Citation
A comparison of male heterosexual and homosexual sexual fantasies and tentative norms for the meaning of sexual experience

Material Information

Title:
A comparison of male heterosexual and homosexual sexual fantasies and tentative norms for the meaning of sexual experience
Creator:
Rodriguez, Gabriel J ( Gabriel Joseph ), 1948-
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
viii, 143 leaves : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Fantasy ( jstor )
Fantasy fiction ( jstor )
Gender roles ( jstor )
Guilt ( jstor )
Homosexuality ( jstor )
Human sexual behavior ( jstor )
Men ( jstor )
Sex linked differences ( jstor )
Sexual self stimulation ( jstor )
Women ( jstor )
Male homosexuality ( lcsh )
Sexual fantasies ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1981.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 132-142).
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Gabriel J. Rodríguez.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
028170931 ( ALEPH )
ABS3832 ( NOTIS )
08401692 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text













A COMPARISON OF MALE HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL
SEXUAL FANTASIES AND TENTATIVE NORMS FOR
THE MEANING OF SEXUAL EXPERIENCE





By

GABRIEL J. RODRIGUEZ


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY





UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1981

























Dedicated to my mother who always wanted a doctor
in the family and to my step-father and uncle,
both of whom believed in me.













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank Dr. Harry Grater for his mentoring and support

throughout my graduate education. To Dr. Milan Kolarik I offer my

thanks for all of his influence upon me as my therapist and friend.

Dr. Rod McDavis served to inspire me through his encouragement and

role modeling. I also wish to thank Drs. Froming, Ziller, Nevill,

Epting, Suchman and Morgan for the things that I learned from them

and the open environment that they provided in our program. We were

allowed to think, to question and to explore in the spirit of true

education.

To Cheryl Phillips I can only say thank you again. She is the

hub around which our program revolves, and she has touched me deeply

as a warm, caring person. I am also indebted to all of the friends

who laughed and cried with me over the past five years. They are

too numerous to list, but each one holds a special place in my heart.















TABLE OF CONTENTS


Page


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . .


LIST OF TABLES .... v

ABSTRACT .... vii

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ..... 1

An Historical Overview. 3
Theory and Research on Fantasy. ... 13
Research on Heterosexual Sexual Fantasy .... 18
Research on Homosexuality and Homosexual
Sexual Fantasy. ... .36
Research and Theory on the Meaning of
Heterosexual Sexual Experience. .. 52
Research and Theory on the Meaning of
Homosexual Sexual Experience. .. 69
A Brief Summary and Statement of
Theoretical Hypotheses. .. 77


II. METHOD . .

Subjects .
Procedure . .
Instruments .

Erotic Response and Orientation Scale .
The Sexual Fantasy Questionnaire. .
The Meaning of Sexual Experience
Questionnaire-IIl .

Statistical Hypotheses .

III. RESULTS . .


Analysis of the Erotic Response and
Orientation Scale (EROS) .
Analysis of the Sexual Fantasy
Questionnaire (SFQ) .
Analysis of the Meaning of Sexual Experience
Questionnaire--III (MOSE-III) .


. 84

. 84
. 84
. 86

. 86
. 87

. 89

. 91


S. 93


S. 93

S. 94

S. 105


. iiii









Page

IV. DISCUSSION. . ... .... 107

Sexual Fantasy. . ... 107
The Meaning of Sexual Experience ... 116
Limitations, Strengths, and Applications
of the Present Study. ... 117

APPENDIX A: EROTIC RESPONSE AND ORIENTATION SCALE. .. 120

APPENDIX B: SEXUAL FANTASY QUESTIONNAIRE .... 122

APPENDIX C: THE MEANING OF SEXUAL EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE--III. 128

REFERENCES. . ... 132

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . 143














LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. TOP-RANKED SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES DURING SEX WITH
A PARTNER, MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING (MALES). .... 34

2. TOP-RANKED SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES DURING SEX WITH
A PARTNER, MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING (FEMALES). ... 35

3. SEX DIFFERENCES FOR MOSE FACTOR ANALYSIS SAMPLE .. 65

4. PERCENTAGES OF FANTASY DURING SEX WITH A PARTNER,
MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING FOR HMs AND GMs ...... 95

5. MANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON THREE
CONDITIONS OF SFQ .... 98

6. ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON SEX
WITH A PARTNER CONDITION OF SFQ AND DISCRIMINANT
ANALYSIS FUNCTIONS. ... 99

7. ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON
MASTURBATION CONDITION AND DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS
FUNCTIONS . 100

8. ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON
DAYDREAMING CONDITION AND DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS
FUNCTIONS ..... 102

9. MOST FREQUENT SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES FOR HMs IN EACH
CONDITION OF SFQ. .... 104

10. MOST FREQUENT SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES FOR GMs IN EACH
CONDITION OF SFQ. .... 105














Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy


A COMPARISON OF MALE HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL
SEXUAL FANTASIES AND TENTATIVE NORMS FOR
THE MEANING OF SEXUAL EXPERIENCE

By

Gabriel J. Rodriguez

December 1981

Chairman: Harry Grater
Major Department: Psychology

This study attempted to compare the sexual fantasies and the

interpersonal meaning of sexual experience between heterosexual (N=32)

and homosexual (N=32) male college students. The empirical research

on sexual fantasy is sporadic in focus with few consistent results.

The meaning of sexual experience has received scant attention especially

for homosexual individuals. A review of the history and current litera-

ture on both topics is presented with a focus on relevant theory.

Several hypotheses were generated for both topics. Sexual fantasies

were investigated using the Erotic Response and Orientation Scale, which

inquires about male and female as sex object fantasies, and the Sexual

Fantasy Questionnaire, which contains three sexual fantasy conditions

(e.g., sex with partner, masturbation, daydreaming) with 22 fantasy

subthemes under each condition. The Meaning of Sexual Experience Ques-

tionnaire-Ill was utilized to compare the two groups and contains the









following categories: affiliation, inadequate/undesirable, achievement,

moral, and erotic dominance.

A data analysis (MANOVA) of the results indicated that homosexual

students fantasized significantly more frequently about males, anal

intercourse, oral sex, sadomasochistic activities, and being forced to

have sex (submission). They also tended to masturbate more frequently.

The heterosexual males had significantly more frequent fantasies about

females, having sex in different settings, and sex with animals. Tables

of the five top-ranked sexual fantasy categories for each group were

presented. No significant differences were found between the groups on

the five meaning of sexual experience categories. The author concluded

that sexual orientation has an effect on those fantasies which relate

to the "mechanical-anatomical" aspects of sexual activity (e.g., anal

intercourse and oral sex). The similarities between the male hetero-

sexual and homosexual samples were seen as resulting from the effects

of gender.


viii














CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE


Research on human sexuality has been a difficult prospect for those

individuals who have dared to address the challenge. Along with the

theoretical and empirical questions with which all researchers are faced,

the sex researcher must also contend with social taboos and the emotion-

laden nature of the topic at hand. Wrightsman (1977) sums up the issue

succinctly when he states:

Even if a researcher is courageous enough to study sexual
behavior while accepting the stigma of doing so, he or she
then faces the very likely outcome that the project's
findings may overturn people's assumptions about sex and
challenge deeply held values and beliefs. Such new
findings are not always popular, and society has a tendency
to punish the bearer of tidings that conflict with cherished
assumptions. (p. 179)

Several pioneers in the area of human sexuality helped to establish

the legitimacy of research on human sexual functioning as well as lay

the groundwork for the methods by which the sexual attitudes, behavior

and physiology of men and women could be investigated (Ellis, 1936, 1942;

Freud, 1962, 1963; Kinsey, Pomeroy,& Martin, 1948; Kinsey, Pomeroy,

Martin,& Gebhard, 1953; Masters & Johnson, 1966). Since the 1960's

research on human sexuality has proliferated, much of it concerning

sexual attitudes (Eysenck, 1971b; Finger, 1975; Gerrard, 1980; Glassner

& Owen, 1976; McBride & Ender, 1977), sexual behaviors (Bentler, 1968;

Finger, 1975; Gross, 1978; Haynes & Oziel, 1976; Peplau, Rubin,& Hill,

1977; Schafer, 1977), and the identification and treatment of sexual






2



dysfunctions or sexual aberrations (Acosta, 1975; Bancroft, 1969; Masters

& Johnson, 1966, 1970; Kaplan, 1974; Kraft, 1967; LoPiccalo & Steger,

1974).

Two areas of human sexuality which have received little attention

from sex researchers concern sexual fantasies and the meaning of an

individual's sexual experiences. Sexual fantasy can be defined as "Any

mental image or imagination which contains sexual matter and/or is

sexually arousing to the person having the sexual fantasy" (Mednick, 1977,

p. 250). Much of the literature on sexual fantasy has been theoretical

in nature, using a psychodynamic interpretive scheme (Hollender, 1963;

Kronhausen & Knonhausen, 1969). Those authors who have approached sexual

fantasy from an empirical basis have relied on one or two items which

were buried within a broader study of sexual behavior (Kinsey et al.,

1948, 1953; Pietropinto & Simenauer, 1977). Women's sexual fantasies

comprise a major portion of sex fantasy research, followed by men's sex

fantasies, with homosexual sex fantasy receiving almost no attention.

The meaning of sexual experience has been approached tangentialy

from several directions, but as Bernstein (1982) states, "Although

inferences from some studies are possible, the meaning of sexual experi-

ence has rarely been directly assessed. ." (p. 18). Again, there are

few studies on the meaning of homosexual sexual experience, and those

studies that do exist must be evaluated in terms of Morin's (1977)

caution against a heterosexual bias in psychological research on homo-

sexuality.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the differences and

similarities between heterosexual and homosexual sexual fantasy and the











meaning of sexuality. The sexual fantasies will be studied in terms of

same-sex, opposite-sex, sexual activity, and various other subtheme

fantasies. The fantasy themes will be compared during three distinct

conditions: sex with a partner, masturbation, and daydreaming. Although

very few studies have been done on the meaning of sexual experience,

there is some basis for comparison due to the recent development of an

assessment instrument (e.g., Bernstein, 1982). The author hopes that

tentative norms will emerge for the meaning of homosexual sexual experi-

ence. Care has been taken to present the data on heterosexual and homo-

sexual subjects, both in the historical overview and in the literature

review. Pertinent information, that will provide a context in which to

view the existing data, will be presented.

A Historical Overview

The history of sexual fantasy was addressed by Taylor (1970) who

found references on the topic dating back to the 12th century. Indi-

viduals who expressed having sexual fantasies were considered to be

possessed by demons called an "incubus," if the victim was a female, or

a "succubus," if the victim was a male. The underlying assumption, to

the attribution of possession, was that "normal" individuals did not

have sexual fantasies. In the 1600's the Malleus Maleficarum was pub-

lished and endorsed by the senate at the University of Cologne, in an

effort to provide a manual by which the practitioners of witchcraft

could be identified and punished. Taylor (1970) describes the manual's

covert function in the following manner: "It is, in many respects, a

case book of sexual psychopathy, and is concerned principally with three











subjects: impotence, sexual fantasies, and conversion hysterias" (p. 111).

Once a practitioner of witchcraft was found, he or she was tortured into a

"confession" and burned at the stake. Two prime indications of witchcraft

were impotence and sexual fantasy. Consequently, to admit to having

sexual fantasies was to invite the wrath of the inquisitors.

Kronhausen and Kronhausen (1969) reviewed the early erotic literature

in search of literary expressions of sexual fantasy. The authors document

a reference on January 13, 1668, in Samuel Pepys' Diary, where Mr. Pepys

recounts his discovery of a French book that ". .. is the most bawdy,

lewd book that I ever saw. ." (p. 3). The authors go on to document

erotic tales throughout the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, providing

psychoanalytic interpretations as to the motives and longings of the

authors and of their readers. Kronhausen and Kronhausen (1969) comment

on their review of the psychiatric and psychoanalytic literature in

preparation for their own work, as emphasizing deviant behavior rather

than fantasy. To quote the authors:

Contemporary clinicians seem to have given the subject little
attention, and what we found, even in psychoanalytically
oriented articles and monographs, mostly in the 1920's and
1930's, was not particularly enlightening, although there are
several isolated descriptions in some of Freud's own cases.
(p. xv)

Thus it appears that sexual fantasy was considered to be a reflection

of psychopathology from its earliest references up to the present day.

In Three Essays on Sexuality, Freud (1962) comments on phantasiess"

as being rooted in the infantile period of human development, where they

persist unconsciously. Nocturnal phantasies are then the unconscious

phantasies rising into consciousness. Freud stressed that the importance











of phantasies derived from their connection with the Oedipus complex and

the effect that the struggle to resolve the complex has on adult

sexuality. He states, "They phantasiess] are of great importance in the

origin of many symptoms, since they precisely constitute preliminary

stages of these symptoms and thus lay down the forms in which the

repressed libidinal components find satisfaction" (p. 92). Most of

Freud's comments on phantasies dealt with the sexually symbolic represen-

tations within the dreams of his patients and the repressed Oedipal

longings that they represented. Again there is a focus on the patho-

logical or maladaptive nature of sexual fantasies, the precursors of

neurotic symptomology.

In an attempt to systematically study the sexual attitudes, beliefs

and behaviors of the American public, Kinsey et al. (1948, 1953)

gathered large samples of male and female subjects. Unfortunately there

is little mention of sexual fantasy in the studies, and what does exist

is related to masturbation. Kinsey et al. (1953) reported that males

masturbate more often than do females and that of those subjects who did

masturbate, 72% of the males and 50% of the females almost always

fantasized during masturbation. Concerning nocturnal emissions, Kinsey

et al. (1948) report that:

The parallel between the content of the nocturnal dream and
one's overt daytime experience has been recognized by all
peoples, primitive and civilized, since the dawn of history.
The present study confirms the usual interpretations, although
it has nothing to contribute to the symbolism in dreams. The
dream is usually a reflection of the individual's overt
experience or of his desire for experience. (p. 526)

The authors further state that heterosexuals tend to have heterosexually

oriented fantasies and homosexuals tend to have homosexually oriented











fantasies. It is apparent that apart from a move away from the super-

natural influences that were purported to exist in sexual fantasies

during the Middle Ages, the reflection of psychopathology within the

content of sexual fantasies, and the verification of the occurrence of

sexual fantasy with those males and females who admitted to fantasy and

masturbation, little was really known about sexual fantasies until the

1960's.

The meaning of sexual experience has undergone many historical

transitions. Tannahil (1980) traces human sexual development back to

the prehistoric world, where the major transitions of the paleolithic

era were a shift from a rear-entry coital position to the face-to-face

"missionary" position, the development of intertribal marriages and,

consequently, the taboo against incest. The major focus of this era

was sex as a means of procreation and a symbol of fertility. During

the neolithic era man emerged as master of his family and superior to

women. The second major sexual taboo developed during this era. Men

were not allowed to have sex with women during their menstrual period

due to attributions of supernatural powers and witchcraft concerning

the blood in the menstrual fluid. Bullough (1976) refers to the

Mesopotamian civilization (3000 to 300 B.C.) where sexual attitudes

derived from the assumption that women were basically the property of

the man. Adultery was not a moral transgression but rather a vio-

lation of another man's property. The purpose of marriage was still

procreation, not companionship. Bullough (1976) also delineates the

Jewish contribution in the formation of Western sexual attitudes,

through their effect on the subsequent development of Christianity.











Early Judaism (before 600 B.C.) had a relatively simple sex code. During

the Talmudic period a permissive attitude predominated in which the

rabbis legitimized the pleasures of sex to such an extent that coitus

between a married couple became a religious duty on Friday nights. Later

periods of sexual repression developed as a result of pressure upon the

Jews to assimilate with other cultures and the hostility of the new-found

Christians toward the Jews. Women's sexual drive was conceptualized as

being more constant and aggressive than that of their male counterparts.

Adultery was only applied in terms of a married woman having sex with an

unmarried man and the penalty was death. Rape was considered to be at

least instinctually consented to by the woman, since her role was an

inferior one in Jewish society.

The Greek culture was the wellspring for the concept of romantic

love according to McCary (1976). There was a schism between sexual

love (eros) and spiritual love (agape). McCrary states,

Spiritual love was an idealized love between men, and was
considered an emotion so pure that women could not attain
it. The ideal of Greek love was therefore homosexual, since
the female was regarded as too lowly and imperfect for the
emotion of love. The essence of beauty and the realization
of love were found only in the male, and therefore usually
existed between an older man and a younger boy. (1976, p. 46)

Consequently marriage was solely for the purpose of producing children

and neither concept of love applied to married couples. In Christianity

the purity of love was idealized as love of God, separate from sexuality.

Sexual expression underwent suppression and through the ideal of the

wedding of nuns to Christ in a spiritual sense, women were idealized

(e.g., the Immaculate Conception). Courtly love arose in the south of

France during the end of the 11th century, according to McCrary (1976).










The nobility adopted an adolescent-like conceptualization of love where
"sexual desire is denied satisfaction." Knights maintained spiritual

romantic relationships with ladies whose husbands were crusading, rather

than with their own spouses. Sexual intercourse was not incorporated

into those affairs but tests of the "purity" of the relationships

involved sexual foreplay in bed that would be stopped just short of

intercourse. McCary states that:

Marriage at that time was contracted for reasons of familial
benefits, property rights, personal protection, and procrea-
tion, but courtly romantic love was devoid of burdens and
responsibilities. Thus romantic love and marriage were two
separate entities that fulfilled entirely separate needs,
and so long as the lovers remained sexually "virtuous," the
husband's marital rights were safeguarded and the rules of
chivalry upheld. (1976, p. 46)

During the Baroque and Rococo periods sexual favors were granted

for gallant acts, and the fusion (or confusion) of sex and love was

established. McCary (1976) notes that during the Renaissance the

platonic doctrine, of earthly love transformed into a path toward

spiritual beauty (i.e., God-like), was adopted but quickly degenerated

until in the 16th century platonic academies were "nothing but courts

of free love" (p. 46). The concept of romantic love in marriage was

born in the 19th century, since the common man did not have the

resources to be both married and in love with a mistress. American

Puritans viewed marriage as a civil contract, where romantic love and

sex between young Puritans was acceptable unless it violated the

sanctity of the family. During the industrial revolution our society

became more mobile, familial ties were weakened and romantic themes

began to appear in the mass media. McCary (1976) states, "in the










United States, especially, an attempt was made to combine sex, love and

marriage into one unique experience between one man and one woman" (p. 47)

The Puritan view of sexuality gave way to a Victorian reinstitution

of courtly love. According to Tannahill (1980), middle class ladies were

transformed "into sweet, untouchable guardians of morality, whose dis-

taste for sex led to an explosive increase in prostitution, an epidemic

spread of venereal disease, and a morbid taste for masochism" (p. 347).

The 1800's became a period in which women were the guardians of purity

and chastity, while men had to struggle with their "base" sexual needs

and the search for sources of sexual expression. Some of the effects

of this period on human sexuality are addressed by Bullough (1976) and

include the following: (1) the portrayal of men as sexual aggressors

and women as reluctant victims; (2) the emergence of the woman's role

as one of child rearer and homemaker while simultaneously mystifying

her existence and confining her to the home; (3) the condemnation of

masturbation by medical authorities due to the draining of vital energy

and the threat of resulting insanity; and (4) the increases in prostitu-

tion, the incidence of venereal disease, the search for "clean" virgins

and medical procedures (e.g., ring insertion in the foreskin of the

penis) to limit one's sexual functioning. In effect, it was a period

of sexual repression and the propagation of sexual myths, some of which

persist to the present day. The dominance of the male and the submis-

siveness of the female were reinforced, with procreation becoming the

only justification for sexual activity.

Havelock Ellis (1964) began the study of human sexuality due to

his own discomfort with the ignorance and anxiety surrounding human










sexuality during his medical training and because "a man's sexual tempera-

ment is too intimate and essential a part of him to be viewed with

indifference" (p. vi). Ellis believed that sexuality should be studied

as a scientific discipline rather than leaving the topic to be defined

according to the whims of moralists and theologians. He was careful to

separate the concepts of "love" and "lust," lust being the physiological

sexual impulse and love being "that impulse in association with other

impulses" (p. 323). On the sexuality of women, Ellis (1964) pointed out

several disadvantages created by past definitions of human sexuality.

Women were not different beings than men, but of essentially the same

sexual composition. Women suffer more than men concerning sexuality due

to ignorance and prejudice on the part of society, which leads to more

dissatisfaction on the women's part in marriage. Ellis also outlined

three main channels through which human sexual impulse could be dis-

charged:

(1) We may avoid all overt manifestations, leaving the impulse
to expend its dynamic energy along whatever paths, normal or
abnormal, the organism may lend itself to; (2) We may be
content with temporary or merely casual relationships, of which
prostitution is the familiar type; (3) We may enter into
marriage, that is to say, a sexual relationship set up with the
intention of, if possible, making it permanent, and involving a
community of more than sexual interests. (1936, p. 353)

Ellis' observations of the options for sexual expression cover the range

of contemporary sexual behaviors in a nonjudgmental fashion. It is

important to note that morality has been separated from sexual function-

ing in Ellis' work, and that the problems women face in expressing their

sexuality have been addressed.

Sex as a primary human motivator was one of the results of Sigmund

Freud's (1962, 1963) development of psychoanalysis. Freud dispelled the










notion of women as nonsexual beings and challenged the notion of procrea-

tion and submission as the only sexual roles which women could fulfill.

Freud (1962) proposed a distinction between the sexual object (i.e., the

person we are sexually attracted to) and the sexual aim (i.e., the

sexual act chosen to express the sexual instinct). Concerning adult

sexual development, Freud stated that,

A person's final sexual attitude is not decided until after
puberty and is the result of a number of factors, not all
of which are yet known; some are of a constitutional nature
but others are accidental in general the multiplicity
of determining factors is reflected in the variety of mani-
fest sexual attitudes in which they find their issue in
mankind. (1962, p. 12)

The sexual instinct (e.g., libido), according to Freud, is connected

with aggression and cruelty and is opposed by pain, disgust, and shame.

Undoubtedly the Victorian repression during Freud's development of a

theory of human sexuality influenced his conceptualizations of the human

sexual instinct and the barriers to its expression.

Despite Freud's theories, the systematic study of human sexuality

did not begin until 1947 with the Kinsey studies on sexual behavior and

attitudes (Kinsey et al., 1948, 1953). Kinsey's work detailed the sexual

behaviors of males. The female orgasmic response was also studied in and

out of marriage. Although the Kinsey studies provided important norms

for sexual behavior within the American population, they failed to

address the issue of the meaning of sexual experience (Gecas & Libby,

1976). This limitation does not serve to mitigate the enormous contri-

bution that Kinsey's studies brought the area of human sexuality,

especially the bringing to light of sexuality as a topic for systematic

study and open discussion.











The study of human sexuality, or sexology, has proliferated in the

past two decades. Masters and Johnson's (1966) study of the physiology

and anatomy of sexuality helped to (1) delineate healthy sexual function-

ing, (2) identify male and female sexual dysfunctions and to establish

treatment strategies for dysfunctional individuals/couples, and

(3) dispel sexual myths (e.g., the female vaginal orgasm). Several

other sexologists have conducted research and published works on the

topic of human sexual functioning (Kaplan, 1974; LoPiccolo & Herman,

1977; LoPiccolo & Steger, 1974; Money & Tucker, 1975). One drawback to

the scientific study of sexuality has been an overconcern about sexual

performance among the general public (Masters & Johnson, 1970).

Bernstein (1982) notes that the interpersonal meaning of sexual experi-

ence must now include competence, mastery and achievement.

The limited nature of the information concerning sexual fantasies

from a historical perspective tends to reflect the taboo associated

with the expression of sexual fantasy, except in isolated literary

references. In the next section, a review of the current literature

on heterosexual and homosexual erotic fantasies will be presented. The

current literature on the meaning of sexual experience for heterosexuals

and homosexuals will follow the above. Sexual fantasies and the meaning

of sexual experience are related in that the individual's attributions

of meaning concerning his/her sexual experience are bound to be

reflected in the schemes of his/her sexual fantasies (e.g., dominance

or submission).











Theory and Research on Fantasy

The study of fantasy processes, according to Klinger (1971),

suffered from a moratorium on the study of inner experience within the

United States from 1920 until 1960. Saint Augustine is credited with

providing a major impetus for the study of inner experience when he

reasoned that man's knowledge of his inner experience could serve as a

guide to his knowledge of God. Klinger (1971) states that John of

Salisbury, the 12th century philosopher, developed "a description for

the categories of inner experience and applied the unifying associative

principle expounded earlier by Aristotle, that ideas experienced con-

tiguously come to be linked in future thought" (p. 11). The work of

Thomas Hobbes, and later, the British Associationist School of Psychology

led to the development of sophisticated techniques for the study of inner

events (i.e., introspection). Although several schools of introspective

psychology developed at the turn of the century, the American psychologi-

cal movement turned to the study of individual differences and the

behavioristic techniques that were derived from the Darwinian method of

study. As Klinger (1971) states,

The very success of the introspectionist psychologists in
formulating increasingly precise and revealing questions
placed increasing demands on the observational and judg-
mental capacities of their highly trained observer-subjects.
Eventually, the demands proved too great, and the methods
then available for the further empirical investigation of
inner experience were shown to be inadequate. (pp. 11-12)

Klinger (1971) notes that until 1966 not a single volume was pub-

lished in the United States that was totally devoted to the systematic

study of fantasy. The authors of the 1920's focused on Jungian or

psychoanalytic concepts in their theoretical work on fantasies.










Singer (1966) was one of the first modern authors to attempt to define

daydreaming. According to Singer, daydreaming "is used to mean a shift

of attention away from an ongoing physical or mental task or from a

perceptual response to external stimulation towards a response to some

internal stimulus" (1966, p. 3). Although proposed definitions of

fantasy help to conceptualize the fantasy process, Klinger (1971) notes

that there are several problems associated with providing a comprehen-

sive definition of fantasy. The problems include (1) a set of

generally accepted criteria for determining the boundaries of fantasy

does not exist; (2) fantasy is similar to related processes (i.e., plan-

ning, reminiscing, analyzing past events, etc.) which serve to obfuscate

the true boundaries of fantasy; (3) since fantasy is primarily a mental

process it is necessarily covert in nature and the researcher is com-

pelled to rely on subjects' verbal reports; and (4) the problem of

differentiating verbal reports reflecting problems in the subject's life

(i.e., task-directed ideation) from reports of actual fantasy ideation.

Despite the aforementioned problems, Klinger (1971) proposes the

following definition of fantasy:

Verbal reports of all mentation whose ideational products
are not evaluated by the subject in terms of their useful-
ness in advancing some immediate goal extrinsic to the men-
tation itself; that is, fantasy is defined as report of
mentation other than orienting responses to, or scanning
of, external stimuli, or operant activity such as problem-
solving in a task situation. (pp. 9-10)

Through a comparison of the similarities between play and fantasy,

Klinger conceptualizes a transition from an infant's undifferentiated

mastery of play and fantasy to the sharp decline of play and dramatic

increase in fantasy during puberty. Dreams and fantasy become











manifestations of an individual's diurnal cycle, where there is a shift

from one to the other depending on the sleep-waking cycle. Klinger

(1971) sees this as a continuous stream of activity which represents a

baseline of activity to which individuals return when they are not

"engaged in scanning or acting upon their environment" (p. 48). Utiliz-

ing this conceptualization, fantasy and dreaming occur when the mind is

not occupied with the necessity of monitoring the environment.

The reader may have noticed a behavioristic bent to Klinger's

(1971) theory. In elucidating the components of fantasy, Klinger pro-

poses that fantasy is a "response process" and that segments of fantasy

can be regarded as "sequences of responses." The response segments are

integrated due to the unitary, organized nature of lower-order fantasy

segments which flow smoothly, rapidly and automatically while allowing

for novelty. Klinger (1971) points out that conceptualizing fantasy as

a form of response integration enables the researcher to explain the

erratic course of fantasies where environmental feedback is "largely

irrelevant" and does not serve to modify the fantasy content. This

would help to explain the unrealistic or surrealistic nature of

fantasies and the lack of reality testing involved in an individual's

fantasy life. This is not to say that fantasies are totally unrelated

to an individual's perceptions of his environment, since "the effect of

current concerns on fantasy content is best described as a potentiating

influence, increasing the probability that ideation relevant to the

incentives that are the object of the concern will occur in fantasy"

(Klinger, 1971, p. 353). At the same time the thematic content of a

fantasy segment is only "loosely related" to the individual's learned










patterns of overt behavior and, therefore, attempts to predict overt

behavior from fantasy content are risky propositions. The thematic

content of a person's fantasies, according to Klinger (1971), seems to

be more closely associated with that individual's self-concept and the

fantasy themes may actually help to shape part of the self-concept.

Several of the functions or uses of fantasy have been outlined by

psychotherapists and counselors. Kelly (1972) lists several uses for

employing a guided fantasy technique in the counseling of adolescents.

It can be used (1) to encourage relatively freely associated, un-

censored communication, (2) to alleviate impasses, (3) to encourage

preliminary expression, (4) to focus more deeply, (5) to open new

avenues of insight, and (6) to gain insight into physiological reactions

or complaints. Kelly (1974) also advocates the counselors use of their

own fantasies during sessions with a client in order to "bring a new

dimension of creativity to the counseling relationship" (p. 113). He

also notes that imagery in counseling may help clients to manipulate

their images in creative ways, tap unrealized potentials, and mobilize

the energies of the will. Klinger (1977) mentions the fantasy-like

process in psychoanalytic free association and the use of fantasy in

diagnostic work where a patient's "cognitive maps, semantics, expec-

tancies, coping repertories and incentive commitments" (p. 228) can be

gleaned from imagery that a patient reports. Klinger goes on to list

the following functions of fantasy for clients: (1) to steer them away

from overtly threatening content, (2) to allow for the rehearsal of

themes which can eventually become a part of the client's inner reality

(e.g., self-worth), (3) to improve mental health by reducing dependency











on outside sources of stimulation, fostering patience and improving

coping capabilities, and (4) to prevent a build-up of hostility and

anxiety, strengthen or undermine resistance to temptation and improve

a client's self-communication by increasing awareness of the meaning

of his/her inner life.

A complete therapy system based on the use of fantasy, guided

affective imagery (GAI), was developed by Leuner (1969). The basic

procedure of GAI is for the therapist to induce relaxation in the

client and then to guide the client through 10 standard imaginary situ-

ations. There is an emphasis on the symbolism of the imagery situations

and on enhancement of the client's emotions. Leuner (1969) goes on to

list five general methods for evoking and interpreting the client's

imagery. GAI is primarily grounded in psychoanalytic theory and can be

viewed as a structured extension of the basic techniques of free associ-

ation and/or dream interpretation.

Guided fantasy has also been used in career counseling and sex

therapy. Skovholt and Hoenninger (1974) state that guided fantasy can

be used to address sex role conflicts as they relate to career develop-

ment, and the indirect expression of a client's emotions, goals and

beliefs, which are useful in helping the client to make career decisions.

An extension of this work was developed by Morgan and Skovholt (1977),

who cite research which demonstrated that occupational daydreams are

important in predicting future occupational choice and that "an individ-

ual's top occupational daydream tends to be more predictive [of future

occupational choice] than that individual's self-directed search summary

code" (p. 392). Sex therapists have outlined the use of fantasy in the











treatment of sexual dysfunctions either through systematic desensitiza-

tion or the enhancement of sexual arousal (e.g., Kaplan, 1974; Masters &

Johnson, 1970).

The above summary of the theory and functions of general fantasy

provides a frame of reference for the following review of the literature

on heterosexual sexual fantasy. Similar problems exist in formulating

a comprehensive definition of sexual fantasy, devising methods with which

to study an inner experience such as fantasy, and determining the moti-

vations, beliefs and values embedded within an individual's sex fantasy

themes.


Research on Heterosexual Sexual Fantasy

The area of heterosexual erotic or sexual fantasy is still in its

infancy in terms of systematic, empirical study. The same limitations

that apply to the study of the more general fantasies also pertain to

the study of erotic fantasy. The first obstacle that a sex fantasy

researcher must contend with is to define the phenomenon of erotic

fantasy in a comprehensive manner. Klinger (1971) addressed the issue

of defining fantasy and stated that "such a definition should encompass

the phenomenon of fantasy not only conceptually but also operationally,

or at least provide means for employing operations to distinguish it

from other forms of activity" (p. 7). At the same time, Klinger also

concedes that the lack of theoretical development concerning the concept

of fantasy is necessary at this juncture in time because of the paucity

of research on the topic. He stated,

Lack of theoretical commitment is desirable at this early
stage, since it avoids too greatly constraining the











theoretical development which the definition is intended to
foster. In any case scientific taxonomies depend upon the
state of relevant knowledge, and the relevant behavioral
domain has simply been insufficiently mapped to support the
setting or rigorous positive boundaries on the concept of
fantasy. (Klinger, 1971, p. 9)

Current definitions of sexual fantasy range from the simplistic to

the more complex, depending on the experimental sophistication of the

author in question. Faraday (1974) utilizes the term "sex dreams to

denote dreams depicting overt sexual activity or explicit sexual

feelings" (p. 84). A more specific definition with psychoanalytic

leanings is provided by Friday (1980). She states, "a fantasy is a map

of desire, mastery, escape, and obscurations; the navigational path we

invent to steer ourselves between the reefs and shoals of anxiety,

guilt, and inhibition. It is a work of consciousness, but in reaction

to unconscious pressures" (Friday, 1980, p. 1). Inherent in Friday's

definition are some of the possible functions of sex fantasy (e.g.,

escape). Masters and Johnson (1979) define sexual fantasy by developing

two categories within which to classify them. Free-floating fantasies

are "fantasies spontaneously evolved by men and women in response to

sexual feelings or needs without restraints of time or place" (p. 176).

"Short-term fantasies are stimulant mechanisms frequently in response to

imminent sexual opportunity" (p. 176). These fantasies tend to serve an

arousal function.

The most comprehensive definition of sexual fantasy is provided by

Mednick (1977). He defines fantasy in the following manner:

General--"Sexual fantasy": any mental image or imagination
which contains sexual matter and/or is sexually arousing to
the person having the fantasy.











I. "Daydream" sexual fantasy: any sexual fantasy which is
experienced at any time, day or night (except in
nocturnal dreaming), other than during masturbation or
sexual relations.

II. "Masturbatory" sexual fantasy: any sexual fantasy
experienced during masturbation which is sexually
arousing.

III. Sexual fantasy "during sexual relations": any sexual
fantasy experienced during sexual relations with another
person, usually leading up to and/or occurring during
sexual intercourse. (p. 250)

Mednick's definition allows for the classification of sexual fantasies

into three activity categories (e.g., sex with a partner, masturbation,

daydreaming).

Several authors have commented on the functions or uses of sexual

fantasy. These functions can be categorized according to the positive

or negative connotations that they imply concerning an individual's sex

fantasies. The positive functions of sex fantasy include (1) fantasies

as initial rehearsals and vicarious organizations of sociosexual dramas

which incorporate symbolic representations from a particular maturational

stage in which the fantasies occur (Gagnon & Simon, 1973); (2) fantasies

as tools for eliciting or enhancing sexual arousal (Campagna, 1976;

Hariton, 1976; Hariton & Singer, 1974; Masters & Johnson, 1979; Sullivan,

1976); (3) fantasies as safety valves for sexual strivings that could be

harmful to the individual or the intended sex partner (Kronhausen &

Kronhausen, 1969); (4) to recall previous sexual experiences which were

pleasurable (Masters & Johnson, 1979; Slattery, 1976); and (5) fantasy

as a way to introduce variety and playlike stimulation into the sex life

of the individual (Carlson & Coleman, 1977).











The negative functions of sexual fantasy include the need (1) to

avoid acknowledgment of wanting sexual intercourse (e.g., rape fantasy)

among women (Hawkins, 1974; Hollender, 1963); (2) to avoid anxiety or

panic during sexual relations (Friday, 1980; Hollender, 1963); (3) to

cope with feelings of guilt (Friday, 1980; Hollender, 1963); (4) to

express women's masochistic nature and their need for submission in

order to suppress their strivings for dominance (Hollender, 1963); and

(5) to serve as a stimulus for conflict (Freud, 1962). It is important

to note that the majority of the negative functions of sexual fantasy

have been attributed to the fantasy life of women.

Some of the literature on sexual fantasy is of a non-empirical

nature and belongs in the category of "pop" psychology. Slattery (1976)

conducted interviews with men of different socioeconomic status over a

five-year period. He divided fantasies into five categories including

(1) heterosexual fantasies, (2) homosexual fantasies, (3) bisexual

fantasies, (4) sadomasochistic fantasies, and (5) assorted fantasies.

Due to the nonsystematic nature of the interviewing and the lack of

insightful commentary, Slattery's work is best considered an addition

to erotic literature. Kronhausen and Kronhausen (1966) completed

"a systematic review of erotic underground literature, both ancient

and modern, and from all parts of the world" (p. xv). Although

they provide some psychoanalytic interpretations for the fantasies that

they found in the literature, the authors do not provide a coherent,

concise scheme for the evaluation or explication of sexual fantasy

content. In a study of men's sexual fantasies, Friday (1980) collected

3,000 letters from the readers of a national men's magazine. Friday's










sample is self-admittedly nonrepresentative and the comments that she

makes concerning the contents of the fantasies are speculative and

general in nature.

Several articles on sexual fantasy have been written by clinicians,

drawing on their experiences with patient populations. Hollender (1963)

discussed women's coital fantasies and the implications of fantasizing

on the interpersonal dynamics of sexual intercourse. He hypothesizes

that women have fantasies more often than men do and that the function of

the fantasy is to remove the woman psychologically from both the sexual

act and the person with whom she is engaged. There are two basic themes

inherent in the contentof women's fantasies during intercourse, accord-

ing to Hollender (1963): "(1) anxiety concerning a sadomasochistic

orientation to sexuality and (2) guilt stemming from forbidden feelings,

mainly Oedipal" (p. 87). In 1970 Hollender interviewed eight "normal"

(i.e., nonpatient) women and modified his views by stating that fantasies

during sex may not be signs of neurosis but attempts to resolve broader

conflicts. In a similar view, Hawkins (1974) addressed the issue of

disturbing erotic fantasies. His main thesis is that sexually deprived

individuals may engage in erotic fantasies during masturbation to the

point of having vivid hallucinations. In his scheme, Hawkins views

women's rape fantasies as their way of seeking absolution from the

responsibility of engaging in coitus willingly. Men's fantasies of

physically and sexually overpowering women are representative of re-

pressed sadistic impulses. Ego-alien fantasies are indications of

shame, disgust, and guilt concerning the individual's sexual longings

(e.g., homosexual fantasies).










Erotic fantasies during masturbation can be viewed as indicators of

an individual's deepest sexual desires. Sullivan (1976) views fantasy

as a technique which allows for the expression of "desires unlimited by

reality" (p. 155). He explores several determinants of specific mastur-

bation fantasies, including (1) an individual's personal experience;

(2) deep stirring of a nonsexual nature (e.g., women's societal status);

(3) a lack of sexual knowledge; and (4) an individual's own internal

disapproval (e.g., Oedipal fantasies). The task of the psychotherapist

is to help the client by being an understanding listener and to reassure

him/her that the sexual fantasy occurs commonly among "normal" individ-

uals. A study of the sexual fantasies of men and women was conducted by

Barclay (1973), although no mention is made of the demographic character-

istics of the subject population or the method of data collection. Sex

differences were predicted due to hormonal differences and the differ-

ences in socialization between males and females in our culture. Barclay

(1973) states, "in short, our male fantasies were stereotyped in that

they all resembled stories of sex without interpersonal involvement. .

women are always seductive and forward [in men's fantasies], ready to

have intercourse at any time men's fantasies have in common a

major emphasis on highly visual imagery" (p. 205). Concerning women's

fantasies, Barclay (1973) states, "even though the fantasy was vivid,

the female subjects appeared to be more involved with their own emo-

tional responses than with the characteristics of their partners" (p. 210).

The implications of the study are that men and women have different moti-

vations for, and goals in, their sexuality.











Although the issues raised in these articles are provocative, the

lack of a systematic approach (e.g., the specification of subject char-

acteristics, experimental methods and a comprehensive bibliography)

relegates the hypotheses to the realm of "educated guesses." Studies of

this type have come under criticism because they represent negative

interpretations of sexual fantasy and have assumed a "deficiency state

or conflictual model of the nature of daydreams" (Hariton & Singer,

1974, p. 314).

Fortunately, not all of the studies on sexual fantasy have been of

a nonempirical nature. Klinger (1971) reviews some early studies on

sexual fantasy and proposes different ways to interpret the results.

In 1952, Clark (in Klinger, 1971, pp. 283-285) studied the effects of

sexual arousal on fantasy. Male students were presented with slides on

nude females in three conditions: in a classroom, in the presence of a

male or female representative from the dean's office, and during a

fraternity beer party. Clark's interpretation of the results involved

stating that sexual arousal induces sexual fantasy but that in guilt-

producing situations (e.g., dean's office), the subjects surpress their

sexual fantasies. Klinger (1971) disagreed and pointed out that the

experiment failed to control for several variables (e.g., incentive,

drive stimuli) so that the results are confounded. Leiman and Epstein

conducted a study in 1961 (in Klinger, 1971, pp. 285-287) on male sub-

jects' attitudes and personal reactions to sexual activity. They con-

cluded that high sex drive serves to produce sexual fantasy but that

guilt about the high sex drive caused subjects to suppress their sexual

fantasies. Klinger (1971) noted differences in the sexual incentives










among the subjects and that this could account for the increases in the

sexual fantasizing of some subjects. The gist of Klinger's comments

reflects the lack of adequate controls within the experimental design.

The more recent studies on the erotic fantasies of heterosexual

males vary from the results of one item embedded within a questionnaire

to longitudinal studies covering a lifetime. Pietropinto and Simenauer

(1977) sampled 4,066 males across the country with a two-part question-

naire concerning their sexual behaviors and attitudes. One item asked,

"What sort of thoughts do you having during intercourse or masturbation?"

(p. 335). The majority of the responses (86%) fell into three categories:

(1) thoughts about the current sex partner (64%); (2) thoughts about a

person other than the current partner (11%); and (3) recalling a past

sexual experience (11%). In a two-part study of male college students,

Campagna (1976) found that erotic masturbatory fantasies appear to be

related to self-reports of sexual activity. He also found that a higher

incidence of masturbation lead to more sexual fantasies during masturba-

tion. Campagna also found that sexual arousal increased as the fantasy

stimulus progressed from nonerotic stories to sexually vivid stories to

the subjects' self-generated fantasies.

