families, that younger siblings had systematically higher levels of sexual activity

at a given age than their older siblings, even when controlling for various genetic,

developmental, and historical effects (East, Felice & Morgan, 1993).

One other maj or factor is whether or not the sibling relationship is same-sex or

opposite-sex. The greater the familiarity with and perceived similarity to another person,

the more likely their behavior and attitudes provide content and validation of the

adolescent' s emerging adult identity. Therefore, on the basis of the similarity principle, I

anticipate a higher correlation in age at first sexual intercourse between same-sex than

opposite-sex sibling pairs (Haurin & Mott, 1990). East, Felice & Morgan (1993) found









that having an adolescent childbearing sister has a stronger effect on permissive sexual

attitudes and non-virgin status than does having many sexually active sisters. They also

found that when compared to girls with only non-childbearing adolescent sisters, girls

with an adolescent childbearing sister have more permissive sexual attitudes, have more

positive intentions for future sexual activity, and are more likely to be non-virgins. It

should be emphasized that sibling effects still seem to take a backstage position in

relation to more fundamental family background factors such as the presence of both

parents in the home and regular church attendance when it comes to predicting the timing

of first intercourse (Haurin & Mott; 1990).

Academics

An adolescent' s mother may play a role in their age of sexual debut outside of

their parental monitoring, supervision and parenting style. The mother's educational

attainment has also been found to contribute to delaying adolescent sexual debut. Higher

parental education has been associated with later initiation of adolescent intercourse

(Furstenberg et al., 1987; Heaton & Jacobson, 1994; Leigh et al., 1988). In addition,

previous findings suggest a positive association between parental education and age of

sexual debut (Miller, 1998) for boys in some studies (e.g., Ku, Sonenstein, & Pleck,

1993) but only for girls in other studies (e.g. Bearman & Bruckner, 2001). In addition, it

has been found that highly educated mothers, mothers who are married to and living with

the fathers, and mothers who were less sexually active as adolescents have daughters with

reduced probability of coital transition (Udry & Billy, 1987). Brewster (1994) reported

that adolescent females whose mothers attended college were more likely to delay sexual

debut. However, it has also been found that parent education was not associated with the

virginity status of boys or girls (Feldman et al., 1995). Educational aspirations and










school involvement are also important protective factors for adolescents. Adolescents

who have aspirations for college are more apt to delay becoming sexually active

(Donovan & Jessor, 1985; Hofferth & Hayes, 1987). Similarly, adolescents who are

highly involved in extracurricular activities at school with conventional peers may be

more likely to delay intercourse (Miller & Olson, 1988). However, there may be

differences among males and females concerning the actual effects of academics on an

adolescent' s sexual debut.

Gender

Luster and Small (1994) found some factors that were associated with sexual risk

taking were the same and some were different for females and for males. Factors

associated with sexual risk taking among females include low GPA, frequent alcohol

consumption, low levels of parental monitoring, and a lack of communication about birth

control with mothers. For males, sexual risk taking was associated with low GPA,

frequent alcohol consumption, suicidal ideations, low levels of parental support, and a

history of sexual abuse. In addition, males are often said to experience strong peer

pressure to engage in coitus (Udry & Billy, 1987). This may be true due to the popular

societal framework of an adolescent male becoming a man when he experiences sexual

debut. Another gender difference can be found related to after-school activities. It has

been reported that time spent in school-related activities and homework delay the

transition to sexual activity longer for girls than for boys (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, &

Conger, 1999). This is strong evidence toward high schools providing just as many team

sport opportunities for girls as for boys. However, while team sports can help build self-

esteem, having high levels of self-esteem may actually be a risk factor. Both an external

locus of control and higher levels of self-esteem predicted an early transition to










intercourse. Perhaps these young women are confident and more forward in their

approach to boys (Day, 1992).

Peers

As one would expect, peers become increasingly more influential as adolescents get

older (Treboux & Busch-Rossnagel, 1990). Adolescents in general begin to care more

about how others view them, and strive to be accepted. Their peers' perception of them

becomes more important. One example is the adolescent's peers' perception of whether

or not he/she is sexually active. Peers' perceptions of adolescent' s sexual activity may

lead to comments like, "You haven't done it yet! What's the matter with you?" This is

one clear way of communicating sexual expectations among the adolescent' s peers.

Peers influence each other's sexual behavior indirectly through everyday communication

and directly through communication of sexual expectations among friends (Rodgers &

Rowe, 1993). In order to gain acceptance among their peers, adolescents usually attempt

to act appropriately in the eyes of their peers (Hartup, 1991; Hollingshead, 1975). With

respect to sexual activity, adolescents might sometimes make decisions that meet their

peers' expectations in order to gain acceptance or remain accepted, thereby empowering

their peers in the timing of their sexual debut.

Summary

This chapter discussed the important findings surrounding adolescent sexual debut.

It reported that the birth rate for teenagers as well as the number of AIDS cases reported

among teenagers is declining. This chapter also reported on research of parenting style

and parental communication, finding that the authoritative parenting style is most likely

to produce positive child outcomes and that parental communication of sexual topics has

been found to have both positive effects and no effect at all on the timing of adolescents'









sexual debut. However, parental communication about sexual issues is still a key

measure of family involvement in adolescents' lives and therefore will be examined in

this study. Furthermore, this chapter reported on the positive effects that an adolescent' s

religiosity (including religious affiliation, religious service attendance, and community

religiosity) have been found to have on the timing of their sexual debut. The factors of

parenting style and religiosity are the focus of this study, as it aims to examine whether

either one affects the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut.

Although other factors may have minor influences (e.g., the suppressing effects of

pro-social activities for girls), the important predictors seem to be opportunity, attitudes

that fit societal views of sexuality (e.g., MTV, commercials, popular songs, and television

programming), and participation in other adult-like behaviors (e.g., alcohol use and

deviant peers) (Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). The first predictor,

opportunity, comes from a lack of parental supervision and monitoring (parenting style).

In addition, opportunity may arise from a family structure where there is only one parent

present. The second predictor, attitudes that fit societal views of sexuality, can come

from any one of the many media outlets that are geared toward adolescents. In addition,

their community's or society's views of sexuality are shaped by their own religiosity,

their parents' religiosity and their community's religiosity. An adolescent' s view of

society is partially shaped by their religious involvement and attendance. The third

predictor, other adult-like behaviors, can come from a breakdown or lack of any one of

the following: parental communication and parenting style, family structure, religiosity,

academics, peers and other societal factors. There are many factors that can affect the

timing of an adolescent's sexual debut. This study will focus on examining parenting






30


style and religiosity (independently) and whether they affect the timing of Jewish

adolescents' sexual debut.















CHAPTER 3
IVETHODOLOGY

The following study was designed to examine the effects of parenting styles and

religiosity on the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts. It will investigate whether

a specific parenting style, as categorized by Baumrind (1996, 1978), has a larger impact

on timing of sexual debut than others. The study will also explore whether a Jewish

adolescent' s religiosity affects the timing of their sexual debut. Finally, the study will

examine whether there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish

adolescents by gender. This chapter will cover the population and sample, setting,

research design and subj ect recruitment, instrumentation, and statistical analysis for the

present study. The information in these sections will describe all procedures, methods,

and analyses for the study that will work toward the study's goal to determine whether or

not parenting style and/or religiosity affect the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual

debut.

Population and Sample

The population is Jewish students at a large university in the Southeast United

States. Potential participants were located and identified through the University's

predominantly and/or historically Jewish fraternities and sororities on campus.

According to their presidents, these fraternities and sororities consist of a maj ority of

Jewish students.

This university publishes demographic statistics every academic year. For the

academic year of 2002-2003, the gender demographics were fifty-two percent female,









and forty-eight percent male. Approximately twenty-three percent of the members of this

university's student body are minorities with seven percent of the student population

consisting of African-American students, almost ten percent Hispanic students, and

almost seven percent Asian American or Pacific Islander students. Seventy-two percent

of enrolled students are undergraduates, twenty-one percent are graduate students and

seven percent are in professional degree programs (including dentistry, law, medicine,

pharmacy, and veterinary medicine). In addition, out of the total of approximately

46,000 total students at this university, about 6,000 are Jewish (13%), with about 5,000

Jewish undergraduates and 1,000 Jewish graduate students.

The sample for my study consisted of a group of Jewish undergraduate students

who elected to participate in my study after I introduced and explained the study. The

Einal sample was 168 individuals.

Settings

The study was conducted at a large university in the Southeast. The participants

were informed of the study at their weekly chapter meetings in their respective fraternity

or sorority house. The study was conducted in a reserved room during the hours of

chapter meetings in September and October of 2003. The participants were briefed on

the topic, benefits/risks, expected length of completion, and who to contact with

questions or concerns. They were then given a consent form to sign. Once a participant

signed and dated the "Informed Consent" form, they were given the survey.

Confidentiality was ensured through the anonymous format of the survey. Participants

were never asked for their name on the instrument. In addition, participants gave the

completed surveys to the research assistants face down. Numbers were later assigned for

data analysis after the surveys had been randomly mixed.









Research Design and Subject Recruitment

This study is a cross-sectional study and the unit of analysis is the individual.

Recruitment of subj ects occurred through the selected fraternities and sororities. The

samples were limited to those fraternity and sorority members that were present at their

weekly chapter meeting that week and who consented to participate. The primary

researcher gave the participants an introduction to the topic, a list of all of the benefits

and risks, the expected length of completion, and who to contact with questions or

concerns. Furthermore, potential participants were informed that if they would like to be

notified of the results of the study to write their e-mail addresses down after they

completed the survey. No respondents did this. Although the surveys were administered

on different days across two months, this study is still a cross-sectional study because the

surveys were not given as a pre-test/post-test. Students who participated on different

days were not the same as students who participated on the first day, thus allowing the

study to still be labeled as cross-sectional.

Instrumentation

The survey instrumentation (Appendix C) consisted of twenty-five items which

were broken up into a personal information section and two content sections. I revised

the instrument three times over two months after careful examination and lengthy

discussion with my committee. The first revision came after it was pilot-tested with three

professors at the same large Southeastern university. The second revision followed a

pilot-test of two graduate students at the same university, and the third and final revision

occurred after a follow-up committee meeting. Changes were made accordingly.










The two subject sections are parenting style and religiosity. Due to the complex

nature of these individual items in this instrument, they will be discussed for further

understanding of this study.