Male fantasy life was measured across a life span by Giambra (1977)

using 218 subjects whose ages ranged from 17 to 91 years of age. He

found that "daydreams about sexual activity and love are most dominant

for the 17-23 year olds then most rapidly drop-off with increasing age

groups so that they largely disappear after the 75th year" (p. 225). In

another study of 277 men who ranged in age from 24 to 91 years, Giambra

and Martin (1977) analyzed the subjects' retrospective reports of sexual











daydreaming and their relationship to three behavioral aspects of their

sexual history (i.e., number of coital partners, early marital coitus,

quantity of sexual activity between ages 20 and 40). They found that

the three behavioral aspects of sexual life history were directly related

to current levels of sexual daydreaming. The authors state,

Thus on a comparative basis men aged 24-64 years with more
coital partners and/or greater customary coital frequency
in the first two years of marriage were found to currently
have higher levels of sexual daydreaming. Also, on a
comparative basis, men 45-65 years of age who had greater
overall levels of sexual activity from age 20 to 40 years
were found to have more sexual daydreaming at time of report.
(Giambra & Martin, 1977, p. 504)

Giambra and Martin (1977) state that high or low frequencies of

sexual activity among males tend to persist over a good deal of their

lifetime. The results are seen as supportive of the points of view that

sexual fantasies vary in relation to sexual drive and that sexual day-

dreams reflect the current concerns of the individual (e.g., Klinger,

1971). Thus the general conclusion can be made that men between the

ages of 17 to 23 years with a high sexual drive and frequent sexual

activity have the highest frequency of erotic daydreams.

There have also been studies focusing exclusively on women's sexual

fantasies. Some of the articles based on clinical impressions (Hawkins,

1974; Hollender, 1963; Sullivan, 1976) or studies with no report of the

experimental method (Barclay, 1973) have already been presented. In a

study of 102 university women students, Brown and Hart (1977) looked at

incidence of sexual fantasy and they related age, sexual experience,

anxiety, independence,and liberal attitudes toward women to the frequency

of sexual fantasy. The results indicated that 99% of the subjects










reported having one or more erotic fantasies during the prior 12-month

period. Women in the 22 to 35-year-old age group reported the highest

quantity of sexual fantasy, as did women who were sexually experienced

(i.e., vs. virgins). Brown and Hart (1977) also found that women who

were more anxious, independent, and held more liberal views reported

more sexual fantasies when compared to their counterparts who scored

low on these attributes. Marital status, religious affiliation (authori-

tarian, nonauthoritarian),introversion and emotionality did not corre-

late with the quantity of sexual fantasy reported by the subjects.

DeMartino (1974) studied 327 women who were members of Mensa and who

had a mean age of 32 and a mean IQ of 151. He found that 39% of the

respondents reported fantasizing once or more during intercourse and

70% reported fantasizing at some point during masturbation.

The effects of response cues (i.e., erotic, romantic, or neutral)

and the level of sex guilt on the erotic fantasies of women were studied

by Moreault and Follingstad (1978). Their findings indicate that

(1) 98% of the sample reported at least one sexual fantasy and all sub-

jects indicated having had at least two fantasy themes in their past

sexual fantasies; (2) "low sex guilt (LSG) subjects demonstrated less

sexual inhibition than high sex guilt (HSG) subjects in terms of sexual

explicitness, expressiveness, and responsiveness to stimuli; for total

number of fantasies; for variety of sex acts; for variety of content;

and for number of fantasy themes checked" (p. 1390); (3) HSG subjects

reported more embarrassment and less vivid fantasies than did the LSG

subjects; (4) in the response cue condition subjects exposed to erotic











response cues reported longer fantasies, more explicit fantasies (i.e.,

number of sex acts and sex organs), a greater degree of physiological

arousal. However LSG and HSG subjects did not differ on levels of

physiological arousal and the number of fantasies and number of themes

checked were not affected by the experimental response cues. Those

results were seen as supportive of Mosher's (1973) data that sex guilt

subjects do not differ significantly in self-reported sexual arousal

and that sexual arousal during fantasy production seems to be a function

of the sexual explictness of the stimuli versus the sex guilt of the

subject. The authors conclude that "sexual fantasy may be more

accurately viewed as being under stimulus control rather than as a

stable trait" (Moreault & Follingstad, 1978, p. 1392).

Hariton and Singer (1974) studied 141 suburban housewives (age

range 25-54 years) by using a questionnaire that elicited information

on "general daydreaming tendencies, fantasies, and other ideation

during coitus, sexual patterns, marital adjustment" (p. 313). Measures

of intelligence, personality, and personal adjustment were also included

in the study. The results indicated that (1) 65% of the subjects

reported having sexual fantasies at "least some of the time" during

coitus and 37% had fantasies "very often" during sexual intercourse;

(2) 65% of the sample reported moderate to high levels of fantasy; and

(3) the three most common sex fantasy themes in terms of frequency and

recurrence were (a) thoughts of an imaginary lover (56%), (b) being over-

powered or forced to surrender by someone (48.9%), and (c) pretending to

do something wicked and forbidden (49.6%). A factor analysis of the

items in the questionnaire was performed in order to test three models











of sexual fantasy. The models include fantasy as a drive-reduction

mechanism, fantasy as an adaptive mechanism, and fantasy as a personality-

cognitive process which is an extension of the individual's overall per-

sonality. The results were seen as supporting the adaptive and person-

ality-cognitive models, but not the drive-reduction model.

The sexual fantasies of males and females have been studied in order

to determine if any differences exist and, if so, in what directions and

on what variables? In a study of sex differences in daydreaming, Wagman

(1967) distributed a fantasy questionnaire to 105 male and 101 female

college students. Of the 24 daydream categories, only one category

pertained to sexual fantasies, with one other category for sexually

"perverse" fantasies. He found that men exceeded women in the proportion

of daydreaming about sexual and aggressive themes. No sex difference was

found for the sexually "perverse" theme. Gelles (1975) looked at the

relationship of sex and violence in the fantasy production of 40 male and

40 female college students, interpreting TAT responses collected from

students in 1959 by Lindzey and Silverman (in Gelles, 1975). Men and

women did not differ in the production of sexual imagery, but men with

higher levels of sexual imagery also tended to produce more violent

imagery than did the women.

Carlson and Coleman (1977) investigated the possible influences of

past fantasy and sexual experience on the induced sexual fantasies of 73

male and 123 female subjects. They found that (1) males had signifi-

cantly higher scores on sexual media experience and current sexual

interest scale when compared to women; (2) women had significantly higher

scores on sexual fantasy complexity and sexual arousal in fantasy scales;











(3) measures of general daydreaming experience, sexual fantasy experience,

and sexual interest produced greater richness in the induced fantasies of

subjects who had high scores on these variables; and (4) men with high sex

guilt experienced less richness in their induced fantasies, but there was

no such effect on the richness of the women's fantasies.

The masturbation fantasies of married couples and the sexual

fantasies of each group of men and women (i.e., 38 Danish couples) were

examined by Hesselland (1976) utilizing an interview technique. He found

that men reported a higher occurrence of erotic fantasies than did the

women. Men also seem to have more fantasies involving several persons

(37.5%) than did women (7.1%). Women (42.8%) had fantasies exclusively

about coitus with a spouse more often when compared to men (25%).

Husselland interprets the results as indicating that masturbation and

sexual fantasies are coital supplements for men but are coital substitutes

for women because women were more satisfied with the intercourse frequency

in the relationship and because they masturbated less often than the men.

Another study on masturbatory fantasies required the subjects (i.e., 96

males, 102 females) to view an explicitly sexual film of either a man or

a woman masturbating to orgasm and then to write fantasies concerning the

protagonist in the film. Abramson and Mosher (1979) found that women

could positively identify with a same-sex protagonist while the men could

not. This finding was related to a Mosher and Abramson (1977) finding

that both males and females can be sexually aroused by a female protagon-

ist, whereas only women were aroused by a film of a male protagonist.

The authors state that sex guilt and negative attitudes toward masturba-

tion can account for the variability in the subject's attributions of










the protagonist's affective tone, motive for masturbation, predicted

future masturbation, feelings about orgasm, and mood as reflected in

their written fantasies, as well as the amount of erotic elaboration

in the content of the subject's written fantasies.

Mednick (1977) proposed a definition of sexual fantasy and divided

the study of erotic fantasies into three conditions under which the

fantasies occur: daydream,masturbatory, and during sexual relations.

In a study of 48 male and 45 female college students, narrative descrip-

tions of sexual fantasies were elicited through the administration of a

sexual fantasy questionnaire. Mednick (1977) completed an inductive

content analysis of the subjects' written sexual fantasies and derived

the following categories: "(1) respondent as recipient; (2) sexual

objects) as recipient; (3) respondent as both recipient and object of

sexual activity; (4) no sexual fantasy reported; (5) insufficient data;

(6) sexual fantasies referencing the past" (p. 250). He found that

significantly more females imagined themselves to be the recipients of

sexual activity from a sexual object (category 1), whereas, significantly

more males fantasized the sexual object as the recipient of their sexual

activity (category 2), within the "daydream" and "sexual relations"

fantasy conditions. For the masturbatoryy" sexual fantasy condition,

marginal tendencies toward reversal of the above gender pattern were

obtained (i.e., category 2 for females, category 1 for males).

A few studies have investigated the effects of psychological

androgyny and gender on the sexual fantasies of males and females. Bem

(1974) hypothesized that strongly sex-typed individuals, as determined

by a high score on the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI) dimensions of











masculinity or feminity, may be limited in the range of behaviors that

they would exhibit in varying situations. According to Bem (1974),

Thus, whereas a narrowly masculine self-concept might inhibit
behaviors that are stereotyped as feminine, and a narrowly
feminine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are
stereotyped as masculine, a mixed, or androgynous, self-
concept might allow an individual to freely engage in both
"masculine" and "feminine" behaviors. (p. 155)

The question arises as to whether the effects of sex-role affect sexual

fantasy and, if so, whether they override the effects of gender on sexual

fantasy.

Bernardi (1977) investigated the effects of psychological androgyny

and gender on the sexual fantasies and experiences of 36 male and 36 female

college students. The subjects were given the BSRI, viewed slides of a

partially-clad man and woman, and wrote an imaginative story about the

individuals portrayed. The results supported the stereotyped notion that

men were perceived as more masculine and less feminine than women, within

the heterosexual behavior portrayed in the subject's sexual fantasies.

No support was found for the androgynous conception of sex-role and no

significant relationship was found between sex-role orientation and

gender for the subject's reported sexual experiences.

Another study on the effects of sex-role identity on the sexual

fantasies of male (N=83) and female (N=139) college students was con-

ducted by Pape (1980). The BSRI was utilized to categorize the subjects

into three sex-role categories: sex-typed, androgynous and undifferenti-

ated. A sexual fantasy questionnaire (SFQ) was designed (see Methods

section and Appendix B) employing Mednick's (1977) three conditions of

sexual fantasy (i.e., daydream, masturbatory, sex with partner), with











22 sexual fantasy themes within each condition. Measures of social

desirability and sexual experience were also elicited from the subjects

(Ss). Statistical analyses of the male/female differences yielded the

following results: (1) males reported a significantly higher incidence

and a greater variety of fantasies, when compared to women, in the sex

with a partner and daydreaming conditions; (2) males reported higher

frequencies of sexual fantasy when compared to women on almost all of

the 22 sexual fantasy themes when sex differences occurred; and (3)

males engaged more in sex with a partner and masturbation when compared

to females (e.g., 84% and 82% for males, 72% and 63% for females,

respectively). No significant differences were found for (1) sex dif-

ferences on the masturbation scale, (2) overall incidence of erotic

fantasies for any of the three conditions, and (3) the main effect of

sex-role in the prediction of sexual fantasy behavior. Pape (1980)

also ranked the sexual fantasy themes during the three fantasy condi-

tions for males (see Table 1) and for females (see Table 2).

The studies on sex differences indicate that gender, but not sex-

role identity, has an effect on the sex fantasy behavior of individuals.

If this hypothesis holds true, then one wonders about the effects of

sexual orientation on the sexual fantasy behavior of individuals within

each gender category (i.e., heterosexual vs. homosexual males, hetero-

sexual vs. homosexual females). A review of the research on homosexuality

and homosexual erotic fantasy will be presented in the next section.











TABLE 1

TOP-RANKED SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES DURING SEX WITH
A PARTNER, MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING


Sex with a Partner Masturbation Daydreaming

MALES
(n=52) (n=62) (n=67)

Thinking about Person other than Person other than
current partner current partner current partner

Receiving oral- Receiving oral- Receiving oral-
genital contact genital contact genital contact

Giving oral- Thinking about Thinking about
genital contact current partner current partner

Being in a differ- Reliving a previous Giving oral-genital
ent setting experience contact

Sex with an irre- Giving oral-genital Reliving a previous
sistably sexy contact experience
person



NOTE: From "Sex Role Identity and Sexual Fantasy," by N. Pape,
Master's Thesis, University of South Florida, 1980.











TABLE 2

TOP-RANKED SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES DURING SEX WITH
A PARTNER, MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING


Sex with a Partner Masturbation Daydreaming

FEMALES
(n=63) (n=58) (n=99)

Thinking about Thinking about Thinking about
current partner current partner current partner

Receiving oral- Receiving oral- Reliving a previous
genital contact genital contact experience

Being in a differ- Being in a differ- Being in a differ-
ent setting ent setting ent setting

Giving oral-genital Reliving a previous Person other than
contact experience current partner

Person other than Giving oral-genital Receiving oral-
current partner contact genital contact




NOTE: From "Sex Role Identity and Sexual Fantasy," by N. Pape,
Master'sThesis, University of South Florida, 1980.










Research on Homosexuality and
Homosexual Sexual Fantasy

A review of the theory and general research on the topic of homo-

sexuality is necessary in order to provide a context in which to view

the current research on homosexual fantasy, or the lack of it. Research

on homosexual individuals up until the 1960's focused mainly on clinical

populations and the psychopathological nature of the homosexual person-

ality (e.g., Bergler, 1956; Fenichel, 1945). These studies reflect

Morin's (1977) criticism of a heterosexual bias in psychological research

on homosexuality. This bias is defined as a belief system that hetero-

sexuality is superior to and/or more "natural" than homosexuality. He

argues that if homosexuality were to be reconceptualized as a valid

option for an adult lifestyle, changes in the questions formulated, the

data collected, and the interpretations offered would be forthcoming

with respect to research on homosexuality.

Generally the etiological explanations for homosexuality fit into

one of the three following categories: biological, psychoanalytic, or

social learning. Acosta (1975) reviewed the literature on the etiology

and treatment of homosexuality. The biological basis for homosexuality

postulates that there are genetic, hormonal, or chromosomal factors

that contribute to the development of a homosexual individual. Accord-

ing to Acosta (1975), "no substantial evidence" has been found to sup-

port the biological basis for the etiology of homosexuality. The

psychoanalytic school focuses on faulty parent-child interactions as

the basis for homosexuality. The basic tenet to this theory is that

the child fails to resolve the Oedipal complex successfully and does











not undergo "anaclitic" and "defensive" identification (Fenichel, 1945).

A neurotic fear of heterosexuality occurs in the individual, who then

turns to homosexuality for need gratification. The disturbed relation-

ship is between mother and child with mother-fixation for the males and

mother-hatred for females. Acosta (1975) sums up the current status of

the psychoanalytic theory with the statement, "Unfortunately, there are

few comprehensive empirical studies on homosexuals which test psycho-

analytic hypotheses, and in general these suffer from methodological

deficiencies" (p. 15).

Social learning theory postulates that both heterosexual and homo-

sexual individuals learn their sexual preferences through social

reinforcements and conditioning patterns (Bandura, 1969). The child

develops the appropriate sex-typed behaviors and gender identity through

observational learning and/or modeling processes, either from their

parents or other adult and peer models. Bandura (1969) also points out

that direct reinforcement is not always necessary in order for a child

to learn appropriate sex-typed behaviors, the attractiveness of a model

may be enough. Although Acosta (1975) indicates that social learning

theory presents the most consistent evidence, he cites the failure of

empirical evidence which demonstrates a direct link between the child-

hood learning of gender identity and sex-typed behaviors and the later

development of homosexuality.

Societal attitudes toward homosexuality have been negative as a

perusal of pertinent attitudinal research will indicate (e.g., Glassner

& Owen, 1976; Nyberg & Alston, 1976-77; Turnbull & Brown, 1977).

G. Wienberg (1973) attributes the negativity to homophobia, which he










defines as "the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals" (p. 4).

MacDonald (1976) argues that anxiety, and not fear, is a more valid term

for the effects of homophobia. He lists some of the beliefs underpinning

homophobia, such as sex is only for procreation; only heterosexual

activity is "natural"; homosexuals are child abusers; promiscuity is

characteristic of homosexual relationships; and the need to maintain

behavioral differences between the sexes. Several authors have stated

that therapists and counselors may share society's negative attitudes

toward homosexuality and homosexual clients (e.g., Davidson, 1976;

Kramer, Wiggers,& Zimpfer, 1975; Money, 1977; G. Wienberg, 1973; M. Wien-

berg, 1970). Studies on the attitudes of therapists toward homosexuals

(e.g., Davidson & Wilson, 1973; Fort, Steiner,& Conrad, 1971; Morris,

1973) tend to reflect both positive and negative attitudes, but social

desirability effects were not controlled for in these studies. Conse-

quently, therapists may hold public attitudes which are positive and

private attitudes which are negative.

The treatment strategies employed in attempts to "reorient" or

change the sexual preference of homosexual individuals also tend to

reflect the negative conceptualizations the psychoanalytic and behav-

ioristic practitioners hold concerning homosexuality (i.e., as a

pathological condition). In their efforts to change a homosexual

client's sexual orientation several behavior therapists have employed

techniques such as systematic desensitization, aversive conditioning,

classical conditioning, and covert sensitization (e.g., Bancroft, 1969;

Feldman & MacCulloch, 1971; Kraft, 1967; McConageny, 1971; Stevenson &

Wolpe, 1960). Severe aversive agents, including electric shock and










emetics, have been included in the reorientation of homosexuals (Acosta,

1975; G. Wienberg, 1973). Psychoanalytic efforts to reorient homo-

sexuals through the use of insights and catharsis, while not severe in

nature, tend to connote that the patient is neurotic. In his review of

the studies attempting to reorient homosexuals, Acosta (1975) points to

poor success rates (e.g., Conrad & Wincze, 1973; Feldman & MacCulloch,

1971) and the diversity of individuals within the homosexual community,

and cautions against believing claims of high success rates without

longitudinal evidence.

Several authors have viewed homosexuality as a viable lifestyle

and/or refuted the claim that homosexuality is automatically indicative

of psychopathology (e.g., Bell, 1976; Churchill, 1967; Hoffman, 1968;

Hooker, 1965; Money, 1977; G. Weinberg, 1973; M. Weinberg, 1970; Wein-

berg & Williams, 1974). Several current studies tend to support this

view and to refute some of the stereotypes about homosexuals. Haynes

and Oziel (1976) found that individuals with homosexual experiences

(among college students) had a similar amount of heterosexual contacts

and did manifest more anxiety or guilt about their sexual behavior than

did their nonexperienced counterparts. In a study of gay males, Harry

(1976-77) found that, contrary to the stereotype, both the "active" and

"passive" (i.e., inserter-insertee) sexual roles were preferred by a

majority of their homosexual subjects. The sexual behavior of lesbians

was found to be influenced more by being a woman (i.e., gender) than by

being a homosexual (i.e., sexual orientation) in a study by Schafer (1977).

Homosexual family relationships have also been investigated with

some positive results. Weeks, Derdeyn, and Langman (1975) found that the











sexual conflicts of homosexual parents, as expressed in attitudes and

behavior toward their children, did not differ from those of hetero-

sexual parents who are conflicted sexually. Townes, Ferguson, and

Gillam (1976) suggest that variations in sexual lifestyle are attribut-

able to different facets of psychological sex, rather than to familial

influences in particular. Studies that report the traditional view of

negative familial influences in the etiology of homosexuality (e.g.,

Gundlach & Bernard, 1967; Snortum, Gillespie, Marshall, McLaughlin,&

Mosberg, 1969) have been criticized for poor methodology and overlook-

ing important variables (e.g., Acosta, 1975; G. Wienberg, 1973;

Wrightsman, 1977). Sex-role disturbances, as a result of faulty

familial modeling (e.g., Rekers & Lovaas, 1974; Rekers, Hortensia,&

Benson, 1977; Rekers, Lovaas,& Benson, 1974), are thought to be at the

root of a homosexual orientation. Ross (1975) found conflicting

results which suggest that sex-role has no necessary correlation to

sexual orientation.

The ultimate vindication of homosexuality may be reflected in its

exclusion, as a diagnostic category, from the Diagnostic and Statistical

Manual of Mental Disorders (DMS III) of the American Psychiatric Associ-

tion. The above literature tends to reflect that homosexuals may not be

that different from their heterosexual counterparts, except for sexual

preference and the possible effects of societal disapproval and discrim-

ination.

Although actual sexual behavior may not directly influence the

content of sexual fantasy (Klinger, 1971), there are studies indicating

that individuals with high levels of sexual activity fantasize more










often than individuals who report lower levels of sexual activity (i.e.,

Brown & Hart, 1977; Campagna, 1976; Carlson & Coleman, 1977; Giambra &

Martin, 1977; Hessellund, 1976). Therefore a comparison of heterosexual

and homosexual sexual activity frequency will be presented below:
1. Masturbation. The incidence of at least one masturbatory epi-

sode ranges from 89% (Gagnon & Simon, 1973) to 95.4% (Finger, 1975) for
heterosexual males (HM). The incidence for heterosexual females (HF)

ranged from 40% (Gagnon & Simon, 1973) to 63% (Hunt, 1976). The fre-

quency of masturbation episodes ranged from 52 per year (Hunt, 1976) to

49 per year (Kinsey et al., 1948) for HMs and from 37 per year (Hunt,

1976) to 21 per year (Kinsey et al., 1953) for HFs. The incidence of at

least one masturbatory episode is 99% (Jay & Young, 1979) for homosexual

males (GM) and 94% (Jay & Young, 1979) for homosexual females (GF). The

frequency of masturbatory episodes is at least once per month for 93%

and once per week for 80% of the GMs, and at least once per month for

80% and once per week for 49% of the GFs (Jay & Young, 1979).
2. Oral sex (mouth-genital contact). From 45% (Kinsey et al.,

1948) to 66% (Hunt, 1976) of the HMs had engaged in oral sex at least

once, compared to from 58% (Kinsey et al., 1953) to 72% (Hunt, 1976) of
the HFs. Comparatively, 99.5% of the GMs had engaged in oral sex at

least once, as had 94.5% of the GFs (Jay & Young, 1979).
3. Anal sex. Kinsey et al. (1948) found the incidence so low

that no figures were provided. Hunt (1976) found that 16% of the HMs

and 16% of the HFs had tried anal intercourse at least once, and that

9% of the HMs and 6% of the HFs had used the technique occasionally in

the past year. For the GMs, 91% had engaged in anal intercourse at










least once and 65% use the technique somewhat frequently (Jay & Young,

1979). There are no figures available for GFs, since they would need

to use an artificial device to engage in this activity and frequencies

are low.

4. Homosexual experiences. The incidence of at least one homo-

sexual experience ranges from 13.7% (Finger, 1975) to 37% (Kinsey et al.,

1948) for HMs, and from 20% (Hunt, 1976) to 28% (Kinsey et al., 1953) for

HFs. The incidence of "at least one" heterosexual experience is 66% for

GMs and 84% for GFs (Jay & Young, 1979).

The above figures show that (1) homosexual and heterosexual men

and women masturbate with approximately the same frequency; (2) almost

all of the GMs and GFs had engaged in oral sex versus a little over one-

half of the HMs and three-quarters of the HFs; (3) a majority of the gay

men had engaged in and use anal intercourse "somewhat frequently" versus

less than 20% of the HMs and HFs, in either category. Pietropinto and

Simenauer (1977) report that only 4.2% of their samples of HMs wanted

to engage in anal intercourse more often; and (4) GMs were almost twice

as likely to have experienced a heterosexual sex act as were the HMs to

have experienced a homosexual encounter. For the women, GFs were

almost three times as likely to have had a heterosexual encounter as

were the HFs to have had a homosexual sexual experience.

The literature on homosexual erotic fantasy is sparse and much of

it is of a nonempirical nature. Both Friday (1980) and Slattery (1976)

include a chapter on male homosexual fantasies, but neither one provides

any insight into the function, frequency, or themes of the fantasy

material. Kronhausen and Kronhausen (1969) provided psychoanalytic











interpretations for the homosexual fantasies that they discovered in

their review of erotic literature. Freud's (1962) basic position of

phantasies as the precursors of neurosis is reflected in his statement

that,

The unconscious mental life of all neurotics (without exception)
shows inverted impulses, fixation of their libido upon persons
of their own sex. It would be impossible without deep discus-
sion to give any adequate appreciation of the importance of
this factor in determining the form taken by the symptoms of
the illness. I can only insist that an unconscious tendency
to inversion [homosexuality] is never absent and is of particu-
lar value in throwing light upon the hysteria of men. (p. 32)

He claimed that inverts repressed their heterosexual desires and "trans-

posed" those sexual desires onto men.

Homosexual fantasies may make the homosexual alternative more

viable for young boys according to Tripp (1975). The excitement gener-

ated by the fantasies, coupled with masturbation and the self-observa-

tion of his genitals, may serve to build an association between

"maleness, male genitalia, and all that is sexually valuable and

exciting" (Tripp, 1975, p. 77). According to Tripp,

These associations amount to an eroticism which is "ready" to
extend itself to other male attributes, particularly to those
of a later same-sex partner. This associative pattern some-
times manages to preempt heterosexual interests, not only by
coming first, but by vitalizing a nearby thought-chain most
boys entertain to some extent: that since girls have no
penis, they are sexless and thus sexually uninteresting.
(1975, p. 77)

Part of his theory seems to be the complement to "penis envy" in girls,

that is, that boys devalue girls due to their lack of a penis.

In a different view, Gagnon and Simon (1973) note that homosexual

experiences in early adolescence result from curiosity, mutual instruc-

tion between friends, and the influence of slightly older males, but










these experiences are not "integrated into the mainstream" of the

individual's development. They conceptualize sexual fantasies as

reflections of an individual's sexual scripts. One possible example

of the above is an adult homosexual's fantasies representing "the man-

agement of dominance or aggression in nonsexual spheres of life, or the

management of ideologies and moralities of social mobility [and that

these], may be the underlying and organizing sources of fantasies whose

sexual content provides an accessible and powerful imagery through

which these other social tensions may be vicariously acted upon" (Gagnon

& Simon, 1973, p. 272). This point of view reflects the concept of

fantasies as symbolic representations of the individual's current con-

cerns.

As stated previously, Masters and Johnson (1979) categorized sexual

fantasies into either "free-floating" (i.e., those in response to sexual

feelings or needs) or "short-term" (i.e., those employed as short-term,

stimulative mechanisms) variations. They studied the sexual fantasy

patterns of male heterosexuals (HM), homosexuals (GM), and ambisexuals,

as well as female heterosexuals (HF), homosexuals (GF), and ambisexuals

(e.g., N = 30 for each group except ambisexuals). The study was con-

ducted from 1957 to 1970 using volunteers from a pool of sexually func-

tional volunteers representing each category, at the Masters and Johnson

Institute in St. Louis, Missouri. Only the data from the HM, GM, HF and

GF groups will be reported here in the interest of brevity.

The sexual fantasy themes of HMs, listed by incidence, were

"(1) replacement of established partner; (2) forced sexual encounter;

(3) observation of sexual activity; (4) cross-preference [homosexual]











encounters; (5) group sex-experiences" (Masters & Johnson, 1979, p.178).

The replacement partners were usually well known to the fantasizing HM

and were always willing to comply. The forced sexual encounters involved

forcing a woman who was known to the individual or being forced to have

sex by a group of unidentified women. Fantasies involving the observa-

tion of the individual's sexual behavior by a group of people was tied

to the research team's actual observations of the HM subject's sexual

activity, and may not obtain for nonclinical populations in more

"natural" settings. These fantasies were of the short-term variety and

as they lost their stimulation value over time, the HMs reverted to rape

fantasies for stimulation effects. The homosexual activity fantasies

were generally confined to physical attributes (e.g., facial attrac-

tiveness, muscular development, penile erection, shape of buttocks);

free-floating in nature, and involved with fellatio as the preferred

activity. The group sex fantasies of HMs were free-floating and involved

mixed groups of faceless individuals, with women's breasts and buttocks

as focal points and women as the receptors of sexual activity. The final

category involved the current partner, although these were free-floating

and never of the short-term stimulative variety. The familiarity of

current partners may serve to undermine their stimulative value in HMs

sexual fantasies.

For the GMS, the incidence of sexual fantasy themes were as follows:

"(1) imagery of sexual anatomy; (2) forced sexual encounters; (3) cross-

preference encounters; (4) idyllic encounters with unknown men; (5) group

sex experiences" (Masters & Johnson, 1979, p. 178). The GMs reported a

higher incidence of free-floating fantasy than did the HMs. The











fantasies involving sexual anatomy imagery concentrated on the penis and

buttocks of males and, to a lesser extent, on their shoulders and facial

characteristics. The GMs fantasies also contained more violence than

those of the HMs. The forced sex fantasies were free-floating and

involved almost as many male victims as there were female victims. The

GMs almost always took the role of rapist and imagined the rape to be

noxious to the "rapee," who was usually restrained and forced into

sexual submission by whippings or beatings. This finding appears to

reflect some repressed hostility and/or sadism within the GM subject

pool and can be taken as support for the higher incidence of violence

in male sexual fantasy (e.g., Gelles, 1975). The high incidence of

cross-preference (heterosexual) relationships among the GMs involved

forced sexual participation of a psychosocial versus physical origin

(e.g., pressure from a dominant older woman or the seduction of a

resisting younger woman). These fantasies were free-floating in nature

and when they involved a woman known to the subject, forced sexual

participation was replaced by sexual curiosity or anticipated pleasure.

Some theorists might interpret the above as an indication of GMs

hostility toward and fear of women. An equally tenable hypothesis would

involve rebellion and anger against the pressures that society imposes

on GMs to conform and engage in "normal" heterosexual activity, expressed

through forced sexuality in fantasy (e.g., G. Wienberg, 1973), especially

since GFs had similar cross-sex fantasies.

Fantasies of idealized sexual encounters were in the free-floating

category and involved one-time chance encounters, on a specific occasion,

with entertainers or men seen in public places. The group sex fantasies










were of the short-term variety and involved observing rather than par-

ticipating in a mixed group sexual encounter. The idealized sexual

encounters parallel HM fantasies of unknown women who grant them sexual

favors. The difference in group sex fantasies between GMs and HMs

involves observation versus participation and short-term stimulation

versus free-floating indicators of a desired experience, respectively.

These differences may be a reflection of the varying incidence rates of

group sex among the HMs and the GMs. Hunt (1976) reports that 40% of

his HM subjects had experienced some sort of group sex at least once,

while 14% of Pietropinto and Simenauers (1977) HM subjects indicated

that they would like to have sex with more than one woman. In contrast,

Jay and Young (1979) found that 58% of their GM sample had engaged in

group sex and that 27% engage in group sex on a "somewhat infrequent"

basis. In terms of "threesomes," 76% of the GMs had participated at

least once and 36% engage in this activity somewhat infrequently. There

appear to be more opportunities for group sex in the homosexual community

and this may lead to less free-floating, desire-based fantasies and more

short-term, curiosity-based fantasies of mixed (heterosexual and homo-

sexual) sexual activity.

Since this study involves a comparison of HM and GM sexual fantasy,

only a summary of the HF and GF fantasy categories will be presented.

Interested readers should consult Masters and Johnson (1979) for greater

detail. The top-ranked sexual fantasies of HFs were as follows:

"(1) replacement of established partner; (2) forced sexual encounter;

(3) observation of sexual activity; (4) idyllic encounters with unknown

men; (5) cross-preference encounters" (p. 178). The GFs fantasized










about "(1) forced sexual encounters; (2) idyllic encounter with estab-

lished partner; (3) cross-preference encounters; (4) recall of past

sexual experience; (5) sadistic imagery" (p. 178). In general, HF and

GF subjects reported more active sexual patterning than did their HM

and GM counterparts. The homosexual subjects described more active and

diverse sexual fantasy patterns in comparison to the heterosexual group.

The limitations of the Masters and Johnson (1979) study include

(1) the use of nonrandomly selected subject population; (2) the lack

of statistical analysis of the data; and (3) the lack of controls for

experimentor bias. The data are of value in that they provide some

indicators of heterosexual and homosexual fantasy incidence and areas of

content.

Storms (1980) investigated the relationship of sex-role orientation

and erotic orientation to the sexual orientation of 86 male and 99 female

subjects. Demographic data were collected (e.g., sex, age) and a self-

rating of the subjects' sexual orientation was elicited on Kinsey's et

al. (1948) 7-point scale. The subjects were also asked to assign them-

selves to a common sexual category, either "straight" (heterosexual),

"gay" (homosexual) or "bisexual." Sex role orientation refers to an

individual's masculinity or feminity, as measured by Spence and Helmreich's

(1978) Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ), in this study. Erotic

orientation is defined as the erotic responses of an individual within

a particular sexual orientation. Storms (1980) developed the Erotic

Response and Orientation Scale (EROS) in order to measure the subject's

erotic fantasy experiences. EROS contains two subscales: (1) a

gynoerotic scale eliciting fantasies with women as the sexual object; and











(2) an androerotic scale eliciting fantasies with men as the sexual

object (see Methods section and Appendix A).

The results of Storms' (1980) study did not support the hypotheses

"that homosexual men are less masculine and/or more feminine and that

homosexual women are more masculine and/or less feminine than their

heterosexual counterparts" (p. 786). These were hypotheses based on

Freudian theory which postulated that sex-role identity had a direct

effect on sexual orientation (e.g., sexual attraction toward women was

associated with a masculine sex role orientation). In terms of sexual

fantasy several findings were significant: "(1) homosexuals have more

fantasies about their own sex and fewer fantasies about the opposite sex

than heterosexuals; (2) homosexual men reported significantly more

androerotic fantasy and less gynoerotic fantasy than heterosexual men;

(3) homosexual women reported significantly more gynoerotic fantasy and

less androerotic fantasy than heterosexual women did; (4) homosexual men

and women reported higher levels of fantasy about the opposite sex than

heterosexuals reported about the same sex" (Storms, 1980, p. 788).

Storms (1980) also proposed reconceptualizing Kinsey's (1948) uni-

dimensional model of sexual orientation into a two-dimensional model

where an individual's homoerotic (homosexual) and heteroerotic (hetero-

sexual) are "separate, orthogonal erotic dimensions rather than opposite

extremes of a single, bipolar dimension." Along with the above results,

the two-dimensional model predicts that "bisexuals will report as much

heteroerotic fantasy as heterosexuals and as much homoerotic fantasy as

homosexuals" (p. 786). The hypothesis was supported in that for same-sex

fantasies, bisexuals scored higher than heterosexuals and were











indistinguishable from homosexuals. For opposite-sex fantasies, bisexuals

were identical to heterosexuals and higher than homosexuals. In summation

bisexuals scored high on both the gynoerotic (female object) and andro-

erotic (male object) scales. The implications of this study are that sex-

role identity is not a good predictor of sexual preference or of sex

fantasy patterns, which tend to confirm the results of Bernardi (1977) and

Pape (1980). Erotic orientation, on the other hand, appears to be a good

predictor of the level of sex fantasy involving homoerotic and hetero-

erotic content within the homosexual and heterosexual populations. In

conjunction with the above conclusions, several studies reflect the strong

influence of gender in the fantasy content of individuals (i.e., Abramson

& Mosher, 1979; Bernardi, 1977; Carlson & Coleman, 1977; Gelles, 1975;

Mednick, 1977; Pape, 1980). This leads to the possibility that gender

may override sexual preference in influencing some of the content of an

individual's sexual fantasies.

In a massive study of male and female homosexual lifestyles, Jay and

Young (1979) collected data through questionnaires sent out by mail and

also recruited subjects through gay organizations, periodicals, and indi-

viduals. The demographic data on the subjects are as follows: (1) the

age of the respondents ranged from 14 to 81 years; (2) the subjects were

from all 50 of the United States and Canada; (3) all of the major ethnic

or racial groups were represented (e.g., Black, Oriental, Spanish Ameri-

can, American Indian, Caucasian); (4) all religious affiliations were

represented; (5) all educational levels were represented (e.g., grade

school through graduate degree). A total of 4,329 homosexual males (GM)

and 962 homosexual females (GF) participated in the survey.










In response to items concerning the sexual fantasies of the GMs,

the following results were obtained: (1) 82% of the respondents had

fantasized during sex with a partner at "least once" and 47% did so

"somewhat frequently"; (2) the GMs were divided about their feelings

toward fantasy with a sex partner, with 56% expressing positive feelings

and 17% expressing negative feelings; (3) fantasy during masturbation

was utilized "at least once" by 98% of the GMs and 92% reported fanta-

sizing "somewhat frequently" during masturbation; and (4) an overwhelm-

ing majority of the GM respondents (91%) felt positive about fantasizing

while masturbating. The fantasy categories of the respondents included

recalling past experiences, extending a nonsexual real experience into a

sexual one, imagining sex with celebrities and pornography stars,

memories of boyhood loves, special settings, body parts, group sex,

incest, dominance and submission (including rape and sadomasochistic

activities) and various uncatalogued themes. Unfortunately Jay and

Young (1979) do not provide any indication of the frequency with which

each fantasy theme is used by the GMs in the sample.

The GF respondents reported the following incidence rates of, and

attitudes toward, erotic fantasy: (1) fantasy was used during sex with a

partner "at least once" by 84% of the GFs and 41% fantasized"somewhat

frequently" during sexual activity; (2) the GFs were also divided about

their attitudes toward fantasy during sex with 56% feeling positive and

21% feeling negative about it; (3) concerning the use of fantasy during

masturbation, 92% of the GFs had used it "at least once" and 77% used it

"somewhat frequently"; and (4) a large proportion of the respondents

(86%) felt positive about fantasy during masturbation. Fantasy theme











categories for the GFs included: celebrities; current, past and "future"

lovers; observation of others having sex, sadomasochistic and rape

fantasies; exhibitionistic fantasies, fantasies about sex with men and

other miscellaneous fantasies.

It appears from the above data that a high percentage of gay indi-

viduals fantasize during masturbation and feel positive about it. A

little less than half of the gay respondents fantasize during sex with a

partner and feel positive about it. The individuals who do not report

fantasies or feel negative about their use remain a mystery, since there

is no way to determine why they abstain or feel the way that they do.

Sexual fantasies can be considered one type of indicator of the

meaning of sexual experience. The content of the various themes can be

related to sexual scripts (Gagnon & Simon, 1973), reflections of

repressed desires (Hawkins, 1974), self-concept (Klinger, 1971), dominance-

submission (Hollender, 1963), sex guilt (Moreault & Follingstad, 1978),

adaptation (Hariton & Singer, 1974), violence (Gelles, 1975), and sexual

activity preferences (Giambra & Martin, 1977; Jay & Young, 1979). How-

ever, this is an indirect method that is subject to misinterpretation.

A review of the literature pertaining to the meaning of sexual experi-

ence is presented in the next section.


Research and Theory on the Meaning of
Heterosexual Sexual Experience

The interpersonal meaning of sexual experience for heterosexual

individuals can often be inferred from research on the different aspects

of human sexuality. One source of information is the research on atti-

tudes toward sexuality. Farley, Nelson, Knight,and Garcia-Colberg (1977)










investigated the influence of politics and personality on the sexual atti-

tudes and behavior of 100 male and 100 female college students. A factor

analysis of the data was performed and resulted in emergence of three

sexuality factors for the female subjects: (1) "a 'sick' factor, 'con-

sisting of sexual maladjustment and frustration, neurotic conflict over

sex, loss of sex controls, and sexual psychopathy'; (2) a 'Victorian'

factor, consisting of sexual repression, sexual frigidity, and low sex

drive and interest; (3) a homosexuality factor" (p. 115). The male data

also resulted in three factors related to sexuality: (1) "a 'sick' fac-

tor, consisting of sexual maladjustment and frustration, neurotic con-

flict over sex, loss of sex controls and lack of sex role confidence;

(2) an unrepressedd heterosexual experience seeking factor', consisting

of high sex drive and interest, freedom from repressive attitudes, and

experience seeking, disinhibition, and boredom susceptibility; (3) an

'ambivalent homosexual extravert factor', consisting of homosexual

tendency, lack of sex-role confidence; sexual maladjustment and frustra-

tion, and extraversion" (p. 116). Both males and females had a "stimu-

lation-seeking" factor which includes sensation seeking, thrill and

adventure seeking and experience seeking, achievement motivation, extra-

version-introversion, and political orientation had little or no effect

on sexuality. The attitudes toward sexuality, of these subjects, ranged

from maladjusted (e.g., sick factor) to heterosexual experience seeking.

Other studies on sexual attitudes include Kelly's (1978) proposed

theory of human sexuality, based on sexual attitudes and behaviors.

Unfortunately the author does not address the meaning of sexual experi-

ence, only the issue of whether sex is enjoyable to the participants. A











complex model of premarital sexual attitudes and behaviors is presented

by Hornick (1978), which includes demographic, family, peer group,

psychological, attitudinal, and behavioral variables. This study, how-

ever, also omits the meaning of sexual experience. Intervention strate-

gies have also been investigated to determine whether they produce

changes in sexual attitudes (e.g., Clement & Pfafflen, 1980; Dearth &

Cassell, 1976; Story, 1979; Zuckerman, Tushup,& Finner, 1976). An

attempt to reverse the interpersonal processes that contribute to the

existence of sexual dysfunctions is presented by Kaufman and Krupka

(1973). These processes include (1) the early deprivation of the need

for affection, which results in the sexualization of the need for inti-

macy and confusion between sexual and affectional needs. Thus an indi-

vidual may engage in sex when the real need is for closeness and warmth;

(2) permission and guilt are interrelated in that parents do not usually

give clear permission for their children to seek out sexual gratifica-

tion. This is especially important in terms of guilt due to the "for-

bidden" nature of sexuality and sexual repression; (3) power struggles

involve the battle over "being right" or "winning" and can override

closeness in the sexuality of a relationship; (4) hostility can be

translated into "impotence, avoidance of sex, or lack of orgasmic

response as a way of punishing or getting even" (p. 461) with one's

partner; (5) individuals' expectations of themselves, or the perceived

expectations of their partners, can lead to debilitative anxiety. This

parallels performance anxiety (e.g., Masters & Johnson, 1970); (6) a

related phenomenon is the individual's need to feel adequate and his/her

fear of potency. Inorgasmic responses in females can lead to male











conflicts in this area. Kaufman and Krupka (1973) believe that group

therapy can help individuals to "integrate their sexuality into the

remainder of their personal experience" (p. 463).

Walfish and Myerson (1980) studied the relationship between sex-

role identity and attitudes toward sexuality. The authors found that

males were more comfortable than females in their attitudes toward

sexuality; and individuals who adopted an androgynous sex role identity

were more comfortable with their sexuality than were individuals with

more traditional (e.g., masculine, feminine) sex roles. Thus it appears

that androgyny can affect an individual's comfort with his/her sexuality

but not the sex fantasy behaviors of an individual (e.g., Bernardi, 1977;

Pape, 1980).

In a study of sexual intimacy in dating relationships, Peplau,

Rubin,and Hill (1977) found that "sex role playing in which the man

encourages intercourse and the woman limits the couples sexual intimacy

was common" (p. 86). This coincides with the findings of other authors

(e.g., McCormick, 1979; LaPlante, McCormick,& Brannigan, 1980) and

implies that males are the aggressive sexual strategists while females

are the defensive sexual strategists. Love was not found to be more

closely associated with sexual satisfaction for females versus males as

had been hypothesized. Peplau et al. (1977) sum up the function of sex

role playing by stating,

In essence, our argument is that sexual role playing provides
dating partners with a common standard to use in interpreting
behavior and making inferences about a person'smotives and
dispositions. While some aspects of sexual role playing can
be modified-how quickly the game is played, with how many
different partners it is repeated, at what age the game first










began-the basic form remains unchanged. A consequence is
that male-female sex differences in sexual behavior are
perpetuated despite changing attitudes about the value of
traditional roles. (p. 107)

The sex practices and beliefs of male college students were viewed

in terms of the changes occurring over 30 years by Finger (1975). He

found that (1) the prevalence estimates of a particular type of behavior

tend to reflect the respondent's own sexual history; (2) the justifica-

tions for premarital sexual activity changed from the acquisition of

knowledge and skill (1943-44 sample) to insuring future marital com-

patability and questioning the postponement of an enjoyable activity

(1969-73 sample); (3) the justifications for abstinence involvingmoral

or religious grounds (1943-44 sample) declined dramatically with only a

few subjects citing a weakened commitment and emotional damage as reasons

for self restraint (1969-73 sample). Finger (1975) sums up his study by

stating that, "the basis and personal meaning of patterns of sexual

behavior might be clarified if future investigators were to request not

only expression of the subject's own attitude toward a given practice and

his estimate of its prevalence in the reference group, but also his per-

ception of the degree of approval by members of that group" (p. 315).

Apparently the author perceives approval as directly influencing the

meaning of an individual's sexuality.

A concept in direct opposition to approval of sexual conduct is

sex guilt. The ability to break guilt down into subcomponents such as

sex guilt was addressed by Mosher (1968). The relationships among moral

reasoning, sex guilt,and premarital sex were studied by D'Augelli and

Cross (1975) as well as other authors (Gerrard, 1980; Mercer & Kohn,











1979). In a study of sex guilt and the sexual behavior sequence, Kutner

(1971) found that sex guilt is negatively correlated with sexual desire,

responsiveness, orgasm frequency, orgasm ease, and arousal for female

subjects. He hypothesizes that different phases of the sexual behavior

sequence (e.g., motivation, instrumental act, goal response) may be

susceptible to sex guilt for any particular individual and can lead to

different effects (e.g., frustration) upon his/her sexual activity. Sex

guilt is related to morality and therefore to the meaning of sexual

experience.

A final study related to sexual attitudes involves Pietropinto and

Simenauer's (1977) survey of male sexuality. The results indicate that

(1) When asked how they felt about sex, 68% of the males indicated that

sex was important, but not the most important pleasure, while 19.8% said

it was the most important pleasure and 11.4% indicated it was only

important as a means of expressing love. Apparently only about one-fifth

of the males rate sex as the top pleasure, contradicting the stereotype

that "sex is all men are after." (2) When asked how they thought women

felt about sex, most men expressed the belief that women are as inter-

ested in sex as men (i.e., for the inherent pleasure of it), while a

minority thought women enjoyed sex only if love was involved. This find-

ing reflects Peplau etal.'s (1977) finding that women do not tie sex to

sexual satisfaction any more than men do. (3) Asked when they felt most

manly, most men answered in terms of having intercourse with women and

feeling that they have satisfied their partners. This finding supports

Peplau etal.'s (1977) finding of sex role playing. (4) An overwhelming

majority of the men (98%) felt that it was important for the woman to











have an orgasm during sexual intercourse and over half would become self-

critical if this were not to occur. This finding has implications for

performance anxiety within men concerning sexuality (e.g., Masters &

Johnson, 1970). (5) A related finding involved situations in which the

man was so "turned-off" that he could not complete the sex act. A

majority of the men (45.6%) listed a woman that seems unresponsive,

followed by recent quarreling (18.2%) and a physically unattractive

woman (12.5%). Unresponsiveness in the woman also accounted for what

irritated men most during sex (60.1%) and what was the most unpleasant

aspect of sex (58.5%). Female responsiveness has a lot of "meaning" for

men in terms of sexual adequacy, satisfaction and arousal. (6) When

asked how they felt after a climax, 45.2% indicated "contentment," 23.9%

stated "very loving," and 15.9% expressed being "exhilarated/high."

This finding indicates a high proportion of positive feeling among a

high proportion of the men after orgasm, connoting a pleasurable meaning

to orgasm.

The above studies highlight the effect of sexual attitudes on

sexual behavior and, indirectly, on the meaning of sexual experience.

Negative attitudes serve to inhibit sexuality and/or leave the individual

with negative feelings about any sexual experience. Positive attitudes

seem to lead to expression of sexual behavior and positive feelings about

sexual experiences. An individual may thus have a loving, intimate mean-

ing to his/her sexuality or a guilt-ridden, immoral meaning for sexual

experience.

A study on positive sexual experiences was conducted by Schildmyer

(1977) using the reports of college students and community organization











members (N=257). The author identified variables related to a positive

sexual experience. The majority of the subjects listed more psychologi-

cal versus physical variables, with the quality of the relationship

between the partners emerging as the primary factor. Meaning is a

cognitive-psychological concept which can, and often does, involve

affective/emotional correlates. Meaning is more reflective of psycho-

logical processes and seems to be more of a determinant of the expres-

sion of sexual behaviors rather than a result of physical sensations.

The sex differences of psychosexual stimulation were investigated

by Sigusch, Schmidt, Reinfeld,and Widemann-Sutor (1970). Slide presen-

tations of sexual content were used as stimuli in order to elicit

ratings of sexual arousal and favorableness-unfavorableness from the

50 male and 50 female subjects. The results indicate that women tend

to react less favorably and report less arousal when viewing sexually

explicit slides than men do, but judged slides of romantic content more

favorably and equally arousing, when compared to the men. The authors

conclude,

Contrary to the sex-specific differences evident in emotional
reactions, there do not seem to be significant differences
with regard to the sexual-physiological reactions and the
sexual behavior after the experiment. Women reported, almost
as often as men, physiological reactions in the genital area
and activation of sexual behavior after the experiment.
(p. 22)

These findings imply that women report less arousal while evidencing

physiological arousal indices, as if they were not "supposed" to get

excited over erotic pictures, while men were open to their arousal.

Hessellund (1971) looked at how young men and woman felt about

their first coital experience. He found that (1) a majority of the











females (81.2%) had a negative reaction to their first coition compared

to less than a third (27.8%) of the men; (2) permissive attitudes (and

parents) do not have an obvious connection with an individual's reaction

to, and evaluation of, a first sexual experience. This finding contra-

dicts the importance of parental permission in sexual adjustment as

proposed by Kaufman and Krupka (1973); (3) men tended to emphasize the

technical aspects of the coital experience when compared to women and

were the only subjects to mention that the sexual relationship affected

their self-image. The author concluded that "there is a great differ-

ence in the meaning of sex for young men and women" (p. 272). Travis

and Offir (1977) attribute the sex differences between men and women to

the different meanings that they attribute to the sexual act. To quote

the authors, "Women, more often than men, use sex to get love; men use

love to get sex" (p. 68). In a similar fashion, Morris (1978) postulates

that women have a stronger commitment to the relational aspects of sex,

while males focus on its recreational aspects.

Personality variables also impact the meaning of sexual experience.

Eysenck (1971b) found that males were "more impersonal, aggressive, more

easily aroused, more excitable, more hedonistic, and less influenced by

traditional concepts of love and faithfulness" (p. 87) than are women.

He also found that extroverts had earlier and more varied sexual experi-

ences than did introverts (Eysenck, 1971a). Barclay (1971) found that

increases in sex motivation and aggression motivation were related to

sexual arousal. The failure to consider the subjective meaning of

sexual acts, according to Libby and Straus (1980), has resulted in

conflicting results about the relationship of sex and aggression. They










proposed two meanings for sexual activity: "(1) dominant sex, where one

(traditionally man) competes for the sexual favors of a given person,

and (2) affectionate sex, which is loving, caring sex, usually associated

with women" (p. 137). A questionnaire survey of 190 college students

provided the following results: (1) subjects high in interpersonally

warm sex were low in aggression and violence of an interpersonal nature,

but not on large-scale, impersonal acts of aggression and violence (e.g.,

war, riot control); (2) that this relationship applies primarily to

males; and (3) interpersonally warm sex is available only to those males

who "break out of stereotypes of sexuality and for whom the meaning of

sex is an act of warmth and human bonding" (Libby & Straus, 1980, p. 145).

The reasons for having sexual relations were investigated by Nelson

(1978), through the use of an instrument listing 56 reasons for sexual

activity, with a 4-point rating scale (e.g., "not important at all" to

"very important"). The results of a factor analysis were five factors,

including (1) pleasurable stimulation, (2) conformity-acceptance,

(3) personal love and affection, (4) power, and (5) recognition-

competition. Apperson (1974) had derived four similar categories, which

are, respectively (from [2] through [5] above): deference, affiliation,

aggression, and dominance.

Grater and Downing (currently under review) selected five dimensions

of the meaning of sexual experience (i.e., morality, affiliation,

pleasure, achievement, dominance). They also selected 476 adjectives and

asked 302 single college students to rate them according to how well the

adjectives described the subject's personal meaning of sexual experience,

with "yes," "no," or "maybe" as response categories. Trained judges were











used to assign adjectives to the dimension that they represented, with a

requirement that two of the three judges agree on each assignment. The

authors hypothesized that males would describe the meaning of their

sexuality in terms of pleasure, dominance,and achievement, while the

females were expected to use words clustering around morality and affili-

ation. Measures of sexual experience and sex role (Bem, 1974) were also

collected. The results were supportive of the hypothesis that males

would use more achievement adjectives and that females would use more

affiliation adjectives. The other differences were not supported.

Sexually experienced subjects used more achievement adjectives, whereas

inexperienced subjects had more attributions of morality. Grater and

Downing concluded that further empirical confirmation is needed concern-

ing whether the adjectives are indicative of the dimensions of meaning.

The Meaning of Sexual Experience Questionnaire-II (MOSE-II) with 16

adjectives for each of the five dimensions was developed as a result of

this study.

An extension of the above study was conducted by Bernstein (1982).

In an effort to develop an instrument to assess the interpersonal mean-

ings of sexual experience, the author administered the 84 adjectives

identified by Grater and Downing (currently under review) to 256 stu-

dents. A 7-point rating scale, from "never or almost never" to "always

or almost always", was used for each item, with the subjects indicating

whether each adjective was descriptive of the meaning of their sexual

experience. Several factor analyses were conducted on the data from

the MOSE-II and a new list of adjectives was prepared by the author,

using the retained items from the old form and some new ones that were











judged as fitting the emerging factors. A new questionnaire, the Meaning

of Sexual Experience Questionnaire-IIl (MOSE--III), including 70 adjec-

tives (see Appendix C) with a 7-point rating scale from "not at all

descriptive" to "completely descriptive," was developed by the author.

The MOSE--III was then administered to 326 students and several fac-

tor analyses were run, resulting in the emergence of five factors, with

54 descriptive adjectives out of the original 70. The five factors

include (1) affiliation which includes these 11 adjectives, "caring,"

"fond," "loving," and "affectionate" (i.e., emotional tone), "gentle,"

"warm," and "kind" (i.e., physical interaction), "intimate," "trusting,"

and "mature" (i.e., safety and respect for the other person);

(2) inadequate/undesirable contains 16 adjectives including "distant,"

"resentful," "flat," "disagreeable" (i.e., emotional tone), "futile,"

"inhibited," "awkward," "timid," "frigid," "inadequate," and "inept"

(i.e., physical interaction), "infantile," "distrustful," "remote,"

"evasive," and "undesirable" (i.e., anxiety and mistrust of self or

other person); (3) achievement with 11 adjectives including "successful,"

"capable" (i.e., achievement), "victorious," "mighty," "winning" (i.e.,

dominance), "daring," "imaginative," "inventive," "determined," "out-

going," "assertive" (i.e., creative and persevering strategy); (4) moral

including nine adjectives connoting a reserved meaning of sexual experi-

ence (e.g.,"proper," "moral," "clean," "pure," "dignified," "virtuous,"

"correct," "righteous," "honorable"); (5) erotic dominance contains

seven adjectives including "hot," "titillating," "erotic," "ecstatic"

(i.e., highly sensual, emotional tone), "forceful," "demanding,"

"aggressive" (i.e., physical interaction and dominance).










Bernstein (1982) compared the sex differences on the MOSE-III (see

Table 3) using 124 male and 202 female subjects and found that (1) the males'

average factor scores were significantly higher than the females'on

achievement and erotic dominance; (2) females scored significantly higher

on the affiliation and moral categories; and (3) no significant differ-

ences were found on the inadequate/undesirable dimension. The signifi-

cant male and female differences tend to support the findings of several

previous studies (e.g., McCormick, 1979; LePlante et al., 1980; Peplau et

al., 1977). The MOSE-III will be used in this study to compare the mean-

ing of sexuality for heterosexual and homosexual males.

A brief review of the theories concerning the interpersonal meaning

of sexual experience will help to provide a context in which to inter-

pret the results of this study. The functions of sexual behavior present

one option in theorizing about the meaning of sexual experience. Wrights-

man (1977) states that sexual behavior is "fundamentally social in that

it has a symbolic value, making it capable of fulfilling many other

desires and needs" (p. 178). He lists the following aspects of sexuality

(1) it helps to form our overall impressions of others (e.g., "healthy,"

"deviant"); (2) it can lead to crippling feelings such as guilt or shame

or positive feelings such as fulfillment, increased self-confidence and

some of the deepest human emotions; (3) it can be used in an aggressive

(e.g., rape), pathological (e.g., sexual psychopath), or utilitarian

(e.g., for material or social gains) fashion; (4) it is a way of prov-

ing one's masculinity or feminity (e.g., ego); and (5) it can be used

for recreation or reproduction.










TABLE 3

SEX DIFFERENCES FOR MOSE FACTOR ANALYSIS SAMPLE


t- Standard
Factor Sex Mean Statistic Deviation Minimum Maximum

Male 64.6 8.8 27 77
Affiliation -4.09
Female 68.4 7.8 37 77

Inadequate/ Male 38.3 10.0 16 70
Undesirable 0.21
Female 38.0 12.7 16 78

Male 53.9 9.7 31 76
Achievement 2.39*
Female 51.0 10.9 19 72

Male 40.8 9.5 10 57
Moral -1.75
Female 42.8 10.4 11 63

Male 34.0 5.7 21 48
Erotic **
Dominance 3
Female 31.7 6.3 14 48



< .05
p < .001

NOTE: From "The Formulation of an Instrument to Assess Interpersonal
Meaning of Sexual Experience" by D. Bernstein, Doctoral Disser-
tation, University of Florida, 1982.




A similar approach was taken by Wilson, Strong, Robbins, and Johns

(1980) in listing the uses of sexual intercourse. The authors state

that,

Sexual intercourse can be used to: show love, have children,
give pleasure, receive pleasure, show tenderness, gain
acceptance, show rejection, prove masculinity/feminity, degrade
someone, gain revenge, make a commitment, end an argument,
degrade yourself, touch or be touched. Sex can be used to











keep a person interested in you, to relieve loneliness, to
dominate another, to make yourself or another feel guilty,
to relieve physical tension, to express liking or love.
(pp. 333-334)

Marriage, according to the authors, changes sexual motivation from ego

gratification to mutual gratification.

The male sex role, according to Pleck (1976), has two fundamental

themes, a stress on achievement and suppression of affect. He sees the

male role in transition from the traditional dominant male, who "expects

women to acknowledge and defer to his authority," to the modern male,

who "expects companionship and intimacy in his relationships with women"

(p. 157). The changes are not all positive and have led to performance

anxiety and the concept of frigidity in order to blame the woman for any

lack of sexual satisfaction. Gross (1978) states that "compared to

women, men tend not only to focus more on sexuality with cross-sex

partners, but also to isolate sex from other aspects of heterosexual

relating" (p. 92). Men are socialized to be goal oriented, controlling,

aggressive, violent,and power seeking. A similar hypothesis is put forth

by Reik (1960), who states that the meaning of sexual experience for men

involves a stronger sexual desire, while women have a stronger need for

affection in their meaning of sexuality. The author states that "The

sexual urge of the male has an aggressive and even sadistic character,

and the wish to intrude the female body amounts to a kind of forceful

incursion. ." (p. 118). The above theories all involve some psycho-

analytic leanings, especially when it comes to sex being paired with

aggression. The psychoanalytic viewpoint is represented in the work of

several other authors who state that (1) too much emphasis is being










placed on "achieving physiological-mechanical success" and that healthy

sexuality is an indicator of mental health (Gersham, 1978); (2) female

"emotionalism" is a mask for "economic dependency" and the male person-

ality is founded in repression of affect and denial of relational needs"

(Chodorow, 1976); and (3) healthy sexuality is necessary for psychologi-

cal health (Reich, 1973).

The concept of sexual scripts has been advanced by Gagnon and Simon

(1973). The authors explain:

Our use of the term script with reference to the sexual has two
major dimensions. One deals with the external, the inter-
personal--the script as the organization of mutually shared
conventions that allows two or more actors to participate in a
complex act involving mutual dependence. The second deals with
the internal, the intrapsychic, the motivational elements that
produce arousal or at least a commitment to the activity.
(p. 20)

Young males, according to Gagnon (1974), are socialized to a male script

of male initiation and dominance. A more explicit elucidation of the

components of a sexual script is provided by Gagnon (1977), which

includes the who, what, when, where,and why of sexual behavior. A list

of the reasons for having sex includes having kids, pleasure, lust,

fun, passion, love, variety, intimacy, rebellion, degradation, instinct/

needs, exploitation, relaxation, achievement,and service. Further work

on sexual scripting has been done by several authors (e.g., Mosher, 1980;

Schwartz, 1979; Steiner, 1974).

Gecas and Libby (1976) conceptualize sexual experiences through the

constructs of symbolic interactionism and hypothesize that sexual

symbolism creates sexual experience. The authors ascribe four codes,

regarding sexual behavior, in contemporary American society. The codes










include (1) the romantic code which "emphasizes the value of love,"

(2) "the traditional-religious philosophy views sexual activity outside

of marriage as sinful, particularly for women" (p. 37); (3) "the recrea-

tional philosophy is concerned with sex primarily as a pleasurable

activity" (p. 38); and (4) the utilitarian-preditory code "views sex as

a means to some other end, it can be used to gain money (as in prostitu-

tion), or power(as in certain types of heterosexual bargaining) or pres-

tige (status in one's peer group)" (p. 38). Slater (1976) comments on

the task-oriented nature of American society, with terms like "adequacy"

applied to a pleasurable act, and infers that men's value of physical

beauty is really a dislike for women. Sex is used for procreation,

intimacy, and physical play. According to Comfort (1976), a division

between the functions has been created by the inception of contracep-

tion. Sex as play "generates its own morality and values" (p. 89),

according to Foote (1976). He further states, "exploration of the

morals and values which might emerge from a forthright public acceptance

of sex as play is obviously a task for extended research" (p. 89).

A list of the psychological dimensions of sexuality for adolescents

was proposed by Mitchell (1972). The list includes (1) the need for

intimacy, (2) the need to belong (e.g., affiliation), (3) the desire for

dominance, (4) the desire for submissiveness, (5) curiosity and compe-

tence needs (e.g., achievement), (6) the desire for passion and inten-

sity (e.g., erotic), (7) identification and imitation, and (8) rebel-

liousness and negative identity (e.g., promiscuity). Schoof-Tams,

Schlaegal, and Walczak (1976) developed a cognitive-developmental model

of adolescent sexual morality (e.g., 11-16 years of age). They postulate











that the adolescent progresses from a traditional view of sexuality (e.g.,

sex for procreation) toward a more permissive view (e.g., sex as love and

commitment).

The meaning of sexual experience has been approached from several

different theoretical and empirical perspectives. A few theories provide

some unification of the various aspects concerning sexual meaning, but a

comprehensive model that can effectively predict behavior in a consistent

manner has not been developed. The meaning of sexuality also appears to

change over time, which necessitates a developmental theory in order to

account for an individual's progression through sexual maturation. The

above literature primarily applies to heterosexuals and a question arises

as to what the meaning of sexuality is for homosexuals or, a more accept-

able term, gays.


Research and Theory on the Meaning of
Homosexual Sexual Experience

There is a paucity of research when it comes to the gay meaning of

sexuality. Most of the concepts will have to be inferred from the

available data and theories concerning gay sexuality.

The plight of the homosexual in history has been documented by

Bullough (1979), who states that,

Terms such as "queer," "fag," "fairy," and "pervert" have been
applied to them as individuals, and at various times in history
they have been put in asylums, imprisoned, executed, medicated,
psychoanalyzed, and ostracized; yet they have continued to exist.
Most survived by remaining in the closet-that is, they never
publicly proclaimed themselves but sought to mask their sexual
preference by living and acting as did their neighbors. (p. 1)

The negative view of homosexuality implies that gay individuals are sick,

perverted, unnatural, and a threat to societal values (G. Wienberg, 1973).










Consequently negative meanings involving guilt, shame, fear, anxiety,and

inadequacy are possible consequences of same-sex sexual activity.

Kaufman and Krupka (1973) view homosexuality from a deprivation per-

spective. They state that "typically, males with homosexual concerns

have experienced deprivation from their fathers. Many of these individ-

uals never received expressions of tenderness or closeness from their

fathers" (p. 459). The authors assert that homosexual behavior is a

quest for affection in compensation for lost paternal tenderness. Sexual

activity here is seen as misdirected and a surrogate for the need for

fatherly affection. In a previously reviewed study, Farley et al. (1977)

derived sexuality factors for males and females. A male "ambivalent

homosexual extravert" factor consisted of "homosexual tendency, lack of

sex role confidence, sexual maladjustment and frustration, and extra-

version" (p. 116). This implies inadequacy, frustration, and maladjust-

ment as meanings of gay male sexuality. Finger (1975) noted a decline

among males in homosexual experiences over the past 30 years and reports

that "the vast majority of students still rate homosexual outlet as the

'most harmful' and the 'most wrong'" (p. 315) sexual activity.

Sex role preference can provide one explanation for homosexual

behavior according to Carrier (1977). He used Hookers (1965) definitions

so that "the term 'sex roles', when homosexual practices are described,

will refer to 'typical sexual performance' only. 'The gender connota-

tions (M-F) of these performances need not then be implicitly assumed.'

The term 'gender role' will refer to the 'expected attitudes and behavior

that distinguish males from females'" (p. 54). Carrier (1977) investi-

gated the cross-cultural differences among homosexual males and found











that (1) the "inserter-insertee" dichotomy of homosexual behavior is

active in the Mexican, Brazilian, Turkish, Greek, and Chicano (Mexican-

American) cultures, with the inserter as masculine and the insertee as

feminine; (2) lower class homosexual behavior in U.S. prisons involves

the aggressor as masculine and nonhomosexual, while the passive partner

is viewed as homosexual; (3) female prisoners structure their relation-

ships in terms of marriage and kinship. Thus, male sexuality is based

on dominance-submission whereas female sexuality is based on affiliation

and commitment.

Tripp (1975) implies that homosexuality can result from male admir-

ation of another male, high aspirations, "idealism," envy or early sexual

maturation. He purports that homosexual men are attracted to the sex

role characteristics of their own sex, identifying with the masculinity

in others. Tripp (1975) states, "In all of their essentials, the sought

after rewards of homosexual and heterosexual complementations are identi-

cal: the symbolic possession of those attributes of a partner, which,

when added to one's own, fill out the illusion of completeness" (p. 93).

The meaning of sexuality here involves the search for the fulfillment of

missing attributes through one's sex partner. Like many of the works

concerning homosexuality, the focus is on males.

Several authors have taken a sociological perspective in their

investigation of homosexuality. Sonenschein (1976) looked at male homo-

sexual relationships in terms of permanence and nonpermanence. He des-

cribes relationships where a younger "boy" is kept by an older male,

transient sexual contacts such as "one night stands," and brief affairs.

Sonenschein (1976) identified two major systems in the homosexual










community which have a direct effect on interpersonal relationships

(1) the cultural system which was comprised of a series of institutions

(e.g., bars, steam baths, parties) where gays can meet temporary or

permanent partners; and (2) a social system "which directly involved the

structure and behavior of groups and the individuals in them" (p. 150).

Both of these systems can be conceptualized as affecting the meaning of

sexuality, either directly or indirectly, through their effects on inter-

personal relationships.

A cross-cultural study on male homosexuality was conducted by

Weinberg and Williams (1974) in an effort to determine the effects of

locale on the social and psychological dimensions of homosexuality. The

comparisons involved American, Dutch, and Danish gays, and lower versus

upper class American homosexuals. The results reflect that (1) greater

societal rejection did not lead to greater psychological difficulties

among gay men; (2) sexual orientation is not necessarily highly corre-

lated with psychological problems; (3) those gay men who have high

involvement in the gay community (vs. those who do not) seem to be less

intimidated by the heterosexual world; and (4) there was no general rela-

tionship between religious background and lifestyle or psychological

problems for homosexual men, except for greater guilt or shame after the

first homoerotic experience. The above results tend to refute the

deficit models of homosexuality (e.g., Farley et al., 1977; Finger, 1975;

Kaufman & Krupka, 1973). It appears that gays may be more similar to

heterosexuals than past theories have implied and that the meaning of

their sexuality may also be more similar than different.











In addressing the issue of homosexuals as patients, Bell (1976)

notes the diversity in the variety of social, psychological, and sexual

correlates of homosexual experience. He states, "there are as many dif-

ferent kinds of homosexuals as heterosexuals, and thus it is impossible

to predict the nature of any patient's personality, social adjustment,

or sexual functioning on the basis of his or her sexual orientation"

(p. 202). Humphreys (1976) comments on emerging styles of homosexual

manliness. He states that there is a decline in "cruising" (i.e.,

picking up men for brief sexual contacts) within the gay community due

to several factors, such as (1) a trend away from impersonalization;

(2) a "virilization" or an increasing emphasis on virility; (3) subcul-

tural diversity; and (4) radicalizationn" in terms of the gay rights

movement. The meaning of sexuality appears to be shifting from an

impersonal, guilt-ridden, effeminate definition to a more virile,

masculine and militant identity.

In their study on homosexuals, Masters and Johnson (1979) note that

gay couples had a freer flow of verbal and nonverbal communication,

between "stimulator and stimulatee" when compared to heterosexual

couples. "Information relative to sexual needs, levels of sexual

involvement, what pleased or what displeased was usually exchanged

openly during sexual activity or discussed without reservation after

any specific sexual episode in anticipation of future sexual

opportunity" (p. 213). The authors theorize that this openness

results from necessity, since there are only two widely popular

stimulative approaches in gay sexual activity (e.g., partner manipu-

lation, fellatio/cunnilingus) and those must be refined constantly to










preserve their stimulative value. An equally viable hypothesis might

be that societal pressures force gay individuals to keep their sexuality

hidden except among themselves, where discussion of their sexuality

elicits mutual support and acceptance.

Another study on homosexual relationships, by Peplau (1981), investi-

gates what gays are searching for in interpersonal relationships. A

questionnaire was administered to gay men and women (e.g., N=128, N=127)

and heterosexual men and women (e.g., N=65 for both) eliciting responses

on love, satisfaction in relationships, living arrangements, sexual

activities,and commitment to the relationship. The results were as

follows: (1) a majority of the lesbians and gay men were not religious

(e.g., 63% and 54%, respectively), had a heterosexual relationship in the

past (e.g., 80% and 66%, respectively), and had median numbers of past

opposite-sex partners which ranged from three to five, respectively;

(2) most of the gay sample exposed the equal sharing of responsibilities

and power in their relationships, although when role playing existed it

was most common among older homosexuals of both sexes, individuals at

lower socioeconomic levels, and in men; (3) relationship values clustered

around two factors, "dynamic attachment" which "reflects the value placed

on having emotionally close and secure relationships" and "desire for

personal autonomy" which values major interests outside of the relation-

ship and a supportive group of friends; (4) the heterosexuals evidenced

more role playing in their relationships; (5) all four groups had similar

priorities for their relationships (e.g., "being able to talk about my

most intimate feelings"); (5) sexual exclusivity was more important to

heterosexuals than it was to homosexuals; (6) gender differences were










greater than sexual orientation differences, with women viewing emo-

tional expressiveness, egalitarian relationships and similarity in

attitudes and political beliefs as more important than did the men;

(7) about 61% of the lesbians and 41% of the gay men were involved in

permanent relationships; (8) there were no differences between gays and

straights in their conceptions of "love"; (9) almost half of the gays

were committed to their relationships and expected them to last for at

least six months (e.g., 50% of the males and 44% of the lesbians);

(10) both gay men and women were satisfied with their sexual relation-

ships; (11) gay men were more likely than heterosexuals or lesbians to

have sex with someone other than their partner. The results of

Peplau's (1981) study indicate that the meaning of sexuality is similar

for heterosexuals and homosexuals. Both value affiliation and closeness

in their relationships, but at the same time also emphasize autonomy.

The stereotype that gay individuals have short-term, unsatisfactory

relationships appears to be in error. An important finding is that

gender seems to affect a relationship more than sexual orientation.

Freedman (1975) argues that homosexuals may be healthier than

heterosexuals. He states that gay individuals have developed their own

values, become more expressive and egalitarian in their relationships,

broken out of the standard male-female sex roles, and are more open to

variations in their sexual behavior (e.g., group sex for gay males).

Peplau's (1981) study appears to confirm some of Freedman's assertions.

Some of the results of Jay and Young's (1979) results have pre-

viously been reviewed, but other components of their survey are relevant

to the meaning of sexuality. The results indicate that: (1) a little










less than half of the gay men (46%) and women (42%) thought sex was

"very important" and most of the rest (e.g., 49% lesbians, 47% gay men)

thought it was "somewhat important"; (2) when asked if they put too much

importance on sex, 73% of the lesbians and 62% of the gay men said their

emphasis was "just right"; (3) concerning others' emphasis on sex, 48%

of the gay men and 37% of the GF indicated "too much"; (4) in terms of

the importance of emotional involvement with their partner, a majority

of the lesbians (86%) and less than half the gay men (47%) responded

that it was "very important"; while a majority of both thought it was

"somewhat important" (e.g., 97% and 83%, respectively); (5) 56% of the

lesbians and 13% of the gay males reported that emotional involvement

was always present when they had sex with a partner; (6) to "have you

ever been in love?" over 93% of male and female gays indicated "yes";

(7) an overwhelming majority of gays (e.g., over 88%) felt "very posi-

tive" about showing affection to "lovers" and "sex partners"; (8) a

majority of the lesbians and gay men felt "negative" about the use of

masculine/feminine sex-role labels (e.g., 78% and 61%, respectively),

and "never" played masculine/feminine sex roles in their relationships

(e.g., 59% and 42%, respectively); and (9) in terms of having sex with

someone that they just met, 85% of the lesbians indicated that they

did so at the most "very infrequently," while only 31% of the gay men

responded in a similar fashion. These results tend to approximate the

previous findings concerning heterosexuals and the gender differences

between males and females.











A Brief Summary and Statement of
Theoretical Hypotheses

Since the purpose of this study is to investigate male heterosexual

and homosexual differences, only the data on male sexual fantasy and the

meaning of sexuality will be briefly summarized.

As previously noted, Storms (1980) hypothesized that gay males (GM)

would have more androerotic (i.e., male as sex object) and less gyno-

erotic (i.e., female as sex object) sexual fantasies when compared to

heterosexual males (HM). The reverse was also predicted, HMs would have

more gynoerotic and less androerotic fantasies than GMs. Since the

object of sexual activity is usually a male for gay individuals, and a

female for heterosexual individuals, these hypotheses make common sense.

Previous data on sexual activity and sexual fantasy would also lend sup-

port to Storms' (1980) assertions (e.g., Jay & Young, 1979; Masters &

Johnson, 1979; Pietropinto & Simenauer, 1977). Although they have less

gynoerotic fantasies than HMs, gay individuals tend to have had more

heterosexual activity than HMs have had homosexual activity (e.g.,

Kinsey, et al., 1948; Hunt, 1976; Jay & Young, 1979). Gay individuals

also have less negative attitudes toward heterosexual sexual activity

(Jay & Young, 1979) than HMs have concerning homosexual sexual activity

(Finger, 1975) and should be more likely to report cross-sex fantasies

than HMs are to report same-sex fantasies.

In the area of sexual activity, several findings have been reported.

Both GMs and HMs report a high incidence of at least one episode of

masturbation, but GMs report a slightly higher frequency of masturbation

(e.g., Hunt, 1976; Jay & Young, 1979). No major differences were found











for the two groups involving fantasy during masturbation (e.g., Jay &

Young, 1979; Pape, 1980). In Pape's (1980) study, 84% of the HMs reported

having sex with a partner at least once in the past three months. In

contrast, 90% of the GMs in Jay and Young's (1979) sample had sex at

least once a month. Given the heightened opportunity for sexual activity

in the male gay community, it is predictable that the incidence of sex

with a partner will be greater for the GMs. Fantasy during sex with a

partner was reported in approximately equal frequencies by both GMs

(82%) and HMs (79%). There were no data on the frequency or incidence

of GM sexual daydreaming and, therefore, a hypothesis concerning any

differences in GM and HM erotic daydreaming cannot be formulated at this

time.

The data on the incidence and frequency of specific sexual techniques

do show differences between the two groups. A majority of the GMs

(99.5%) had engaged in oral sex in comparison to two-thirds of the HMs

(66%) (e.g., Hunt, 1976; Jay & Young, 1979), and since fellatio is a

primary sexual activity in the gay male community (Masters & Johnson),

one would expect them to fantasize about this activity more often. In

terms of anal intercourse, the two groups also vary widely for incidence,

with 91% of the GMs and only 16% of the HMs having engaged in it at least

once (Hunt, 1976; Jay & Young, 1979). Since anal intercourse is the only

approximation of coitus in the gay male community, there should be a

higher rate of fantasizing about it among GMs when compared to HMs.

The above categories involve the "mechanical-anatomical" aspects of

sexual activity, that is, the limitations of sexual activity due to

physical make-up (e.g., the lack of a vagina in males). Coitus is not











available to GMs and, although anal intercourse is an approximation,

they must engage in other varieties of sexual activity (e.g., fellatio,

mutual masturbation). Other categories exist for sexual activity and

erotic fantasy including choice of partnerss, dominance-submission,

choice of setting, various situations (e.g., paying for sex, observing

others having sex) and various thought patterns (e.g., recalling past

experiences, imaginary lovers). Depending on the theoretical system

under consideration, the prediction of the differences or similarities

between the sexual fantasies of GMs and HMs will vary.

Masters and Johnson (1979) reported that the most prevalent sexual

fantasy for HMs was the replacement of the current sex partner. In

Pape's (1980) study, HMs reported thinking about their current partner

most often during sex (with that partner), and thinking about sex with

a person other than their partner during masturbation and daydreaming.

For GMs, idyllic encounters with unknown men was ranked as the fourth

most prevalent fantasy since GMs have more opportunities for sex with

different partners (Humphreys, 1976), and if fantasy is construed as an

indication of longing for unfulfilled sexual desires, then HMs should

have more fantasies about different sex partners.

Sex-role disturbances have been postulated as contributing to the

development of homosexuality (e.g., Rekers & Lovaas, 1974). The gay

male is considered more effeminate, passive,and submissive than the

heterosexual male. This line of reasoning would predict that GMs would

have fewer fantasies concerning aggressive sexual acts (i.e., forcing

someone to have sex) and more passive fantasies (i.e., being forced to

have sex with someone) when compared to HMs. Several studies, however,










refute the passive sexual nature of homosexuals (e.g., Harry, 1976-77),

and other studies reflect that gender has more of an influence on sex

fantasies than does sex-role (e.g., Bernardi, 1977; Pape, 1980; Storms,

1980). Masters and Johnson (1979) report that GMs have aggressive

sexual fantasies and that these fantasies contained more violent content

than the HM forced-sex fantasies. Since gays reject sex-role stereo-

types (Peplau, 1981), they should be more inclined to accept the passive

role than HMs who are more concerned with masculinity. Therefore, GMs

should have more passive fantasies than HMs, but not fewer aggressive

fantasies.

Group sex was the fifth most prevalent sex fantasy reported by both

GMs and HMs in Masters and Johnson's (1979) study. Other reports on

group sex fantasies for HMs range from 4.5% (Pietropinto & Simenauer) to

37.5% (Hesselland, 1976). Although sex with more than one person was a

fantasy category for the GMs in Jay and Young's (1979) study, they gave

no indication as to the frequency or incidence of these fantasies. More

than one-fourth of the GMs (27%), however, did report engaging in group

sex at least "somewhat frequently". Group sex provides the opportunity

to observe others having sex. Therefore, if fantasy is conceptualized

as a reflection of current concerns (Klinger, 1971), then GMs should

fantasize about sex with more than one person more often than HMs, as

well as fantasize about observing others during sexual activity.

Masters and Johnson (1979) found that GMs reported more sadomaso-

chistic fantasies (i.e., hurting someone or being hurt by them) with a

higher incidence of violence, when compared to HMs. Jay and Young

(1979) also cited a high incidence of sadomasochistic fantasies among










their GM sample, but did not give any figures on incidence or frequency.

HMs reported very low incidences (2.2%) of sadomasochistic fantasy.

Therefore, GMs should have a higher rate of sadomasochistic fantasy when

compared to HMs.

Bernstein's (1982) development of five categories for the meaning

of sexual experience will allow for a comparison of GM and HM sexual

meanings. The factors include (1) affiliation; (2) inadequate/

undesirable; (3) achievement; (4) moral; and (5) erotic dominance.

Although there has been little direct study of the meaning of sexual

experience for gays, some hypotheses can be generated from the available

literature.

Given the psychoanalytic interpretation of homosexuality (Bergler,

1956; Fenichel, 1945; Freud, 1962), GMs should reflect more maladjust-

ment in their sexuality and, consequently, they should feel more nega-

tively about their sexual experience. Several authors refute this

hypothesis (e.g., Bell, 1976; Churchill, 1967; Hoffman, 1968; G. Wein-

berg, 1973) and claim that gays are not more maladjusted than hetero-

sexuals. According to the former authors, GMs should view their

sexuality as more inadequate/undesirable when compared to HMs, whereas

the latter theorists would predict no differences. A reversed predic-

tion should hold for affiliation-GMs should be less affiliative than

HMs according to psychoanalytic theory. Peplau's (1981) findings on

gay relationships would lead to a prediction of no differences.

In the moral category, differences would be predicted by tradi-

tional versus modern views of sexuality. In order to adopt a gay

lifestyle an individual must reject the traditional moral values and











develop his own (Freedman, 1975; Peplau, 1981). Therefore, HMs should

score higher on morality than the GMs. Since GMs also reject sex-role

stereotypes (Freedman, 1975; Peplau, 1981), they should score lower on

achievement in the meaning of sexuality when compared to HMs. The

erotic dominance category is confusing and contains both erotic and

conquest-related variables, therefore no predictions will be made about

this category.

The following hypotheses were tested for sexual fantasy:

1. GMs will report androerotic fantasies more often and
gynoerotic fantasies less often than HMs.

2. GMs will report gynoerotic fantasies more often than
HMs will report androerotic fantasies.

3. GMs will report having sex with a partner more often
than HMs.

4. GMs will report having oral sex fantasies more often
than HMs.

5. GMs will report having anal intercourse fantasies
more often than HMs.

6. HMs will have fantasies about having sex with someone
other than their current partner more often than GMs.

7. GMs will have fantasies of being forced to have sex
with someone more often than HMs.

8. GMs will have fantasies about having sex with more
than one person at a time and observing others having
sex more often than HMs.

9. GMs will have fantasies about hurting someone or
being hurt by someone more often than HMs.

The following hypotheses were tested for the meaning of sexuality:

1. GMs will report the meaning of their sexuality as
inadequate/undesirable more often than HMs.

2. HMs will report the meaning of their sexuality as
affiliation oriented more often than GMs.







83



3. HMs will report the meaning of their sexuality as
moral more often than will GMs.

4. HMs will report the meaning of their sexuality as
achievement oriented more often than GMs.

A .05 level of significance will be adopted as the criterion of rejection

for the null hypothesis (e.g., H = no differences).













CHAPTER II

METHOD


Subjects

The subjects in this study were 32 heterosexual and 32 homosexual

male college students. All of the subjects were Caucasian with age

ranges of 17 to 26 years (X = 19.3 years) for the heterosexuals and 19

to 29 years (X = 20.5 years) for the homosexuals. Religious affiliation

varied between the heterosexual (HM) and homosexual (GM) subjects as

follows: Protestant (28.1% HMs, 18.8% GMs); Catholic (25.0% HMs, 18.8%

GMs); Jewish (15.6% HMs, 3.1% GMs); "other" (6.3% HMs, 15.6% GMs); and

"none" (25.0% HMs, 43.8% GMs). A majority of the HM subjects (56.3%)

reported having a steady sexual partner, whereas a majority of the GM

subjects reported not having a steady sexual partner (65.6%). Both

groups described their current sexual activity in approximately equal

proportions, as follows: "very satisfactory" (HMs 25.0%, GMs 25.0%);

"moderately satisfactory" (HMs 43.8%, GMs 40.6%); "mildly satisfactory"

(HMs 15.6%, GMs 15.6%); and "unsatisfactory" (15.6% HMs, 18.8% GMs).


Procedure

The HM subjects were recruited from general psychology classes at

the University of Florida and the Illinois State University as well as

from cooperative housing associations at the University of Texas at

Austin. The GM subjects were recruited through campus gay organizations

at the Universities of Florida, Texas at Austin, and Illinois State

84










University. The HM subjects at the University of Florida were adminis-

tered the EROS, SFQ, and MOSE-III (see Appendices A, B, and C) in a

large group. The Illinois State HMs were administered the instruments

in small groups of five and some subjects took the instruments home

for friends to return via mail. The instruments were delivered to

the cooperative housing establishments in Austin, Texas, and picked

up, in sealed envelopes, at a later date. A total of 123 instruments

were disseminated to HM subjects, with 74 administered to psychology

students (who received one hour of research credit) and 49 to be

returned via mail or picked up at the cooperative houses (with a

return rate of 53.6%).

The instruments were disseminated at campus gay organization

meetings in all geographic locations and were returned in self-

addressed, stamped envelopes. A total of 125 instruments were given

out to the organization members, for themsevles and their friends,

with a 39.2% return rate.