Personal Information

The first background item asked for the participant's sex. The results from this

item were used in the analysis of gender differences. This was followed by the question,

"Do you consider yourself Jewish?" This item eliminated any discrepancy between who

was Jewish and who was not Jewish. Using the phrase, "do you consider yourself,"

eliminated any written rules or religious laws as the sole classification for membership.

Respondents who declared themselves "Not Jewish" were excluded from this study

(N= 2) .

The third introductory question asked participants whether they had sexual

intercourse, and the answers were, "Yes, and I was _years old the first time," and "No,

I have not and I am currently _years old." The answer to this item provided the

individual with their specific "reference point."

The directions after item three explained that if the participant' s answer was "Yes"

for item three, then the number (age) would be considered the "reference point" for the

remainder of the survey. If the answer was "No" for item four, then the participant' s

current age would be considered their "reference point" for the remainder of the survey.

The term "reference point" was used throughout the survey to clearly create a time frame

regarding sexual debut for respondents to use while completing the survey.

The concept of "Reference point," was used for two main reasons. First, it was

used as a phrase to unify those who had experienced their sexual debut and those who

had not. For example, if every item asked the participant to describe any dating









restrictions that were present at the time of their sexual debut, the item would have

clearly excluded those who had not experienced their sexual debut. By making their

current age the reference point for respondents who had not experienced their sexual

debut every item could be answered by both types of respondents. Second, the concept

of reference point was used to help participants answer questions that could possibly

require them to remember back many years and recall the feelings and situations of that

time in their life. In addition, because the study examined factors (parenting style and

religiosity) that affect an adolescent's sexual debut, it was important to be able to

examine these factors with a perspective that is based on a very specific time. For

example, presenting a question that asks to describe a relationship with a sibling now

could have yielded a different answer when asked to describe a relationship with a sibling

at one's reference point, a time potentially in one's past. Clearly, questions that

examined factors at a respondent' s "reference point" are much more relevant regarding

adolescent sexual debut than questions that consider a respondent' s current status.

Item four asked the participant to fill in the blank with their reference point. By

writing it down, participants became more accustomed to associating that number with

the term "reference point" throughout the duration of the survey administration.

Furthermore, by having written this number (age) on the front page, respondents could

easily refer back to this item on the first page.

The Personal Information section concluded with item five asking, "Are you or

were you married at the age of your reference point?" This question helped in the

analysis determining whether Jewish adolescents were consistent with Judaism's

proscriptions against premarital sex.









Parenting Style

The first subj ect section, items six through fifteen, examined parenting style.

Items six and seven inquired about dating. Item six asked how old the respondent was

when he/she was first allowed to date, while item seven asked if there were rules or

restrictions on the age at which they could first date. Dating restrictions are one way in

which form that parenting style is displayed. Item eight asked their first serious

relationship. All three of these items helped to examine the level of parental

demandingness.

A maj or part of parenting style affecting an adolescent' s sexual debut was sexual

discussion with their parentss. Not only was whether or not a discussion ever occurred

important but so was the gender of the parent that held the discussion (Meschke,

Bartholomae, & Zentall, 2000). Therefore, item nine asked, "Did your parents discuss

sex with you before your reference point?" The respondent had the following choices:

"Yes they both did," "Yes, my same-sex parent did," "Yes, my opposite sex parent did,"

and "No, not at all." In addition, many more factors may affect the timing of an

adolescent' s sexual debut such as: the frequency of parental sexual discussions, how in-

depth the discussion is, the topics covered, and the age at first discussion. The next item

aimed to determine the frequency of sexual discussions between the parent and the

adolescent. Responses to frequency were, "A one-time thing," "More than once," "Part

of an on-going dialogue of sexual topics," "Daily," and "Does not apply." Item eleven

examined how in-depth their sex discussion was if one occurred. The respondent had

five choices that ranged from "Very in-depth" to "Not at all." Another important aspect

of parent/adolescent sexual discussions was the topics that were covered. Participants

were asked to check all of the topics that were included during the sexual discussions)









with their parentss. The choices were, "Physical development," "Abstinence," "Safe

sex," "Emotion-based intimacy," and "Consequences." The final item with regards to

parent/adolescent sexual discussion asked, "If a sexual discussion occurred, how old were

you at the first discussion?" All of these sexual discussion items were important because

if a parent discusses sex with their adolescent, the information is probably accurate and

could lead to the adolescent making more informed decisions.

This section concluded with the definition of the four maj or parenting styles

according to psychologist Diana Baumrind (1996, 1978). The definitions of each

parenting style were defined in terms of parental responsiveness and parental

demandingness. These two terms are defined immediately preceding the four definitions

of parenting styles. Item fourteen then asked, "Which parenting style is the closet to the

way you were raised up to your reference point?" The respondent had choices of the four

maj or parenting styles, Permissive, Authoritarian, Indifferent, and Authoritative. This

item was specifically used to examine if a relationship existed between an adolescent' s

perceived parenting style and their age of sexual debut. Item fifteen examined the

respondent' s belief about the influence of parenting style on their decision to have sexual

intercourse for the first time. The choices ranged from "Very strong influence" to "No

influence at all." This question was specifically examined to see whether a relationship

existed between an adolescent' s perceived level of parental influence on sexual debut and

age of sexual debut. Analyses of this entire section helped determine whether or not

parenting style affects the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts.

Religiosity

The second subj ect section, items sixteen through twenty-five, examined religiosity

from a Jewish standpoint. The items in this section inquired about the participant' s










religious affiliation and attendance, and their community's religiosity. Each of these

three sections was one-third of the Sum Religiosity Index (Appendix D) which was used

to represent the respondent' s overall level of religiosity. The Sum Religiosity Index

consisted of three sections with varying amounts of items. In order to weight the three

sections equally, each section (affiliation, attendance, and community religiosity) was

scored individually and translated into a percentage. The three religiosity sections were

then combined to create one overall religiosity score.

Item sixteen asked the respondent to classify the division of Judaism that they

believe they belong to. The respondent had four choices: "Orthodox," "Conservative,"

"Reform" or "Other please explain." This was important because the division of Judaism

an adolescent believes they belong to may affect the timing of their sexual debut. This

item was examined independently of the religiosity index and was explored for statistical

significance by frequencies and a chi-square test. This item was excluded from the

religiosity index due to its subjective nature. A person belonging to any classification of

Judaism can have a religiosity of any level. For example, a respondent who classified

themselves as Orthodox can have a high, moderate, or low level of religiosity similar to

someone who classified themselves as Conservative.

The index began with two items (seventeen and eighteen) that focused on

affiliation to Judaism. The first item with respect to affiliation asked the respondent to

characterize their family's practice of religion. Their responses ranged from "Very

strongly observant," to "Not observant at all." The last item about religious affiliation

asked the respondent how he/she would rate his/her affiliation to Judaism at the age of

their reference point. Affiliation was described as meaning how much one feels a part of









or how much one identifies with any certain group. The choices included "Very strongly

affiliated," "Moderately affiliated," "Somewhat affiliated," "Minimally affiliated," and

"Not affiliated at all."

The next four items, nineteen through twenty-two, focused on religious attendance.

The first two items asked about frequency of attendance at religious services and Hebrew

school. Hebrew school is often started in 3rd grade and its primary purpose (in most

synagogues) is to familiarize children with the Hebrew language and to form the basis for

Bar/Bat Mitzvah training. The item specifically pertaining to religious service attendance

asked the respondent to choose which answer was closest to the frequency of their

religious service attendance at the time of their reference point. Responses included,

weekly or almost weekly, monthly or almost monthly, a few times per year, only on High

Holidays, and not at all.

The next item, twenty-one, asked the participant to characterize the school he/she

attended at the age of their reference point. Their choices were, "Private and Jewish,"

"Private and religious but not Jewish," "Private and non-religious," and "Public." The

next item asked whether or not the respondent had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah.

A Bar Mitzvah is for a boy and a Bat Mitzvah is for a girl. The actual Hebrew

translation of Bar is "son of," while Bat means "daughter of." When combined with the

word mitzvah it simply translates to son/daughter of the commandments. This traditional

ceremony is described by some as "a coming of age" ceremony, and the definition

literally means that Judaism now looks upon that child as an adult. In the past, Jewish

girls were not allowed to have a Bat Mitzvah. It is only in the past two generations that it

has become more acceptable for women to go through the coming of age ceremony once










reserved for boys becoming men. Orthodox (Jewish) girls are currently still forbidden to

have a Bat Mitzvah and are not even counted for a quorum in any religious service.

Whether or not an adolescent experienced this ceremony is sometimes decided by their

attendance to religious services, with less religious service attendance not emphasizing

the ceremony as much, and limiting the amount of exposure to the ceremony when

compared to an adolescent with a greater religious service attendance.

The third section of religiosity, community religiosity, had a few different aspects.

The first item, twenty-three, asked about the level of involvement of the adolescent in a

Jewish youth group. It asked, "Were you a member of a Jewish youth group?" and gives

some common examples. Any adolescent who is in involved in a religious-based youth

group might be seen as more aff61iated toward that religion than those who are not

members of youth groups. In addition, it is a variable in community religiosity too,

because one might be less likely to be involved in a religious youth group in a less

religious community where less opportunities are available compared to communities that

are more religious, where many more opportunities to participate in a religious youth

group may exist.

The next two items, twenty-four and twenty-five, also focused solely on the

adolescent' s community religiosity. Item twenty-four asked if there was a Jewish

Community Center in their community and if there was the respondent a member.

Jewish Community Center' s (J.C.C.'s) are very popular across the United States and

Canada. There are eleven in the state of Florida and over 230 J.C.C.s across the United

States and Canada. These community centers provide a multitude of services to the

community and usually provide year-round programming specifically aimed at









adolescents. Whether or not a J.C.C. is present in a community may help in determining

a community's religiosity because a more religious community is more likely to have a

demand for a J.C.C. than a community that is not religious at all. The final item, twenty-

five, asked the participant to consider their Jewish community at their reference point. It

asked, "How would you rate your Jewish community's religiosity up until your reference

point?" Following, was the range of responses: "Very religious," "Moderately religious,"

"Somewhat religious," "Minimally religious," and "Not religious at all." The survey

concluded with a note thanking each respondent for their time and explaining that their

completion of the survey helped to contribute to the understanding of the experiences of

Jewish youth.

Statistical Analysis

Data analysis included basic descriptive statistics of all the items. Frequencies

were run on each item to provide the basic descriptive statistics. Next, the data set was

split into two groups for analytical purposes. The first group consisted of those

respondents who answered "Yes" to having had sex (n=121). The second group

consisted of those respondents who answered "No" to having had sex (n=47). Dividing

the two groups allowed for analyses of just those respondents who have experienced their

sexual debut and the factors that affected the timing of their sexual debut. The division

also allows for description of characteristics of the virgin group.

Primary Research Questions

In order to investigate the primary research question, which asks if parenting style

affects the timing of a Jewish adolescent' s sexual debut, ANOVAs were calculated for

the "Yes" group to determine the mean age of sexual debut by parenting style. In

addition, the answer to primary research question two, which asks if any parenting style









positively affected (delayed) the timing of a Jewish adolescent' s sexual debut, should be

found by exploring whether a relationship exists between each parenting style and the

mean age of sexual debut (p < .05). This will help in determining whether, for those have

had sex, any of the four parenting styles positively affected (delayed) the timing of

Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts, and whether any of the four parenting styles

negatively affected (expedited) the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts.

Secondary Research Questions

In order to determine if there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among

Jewish adolescents who had different levels of religiosity, the two separate data sets were

again used to isolate those who had actually experienced their sexual debut. The "Yes"

group data set was used to compare the respondent's Sum Religiosity Index score with

their age of sexual debut and additionally used to determine whether any of the three

aspects of religiosity positively affected (delayed) the timing of Jewish adolescents'

sexual debut. One-way ANOVAs were used again to determine if there were differences

in the mean age of sexual debut between and within these groups (p < .05).

Finally, to explore the third secondary research question which simply asks if there

is a difference in timing of sexual debut for Jewish adolescents between genders, a

Crosstabs procedure was run. Statistical differences (p <. 05) between males and females

and among different ages of reference points, parenting styles, and religiosity were

evaluated using Crosstabs to help determine if there a difference in timing of sexual debut

among male and female Jewish adolescents. In addition, a chi-square test was run to

evaluate whether there were differences in age of sexual debut by gender.









Additional Results

Additional significant relationships (p<.05) were explored through oneway

ANOVAs that were run for each item for the data set that only included those who had

sexual intercourse ("Yes dataset, n=121). Furthermore, all respondents who said they

had not had sexual intercourse ("No" dataset, N= 47) were considered to have had a delay

in timing of sexual debut because all respondents were 18 years old or older, and the

mean age of sexual debut for those who had sex was 17. 10 years old. In order to

formulate protective factors that might have contributed to these delays in timing of

sexual debut frequency tests were run on each item for the "No" data set. It was assumed

that if one type of response were selected by a clear maj ority of respondents, this choice

may have represented a protective factor. All of these statistical analyses were completed

utilizing SPSS (version 12.0).















CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

The primary purpose of this study was to examine how parenting style and

religiosity affect the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut. It explored current

college students' analysis of different aspects of their parents' rules and communicative

actions. It also examined three aspects of religiosity: religious attendance, religious

affiliation, and community religiosity, in terms of age of sexual debut. Finally, this study

observed differences in age of sexual debut by gender. Results for all of these questions

will be discussed in this chapter. The chapter concludes with additional significant

results that were not directly related to primary or secondary research questions.

Descriptive Results

Before discussing the analyses of each research question which was outlined in

Chapter 1, a brief description of the participant population will be discussed. The

demographic characteristics of the research participants consisted of exactly 170

respondents. However, two respondents replied that they were not Jewish and were

therefore excluded from the survey data, leaving a sample size of approximately 170 (n =

168). A complete breakdown of the demographic characteristics of the study can be

examined in tables throughout this chapter. In addition, respondents who reported they

had sexual intercourse will be referred to as non-virgins, while respondents who have not

will be referred to as virgins.










Gender

Men made up more than half of the population (53.0%), or 89 of the 168

respondents, and females composed a little less than half (47.0%), or 79 of the 168

respondents. The gender breakdown of this study was consistent with the assumptions

created during data collection. Due to data collection occurring at three fraternity houses,

compared to only two sorority houses, a majority-male gender breakdown was expected.

However, if the number of responses at each house were equal, then males would have

made up 60% and females 40% of the participants. The higher than expected female

percentage is accounted for by an overall higher female willingness to participate in the

study, as an approximately equal opportunity for all house members was available at each

house.

Table 4-1. Participant gender.

Gender Fre uenc Valid Percent
Male 89 53.0
Female 79 47.0
Total 168 100.0

Religious Classification

All of the study participants were Jewish, due to the nature of the study. Half were

Conservative (50.0%), followed by Reform (45.2%), Orthodox (2.4%), and Other (2.4%)

(Table 4-2).

Table 4-2. Participant Classification of Judaism.

Classification Freqecy Valid Percent
Orthodox 4 2.4
Conservative 84 50.0
Reform 76 45.2
Other 4 2.4
Total 168 100.0









Sexual Intercourse

In this study, 121 of 168 (72.0%) respondents reported having previously had sex

before the administration of the survey, while 47 (28.0%) of 168 respondents reported not

having had sexual intercourse. All 168 (100.0%) of respondents answered this question.

The mean age of sexual debut (for those who reported having previously had sex) was

17. 10 years (SD= .148).

Table 4-3. Participant experience of sex.

Frequency Valid Percent
Yes, has had sex 121 72.0
No, has NOT had sex 47 28.0
Total 168 100.0

Marriage

All 168 (100.0%) of the respondents answered the question about their current

marital status. All replied that they were currently not, and have not been, married.

Parenting Style

Age at first date and first serious relationship. This section of the survey asked

questions that helped provide depth into the background of respondents' parentss'

parenting style. These specific questions include items about the timing of other events,

which might be related to the timing of sexual debut, such as first date and first serious

relationship. The sample reported the following ages at the time of first date: 26 of 168

(15.5%) reported 12 years old or younger 19 of 168 (11.3%) reported 13 years old, 30 of

168 (17.9%) reported 14 years old, 53 of 168 (31.5%) reported 15 years old, 25 of 168

(14.9%) reported 16 years old, 5 of 168 (3.0%) reported 17 years old, and equally 5 of

168 (3.0%) respondents reported 18 years old. Five respondents (3.0%) responded that

they had not yet been on a first date (Table E-1).









Furthermore, when asked if there was a restriction on the age at which they could

first date, a vast maj ority 95.8% (161 of 168) reported there were no restrictions on the

age at which they could first date, while only 7 (4.2%) responded they did have

restrictions on the age at which they could first date. When respondents were questioned

on the age at the time of what they would consider their first serious relationship, only a

small percentage (3.6%) said they were 13 years old, 14 or 15 years old comprised

19.6%, 16 years old made up 35.1%, 17 years old was the response for 11.3%, and

having their first serious relationship at legal adult age of 18 was 13.1%. In addition, 29

(17.3%) of 168 respondents said they had not yet been in a serious relationship.

Parental sexual communication. Parenting style is not just made up of rules,

restrictions, and demands, but there is also the very important aspect of parental

communication and responsiveness. For this study, it was important to examine parental

communication about sex. Respondents were asked if their parents) ever discussed sex

with them, which parent did, how often a sexual discussion occurred, how in-depth the

discussions) was, what topics were covered, and how old they were when the first sexual

discussion occurred. When respondents were asked whether their parents discussed sex

with them before their reference point, nearly half 83 of 168, or 49.4%, said both parents

discussed with them, nearly one fourth (24.4%) said only their same sex parent discussed

sex with them, and 4 (2.4%) said only their opposite sex parent discussed sex with them.

Almost one-fourth (23.8%) of the respondents said that neither parent discussed sex with

them before their reference point (E-3).

When asked about the frequency of a sexual discussion, 35 (20.8%) said their

discussion was a one-time thing, the most frequent reply was that the discussions were









more than once (34.5%), the next most frequent response was the sexual discussions were

part of an on-going dialogue (21.4%), and only 1 (.6%) respondent said their discussions

occurred daily. This question did not apply to 38 (22.6%) of the 168 respondents

according to their responses. If those respondents who replied that the question did not

apply to them are disregarded and only those who actually had a sexual discussion are

taken into account the percentage breakdowns are as follows: 27% discussion was a one-

time thing, 45% discussions were more than once, 27% discussions were part of an on-

going dialogue, and 1% said discussions occurred daily (Table E-4).

When asked about the depth of the sexual discussion (Table E-5) almost half

(46.4 %) of all respondents said their sexual discussion was either very in-depth or in-depth,

while almost a third, 58 of 168 respondents (30.3%), said their sexual discussion was not

in-depth or not in-depth at all. This question did not apply to 39 of the 168 respondents

(23.2%) according to their responses. If those respondents who replied that the question

did not apply to them are disregarded and only those who had a sexual discussion are

calculated, the percentage breakdowns are as follows: 60% very in-depth or in-depth and

40% not in-depth or not in-depth at all. So, for those parents who did discuss sex with

their adolescent, more than half had discussions that were in-depth, or very in-depth.

If a sexual discussion occurred, respondents were also asked about the content

(Table E-6). They were allowed to select as many of the following topics as were

applicable: physical development, abstinence, safe sex, emotion-based intimacy, and

consequences. The number of topics discussed created a nearly equal distribution with

only one topic being covered for 12 of 168 respondents (7.1%), only two topics being

covered for 28 respondents (16.7%), three topics were covered for 27 respondents









(16.1%), four topics were covered for 28 respondents (16.7%), and all five topics were

covered for 33 respondents (19.6%). This question was not answered by 40 (23.8%) of

168 respondents because it did not apply to them or for other reasons. If those

respondents who did not answer the question are disregarded and only those who had a

sexual discussion are taken into account, the percentage breakdowns are as follows: only

one topic, 9.4%; only two topics, 21.9%; three topics, 21.1%; four topics, 21.9%; and all

five topics were covered for 25.8%.

The topic of physical development (Table E-7) was covered for 68 (40.5%) of 168

respondents. When we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer this question, of

the remaining respondents who said that they discussed at least one of the five topics,

53.8% had discussed physical development.

The topic of abstinence (Table E-8) was covered for 70 of the 168 respondents

(41.7%). When we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer this question, for

the remaining respondents who reported that they had discussed at least one of the five

topics, 54.7% said that abstinence was a topic. The topic of safe sex (Table E-9) was

covered for 115 (68.5%), and when we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer

this question, of the remaining respondents, 89.8% had safe sex as a topic of discussion.