In order to control for sexual and fantasy activity, only those

subjects who indicated that they had engaged in sex with a partner

(with fantasy), masturbation with fantasy and sexual daydreaming in

the past three months (see Appendix B, SFQ items 7, 8, 32, 33, & 57)

were included in this study. Subjects who only partially completed

the instruments, were ethnic minorities (3 GMs, 2 HMs), or were older

than average (3 GMs, 2 HMs) were also excluded from the study.










Instruments

Erotic Response and Orientation Scale (EROS)

The EROS was developed by Storms (1980) to measure the erotic fanta-

sies of heterosexual and homosexual individuals. The questionnaire

contains 16 items, with two subscales of eight basic types of erotic

fantasies in each scale (see Appendix A). The "androerotic" scale des-

cribes fantasies with men as the sexual object, and the "gynoerotic"

scale describes the same fantasies with a female sexual object. Subjects

were asked to indicate how often they have had the erotic fantasy in each

item during the past year. A Guttman 7-point scale, ranging from "never"

(0) to "almost daily" (7), was available for the subject's responses to

each item. The scale items for each scale range from "low intensity

fantasies (thinking someone is sexually attractive) through moderate

intensity fantasies (daydreaming about having sex with someone) to high

intensity fantasies (masturbating while fantasizing sex with someone)"

(p. 786).

Utilizing a Guttman scalogram, Storms (1980) determined the internal

reliability of the scales; coefficients of reproduceabilitywere .93 for the

androerotic scale and .92 for the gynoerotic scale. He also determined

that the internal validity of the scales, in the sense of coherence and

cumulativity, was good (coefficients of scalability were .74 for the

androerotic scale and .77 for the gynoerotic scale). A comparison of

scalogram values between the total subject sample (N = 185) and the

heterosexual subjects (N = 70) proved to be almost identical, demonstrat-

ing consistent reliability across sexual orientation groups.










The Sexual Fantasy Questionnaire (SFQ)

The SFQ was developed by Pape (1980) in order to study the incidence,

frequency, variety, and content of sexual fantasies under three conditions

(1) sex with a partner, (2) masturbation, and (3) daydreaming (Mednick,

1977). Part I (see Appendix B) elicits the following demographic data:

(1) age; (2) ethnic background; (3) religious affiliation; (4) sexual

orientation (e.g., Kinsey-type scale ranging from "exclusively hetero-

sexual" to "exclusively homosexual"); (5) availability of current sex

partner (e.g., "yes" or "no"); and (6) description of current sexual

activity (e.g., 4-point scale ranging from "very satisfactory" to "very

unsatisfactory").

Part II is comprised of three sections, which reflect the afore-

mentioned three conditions, with the same 22 sexual fantasy subthemes

under each condition. An "other" subtheme was also provided under each

condition to allow the subjects to write in and rate any fantasy theme

not included within the 22 subthemes. The first two sections (e.g.,

sex with a partner and masturbation) begin with two filter questions

instructing the subject to complete the section only if they have engaged

in the required activity and have had sexual fantasies at least "rarely"

during that activity. Subjects who have not engaged in the activity, or

who have not fantasized during the activity, are instructed to go on to

the next section. In the daydreaming section only one filter question

inquires about sexual fantasy, since it is presumed that all individuals

engage in daydreaming of some sort. Each section inquired about the

activities and fantasies over the past three months, with a 6-point scale

ranging from "never" (1) to "always" (6) for each subtheme within the










condition under consideration. Both sexual activity questions (e.g.,

sex with a partner and masturbation) asked how often the subject engaged

in the activity, over the past three months, with 10 response categories

ranging from "0" (1) to "over 40" (10) times. The three fantasy filter

questions asked how often the subject had fantasized, during the activity

under consideration (over the past three months), with a 6-point rating

scale ranging from "never" (1) to "always" (6).

Two final questions were included at the end of Part II. One ques-

tion asked about the subject's level of comfort in filling out the SFQ,

with a 4-point rating scale ranging from "very comfortable" (1) to "very

uncomfortable" (4). Pape (1980) considered this item a "rough" indica-

tor of "willingness to disclose." A final question was open-ended and

inquired about the subject's comments concerning the study.

Pape (1980) determined the reliability of the SFQ by computing test-

retest correlations (for the 91 initial subjects), after a two-week

period, "for the three situational fantasy subscale scores and for the

individual theme responses in each of the three situational conditions"

(p. 34). In the "sex with a partner" condition, the situational sub-

scale score (i.e., sum of 22 subtheme responses) showed a test-retest

correlation which was significant (p < .001). The 22 subtheme ratings

had test-retest correlations ranging from .50 to .88 and all were sig-

nificant (p < .001) except for the "imagining that you are a prostitute"

theme. This item was changed, for this study, to read "imagining that

you are being paid to have sex with someone," in order to remove any

stigma concerning the word "prostitute." For the masturbation and day-

dreaming conditions, the subscale test-retest correlations were .76 and










.78, respectively (both significant at the p < .001 level). The individ-

ual theme test-retest correlation coefficients ranged from .48 to .95 for

the masturbation condition and from .44 to .86 for the daydreaming condi-

tion (p < .001, for all correlations). Cronbach's (1951) alpha was used

to measure the internal consistency scores of the situational subscales

and the results were .84 for the "sex with a partner" condition, .84 for

the "masturbation" condition, and .85 for the "daydreaming" condition.


The Meaning of Sexual Experience
Questionnaire--III (MOSE--II)

The MOSE-III was developed by Bernstein (1982) in order to attempt

an assessment of the interpersonal meanings of sexual experience. As

previously mentioned, he administered the 84 adjectives (MOSE-II),

identified by Grater and Downing (currently under review), which were

purported to pertain to the meaning dimensions of morality, affiliation,

pleasure, achievement, and dominance, to 255 college students. A 7-

point rating scale was used to rate each adjective, in terms of the

subject's meaning of sexual experience, ranging from "never or almost

never" (1) to "always or almost always" (7). Several factor analyses

were performed on the data in order to determine

the most meaningful factors both statistically and
conceptually. The criteria levels for maintaining items
were factor ratings of at least .40 on one factor and less
than .30 on every other factor. In addition, oblique
factor rotation was permitted as long as the correlation
between factors was not substantially greater than .30 for
any two factors. (Bernstein, 1982, p. 34)

A new list of adjectives was then constructed by Bernstein (1982),

retaining items from the MOSE-II and generating items that the author

judged to be reflective of the emerging factors. The MOSE-III (see











Appendix C) includes 70 adjectives, with a 7-point rating scale ranging

from "not at all descriptive" (1) to "completely descriptive" (7) (i.e.,

of the meaning of the subject's sexual experience). The MOSE-III was

administered to 326 college students and several factor analyses were

run, utilizing the same criteria levels that were mentioned above for

the MOSE-II analysis. A total of five factors emerged from the final

analysis, with a total of 54 adjectives, and these factors include:

(1) affiliation; (2) inadequate/undesirable; (3) achievement; (4) moral;

and (5) erotic dominance. In this case, an orthogonal analysis was run,

utilizing the criteria levels mentioned for the MOSE-II, to determine

if the factors would obtain with no intercorrelations. None of the

adjectives loaded on a different factor from the factor on which they

originally loaded in the oblique analysis.

Bernstein (1982) assessed the reliability of the MOSE-III by

using Cronbach's (1951) coefficient alpha (e.g., the average of all

possible split-half reliability coefficients). A criterion level of

.70 was adopted, as per Nunnally's (1978) suggestion. The alpha coef-

ficients for the five factors were as follows: (1) .91 for affiliation;

(2) .86 for inadequate/undesirable; (3) .84 for achievement; (4) .85 for

moral; and (5) .69 for erotic dominance. Several different approaches

were taken in order to assess the validity of the MOSE-III. The 70

adjectives were administered to 67 students, who were asked to categorize

the items in terms of "don't understand at all," "have some idea," and

"know what it means." Of the 70 words, only two were categorized as

"don't understand at all" by more than two students (e.g., "amorous,"

"titillating"). This precluded definition problems as possible threats










to the validity of the MOSE-III. Content validity, according to

Bernstein (1982) was demonstrated by the selection of adjectives along

conceptual guidelines and by the successful prediction of three out of

the five hypothesized dimensions (e.g., affiliation, morality, and

achievement). The other two emergent factors (e.g., inadequate/

undesirable and erotic dominance) were seen as "conceptually cohesive"

and, therefore, also supportive of content and, partially, construct

validity. Nelson's (1978) previously reviewed Sexual Functions Measure

(SFM) was utilized to assess the convergent validity of the MOSE-III.

A sample of 70 students (i.e., 33 females and 37 males) were administered

the SFM and the MOSE-III, with predicted correlations between the fol-

lowing factors on the instruments: (1) "affiliation (MOSE) with per-

sonal love and affection" (SFM); (2) "achievement (MOSE) with power,

recognition, and competition (SFM)"; and (3) "erotic dominance (MOSE)

with pleasurable stimulation (SFM)" (Bernstein, 1982, p. 53). The

correlations were significant for gender in some cases, but overall,

only weak support for the convergent validity of the MOSE-III was

demonstrated.


Statistical Hypotheses

The statistical hypotheses for sexual fantasy are as follows:

1. The GMs will have a significantly higher group mean score
on the EROS androerotic scale than the HMs and the HMs
will have a significantly higher mean score on the EROS
gynoerotic scale than the GMs.

2. The GMs will have a significantly higher group mean score
on fantasies about the opposite sex (e.g., items 26, 51,
& 75 on the SFQ) than the HMs will have about the same sex.

3. The GMs will have a significantly higher group mean score
on sex with a partner (e.g., item 7 on the SFQ) than will
the HMs.











4. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about oral sex (e.g., items 22, 23, 47, 48,
71, & 72 on the SFQ) than will the HMs.

5. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about anal intercourse (e.g., items 29, 54,
& 78 on the SFQ) than will the HMs.

6. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about replacing their current partner (e.g.,
items 10, 12, 35, 37, 59, & 62 on the SFQ) than will the
HMs.

7. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about being overpowered or forced to sur-
render to someone (e.g., items 13, 38, & 62 on the SFQ)
than will the HMs.

8. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about having sex with more than one person
at a time and observing others having sex (e.g., items
16, 19, 41, 44, 65, & 68 on the SFQ) than will the HMs.

9. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about enjoyment of being hurt and of hurting
another during a sexual encounter (e.g., items 24, 25,
49, 50, 73, & 74 on the SFQ) than will the HMs.

The statistical hypotheses for the meaning of sexual experience are as

follows:

1. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on the inadequate/undesirable factor (e.g., 16 adjectives)
of the MOSE-III than will the HMs.

2. The HMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on the affiliation factor (e.g., 11 adjectives) of the
MOSE-III than will the GMs.

3. The HMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on the morality factor (e.g., 9 adjectives) of the MOSE-
III than will the GMs.

4. The HMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on the achievement factor (e.g., 11 adjectives) of the
MOSE--III than will the GMs.




Full Text

PAGE 1

$ &203$5,621 2) 0$/( +(7(526(;8$/ $1' +2026(;8$/ 6(;8$/ )$17$6,(6 $1' 7(17$7,9( 12506 )25 7+( 0($1,1* 2) 6(;8$/ (;3(5,(1&( %\ *$%5,(/ 52'5,*8(= $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( &281&,/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

'HGLFDWHG WR P\ PRWKHU ZKR DOZD\V ZDQWHG D GRFWRU LQ WKH IDPLO\ DQG WR P\ VWHSIDWKHU DQG XQFOH ERWK RI ZKRP EHOLHYHG LQ PH

PAGE 3

$&.12:/('*0(176 ZLVK WR WKDQN 'U +DUU\ *UDWHU IRU KLV PHQWRULQJ DQG VXSSRUW WKURXJKRXW P\ JUDGXDWH HGXFDWLRQ 7R 'U 0LODQ .RODULN RIIHU P\ WKDQNV IRU DOO RI KLV LQIOXHQFH XSRQ PH DV P\ WKHUDSLVW DQG IULHQG 'U 5RG 0F'DYLV VHUYHG WR LQVSLUH PH WKURXJK KLV HQFRXUDJHPHQW DQG UROH PRGHOLQJ DOVR ZLVK WR WKDQN 'UV )URPLQJ =LOOHU 1HYLOO (SWLQJ 6XFKPDQ DQG 0RUJDQ IRU WKH WKLQJV WKDW OHDUQHG IURP WKHP DQG WKH RSHQ HQYLURQPHQW WKDW WKH\ SURYLGHG LQ RXU SURJUDP :H ZHUH DOORZHG WR WKLQN WR TXHVWLRQ DQG WR H[SORUH LQ WKH VSLULW RI WUXH HGXFDWLRQ 7R &KHU\O 3KLOOLSV FDQ RQO\ VD\ WKDQN \RX DJDLQ 6KH LV WKH KXE DURXQG ZKLFK RXU SURJUDP UHYROYHV DQG VKH KDV WRXFKHG PH GHHSO\ DV D ZDUP FDULQJ SHUVRQ DP DOVR LQGHEWHG WR DOO RI WKH IULHQGV ZKR ODXJKHG DQG FULHG ZLWK PH RYHU WKH SDVW ILYH \HDUV 7KH\ DUH WRR QXPHURXV WR OLVW EXW HDFK RQH KROGV D VSHFLDO SODFH LQ P\ KHDUW L L L

PAGE 4

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f§,,, 6WDWLVWLFDO +\SRWKHVHV ,,,5(68/76 $QDO\VLV RI WKH (URWLF 5HVSRQVH DQG 2ULHQWDWLRQ 6FDOH (526f $QDO\VLV RI WKH 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 6)4f $QDO\VLV RI WKH 0HDQLQJ RI 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUHf§,,, 026(f§,,,f 79

PAGE 5

3DJH ,9 ',6&866,21 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ 7KH 0HDQLQJ RI 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFH /LPLWDWLRQV 6WUHQJWKV DQG $SSOLFDWLRQV RI WKH 3UHVHQW 6WXG\ $33(1',; $ (527,& 5(63216( $1' 25,(17$7,21 6&$/( $33(1',; % 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 48(67,211$,5( $33(1',; & 7+( 0($1,1* 2) 6(;8$/ (;3(5,(1&( 48(67,211$,5(f§ 5()(5(1&(6 %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ Y

PAGE 6

/,67 2) 7$%/(6 7DEOH 3DJH 7235$1.(' 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 7+(0(6 '85,1* 6(; :,7+ $ 3$571(5 0$6785%$7,21 $1' '$<'5($0,1* 0$/(6f 7235$1.(' 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 7+(0(6 '85,1* 6(; :,7+ $ 3$571(5 0$6785%$7,21 $1' '$<'5($0,1* )(0$/(6f 6(; ',))(5(1&(6 )25 026( )$&725 $1$/<6,6 6$03/( 3(5&(17$*(6 2) )$17$6< '85,1* 6(; :,7+ $ 3$571(5 0$6785%$7,21 $1' '$<'5($0,1* )25 +0V $1' *0V 0$129$6 )25 &203$5,6216 2) +0V $1' *0V 21 7+5(( &21',7,216 2) 6)4 21(:$< $129$6 )25 &203$5,6216 2) +0V $1' *0V 21 6(; :,7+ $ 3$571(5 &21',7,21 2) 6)4 $1' ',6&5,0,1$17 $1$/<6,6 )81&7,216 21(:$< $129$6 )25 &203$5,6216 2) +0V $1' *0V 21 0$6785%$7,21 &21',7,21 $1' ',6&5,0,1$17 $1$/<6,6 )81&7,216 21(:$< $129$6 )25 &203$5,6216 2) +0V $1' *0V 21 '$<'5($0,1* &21',7,21 $1' ',6&5,0,1$17 $1$/<6,6 )81&7,216 0267 )5(48(17 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 7+(0(6 )25 +0V ,1 ($&+ &21',7,21 2) 6)4 0267 )5(48(17 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 7+(0(6 )25 *0V ,1 ($&+ &21',7,21 2) 6)4 YL

PAGE 7

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f DQG KRPRVH[XDO 1 f PDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV 7KH HPSLULFDO UHVHDUFK RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ LV VSRUDGLF LQ IRFXV ZLWK IHZ FRQVLVWHQW UHVXOWV 7KH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH KDV UHFHLYHG VFDQW DWWHQWLRQ HVSHFLDOO\ IRU KRPRVH[XDO LQGLYLGXDOV $ UHYLHZ RI WKH KLVWRU\ DQG FXUUHQW OLWHUDn WXUH RQ ERWK WRSLFV LV SUHVHQWHG ZLWK D IRFXV RQ UHOHYDQW WKHRU\ 6HYHUDO K\SRWKHVHV ZHUH JHQHUDWHG IRU ERWK WRSLFV 6H[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZHUH LQYHVWLJDWHG XVLQJ WKH (URWLF 5HVSRQVH DQG 2ULHQWDWLRQ 6FDOH ZKLFK LQTXLUHV DERXW PDOH DQG IHPDOH DV VH[ REMHFW IDQWDVLHV DQG WKH 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ 4XHVWLRQQDLUH ZKLFK FRQWDLQV WKUHH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ FRQGLWLRQV HJ VH[ ZLWK SDUWQHU PDVWXUEDWLRQ GD\GUHDPLQJf ZLWK IDQWDV\ VXEWKHPHV XQGHU HDFK FRQGLWLRQ 7KH 0HDQLQJ RI 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFH 4XHVn WLRQQDLUHf§,, ZDV XWLOL]HG WR FRPSDUH WKH WZR JURXSV DQG FRQWDLQV WKH

PAGE 8

IROORZLQJ FDWHJRULHV DIILOLDWLRQ LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH DFKLHYHPHQW PRUDO DQG HURWLF GRPLQDQFH $ GDWD DQDO\VLV 0$129$f RI WKH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW KRPRVH[XDO VWXGHQWV IDQWDVL]HG VLJQLILFDQWO\ PRUH IUHTXHQWO\ DERXW PDOHV DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH RUDO VH[ VDGRPDVRFKLVWLF DFWLYLWLHV DQG EHLQJ IRUFHG WR KDYH VH[ VXEPLVVLRQf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f 7KH VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ WKH PDOH KHWHURn VH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO VDPSOHV ZHUH VHHQ DV UHVXOWLQJ IURP WKH HIIHFWV RI JHQGHU Y L L L

PAGE 9

&+$37(5 ,1752'8&7,21 $1' 5(9,(: 2) 7+( /,7(5$785( 5HVHDUFK RQ KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ KDV EHHQ D GLIILFXOW SURVSHFW IRU WKRVH LQGLYLGXDOV ZKR KDYH GDUHG WR DGGUHVV WKH FKDOOHQJH $ORQJ ZLWK WKH WKHRUHWLFDO DQG HPSLULFDO TXHVWLRQV ZLWK ZKLFK DOO UHVHDUFKHUV DUH IDFHG WKH VH[ UHVHDUFKHU PXVW DOVR FRQWHQG ZLWK VRFLDO WDERRV DQG WKH HPRWLRQn ODGHQ QDWXUH RI WKH WRSLF DW KDQG :ULJKWVPDQ f VXPV XS WKH LVVXH VXFFLQFWO\ ZKHQ KH VWDWHV (YHQ LI D UHVHDUFKHU LV FRXUDJHRXV HQRXJK WR VWXG\ VH[XDO EHKDYLRU ZKLOH DFFHSWLQJ WKH VWLJPD RI GRLQJ VR KH RU VKH WKHQ IDFHV WKH YHU\ OLNHO\ RXWFRPH WKDW WKH SURMHFWnV ILQGLQJV PD\ RYHUWXUQ SHRSOHnV DVVXPSWLRQV DERXW VH[ DQG FKDOOHQJH GHHSO\ KHOG YDOXHV DQG EHOLHIV 6XFK QHZ ILQGLQJV DUH QRW DOZD\V SRSXODU DQG VRFLHW\ KDV D WHQGHQF\ WR SXQLVK WKH EHDUHU RI WLGLQJV WKDW FRQIOLFW ZLWK FKHULVKHG DVVXPSWLRQV S f 6HYHUDO SLRQHHUV LQ WKH DUHD RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ KHOSHG WR HVWDEOLVK WKH OHJLWLPDF\ RI UHVHDUFK RQ KXPDQ VH[XDO IXQFWLRQLQJ DV ZHOO DV OD\ WKH JURXQGZRUN IRU WKH PHWKRGV E\ ZKLFK WKH VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV EHKDYLRU DQG SK\VLRORJ\ RI PHQ DQG ZRPHQ FRXOG EH LQYHVWLJDWHG (OOLV )UHXG .LQVH\ 3RPHUR\ t 0DUWLQ .LQVH\ 3RPHUR\ 0DUWLQ t *HEKDUG 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ f 6LQFH WKH nV UHVHDUFK RQ KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ KDV SURLIHUDWHG PXFK RI LW FRQFHUQLQJ VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV (\VHQFN E )LQJHU *HUUDUG *ODVVQHU t 2ZHQ 0F%ULGH t (QGHU f VH[XDO EHKDYLRUV %HQWOHU )LQJHU *URVV +D\QHV t 2]LHO 3HSODX 5XELQt +LOO 6FKDIHU f DQG WKH LGHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG WUHDWPHQW RI VH[XDO

PAGE 10

G\VIXQFWLRQV RU VH[XDO DEHUUDWLRQV $FRVWD %DQFURIW 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ .DSODQ .UDIW /R3LFFDOR t 6WHJHU f 7ZR DUHDV RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ ZKLFK KDYH UHFHLYHG OLWWOH DWWHQWLRQ IURP VH[ UHVHDUFKHUV FRQFHUQ VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DQG WKH PHDQLQJ RI DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV VH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV 6H[XDO IDQWDV\ FDQ EH GHILQHG DV $Q\ PHQWDO LPDJH RU LPDJLQDWLRQ ZKLFK FRQWDLQV VH[XDO PDWWHU DQGRU LV VH[XDOO\ DURXVLQJ WR WKH SHUVRQ KDYLQJ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 0HGQLFN S f 0XFK RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ KDV EHHQ WKHRUHWLFDO LQ QDWXUH XVLQJ D SV\FKRG\QDPLF LQWHUSUHWLYH VFKHPH +RLOHQGHU .URQKDXVHQ t .QRQKDXVHQ f 7KRVH DXWKRUV ZKR KDYH DSSURDFKHG VH[XDO IDQWDV\ IURP DQ HPSLULFDO EDVLV KDYH UHOLHG RQ RQH RU WZR LWHPV ZKLFK ZHUH EXULHG ZLWKLQ D EURDGHU VWXG\ RI VH[XDO EHKDYLRU .LQVH\ HW DO 3LHWURSLQWR t 6LPHQDXHU f :RPHQnV VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV FRPSULVH D PDMRU SRUWLRQ RI VH[ IDQWDV\ UHVHDUFK IROORZHG E\ PHQnV VH[ IDQWDVLHV ZLWK KRPRVH[XDO VH[ IDQWDV\ UHFHLYLQJ DOPRVW QR DWWHQWLRQ 7KH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH KDV EHHQ DSSURDFKHG WDQJHQWLDO\ IURP VHYHUDO GLUHFWLRQV EXW DV %HUQVWHLQ f VWDWHV $OWKRXJK LQIHUHQFHV IURP VRPH VWXGLHV DUH SRVVLEOH WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFH KDV UDUHO\ EHHQ GLUHFWO\ DVVHVVHG S f $JDLQ WKHUH DUH IHZ VWXGLHV RQ WKH PHDQLQJ RI KRPRVH[XDO VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH DQG WKRVH VWXGLHV WKDW GR H[LVW PXVW EH HYDOXDWHG LQ WHUPV RI 0RULQnV f FDXWLRQ DJDLQVW D KHWHURVH[XDO ELDV LQ SV\FKRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK RQ KRPRn VH[XDOLW\ 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ LV WR LQYHVWLJDWH WKH GLIIHUHQFHV DQG VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG WKH

PAGE 11

PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ 7KH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZLOO EH VWXGLHG LQ WHUPV RI VDPHVH[ RSSRVLWHVH[ VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ DQG YDULRXV RWKHU VXEWKHPH IDQWDVLHV 7KH IDQWDV\ WKHPHV ZLOO EH FRPSDUHG GXULQJ WKUHH GLVWLQFW FRQGLWLRQV VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU PDVWXUEDWLRQ DQG GD\GUHDPLQJ $OWKRXJK YHU\ IHZ VWXGLHV KDYH EHHQ GRQH RQ WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH WKHUH LV VRPH EDVLV IRU FRPSDULVRQ GXH WR WKH UHFHQW GHYHORSPHQW RI DQ DVVHVVPHQW LQVWUXPHQW HJ %HUQVWHLQ f 7KH DXWKRU KRSHV WKDW WHQWDWLYH QRUPV ZLOO HPHUJH IRU WKH PHDQLQJ RI KRPRVH[XDO VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFH &DUH KDV EHHQ WDNHQ WR SUHVHQW WKH GDWD RQ KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRn VH[XDO VXEMHFWV ERWK LQ WKH KLVWRULFDO RYHUYLHZ DQG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH UHYLHZ 3HUWLQHQW LQIRUPDWLRQ WKDW ZLOO SURYLGH D FRQWH[W LQ ZKLFK WR YLHZ WKH H[LVWLQJ GDWD ZLOO EH SUHVHQWHG $ +LVWRULFDO 2YHUYLHZ 7KH KLVWRU\ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ ZDV DGGUHVVHG E\ 7D\ORU f ZKR IRXQG UHIHUHQFHV RQ WKH WRSLF GDWLQJ EDFN WR WKH WK FHQWXU\ ,QGLn YLGXDOV ZKR H[SUHVVHG KDYLQJ VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZHUH FRQVLGHUHG WR EH SRVVHVVHG E\ GHPRQV FDOOHG DQ LQFXEXV LI WKH YLFWLP ZDV D IHPDOH RU D VXFFXEXV LI WKH YLFWLP ZDV D PDOH 7KH XQGHUO\LQJ DVVXPSWLRQ WR WKH DWWULEXWLRQ RI SRVVHVVLRQ ZDV WKDW QRUPDO LQGLYLGXDOV GLG QRW KDYH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ,Q WKH nV WKH 0DOOHXV 0DOILFDUXP ZDV SXEn OLVKHG DQG HQGRUVHG E\ WKH VHQDWH DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI &RORJQH LQ DQ HIIRUW WR SURYLGH D PDQXDO E\ ZKLFK WKH SUDFWLWLRQHUV RI ZLWFKFUDIW FRXOG EH LGHQWLILHG DQG SXQLVKHG 7D\ORU f GHVFULEHV WKH PDQXDOnV FRYHUW IXQFWLRQ LQ WKH IROORZLQJ PDQQHU ,W LV LQ PDQ\ UHVSHFWV D FDVH ERRN RI VH[XDO SV\FKRSDWK\ DQG LV FRQFHUQHG SULQFLSDOO\ ZLWK WKUHH

PAGE 12

VXEMHFWV LPSRWHQFH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DQG FRQYHUVLRQ K\VWHULDV S f 2QFH D SUDFWLWLRQHU RI ZLWFKFUDIW ZDV IRXQG KH RU VKH ZDV WRUWXUHG LQWR D FRQIHVVLRQ DQG EXUQHG DW WKH VWDNH 7ZR SULPH LQGLFDWLRQV RI ZLWFKFUDIW ZHUH LPSRWHQFH DQG VH[XDO IDQWDV\ &RQVHTXHQWO\ WR DGPLW WR KDYLQJ VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZDV WR LQYLWH WKH ZUDWK RI WKH LQTXLVLWRUV .URQKDXVHQ DQG .URQKDXVHQ f UHYLHZHG WKH HDUO\ HURWLF OLWHUDWXUH LQ VHDUFK RI OLWHUDU\ H[SUHVVLRQV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 7KH DXWKRUV GRFXPHQW D UHIHUHQFH RQ -DQXDU\ LQ 6DPXHO 3HS\V 'LDU\ ZKHUH 0U 3HS\V UHFRXQWV KLV GLVFRYHU\ RI D )UHQFK ERRN WKDW LV WKH PRVW EDZG\ OHZG ERRN WKDW HYHU VDZ S f 7KH DXWKRUV JR RQ WR GRFXPHQW HURWLF WDOHV WKURXJKRXW WKH WK WK DQG WK FHQWXULHV SURYLGLQJ SV\FKRDQDO\WLF LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV DV WR WKH PRWLYHV DQG ORQJLQJV RI WKH DXWKRUV DQG RI WKHLU UHDGHUV .URQKDXVHQ DQG .URQKDXVHQ f FRPPHQW RQ WKHLU UHYLHZ RI WKH SV\FKLDWULF DQG SV\FKRDQDO\WLF OLWHUDWXUH LQ SUHSDUDWLRQ IRU WKHLU RZQ ZRUN DV HPSKDVL]LQJ GHYLDQW EHKDYLRU UDWKHU WKDQ IDQWDV\ 7R TXRWH WKH DXWKRUV &RQWHPSRUDU\ FOLQLFLDQV VHHP WR KDYH JLYHQ WKH VXEMHFW OLWWOH DWWHQWLRQ DQG ZKDW ZH IRXQG HYHQ LQ SV\FKRDQDO\WLFDOO\ RULHQWHG DUWLFOHV DQG PRQRJUDSKV PRVWO\ LQ WKH nV DQG V ZDV QRW SDUWLFXODUO\ HQOLJKWHQLQJ DOWKRXJK WKHUH DUH VHYHUDO LVRODWHG GHVFULSWLRQV LQ VRPH RI )UHXGnV RZQ FDVHV S [Yf 7KXV LW DSSHDUV WKDW VH[XDO IDQWDV\ ZDV FRQVLGHUHG WR EH D UHIOHFWLRQ RI SV\FKRSDWKRORJ\ IURP LWV HDUOLHVW UHIHUHQFHV XS WR WKH SUHVHQW GD\ ,Q 7KUHH (VVD\V RQ 6H[XDOLW\ )UHXG f FRPPHQWV RQ SKDQWDVLHV DV EHLQJ URRWHG LQ WKH LQIDQWLOH SHULRG RI KXPDQ GHYHORSPHQW ZKHUH WKH\ SHUVLVW XQFRQVFLRXVO\ 1RFWXUQDO SKDQWDVLHV DUH WKHQ WKH XQFRQVFLRXV SKDQWDVLHV ULVLQJ LQWR FRQVFLRXVQHVV )UHXG VWUHVVHG WKDW WKH LPSRUWDQFH

PAGE 13

RI SKDQWDVLHV GHULYHG IURP WKHLU FRQQHFWLRQ ZLWK WKH 2HGLSXV FRPSOH[ DQG WKH HIIHFW WKDW WKH VWUXJJOH WR UHVROYH WKH FRPSOH[ KDV RQ DGXOW VH[XDOLW\ +H VWDWHV 7KH\ >SKDQWDVLHV@ DUH RI JUHDW LPSRUWDQFH LQ WKH RULJLQ RI PDQ\ V\PSWRPV VLQFH WKH\ SUHFLVHO\ FRQVWLWXWH SUHOLPLQDU\ VWDJHV RI WKHVH V\PSWRPV DQG WKXV OD\ GRZQ WKH IRUPV LQ ZKLFK WKH UHSUHVVHG OLELGLQDO FRPSRQHQWV ILQG VDWLVIDFWLRQ S f 0RVW RI )UHXGnV FRPPHQWV RQ SKDQWDVLHV GHDOW ZLWK WKH VH[XDOO\ V\PEROLF UHSUHVHQn WDWLRQV ZLWKLQ WKH GUHDPV RI KLV SDWLHQWV DQG WKH UHSUHVVHG 2HGLSDO ORQJLQJV WKDW WKH\ UHSUHVHQWHG $JDLQ WKHUH LV D IRFXV RQ WKH SDWKRn ORJLFDO RU PDODGDSWLYH QDWXUH RI VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV WKH SUHFXUVRUV RI QHXURWLF V\PSWRPRORJ\ ,Q DQ DWWHPSW WR V\VWHPDWLFDOO\ VWXG\ WKH VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV EHOLHIV DQG EHKDYLRUV RI WKH $PHULFDQ SXEOLF .LQVH\ HW DO f JDWKHUHG ODUJH VDPSOHV RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH VXEMHFWV 8QIRUWXQDWHO\ WKHUH LV OLWWOH PHQWLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ LQ WKH VWXGLHV DQG ZKDW GRHV H[LVW LV UHODWHG WR PDVWXUEDWLRQ .LQVH\ HW DO f UHSRUWHG WKDW PDOHV PDVWXUEDWH PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ GR IHPDOHV DQG WKDW RI WKRVH VXEMHFWV ZKR GLG PDVWXUEDWH b RI WKH PDOHV DQG b RI WKH IHPDOHV DOPRVW DOZD\V IDQWDVL]HG GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ &RQFHUQLQJ QRFWXUQDO HPLVVLRQV .LQVH\ HW DO f UHSRUW WKDW 7KH SDUDOOHO EHWZHHQ WKH FRQWHQW RI WKH QRFWXUQDO GUHDP DQG RQHnV RYHUW GD\WLPH H[SHULHQFH KDV EHHQ UHFRJQL]HG E\ DOO SHRSOHV SULPLWLYH DQG FLYLOL]HG VLQFH WKH GDZQ RI KLVWRU\ 7KH SUHVHQW VWXG\ FRQILUPV WKH XVXDO LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV DOWKRXJK LW KDV QRWKLQJ WR FRQWULEXWH WR WKH V\PEROLVP LQ GUHDPV 7KH GUHDP LV XVXDOO\ D UHIOHFWLRQ RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV RYHUW H[SHULHQFH RU RI KLV GHVLUH IRU H[SHULHQFH S f 7KH DXWKRUV IXUWKHU VWDWH WKDW KHWHURVH[XDOV WHQG WR KDYH KHWHURVH[XDOO\ RULHQWHG IDQWDVLHV DQG KRPRVH[XDOV WHQG WR KDYH KRPRVH[XDOO\ RULHQWHG

PAGE 14

IDQWDVLHV ,W LV DSSDUHQW WKDW DSDUW IURP D PRYH DZD\ IURP WKH VXSHUn QDWXUDO LQIOXHQFHV WKDW ZHUH SXUSRUWHG WR H[LVW LQ VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV GXULQJ WKH 0LGGOH $JHV WKH UHIOHFWLRQ RI SV\FKRSDWKRORJ\ ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWHQW RI VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DQG WKH YHULILFDWLRQ RI WKH RFFXUUHQFH RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ ZLWK WKRVH PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV ZKR DGPLWWHG WR IDQWDV\ DQG PDVWXUEDWLRQ OLWWOH ZDV UHDOO\ NQRZQ DERXW VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV XQWLO WKH nV 7KH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH KDV XQGHUJRQH PDQ\ KLVWRULFDO WUDQVLWLRQV 7DQQDKLO f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f UHIHUV WR WKH 0HVRSRWDPLDQ FLYLOL]DWLRQ WR %&f ZKHUH VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV GHULYHG IURP WKH DVVXPSWLRQ WKDW ZRPHQ ZHUH EDVLFDOO\ WKH SURSHUW\ RI WKH PDQ $GXOWHU\ ZDV QRW D PRUDO WUDQVJUHVVLRQ EXW UDWKHU D YLRn ODWLRQ RI DQRWKHU PDQnV SURSHUW\ 7KH SXUSRVH RI PDUULDJH ZDV VWLOO SURFUHDWLRQ QRW FRPSDQLRQVKLS %XOORXJK f DOVR GHOLQHDWHV WKH -HZLVK FRQWULEXWLRQ LQ WKH IRUPDWLRQ RI :HVWHUQ VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV WKURXJK WKHLU HIIHFW RQ WKH VXEVHTXHQW GHYHORSPHQW RI &KULVWLDQLW\

PAGE 15

(DUO\ -XGDLVP EHIRUH %&f KDG D UHODWLYHO\ VLPSOH VH[ FRGH 'XULQJ WKH 7DOPXGLF SHULRG D SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGH SUHGRPLQDWHG LQ ZKLFK WKH UDEELV OHJLWLPL]HG WKH SOHDVXUHV RI VH[ WR VXFK DQ H[WHQW WKDW FRLWXV EHWZHHQ D PDUULHG FRXSOH EHFDPH D UHOLJLRXV GXW\ RQ )ULGD\ QLJKWV /DWHU SHULRGV RI VH[XDO UHSUHVVLRQ GHYHORSHG DV D UHVXOW RI SUHVVXUH XSRQ WKH -HZV WR DVVLPLODWH ZLWK RWKHU FXOWXUHV DQG WKH KRVWLOLW\ RI WKH QHZIRXQG &KULVWLDQV WRZDUG WKH -HZV :RPHQnV VH[XDO GULYH ZDV FRQFHSWXDOL]HG DV EHLQJ PRUH FRQVWDQW DQG DJJUHVVLYH WKDQ WKDW RI WKHLU PDOH FRXQWHUSDUWV $GXOWHU\ ZDV RQO\ DSSOLHG LQ WHUPV RI D PDUULHG ZRPDQ KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK DQ XQPDUULHG PDQ DQG WKH SHQDOW\ ZDV GHDWK 5DSH ZDV FRQVLGHUHG WR EH DW OHDVW LQVWLQFWXDOO\ FRQVHQWHG WR E\ WKH ZRPDQ VLQFH KHU UROH ZDV DQ LQIHULRU RQH LQ -HZLVK VRFLHW\ 7KH *UHHN FXOWXUH ZDV WKH ZHOOVSULQJ IRU WKH FRQFHSW RI URPDQWLF ORYH DFFRUGLQJ WR 0F&DU\ f 7KHUH ZDV D VFKLVP EHWZHHQ VH[XDO ORYH HURVf DQG VSLULWXDO ORYH DJDSHf 0F&UDU\ VWDWHV 6SLULWXDO ORYH ZDV DQ LGHDOL]HG ORYH EHWZHHQ PHQ DQG ZDV FRQVLGHUHG DQ HPRWLRQ VR SXUH WKDW ZRPHQ FRXOG QRW DWWDLQ LW 7KH LGHDO RI *UHHN ORYH ZDV WKHUHIRUH KRPRVH[XDO VLQFH WKH IHPDOH ZDV UHJDUGHG DV WRR ORZO\ DQG LPSHUIHFW IRU WKH HPRWLRQ RI ORYH 7KH HVVHQFH RI EHDXW\ DQG WKH UHDOL]DWLRQ RI ORYH ZHUH IRXQG RQO\ LQ WKH PDOH DQG WKHUHIRUH XVXDOO\ H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ DQ ROGHU PDQ DQG D \RXQJHU ER\ S f &RQVHTXHQWO\ PDUULDJH ZDV VROHO\ IRU WKH SXUSRVH RI SURGXFLQJ FKLOGUHQ DQG QHLWKHU FRQFHSW RI ORYH DSSOLHG WR PDUULHG FRXSOHV ,Q &KULVWLDQLW\ WKH SXULW\ RI ORYH ZDV LGHDOL]HG DV ORYH RI *RG VHSDUDWH IURP VH[XDOLW\ 6H[XDO H[SUHVVLRQ XQGHUZHQW VXSSUHVVLRQ DQG WKURXJK WKH LGHDO RI WKH ZHGGLQJ RI QXQV WR &KULVW LQ D VSLULWXDO VHQVH ZRPHQ ZHUH LGHDOL]HG HJ WKH ,PPDFXODWH &RQFHSWLRQf &RXUWO\ ORYH DURVH LQ WKH VRXWK RI )UDQFH GXULQJ WKH HQG RI WKH WK FHQWXU\ DFFRUGLQJ WR 0F&UDU\ f

PAGE 16

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n WLRQ EXW FRXUWO\ URPDQWLF ORYH ZDV GHYRLG RI EXUGHQV DQG UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV 7KXV URPDQWLF ORYH DQG PDUULDJH ZHUH WZR VHSDUDWH HQWLWLHV WKDW IXOILOOHG HQWLUHO\ VHSDUDWH QHHGV DQG VR ORQJ DV WKH ORYHUV UHPDLQHG VH[XDOO\ YLUWXRXV WKH KXVEDQGnV PDULWDO ULJKWV ZHUH VDIHJXDUGHG DQG WKH UXOHV RI FKLYDOU\ XSKHOG S f 'XULQJ WKH %DURTXH DQG 5RFRFR SHULRGV VH[XDO IDYRUV ZHUH JUDQWHG IRU JDOODQW DFWV DQG WKH IXVLRQ RU FRQIXVLRQf RI VH[ DQG ORYH ZDV HVWDEOLVKHG 0F&DU\ f QRWHV WKDW GXULQJ WKH 5HQDLVVDQFH WKH SODWRQLF GRFWULQH RI HDUWKO\ ORYH WUDQVIRUPHG LQWR D SDWK WRZDUG VSLULWXDO EHDXW\ LH *RGOLNHf ZDV DGRSWHG EXW TXLFNO\ GHJHQHUDWHG XQWLO LQ WKH WK FHQWXU\ SODWRQLF DFDGHPLHV ZHUH QRWKLQJ EXW FRXUWV RI IUHH ORYH S f 7KH FRQFHSW RI URPDQWLF ORYH LQ PDUULDJH ZDV ERUQ LQ WKH WK FHQWXU\ VLQFH WKH FRPPRQ PDQ GLG QRW KDYH WKH UHVRXUFHV WR EH ERWK PDUULHG DQG LQ ORYH ZLWK D PLVWUHVV $PHULFDQ 3XULWDQV YLHZHG PDUULDJH DV D FLYLO FRQWUDFW ZKHUH URPDQWLF ORYH DQG VH[ EHWZHHQ \RXQJ 3XULWDQV ZDV DFFHSWDEOH XQOHVV LW YLRODWHG WKH VDQFWLW\ RI WKH IDPLO\ 'XULQJ WKH LQGXVWULDO UHYROXWLRQ RXU VRFLHW\ EHFDPH PRUH PRELOH IDPLOLDO WLHV ZHUH ZHDNHQHG DQG URPDQWLF WKHPHV EHJDQ WR DSSHDU LQ WKH PDVV PHGLD 0F&DU\ f VWDWHV LQ WKH