The topic of emotion-based intimacy (Table E-10) was covered for 66 (39.3%), and when

we disregard the 40 respondents who did not answer this question, for the remaining

respondents who responded that they had at least one of the five topics, 51.6% had

emotion-based intimacy as a topic within their sexual discussion. The topic of

consequences (Table E-11) was covered for 107 (63.7%), and when we disregard the 40

respondents who did not answer this question, for the remaining respondents who










responded that they had at least one of the five topics, 83.6% had consequences as a topic

within their sexual discussion.

Also of interest was the age at which this first sexual discussion occurred (Table E-

12). According to respondents, 20 had their first sexual discussion before 10 years old

(12.0%), 18 had their first sexual discussion at 10 or 11 years old (10.7%), 22 had their

first sexual discussion at 12 years old (13.1%), 36 had their first sexual discussion at 13

years old (21.4%), 21 had their first sexual discussion at 14 or 15 years old (12.5%),

while 10 had their first sexual discussion at 16 or 17 years old (6.0%). This question was

not answered by 41 (24.4 %) of 168 respondents. If those respondents who did not

answer the question are disregarded and only those who had a sexual discussion are taken

into account, the percentage breakdowns are as follows: First sexual discussion before 10

years old, 15.7%; first sexual discussion at 10 or 11 years old, 14.2%; first sexual

discussion at 12 years old, 17.3%; first sexual discussion at 13 years old, 28.3%; first

sexual discussion at 14 or 15 years old, 16.5%; first sexual discussion at 16 or 17 years

old, 7.9%.

Based on Baumrind' s (1996, 1978) four classifications of parenting styles,

respondents were next asked to classify the parenting style that best described their

parents) at the time of their sexual debut (Table 4-4). According to respondents, 77

believed their parents' parenting style to be permissive (45.8%), 63 believed their

parents' parenting style to be authoritative (37.5%), 16 believed their parents' parenting

style to be authoritarian (9.5%), while 12 believed their parents' parenting style to be

indifferent (7.1%). When respondents were asked how much the parenting style that they

were raised with influenced their decision to have sexual intercourse for the first time










(Table 4-5), 14 (8.3%) responded that their parents' parenting style had a very strong

influence on their decision, 33 (19.6%) responded that their parents' parenting style had a

strong influence on their decision, 54 (32.1%) responded that their parents' parenting

style had at least some influence on their decision, 43 (25.6%) said their parents'

parenting style had very little influence at all on their decision, while 24 (14.3%) said

their parent' s parenting style had no effect at all on their decision.

Table 4-4. Respondents' selection of parents' parenting. style.

Freqenc Valid Percent
Permissive 77 45.8
Authoritarian 16 9.5
Indifferent 12 7.1
Authoritative 63 37.5
Total 168 100.0

Table 4-5. Influence of parents' parenting style on decision to have, or not to have sex.

Fre uenc Valid Percent
Very strong influence 14 8.3
Strong influence 33 19.6
Some influence 54 32.1
Very little influence 43 25.6
No influence at all 24 14.3
Total 168 100.0

Religiosity

Religiosity is the other maj or factor that this study aims to explore. The following

sections will examine respondents' answers to questions regarding religious affiliation,

religious attendance, and community religiosity. Each section will be examined by (a)

frequencies and proportions for each question, and (b) frequencies and proportions on the

religiosity index of those respondents who reportedly have had their sexual debut.

Following an examination of each of the three individual religiosity components

(affiliation, attendance, and community religiosity), the overall religiosity index









(Appendix D) will be examined for frequencies and proportions to explore levels of

religiosity for those respondents who reported they have had a sexual debut (N=121).

Religious affiliation. Respondents were asked how they would characterize their

family's practice of religion (Table E-13). To this question, only 2 of 168 said their

family's practice of religion was very observant (1.2%), 24 said their family's practice of

religion was moderately observant (14.3%), 90 said their family's practice of religion was

somewhat observant (53.6%), 50 said their family's practice of religion was not very

observant (29.8%), and 2 said their family's practice of religion was not observant at all

(1 .2%).

Respondents were then asked how they would rate their affliation to Judaism up to

their reference point (Table E-14). On this item, 40 said they were very strongly

affliated to Judaism (23.8%), 66 said they were strongly affliated to Judaism (39.3%),

38 said they were somewhat affliated to Judaism (22.6%), 24 said they were not very

affliated or not affliated at all to Judaism (14.3%).

Overall, these two items were rated using a Religious Affliation Index (Appendix

D) created for this study in order to gain a sum religious affliation score for respondents

who reported having had a sexual debut. The Index found that 10 of 121 respondents

scored a highest religious affliation (8.3%), 12 scored a high religious affliation (9.9%),

41 scored a moderate religious affliation (33.9%), 25 scored a minimal religious

affliation (20.7%), and 33 scored a not very religious at all religious affliation (27.3%).









Table 4-6. Non-virgin respondents' score on the Sum Religious Affiliation Index

Freqenc Valid Percent
Not very religious 33 27.3
Minimal religious affiliation 25 20.7
Moderate religious affiliation 41 33.9
High religious affiliation 12 9.9
Highest religious affiliation 10 8.3
Total 121 100.0

Religious attendance. Respondents were asked how often they attended religious

services at their reference point (Table E-15). Nineteen of 168 respondents reported that

they attended weekly or almost weekly (11.3%), 28 said they attend monthly or almost

monthly (16.7%), 69 said they attended a few times per year (41.1%), 45 said they

attended only on the High Holidays (26.8%), and 7 said they did not attend at all (4.2%).

Respondents were then asked if they regularly (at least once per week) attended a

Hebrew School or Sunday School at the age of their reference point (Table E-16).

According to respondents, 44 said yes (26.2%), 1 10 said they did not at the age of their

reference point but did up to a different age (65.5%), and 14 said they did not attend a

Hebrew School or Sunday School at all (8.3%).

The study also aimed not only to explore religious schooling, but primary school

background as well. Respondents were asked to characterize the primary school that they

attended at the age of their reference point (Table E-17). To this question, 12 of 168

respondents reported their primary school was private and Jewish (7.1%), 7 reported their

primary school was private and religious but not Jewish (4.2%), 14 said their primary

school was private and non-religious (8.3%), and 135 said their primary school was

public (80.4%). The last item in the religious attendance component asks the respondent

if they had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah (Table E-18). According to respondents, 150 of 168










respondents reported that they had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah (89.3%), while 18 reported that

they had not (10.7%).

Overall, these four questions were rated using a Religious Attendance Index

(Appendix D) created for this study to gain a sum religious attendance score for those

respondents who had reported having had a sexual debut. The Index found that 4 of 121

respondents scored highest religious attendance (3.3%), 8 scored high religious

attendance (6.6%), 27 scored moderate religious attendance (22.3%), 69 scored minimal

religious attendance (57.0%), and 13 scored no substantial religious attendance (10.7%).

Table 4-7. Non-virgin respondents' scores on the Sum Religious Attendance Index.
Freuenc Valid Percent
No substantial religious attendance 13 10.7
Minimal religious attendance 69 57.0
Moderate religious attendance 27 22.3
High religious attendance 8 6.6
Highest religious attendance 4 3.3
Total 121 100.0

Community religiosity. Respondents were asked if they were involved in a

Jewish youth group (Table E-19). To this question, 37 of 168 respondents stated that

they were highly involved in a Jewish youth group (33.0%), 10 were moderately involved

(6.0%), 28 were somewhat involved (16.7%), 36 were only slightly involved (21.4%),

and 57 were not involved at all in a Jewish youth group (33.9%). Next, respondents were

asked whether their community had a Jewish Community Center (Table E-20). Results

showed that 149 of 168 respondents reported their community did have a J.C.C (88.7%)

while 19 reported that their communities did not (1 1.3%). Of those 149 respondents that

grew up in communities that did have a J.C.C., 84 were members (56.4%) and 65 were

not members (43.6%). The final item on the instrument asked respondents to

characterize their Jewish community at the time of their reference point (Table E-21). To









this question, 6 characterized their community as very religious (3.6%), 69 thought their

community was moderately religious (41.1%), 53 said their community was somewhat

religious (31.5%), 25 said their community was minimally religious (14.9%), while 14

said their community was not religious at all (8.3%). In addition, 1 (.6%) respondent did

not answer this question.

Overall, these three questions were rated using a Community Religiosity Index

(Appendix D) created for this study to gain a sum community religiosity score for those

respondents who reported having had a sexual debut (Table 4-8). The Index found that 7

of 121 respondents scored a highest community religiosity (5.7%), 17 scored a high

community religiosity (14.0%), 22 scored a moderate community religiosity (18.2%), 56

scored a minimal community religiosity (46.3%), and 19 scored a no substantial

community religiosity (15.7%).

Table 4-8. Non-virgin respondents' score on the Sum Community Religiosity Index.
Freqenc Valid Percent
No substantial community religiosity 19 15.7
Minimal community religiosity 56 46.3
Moderate community religiosity 22 18.2
High community religiosity 17 14.0
Highest community religiosity 7 5.7
Total 121 100.0

Overall Religiosity Score

Overall, the three sections of religious affiliation, religious attendance, and

community religiosity were rated using a specific index for each variable. Each index

then was weighted equally (33%) and calculated to form an overall Sum Religiosity

Index (S.R.I.) (Appendix D). This index was used to help calculate the effects that

religiosity may have had on the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut. For this

study, the S.R.I. found that of the 121 respondents who reportedly had their sexual debut,









14 scored a high religiosity (12.4%), 21 scored a moderate religiosity (17.4%), 51 scored

a minimal religiosity (42.1%), and 34 scored a no substantial religiosity (28.1%). These

results will be analyzed further in the next section, which specifically examines results

for each primary and secondary research question stated in Chapter 1.

Table 4-9. Non-virgin respondents scores on the overall Sum Religiosity Index.

Frequency Valid Percent
No substantial religiosity 34 28.1
Minimal religiosity 51 42.1
Moderate religiosity 21 17.4
High religiosity 15 12.4
Total 121 100.0

Analysis of Research Questions

Primary Research Questions

Primary research question 1. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut

among Jewish adolescents raised with different parenting styles?

The purpose of this question was to explore and compare the mean age of sexual

debut for each of the four parenting styles (Table 4-10). For those respondents who

responded that they have experienced their sexual debut (n=121), 51 classified their

parents' parenting style as Permissive (41.1%), 48 classified their parents' parenting style

as Authoritative (39.7%), 13 classified their parents' parenting style as Authoritarian

(10.7%), and 9 classified their parents' parenting style as Indifferent (7.4%). The mean

age of sexual debut for each parenting style is as follows: Authoritative--1 7.73 years old

(SD=1.3 8), Permissive--16.88 years old (1.64), Authoritarian--1 6.69 years old (1.44), and

Indifferent--15.56 years old (1.74). The overall mean age of sexual debut for all

respondents who reported having already experienced their sexual debut was 17.10 years

old (SD=1.63).










Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of

parenting style on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant

relationship (f-6.42, p<.001) among parenting styles with respect to mean age of sexual

debut (Table 4-11). Tukey's Honestly Signifieant Difference (HSD) test was used to test

all possible pairwise comparisons between parenting styles and the mean ages of each

parenting style (Table 4-12). "HSD is the most conservative of the post-hoc tests in that

it is the most likely to accept the null hypothesis of no group differences" (U.C.L.A.,

2004).

Two significant relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut

between parenting styles. The first was between permissive and authoritative parenting

styles (p<.05) (Table 4-12). The second was between indifferent and authoritative

parenting styles (p<.05) (Table 4-12).

Table 4-10. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among. parenting. styles.

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error
Permissive 51 16.88 1.64 .23
Authoritarian 13 16.69 1.44 .40
Indifferent 9 15.55 1.74 .58
Authoritative 48 17.73 1.38 .20
Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15

Table 4-11. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among. parenting. styles ANOVA.
Sum of Degress of
Shares Freedom Mean Sqare F Si.
Between Groups 45.05 3 15.02 6.42 .00(*)
Within Groups 273.77 117 2.34
Total 318.81 120
Note. p<.05 = *










Table 4-12. Post-hoc evaluation of significant differences of mean age of sexual debut
between parenting styles.
Dependent Variable: reference point
Tukey HSD
Mean
Parenting Style Parenting Style Difference Standard
(I) (J) (I-J) Error Sig.
Permissive Authoritarian .19 .48 .98
Indifferent 1.33 .55 .08
Authoritative -.83 .31 .03(*)
Authoritarian Permissive -.19 .48 .98
Indifferent 1.14 .66 .32
Authoritative -1.04 .48 .14
Indifferent Permissive -1.33 .55 .08
Authoritarian -1.14 .66 .32
Authoritative -2.17 .56 .00(*)
Authoritative Permissive .85 .308 .03(*)
Authoritarian 1.04 .48 .14
Indifferent 2.17 .56 .00(*)
Note. p<.05 = *

Primary research question 2. Do any of the four parenting styles positively affect

(delay) the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts?

The purpose of this question was to explore and compare the mean age of sexual

debut for each of the four parenting styles (Table 4-10) and to identify which, if any,

parenting style has a positive effect on the mean age of sexual debut. To do this, a

comparison of mean ages of sexual debut across parenting styles was generated through a

oneway ANOVA test (p<.05) and each mean was compared to that of the overall mean of

sexual debut for the study, 17.10 years old (Table 4-10). Authoritative is the only

parenting style that has a mean, 17.73 years old, greater than the overall mean of sexual

debut for the study, 17. 10 years old. Furthermore, as mentioned above, significant

statistical differences in the means of sexual debut were found for permissive (p<.05) and

indifferent (p<.05) parenting styles when compared to the authoritative parenting style

(Table 4-12). It should be noted that, according to the survey instrument, the permissive









and indifferent parenting styles both lack parental demandingness, which the instrument

defines, as parent(s)/guardian(s) setting high standards and insisting that their children

meet them. Therefore, it may be a single characteristic within a parenting style rather

than an overall parenting style that affects the mean age of sexual debut.

Primary research question 3. Do any of the four parenting styles negatively

affect (expedite) the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts?

The purpose of this question was to explore and compare the mean age of sexual

debut for each of the four parenting styles (Table 4-10) and to identify which, if any

parenting style negatively affects (expedites) the mean age of sexual debut. To do this, a

comparison of means of sexual debut among parenting styles was generated through a

oneway ANOVA test (p<.05) and each mean was compared to that of the overall mean of

sexual debut for the study, 17. 10 years old (Table 4-11).

Three out of the four parenting styles had negative effects on sexual debut and

generated means of sexual debut less than the overall mean of sexual debut for this study.

They were permissive (16.88), authoritarian (16.69), and indifferent (15.56) parenting

styles. The two parenting styles that have the greatest negative effect, when computing

difference of means (overall mean mean of parenting style), are authoritarian and

indifferent (Table 4-12). It should be noted that, according to Baumrind (1996, 1978),

the authoritarian and indifferent parenting styles both lack parental responsiveness, which

the instrument defines as parent(s)/guardian(s) engaging in open discussions and having

verbal give and take with their children.

Secondary Research Questions

Secondary research question 1. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut

among Jewish adolescents who had different levels of religiosity?










The purpose of this question was to determine if Jewish adolescents' level of

religiosity affected their age of sexual debut. To do this, the three sections of religious

affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity were rated using a specific

index for each factor (Appendix D). Each index then was weighted equally (1/3, .33%)

and calculated to form an overall Sum Religiosity Index (Appendix D). This sum index

was then used to help calculate the effects that overall religiosity may have had on the

timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut. A oneway ANOVA (p<.05) was run to

compare means of sexual debut among different levels of overall religiosity based on the

created Sum Religiosity Index.

The five possible levels of overall religiosity were as follows: highest religiosity,

high religiosity, moderate religiosity, minimal religiosity, and no substantial religiosity.

No respondents fell into the highest religiosity category. When compared to the overall

mean age of sexual debut, 17. 10 years old, mathematical differences were found among

the four remaining levels of overall religiosity. The mean ages of sexual debut were as

follows: high overall religiosity, 16.53 years old; moderate overall religiosity, 17.00 years

old; minimal overall religiosity, 18.00 years old; and no substantial overall religiosity,

16.06 years old.

Table 4-13. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Sum
Religiosity Index.
N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error
No substantial religiosity 34 16.06 1.30 .22
Minimal religiosity 51 18.00 1.20 .17
Moderate religiosity 21 17.00 1.79 .39
High religiosity 15 16.53 1.77 .46
Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15

Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of

overall religiosity on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant









relationship (f-6.42, p<.001) among different levels of religiosity with respect to mean

age of sexual debut (Table 4-14). Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test

was used to test all possible pairwise comparisons between overall levels of religiosity

and the means of each parenting style (Table 4-15). Two significant relationships were

found for mean differences in age of sexual debut among levels of overall religiosity.

The first one was between no substantial overall religiosity and minimal overall

religiosity (p<.05). The second was between minimal overall religiosity and high overall

religiosity (p<.05) (Table 4-15).

Table 4-14. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Sum Religious
Index ANOVA.
Sum of Degrees of
Squares Freedom Mean Suare F Si.
Between Groups 83.19 3 27.73 13.77 .000(*)
Within Groups 235.62 117 2.01
Total 318.81 120
Note. p<.05 =*









Table 4-15. Post-hoc evaluation of significant differences of mean age of sexual debut
between levels of Sum Religiosity Index.
Dependent Variable: reference point
Tukey HSD
Mean
Sum Religiosity Score Sum Religiosity Score Difference Standard
(I) (J) (I-J) Error Sig.
No substantial religiosity Minimal religiosity -1.94 .31 .00(*)
Moderate religiosity -.94 .39 .11
High religiosity -.47 .44 1.00
Minimal religiosity No substantial religiosity 1.94 .31 .00(*)
Moderate religiosity 1.00 .37 .05(*)
High religiosity 1.47 .42 .00(*)
Moderate religiosity No substantial religiosity .94 .39 .11
Minimal religiosity -1.00 .37 .05(*)
High religiosity .47 .48 1.00
High religiosity No substantial religiosity .47 .44 1.00
Minimal religiosity -1.47 .42 .00(*)
Moderate religiosity -.47 .48 1.00
Note. p<.05 = *

Secondary research question 2. Do any of the three aspects of religiosity

positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut?

The purpose of this question was to explore and compare the mean age of sexual

debut for each of the four levels of overall religiosity (Table 4-13) and to identify which,

if any of the three variables of overall religiosity has a positive effect on the mean age of

sexual debut. The three variables examined were religious affiliation, religious

attendance, and community religiosity. To do this, the three components of religious

affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity were rated using a specific

index for each factor.

Religious affiliation. When the first component, religious affiliation, was

compared to the overall mean age of sexual debut of 17.10 years old, two levels of

religious affiliation positively affected (delayed) the timing of sexual debut (Table 4-16).

They were minimal religious affiliation with a mean age of 17.24 years old and moderate










religious affiliation with a mean age of 18.12 years old. The two extreme levels of

religious affiliation provided mean ages of sexual debut farthest from the overall mean

(overall mean age of sexual debut mean age of sexual debut for each level of religious

affiliation). The mean age for not very religious was 16.12 and on the other end, the

mean age for highest religious affiliation was 16.10. However, the mean for high

religious affiliation (16.83) was a lot closer to the overall mean age. Conducting oneway

analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of religious affiliation on the

mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant relationship (f=10.68,

p<.001) among different levels of religious affiliation with respect to mean age of sexual

debut (Table 4-17).

Table 4-16. Comparison of age of sexual debut among levels of the Religious Affiliation
Index.
N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error
Not very religious 33 16.12 1.45 .25
Minimal religious affiliation 25 17.24 1.36 .27
Moderate religious affiliation 41 18.12 1.31 .20
High religious affiliation 12 16.83 1.19 .34
Highest religious affiliation 10 16.10 2.02 .64
Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15

Table 4-17. Comparison of age of sexual debut among scores on Religious Affiliation
Index ANOVA.
Sum of Degrees of
Squaes Freedom Mean Sqare F Sig
Between Groups 85.78 4 21.44 10.68 .00(*)
Within Groups 233.03 116 2.01
Total 318.81 120
Note. p<.05 = *

Religious attendance. When religious attendance was compared to the overall

mean age of sexual debut of 17. 10 years old, three levels of religious attendance

positively affected (delayed) the timing of sexual debut (Table 4-18). They were minimal










religious attendance with a mean age of 17.23, moderate religious attendance with a

mean age of 17.33, and high religious attendance with a mean age of 17.25. Once again,

as was the case with religious affiliation, the two extremes of religious attendance

provided the largest negative effect in difference (overall mean age mean age of each

level of religious attendance) of mean age of sexual debut. No substantial religious

attendance had a mean age of 16.69 years old and highest religious attendance had a

mean age of 14.24 years old. Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to

determine the impact of religious attendance on the mean age of sexual debut indicated

the presence of a significant relationship (f-3.87, p<.01) among different levels of

religious attendance with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-19). We can,

therefore, conclude that there are differences in group means, indicating that the

independent variable, religious attendance, has an effect on the dependent variable mean

age of sexual debut.