PAGE 17

8QLWHG 6WDWHV HVSHFLDOO\ DQ DWWHPSW ZDV PDGH WR FRPELQH VH[ ORYH DQG PDUULDJH LQWR RQH XQLTXH H[SHULHQFH EHWZHHQ RQH PDQ DQG RQH ZRPDQ S f 7KH 3XULWDQ YLHZ RI VH[XDOLW\ JDYH ZD\ WR D 9LFWRULDQ UHLQVWLWXWLRQ RI FRXUWO\ ORYH $FFRUGLQJ WR 7DQQDKLOO f PLGGOH FODVV ODGLHV ZHUH WUDQVIRUPHG LQWR VZHHW XQWRXFKDEOH JXDUGLDQV RI PRUDOLW\ ZKRVH GLVn WDVWH IRU VH[ OHG WR DQ H[SORVLYH LQFUHDVH LQ SURVWLWXWLRQ DQ HSLGHPLF VSUHDG RI YHQHUHDO GLVHDVH DQG D PRUELG WDVWH IRU PDVRFKLVP S f 7KH fV EHFDPH D SHULRG LQ ZKLFK ZRPHQ ZHUH WKH JXDUGLDQV RI SXULW\ DQG FKDVWLW\ ZKLOH PHQ KDG WR VWUXJJOH ZLWK WKHLU EDVH VH[XDO QHHGV DQG WKH VHDUFK IRU VRXUFHV RI VH[XDO H[SUHVVLRQ 6RPH RI WKH HIIHFWV RI WKLV SHULRG RQ KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ DUH DGGUHVVHG E\ %XOORXJK f DQG LQFOXGH WKH IROORZLQJ f WKH SRUWUD\DO RI PHQ DV VH[XDO DJJUHVVRUV DQG ZRPHQ DV UHOXFWDQW YLFWLPV f WKH HPHUJHQFH RI WKH ZRPDQnV UROH DV RQH RI FKLOG UHDUHU DQG KRPHPDNHU ZKLOH VLPXOWDQHRXVO\ P\VWLI\LQJ KHU H[LVWHQFH DQG FRQILQLQJ KHU WR WKH KRPH f WKH FRQGHPQDWLRQ RI PDVWXUEDWLRQ E\ PHGLFDO DXWKRULWLHV GXH WR WKH GUDLQLQJ RI YLWDO HQHUJ\ DQG WKH WKUHDW RI UHVXOWLQJ LQVDQLW\ DQG f WKH LQFUHDVHV LQ SURVWLWXn WLRQ WKH LQFLGHQFH RI YHQHUHDO GLVHDVH WKH VHDUFK IRU FOHDQ YLUJLQV DQG PHGLFDO SURFHGXUHV HJ ULQJ LQVHUWLRQ LQ WKH IRUHVNLQ RI WKH SHQLVf WR OLPLW RQHnV VH[XDO IXQFWLRQLQJ ,Q HIIHFW LW ZDV D SHULRG RI VH[XDO UHSUHVVLRQ DQG WKH SURSDJDWLRQ RI VH[XDO P\WKV VRPH RI ZKLFK SHUVLVW WR WKH SUHVHQW GD\ 7KH GRPLQDQFH RI WKH PDOH DQG WKH VXEPLV VLYHQHVV RI WKH IHPDOH ZHUH UHLQIRUFHG ZLWK SURFUHDWLRQ EHFRPLQJ WKH RQO\ MXVWLILFDWLRQ IRU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ +DYHORFN (OOLV f EHJDQ WKH VWXG\ RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ GXH WR KLV RZQ GLVFRPIRUW ZLWK WKH LJQRUDQFH DQG DQ[LHW\ VXUURXQGLQJ KXPDQ

PAGE 18

VH[XDOLW\ GXULQJ KLV PHGLFDO WUDLQLQJ DQG EHFDXVH D PDQnV VH[XDO WHPSHUDn PHQW LV WRR LQWLPDWH DQG HVVHQWLDO D SDUW RI KLP WR EH YLHZHG ZLWK LQGLIIHUHQFH S YLf (OOLV EHOLHYHG WKDW VH[XDOLW\ VKRXOG EH VWXGLHG DV D VFLHQWLILF GLVFLSOLQH UDWKHU WKDQ OHDYLQJ WKH WRSLF WR EH GHILQHG DFFRUGLQJ WR WKH ZKLPV RI PRUDOLVWV DQG WKHRORJLDQV +H ZDV FDUHIXO WR VHSDUDWH WKH FRQFHSWV RI ORYH DQG OXVW OXVW EHLQJ WKH SK\VLRORJLFDO VH[XDO LPSXOVH DQG ORYH EHLQJ WKDW LPSXOVH LQ DVVRFLDWLRQ ZLWK RWKHU LPSXOVHV S f 2Q WKH VH[XDOLW\ RI ZRPHQ (OOLV f SRLQWHG RXW VHYHUDO GLVDGYDQWDJHV FUHDWHG E\ SDVW GHILQLWLRQV RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ :RPHQ ZHUH QRW GLIIHUHQW EHLQJV WKDQ PHQ EXW RI HVVHQWLDOO\ WKH VDPH VH[XDO FRPSRVLWLRQ :RPHQ VXIIHU PRUH WKDQ PHQ FRQFHUQLQJ VH[XDOLW\ GXH WR LJQRUDQFH DQG SUHMXGLFH RQ WKH SDUW RI VRFLHW\ ZKLFK OHDGV WR PRUH GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ RQ WKH ZRPHQnV SDUW LQ PDUULDJH (OOLV DOVR RXWOLQHG WKUHH PDLQ FKDQQHOV WKURXJK ZKLFK KXPDQ VH[XDO LPSXOVH FRXOG EH GLVn FKDUJHG f :H PD\ DYRLG DOO RYHUW PDQLIHVWDWLRQV OHDYLQJ WKH LPSXOVH WR H[SHQG LWV G\QDPLF HQHUJ\ DORQJ ZKDWHYHU SDWKV QRUPDO RU DEQRUPDO WKH RUJDQLVP PD\ OHQG LWVHOI WR f :H PD\ EH FRQWHQW ZLWK WHPSRUDU\ RU PHUHO\ FDVXDO UHODWLRQVKLSV RI ZKLFK SURVWLWXWLRQ LV WKH IDPLOLDU W\SH f :H PD\ HQWHU LQWR PDUULDJH WKDW LV WR VD\ D VH[XDO UHODWLRQVKLS VHW XS ZLWK WKH LQWHQWLRQ RI LI SRVVLEOH PDNLQJ LW SHUPDQHQW DQG LQYROYLQJ D FRPPXQLW\ RI PRUH WKDQ VH[XDO LQWHUHVWV S f (OOLVn REVHUYDWLRQV RI WKH RSWLRQV IRU VH[XDO H[SUHVVLRQ FRYHU WKH UDQJH RI FRQWHPSRUDU\ VH[XDO EHKDYLRUV LQ D QRQMXGJPHQWDO IDVKLRQ ,W LV LPSRUWDQW WR QRWH WKDW PRUDOLW\ KDV EHHQ VHSDUDWHG IURP VH[XDO IXQFWLRQn LQJ LQ (OOLVn ZRUN DQG WKDW WKH SUREOHPV ZRPHQ IDFH LQ H[SUHVVLQJ WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ KDYH EHHQ DGGUHVVHG 6H[ DV D SULPDU\ KXPDQ PRWLYDWRU ZDV RQH RI WKH UHVXOWV RI 6LJPXQG )UHXGnV f GHYHORSPHQW RI SV\FKRDQDO\VLV )UHXG GLVSHOOHG WKH

PAGE 19

QRWLRQ RI ZRPHQ DV QRQVH[XDO EHLQJV DQG FKDOOHQJHG WKH QRWLRQ RI SURFUHDn WLRQ DQG VXEPLVVLRQ DV WKH RQO\ VH[XDO UROHV ZKLFK ZRPHQ FRXOG IXOILOO )UHXG f SURSRVHG D GLVWLQFWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH VH[XDO REMHFW LH WKH SHUVRQ ZH DUH VH[XDOO\ DWWUDFWHG WRf DQG WKH VH[XDO DLP LH WKH VH[XDO DFW FKRVHQ WR H[SUHVV WKH VH[XDO LQVWLQFWf &RQFHUQLQJ DGXOW VH[XDO GHYHORSPHQW )UHXG VWDWHG WKDW $ SHUVRQnV ILQDO VH[XDO DWWLWXGH LV QRW GHFLGHG XQWLO DIWHU SXEHUW\ DQG LV WKH UHVXOW RI D QXPEHU RI IDFWRUV QRW DOO RI ZKLFK DUH \HW NQRZQ VRPH DUH RI D FRQVWLWXWLRQDO QDWXUH EXW RWKHUV DUH DFFLGHQWDO LQ JHQHUDO WKH PXOWLSOLFLW\ RI GHWHUPLQLQJ IDFWRUV LV UHIOHFWHG LQ WKH YDULHW\ RI PDQLn IHVW VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV LQ ZKLFK WKH\ ILQG WKHLU LVVXH LQ PDQNLQG S f 7KH VH[XDO LQVWLQFW HJ OLELGRf DFFRUGLQJ WR )UHXG LV FRQQHFWHG ZLWK DJJUHVVLRQ DQG FUXHOW\ DQG LV RSSRVHG E\ SDLQ GLVJXVW DQG VKDPH 8QGRXEWHGO\ WKH 9LFWRULDQ UHSUHVVLRQ GXULQJ )UHXGnV GHYHORSPHQW RI D WKHRU\ RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ LQIOXHQFHG KLV FRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQV RI WKH KXPDQ VH[XDO LQVWLQFW DQG WKH EDUULHUV WR LWV H[SUHVVLRQ 'HVSLWH )UHXGnV WKHRULHV WKH V\VWHPDWLF VWXG\ RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ GLG QRW EHJLQ XQWLO ZLWK WKH .LQVH\ VWXGLHV RQ VH[XDO EHKDYLRU DQG DWWLWXGHV .LQVH\ HW DO f .LQVH\nV ZRUN GHWDLOHG WKH VH[XDO EHKDYLRUV RI PDOHV 7KH IHPDOH RUJDVPLF UHVSRQVH ZDV DOVR VWXGLHG LQ DQG RXW RI PDUULDJH $OWKRXJK WKH .LQVH\ VWXGLHV SURYLGHG LPSRUWDQW QRUPV IRU VH[XDO EHKDYLRU ZLWKLQ WKH $PHULFDQ SRSXODWLRQ WKH\ IDLOHG WR DGGUHVV WKH LVVXH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH *HFDV t /LEE\ f 7KLV OLPLWDWLRQ GRHV QRW VHUYH WR PLWLJDWH WKH HQRUPRXV FRQWULn EXWLRQ WKDW .LQVH\nV VWXGLHV EURXJKW WKH DUHD RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ HVSHFLDOO\ WKH EULQJLQJ WR OLJKW RI VH[XDOLW\ DV D WRSLF IRU V\VWHPDWLF VWXG\ DQG RSHQ GLVFXVVLRQ

PAGE 20

7KH VWXG\ RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ RU VH[RORJ\ KDV SUROLIHUDWHG LQ WKH SDVW WZR GHFDGHV 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQnV f VWXG\ RI WKH SK\VLRORJ\ DQG DQDWRP\ RI VH[XDOLW\ KHOSHG WR f GHOLQHDWH KHDOWK\ VH[XDO IXQFWLRQn LQJ f LGHQWLI\ PDOH DQG IHPDOH VH[XDO G\VIXQFWLRQV DQG WR HVWDEOLVK WUHDWPHQW VWUDWHJLHV IRU G\VIXQFWLRQDO LQGLYLGXDOVFRXSOHV DQG f GLVSHO VH[XDO P\WKV HJ WKH IHPDOH YDJLQDO RUJDVPf 6HYHUDO RWKHU VH[RORJLVWV KDYH FRQGXFWHG UHVHDUFK DQG SXEOLVKHG ZRUNV RQ WKH WRSLF RI KXPDQ VH[XDO IXQFWLRQLQJ .DSODQ /R3LFFROR t +HUPDQ /R3LFFROR t 6WHJHU 0RQH\ t 7XFNHU f 2QH GUDZEDFN WR WKH VFLHQWLILF VWXG\ RI VH[XDOLW\ KDV EHHQ DQ RYHUFRQFHUQ DERXW VH[XDO SHUIRUPDQFH DPRQJ WKH JHQHUDO SXEOLF 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ f %HUQVWHLQ f QRWHV WKDW WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFH PXVW QRZ LQFOXGH FRPSHWHQFH PDVWHU\ DQG DFKLHYHPHQW 7KH OLPLWHG QDWXUH RI WKH LQIRUPDWLRQ FRQFHUQLQJ VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV IURP D KLVWRULFDO SHUVSHFWLYH WHQGV WR UHIOHFW WKH WDERR DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH H[SUHVVLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ H[FHSW LQ LVRODWHG OLWHUDU\ UHIHUHQFHV ,Q WKH QH[W VHFWLRQ D UHYLHZ RI WKH FXUUHQW OLWHUDWXUH RQ KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO HURWLF IDQWDVLHV ZLOO EH SUHVHQWHG 7KH FXUUHQW OLWHUDWXUH RQ WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH IRU KHWHURVH[XDOV DQG KRPRVH[XDOV ZLOO IROORZ WKH DERYH 6H[XDO IDQWDVLHV DQG WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH DUH UHODWHG LQ WKDW WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV DWWULEXWLRQV RI PHDQLQJ FRQFHUQLQJ KLVKHU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH DUH ERXQG WR EH UHIOHFWHG LQ WKH VFKHPHV RI KLVKHU VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV HJ GRPLQDQFH RU VXEPLVVLRQf

PAGE 21

7KHRU\ DQG 5HVHDUFK RQ )DQWDV\ 7KH VWXG\ RI IDQWDV\ SURFHVVHV DFFRUGLQJ WR .OLQJHU f VXIIHUHG IURP D PRUDWRULXP RQ WKH VWXG\ RI LQQHU H[SHULHQFH ZLWKLQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV IURP XQWLO 6DLQW $XJXVWLQH LV FUHGLWHG ZLWK SURYLGLQJ D PDMRU LPSHWXV IRU WKH VWXG\ RI LQQHU H[SHULHQFH ZKHQ KH UHDVRQHG WKDW PDQnV NQRZOHGJH RI KLV LQQHU H[SHULHQFH FRXOG VHUYH DV D JXLGH WR KLV NQRZOHGJH RI *RG .OLQJHU f VWDWHV WKDW -RKQ RI 6DOLVEXU\ WKH WK FHQWXU\ SKLORVRSKHU GHYHORSHG D GHVFULSWLRQ IRU WKH FDWHJRULHV RI LQQHU H[SHULHQFH DQG DSSOLHG WKH XQLI\LQJ DVVRFLDWLYH SULQFLSOH H[SRXQGHG HDUOLHU E\ $ULVWRWOH WKDW LGHDV H[SHULHQFHG FRQn WLJXRXVO\ FRPH WR EH OLQNHG LQ IXWXUH WKRXJKW S f 7KH ZRUN RI 7KRPDV +REEHV DQG ODWHU WKH %ULWLVK $VVRFLDWLRQLVW 6FKRRO RI 3V\FKRORJ\ OHG WR WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI VRSKLVWLFDWHG WHFKQLTXHV IRU WKH VWXG\ RI LQQHU HYHQWV LH LQWURVSHFWLRQf $OWKRXJK VHYHUDO VFKRROV RI LQWURVSHFWLYH SV\FKRORJ\ GHYHORSHG DW WKH WXUQ RI WKH FHQWXU\ WKH $PHULFDQ SV\FKRORJLn FDO PRYHPHQW WXUQHG WR WKH VWXG\ RI LQGLYLGXDO GLIIHUHQFHV DQG WKH EHKDYLRULVWLF WHFKQLTXHV WKDW ZHUH GHULYHG IURP WKH 'DUZLQLDQ PHWKRG RI VWXG\ $V .OLQJHU f VWDWHV 7KH YHU\ VXFFHVV RI WKH LQWURVSHFWLRQLVW SV\FKRORJLVWV LQ IRUPXODWLQJ LQFUHDVLQJO\ SUHFLVH DQG UHYHDOLQJ TXHVWLRQV SODFHG LQFUHDVLQJ GHPDQGV RQ WKH REVHUYDWLRQDO DQG MXGJn PHQWDO FDSDFLWLHV RI WKHLU KLJKO\ WUDLQHG REVHUYHUVXEMHFWV (YHQWXDOO\ WKH GHPDQGV SURYHG WRR JUHDW DQG WKH PHWKRGV WKHQ DYDLODEOH IRU WKH IXUWKHU HPSLULFDO LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI LQQHU H[SHULHQFH ZHUH VKRZQ WR EH LQDGHTXDWH SS f .OLQJHU f QRWHV WKDW XQWLO QRW D VLQJOH YROXPH ZDV SXEn OLVKHG LQ WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV WKDW ZDV WRWDOO\ GHYRWHG WR WKH V\VWHPDWLF VWXG\ RI IDQWDV\ 7KH DXWKRUV RI WKH nV IRFXVHG RQ -XQJLDQ RU SV\FKRDQDO\WLF FRQFHSWV LQ WKHLU WKHRUHWLFDO ZRUN RQ IDQWDVLHV

PAGE 22

6LQJHU f ZDV RQH RI WKH ILUVW PRGHUQ DXWKRUV WR DWWHPSW WR GHILQH GD\GUHDPLQJ $FFRUGLQJ WR 6LQJHU GD\GUHDPLQJ LV XVHG WR PHDQ D VKLIW RI DWWHQWLRQ DZD\ IURP DQ RQJRLQJ SK\VLFDO RU PHQWDO WDVN RU IURP D SHUFHSWXDO UHVSRQVH WR H[WHUQDO VWLPXODWLRQ WRZDUGV D UHVSRQVH WR VRPH LQWHUQDO VWLPXOXV S f $OWKRXJK SURSRVHG GHILQLWLRQV RI IDQWDV\ KHOS WR FRQFHSWXDOL]H WKH IDQWDV\ SURFHVV .OLQJHU f QRWHV WKDW WKHUH DUH VHYHUDO SUREOHPV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK SURYLGLQJ D FRPSUHKHQn VLYH GHILQLWLRQ RI IDQWDV\ 7KH SUREOHPV LQFOXGH f D VHW RI JHQHUDOO\ DFFHSWHG FULWHULD IRU GHWHUPLQLQJ WKH ERXQGULHV RI IDQWDV\ GRHV QRW H[LVW f IDQWDV\ LV VLPLODU WR UHODWHG SURFHVVHV LH SODQn QLQJ UHPLQLVFLQJ DQDO\]LQJ SDVW HYHQWV HWFf ZKLFK VHUYH WR REIXVFDWH WKH WUXH ERXQGULHV RI IDQWDV\ f VLQFH IDQWDV\ LV SULPDULO\ D PHQWDO SURFHVV LW LV QHFHVVDULO\ FRYHUW LQ QDWXUH DQG WKH UHVHDUFKHU LV FRPn SHOOHG WR UHO\ RQ VXEMHFWVn YHUEDO UHSRUWV DQG f WKH SUREOHP RI GLIIHUHQWLDWLQJ YHUEDO UHSRUWV UHIOHFWLQJ SUREOHPV LQ WKH VXEMHFWnV OLIH LH WDVNGLUHFWHG LGHDWLRQf IURP UHSRUWV RI DFWXDO IDQWDV\ LGHDWLRQ 'HVSLWH WKH DIRUHPHQWLRQHG SUREOHPV .OLQJHU f SURSRVHV WKH IROORZLQJ GHILQLWLRQ RI IDQWDV\ 9HUEDO UHSRUWV RI DOO PHQWDWLRQ ZKRVH LGHDWLRQDO SURGXFWV DUH QRW HYDOXDWHG E\ WKH VXEMHFW LQ WHUPV RI WKHLU XVHIXOn QHVV LQ DGYDQFLQJ VRPH LPPHGLDWH JRDO H[WULQVLF WR WKH PHQn WDWLRQ LWVHOI WKDW LV IDQWDV\ LV GHILQHG DV UHSRUW RI PHQWDWLRQ RWKHU WKDQ RULHQWLQJ UHVSRQVHV WR RU VFDQQLQJ RI H[WHUQDO VWLPXOL RU RSHUDQW DFWLYLW\ VXFK DV SUREOHPn VROYLQJ LQ D WDVN VLWXDWLRQ SS f 7KURXJK D FRPSDULVRQ RI WKH VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ SOD\ DQG IDQWDV\ .OLQJHU FRQFHSWXDOL]HV D WUDQVLWLRQ IURP DQ LQIDQWnV XQGLIIHUHQWLDWHG PDVWHU\ RI SOD\ DQG IDQWDV\ WR WKH VKDUS GHFOLQH RI SOD\ DQG GUDPDWLF LQFUHDVH LQ IDQWDV\ GXULQJ SXEHUW\ 'UHDPV DQG IDQWDV\ EHFRPH

PAGE 23

PDQLIHVWDWLRQV RI DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV GLXUQDO F\FOH ZKHUH WKHUH LV D VKLIW IURP RQH WR WKH RWKHU GHSHQGLQJ RQ WKH VOHHSZDNLQJ F\FOH .OLQJHU f VHHV WKLV DV D FRQWLQXRXV VWUHDP RI DFWLYLW\ ZKLFK UHSUHVHQWV D EDVHOLQH RI DFWLYLW\ WR ZKLFK LQGLYLGXDOV UHWXUQ ZKHQ WKH\ DUH QRW HQJDJHG LQ VFDQQLQJ RU DFWLQJ XSRQ WKHLU HQYLURQPHQW S f 8WLOL]n LQJ WKLV FRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQ IDQWDV\ DQG GUHDPLQJ RFFXU ZKHQ WKH PLQG LV QRW RFFXSLHG ZLWK WKH QHFHVVLW\ RI PRQLWRULQJ WKH HQYLURQPHQW 7KH UHDGHU PD\ KDYH QRWLFHG D EHKDYLRULVWLF EHQW WR .OLQJHUfV f WKHRU\ ,Q HOXFLGDWLQJ WKH FRPSRQHQWV RI IDQWDV\ .OLQJHU SURn SRVHV WKDW IDQWDV\ LV D UHVSRQVH SURFHVV DQG WKDW VHJPHQWV RI IDQWDV\ FDQ EH UHJDUGHG DV VHTXHQFHV RI UHVSRQVHV 7KH UHVSRQVH VHJPHQWV DUH LQWHJUDWHG GXH WR WKH XQLWDU\ RUJDQL]HG QDWXUH RI ORZHURUGHU IDQWDV\ VHJPHQWV ZKLFK IORZ VPRRWKO\ UDSLGO\ DQG DXWRPDWLFDOO\ ZKLOH DOORZLQJ IRU QRYHOW\ .OLQJHU f SRLQWV RXW WKDW FRQFHSWXDOL]LQJ IDQWDV\ DV D IRUP RI UHVSRQVH LQWHJUDWLRQ HQDEOHV WKH UHVHDUFKHU WR H[SODLQ WKH HUUDWLF FRXUVH RI IDQWDVLHV ZKHUH HQYLURQPHQWDO IHHGEDFN LV ODUJHO\ LUUHOHYDQW DQG GRHV QRW VHUYH WR PRGLI\ WKH IDQWDV\ FRQWHQW 7KLV ZRXOG KHOS WR H[SODLQ WKH XQUHDOLVWLF RU VXUUHDOLVWLF QDWXUH RI IDQWDVLHV DQG WKH ODFN RI UHDOLW\ WHVWLQJ LQYROYHG LQ DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV IDQWDV\ OLIH 7KLV LV QRW WR VD\ WKDW IDQWDVLHV DUH WRWDOO\ XQUHODWHG WR DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV SHUFHSWLRQV RI KLV HQYLURQPHQW VLQFH WKH HIIHFW RI FXUUHQW FRQFHUQV RQ IDQWDV\ FRQWHQW LV EHVW GHVFULEHG DV D SRWHQWLDWLQJ LQIOXHQFH LQFUHDVLQJ WKH SUREDELOLW\ WKDW LGHDWLRQ UHOHYDQW WR WKH LQFHQWLYHV WKDW DUH WKH REMHFW RI WKH FRQFHUQ ZLOO RFFXU LQ IDQWDV\ .OLQJHU S f $W WKH VDPH WLPH WKH WKHPDWLF FRQWHQW RI D IDQWDV\ VHJPHQW LV RQO\ ORRVHO\ UHODWHG WR WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV OHDUQHG

PAGE 24

SDWWHUQV RI RYHUW EHKDYLRU DQG WKHUHIRUH DWWHPSWV WR SUHGLFW RYHUW EHKDYLRU IURP IDQWDV\ FRQWHQW DUH ULVN\ SURSRVLWLRQV 7KH WKHPDWLF FRQWHQW RI D SHUVRQnV IDQWDVLHV DFFRUGLQJ WR .OLQJHU f VHHPV WR EH PRUH FORVHO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKDW LQGLYLGXDOnV VHOIFRQFHSW DQG WKH IDQWDV\ WKHPHV PD\ DFWXDOO\ KHOS WR VKDSH SDUW RI WKH VHOIFRQFHSW 6HYHUDO RI WKH IXQFWLRQV RU XVHV RI IDQWDV\ KDYH EHHQ RXWOLQHG E\ SV\FKRWKHUDSLVWV DQG FRXQVHORUV .HOO\ f OLVWV VHYHUDO XVHV IRU HPSOR\LQJ D JXLGHG IDQWDV\ WHFKQLTXH LQ WKH FRXQVHOLQJ RI DGROHVFHQWV ,W FDQ EH XVHG f WR HQFRXUDJH UHODWLYHO\ IUHHO\ DVVRFLDWHG XQn FHQVRUHG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ f WR DOOHYLDWH LPSDVVHV f WR HQFRXUDJH SUHOLPLQDU\ H[SUHVVLRQ f WR IRFXV PRUH GHHSO\ f WR RSHQ QHZ DYHQXHV RI LQVLJKW DQG f WR JDLQ LQVLJKW LQWR SK\VLRORJLFDO UHDFWLRQV RU FRPSODLQWV .HOO\ f DOVR DGYRFDWHV WKH FRXQVHORUV XVH RI WKHLU RZQ IDQWDVLHV GXULQJ VHVVLRQV ZLWK D FOLHQW LQ RUGHU WR EULQJ D QHZ GLPHQVLRQ RI FUHDWLYLW\ WR WKH FRXQVHOLQJ UHODWLRQVKLS S f +H DOVR QRWHV WKDW LPDJHU\ LQ FRXQVHOLQJ PD\ KHOS FOLHQWV WR PDQLSXODWH WKHLU LPDJHV LQ FUHDWLYH ZD\V WDS XQUHDOL]HG SRWHQWLDOV DQG PRELOL]H WKH HQHUJLHV RI WKH ZLOO .OLQJHU f PHQWLRQV WKH IDQWDV\OLNH SURFHVV LQ SV\FKRDQDO\WLF IUHH DVVRFLDWLRQ DQG WKH XVH RI IDQWDV\ LQ GLDJQRVWLF ZRUN ZKHUH D SDWLHQWnV FRJQLWLYH PDSV VHPDQWLFV H[SHFn WDQFLHV FRSLQJ UHSHUWRULHV DQG LQFHQWLYH FRPPLWPHQWV S f FDQ EH JOHDQHG IURP LPDJHU\ WKDW D SDWLHQW UHSRUWV .OLQJHU JRHV RQ WR OLVW WKH IROORZLQJ IXQFWLRQV RI IDQWDV\ IRU FOLHQWV f WR VWHHU WKHP DZD\ IURP RYHUWO\ WKUHDWHQLQJ FRQWHQW f WR DOORZ IRU WKH UHKHDUVDO RI WKHPHV ZKLFK FDQ HYHQWXDOO\ EHFRPH D SDUW RI WKH FOLHQWnV LQQHU UHDOLW\ HJ VHOIZRUWKf f WR LPSURYH PHQWDO KHDOWK E\ UHGXFLQJ GHSHQGHQF\

PAGE 25

RQ RXWVLGH VRXUFHV RI VWLPXODWLRQ IRVWHULQJ SDWLHQFH DQG LPSURYLQJ FRSLQJ FDSDELOLWLHV DQG f WR SUHYHQW D EXLOGXS RI KRVWLOLW\ DQG DQ[LHW\ VWUHQJWKHQ RU XQGHUPLQH UHVLVWDQFH WR WHPSWDWLRQ DQG LPSURYH D FOLHQWnV VHOIFRPPXQLFDWLRQ E\ LQFUHDVLQJ DZDUHQHVV RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI KLVKHU LQQHU OLIH $ FRPSOHWH WKHUDS\ V\VWHP EDVHG RQ WKH XVH RI IDQWDV\ JXLGHG DIIHFWLYH LPDJHU\ *$,f ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ /HXQHU f 7KH EDVLF SURFHGXUH RI *$, LV IRU WKH WKHUDSLVW WR LQGXFH UHOD[DWLRQ LQ WKH FOLHQW DQG WKHQ WR JXLGH WKH FOLHQW WKURXJK VWDQGDUG LPDJLQDU\ VLWXn DWLRQV 7KHUH LV DQ HPSKDVLV RQ WKH V\PEROLVP RI WKH LPDJHU\ VLWXDWLRQV DQG RQ HQKDQFHPHQW RI WKH FOLHQWnV HPRWLRQV /HXQHU f JRHV RQ WR OLVW ILYH JHQHUDO PHWKRGV IRU HYRNLQJ DQG LQWHUSUHWLQJ WKH FOLHQWnV LPDJHU\ *$, LV SULPDULO\ JURXQGHG LQ SV\FKRDQDO\WLF WKHRU\ DQG FDQ EH YLHZHG DV D VWUXFWXUHG H[WHQVLRQ RI WKH EDVLF WHFKQLTXHV RI IUHH DVVRFLn DWLRQ DQGRU GUHDP LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ *XLGHG IDQWDV\ KDV DOVR EHHQ XVHG LQ FDUHHU FRXQVHOLQJ DQG VH[ WKHUDS\ 6NRYKROW DQG +RHQQLQJHU f VWDWH WKDW JXLGHG IDQWDV\ FDQ EH XVHG WR DGGUHVV VH[ UROH FRQIOLFWV DV WKH\ UHODWH WR FDUHHU GHYHORSn PHQW DQG WKH LQGLUHFW H[SUHVVLRQ RI D FOLHQWnV HPRWLRQV JRDOV DQG EHOLHIV ZKLFK DUH XVHIXO LQ KHOSLQJ WKH FOLHQW WR PDNH FDUHHU GHFLVLRQV $Q H[WHQVLRQ RI WKLV ZRUN ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ 0RUJDQ DQG 6NRYKROW f ZKR FLWH UHVHDUFK ZKLFK GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW RFFXSDWLRQDO GD\GUHDPV DUH LPSRUWDQW LQ SUHGLFWLQJ IXWXUH RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFH DQG WKDW DQ LQGLYLGn XDO nV WRS RFFXSDWLRQDO GD\GUHDP WHQGV WR EH PRUH SUHGLFWLYH >RI IXWXUH RFFXSDWLRQDO FKRLFH@ WKDQ WKDW LQGLYLGXDOnV VHOIGLUHFWHG VHDUFK VXPPDU\ FRGH S f 6H[ WKHUDSLVWV KDYH RXWOLQHG WKH XVH RI IDQWDV\ LQ WKH

PAGE 26

WUHDWPHQW RI VH[XDO G\VIXQFWLRQV HLWKHU WKURXJK V\VWHPDWLF GHVHQVLWL]Dn WLRQ RU WKH HQKDQFHPHQW RI VH[XDO DURXVDO HJ .DSODQ 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ f 7KH DERYH VXPPDU\ RI WKH WKHRU\ DQG IXQFWLRQV RI JHQHUDO IDQWDV\ SURYLGHV D IUDPH RI UHIHUHQFH IRU WKH IROORZLQJ UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ KHWHURVH[XDO VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 6LPLODU SUREOHPV H[LVW LQ IRUPXODWLQJ D FRPSUHKHQVLYH GHILQLWLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ GHYLVLQJ PHWKRGV ZLWK ZKLFK WR VWXG\ DQ LQQHU H[SHULHQFH VXFK DV IDQWDV\ DQG GHWHUPLQLQJ WKH PRWLn YDWLRQV EHOLHIV DQG YDOXHV HPEHGGHG ZLWKLQ DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV VH[ IDQWDV\ WKHPHV 5HVHDUFK RQ +HWHURVH[XDO 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ 7KH DUHD RI KHWHURVH[XDO HURWLF RU VH[XDO IDQWDV\ LV VWLOO LQ LWV LQIDQF\ LQ WHUPV RI V\VWHPDWLF HPSLULFDO VWXG\ 7KH VDPH OLPLWDWLRQV WKDW DSSO\ WR WKH VWXG\ RI WKH PRUH JHQHUDO IDQWDVLHV DOVR SHUWDLQ WR WKH VWXG\ RI HURWLF IDQWDV\ 7KH ILUVW REVWDFOH WKDW D VH[ IDQWDV\ UHVHDUFKHU PXVW FRQWHQG ZLWK LV WR GHILQH WKH SKHQRPHQRQ RI HURWLF IDQWDV\ LQ D FRPSUHKHQVLYH PDQQHU .OLQJHU f DGGUHVVHG WKH LVVXH RI GHILQLQJ IDQWDV\ DQG VWDWHG WKDW VXFK D GHILQLWLRQ VKRXOG HQFRPSDVV WKH SKHQRPHQRQ RI IDQWDV\ QRW RQO\ FRQFHSWXDOO\ EXW DOVR RSHUDWLRQDOO\ RU DW OHDVW SURYLGH PHDQV IRU HPSOR\LQJ RSHUDWLRQV WR GLVWLQJXLVK LW IURP RWKHU IRUPV RI DFWLYLW\ S f $W WKH VDPH WLPH .OLQJHU DOVR FRQFHGHV WKDW WKH ODFN RI WKHRUHWLFDO GHYHORSPHQW FRQFHUQLQJ WKH FRQFHSW RI IDQWDV\ LV QHFHVVDU\ DW WKLV MXQFWXUH LQ WLPH EHFDXVH RI WKH SDXFLW\ RI UHVHDUFK RQ WKH WRSLF +H VWDWHG /DFN RI WKHRUHWLFDO FRPPLWPHQW LV GHVLUDEOH DW WKLV HDUO\ VWDJH VLQFH LW DYRLGV WRR JUHDWO\ FRQVWUDLQLQJ WKH

PAGE 27

WKHRUHWLFDO GHYHORSPHQW ZKLFK WKH GHILQLWLRQ LV LQWHQGHG WR IRVWHU ,Q DQ\ FDVH VFLHQWLILF WD[RQRPLHV GHSHQG XSRQ WKH VWDWH RI UHOHYDQW NQRZOHGJH DQG WKH UHOHYDQW EHKDYLRUDO GRPDLQ KDV VLPSO\ EHHQ LQVXIILFLHQWO\ PDSSHG WR VXSSRUW WKH VHWWLQJ RU ULJRURXV SRVLWLYH ERXQGDULHV RQ WKH FRQFHSW RI IDQWDV\ .OLQJHU S f &XUUHQW GHILQLWLRQV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ UDQJH IURP WKH VLPSOLVWLF WR WKH PRUH FRPSOH[ GHSHQGLQJ RQ WKH H[SHULPHQWDO VRSKLVWLFDWLRQ RI WKH DXWKRU LQ TXHVWLRQ )DUDGD\ f XWLOL]HV WKH WHUP VH[ GUHDPV WR GHQRWH GUHDPV GHSLFWLQJ RYHUW VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ RU H[SOLFLW VH[XDO IHHOLQJV S f $ PRUH VSHFLILF GHILQLWLRQ ZLWK SV\FKRDQDO\WLF OHDQLQJV LV SURYLGHG E\ )ULGD\ f 6KH VWDWHV D IDQWDV\ LV D PDS RI GHVLUH PDVWHU\ HVFDSH DQG REVFXUDWLRQV WKH QDYLJDWLRQDO SDWK ZH LQYHQW WR VWHHU RXUVHOYHV EHWZHHQ WKH UHHIV DQG VKRDOV RI DQ[LHW\ JXLOW DQG LQKLELWLRQ ,W LV D ZRUN RI FRQVFLRXVQHVV EXW LQ UHDFWLRQ WR XQFRQVFLRXV SUHVVXUHV )ULGD\ S f ,QKHUHQW LQ )ULGD\nV GHILQLWLRQ DUH VRPH RI WKH SRVVLEOH IXQFWLRQV RI VH[ IDQWDV\ HJ HVFDSHf 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f GHILQH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ E\ GHYHORSLQJ WZR FDWHJRULHV ZLWKLQ ZKLFK WR FODVVLI\ WKHP )UHHIORDWLQJ IDQWDVLHV DUH IDQWDVLHV VSRQWDQHRXVO\ HYROYHG E\ PHQ DQG ZRPHQ LQ UHVSRQVH WR VH[XDO IHHOLQJV RU QHHGV ZLWKRXW UHVWUDLQWV RI WLPH RU SODFH S f 6KRUWWHUP IDQWDVLHV DUH VWLPXODQW PHFKDQLVPV IUHTXHQWO\ LQ UHVSRQVH WR LPPLQHQW VH[XDO RSSRUWXQLW\ S f 7KHVH IDQWDVLHV WHQG WR VHUYH DQ DURXVDO IXQFWLRQ 7KH PRVW FRPSUHKHQVLYH GHILQLWLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ LV SURYLGHG E\ 0HGQLFN f +H GHILQHV IDQWDV\ LQ WKH IROORZLQJ PDQQHU *HQHUDOf§6H[XDO IDQWDV\ DQ\ PHQWDO LPDJH RU LPDJLQDWLRQ ZKLFK FRQWDLQV VH[XDO PDWWHU DQGRU LV VH[XDOO\ DURXVLQJ WR WKH SHUVRQ KDYLQJ WKH IDQWDV\

PAGE 28

,'D\GUHDP VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQ\ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ ZKLFK LV H[SHULHQFHG DW DQ\ WLPH GD\ RU QLJKW H[FHSW LQ QRFWXUQDO GUHDPLQJf RWKHU WKDQ GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ RU VH[XDO UHODWLRQV ,,0DVWXUEDWRU\ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQ\ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ H[SHULHQFHG GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ ZKLFK LV VH[XDOO\ DURXVLQJ ,,,6H[XDO IDQWDV\ GXULQJ VH[XDO UHODWLRQV DQ\ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ H[SHULHQFHG GXULQJ VH[XDO UHODWLRQV ZLWK DQRWKHU SHUVRQ XVXDOO\ OHDGLQJ XS WR DQGRU RFFXUULQJ GXULQJ VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH S f 0HGQLFNnV GHILQLWLRQ DOORZV IRU WKH FODVVLILFDWLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV LQWR WKUHH DFWLYLW\ FDWHJRULHV HJ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU PDVWXUEDWLRQ GD\GUHDPLQJf 6HYHUDO DXWKRUV KDYH FRPPHQWHG RQ WKH IXQFWLRQV RU XVHV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 7KHVH IXQFWLRQV FDQ EH FDWHJRUL]HG DFFRUGLQJ WR WKH SRVLWLYH RU QHJDWLYH FRQQRWDWLRQV WKDW WKH\ LPSO\ FRQFHUQLQJ DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV VH[ IDQWDVLHV 7KH SRVLWLYH IXQFWLRQV RI VH[ IDQWDV\ LQFOXGH f IDQWDVLHV DV LQLWLDO UHKHDUVDOV DQG YLFDULRXV RUJDQL]DWLRQV RI VRFLRVH[XDO GUDPDV ZKLFK LQFRUSRUDWH V\PEROLF UHSUHVHQWDWLRQV IURP D SDUWLFXODU PDWXUDWLRQDO VWDJH LQ ZKLFK WKH IDQWDVLHV RFFXU *DJQRQ t 6LPRQ f f IDQWDVLHV DV WRROV IRU HOLFLWLQJ RU HQKDQFLQJ VH[XDO DURXVDO &DPSDJQD +DULWRQ +DULWRQ t 6LQJHU 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ 6XOOLYDQ f f IDQWDVLHV DV VDIHW\ YDOYHV IRU VH[XDO VWULYLQJV WKDW FRXOG EH KDUPIXO WR WKH LQGLYLGXDO RU WKH LQWHQGHG VH[ SDUWQHU .URQKDXVHQ t .URQKDXVHQ f f WR UHFDOO SUHYLRXV VH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV ZKLFK ZHUH SOHDVXUDEOH 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ 6ODWWHU\ f DQG f IDQWDV\ DV D ZD\ WR LQWURGXFH YDULHW\ DQG SOD\OLNH VWLPXODWLRQ LQWR WKH VH[ OLIH RI WKH LQGLYLGXDO &DUOVRQ t &ROHPDQ f

PAGE 29

7KH QHJDWLYH IXQFWLRQV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ LQFOXGH WKH QHHG f WR DYRLG DFNQRZOHGJPHQW RI ZDQWLQJ VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH HJ UDSH IDQWDV\f DPRQJ ZRPHQ +DZNLQV +ROOHQGHU f f WR DYRLG DQ[LHW\ RU SDQLF GXULQJ VH[XDO UHODWLRQV )ULGD\ +ROOHQGHU f f WR FRSH ZLWK IHHOLQJV RI JXLOW )ULGD\ +ROOHQGHU f f WR H[SUHVV ZRPHQnV PDVRFKLVWLF QDWXUH DQG WKHLU QHHG IRU VXEPLVVLRQ LQ RUGHU WR VXSSUHVV WKHLU VWULYLQJV IRU GRPLQDQFH +ROOHQGHU f DQG f WR VHUYH DV D VWLPXOXV IRU FRQIOLFW )UHXG f ,W LV LPSRUWDQW WR QRWH WKDW WKH PDMRULW\ RI WKH QHJDWLYH IXQFWLRQV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ KDYH EHHQ DWWULEXWHG WR WKH IDQWDV\ OLIH RI ZRPHQ 6RPH RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ LV RI D QRQHPSLULFDO QDWXUH DQG EHORQJV LQ WKH FDWHJRU\ RI SRS SV\FKRORJ\ 6ODWWHU\ f FRQGXFWHG LQWHUYLHZV ZLWK PHQ RI GLIIHUHQW VRFLRHFRQRPLF VWDWXV RYHU D ILYH\HDU SHULRG +H GLYLGHG IDQWDVLHV LQWR ILYH FDWHJRULHV LQFOXGLQJ f KHWHURVH[XDO IDQWDVLHV f KRPRVH[XDO IDQWDVLHV f ELVH[XDO IDQWDVLHV f VDGRPDVRFKLVWLF IDQWDVLHV DQG f DVVRUWHG IDQWDVLHV 'XH WR WKH QRQV\VWHPDWLF QDWXUH RI WKH LQWHUYLHZLQJ DQG WKH ODFN RI LQVLJKWIXO FRPPHQWDU\ 6ODWWHU\nV ZRUN LV EHVW FRQVLGHUHG DQ DGGLWLRQ WR HURWLF OLWHUDWXUH .URQKDXVHQ DQG .URQKDXVHQ f FRPSOHWHG D V\VWHPDWLF UHYLHZ RI HURWLF XQGHUJURXQG OLWHUDWXUH ERWK DQFLHQW DQG PRGHUQ DQG IURP DOO SDUWV RI WKH ZRUOG S [Yf $OWKRXJK WKH\ SURYLGH VRPH SV\FKRDQDO\WLF LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV IRU WKH IDQWDVLHV WKDW WKH\ IRXQG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH WKH DXWKRUV GR QRW SURYLGH D FRKHUHQW FRQFLVH VFKHPH IRU WKH HYDOXDWLRQ RU H[SOLFDWLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ FRQWHQW ,Q D VWXG\ RI PHQnV VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV )ULGD\ f FROOHFWHG OHWWHUV IURP WKH UHDGHUV RI D QDWLRQDO PHQnV PDJD]LQH )ULGD\nV