Table 4-18. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Religious
Attendance Index.
Standard Standard
N Mean Deviation Error
No substantial religious attendance 13 16.69 1.89 .52
Minimal religious attendance 69 17.23 1.5 .18
Moderate religious attendance 27 17.33 1.39 .27
High religious attendance 8 17.25 1.49 .53
Highest religious attendance 4 14.25 2.50 1.25
Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15

Table 4-19. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of Religious
Attendance Index ANOVA.
Sum of Degrees of
Squares Freedom Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 37.50 4 9.38 3.87 .01(*)
Within Groups 281.31 116 2.43
Total 318.81 120
Note. p<.05 = *









Community religiosity. When community religiosity was compared to the overall

mean age of sexual debut of 17. 10 years old, two levels of community religiosity

positively affected (delayed) the timing of sexual debut (Table 4-20). They were minimal

community religiosity with a mean age of 17. 16 years old and high community religiosity

with a mean age of 17.65 years old. It should be noted that the moderate community

religiosity, the level in between minimal and high community religiosity, had a mean age

of 17.05. In addition, consistent with the results of religious affiliation and religious

attendance, the two extremes of levels of community religiosity provided the largest

negative difference (overall mean age mean age of each level of community religiosity)

from the overall mean age of sexual debut. No substantial community religiosity had a

mean age of 16.84 years old and highest community religiosity had a mean age of 16.14

years old. Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact

of community religiosity on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the lack of a

significant relationship (f-1.236), at the p<.05 level, among different levels of

community religiosity with respect to mean age of sexual debut (Table 4-21). It cannot

be concluded, therefore, that there are differences in group means, indicating that the

independent variable, level of community religiosity, did not have a significant effect on

the dependent variable mean age of sexual debut.

Table 4-20. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Community
Religiosity Index.
Standard
N Mean Deviation Std. Error
No substantial community religiosity 19 16.84 1.12 .26
Minimal community religiosity 56 17.16 1.73 .23
Moderate community religiosity 22 17.05 1.65 .35
High community religiosity 17 17.65 1.27 .31
Highest community religiosity 7 16.14 2.41 .91
Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15










Table 4-21. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut among levels of the Community
Religiosity Index ANOVA.
Sum of Degrees of
Squares Freedom Mean Suare F Si.
Between Groups 13.04 4 3.26 1.24 .30
Within Groups 305.77 116 2.6
Total 318.81 120
Note. p<.05 = *

Secondary research question 3. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut

among Jewish adolescents of different gender?

The purpose of this question is to investigate whether male and female Jewish

adolescents have differences in the timing of their sexual debut. When compared to the

overall mean age of sexual debut, 17.10 years old, neither males nor females had mean

ages of sexual debut far from the overall mean age. Males had a mean age of sexual

debut of 17.16 years old and females had a mean age of sexual debut of 17.00 years old.

Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of gender on

the mean age of sexual debut indicated the lack of a significant relationship (f-.283), at

the p<.05 level, between genders with respect to mean age of sexual debut. It cannot be

concluded, therefore, that there are differences in group means, indicating that the

independent variable, gender, may not have had an effect on the dependent variable mean

age of sexual debut.

Table 4-22. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut by gender.

N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error
Male 74 17.16 1.80 .21
Female 47 17.00 1.34 .19
Total 121 17.10 1.63 .15









Table 4-23. Comparison of mean age of sexual debut by gender ANOVA.
Sum of Degrees of
Squares Freedom Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups .76 1 .76 .28 .60
Within Groups 318.05 119 2.67
Total 318.81 120


Note. p<.05 = *

Additional Results

Additional significant relationships (p<.05) were explored through oneway

ANOVAs that were run for each item for the data set that only included those who had

sexual intercourse ("Yes dataset, n=121).

Parenting Style

A significant relationship (f-4.95, p<.05) was found between age at first date and

mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-22). In addition, a significant relationship (f=6.07,

p<.05) was found between age of first serious relationship and mean ages of sexual debut

(Table E-23). Furthermore, a significant relationship (f-2.44, p<.05) was found for age

of first sexual discussion when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-24).

Therefore, all three, age of first date, age of first serious relationship, and age of first

sexual discussion, had an effect on the timing of sexual debut. However, due to one or

more ages having two or less responses, post-hoc tests were unable to be run on any of

the three items.

Frequency of sexual discussion (f=3.36, p<.05) and how in-depth the sexual

discussion was (f=3.18, p<.05) also provided a significant relationship when comparing

mean ages of sexual debut. For frequency of sexual discussion, Tukey's HSD test yielded

a significant relationship between the mean age of sexual debut for those who had only

one sexual discussion and those respondents who had more than one sexual discussion.









Tukey's HSD test yielded a significant difference in mean age of sexual debut between

those respondents who had a very in-depth sexual discussions) and those respondents

who had an in-depth sexual discussionss.

Religiosity

A significant relationship (f-10.20, p<.05) was found among different

classifications of Judaism when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-29).

Tukey's HSD test yielded two significant relationships (Table E-30). They were found

when comparing both Reform and Conservative independently to Orthodox (p<.05). In

addition, another significant relationship (f=18.04, p<.01) was found among levels of

observance when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-30). However, due to

one or more of the levels of observance having two or less responses, I could not run

post-hoc tests on this item to make pairwise comparisons. The level of religious

affiliation also yielded a significant relationship (f-11.31, p<.01) when comparing mean

ages of sexual debut (Table E-31). Specific significant pairwise relationships were

discovered using Tukey's HSD test (Table E-32). Significant relationships were found

among every level of affiliation when each was compared pairwise with not very

affiliated (p<.05). An additional significant relationship (p<.05) was found between very

strongly affiliated and moderately affiliated.

Religious service attendance (f=7.37, p<.05, Table E-33) and Hebrew School

attendance (f=7.25, p<.05, Table E-34) also yielded significant relationships when

comparing mean ages of sexual debut. For religious service attendance, Tukey's HSD

test only yielded one significant pairwise relationship (p<.05) (Table E-35). It was

between those respondents who attended religious services a few times per year

compared to those respondents who only attended religious services during the High









Holidays. For Hebrew school attendance, significant pairwise relationships (p<.05) were

found between those respondents who attended Hebrew school up to their reference point

and those respondents who did not attend Hebrew school at the age of their reference

point but did attend Hebrew school up to an age younger than their reference point (Table

E-36). Primary school type also yielded a significant relationship (f-3.28, p<.05) when

comparing mean ages of sexual debut. However, post-hoc test results showed no

significant pairwise relationships (Table E-37).

Community religiosity was also examined using oneway ANOVA to explore

effects on the mean age of sexual debut (Table E-3 8). For involvement in a Jewish youth

group, a significant relationship (f-4.91, p<.05) was found when comparing mean ages of

sexual debut (Table E-39). Post-hoc tests (Tukey's HSD) showed two significant

pairwise relationships (p<.05, Table E-40). The first one was between those respondents

who said they were not involved at all and those respondents who said they were only

slightly involved. The second significant relationship was found between those

respondents were only slightly involved in a Jewish youth group and those respondents

who were somewhat involved in a Jewish youth group. Exploring membership to a

Jewish Community Center (J.C.C.), a significant relationship (f-7.39, p<.05) was found

when comparing mean ages of sexual debut (Table E-41). Tukey's HSD test yielded one

significant pairwise relationship (p<.05) is between those respondents who had a J.C.C.

in their community and were not members and those respondents who had a J.C.C. in

their community and were members (Table E-42). Finally, when examining the levels of

how respondents characterized the religiosity of their community, another significant

relationship (f-6.33, p<.05) was found when comparing the mean ages of sexual debut










(Table E-43). Two significant pairwise relationships (p<.05) were found when post-hoc

(Tukey's HSD) tests were run (Table E-44). The first one was between those

respondents who classified their community as minimally religious and those respondents

who classified their community as moderately religious. The second significant

relationship was between those respondents who classified their community as

moderately religious and those respondents who classified their community as not

religious at all.

Virgins

All respondents who said they had not had sexual intercourse ("No" dataset, N=

47) were considered to have had a delay in timing of sexual debut because all

respondents were 18 years old or older, and the mean age of sexual debut for those who

had sex was 17. 10 years old. In order to formulate protective factors that might have

contributed to these delays in timing of sexual debuts, frequency tests were run on each

item for the "No" data set along with Chi-Square Tests. If a maj ority of virgins had

selected one type of response, this might provide clues leading to the discovery of a

protective factor for early sexual debut.

A statistically significant relationship (p<.05) was found using a Chi-Square Test

between the number of respondents who had restrictions on the age they could first date

(n=3) and the number of respondents who had no restrictions on the age they could first

date (n=44) (Table E-44). Another significant relationship (p<.05) was found using the

same method among the responses for age at first serious relationship, with 24

respondents claiming to never have been in what they would consider a serious

relationship (Table E-45). In addition, significant relationships were found among

responses regarding whether any parent discussed sex with them prior to their reference









point (p<.05, Table E-46), the frequency of sexual discussions prior to their reference

point (p<.05, Table E-47), and for how in-depth the sexual discussions prior to the

respondent' s reference point (p<.05, Table E-48), which for virgins would be their

current age. An additional significant relationship (p<.05) was found among age at first

sexual discussion (Table E-49). For those virgins who had a sexual discussion (n=35), all

but 6 had the discussion at age 13 or younger (29). When examining how many of the

five sexual topics were discussed for the virgins (n=47), an average of almost three topics

(u=2.81, SD=1.95) were discussed (Table E-50), indicating that discussing at least three

topics may be a protective factor in the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut.

It is important to identify, if possible, a parenting style that a maj ority of virgins

(n=47) had. A significant relationship (p<.05) was found among responses, with

permissive being chosen by 26 (55.3%) and authoritative being chosen by 15 (31.9%). It

should be noted that both of these parenting styles (according to the survey instrument

(Baumrind, 1996, 1978) posses the quality of parental responsiveness, which is defined in

the survey as a parent(s)/guardian(s) engaging in open discussions and having verbal give

and take with their children (Table E-51). Finally, a significant relationship (p<.05) was

found among responses to the question that asks how much influence do you believe your

parents' parenting style had on your decisions to have (in this case to not have) sex

(Table E-52).

When examining religiosity, many more statistically significant relationships

appeared (p<.05). The first significant relationship was found among classifications of

Judaism (p<.01, Table E-53). Conservative (N=23, 48.9%) and Reform (N=20, 42.3%)

made up the maj ority of the virgin respondents. The next significant relationship (p<.01)









was found within respondents classifying the strength of their affiliation to Judaism

(Table E-54). A clear maj ority (78.7%) of respondents were only somewhat affiliated or

not very affiliated at all. These two groups comprised 37 out of the total 47 virgin

respondents.

When asked about their religious service attendance, 33 (70.2%) of the 47 virgin

respondents said they attended synagogue at least a few times per year. In addition, a

Chi-Square Test displayed a significant statistical relationship (p<.05) for religious

service attendance (Table E-55). Furthermore, with respect to Hebrew school attendance,

46 (97.9%) out of the 47 virgin respondents said they attended Hebrew school up to a

certain age. The Chi-Square test also conveyed yet another statistically significant

relationship (p<.05, Table E-56). The same test showed significant relationships for

primary school type (Table E-57) and whether or not the respondent had a Bar/Bat

Mitzvah (Table E-58). For primary school type, a vast majority (80.9%) or 38 out of the

37 virgin respondents said they went to public school. Similarly, a clear majority

(89.4%) said they have had a Bar/Bat Mitzvah, making up 42 out of the 47 virgin

respondents.

A statistically significant relationship (p<.05) was found using a Chi-Square Test

for the final three items. They were: level of involvement in a Jewish youth group

(Table E-59), whether or not the respondent' s community had a Jewish Community

Center and if they were a member (Table E-60), and how the respondent would rate their

community's religiosity (Table E-61). The most common responses to level of

involvement in a Jewish youth group were the two extremes. Highly involved comprised

3 8.3% and not involved at all comprised 29.8%. However, if we were to combine the top









three levels of involvement in a Jewish youth group, we would see that almost 60%

(N=28, 59.6%) of the virgin respondents (N=47) were at least somewhat involved in a

Jewish youth group. In addition, when looking at whether or not there was a Jewish

Community Center in the respondent' s city in which they grew up, 41 (87.2%) out of the

47 virgin respondents said there was a J.C.C. in their city. Out of those 41 virgin

respondents who had a J.C.C. in their city, 20 (48.8%) were members and 21 (51.2%)

were not. When asked to characterize their community's religiosity, a vast majority

(87.0%) of the virgin respondents claimed their community's religiosity to be at least

somewhat religious.

Summary

This chapter has provided descriptive results for all items of the instrument: gender,

religious classification, sexual intercourse, marriage, parenting style, religiosity, religious

affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity. In addition, this chapter

focused on results related to the primary and secondary research questions stated in

Chapter 1. This chapter concluded with additional information on results that were found

to be statistically significant for items that were not directly related to the primary or

secondary research questions. The following chapter will discuss in-depth the results

related to the primary and secondary research questions.















CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION

Findings

This study was designed to examine the effects of parenting style on the timing of

Jewish adolescents' sexual debut. It explored four classifications of parenting styles

(Baumrind, 1996, 1978) to determine whether a specific parenting style affected the

timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut. Each parenting style was examined for

positive (delay) and negative (early) relationships compared to the overall mean age of

sexual debut, which for this study was 17.10 (SD=1.63) years old. Furthermore, this

study examined the effects of religiosity on the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual

debut. Religiosity was comprised of three components: religious affiliation, religious

attendance, and community religiosity. Each component was measured as an

independent index and then equally compiled into a Sum Religiosity Index (Appendix

D), which was used to explore whether religiosity affects the timing of Jewish

adolescents' sexual debut. The study also explored each independent index to determine

whether any isolated aspect of religiosity affects the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual

debut. Finally, the timing of sexual debut for Jewish adolescents was examined by

comparing mean ages of sexual debut between genders.

Descriptive Results

The participant population provides a background of factors that may affect the

timing of a Jewish adolescent' s sexual debut. More than half of the population was male










(53.0%), which possibly occurred because data collection took place at three fraternity

houses compared to only two sorority houses.

Participants' classifications of Judaism yielded a population comprised of basically

two groups. Conservative and Reform Judaism were the classifications for over 95% of

respondents. In order to make broad generalizations about the timing of sexual debut for

Jewish adolescents across all sects of Judaism, a near equal distribution would have been

necessary. However, because the only two non-Jewish respondents were not counted in

data collection, all respondents were Jewish (N=168) and research questions can

therefore still be answered about the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut.

This study focuses on the timing of sexual debut and in order to examine factors

that contributed to respondents either having sex or not having sex It was important to

separate those respondents who had experienced their sexual debut (non virgins, N=121)

from those who had not (virgins, N=47) and examine each group separately. Finally,

although every sect of Judaism, is opposed to premarital sex, regardless of the different

ways they portray it, all respondents (N=168) reported that they were currently not, and

have not been married. This means that 121 (72.0%) out of 168 respondents acted

against Judaism's common fiber of opposition to premarital sex.

Primary Research Questions

1. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents raised
with different parenting styles?

2. Do any of the four parenting styles positively affect (delay) the timing of Jewish
adolescents' sexual debuts?

3. Do any of the four parenting styles negatively affect (expediate) the timing of
Jewish adolescents' sexual debuts?









Secondary Research Questions

1. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents who had
different levels of religiosity?

2. Do any of the three aspects of religiosity positively affect (delay) the timing of
Jewish adolescents' sexual debut?

3. Is there a difference in timing of sexual debut among Jewish adolescents of
different gender?

Oneway ANOVAs (p<.05) were used to analyze and answer each of these research

questions. The group of interest used to analyze the research questions was only those

respondents who reported having experienced their sexual debut (N=121). This group

was isolated for exploration because each research question asks about the timing of

Jewish adolescents' sexual debut, thereby limiting research to those respondents who

have actually experienced their sexual debut. The other group (n=47), respondents who

have not experienced their sexual debut, was analyzed using Chi-square tests for

frequencies. Because the mean age of sexual debut for those respondents who had

experienced their sexual debut was 17. 10 years old, and all respondents were 18 years old

or older, then those respondents who had not experienced their sexual debut are

considered to have a delay in the timing of their sexual debut when compared to the mean

age of sexual debut. This population of virgins was, therefore, examined for factors that

may have contributed positively to the delaying of sexual debut.

Parenting Style

In order to determine effects that parenting style may have had on the timing of

Jewish adolescents' sexual debut, the survey (Appendix D) defined four parenting styles

according to Baumrind (1996, 1978) and defined each one. Respondents were then asked

to classify which of the four parenting styles was closest to the way they were reared, up









to the age of their reference point. As previously mentioned, to examine sexual debut the

data set must be limited to only those respondents who reported having had experienced

their sexual debut (N=121). The mean age of sexual debut for each parenting style is as

follows: Indifferent 15.56 (SD=1.74), Authoritarian 16.69 (SD=1.44), Permissive 16.88

(SD=1.64), and Authoritative 17.73 (SD=1.38). Clearly, there is a difference in timing of

sexual debut among parenting styles.

Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of

parenting style on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant

relationship (f-6.42, p<.01) among parenting styles with respect to mean age of sexual

debut (Table 4-11). This study can conclude that parenting style does, in fact, have an

effect on Jewish adolescents' timing of sexual debut. This finding is consistent with

previous findings for adolescents that differences in levels of parental demandingness and

parental responsiveness (the two factors that Baumrind (1996, 1978)) uses to classify

parenting styles) may affect adolescent outcomes (Baldwin & Baranoski; Levin, Xu,

Bartkowski, 2002; Rosenthal & Feldman, 1999; Rosenthal et al., 1990). Additionally,

two significant relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut among

parenting styles. The first relationship was between permissive and authoritative

parenting styles (p<.05) (Table 4-12). The second relationship was between indifferent

and authoritative parenting styles (p<.05) (Table 4-12). Authoritative parenting style,

which produced the highest mean age of sexual debut (17.73), according to Baumrind

(1996, 1978), is high on both parental responsiveness and parental demandingness. Both

indifferent and permissive parenting styles are low on parental demandingness. It is,

possible that Jewish adolescents whose parents set high standards for them and insist that









their children meet them, may have a later sexual debut than those Jewish adolescents

whose parents do not.

Authoritative parenting has often been cited as the most effective means of

parenting in respect to child outcomes (Luster & Small, 1994; Meschke & Silbereisen,

1997; Rodgers, 1999; Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). Adolescents reared in

authoritative homes are more responsible, more self-assured, more adaptive, more

creative, more curious, more socially skilled, and more successful in school than

adolescents reared in non-authoritative homes (Fuligni & Eccles, 1993; Kurdeck & Fine,

1994; Lamborn et al., 1991; Pulkkinen, 1982; Steinberg et al., 1994). These parents are

described as warm but firm and maintain standards for their child's conduct by forming

expectations that are consistent with their child's developing needs and capabilities

(Berk, 2000). In terms of timing of sexual debut, an authoritative parent would, not only

have expectations of their adolescent about not having sex at a young age, but also would

communicate openly with them about their sexual expectations (parental

demandingness). Furthermore, an authoritative parent would openly discuss sex with

their adolescent at a young age, and as they grew. In addition, the discussions would be

in-depth and cover age-appropriate topics (parental responsiveness).

When looking for one or more parenting styles that may negatively affect

(expedite) the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut, the mean age of sexual debut

for this study must be examined. For all respondents who reported having experienced

their sexual debut, the mean age of sexual debut was 17.10 years old (SD= 1.63). While

permissive (u=16.88) and authoritarian (16.69) both had mean ages of sexual debut less

than the overall mean age of 17. 10, the difference between each parenting style mean and









the overall mean is only .22 and .41 respectively. When those differences are translated

into months, the difference between the mean ages of sexual debut for permissive and

authoritarian parenting styles compared to the mean age of sexual debut is less than three

months earlier for permissive and less than five months earlier for authoritarian.

The largest difference appears when the indifferent parenting style is examined.