PAGE 30

VDPSOH LV VHOIDGPLWWHGO\ QRQUHSUHVHQWDWLYH DQG WKH FRPPHQWV WKDW VKH PDNHV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH FRQWHQWV RI WKH IDQWDVLHV DUH VSHFXODWLYH DQG JHQHUDO LQ QDWXUH 6HYHUDO DUWLFOHV RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ KDYH EHHQ ZULWWHQ E\ FOLQLFLDQV GUDZLQJ RQ WKHLU H[SHULHQFHV ZLWK SDWLHQW SRSXODWLRQV +ROOHQGHU f GLVFXVVHG ZRPHQnV FRLWDO IDQWDVLHV DQG WKH LPSOLFDWLRQV RI IDQWDVL]LQJ RQ WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO G\QDPLFV RI VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH +H K\SRWKHVL]HV WKDW ZRPHQ KDYH IDQWDVLHV PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ PHQ GR DQG WKDW WKH IXQFWLRQ RI WKH IDQWDV\ LV WR UHPRYH WKH ZRPDQ SV\FKRORJLFDOO\ IURP ERWK WKH VH[XDO DFW DQG WKH SHUVRQ ZLWK ZKRP VKH LV HQJDJHG 7KHUH DUH WZR EDVLF WKHPHV LQKHUHQW LQ WKHFRQWHQWRI ZRPHQfV IDQWDVLHV GXULQJ LQWHUFRXUVH DFFRUGn LQJ WR +ROOHQGHU f f DQ[LHW\ FRQFHUQLQJ D VDGRPDVRFKLVWLF RULHQWDWLRQ WR VH[XDOLW\ DQG f JXLOW VWHPPLQJ IURP IRUELGGHQ IHHOLQJV PDLQO\ 2HGLSDO S f ,Q +ROOHQGHU LQWHUYLHZHG HLJKW QRUPDO LH QRQSDWLHQWf ZRPHQ DQG PRGLILHG KLV YLHZV E\ VWDWLQJ WKDW IDQWDVLHV GXULQJ VH[ PD\ QRW EH VLJQV RI QHXURVLV EXW DWWHPSWV WR UHVROYH EURDGHU FRQIOLFWV ,Q D VLPLODU YLHZ +DZNLQV f DGGUHVVHG WKH LVVXH RI GLVWXUELQJ HURWLF IDQWDVLHV +LV PDLQ WKHVLV LV WKDW VH[XDOO\ GHSULYHG LQGLYLGXDOV PD\ HQJDJH LQ HURWLF IDQWDVLHV GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ WR WKH SRLQW RI KDYLQJ YLYLG KDOOXFLQDWLRQV ,Q KLV VFKHPH +DZNLQV YLHZV ZRPHQnV UDSH IDQWDVLHV DV WKHLU ZD\ RI VHHNLQJ DEVROXWLRQ IURP WKH UHVSRQVLELOLW\ RI HQJDJLQJ LQ FRLWXV ZLOOLQJO\ 0HQnV IDQWDVLHV RI SK\VLFDOO\ DQG VH[XDOO\ RYHUSRZHULQJ ZRPHQ DUH UHSUHVHQWDWLYH RI UHn SUHVVHG VDGLVWLF LPSXOVHV (JRDOLHQ IDQWDVLHV DUH LQGLFDWLRQV RI VKDPH GLVJXVW DQG JXLOW FRQFHUQLQJ WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV VH[XDO ORQJLQJV HJ KRPRVH[XDO IDQWDVLHVf

PAGE 31

(URWLF IDQWDVLHV GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ FDQ EH YLHZHG DV LQGLFDWRUV RI DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV GHHSHVW VH[XDO GHVLUHV 6XOOLYDQ f YLHZV IDQWDV\ DV D WHFKQLTXH ZKLFK DOORZV IRU WKH H[SUHVVLRQ RI GHVLUHV XQOLPLWHG E\ UHDOLW\ S f +H H[SORUHV VHYHUDO GHWHUPLQDQWV RI VSHFLILF PDVWXUn EDWLRQ IDQWDVLHV LQFOXGLQJ f DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV SHUVRQDO H[SHULHQFH f GHHS VWLUULQJV RI D QRQVH[XDO QDWXUH HJ ZRPHQnV VRFLHWDO VWDWXVf f D ODFN RI VH[XDO NQRZOHGJH DQG f DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV RZQ LQWHUQDO GLVDSSURYDO HJ 2HGLSDO IDQWDVLHVf 7KH WDVN RI WKH SV\FKRWKHUDSLVW LV WR KHOS WKH FOLHQW E\ EHLQJ DQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ OLVWHQHU DQG WR UHDVVXUH KLPKHU WKDW WKH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ RFFXUV FRPPRQO\ DPRQJ QRUPDO LQGLYLGn XDOV $ VWXG\ RI WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI PHQ DQG ZRPHQ ZDV FRQGXFWHG E\ %DUFOD\ f DOWKRXJK QR PHQWLRQ LV PDGH RI WKH GHPRJUDSKLF FKDUDFWHUn LVWLFV RI WKH VXEMHFW SRSXODWLRQ RU WKH PHWKRG RI GDWD FROOHFWLRQ 6H[ GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH SUHGLFWHG GXH WR KRUPRQDO GLIIHUHQFHV DQG WKH GLIIHUn HQFHV LQ VRFLDOL]DWLRQ EHWZHHQ PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV LQ RXU FXOWXUH %DUFOD\ f VWDWHV LQ VKRUW RXU PDOH IDQWDVLHV ZHUH VWHUHRW\SHG LQ WKDW WKH\ DOO UHVHPEOHG VWRULHV RI VH[ ZLWKRXW LQWHUSHUVRQDO LQYROYHPHQW ZRPHQ DUH DOZD\V VHGXFWLYH DQG IRUZDUG >LQ PHQnV IDQWDVLHV@ UHDG\ WR KDYH LQWHUFRXUVH DW DQ\ WLPH PHQnV IDQWDVLHV KDYH LQ FRPPRQ D PDMRU HPSKDVLV RQ KLJKO\ YLVXDO LPDJHU\ S f &RQFHUQLQJ ZRPHQnV IDQWDVLHV %DUFOD\ f VWDWHV HYHQ WKRXJK WKH IDQWDV\ ZDV YLYLG WKH IHPDOH VXEMHFWV DSSHDUHG WR EH PRUH LQYROYHG ZLWK WKHLU RZQ HPRn WLRQDO UHVSRQVHV WKDQ ZLWK WKH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI WKHLU SDUWQHUV S f 7KH LPSOLFDWLRQV RI WKH VWXG\ DUH WKDW PHQ DQG ZRPHQ KDYH GLIIHUHQW PRWLn YDWLRQV IRU DQG JRDOV LQ WKHLU VH[XDOLW\

PAGE 32

$OWKRXJK WKH LVVXHV UDLVHG LQ WKHVH DUWLFOHV DUH SURYRFDWLYH WKH ODFN RI D V\VWHPDWLF DSSURDFK HJ WKH VSHFLILFDWLRQ RI VXEMHFW FKDUn DFWHULVWLFV H[SHULPHQWDO PHWKRGV DQG D FRPSUHKHQVLYH ELELRJUDSK\f UHOHJDWHV WKH K\SRWKHVHV WR WKH UHDOP RI HGXFDWHG JXHVVHV 6WXGLHV RI WKLV W\SH KDYH FRPH XQGHU FULWLFLVP EHFDXVH WKH\ UHSUHVHQW QHJDWLYH LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG KDYH DVVXPHG D GHILFLHQF\ VWDWH RU FRQIOLFWXDO PRGHO RI WKH QDWXUH RI GD\GUHDPV +DULWRQ t 6LQJHU S f )RUWXQDWHO\ QRW DOO RI WKH VWXGLHV RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ KDYH EHHQ RI D QRQHPSLULFDO QDWXUH .OLQJHU f UHYLHZV VRPH HDUO\ VWXGLHV RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG SURSRVHV GLIIHUHQW ZD\V WR LQWHUSUHW WKH UHVXOWV ,Q &ODUN LQ .OLQJHU SS f VWXGLHG WKH HIIHFWV RI VH[XDO DURXVDO RQ IDQWDV\ 0DOH VWXGHQWV ZHUH SUHVHQWHG ZLWK VOLGHV RQ QXGH IHPDOHV LQ WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV LQ D FODVVURRP LQ WKH SUHVHQFH RI D PDOH RU IHPDOH UHSUHVHQWDWLYH IURP WKH GHDQnV RIILFH DQG GXULQJ D IUDWHUQLW\ EHHU SDUW\ &ODUNnV LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI WKH UHVXOWV LQYROYHG VWDWLQJ WKDW VH[XDO DURXVDO LQGXFHV VH[XDO IDQWDV\ EXW WKDW LQ JXLOW SURGXFLQJ VLWXDWLRQV HJ GHDQnV RIILFHf WKH VXEMHFWV VXUSUHVV WKHLU VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV .OLQJHU f GLVDJUHHG DQG SRLQWHG RXW WKDW WKH H[SHULPHQW IDLOHG WR FRQWURO IRU VHYHUDO YDULDEOHV HJ LQFHQWLYH GULYH VWLPXOLf VR WKDW WKH UHVXOWV DUH FRQIRXQGHG /HLPDQ DQG (SVWHLQ FRQGXFWHG D VWXG\ LQ LQ .OLQJHU SS f RQ PDOH VXEn MHFWVn DWWLWXGHV DQG SHUVRQDO UHDFWLRQV WR VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ 7KH\ FRQn FOXGHG WKDW KLJK VH[ GULYH VHUYHV WR SURGXFH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ EXW WKDW JXLOW DERXW WKH KLJK VH[ GULYH FDXVHG VXEMHFWV WR VXSSUHVV WKHLU VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV .OLQJHU f QRWHG GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH VH[XDO LQFHQWLYHV

PAGE 33

DPRQJ WKH VXEMHFWV DQG WKDW WKLV FRXOG DFFRXQW IRU WKH LQFUHDVHV LQ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVL]LQJ RI VRPH VXEMHFWV 7KH JLVW RI .OLQJHUnV FRPPHQWV UHIOHFWV WKH ODFN RI DGHTXDWH FRQWUROV ZLWKLQ WKH H[SHULPHQWDO GHVLJQ 7KH PRUH UHFHQW VWXGLHV RQ WKH HURWLF IDQWDVLHV RI KHWHURVH[XDO PDOHV YDU\ IURP WKH UHVXOWV RI RQH LWHP HPEHGGHG ZLWKLQ D TXHVWLRQQDLUH WR ORQJLWXGLQDO VWXGLHV FRYHULQJ D OLIHWLPH 3LHWURSLQWR DQG 6LPHQDXHU f VDPSOHG PDOHV DFURVV WKH FRXQWU\ ZLWK D WZRSDUW TXHVWLRQn QDLUH FRQFHUQLQJ WKHLU VH[XDO EHKDYLRUV DQG DWWLWXGHV 2QH LWHP DVNHG :KDW VRUW RI WKRXJKWV GR \RX KDYLQJ GXULQJ LQWHUFRXUVH RU PDVWXUEDWLRQ" S f 7KH PDMRULW\ RI WKH UHVSRQVHV bf IHOO LQWR WKUHH FDWHJRULHV f WKRXJKWV DERXW WKH FXUUHQW VH[ SDUWQHU bf f WKRXJKWV DERXW D SHUVRQ RWKHU WKDQ WKH FXUUHQW SDUWQHU bf DQG f UHFDOOLQJ D SDVW VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH bf ,Q D WZRSDUW VWXG\ RI PDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV &DPSDJQD f IRXQG WKDW HURWLF PDVWXUEDWRU\ IDQWDVLHV DSSHDU WR EH UHODWHG WR VHOIUHSRUWV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ +H DOVR IRXQG WKDW D KLJKHU LQFLGHQFH RI PDVWXUEDWLRQ OHDG WR PRUH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV GXULQJ PDVWXUEDn WLRQ &DPSDJQD DOVR IRXQG WKDW VH[XDO DURXVDO LQFUHDVHG DV WKH IDQWDV\ VWLPXOXV SURJUHVVHG IURP QRQHURWLF VWRULHV WR VH[XDOO\ YLYLG VWRULHV WR WKH VXEMHFWVn VHOIJHQHUDWHG IDQWDVLHV 0DOH IDQWDV\ OLIH ZDV PHDVXUHG DFURVV D OLIH VSDQ E\ *LDPEUD f XVLQJ VXEMHFWV ZKRVH DJHV UDQJHG IURP WR \HDUV RI DJH +H IRXQG WKDW GD\GUHDPV DERXW VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ DQG ORYH DUH PRVW GRPLQDQW IRU WKH \HDU ROGV WKHQ PRVW UDSLGO\ GURSRII ZLWK LQFUHDVLQJ DJH JURXSV VR WKDW WKH\ ODUJHO\ GLVDSSHDU DIWHU WKH WK \HDU S f ,Q DQRWKHU VWXG\ RI PHQ ZKR UDQJHG LQ DJH IURP WR \HDUV *LDPEUD DQG 0DUWLQ f DQDO\]HG WKH VXEMHFWVn UHWURVSHFWLYH UHSRUWV RI VH[XDO

PAGE 34

GD\GUHDPLQJ DQG WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLS WR WKUHH EHKDYLRUDO DVSHFWV RI WKHLU VH[XDO KLVWRU\ LH QXPEHU RI FRLWDO SDUWQHUV HDUO\ PDULWDO FRLWXV TXDQWLW\ RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ EHWZHHQ DJHV DQG f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t 0DUWLQ S f *LDPEUD DQG 0DUWLQ f VWDWH WKDW KLJK RU ORZ IUHTXHQFLHV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ DPRQJ PDOHV WHQG WR SHUVLVW RYHU D JRRG GHDO RI WKHLU OLIHWLPH 7KH UHVXOWV DUH VHHQ DV VXSSRUWLYH RI WKH SRLQWV RI YLHZ WKDW VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV YDU\ LQ UHODWLRQ WR VH[XDO GULYH DQG WKDW VH[XDO GD\n GUHDPV UHIOHFW WKH FXUUHQW FRQFHUQV RI WKH LQGLYLGXDO HJ .OLQJHU f 7KXV WKH JHQHUDO FRQFOXVLRQ FDQ EH PDGH WKDW PHQ EHWZHHQ WKH DJHV RI WR \HDUV ZLWK D KLJK VH[XDO GULYH DQG IUHTXHQW VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ KDYH WKH KLJKHVW IUHTXHQF\ RI HURWLF GD\GUHDPV 7KHUH KDYH DOVR EHHQ VWXGLHV IRFXVLQJ H[FOXVLYHO\ RQ ZRPHQnV VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV 6RPH RI WKH DUWLFOHV EDVHG RQ FOLQLFDO LPSUHVVLRQV +DZNLQV +ROOHQGHU 6XOOLYDQ f RU VWXGLHV ZLWK QR UHSRUW RI WKH H[SHULPHQWDO PHWKRG %DUFOD\ f KDYH DOUHDG\ EHHQ SUHVHQWHG ,Q D VWXG\ RI XQLYHUVLW\ ZRPHQ VWXGHQWV %URZQ DQG +DUW f ORRNHG DW LQFLGHQFH RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG WKH\ UHODWHG DJH VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH DQ[LHW\ LQGHSHQGHQFHDQG OLEHUDO DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG ZRPHQ WR WKH IUHTXHQF\ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW b RI WKH VXEMHFWV

PAGE 35

UHSRUWHG KDYLQJ RQH RU PRUH HURWLF IDQWDVLHV GXULQJ WKH SULRU PRQWK SHULRG :RPHQ LQ WKH WR \HDUROG DJH JURXS UHSRUWHG WKH KLJKHVW TXDQWLW\ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DV GLG ZRPHQ ZKR ZHUH VH[XDOO\ H[SHULHQFHG LH YV YLUJLQVf %URZQ DQG +DUW f DOVR IRXQG WKDW ZRPHQ ZKR ZHUH PRUH DQ[LRXV LQGHSHQGHQW DQG KHOG PRUH OLEHUDO YLHZV UHSRUWHG PRUH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKHLU FRXQWHUSDUWV ZKR VFRUHG ORZ RQ WKHVH DWWULEXWHV 0DULWDO VWDWXV UHOLJLRXV DIILOLDWLRQ DXWKRULn WDULDQ QRQDXWKRULWDULDQf LQWURYHUVLRQ DQG HPRWLRQDOLW\ GLG QRW FRUUHn ODWH ZLWK WKH TXDQWLW\ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ UHSRUWHG E\ WKH VXEMHFWV 'H0DUWLQR f VWXGLHG ZRPHQ ZKR ZHUH PHPEHUV RI 0HQVD DQG ZKR KDG D PHDQ DJH RI DQG D PHDQ ,4 RI +H IRXQG WKDW b RI WKH UHVSRQGHQWV UHSRUWHG IDQWDVL]LQJ RQFH RU PRUH GXULQJ LQWHUFRXUVH DQG b UHSRUWHG IDQWDVL]LQJ DW VRPH SRLQW GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ 7KH HIIHFWV RI UHVSRQVH FXHV LH HURWLF URPDQWLF RU QHXWUDOf DQG WKH OHYHO RI VH[ JXLOW RQ WKH HURWLF IDQWDVLHV RI ZRPHQ ZHUH VWXGLHG E\ 0RUHDXOW DQG )ROOLQJVWDG f 7KHLU ILQGLQJV LQGLFDWH WKDW f b RI WKH VDPSOH UHSRUWHG DW OHDVW RQH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG DOO VXEn MHFWV LQGLFDWHG KDYLQJ KDG DW OHDVW WZR IDQWDV\ WKHPHV LQ WKHLU SDVW VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV f ORZ VH[ JXLOW /6*f VXEMHFWV GHPRQVWUDWHG OHVV VH[XDO LQKLELWLRQ WKDQ KLJK VH[ JXLOW +6*f VXEMHFWV LQ WHUPV RI VH[XDO H[SOLFLWQHVV H[SUHVVLYHQHVV DQG UHVSRQVLYHQHVV WR VWLPXOL IRU WRWDO QXPEHU RI IDQWDVLHV IRU YDULHW\ RI VH[ DFWV IRU YDULHW\ RI FRQWHQW DQG IRU QXPEHU RI IDQWDV\ WKHPHV FKHFNHG S f f +6* VXEMHFWV UHSRUWHG PRUH HPEDUUDVVPHQW DQG OHVV YLYLG IDQWDVLHV WKDQ GLG WKH /6* VXEMHFWV f LQ WKH UHVSRQVH FXH FRQGLWLRQ VXEMHFWV H[SRVHG WR HURWLF

PAGE 36

UHVSRQVH FXHV UHSRUWHG ORQJHU IDQWDVLHV PRUH H[SOLFLW IDQWDVLHV LH QXPEHU RI VH[ DFWV DQG VH[ RUJDQVf D JUHDWHU GHJUHH RI SK\VLRORJLFDO DURXVDO +RZHYHU /6* DQG +6* VXEMHFWV GLG QRW GLIIHU RQ OHYHOV RI SK\VLRORJLFDO DURXVDO DQG WKH QXPEHU RI IDQWDVLHV DQG QXPEHU RI WKHPHV FKHFNHG ZHUH QRW DIIHFWHG E\ WKH H[SHULPHQWDO UHVSRQVH FXHV 7KRVH UHVXOWV ZHUH VHHQ DV VXSSRUWLYH RI 0RVKHUnV f GDWD WKDW VH[ JXLOW VXEMHFWV GR QRW GLIIHU VLJQLILFDQWO\ LQ VHOIUHSRUWHG VH[XDO DURXVDO DQG WKDW VH[XDO DURXVDO GXULQJ IDQWDV\ SURGXFWLRQ VHHPV WR EH D IXQFWLRQ RI WKH VH[XDO H[SOLFWQHVV RI WKH VWLPXOL YHUVXV WKH VH[ JXLOW RI WKH VXEMHFW 7KH DXWKRUV FRQFOXGH WKDW VH[XDO IDQWDV\ PD\ EH PRUH DFFXUDWHO\ YLHZHG DV EHLQJ XQGHU VWLPXOXV FRQWURO UDWKHU WKDQ DV D VWDEOH WUDLW 0RUHDXOW t )ROOLQJVWDG S f +DULWRQ DQG 6LQJHU f VWXGLHG VXEXUEDQ KRXVHZLYHV DJH UDQJH \HDUVf E\ XVLQJ D TXHVWLRQQDLUH WKDW HOLFLWHG LQIRUPDWLRQ RQ JHQHUDO GD\GUHDPLQJ WHQGHQFLHV IDQWDVLHV DQG RWKHU LGHDWLRQ GXULQJ FRLWXV VH[XDO SDWWHUQV PDULWDO DGMXVWPHQW S f 0HDVXUHV RI LQWHOOLJHQFH SHUVRQDOLW\ DQG SHUVRQDO DGMXVWPHQW ZHUH DOVR LQFOXGHG LQ WKH VWXG\ 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW f b RI WKH VXEMHFWV UHSRUWHG KDYLQJ VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DW OHDVW VRPH RI WKH WLPH GXULQJ FRLWXV DQG b KDG IDQWDVLHV YHU\ RIWHQ GXULQJ VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH f b RI WKH VDPSOH UHSRUWHG PRGHUDWH WR KLJK OHYHOV RI IDQWDV\ DQG f WKH WKUHH PRVW FRPPRQ VH[ IDQWDV\ WKHPHV LQ WHUPV RI IUHTXHQF\ DQG UHFXUUHQFH ZHUH Df WKRXJKWV RI DQ LPDJLQDU\ ORYHU bf Ef EHLQJ RYHUn SRZHUHG RU IRUFHG WR VXUUHQGHU E\ VRPHRQH bf DQG Ff SUHWHQGLQJ WR GR VRPHWKLQJ ZLFNHG DQG IRUELGGHQ bf $ IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH LWHPV LQ WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUH ZDV SHUIRUPHG LQ RUGHU WR WHVW WKUHH PRGHOV

PAGE 37

RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 7KH PRGHOV LQFOXGH IDQWDV\ DV D GULYHUHGXFWLRQ PHFKDQLVP IDQWDV\ DV DQ DGDSWLYH PHFKDQLVP DQG IDQWDV\ DV D SHUVRQDOLW\ FRJQLWLYH SURFHVV ZKLFK LV DQ H[WHQVLRQ RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV RYHUDOO SHUn VRQDOLW\ 7KH UHVXOWV ZHUH VHHQ DV VXSSRUWLQJ WKH DGDSWLYH DQG SHUVRQn DOLW\FRJQLWLYH PRGHOV EXW QRW WKH GULYHUHGXFWLRQ PRGHO 7KH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV KDYH EHHQ VWXGLHG LQ RUGHU WR GHWHUPLQH LI DQ\ GLIIHUHQFHV H[LVW DQG LI VR LQ ZKDW GLUHFWLRQV DQG RQ ZKDW YDULDEOHV" ,Q D VWXG\ RI VH[ GLIIHUHQFHV LQ GD\GUHDPLQJ :DJPDQ f GLVWULEXWHG D IDQWDV\ TXHVWLRQQDLUH WR PDOH DQG IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV 2I WKH GD\GUHDP FDWHJRULHV RQO\ RQH FDWHJRU\ SHUWDLQHG WR VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZLWK RQH RWKHU FDWHJRU\ IRU VH[XDOO\ SHUYHUVH IDQWDVLHV +H IRXQG WKDW PHQ H[FHHGHG ZRPHQ LQ WKH SURSRUWLRQ RI GD\GUHDPLQJ DERXW VH[XDO DQG DJJUHVVLYH WKHPHV 1R VH[ GLIIHUHQFH ZDV IRXQG IRU WKH VH[XDOO\ SHUYHUVH WKHPH *HOOHV f ORRNHG DW WKH UHODWLRQVKLS RI VH[ DQG YLROHQFH LQ WKH IDQWDV\ SURGXFWLRQ RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV LQWHUSUHWLQJ 7$7 UHVSRQVHV FROOHFWHG IURP VWXGHQWV LQ E\ /LQG]H\ DQG 6LOYHUPDQ LQ *HOOHV f 0HQ DQG ZRPHQ GLG QRW GLIIHU LQ WKH SURGXFWLRQ RI VH[XDO LPDJHU\ EXW PHQ ZLWK KLJKHU OHYHOV RI VH[XDO LPDJHU\ DOVR WHQGHG WR SURGXFH PRUH YLROHQW LPDJHU\ WKDQ GLG WKH ZRPHQ &DUOVRQ DQG &ROHPDQ f LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH SRVVLEOH LQIOXHQFHV RI SDVW IDQWDV\ DQG VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH RQ WKH LQGXFHG VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH VXEMHFWV 7KH\ IRXQG WKDW f PDOHV KDG VLJQLILn FDQWO\ KLJKHU VFRUHV RQ VH[XDO PHGLD H[SHULHQFH DQG FXUUHQW VH[XDO LQWHUHVW VFDOH ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR ZRPHQ f ZRPHQ KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU VFRUHV RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ FRPSOH[LW\ DQG VH[XDO DURXVDO LQ IDQWDV\ VFDOHV

PAGE 38

f PHDVXUHV RI JHQHUDO GD\GUHDPLQJ H[SHULHQFH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ H[SHULHQFH DQG VH[XDO LQWHUHVW SURGXFHG JUHDWHU ULFKQHVV LQ WKH LQGXFHG IDQWDVLHV RI VXEMHFWV ZKR KDG KLJK VFRUHV RQ WKHVH YDULDEOHV DQG f PHQ ZLWK KLJK VH[ JXLOW H[SHULHQFHG OHVV ULFKQHVV LQ WKHLU LQGXFHG IDQWDVLHV EXW WKHUH ZDV QR VXFK HIIHFW RQ WKH ULFKQHVV RI WKH ZRPHQnV IDQWDVLHV 7KH PDVWXUEDWLRQ IDQWDVLHV RI PDUULHG FRXSOHV DQG WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI HDFK JURXS RI PHQ DQG ZRPHQ LH 'DQLVK FRXSOHVf ZHUH H[DPLQHG E\ +HVVHOODQG f XWLOL]LQJ DQ LQWHUYLHZ WHFKQLTXH +H IRXQG WKDW PHQ UHSRUWHG D KLJKHU RFFXUUHQFH RI HURWLF IDQWDVLHV WKDQ GLG WKH ZRPHQ 0HQ DOVR VHHP WR KDYH PRUH IDQWDVLHV LQYROYLQJ VHYHUDO SHUVRQV bf WKDQ GLG ZRPHQ bf :RPHQ bf KDG IDQWDVLHV H[FOXVLYHO\ DERXW FRLWXV ZLWK D VSRXVH PRUH RIWHQ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR PHQ bf +XVVHOODQG LQWHUSUHWV WKH UHVXOWV DV LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW PDVWXUEDWLRQ DQG VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DUH FRLWDO VXSSOHPHQWV IRU PHQ EXW DUH FRLWDO VXEVWLWXWHV IRU ZRPHQ EHFDXVH ZRPHQ ZHUH PRUH VDWLVILHG ZLWK WKH LQWHUFRXUVH IUHTXHQF\ LQ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS DQG EHFDXVH WKH\ PDVWXUEDWHG OHVV RIWHQ WKDQ WKH PHQ $QRWKHU VWXG\ RQ PDVWXUEDWRU\ IDQWDVLHV UHTXLUHG WKH VXEMHFWV LH PDOHV IHPDOHVf WR YLHZ DQ H[SOLFLWO\ VH[XDO ILOP RI HLWKHU D PDQ RU D ZRPDQ PDVWXUEDWLQJ WR RUJDVP DQG WKHQ WR ZULWH IDQWDVLHV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH SURWDJRQLVW LQ WKH ILOP $EUDPVRQ DQG 0RVKHU f IRXQG WKDW ZRPHQ FRXOG SRVLWLYHO\ LGHQWLI\ ZLWK D VDPHVH[ SURWDJRQLVW ZKLOH WKH PHQ FRXOG QRW 7KLV ILQGLQJ ZDV UHODWHG WR D 0RVKHU DQG $EUDPVRQ f ILQGLQJ WKDW ERWK PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV FDQ EH VH[XDOO\ DURXVHG E\ D IHPDOH SURWDJRQn LVW ZKHUHDV RQO\ ZRPHQ ZHUH DURXVHG E\ D ILOP RI D PDOH SURWDJRQLVW 7KH DXWKRUV VWDWH WKDW VH[ JXLOW DQG QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG PDVWXUEDn WLRQ FDQ DFFRXQW IRU WKH YDULDELOLW\ LQ WKH VXEMHFWnV DWWULEXWLRQV RI

PAGE 39

WKH SURWDJRQLVWnV DIIHFWLYH WRQH PRWLYH IRU PDVWXUEDWLRQ SUHGLFWHG IXWXUH PDVWXUEDWLRQ IHHOLQJV DERXW RUJDVP DQG PRRG DV UHIOHFWHG LQ WKHLU ZULWWHQ IDQWDVLHV DV ZHOO DV WKH DPRXQW RI HURWLF HODERUDWLRQ LQ WKH FRQWHQW RI WKH VXEMHFWnV ZULWWHQ IDQWDVLHV 0HGQLFN f SURSRVHG D GHILQLWLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG GLYLGHG WKH VWXG\ RI HURWLF IDQWDVLHV LQWR WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV XQGHU ZKLFK WKH IDQWDVLHV RFFXU GD\GUHDPPDVWXUEDWRU\ DQG GXULQJ VH[XDO UHODWLRQV ,Q D VWXG\ RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV QDUUDWLYH GHVFULSn WLRQV RI VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZHUH HOLFLWHG WKURXJK WKH DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ RI D VH[XDO IDQWDV\ TXHVWLRQQDLUH 0HGQLFN f FRPSOHWHG DQ LQGXFWLYH FRQWHQW DQDO\VLV RI WKH VXEMHFWVn ZULWWHQ VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DQG GHULYHG WKH IROORZLQJ FDWHJRULHV f UHVSRQGHQW DV UHFLSLHQW f VH[XDO REMHFWVf DV UHFLSLHQW f UHVSRQGHQW DV ERWK UHFLSLHQW DQG REMHFW RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ f QR VH[XDO IDQWDV\ UHSRUWHG f LQVXIILFLHQW GDWD f VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV UHIHUHQFLQJ WKH SDVW S f +H IRXQG WKDW VLJQLILFDQWO\ PRUH IHPDOHV LPDJLQHG WKHPVHOYHV WR EH WKH UHFLSLHQWV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ IURP D VH[XDO REMHFW FDWHJRU\ f ZKHUHDV VLJQLILFDQWO\ PRUH PDOHV IDQWDVL]HG WKH VH[XDO REMHFW DV WKH UHFLSLHQW RI WKHLU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ FDWHJRU\ f ZLWKLQ WKH GD\GUHDP DQG VH[XDO UHODWLRQV IDQWDV\ FRQGLWLRQV )RU WKH PDVWXUEDWRU\ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ FRQGLWLRQ PDUJLQDO WHQGHQFLHV WRZDUG UHYHUVDO RI WKH DERYH JHQGHU SDWWHUQ ZHUH REWDLQHG LH FDWHJRU\ IRU IHPDOHV FDWHJRU\ IRU PDOHVf $ IHZ VWXGLHV KDYH LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH HIIHFWV RI SV\FKRORJLFDO DQGURJ\Q\ DQG JHQGHU RQ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV %HUQ f K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW VWURQJO\ VH[W\SHG LQGLYLGXDOV DV GHWHUPLQHG E\ D KLJK VFRUH RQ WKH %HUQ 6H[5ROH ,QYHQWRU\ %65,f GLPHQVLRQV RI

PAGE 40

PDVFXOLQLW\ RU IHPLQLW\ PD\ EH OLPLWHG LQ WKH UDQJH RI EHKDYLRUV WKDW WKH\ ZRXOG H[KLELW LQ YDU\LQJ VLWXDWLRQV $FFRUGLQJ WR %HUQ f 7KXV ZKHUHDV D QDUURZO\ PDVFXOLQH VHOIFRQFHSW PLJKW LQKLELW EHKDYLRUV WKDW DUH VWHUHRW\SHG DV IHPLQLQH DQG D QDUURZO\ IHPLQLQH VHOIFRQFHSW PLJKW LQKLELW EHKDYLRUV WKDW DUH VWHUHRW\SHG DV PDVFXOLQH D PL[HG RU DQGURJ\QRXV VHOI FRQFHSW PLJKW DOORZ DQ LQGLYLGXDO WR IUHHO\ HQJDJH LQ ERWK PDVFXOLQH DQG IHPLQLQH EHKDYLRUV S f 7KH TXHVWLRQ DULVHV DV WR ZKHWKHU WKH HIIHFWV RI VH[UROH DIIHFW VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG LI VR ZKHWKHU WKH\ RYHUULGH WKH HIIHFWV RI JHQGHU RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ %HUQDUGL f LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH HIIHFWV RI SV\FKRORJLFDO DQGURJ\Q\ DQG JHQGHU RQ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DQG H[SHULHQFHV RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV 7KH VXEMHFWV ZHUH JLYHQ WKH %65, YLHZHG VOLGHV RI D SDUWLDOO\FODG PDQ DQG ZRPDQ DQG ZURWH DQ LPDJLQDWLYH VWRU\ DERXW WKH LQGLYLGXDOV SRUWUD\HG 7KH UHVXOWV VXSSRUWHG WKH VWHUHRW\SHG QRWLRQ WKDW PHQ ZHUH SHUFHLYHG DV PRUH PDVFXOLQH DQG OHVV IHPLQLQH WKDQ ZRPHQ ZLWKLQ WKH KHWHURVH[XDO EHKDYLRU SRUWUD\HG LQ WKH VXEMHFWnV VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV 1R VXSSRUW ZDV IRXQG IRU WKH DQGURJ\QRXV FRQFHSWLRQ RI VH[UROH DQG QR VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV IRXQG EHWZHHQ VH[UROH RULHQWDWLRQ DQG JHQGHU IRU WKH VXEMHFWnV UHSRUWHG VH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV $QRWKHU VWXG\ RQ WKH HIIHFWV RI VH[UROH LGHQWLW\ RQ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI PDOH 1 f DQG IHPDOH 1 f FROOHJH VWXGHQWV ZDV FRQn GXFWHG E\ 3DSH f 7KH %65, ZDV XWLOL]HG WR FDWHJRUL]H WKH VXEMHFWV LQWR WKUHH VH[UROH FDWHJRULHV VH[W\SHG DQGURJ\QRXV DQG XQGLIIHUHQWLn DWHG $ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ TXHVWLRQQDLUH 6)4f ZDV GHVLJQHG VHH 0HWKRGV VHFWLRQ DQG $SSHQGL[ %f HPSOR\LQJ 0HGQLFNnV f WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ LH GD\GUHDP PDVWXUEDWRU\ VH[ ZLWK SDUWQHUf ZLWK

PAGE 41

VH[XDO IDQWDV\ WKHPHV ZLWKLQ HDFK FRQGLWLRQ 0HDVXUHV RI VRFLDO GHVLUDELOLW\ DQG VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZHUH DOVR HOLFLWHG IURP WKH VXEMHFWV 6Vf 6WDWLVWLFDO DQDO\VHV RI WKH PDOHIHPDOH GLIIHUHQFHV \LHOGHG WKH IROORZLQJ UHVXOWV f PDOHV UHSRUWHG D VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU LQFLGHQFH DQG D JUHDWHU YDULHW\ RI IDQWDVLHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR ZRPHQ LQ WKH VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DQG GD\GUHDPLQJ FRQGLWLRQV f PDOHV UHSRUWHG KLJKHU IUHTXHQFLHV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR ZRPHQ RQ DOPRVW DOO RI WKH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ WKHPHV ZKHQ VH[ GLIIHUHQFHV RFFXUUHG DQG f PDOHV HQJDJHG PRUH LQ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DQG PDVWXUEDWLRQ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR IHPDOHV HJ b DQG b IRU PDOHV b DQG b IRU IHPDOHV UHVSHFWLYHO\f 1R VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG IRU f VH[ GLIn IHUHQFHV RQ WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ VFDOH f RYHUDOO LQFLGHQFH RI HURWLF IDQWDVLHV IRU DQ\ RI WKH WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV DQG f WKH PDLQ HIIHFW RI VH[UROH LQ WKH SUHGLFWLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ EHKDYLRU 3DSH f DOVR UDQNHG WKH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ WKHPHV GXULQJ WKH WKUHH IDQWDV\ FRQGLn WLRQV IRU PDOHV VHH 7DEOH f DQG IRU IHPDOHV VHH 7DEOH f 7KH VWXGLHV RQ VH[ GLIIHUHQFHV LQGLFDWH WKDW JHQGHU EXW QRW VH[ UROH LGHQWLW\ KDV DQ HIIHFW RQ WKH VH[ IDQWDV\ EHKDYLRU RI LQGLYLGXDOV ,I WKLV K\SRWKHVLV KROGV WUXH WKHQ RQH ZRQGHUV DERXW WKH HIIHFWV RI VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ RQ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ EHKDYLRU RI LQGLYLGXDOV ZLWKLQ HDFK JHQGHU FDWHJRU\ LH KHWHURVH[XDO YV KRPRVH[XDO PDOHV KHWHURn VH[XDO YV KRPRVH[XDO IHPDOHVf $ UHYLHZ RI WKH UHVHDUFK RQ KRPRVH[XDOLW\ DQG KRPRVH[XDO HURWLF IDQWDV\ ZLOO EH SUHVHQWHG LQ WKH QH[W VHFWLRQ

PAGE 42

7$%/( 7235$1.(' 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 7+(0(6 '85,1* 6(; :,7+ $ 3$571(5 0$6785%$7,21 $1' '$<'5($0,1* 6H[ ZLWK D 3DUWQHU 0DVWXUEDWLRQ 'D\GUHDPLQJ Q f 0$/(6 Q f Q f 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU 3HUVRQ RWKHU WKDQ FXUUHQW SDUWQHU 3HUVRQ RWKHU WKDQ FXUUHQW SDUWQHU 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW *LYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU %HLQJ LQ D GLIIHUn HQW VHWWLQJ 5HOLYLQJ D SUHYLRXV H[SHULHQFH *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW 6H[ ZLWK DQ LUUH VLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQ *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW 5HOLYLQJ D SUHYLRXV H[SHULHQFH 127( )URP 6H[ 5ROH ,GHQWLW\ DQG 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ E\ 1 3DSH 0DVWHUnV 7KHVLV 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 6RXWK )ORULGD

PAGE 43

7$%/( 7235$1.(' 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 7+(0(6 '85,1* 6(; :,7+ $ 3$571(5 0$6785%$7,21 $1' '$<'5($0,1* 6H[ ZLWK D 3DUWQHU 0DVWXUEDWLRQ 'D\GUHDPLQJ Q f )(0$/(6 Q f Q f 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW 5HOLYLQJ D SUHYLRXV H[SHULHQFH %HLQJ LQ D GLIIHUn HQW VHWWLQJ %HLQJ LQ D GLIIHUn HQW VHWWLQJ %HLQJ LQ D GLIIHUn HQW VHWWLQJ *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW 5HOLYLQJ D SUHYLRXV H[SHULHQFH 3HUVRQ RWKHU WKDQ FXUUHQW SDUWQHU 3HUVRQ RWKHU WKDQ FXUUHQW SDUWQHU *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW 127( )URP 6H[ 5ROH ,GHQWLW\ DQG 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ E\ 1 3DSH 0DVWHUnV 7KHVLV 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 6RXWK )ORULGD

PAGE 44

5HVHDUFK RQ +RPRVH[XDOLW\ DQG +RPRVH[XDO 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ $ UHYLHZ RI WKH WKHRU\ DQG JHQHUDO UHVHDUFK RQ WKH WRSLF RI KRPRn VH[XDOLW\ LV QHFHVVDU\ LQ RUGHU WR SURYLGH D FRQWH[W LQ ZKLFK WR YLHZ WKH FXUUHQW UHVHDUFK RQ KRPRVH[XDO IDQWDV\ RU WKH ODFN RI LW 5HVHDUFK RQ KRPRVH[XDO LQGLYLGXDOV XS XQWLO WKH nV IRFXVHG PDLQO\ RQ FOLQLFDO SRSXODWLRQV DQG WKH SV\FKRSDWKRORJLFDO QDWXUH RI WKH KRPRVH[XDO SHUVRQn DOLW\ HJ %HUJOHU )HQLFKHO f 7KHVH VWXGLHV UHIOHFW 0RULQnV f FULWLFLVP RI D KHWHURVH[XDO ELDV LQ SV\FKRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK RQ KRPRVH[XDOLW\ 7KLV ELDV LV GHILQHG DV D EHOLHI V\VWHP WKDW KHWHURn VH[XDOLW\ LV VXSHULRU WR DQGRU PRUH QDWXUDO WKDQ KRPRVH[XDOLW\ +H DUJXHV WKDW LI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ ZHUH WR EH UHFRQFHSWXDOL]HG DV D YDOLG RSWLRQ IRU DQ DGXOW OLIHVW\OH FKDQJHV LQ WKH TXHVWLRQV IRUPXODWHG WKH GDWD FROOHFWHG DQG WKH LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV RIIHUHG ZRXOG EH IRUWKFRPLQJ ZLWK UHVSHFW WR UHVHDUFK RQ KRPRVH[XDOLW\ *HQHUDOO\ WKH HWLRORJLFDO H[SODQDWLRQV IRU KRPRVH[XDOLW\ ILW LQWR RQH RI WKH WKUHH IROORZLQJ FDWHJRULHV ELRORJLFDO SV\FKRDQDO\WLF RU VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ $FRVWD f UHYLHZHG WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ WKH HWLRORJ\ DQG WUHDWPHQW RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ 7KH ELRORJLFDO EDVLV IRU KRPRVH[XDOLW\ SRVWXODWHV WKDW WKHUH DUH JHQHWLF KRUPRQDO RU FKURPRVRPDO IDFWRUV WKDW FRQWULEXWH WR WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI D KRPRVH[XDO LQGLYLGXDO $FFRUGn LQJ WR $FRVWD f QR VXEVWDQWLDO HYLGHQFH KDV EHHQ IRXQG WR VXSn SRUW WKH ELRORJLFDO EDVLV IRU WKH HWLRORJ\ RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ 7KH SV\FKRDQDO\WLF VFKRRO IRFXVHV RQ IDXOW\ SDUHQWFKLOG LQWHUDFWLRQV DV WKH EDVLV IRU KRPRVH[XDOLW\ 7KH EDVLF WHQHW WR WKLV WKHRU\ LV WKDW WKH FKLOG IDLOV WR UHVROYH WKH 2HGLSDO FRPSOH[ VXFFHVVIXOO\ DQG GRHV