The mean age of sexual debut for respondents who reported their parents having an

indifferent parenting style was 15.56 years old (SD=1.74). Indifferent parents minimize

the time and energy they devote to interacting with their child. They know little about

their child's activities and whereabouts, show little interest in their child's experiences at

school or with friends, rarely converse with their child, and rarely consider their child's

opinion when making decisions (Berk, 2000). While Baumrind classifies the indifferent

parenting style as being low on parental demandingness and low on parental

responsiveness (1996, 1978), it has also been well documented that adolescents with

indifferent parents are not as likely to encounter positive child outcomes as adolescents of

other parenting styles (Luster & Small, 1994; Meschke & Silbereisen, 1997; Rodgers,

1999; Whitbeck, Yoder, Hoyt, & Conger, 1999). This study's finding of adolescents with

indifferent parents having an early sexual debut is consistent with other studies' findings,

assuming that an early sexual debut is considered a negative outcome. With parents who

are not demanding and not responsive, the adolescent has the power and many

opportunities to make decisions on their own; and it has been found that sexual

intercourse is most likely to occur among adolescents who have the most autonomy (the

least parental control) to date whom they want, to date at an early age, and to control their

own dating activities (where to go, when to come home, etc.) (Miller, McCoy, Olson &









Wallace, 1986). Furthermore, adolescents raised in indifferent homes are often impulsive

and more likely to be involved in delinquent behavior and in premature experiments with

sex, drugs, and alcohol (Fuligni & Eccles, 1993; Kurdeck & Fine, 1994; Lamborn et al.,

1991; Pulkkinen, 1982; Steinberg et al., 1994). This study's findings are consistent with

previous research, not only for the indifferent parenting style having the worst outcome,

but as well for the authoritative parenting style having the best outcome.

Religiosity

In order to determine the effects that religiosity may have had on the timing of

Jewish adolescents' sexual debut, the Sum Religiosity Index (SRI) (Appendix D) was

used to compare the mean age of sexual debut for each level of overall religiosity. As

described in previous chapters, the SRI is an overall score made up of three parts that all

were rated equally: religious affiliation, religious attendance, and community religiosity.

Also, as described in previous chapters, the SRI was intended to have five levels;

however no respondents scored in the highest religiosity level. Therefore, the four

remaining levels of overall religiosity are: no substantial religiosity, minimal religiosity,

moderate religiosity, and high religiosity. "No substantial religiosity," produced a mean

age of sexual debut of 16.06 years old (SD=1.0); "minimal religiosity" produced a mean

age of sexual debut of 18.00 years old (SD=1.20); "moderate religiosity" produced a

mean age of sexual debut of 17.00 (SD=1.79); and "high religiosity" produced a mean

age of sexual debut of 16.53 (SD=1.77). Clearly, there is a difference in timing of Jewish

adolescents' sexual debut among levels of religiosity. This finding is consistent with

previous research that found religiosity affects the likelihood that an adolescent will

engage in risk-related behaviors, such as sexual activity (Wilcox, Rostosky, Randall, &

Wright, 2001; Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000).









Conducting oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of

overall religiosity on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant

relationship (f-13.77, p<.01) among levels of overall religiosity with respect to mean age

of sexual debut (Table 4-14). It therefore can be concluded that Jewish adolescents'

religiosity can affect the timing of their sexual debut. Thus, religion may serve as an

important social referent for adolescents' decisions to abstain from sexual relations

(Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991).

Additionally, two significant relationships were found for difference of mean of

sexual debut among levels of overall religiosity. The first relationship was between no

substantial religiosity and minimal religiosity (p<.05) (Table 4-15). It appears from these

that even a little religiosity delays sexual debut, compared to no religiosity. The second

relationship was between minimal overall religiosity and high overall religiosity (p<.05)

(Table 4-15). If we look at these significant relationships together, we see that both, the

low extreme (no substantial religiosity) and the high extreme (high religiosity), have the

earliest mean ages of sexual debut and that these relationships are significant when

compared to minimal religiosity, which had the highest mean age of sexual debut at 18.00

years of age. Extremes at either end seem to produce a negative outcome in terms of

timing of sexual debut. While many studies find that strong religiosity is associated with

a delay in the timing of sexual debut (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley,

1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985; Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000), this

study suggests that a high level of religiosity may not produce a positive outcome. In

other words, excessive religiosity may not serve as a protective factor in terms of timing

of sexual debut. It is therefore possible that Jewish adolescents who have even minimal









or moderate levels of overall religiosity may have the best chance at a positive outcome

and a later sexual debut than those Jewish adolescents who have either extremely high or

non-existent religiosity.

When looking for one aspect of overall religiosity that may have positively affected

(delayed) the timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut, we must look at the different

levels for each aspect. This study examined whether: (a) different levels of religious

affiliation produce a delay in the timing of sexual debut, (b) different levels of religious

attendance produce a delay in the timing of sexual debut, and (c) different levels of

community religiosity produce a delay in the timing of sexual debut. To explore each

aspect, the created index for each was examined by analyzing and comparing the mean

ages of sexual debut for each level.

Religious aff61iation. The results from the Religious Aff61iation Index (Appendix

D) were explored to determine the effects of religious aff61iation on the timing of Jewish

adolescents' sexual debut. The mean ages of sexual debut were examined for each of the

Hyve levels of religious affiliation. The Hyve levels and their reported means are: "Not very

religious," 16. 12 years old (SD=1.45); "Minimal religious aff61iation," 17.24 (SD=1.36);

"Moderate religious affiliation," 18.12 (SD= 1.31); "High religious aff61iation," 16.83

(SD=1.19); and "Highest religious affiliation," 16.10 (SD=2.02). Clearly, there is a

difference in timing of sexual debut among different levels of religious affiliation, with

minimal religious affiliation and moderate religious affiliation positively affecting

(delaying) the timing of sexual debut. It has been reported that many adolescents may

not engage in risk-related behavior due to their religious beliefs and the proscriptions of

their faith (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting,









1992; Woodroof, 1985), and this is consistent with the findings of this study. It is

possible that the level of affiliation a Jewish adolescent feels toward Judaism will affect

the timing of their sexual debut. This presents a challenge to parents, to keep Judaism a

priority in post Bar/Bat Mitzvah years, which is usually dominated by the emergence of

stronger peer relationships (Treboux & Busch-Rossnagel, 1990).

A oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) determined the impact of religious

affiliation on the mean age of sexual debut, indicating the presence of a significant

relationship (f-10.68, p<.01) among levels of religious affiliation with respect to mean

age of sexual debut (Table 4-17). This study can conclude that religious affiliation does,

in fact, have an effect on Jewish adolescents' timing of sexual debut. Four significant

relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut among levels of religious

affiliation. The first three relationships were all found among not very religious, high

religious affiliation and highest religious affiliation when each was compared pair-wise to

moderate religious affiliation (p<.05). The fourth relationship was between not very

religious and minimal religious affiliation (p<.05). If these significant relationships are

examined together, both findings indicate that the low extreme (not very religious) and

the high extreme (highest religious affiliation), have the lowest mean ages of sexual debut

and that these relationships are significant when compared to moderate religious

affiliation which had the highest mean age of sexual debut at 18.12 years of age.

Extreme religious affiliation, on either end, seems to produce the most negative outcome

in terms of timing of sexual debut. This finding is similar to that of overall religiosity.

As mentioned before many studies find that strong religiosity, of which religious

affiliation is a component, is associated with a delay in the timing of sexual debut










(Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor, 1992; Netting, 1992;

Woodroof, 1985; Zaleski & Schiaffino, 2000). This study found, however, that an

extremely high level of religious affiliation may not produce the same positive outcome.

In other words, the highest levels of religious affiliation may not serve as a protective

factor in terms of timing of sexual debut. It is possible that Jewish adolescents who have

moderate levels of religious affiliation may have a better chance of later sexual debut

than those Jewish adolescents who have either extremely high or not very religious

affiliations. Previous research agrees with the fact that adolescents with moderate

religious affiliation are more likely to have positive outcomes than adolescents who are

not very religious (Coie et al., 1993). However, this study's finding of an early sexual

debut for those Jewish adolescents who had extremely high religious affiliation seems to

be unique.

Religious attendance. To determine the effects of religious attendance on the

timing of Jewish adolescents' sexual debut, I will explore the results from the Religious

Attendance Index (Appendix D). I will closely examine the mean ages of sexual debut

for each of the five levels of religious attendance. The five levels and their means are:

"No substantial religious attendance," 16.19 (SD=1.88); "Minimal religious attendance,"

17.23 (SD=1.51); "Moderate religious attendance," 17.33 (SD=1.39); "High religious

attendance," 17.25 (SD=1.49); and "Highest religious attendance, 14.25 (SD=2.50).

Clearly, there is a difference in timing of sexual debut among different levels of religious

attendance, with three middle levels (minimal religious attendance, moderate religious

attendance, and high religious attendance) positively affecting (delaying) the timing of

sexual debut.









A oneway analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the impact of religious

attendance on the mean age of sexual debut indicated the presence of a significant

relationship (f-3.87, p<.01) among levels of religious attendance with respect to mean

age of sexual debut (Table 4-19). It can be concluded that religious attendance does have

an effect on Jewish adolescents' timing of sexual debut. Additionally, three significant

relationships were found for difference of mean of sexual debut among levels of religious

attendance. All three relationships were found in comparison to highest religious

attendance (p<.05). Minimal, moderate, and high religious attendance all produced

significant relationships when compared independently and pair-wise to highest religious

attendance. If these significant relationships are examined together, both the low extreme

(no substantial religious attendance) and the high extreme (highest religious attendance),

have the earliest mean ages of sexual debut and the relationship between the high

extreme, highest religious attendance, and the middle of the five levels, moderate

religious attendance (which had the highest mean age of sexual debut (17.33)), have a

significant relationship. It appears that extreme religious attendance, on either the low

end or the high end, seems to produce the most negative outcome in terms of timing of

sexual debut. This finding is similar to and supports the prior finding related to overall

religiosity and religious affiliation. As mentioned earlier, many studies find that strong

religiosity, of which religious attendance is a component of, provides a delay in the

timing of sexual debut (Campbell & Stewart, 1992; Cochran & Beeghley, 1991; Jessor,

1992; Netting, 1992; Woodroof, 1985; Zaleskit & Schiaffino, 2000). This study found

that to be true, but also suggests that the highest levels of religious attendance may not

delay sexual debut. It is possible that Jewish adolescents who have moderate levels of