PAGE 45

QRW XQGHUJR DQDFOLWLF DQG GHIHQVLYH LGHQWLILFDWLRQ )HQLFKHO f $ QHXURWLF IHDU RI KHWHURVH[XDOLW\ RFFXUV LQ WKH LQGLYLGXDO ZKR WKHQ WXUQV WR KRPRVH[XDOLW\ IRU QHHG JUDWLILFDWLRQ 7KH GLVWXUEHG UHODWLRQn VKLS LV EHWZHHQ PRWKHU DQG FKLOG ZLWK PRWKHUIL[DWLRQ IRU WKH PDOHV DQG PRWKHUKDWUHG IRU IHPDOHV $FRVWD f VXPV XS WKH FXUUHQW VWDWXV RI WKH SV\FKRDQDO\WLF WKHRU\ ZLWK WKH VWDWHPHQW 8QIRUWXQDWHO\ WKHUH DUH IHZ FRPSUHKHQVLYH HPSLULFDO VWXGLHV RQ KRPRVH[XDOV ZKLFK WHVW SV\FKRn DQDO\WLF K\SRWKHVHV DQG LQ JHQHUDO WKHVH VXIIHU IURP PHWKRGRORJLFDO GHILFLHQFLHV S f 6RFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ SRVWXODWHV WKDW ERWK KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRn VH[XDO LQGLYLGXDOV OHDUQ WKHLU VH[XDO SUHIHUHQFHV WKURXJK VRFLDO UHLQIRUFHPHQWV DQG FRQGLWLRQLQJ SDWWHUQV %DQGXUD f 7KH FKLOG GHYHORSV WKH DSSURSULDWH VH[W\SHG EHKDYLRUV DQG JHQGHU LGHQWLW\ WKURXJK REVHUYDWLRQDO OHDUQLQJ DQGRU PRGHOLQJ SURFHVVHV HLWKHU IURP WKHLU SDUHQWV RU RWKHU DGXOW DQG SHHU PRGHOV %DQGXUD f DOVR SRLQWV RXW WKDW GLUHFW UHLQIRUFHPHQW LV QRW DOZD\V QHFHVVDU\ LQ RUGHU IRU D FKLOG WR OHDUQ DSSURSULDWH VH[W\SHG EHKDYLRUV WKH DWWUDFWLYHQHVV RI D PRGHO PD\ EH HQRXJK $OWKRXJK $FRVWD f LQGLFDWHV WKDW VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ SUHVHQWV WKH PRVW FRQVLVWHQW HYLGHQFH KH FLWHV WKH IDLOXUH RI HPSLULFDO HYLGHQFH ZKLFK GHPRQVWUDWHV D GLUHFW OLQN EHWZHHQ WKH FKLOGn KRRG OHDUQLQJ RI JHQGHU LGHQWLW\ DQG VH[W\SHG EHKDYLRUV DQG WKH ODWHU GHYHORSPHQW RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ 6RFLHWDO DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG KRPRVH[XDOLW\ KDYH EHHQ QHJDWLYH DV D SHUXVDO RI SHUWLQHQW DWWLWXGLQDO UHVHDUFK ZLOO LQGLFDWH HJ *ODVVQHU t 2ZHQ 1\EHUJ t $OVWRQ 7XUQEXOO t %URZQ f :LHQEHUJ f DWWULEXWHV WKH QHJDWLYLW\ WR KRPRSKRELD ZKLFK KH

PAGE 46

GHILQHV DV WKH GUHDG RI EHLQJ LQ FORVH TXDUWHUV ZLWK KRPRVH[XDOV S f 0DF'RQDOG f DUJXHV WKDW DQ[LHW\ DQG QRW IHDU LV D PRUH YDOLG WHUP IRU WKH HIIHFWV RI KRPRSKRELD +H OLVWV VRPH RI WKH EHOLHIV XQGHUSLQQLQJ KRPRSKRELD VXFK DV VH[ LV RQO\ IRU SURFUHDWLRQ RQO\ KHWHURVH[XDO DFWLYLW\ LV QDWXUDO KRPRVH[XDOV DUH FKLOG DEXVHUV SURPLVFXLW\ LV FKDUDFWHULVWLF RI KRPRVH[XDO UHODWLRQVKLSV DQG WKH QHHG WR PDLQWDLQ EHKDYLRUDO GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH VH[HV 6HYHUDO DXWKRUV KDYH VWDWHG WKDW WKHUDSLVWV DQG FRXQVHORUV PD\ VKDUH VRFLHW\nV QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG KRPRVH[XDOLW\ DQG KRPRVH[XDO FOLHQWV HJ 'DYLGVRQ .UDPHU :LJJHUVt =LPSIHU 0RQH\ :LHQEHUJ 0 :LHQ EHUJ f 6WXGLHV RQ WKH DWWLWXGHV RI WKHUDSLVWV WRZDUG KRPRVH[XDOV HJ 'DYLGVRQ t :LOVRQ )RUW 6WHLQHUt &RQUDG 0RUULV f WHQG WR UHIOHFW ERWK SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGHV EXW VRFLDO GHVLUDELOLW\ HIIHFWV ZHUH QRW FRQWUROOHG IRU LQ WKHVH VWXGLHV &RQVHn TXHQWO\ WKHUDSLVWV PD\ KROG SXEOLF DWWLWXGHV ZKLFK DUH SRVLWLYH DQG SULYDWH DWWLWXGHV ZKLFK DUH QHJDWLYH 7KH WUHDWPHQW VWUDWHJLHV HPSOR\HG LQ DWWHPSWV WR UHRULHQW RU FKDQJH WKH VH[XDO SUHIHUHQFH RI KRPRVH[XDO LQGLYLGXDOV DOVR WHQG WR UHIOHFW WKH QHJDWLYH FRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQV WKH SV\FKRDQDO\WLF DQG EHKDYn LRULVWLF SUDFWLWLRQHUV KROG FRQFHUQLQJ KRPRVH[XDOLW\ LH DV D SDWKRORJLFDO FRQGLWLRQf ,Q WKHLU HIIRUWV WR FKDQJH D KRPRVH[XDO FOLHQWnV VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ VHYHUDO EHKDYLRU WKHUDSLVWV KDYH HPSOR\HG WHFKQLTXHV VXFK DV V\VWHPDWLF GHVHQVLWL]DWLRQ DYHUVLYH FRQGLWLRQLQJ FODVVLFDO FRQGLWLRQLQJ DQG FRYHUW VHQVLWL]DWLRQ HJ %DQFURIW )HOGPDQ t 0DF&XOORFK .UDIW 0F&RQDJHQ\ 6WHYHQVRQ t :ROSH f 6HYHUH DYHUVLYH DJHQWV LQFOXGLQJ HOHFWULF VKRFN DQG

PAGE 47

HPHWLFV KDYH EHHQ LQFOXGHG LQ WKH UHRULHQWDWLRQ RI KRPRVH[XDOV $FRVWD :LHQEHUJ f 3V\FKRDQDO\WLF HIIRUWV WR UHRULHQW KRPRn VH[XDOV WKURXJK WKH XVH RI LQVLJKWV DQG FDWKDUVLV ZKLOH QRW VHYHUH LQ QDWXUH WHQG WR FRQQRWH WKDW WKH SDWLHQW LV QHXURWLF ,Q KLV UHYLHZ RI WKH VWXGLHV DWWHPSWLQJ WR UHRULHQW KRPRVH[XDOV $FRVWD f SRLQWV WR SRRU VXFFHVV UDWHV HJ &RQUDG t :LQF]H )HOGPDQ t 0DF&XOORFK f DQG WKH GLYHUVLW\ RI LQGLYLGXDOV ZLWKLQ WKH KRPRVH[XDO FRPPXQLW\ DQG FDXWLRQV DJDLQVW EHOLHYLQJ FODLPV RI KLJK VXFFHVV UDWHV ZLWKRXW ORQJLWXGLQDO HYLGHQFH 6HYHUDO DXWKRUV KDYH YLHZHG KRPRVH[XDOLW\ DV D YLDEOH OLIHVW\OH DQGRU UHIXWHG WKH FODLP WKDW KRPRVH[XDOLW\ LV DXWRPDWLFDOO\ LQGLFDWLYH RI SV\FKRSDWKRORJ\ HJ %HOO &KXUFKLOO +RIIPDQ +RRNHU 0RQH\ :HLQEHUJ 0 :HLQEHUJ :HLQn EHUJ t :LOOLDPV f 6HYHUDO FXUUHQW VWXGLHV WHQG WR VXSSRUW WKLV YLHZ DQG WR UHIXWH VRPH RI WKH VWHUHRW\SHV DERXW KRPRVH[XDOV +D\QHV DQG 2]LHO f IRXQG WKDW LQGLYLGXDOV ZLWK KRPRVH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV DPRQJ FROOHJH VWXGHQWVf KDG D VLPLODU DPRXQW RI KHWHURVH[XDO FRQWDFWV DQG GLG PDQLIHVW PRUH DQ[LHW\ RU JXLOW DERXW WKHLU VH[XDO EHKDYLRU WKDQ GLG WKHLU QRQH[SHULHQFHG FRXQWHUSDUWV ,Q D VWXG\ RI JD\ PDOHV +DUU\ f IRXQG WKDW FRQWUDU\ WR WKH VWHUHRW\SH ERWK WKH DFWLYH DQG SDVVLYH LH LQVHUWHULQVHUWHHf VH[XDO UROHV ZHUH SUHIHUUHG E\ D PDMRULW\ RI WKHLU KRPRVH[XDO VXEMHFWV 7KH VH[XDO EHKDYLRU RI OHVELDQV ZDV IRXQG WR EH LQIOXHQFHG PRUH E\ EHLQJ D ZRPDQ LH JHQGHUf WKDQ E\ EHLQJ D KRPRVH[XDO LH VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQf LQ D VWXG\ E\ 6FKDIHU f +RPRVH[XDO IDPLO\ UHODWLRQVKLSV KDYH DOVR EHHQ LQYHVWLJDWHG ZLWK VRPH SRVLWLYH UHVXOWV :HHNV 'HUGH\Q DQG /DQJPDQ f IRXQG WKDW WKH

PAGE 48

VH[XDO FRQIOLFWV RI KRPRVH[XDO SDUHQWV DV H[SUHVVHG LQ DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRU WRZDUG WKHLU FKLOGUHQ GLG QRW GLIIHU IURP WKRVH RI KHWHURn VH[XDO SDUHQWV ZKR DUH FRQIOLFWHG VH[XDOO\ 7RZQHV )HUJXVRQ DQG *LOODP f VXJJHVW WKDW YDULDWLRQV LQ VH[XDO OLIHVW\OH DUH DWWULEXWn DEOH WR GLIIHUHQW IDFHWV RI SV\FKRORJLFDO VH[ UDWKHU WKDQ WR IDPLOLDO LQIOXHQFHV LQ SDUWLFXODU 6WXGLHV WKDW UHSRUW WKH WUDGLWLRQDO YLHZ RI QHJDWLYH IDPLOLDO LQIOXHQFHV LQ WKH HWLRORJ\ RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ HJ *XQGODFK t %HUQDUG 6QRUWXP *LOOHVSLH 0DUVKDOO 0F/DXJKOLQ t 0RVEHUJ f KDYH EHHQ FULWLFL]HG IRU SRRU PHWKRGRORJ\ DQG RYHUORRNn LQJ LPSRUWDQW YDULDEOHV HJ $FRVWD :LHQEHUJ :ULJKWVPDQ f 6H[UROH GLVWXUEDQFHV DV D UHVXOW RI IDXOW\ IDPLOLDO PRGHOLQJ HJ 5HNHUV t /RYDDV 5HNHUV +RUWHQVLDt %HQVRQ 5HNHUV /RYDDV t %HQVRQ f DUH WKRXJKW WR EH DW WKH URRW RI D KRPRVH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ 5RVV f IRXQG FRQIOLFWLQJ UHVXOWV ZKLFK VXJJHVW WKDW VH[UROH KDV QR QHFHVVDU\ FRUUHODWLRQ WR VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ 7KH XOWLPDWH YLQGLFDWLRQ RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ PD\ EH UHIOHFWHG LQ LWV H[FOXVLRQ DV D GLDJQRVWLF FDWHJRU\ IURP WKH 'LDJQRVWLF DQG 6WDWLVWLFDO 0DQXDO RI 0HQWDO 'LVRUGHUV '06 ,,,f RI WKH $PHULFDQ 3V\FKLDWULF $VVRFL WLRQ 7KH DERYH OLWHUDWXUH WHQGV WR UHIOHFW WKDW KRPRVH[XDOV PD\ QRW EH WKDW GLIIHUHQW IURP WKHLU KHWHURVH[XDO FRXQWHUSDUWV H[FHSW IRU VH[XDO SUHIHUHQFH DQG WKH SRVVLEOH HIIHFWV RI VRFLHWDO GLVDSSURYDO DQG GLVFULPn LQDWLRQ $OWKRXJK DFWXDO VH[XDO EHKDYLRU PD\ QRW GLUHFWO\ LQIOXHQFH WKH FRQWHQW RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ .OLQJHU f WKHUH DUH VWXGLHV LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW LQGLYLGXDOV ZLWK KLJK OHYHOV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ IDQWDVL]H PRUH

PAGE 49

RIWHQ WKDQ LQGLYLGXDOV ZKR UHSRUW ORZHU OHYHOV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ LH %URZQ t +DUW &DPSDJQD &DUOVRQ t &ROHPDQ *LDPEUD t 0DUWLQ +HVVHOOXQG f 7KHUHIRUH D FRPSDULVRQ RI KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ IUHTXHQF\ ZLOO EH SUHVHQWHG EHORZ 0DVWXUEDWLRQ 7KH LQFLGHQFH RI DW OHDVW RQH PDVWXUEDWRU\ HSLn VRGH UDQJHV IURP b *DJQRQ t 6LPRQ f WR b )LQJHU f IRU KHWHURVH[XDO PDOHV +0f 7KH LQFLGHQFH IRU KHWHURVH[XDO IHPDOHV +)f UDQJHG IURP b *DJQRQ t 6LPRQ f WR b +XQW f 7KH IUHn TXHQF\ RI PDVWXUEDWLRQ HSLVRGHV UDQJHG IURP SHU \HDU +XQW f WR SHU \HDU .LQVH\ HW DO f IRU +0V DQG IURP SHU \HDU +XQW f WR SHU \HDU .LQVH\ HW DO f IRU +)V 7KH LQFLGHQFH RI DW OHDVW RQH PDVWXUEDWRU\ HSLVRGH LV b -D\ t
PAGE 50

OHDVW RQFH DQG b XVH WKH WHFKQLTXH VRPHZKDW IUHTXHQWO\ -D\ t
PAGE 51

LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV IRU WKH KRPRVH[XDO IDQWDVLHV WKDW WKH\ GLVFRYHUHG LQ WKHLU UHYLHZ RI HURWLF OLWHUDWXUH )UHXGnV f EDVLF SRVLWLRQ RI SKDQWDVLHV DV WKH SUHFXUVRUV RI QHXURVLV LV UHIOHFWHG LQ KLV VWDWHPHQW WKDW 7KH XQFRQVFLRXV PHQWDO OLIH RI DOO QHXURWLFV ZLWKRXW H[FHSWLRQf VKRZV LQYHUWHG LPSXOVHV IL[DWLRQ RI WKHLU OLELGR XSRQ SHUVRQV RI WKHLU RZQ VH[ ,W ZRXOG EH LPSRVVLEOH ZLWKRXW GHHS GLVFXVn VLRQ WR JLYH DQ\ DGHTXDWH DSSUHFLDWLRQ RI WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI WKLV IDFWRU LQ GHWHUPLQLQJ WKH IRUP WDNHQ E\ WKH V\PSWRPV RI WKH LOOQHVV FDQ RQO\ LQVLVW WKDW DQ XQFRQVFLRXV WHQGHQF\ WR LQYHUVLRQ >KRPRVH[XDOLW\@ LV QHYHU DEVHQW DQG LV RI SDUWLFXn ODU YDOXH LQ WKURZLQJ OLJKW XSRQ WKH K\VWHULD RI PHQ S f +H FODLPHG WKDW LQYHUWV UHSUHVVHG WKHLU KHWHURVH[XDO GHVLUHV DQG WUDQVn SRVHG WKRVH VH[XDO GHVLUHV RQWR PHQ +RPRVH[XDO IDQWDVLHV PD\ PDNH WKH KRPRVH[XDO DOWHUQDWLYH PRUH YLDEOH IRU \RXQJ ER\V DFFRUGLQJ WR 7ULSS f 7KH H[FLWHPHQW JHQHUn DWHG E\ WKH IDQWDVLHV FRXSOHG ZLWK PDVWXUEDWLRQ DQG WKH VHOIREVHUYDn WLRQ RI KLV JHQLWDOV PD\ VHUYH WR EXLOG DQ DVVRFLDWLRQ EHWZHHQ PDOHQHVV PDOH JHQLWDOLD DQG DOO WKDW LV VH[XDOO\ YDOXDEOH DQG H[FLWLQJ 7ULSS S f $FFRUGLQJ WR 7ULSS 7KHVH DVVRFLDWLRQV DPRXQW WR DQ HURWLFLVP ZKLFK LV UHDG\ WR H[WHQG LWVHOI WR RWKHU PDOH DWWULEXWHV SDUWLFXODUO\ WR WKRVH RI D ODWHU VDPHVH[ SDUWQHU 7KLV DVVRFLDWLYH SDWWHUQ VRPHn WLPHV PDQDJHV WR SUHHPSW KHWHURVH[XDO LQWHUHVWV QRW RQO\ E\ FRPLQJ ILUVW EXW E\ YLWDOL]LQJ D QHDUE\ WKRXJKWFKDLQ PRVW ER\V HQWHUWDLQ WR VRPH H[WHQW WKDW VLQFH JLUOV KDYH QR SHQLV WKH\ DUH VH[OHVV DQG WKXV VH[XDOO\ XQLQWHUHVWLQJ S f 3DUW RI KLV WKHRU\ VHHPV WR EH WKH FRPSOHPHQW WR SHQLV HQY\ LQ JLUOV WKDW LV WKDW ER\V GHYDOXH JLUOV GXH WR WKHLU ODFN RI D SHQLV ,Q D GLIIHUHQW YLHZ *DJQRQ DQG 6LPRQ f QRWH WKDW KRPRVH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV LQ HDUO\ DGROHVFHQFH UHVXOW IURP FXULRVLW\ PXWXDO LQVWUXFn WLRQ EHWZHHQ IULHQGV DQG WKH LQIOXHQFH RI VOLJKWO\ ROGHU PDOHV EXW

PAGE 52

WKHVH H[SHULHQFHV DUH QRW LQWHJUDWHG LQWR WKH PDLQVWUHDP RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV GHYHORSPHQW 7KH\ FRQFHSWXDOL]H VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DV UHIOHFWLRQV RI DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV VH[XDO VFULSWV 2QH SRVVLEOH H[DPSOH RI WKH DERYH LV DQ DGXOW KRPRVH[XDOnV IDQWDVLHV UHSUHVHQWLQJ WKH PDQn DJHPHQW RI GRPLQDQFH RU DJJUHVVLRQ LQ QRQVH[XDO VSKHUHV RI OLIH RU WKH PDQDJHPHQW RI LGHRORJLHV DQG PRUDOLWLHV RI VRFLDO PRELOLW\ >DQG WKDW WKHVH@ PD\ EH WKH XQGHUO\LQJ DQG RUJDQL]LQJ VRXUFHV RI IDQWDVLHV ZKRVH VH[XDO FRQWHQW SURYLGHV DQ DFFHVVLEOH DQG SRZHUIXO LPDJHU\ WKURXJK ZKLFK WKHVH RWKHU VRFLDO WHQVLRQV PD\ EH YLFDULRXVO\ DFWHG XSRQ *DJQRQ t 6LPRQ S f 7KLV SRLQW RI YLHZ UHIOHFWV WKH FRQFHSW RI IDQWDVLHV DV V\PEROLF UHSUHVHQWDWLRQV RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV FXUUHQW FRQn FHUQV $V VWDWHG SUHYLRXVO\ 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f FDWHJRUL]HG VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV LQWR HLWKHU IUHHIORDWLQJ LH WKRVH LQ UHVSRQVH WR VH[XDO IHHOLQJV RU QHHGVf RU VKRUWWHUP LH WKRVH HPSOR\HG DV VKRUWWHUP VWLPXODWLYH PHFKDQLVPVf YDULDWLRQV 7KH\ VWXGLHG WKH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ SDWWHUQV RI PDOH KHWHURVH[XDOV +0f KRPRVH[XDOV *0f DQG DPELVH[XDOV DV ZHOO DV IHPDOH KHWHURVH[XDOV +)f KRPRVH[XDOV *)f DQG DPELVH[XDOV HJ 1 IRU HDFK JURXS H[FHSW DPELVH[XDOVf 7KH VWXG\ ZDV FRQn GXFWHG IURP WR XVLQJ YROXQWHHUV IURP D SRRO RI VH[XDOO\ IXQFn WLRQDO YROXQWHHUV UHSUHVHQWLQJ HDFK FDWHJRU\ DW WKH 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ ,QVWLWXWH LQ 6W /RXLV 0LVVRXUL 2QO\ WKH GDWD IURP WKH +0 *0 +) DQG *) JURXSV ZLOO EH UHSRUWHG KHUH LQ WKH LQWHUHVW RI EUHYLW\ 7KH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ WKHPHV RI +0V OLVWHG E\ LQFLGHQFH ZHUH f UHSODFHPHQW RI HVWDEOLVKHG SDUWQHU f IRUFHG VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU f REVHUYDWLRQ RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ f FURVVSUHIHUHQFH >KRPRVH[XDO@

PAGE 53

HQFRXQWHUV f JURXS VH[H[SHULHQFHV 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ Sf 7KH UHSODFHPHQW SDUWQHUV ZHUH XVXDOO\ ZHOO NQRZQ WR WKH IDQWDVL]LQJ +0 DQG ZHUH DOZD\V ZLOOLQJ WR FRPSO\ 7KH IRUFHG VH[XDO HQFRXQWHUV LQYROYHG IRUFLQJ D ZRPDQ ZKR ZDV NQRZQ WR WKH LQGLYLGXDO RU EHLQJ IRUFHG WR KDYH VH[ E\ D JURXS RI XQLGHQWLILHG ZRPHQ )DQWDVLHV LQYROYLQJ WKH REVHUYDn WLRQ RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV VH[XDO EHKDYLRU E\ D JURXS RI SHRSOH ZDV WLHG WR WKH UHVHDUFK WHDPnV DFWXDO REVHUYDWLRQV RI WKH +0 VXEMHFWnV VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ DQG PD\ QRW REWDLQ IRU QRQFOLQLFDO SRSXODWLRQV LQ PRUH QDWXUDO VHWWLQJV 7KHVH IDQWDVLHV ZHUH RI WKH VKRUWWHUP YDULHW\ DQG DV WKH\ ORVW WKHLU VWLPXODWLRQ YDOXH RYHU WLPH WKH +0V UHYHUWHG WR UDSH IDQWDVLHV IRU VWLPXODWLRQ HIIHFWV 7KH KRPRVH[XDO DFWLYLW\ IDQWDVLHV ZHUH JHQHUDOO\ FRQILQHG WR SK\VLFDO DWWULEXWHV HJ IDFLDO DWWUDFn WLYHQHVV PXVFXODU GHYHORSPHQW SHQLOH HUHFWLRQ VKDSH RI EXWWRFNVf IUHHIORDWLQJ LQ QDWXUH DQG LQYROYHG ZLWK IHOODWLR DV WKH SUHIHUUHG DFWLYLW\ 7KH JURXS VH[ IDQWDVLHV RI +0V ZHUH IUHHIORDWLQJ DQG LQYROYHG PL[HG JURXSV RI IDFHOHVV LQGLYLGXDOV ZLWK ZRPHQnV EUHDVWV DQG EXWWRFNV DV IRFDO SRLQWV DQG ZRPHQ DV WKH UHFHSWRUV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ 7KH ILQDO FDWHJRU\ LQYROYHG WKH FXUUHQW SDUWQHU DOWKRXJK WKHVH ZHUH IUHHIORDWLQJ DQG QHYHU RI WKH VKRUWWHUP VWLPXODWLYH YDULHW\ 7KH IDPLOLDULW\ RI FXUUHQW SDUWQHUV PD\ VHUYH WR XQGHUPLQH WKHLU VWLPXODWLYH YDOXH LQ +0V VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV )RU WKH *06 WKH LQFLGHQFH RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ WKHPHV ZHUH DV IROORZV f LPDJHU\ RI VH[XDO DQDWRP\ f IRUFHG VH[XDO HQFRXQWHUV f FURVVn SUHIHUHQFH HQFRXQWHUV f LG\OOLF HQFRXQWHUV ZLWK XQNQRZQ PHQ f JURXS VH[ H[SHULHQFHV 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ S f 7KH *0V UHSRUWHG D KLJKHU LQFLGHQFH RI IUHHIORDWLQJ IDQWDV\ WKDQ GLG WKH +0V 7KH

PAGE 54

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f 7KH KLJK LQFLGHQFH RI FURVVSUHIHUHQFH KHWHURVH[XDOf UHODWLRQVKLSV DPRQJ WKH *0V LQYROYHG IRUFHG VH[XDO SDUWLFLSDWLRQ RI D SV\FKRVRFLDO YHUVXV SK\VLFDO RULJLQ HJ SUHVVXUH IURP D GRPLQDQW ROGHU ZRPDQ RU WKH VHGXFWLRQ RI D UHVLVWLQJ \RXQJHU ZRPDQf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f HVSHFLDOO\ VLQFH *)V KDG VLPLODU FURVVVH[ IDQWDVLHV )DQWDVLHV RI LGHDOL]HG VH[XDO HQFRXQWHUV ZHUH LQ WKH IUHHIORDWLQJ FDWHJRU\ DQG LQYROYHG RQHWLPH FKDQFH HQFRXQWHUV RQ D VSHFLILF RFFDVLRQ ZLWK HQWHUWDLQHUV RU PHQ VHHQ LQ SXEOLF SODFHV 7KH JURXS VH[ IDQWDVLHV

PAGE 55

ZHUH RI WKH VKRUWWHUP YDULHW\ DQG LQYROYHG REVHUYLQJ UDWKHU WKDQ SDUn WLFLSDWLQJ LQ D PL[HG JURXS VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU 7KH LGHDOL]HG VH[XDO HQFRXQWHUV SDUDOOHO +0 IDQWDVLHV RI XQNQRZQ ZRPHQ ZKR JUDQW WKHP VH[XDO IDYRUV 7KH GLIIHUHQFH LQ JURXS VH[ IDQWDVLHV EHWZHHQ *0V DQG +0V LQYROYHV REVHUYDWLRQ YHUVXV SDUWLFLSDWLRQ DQG VKRUWWHUP VWLPXODWLRQ YHUVXV IUHHIORDWLQJ LQGLFDWRUV RI D GHVLUHG H[SHULHQFH UHVSHFWLYHO\ 7KHVH GLIIHUHQFHV PD\ EH D UHIOHFWLRQ RI WKH YDU\LQJ LQFLGHQFH UDWHV RI JURXS VH[ DPRQJ WKH +0V DQG WKH *0V +XQW f UHSRUWV WKDW b RI KLV +0 VXEMHFWV KDG H[SHULHQFHG VRPH VRUW RI JURXS VH[ DW OHDVW RQFH ZKLOH b RI 3LHWURSLQWR DQG 6LPHQDXHUV f +0 VXEMHFWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ ZRXOG OLNH WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK PRUH WKDQ RQH ZRPDQ ,Q FRQWUDVW -D\ DQG
PAGE 56

DERXW f IRUFHG VH[XDO HQFRXQWHUV f LG\OOLF HQFRXQWHU ZLWK HVWDEn OLVKHG SDUWQHU f FURVVSUHIHUHQFH HQFRXQWHUV f UHFDOO RI SDVW VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH f VDGLVWLF LPDJHU\ S f ,Q JHQHUDO +) DQG *) VXEMHFWV UHSRUWHG PRUH DFWLYH VH[XDO SDWWHUQLQJ WKDQ GLG WKHLU +0 DQG *0 FRXQWHUSDUWV 7KH KRPRVH[XDO VXEMHFWV GHVFULEHG PRUH DFWLYH DQG GLYHUVH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ SDWWHUQV LQ FRPSDULVRQ WR WKH KHWHURVH[XDO JURXS 7KH OLPLWDWLRQV RI WKH 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f VWXG\ LQFOXGH f WKH XVH RI QRQUDQGRPO\ VHOHFWHG VXEMHFW SRSXODWLRQ f WKH ODFN RI VWDWLVWLFDO DQDO\VLV RI WKH GDWD DQG f WKH ODFN RI FRQWUROV IRU H[SHULPHQWRU ELDV 7KH GDWD DUH RI YDOXH LQ WKDW WKH\ SURYLGH VRPH LQGLFDWRUV RI KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO IDQWDV\ LQFLGHQFH DQG DUHDV RI FRQWHQW 6WRUPV f LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS RI VH[UROH RULHQWDWLRQ DQG HURWLF RULHQWDWLRQ WR WKH VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH VXEMHFWV 'HPRJUDSKLF GDWD ZHUH FROOHFWHG HJ VH[ DJHf DQG D VHOIn UDWLQJ RI WKH VXEMHFWVn VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ ZDV HOLFLWHG RQ .LQVH\nV HW DO f SRLQW VFDOH 7KH VXEMHFWV ZHUH DOVR DVNHG WR DVVLJQ WKHPn VHOYHV WR D FRPPRQ VH[XDO FDWHJRU\ HLWKHU VWUDLJKW KHWHURVH[XDOf JD\ KRPRVH[XDOf RU ELVH[XDO 6H[ UROH RULHQWDWLRQ UHIHUV WR DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV PDVFXOLQLW\ RU IHPLQLW\ DV PHDVXUHG E\ 6SHQFH DQG +HOPUHLFKnV f 3HUVRQDO $WWULEXWHV 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 3$4f LQ WKLV VWXG\ (URWLF RULHQWDWLRQ LV GHILQHG DV WKH HURWLF UHVSRQVHV RI DQ LQGLYLGXDO ZLWKLQ D SDUWLFXODU VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ 6WRUPV f GHYHORSHG WKH (URWLF 5HVSRQVH DQG 2ULHQWDWLRQ 6FDOH (526f LQ RUGHU WR PHDVXUH WKH VXEMHFWnV HURWLF IDQWDV\ H[SHULHQFHV (526 FRQWDLQV WZR VXEVFDOHV f D J\QRHURWLF VFDOH HOLFLWLQJ IDQWDVLHV ZLWK ZRPHQ DV WKH VH[XDO REMHFW DQG

PAGE 57

f DQ DQGURHURWLF VFDOH HOLFLWLQJ IDQWDVLHV ZLWK PHQ DV WKH VH[XDO REMHFW VHH 0HWKRGV VHFWLRQ DQG $SSHQGL[ $f 7KH UHVXOWV RI 6WRUPVn f VWXG\ GLG QRW VXSSRUW WKH K\SRWKHVHV WKDW KRPRVH[XDO PHQ DUH OHVV PDVFXOLQH DQGRU PRUH IHPLQLQH DQG WKDW KRPRVH[XDO ZRPHQ DUH PRUH PDVFXOLQH DQGRU OHVV IHPLQLQH WKDQ WKHLU KHWHURVH[XDO FRXQWHUSDUWV S f 7KHVH ZHUH K\SRWKHVHV EDVHG RQ )UHXGLDQ WKHRU\ ZKLFK SRVWXODWHG WKDW VH[UROH LGHQWLW\ KDG D GLUHFW HIIHFW RQ VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ HJ VH[XDO DWWUDFWLRQ WRZDUG ZRPHQ ZDV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK D PDVFXOLQH VH[ UROH RULHQWDWLRQf ,Q WHUPV RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ VHYHUDO ILQGLQJV ZHUH VLJQLILFDQW f KRPRVH[XDOV KDYH PRUH IDQWDVLHV DERXW WKHLU RZQ VH[ DQG IHZHU IDQWDVLHV DERXW WKH RSSRVLWH VH[ WKDQ KHWHURVH[XDOV f KRPRVH[XDO PHQ UHSRUWHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ PRUH DQGURHURWLF IDQWDV\ DQG OHVV J\QRHURWLF IDQWDV\ WKDQ KHWHURVH[XDO PHQ f KRPRVH[XDO ZRPHQ UHSRUWHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ PRUH J\QRHURWLF IDQWDV\ DQG OHVV DQGURHURWLF IDQWDV\ WKDQ KHWHURVH[XDO ZRPHQ GLG f KRPRVH[XDO PHQ DQG ZRPHQ UHSRUWHG KLJKHU OHYHOV RI IDQWDV\ DERXW WKH RSSRVLWH VH[ WKDQ KHWHURVH[XDOV UHSRUWHG DERXW WKH VDPH VH[ 6WRUPV S f 6WRUPV f DOVR SURSRVHG UHFRQFHSWXDOL]LQJ .LQVH\nV f XQLn GLPHQVLRQDO PRGHO RI VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ LQWR D WZRGLPHQVLRQDO PRGHO ZKHUH DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV KRPRHURWLF KRPRVH[XDOf DQG KHWHURHURWLF KHWHURn VH[XDOf DUH VHSDUDWH RUWKRJRQDO HURWLF GLPHQVLRQV UDWKHU WKDQ RSSRVLWH H[WUHPHV RI D VLQJOH ELSRODU GLPHQVLRQ $ORQJ ZLWK WKH DERYH UHVXOWV WKH WZRGLPHQVLRQDO PRGHO SUHGLFWV WKDW ELVH[XDOV ZLOO UHSRUW DV PXFK KHWHURHURWLF IDQWDV\ DV KHWHURVH[XDOV DQG DV PXFK KRPRHURWLF IDQWDV\ DV KRPRVH[XDOV S f 7KH K\SRWKHVLV ZDV VXSSRUWHG LQ WKDW IRU VDPHVH[ IDQWDVLHV ELVH[XDOV VFRUHG KLJKHU WKDQ KHWHURVH[XDOV DQG ZHUH

PAGE 58

LQGLVWLQJXLVKDEOH IURP KRPRVH[XDOV )RU RSSRVLWHVH[ IDQWDVLHV ELVH[XDOV ZHUH LGHQWLFDO WR KHWHURVH[XDOV DQG KLJKHU WKDQ KRPRVH[XDOV ,Q VXPPDWLRQ ELVH[XDOV VFRUHG KLJK RQ ERWK WKH J\QRHURWLF IHPDOH REMHFWf DQG DQGUR HURWLF PDOH REMHFWf VFDOHV 7KH LPSOLFDWLRQV RI WKLV VWXG\ DUH WKDW VH[ UROH LGHQWLW\ LV QRW D JRRG SUHGLFWRU RI VH[XDO SUHIHUHQFH RU RI VH[ IDQWDV\ SDWWHUQV ZKLFK WHQG WR FRQILUP WKH UHVXOWV RI %HUQDUGL f DQG 3DSH f (URWLF RULHQWDWLRQ RQ WKH RWKHU KDQG DSSHDUV WR EH D JRRG SUHGLFWRU RI WKH OHYHO RI VH[ IDQWDV\ LQYROYLQJ KRPRHURWLF DQG KHWHURn HURWLF FRQWHQW ZLWKLQ WKH KRPRVH[XDO DQG KHWHURVH[XDO SRSXODWLRQV ,Q FRQMXQFWLRQ ZLWK WKH DERYH FRQFOXVLRQV VHYHUDO VWXGLHV UHIOHFW WKH VWURQJ LQIOXHQFH RI JHQGHU LQ WKH IDQWDV\ FRQWHQW RI LQGLYLGXDOV LH $EUDPVRQ t 0RVKHU %HUQDUGL &DUOVRQ t &ROHPDQ *HOOHV 0HGQLFN 3DSH f 7KLV OHDGV WR WKH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW JHQGHU PD\ RYHUULGH VH[XDO SUHIHUHQFH LQ LQIOXHQFLQJ VRPH RI WKH FRQWHQW RI DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ,Q D PDVVLYH VWXG\ RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH KRPRVH[XDO OLIHVW\OHV -D\ DQG
PAGE 59

,Q UHVSRQVH WR LWHPV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI WKH *0V WKH IROORZLQJ UHVXOWV ZHUH REWDLQHG f b RI WKH UHVSRQGHQWV KDG IDQWDVL]HG GXULQJ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DW OHDVW RQFH DQG b GLG VR VRPHZKDW IUHTXHQWO\ f WKH *0V ZHUH GLYLGHG DERXW WKHLU IHHOLQJV WRZDUG IDQWDV\ ZLWK D VH[ SDUWQHU ZLWK b H[SUHVVLQJ SRVLWLYH IHHOLQJV DQG b H[SUHVVLQJ QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV f IDQWDV\ GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ ZDV XWLOL]HG DW OHDVW RQFH E\ b RI WKH *0V DQG b UHSRUWHG IDQWDn VL]LQJ VRPHZKDW IUHTXHQWO\ GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ DQG f DQ RYHUZKHOPn LQJ PDMRULW\ RI WKH *0 UHVSRQGHQWV bf IHOW SRVLWLYH DERXW IDQWDVL]LQJ ZKLOH PDVWXUEDWLQJ 7KH IDQWDV\ FDWHJRULHV RI WKH UHVSRQGHQWV LQFOXGHG UHFDOOLQJ SDVW H[SHULHQFHV H[WHQGLQJ D QRQVH[XDO UHDO H[SHULHQFH LQWR D VH[XDO RQH LPDJLQLQJ VH[ ZLWK FHOHEULWLHV DQG SRUQRJUDSK\ VWDUV PHPRULHV RI ER\KRRG ORYHV VSHFLDO VHWWLQJV ERG\ SDUWV JURXS VH[ LQFHVW GRPLQDQFH DQG VXEPLVVLRQ LQFOXGLQJ UDSH DQG VDGRPDVRFKLVWLF DFWLYLWLHVf DQG YDULRXV XQFDWDORJXHG WKHPHV 8QIRUWXQDWHO\ -D\ DQG
PAGE 60

FDWHJRULHV IRU WKH *)V LQFOXGHG FHOHEULWLHV FXUUHQW SDVW DQG IXWXUH ORYHUV REVHUYDWLRQ RI RWKHUV KDYLQJ VH[ VDGRPDVRFKLVWLF DQG UDSH IDQWDVLHV H[KLELWLRQLVWLF IDQWDVLHV IDQWDVLHV DERXW VH[ ZLWK PHQ DQG RWKHU PLVFHOODQHRXV IDQWDVLHV ,W DSSHDUV IURP WKH DERYH GDWD WKDW D KLJK SHUFHQWDJH RI JD\ LQGLn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t 6LPRQ f UHIOHFWLRQV RI UHSUHVVHG GHVLUHV +DZNLQV f VHOIFRQFHSW .OLQJHU f GRPLQDQFH VXEPLVVLRQ +ROOHQGHU f VH[ JXLOW 0RUHDXOW t )ROOLQJVWDG f DGDSWDWLRQ +DULWRQ t 6LQJHU f YLROHQFH *HOOHV f DQG VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ SUHIHUHQFHV *LDPEUD t 0DUWLQ -D\ t
PAGE 61

LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH LQIOXHQFH RI SROLWLFV DQG SHUVRQDOLW\ RQ WKH VH[XDO DWWLn WXGHV DQG EHKDYLRU RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV $ IDFWRU DQDO\VLV RI WKH GDWD ZDV SHUIRUPHG DQG UHVXOWHG LQ HPHUJHQFH RI WKUHH VH[XDOLW\ IDFWRUV IRU WKH IHPDOH VXEMHFWV f D fVLFN IDFWRU nFRQn VLVWLQJ RI VH[XDO PDODGMXVWPHQW DQG IUXVWUDWLRQ QHXURWLF FRQIOLFW RYHU VH[ ORVV RI VH[ FRQWUROV DQG VH[XDO SV\FKRSDWK\n f D n9LFWRULDQn IDFWRU FRQVLVWLQJ RI VH[XDO UHSUHVVLRQ VH[XDO IULJLGLW\ DQG ORZ VH[ GULYH DQG LQWHUHVW f D KRPRVH[XDOLW\ IDFWRU S f 7KH PDOH GDWD DOVR UHVXOWHG LQ WKUHH IDFWRUV UHODWHG WR VH[XDOLW\ f D nVLFNn IDFn WRU FRQVLVWLQJ RI VH[XDO PDODGMXVWPHQW DQG IUXVWUDWLRQ QHXURWLF FRQn IOLFW RYHU VH[ ORVV RI VH[ FRQWUROV DQG ODFN RI VH[ UROH FRQILGHQFH f DQ nXQUHSUHVVHG KHWHURVH[XDO H[SHULHQFH VHHNLQJ IDFWRUn FRQVLVWLQJ RI KLJK VH[ GULYH DQG LQWHUHVW IUHHGRP IURP UHSUHVVLYH DWWLWXGHV DQG H[SHULHQFH VHHNLQJ GLVLQKLELWLRQ DQG ERUHGRP VXVFHSWLELOLW\ f DQ nDPELYDOHQW KRPRVH[XDO H[WUDYHUW IDFWRUn FRQVLVWLQJ RI KRPRVH[XDO WHQGHQF\ ODFN RI VH[UROH FRQILGHQFH VH[XDO PDODGMXVWPHQW DQG IUXVWUDn WLRQ DQG H[WUDYHUVLQ S f %RWK PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV KDG D VWLPXn ODWLRQVHHNLQJ IDFWRU ZKLFK LQFOXGHV VHQVDWLRQ VHHNLQJ WKULOO DQG DGYHQWXUH VHHNLQJ DQG H[SHULHQFH VHHNLQJ DFKLHYHPHQW PRWLYDWLRQ H[WUD YHUVLRQLQWURYHUVLRQ DQG SROLWLFDO RULHQWDWLRQ KDG OLWWOH RU QR HIIHFW RQ VH[XDOLW\ 7KH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VH[XDOLW\ RI WKHVH VXEMHFWV UDQJHG IURP PDODGMXVWHG HJ VLFN IDFWRUf WR KHWHURVH[XDO H[SHULHQFH VHHNLQJ 2WKHU VWXGLHV RQ VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV LQFOXGH .HOO\nV f SURSRVHG WKHRU\ RI KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ EDVHG RQ VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV 8QIRUWXQDWHO\ WKH DXWKRU GRHV QRW DGGUHVV WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFH RQO\ WKH LVVXH RI ZKHWKHU VH[ LV HQMR\DEOH WR WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV $

PAGE 62

FRPSOH[ PRGHO RI SUHPDULWDO VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV LV SUHVHQWHG E\ +RUQLFN f ZKLFK LQFOXGHV GHPRJUDSKLF IDPLO\ SHHU JURXS SV\FKRORJLFDO DWWLWXGLQDO DQG EHKDYLRUDO YDULDEOHV 7KLV VWXG\ KRZn HYHU DOVR RPLWV WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ,QWHUYHQWLRQ VWUDWHn JLHV KDYH DOVR EHHQ LQYHVWLJDWHG WR GHWHUPLQH ZKHWKHU WKH\ SURGXFH FKDQJHV LQ VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV HJ &OHPHQW t 3IDIIOHQ 'HDUWK t &DVVHOO 6WRU\ =XFNHUPDQ 7XVKXSt )LQQHU f $Q DWWHPSW WR UHYHUVH WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO SURFHVVHV WKDW FRQWULEXWH WR WKH H[LVWHQFH RI VH[XDO G\VIXQFWLRQV LV SUHVHQWHG E\ .DXIPDQ DQG .UXSND f 7KHVH SURFHVVHV LQFOXGH f WKH HDUO\ GHSULYDWLRQ RI WKH QHHG IRU DIIHFWLRQ ZKLFK UHVXOWV LQ WKH VH[XDOL]DWLRQ RI WKH QHHG IRU LQWLn PDF\ DQG FRQIXVLRQ EHWZHHQ VH[XDO DQG DIIHFWLRQDO QHHGV 7KXV DQ LQGLn YLGXDO PD\ HQJDJH LQ VH[ ZKHQ WKH UHDO QHHG LV IRU FORVHQHVV DQG ZDUPWK f SHUPLVVLRQ DQG JXLOW DUH LQWHUUHODWHG LQ WKDW SDUHQWV GR QRW XVXDOO\ JLYH FOHDU SHUPLVVLRQ IRU WKHLU FKLOGUHQ WR VHHN RXW VH[XDO JUDWLILFDn WLRQ 7KLV LV HVSHFLDOO\ LPSRUWDQW LQ WHUPV RI JXLOW GXH WR WKH IRUn ELGGHQ QDWXUH RI VH[XDOLW\ DQG VH[XDO UHSUHVVLRQ f SRZHU VWUXJJOHV LQYROYH WKH EDWWOH RYHU EHLQJ ULJKW RU ZLQQLQJ DQG FDQ RYHUULGH FORVHQHVV LQ WKH VH[XDOLW\ RI D UHODWLRQVKLS f KRVWLOLW\ FDQ EH WUDQVODWHG LQWR LPSRWHQFH DYRLGDQFH RI VH[ RU ODFN RI RUJDVPLF UHVSRQVH DV D ZD\ RI SXQLVKLQJ RU JHWWLQJ HYHQ S f ZLWK RQHnV SDUWQHU f LQGLYLGXDOVn H[SHFWDWLRQV RI WKHPVHOYHV RU WKH SHUFHLYHG H[SHFWDWLRQV RI WKHLU SDUWQHUV FDQ OHDG WR GELOLWDWLYH DQ[LHW\ 7KLV SDUDOOHOV SHUIRUPDQFH DQ[LHW\ HJ 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ f f D UHODWHG SKHQRPHQRQ LV WKH LQGLYLGXDOnV QHHG WR IHHO DGHTXDWH DQG KLVKHU IHDU RI SRWHQF\ ,QRUJDVPLF UHVSRQVHV LQ IHPDOHV FDQ OHDG WR PDOH

PAGE 63

FRQIOLFWV LQ WKLV DUHD .DXIPDQ DQG .UXSND f EHOLHYH WKDW JURXS WKHUDS\ FDQ KHOS LQGLYLGXDOV WR LQWHJUDWH WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ LQWR WKH UHPDLQGHU RI WKHLU SHUVRQDO H[SHULHQFH S f :DOILVK DQG 0\HUVRQ f VWXGLHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ VH[ UROH LGHQWLW\ DQG DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VH[XDOLW\ 7KH DXWKRUV IRXQG WKDW PDOHV ZHUH PRUH FRPIRUWDEOH WKDQ IHPDOHV LQ WKHLU DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG VH[XDOLW\ DQG LQGLYLGXDOV ZKR DGRSWHG DQ DQGURJ\QRXV VH[ UROH LGHQWLW\ ZHUH PRUH FRPIRUWDEOH ZLWK WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ WKDQ ZHUH LQGLYLGXDOV ZLWK PRUH WUDGLWLRQDO HJ PDVFXOLQH IHPLQLQHf VH[ UROHV 7KXV LW DSSHDUV WKDW DQGURJ\Q\ FDQ DIIHFW DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV FRPIRUW ZLWK KLVKHU VH[XDOLW\ EXW QRW WKH VH[ IDQWDV\ EHKDYLRUV RI DQ LQGLYLGXDO HJ %HUQDUGL 3DSH f ,Q D VWXG\ RI VH[XDO LQWLPDF\ LQ GDWLQJ UHODWLRQVKLSV 3HSODX 5XELQDQG +LOO f IRXQG WKDW VH[ UROH SOD\LQJ LQ ZKLFK WKH PDQ HQFRXUDJHV LQWHUFRXUVH DQG WKH ZRPDQ OLPLWV WKH FRXSOHV VH[XDO LQWLPDF\ ZDV FRPPRQ S f 7KLV FRLQFLGHV ZLWK WKH ILQGLQJV RI RWKHU DXWKRUV HJ 0F&RUPLFN /D3ODQWH 0F&RUPLFNt %UDQQLJDQ f DQG LPSOLHV WKDW PDOHV DUH WKH DJJUHVVLYH VH[XDO VWUDWHJLVWV ZKLOH IHPDOHV DUH WKH GHIHQVLYH VH[XDO VWUDWHJLVWV /RYH ZDV QRW IRXQG WR EH PRUH FORVHO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK VH[XDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ IRU IHPDOHV YHUVXV PDOHV DV KDG EHHQ K\SRWKHVL]HG 3HSODX HW DO f VXP XS WKH IXQFWLRQ RI VH[ UROH SOD\LQJ E\ VWDWLQJ ,Q HVVHQFH RXU DUJXPHQW LV WKDW VH[XDO UROH SOD\LQJ SURYLGHV GDWLQJ SDUWQHUV ZLWK D FRPPRQ VWDQGDUG WR XVH LQ LQWHUSUHWLQJ EHKDYLRU DQG PDNLQJ LQIHUHQFHV DERXW D SHUVRQn V PRWLYHV DQG GLVSRVLWLRQV :KLOH VRPH DVSHFWV RI VH[XDO UROH SOD\LQJ FDQ EH PRGLILHGf§KRZ TXLFNO\ WKH JDPH LV SOD\HG ZLWK KRZ PDQ\ GLIIHUHQW SDUWQHUV LW LV UHSHDWHG DW ZKDW DJH WKH JDPH ILUVW

PAGE 64

EHJDQf§WKH EDVLF IRUP UHPDLQV XQFKDQJHG $ FRQVHTXHQFH LV WKDW PDOHIHPDOH VH[ GLIIHUHQFHV LQ VH[XDO EHKDYLRU DUH SHUSHWXDWHG GHVSLWH FKDQJLQJ DWWLWXGHV DERXW WKH YDOXH RI WUDGLWLRQDO UROHV S f 7KH VH[ SUDFWLFHV DQG EHOLHIV RI PDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV ZHUH YLHZHG LQ WHUPV RI WKH FKDQJHV RFFXUULQJ RYHU \HDUV E\ )LQJHU f +H IRXQG WKDW f WKH SUHYDOHQFH HVWLPDWHV RI D SDUWLFXODU W\SH RI EHKDYLRU WHQG WR UHIOHFW WKH UHVSRQGHQWnV RZQ VH[XDO KLVWRU\ f WKH MXVWLILFDn WLRQV IRU SUHPDULWDO VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ FKDQJHG IURP WKH DFTXLVLWLRQ RI NQRZOHGJH DQG VNLOO VDPSOHf WR LQVXULQJ IXWXUH PDULWDO FRP SDWDELOLW\ DQG TXHVWLRQLQJ WKH SRVWSRQHPHQW RI DQ HQMR\DEOH DFWLYLW\ VDPSOHf f WKH MXVWLILFDWLRQV IRU DEVWLQHQFH LQYROYLQJ PRUDO RU UHOLJLRXV JURXQGV VDPSOHf GHFOLQHG GUDPDWLFDOO\ ZLWK RQO\ D IHZ VXEMHFWV FLWLQJ D ZHDNHQHG FRPPLWPHQW DQG HPRWLRQDO GDPDJH DV UHDVRQV IRU VHOI UHVWUDLQW VDPSOHf )LQJHU f VXPV XS KLV VWXG\ E\ VWDWLQJ WKDW WKH EDVLV DQG SHUVRQDO PHDQLQJ RI SDWWHUQV RI VH[XDO EHKDYLRU PLJKW EH FODULILHG LI IXWXUH LQYHVWLJDWRUV ZHUH WR UHTXHVW QRW RQO\ H[SUHVVLRQ RI WKH VXEMHFWnV RZQ DWWLWXGH WRZDUG D JLYHQ SUDFWLFH DQG KLV HVWLPDWH RI LWV SUHYDOHQFH LQ WKH UHIHUHQFH JURXS EXW DOVR KLV SHUn FHSWLRQ RI WKH GHJUHH RI DSSURYDO E\ PHPEHUV RI WKDW JURXS S f $SSDUHQWO\ WKH DXWKRU SHUFHLYHV DSSURYDO DV GLUHFWO\ LQIOXHQFLQJ WKH PHDQLQJ RI DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV VH[XDOLW\ $ FRQFHSW LQ GLUHFW RSSRVLWLRQ WR DSSURYDO RI VH[XDO FRQGXFW LV VH[ JXLOW 7KH DELOLW\ WR EUHDN JXLOW GRZQ LQWR VXEFRPSRQHQWV VXFK DV VH[ JXLOW ZDV DGGUHVVHG E\ 0RVKHU f 7KH UHODWLRQVKLSV DPRQJ PRUDO UHDVRQLQJ VH[ JXLOWDQG SUHPDULWDO VH[ ZHUH VWXGLHG E\ 'n$XJHOOL DQG &URVV f DV ZHOO DV RWKHU DXWKRUV *HUUDUG 0HUFHU t .RKQ

PAGE 65

f ,Q D VWXG\ RI VH[ JXLOW DQG WKH VH[XDO EHKDYLRU VHTXHQFH .XWQHU f IRXQG WKDW VH[ JXLOW LV QHJDWLYHO\ FRUUHODWHG ZLWK VH[XDO GHVLUH UHVSRQVLYHQHVV RUJDVP IUHTXHQF\ RUJDVP HDVH DQG DURXVDO IRU IHPDOH VXEMHFWV +H K\SRWKHVL]HV WKDW GLIIHUHQW SKDVHV RI WKH VH[XDO EHKDYLRU VHTXHQFH HJ PRWLYDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQWDO DFW JRDO UHVSRQVHf PD\ EH VXVFHSWLEOH WR VH[ JXLOW IRU DQ\ SDUWLFXODU LQGLYLGXDO DQG FDQ OHDG WR GLIIHUHQW HIIHFWV HJ IUXVWUDWLRQf XSRQ KLVKHU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ 6H[ JXLOW LV UHODWHG WR PRUDOLW\ DQG WKHUHIRUH WR WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH $ ILQDO VWXG\ UHODWHG WR VH[XDO DWWLWXGHV LQYROYHV 3LHWURSLQWR DQG 6LPHQDXHUnV f VXUYH\ RI PDOH VH[XDOLW\ 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW f :KHQ DVNHG KRZ WKH\ IHOW DERXW VH[ b RI WKH PDOHV LQGLFDWHG WKDW VH[ ZDV LPSRUWDQW EXW QRW WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW SOHDVXUH ZKLOH b VDLG LW ZDV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW SOHDVXUH DQG b LQGLFDWHG LW ZDV RQO\ LPSRUWDQW DV D PHDQV RI H[SUHVVLQJ ORYH $SSDUHQWO\ RQO\ DERXW RQHILIWK RI WKH PDOHV UDWH VH[ DV WKH WRS SOHDVXUH FRQWUDGLFWLQJ WKH VWHUHRW\SH WKDW VH[ LV DOO PHQ DUH DIWHU f :KHQ DVNHG KRZ WKH\ WKRXJKW ZRPHQ IHOW DERXW VH[ PRVW PHQ H[SUHVVHG WKH EHOLHI WKDW ZRPHQ DUH DV LQWHUn HVWHG LQ VH[ DV PHQ LH IRU WKH LQKHUHQW SOHDVXUH RI LWf ZKLOH D PLQRULW\ WKRXJKW ZRPHQ HQMR\HG VH[ RQO\ LI ORYH ZDV LQYROYHG 7KLV ILQGn LQJ UHIOHFWV 3HSODX HW DOnV f ILQGLQJ WKDW ZRPHQ GR QRW WLH VH[ WR VH[XDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQ\ PRUH WKDQ PHQ GR f $VNHG ZKHQ WKH\ IHOW PRVW PDQO\ PRVW PHQ DQVZHUHG LQ WHUPV RI KDYLQJ LQWHUFRXUVH ZLWK ZRPHQ DQG IHHOLQJ WKDW WKH\ KDYH VDWLVILHG WKHLU SDUWQHUV 7KLV ILQGLQJ VXSSRUWV 3HSODX HW DOnV f ILQGLQJ RI VH[ UROH SOD\LQJ f $Q RYHUZKHOPLQJ PDMRULW\ RI WKH PHQ bf IHOW WKDW LW ZDV LPSRUWDQW IRU WKH ZRPDQ WR

PAGE 66

KDYH DQ RUJDVP GXULQJ VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH DQG RYHU KDOI ZRXOG EHFRPH VHOI FULWLFDO LI WKLV ZHUH QRW WR RFFXU 7KLV ILQGLQJ KDV LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU SHUIRUPDQFH DQ[LHW\ ZLWKLQ PHQ FRQFHUQLQJ VH[XDOLW\ HJ 0DVWHUV t -RKQVRQ f f $ UHODWHG ILQGLQJ LQYROYHG VLWXDWLRQV LQ ZKLFK WKH PDQ ZDV VR WXUQHGRII WKDW KH FRXOG QRW FRPSOHWH WKH VH[ DFW $ PDMRULW\ RI WKH PHQ bf OLVWHG D ZRPDQ WKDW VHHPV XQUHVSRQVLYH IROORZHG E\ UHFHQW TXDUUHOLQJ bf DQG D SK\VLFDOO\ XQDWWUDFWLYH ZRPDQ bf 8QUHVSRQVLYHQHVV LQ WKH ZRPDQ DOVR DFFRXQWHG IRU ZKDW LUULWDWHG PHQ PRVW GXULQJ VH[ bf DQG ZKDW ZDV WKH PRVW XQSOHDVDQW DVSHFW RI VH[ bf )HPDOH UHVSRQVLYHQHVV KDV D ORW RI PHDQLQJ IRU PHQ LQ WHUPV RI VH[XDO DGHTXDF\ VDWLVIDFWLRQ DQG DURXVDO f :KHQ DVNHG KRZ WKH\ IHOW DIWHU D FOLPD[ b LQGLFDWHG FRQWHQWPHQW b VWDWHG YHU\ ORYLQJ DQG b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n LQJ WR KLVKHU VH[XDOLW\ RU D JXLOWULGGHQ LPPRUDO PHDQLQJ IRU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH $ VWXG\ RQ SRVLWLYH VH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV ZDV FRQGXFWHG E\ 6FKLOGP\HU f XVLQJ WKH UHSRUWV RI FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DQG FRPPXQLW\ RUJDQL]DWLRQ

PAGE 67

PHPEHUV 1 f 7KH DXWKRU LGHQWLILHG YDULDEOHV UHODWHG WR D SRVLWLYH VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH 7KH PDMRULW\ RI WKH VXEMHFWV OLVWHG PRUH SV\FKRORJLn FDO YHUVXV SK\VLFDO YDULDEOHV ZLWK WKH TXDOLW\ RI WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH SDUWQHUV HPHUJLQJ DV WKH SULPDU\ IDFWRU 0HDQLQJ LV D FRJQLWLYHSV\FKRORJLFDO FRQFHSW ZKLFK FDQ DQG RIWHQ GRHV LQYROYH DIIHFWLYHHPRWLRQDO FRUUHODWHV 0HDQLQJ LV PRUH UHIOHFWLYH RI SV\FKRn ORJLFDO SURFHVVHV DQG VHHPV WR EH PRUH RI D GHWHUPLQDQW RI WKH H[SUHVn VLRQ RI VH[XDO EHKDYLRUV UDWKHU WKDQ D UHVXOW RI SK\VLFDO VHQVDWLRQV 7KH VH[ GLIIHUHQFHV RI SV\FKRVH[XDO VWLPXODWLRQ ZHUH LQYHVWLJDWHG E\ 6LJXVFK 6FKPLGW 5HLQIHOGDQG :LGHPDQQ6XWRU f 6OLGH SUHVHQn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f 7KHVH ILQGLQJV LPSO\ WKDW ZRPHQ UHSRUW OHVV DURXVDO ZKLOH HYLGHQFLQJ SK\VLRORJLFDO DURXVDO LQGLFHV DV LI WKH\ ZHUH QRW VXSSRVHG WR JHW H[FLWHG RYHU HURWLF SLFWXUHV ZKLOH PHQ ZHUH RSHQ WR WKHLU DURXVDO +HVVHOOXQG f ORRNHG DW KRZ \RXQJ PHQ DQG ZRPDQ IHOW DERXW WKHLU ILUVW FRLWDO H[SHULHQFH +H IRXQG WKDW f D PDMRULW\ RI WKH

PAGE 68

IHPDOHV bf KDG D QHJDWLYH UHDFWLRQ WR WKHLU ILUVW FRLWLRQ FRPSDUHG WR OHVV WKDQ D WKLUG bf RI WKH PHQ f SHUPLVVLYH DWWLWXGHV DQG SDUHQWVf GR QRW KDYH DQ REYLRXV FRQQHFWLRQ ZLWK DQ LQGLYLGXDOnV UHDFWLRQ WR DQG HYDOXDWLRQ RI D ILUVW VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH 7KLV ILQGLQJ FRQWUDn GLFWV WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI SDUHQWDO SHUPLVVLRQ LQ VH[XDO DGMXVWPHQW DV SURSRVHG E\ .DXIPDQ DQG .UXSND f f PHQ WHQGHG WR HPSKDVL]H WKH WHFKQLFDO DVSHFWV RI WKH FRLWDO H[SHULHQFH ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR ZRPHQ DQG ZHUH WKH RQO\ VXEMHFWV WR PHQWLRQ WKDW WKH VH[XDO UHODWLRQVKLS DIIHFWHG WKHLU VHOILPDJH 7KH DXWKRU FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKHUH LV D JUHDW GLIIHUn HQFH LQ WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[ IRU \RXQJ PHQ DQG ZRPHQ S f 7UDYLV DQG 2IILU f DWWULEXWH WKH VH[ GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ PHQ DQG ZRPHQ WR WKH GLIIHUHQW PHDQLQJV WKDW WKH\ DWWULEXWH WR WKH VH[XDO DFW 7R TXRWH WKH DXWKRUV :RPHQ PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ PHQ XVH VH[ WR JHW ORYH PHQ XVH ORYH WR JHW VH[ S f ,Q D VLPLODU IDVKLRQ 0RUULV f SRVWXODWHV WKDW ZRPHQ KDYH D VWURQJHU FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH UHODWLRQDO DVSHFWV RI VH[ ZKLOH PDOHV IRFXV RQ LWV UHFUHDWLRQDO DVSHFWV 3HUVRQDOLW\ YDULDEOHV DOVR LPSDFW WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH (\VHQFN Ef IRXQG WKDW PDOHV ZHUH PRUH LPSHUVRQDO DJJUHVVLYH PRUH HDVLO\ DURXVHG PRUH H[FLWDEOH PRUH KHGRQLVWLF DQG OHVV LQIOXHQFHG E\ WUDGLWLRQDO FRQFHSWV RI ORYH DQG IDLWKIXOQHVV S f WKDQ DUH ZRPHQ +H DOVR IRXQG WKDW H[WURYHUWV KDG HDUOLHU DQG PRUH YDULHG VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFHV WKDQ GLG LQWURYHUWV (\VHQFN Df %DUFOD\ f IRXQG WKDW LQFUHDVHV LQ VH[ PRWLYDWLRQ DQG DJJUHVVLRQ PRWLYDWLRQ ZHUH UHODWHG WR VH[XDO DURXVDO 7KH IDLOXUH WR FRQVLGHU WKH VXEMHFWLYH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO DFWV DFFRUGLQJ WR /LEE\ DQG 6WUDXV f KDV UHVXOWHG LQ FRQIOLFWLQJ UHVXOWV DERXW WKH UHODWLRQVKLS RI VH[ DQG DJJUHVVLRQ 7KH\

PAGE 69

SURSRVHG WZR PHDQLQJV IRU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ f GRPLQDQW VH[ ZKHUH RQH WUDGLWLRQDOO\ PDQf FRPSHWHV IRU WKH VH[XDO IDYRUV RI D JLYHQ SHUVRQ DQG f DIIHFWLRQDWH VH[ ZKLFK LV ORYLQJ FDULQJ VH[ XVXDOO\ DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK ZRPHQ S f $ TXHVWLRQQDLUH VXUYH\ RI FROOHJH VWXGHQWV SURYLGHG WKH IROORZLQJ UHVXOWV f VXEMHFWV KLJK LQ LQWHUSHUVRQDOO\ ZDUP VH[ ZHUH ORZ LQ DJJUHVVLRQ DQG YLROHQFH RI DQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO QDWXUH EXW QRW RQ ODUJHVFDOH LPSHUVRQDO DFWV RI DJJUHVVLRQ DQG YLROHQFH HJ ZDU ULRW FRQWUROf f WKDW WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS DSSOLHV SULPDULO\ WR PDOHV DQG f LQWHUSHUVRQDOO\ ZDUP VH[ LV DYDLODEOH RQO\ WR WKRVH PDOHV ZKR EUHDN RXW RI VWHUHRW\SHV RI VH[XDOLW\ DQG IRU ZKRP WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[ LV DQ DFW RI ZDUPWK DQG KXPDQ ERQGLQJ /LEE\ t 6WUDXV S f 7KH UHDVRQV IRU KDYLQJ VH[XDO UHODWLRQV ZHUH LQYHVWLJDWHG E\ 1HOVRQ f WKURXJK WKH XVH RI DQ LQVWUXPHQW OLVWLQJ UHDVRQV IRU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ ZLWK D SRLQW UDWLQJ VFDOH HJ QRW LPSRUWDQW DW DOO WR YHU\ LPSRUWDQWf 7KH UHVXOWV RI D IDFWRU DQDO\VLV ZHUH ILYH IDFWRUV LQFOXGLQJ f SOHDVXUDEOH VWLPXODWLRQ f FRQIRUPLW\DFFHSWDQFH f SHUVRQDO ORYH DQG DIIHFWLRQ f SRZHU DQG f UHFRJQLWLRQ FRPSHWLWLRQ $SSHUVRQ f KDG GHULYHG IRXU VLPLODU FDWHJRULHV ZKLFK DUH UHVSHFWLYHO\ IURP >@ WKURXJK >@ DERYHf GHIHUHQFH DIILOLDWLRQ DJJUHVVLRQ DQG GRPLQDQFH *UDWHU DQG 'RZQLQJ FXUUHQWO\ XQGHU UHYLHZf VHOHFWHG ILYH GLPHQVLRQV RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH LH PRUDOLW\ DIILOLDWLRQ SOHDVXUH DFKLHYHPHQW GRPLQDQFHf 7KH\ DOVR VHOHFWHG DGMHFWLYHV DQG DVNHG VLQJOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV WR UDWH WKHP DFFRUGLQJ WR KRZ ZHOO WKH DGMHFWLYHV GHVFULEHG WKH VXEMHFWnV SHUVRQDO PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK \HV QR RU PD\EH DV UHVSRQVH FDWHJRULHV 7UDLQHG MXGJHV ZHUH

PAGE 70

XVHG WR DVVLJQ DGMHFWLYHV WR WKH GLPHQVLRQ WKDW WKH\ UHSUHVHQWHG ZLWK D UHTXLUHPHQW WKDW WZR RI WKH WKUHH MXGJHV DJUHH RQ HDFK DVVLJQPHQW 7KH DXWKRUV K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW PDOHV ZRXOG GHVFULEH WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ LQ WHUPV RI SOHDVXUH GRPLQDQFHDQG DFKLHYHPHQW ZKLOH WKH IHPDOHV ZHUH H[SHFWHG WR XVH ZRUGV FOXVWHULQJ DURXQG PRUDOLW\ DQG DIILOLn DWLRQ 0HDVXUHV RI VH[XDO H[SHGLHQFH DQG VH[ UROH %HUQ f ZHUH DOVR FROOHFWHG 7KH UHVXOWV ZHUH VXSSRUWLYH RI WKH K\SRWKHVLV WKDW PDOHV ZRXOG XVH PRUH DFKLHYHPHQW DGMHFWLYHV DQG WKDW IHPDOHV ZRXOG XVH PRUH DIILOLDWLRQ DGMHFWLYHV 7KH RWKHU GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH QRW VXSSRUWHG 6H[XDOO\ H[SHULHQFHG VXEMHFWV XVHG PRUH DFKLHYHPHQW DGMHFWLYHV ZKHUHDV LQH[SHULHQFHG VXEMHFWV KDG PRUH DWWULEXWLRQV RI PRUDOLW\ *UDWHU DQG 'RZQLQJ FRQFOXGHG WKDW IXUWKHU HPSLULFDO FRQILUPDWLRQ LV QHHGHG FRQFHUQn LQJ ZKHWKHU WKH DGMHFWLYHV DUH LQGLFDWLYH RI WKH GLPHQVLRQV RI PHDQLQJ 7KH 0HDQLQJ RI 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUHf§,, 026(f§,,f ZLWK DGMHFWLYHV IRU HDFK RI WKH ILYH GLPHQVLRQV ZDV GHYHORSHG DV D UHVXOW RI WKLV VWXG\ $Q H[WHQVLRQ RI WKH DERYH VWXG\ ZDV FRQGXFWHG E\ %HUQVWHLQ f ,Q DQ HIIRUW WR GHYHORS DQ LQVWUXPHQW WR DVVHVV WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO PHDQn LQJV RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH WKH DXWKRU DGPLQLVWHUHG WKH DGMHFWLYHV LGHQWLILHG E\ *UDWHU DQG 'RZQLQJ FXUUHQWO\ XQGHU UHYLHZf WR VWXn GHQWV $ SRLQW UDWLQJ VFDOH IURP QHYHU RU DOPRVW QHYHU WR DOZD\V RU DOPRVW DOZD\V ZDV XVHG IRU HDFK LWHP ZLWK WKH VXEMHFWV LQGLFDWLQJ ZKHWKHU HDFK DGMHFWLYH ZDV GHVFULSWLYH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKHLU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH 6HYHUDO IDFWRU DQDO\VHV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG RQ WKH GDWD IURP WKH 026(f§,, DQG D QHZ OLVW RI DGMHFWLYHV ZDV SUHSDUHG E\ WKH DXWKRU XVLQJ WKH UHWDLQHG LWHPV IURP WKH ROG IRUP DQG VRPH QHZ RQHV WKDW ZHUH

PAGE 71

MXGJHG DV ILWWLQJ WKH HPHUJLQJ IDFWRUV $ QHZ TXHVWLRQQDLUH WKH 0HDQLQJ RI 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUHf§,,, 026(f§,,,f LQFOXGLQJ DGMHFn WLYHV VHH $SSHQGL[ &f ZLWK D SRLQW UDWLQJ VFDOH IURP QRW DW DOO GHVFULSWLYH WR FRPSOHWHO\ GHVFULSWLYH ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ WKH DXWKRU 7KH 026(f§,,, ZDV WKHQ DGPLQLVWHUHG WR VWXGHQWV DQG VHYHUDO IDFn WRU DQDO\VHV ZHUH UXQ UHVXOWLQJ LQ WKH HPHUJHQFH RI ILYH IDFWRUV ZLWK GHVFULSWLYH DGMHFWLYHV RXW RI WKH RULJLQDO 7KH ILYH IDFWRUV LQFOXGH f DIILOLDWLRQ ZKLFK LQFOXGHV WKHVH DGMHFWLYHV FDULQJ IRQG ORYLQJ DQG DIIHFWLRQDWH LH HPRWLRQDO WRQHf JHQWOH ZDUP DQG NLQG LH SK\VLFDO LQWHUDFWLRQf LQWLPDWH WUXVWLQJ DQG PDWXUH LH VDIHW\ DQG UHVSHFW IRU WKH RWKHU SHUVRQf f LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH FRQWDLQV DGMHFWLYHV LQFOXGLQJ GLVWDQW UHVHQWIXO IODW GLVDJUHHDEOH LH HPRWLRQDO WRQHf IXWLOH LQKLELWHG DZNZDUG WLPLG IULJLG LQDGHTXDWH DQG LQHSW LH SK\VLFDO LQWHUDFWLRQf LQIDQWLOH GLVWUXVWIXO UHPRWH HYDVLYH DQG XQGHVLUDEOH LH DQ[LHW\ DQG PLVWUXVW RI VHOI RU RWKHU SHUVRQf f DFKLHYHPHQW ZLWK DGMHFWLYHV LQFOXGLQJ VXFFHVVIXO FDSDEOH LH DFKLHYHPHQWf YLFWRULRXV PLJKW\ ZLQQLQJ LH GRPLQDQFHf GDULQJ LPDJLQDWLYH LQYHQWLYH GHWHUPLQHG RXWn JRLQJ DVVHUWLYH LH FUHDWLYH DQG SHUVHYHULQJ VWUDWHJ\f f PRUDO LQFOXGLQJ QLQH DGMHFWLYHV FRQQRWLQJ D UHVHUYHG PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFH HJSURSHU PRUDO FOHDQ SXUH GLJQLILHG YLUWXRXV FRUUHFW ULJKWHRXV KRQRUDEOHf f HURWLF GRPLQDQFH FRQWDLQV VHYHQ DGMHFWLYHV LQFOXGLQJ KRW WLWLOODWLQJ HURWLF HFVWDWLF LH KLJKO\ VHQVXDO HPRWLRQDO WRQHf IRUFHIXO GHPDQGLQJ DJJUHVVLYH LH SK\VLFDO LQWHUDFWLRQ DQG GRPLQDQFHf

PAGE 72

%HUQVWHLQ f FRPSDUHG WKH VH[ GLIIHUHQFHV RQ WKH 026(f§ ,,, VHH 7DEOH f XVLQJ PDOH DQG IHPDOH VXEMHFWV DQG IRXQG WKDW f WKH PDOHVn DYHUDJH IDFWRU VFRUHV ZHUH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU WKDQ WKH IHPDOHVn RQ DFKLHYHPHQW DQG HURWLF GRPLQDQFH f IHPDOHV VFRUHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU RQ WKH DIILOLDWLRQ DQG PRUDO FDWHJRULHV DQG f QR VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUn HQFHV ZHUH IRXQG RQ WKH LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH GLPHQVLRQ 7KH VLJQLILn FDQW PDOH DQG IHPDOH GLIIHUHQFHV WHQG WR VXSSRUW WKH ILQGLQJV RI VHYHUDO SUHYLRXV VWXGLHV HJ 0F&RUPLFN /H3ODQWH HW DO 3HSODX HW DO f 7KH 026(f§,,, ZLOO EH XVHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ WR FRPSDUH WKH PHDQn LQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ IRU KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO PDOHV $ EULHI UHYLHZ RI WKH WKHRULHV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLOO KHOS WR SURYLGH D FRQWH[W LQ ZKLFK WR LQWHUn SUHW WKH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ 7KH IXQFWLRQV RI VH[XDO EHKDYLRU SUHVHQW RQH RSWLRQ LQ WKHRUL]LQJ DERXW WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH :ULJKWV PDQ f VWDWHV WKDW VH[XDO EHKDYLRU LV IXQGDPHQWDOO\ VRFLDO LQ WKDW LW KDV D V\PEROLF YDOXH PDNLQJ LW FDSDEOH RI IXOILOOLQJ PDQ\ RWKHU GHVLUHV DQG QHHGV S f +H OLVWV WKH IROORZLQJ DVSHFWV RI VH[XDOLW\ f LW KHOSV WR IRUP RXU RYHUDOO LPSUHVVLRQV RI RWKHUV HJ KHDOWK\ GHYLDQWf f LW FDQ OHDG WR FULSSOLQJ IHHOLQJV VXFK DV JXLOW RU VKDPH RU SRVLWLYH IHHOLQJV VXFK DV IXOILOOPHQW LQFUHDVHG VHOIFRQILGHQFH DQG VRPH RI WKH GHHSHVW KXPDQ HPRWLRQV f LW FDQ EH XVHG LQ DQ DJJUHVVLYH HJ UDSHf SDWKRORJLFDO HJ VH[XDO SV\FKRSDWKf RU XWLOLWDULDQ HJ IRU PDWHULDO RU VRFLDO JDLQVf IDVKLRQ f LW LV D ZD\ RI SURYn LQJ RQHnV PDVFXOLQLW\ RU IHPLQLW\ HJ HJRf DQG f LW FDQ EH XVHG IRU UHFUHDWLRQ RU UHSURGXFWLRQ

PAGE 73

7$%/( 6(; ',))(5(1&(6 )25 026( )$&725 $1$/<6,6 6$03/( W 6WDQGDUG )DFWRU 6H[ 0HDQ 6WDWLVWLF 'HYLDWLRQ 0LQLPXP 0D[LPXP 0DOH $IILOLDWLRQ )HPDOH ,QDGHTXDWH 0DOH 8QGHVLUDELH )HPDOH 0DOH $FKLHYHPHQW )HPDOH 0DOH 0RUDO )HPDOH (URWLF 0DOH 'RPLQDQFH )HPDOH 127( )URP 7KH )RUPXODWLRQ RI DQ ,QVWUXPHQW WR $VVHVV ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 0HDQLQJ RI 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFH E\ %HUQVWHLQ 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUn WDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD $ VLPLODU DSSURDFK ZDV WDNHQ E\ :LOVRQ 6WURQJ 5REELQV DQG -RKQV f LQ OLVWLQJ WKH XVHV RI VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH 7KH DXWKRUV VWDWH WKDW 6H[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH FDQ EH XVHG WR VKRZ ORYH KDYH FKLOGUHQ JLYH SOHDVXUH UHFHLYH SOHDVXUH VKRZ WHQGHUQHVV JDLQ DFFHSWDQFH VKRZ UHMHFWLRQ SURYH PDVFXOLQLW\IHPLQLW\ GHJUDGH VRPHRQH JDLQ UHYHQJH PDNH D FRPPLWPHQW HQG DQ DUJXPHQW GHJUDGH \RXUVHOI WRXFK RU EH WRXFKHG 6H[ FDQ EH XVHG WR

PAGE 74

NHHS D SHUVRQ LQWHUHVWHG LQ \RX WR UHOLHYH ORQHOLQHVV WR GRPLQDWH DQRWKHU WR PDNH \RXUVHOI RU DQRWKHU IHHO JXLOW\ WR UHOLHYH SK\VLFDO WHQVLRQ WR H[SUHVV OLNLQJ RU ORYH SS f 0DUULDJH DFFRUGLQJ WR WKH DXWKRUV FKDQJHV VH[XDO PRWLYDWLRQ IURP HJR JUDWLILFDWLRQ WR PXWXDO JUDWLILFDWLRQ 7KH PDOH VH[ UROH DFFRUGLQJ WR 3OHFN f KDV WZR IXQGDPHQWDO WKHPHV D VWUHVV RQ DFKLHYHPHQW DQG VXSSUHVVLRQ RI DIIHFW +H VHHV WKH PDOH UROH LQ WUDQVLWLRQ IURP WKH WUDGLWLRQDO GRPLQDQW PDOH ZKR H[SHFWV ZRPHQ WR DFNQRZOHGJH DQG GHIHU WR KLV DXWKRULW\ WR WKH PRGHUQ PDOH ZKR H[SHFWV FRPSDQLRQVKLS DQG LQWLPDF\ LQ KLV UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK ZRPHQ S f 7KH FKDQJHV DUH QRW DOO SRVLWLYH DQG KDYH OHG WR SHUIRUPDQFH DQ[LHW\ DQG WKH FRQFHSW RI IULJLGLW\ LQ RUGHU WR EODPH WKH ZRPDQ IRU DQ\ ODFN RI VH[XDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ *URVV f VWDWHV WKDW FRPSDUHG WR ZRPHQ PHQ WHQG QRW RQO\ WR IRFXV PRUH RQ VH[XDOLW\ ZLWK FURVVVH[ SDUWQHUV EXW DOVR WR LVRODWH VH[ IURP RWKHU DVSHFWV RI KHWHURVH[XDO UHODWLQJ S f 0HQ DUH VRFLDOL]HG WR EH JRDO RULHQWHG FRQWUROOLQJ DJJUHVVLYH YLROHQWDQG SRZHU VHHNLQJ $ VLPLODU K\SRWKHVLV LV SXW IRUWK E\ 5HLN f ZKR VWDWHV WKDW WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH IRU PHQ LQYROYHV D VWURQJHU VH[XDO GHVLUH ZKLOH ZRPHQ KDYH D VWURQJHU QHHG IRU DIIHFWLRQ LQ WKHLU PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ 7KH DXWKRU VWDWHV WKDW 7KH VH[XDO XUJH RI WKH PDOH KDV DQ DJJUHVVLYH DQG HYHQ VDGLVWLF FKDUDFWHU DQG WKH ZLVK WR LQWUXGH WKH IHPDOH ERG\ DPRXQWV WR D NLQG RI IRUFHIXO LQFXUVLRQ S f 7KH DERYH WKHRULHV DOO LQYROYH VRPH SV\FKRn DQDO\WLF OHDQLQJV HVSHFLDOO\ ZKHQ LW FRPHV WR VH[ EHLQJ SDLUHG ZLWK DJJUHVVLRQ 7KH SV\FKRDQDO\WLF YLHZSRLQW LV UHSUHVHQWHG LQ WKH ZRUN RI VHYHUDO RWKHU DXWKRUV ZKR VWDWH WKDW f WRR PXFK HPSKDVLV LV EHLQJ

PAGE 75

SODFHG RQ DFKLHYLQJ SK\VLRORJLFDOPHFKDQLFDO VXFFHVV DQG WKDW KHDOWK\ VH[XDOLW\ LV DQ LQGLFDWRU RI PHQWDO KHDOWK *HUVKDP f f IHPDOH HPRWLRQDOLVP LV D PDVN IRU HFRQRPLF GHSHQGHQF\ DQG WKH PDOH SHUVRQn DOLW\ LV IRXQGHG LQ UHSUHVVLRQ RI DIIHFW DQG GHQLDO RI UHODWLRQDO QHHGV &KRGRURZ f DQG f KHDOWK\ VH[XDOLW\ LV QHFHVVDU\ IRU SV\FKRORJLn FDO KHDOWK 5HLFK f 7KH FRQFHSW RI VH[XDO VFULSWV KDV EHHQ DGYDQFHG E\ *DJQRQ DQG 6LPRQ f 7KH DXWKRUV H[SODLQ 2XU XVH RI WKH WHUP VFULSW ZLWK UHIHUHQFH WR WKH VH[XDO KDV WZR PDMRU GLPHQVLRQV 2QH GHDOV ZLWK WKH H[WHUQDO WKH LQWHUn SHUVRQDOf§WKH VFULSW DV WKH RUJDQL]DWLRQ RI PXWXDOO\ VKDUHG FRQYHQWLRQV WKDW DOORZV WZR RU PRUH DFWRUV WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ D FRPSOH[ DFW LQYROYLQJ PXWXDO GHSHQGHQFH 7KH VHFRQG GHDOV ZLWK WKH LQWHUQDO WKH LQWUDSV\FKLF WKH PRWLYDWLRQDO HOHPHQWV WKDW SURGXFH DURXVDO RU DW OHDVW D FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH DFWLYLW\ S f
PAGE 76

LQFOXGH f WKH URPDQWLF FRGH ZKLFK HPSKDVL]HV WKH YDOXH RI ORYH f WKH WUDGLWLRQDOf§UHOLJLRXV SKLORVRSK\ YLHZV VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ RXWVLGH RI PDUULDJH DV VLQIXO SDUWLFXODUO\ IRU ZRPHQ S f f WKH UHFUHDn WLRQDO SKLORVRSK\ LV FRQFHUQHG ZLWK VH[ SULPDULO\ DV D SOHDVXUDEOH DFWLYLW\ S f DQG f WKH XWLOLWDULDQSUHGLWRU\ FRGH YLHZV VH[ DV D PHDQV WR VRPH RWKHU HQG LW FDQ EH XVHG WR JDLQ PRQH\ DV LQ SURVWLWXn WLRQf RU SRZHUDV LQ FHUWDLQ W\SHV RI KHWHURVH[XDO EDUJDLQLQJf RU SUHVn WLJH VWDWXV LQ RQHnV SHHU JURXSf S f 6ODWHU f FRPPHQWV RQ WKH WDVNRULHQWHG QDWXUH RI $PHULFDQ VRFLHW\ ZLWK WHUPV OLNH DGHTXDF\ DSSOLHG WR D SOHDVXUDEOH DFW DQG LQIHUV WKDW PHQnV YDOXH RI SK\VLFDO EHDXW\ LV UHDOO\ D GLVOLNH IRU ZRPHQ 6H[ LV XVHG IRU SURFUHDWLRQ LQWLPDF\ DQG SK\VLFDO SOD\ $FFRUGLQJ WR &RPIRUW f D GLYLVLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH IXQFWLRQV KDV EHHQ FUHDWHG E\ WKH LQFHSWLRQ RI FRQWUDFHSn WLRQ 6H[ DV SOD\ JHQHUDWHV LWV RZQ PRUDOLW\ DQG YDOXHV S f DFFRUGLQJ WR )RRWH f +H IXUWKHU VWDWHV H[SORUDWLRQ RI WKH PRUDOV DQG YDOXHV ZKLFK PLJKW HPHUJH IURP D IRUWKULJKW SXEOLF DFFHSWDQFH RI VH[ DV SOD\ LV REYLRXVO\ D WDVN IRU H[WHQGHG UHVHDUFK S f $ OLVW RI WKH SV\FKRORJLFDO GLPHQVLRQV RI VH[XDOLW\ IRU DGROHVFHQWV ZDV SURSRVHG E\ 0LWFKHOO f 7KH OLVW LQFOXGHV f WKH QHHG IRU LQWLPDF\ f WKH QHHG WR EHORQJ HJ DIILOLDWLRQf f WKH GHVLUH IRU GRPLQDQFH f WKH GHVLUH IRU VXEPLVVLYHQHVV f FXULRVLW\ DQG FRPSHn WHQFH QHHGV HJ DFKLHYHPHQWf f WKH GHVLUH IRU SDVVLRQ DQG LQWHQn VLW\ HJ HURWLFf f LGHQWLILFDWLRQ DQG LPLWDWLRQ DQG f UHEHOn OLRXVQHVV DQG QHJDWLYH LGHQWLW\ HJ SURPLVFXLW\f 6FKRRI7DPV 6FKODHJDO DQG :DOF]DN f GHYHORSHG D FRJQLWLYHGHYHORSPHQWDO PRGHO RI DGROHVFHQW VH[XDO PRUDOLW\ HJ \HDUV RI DJHf 7KH\ SRVWXODWH

PAGE 77

WKDW WKH DGROHVFHQW SURJUHVVHV IURP D WUDGLWLRQDO YLHZ RI VH[XDOLW\ HJ VH[ IRU SURFUHDWLRQf WRZDUG D PRUH SHUPLVVLYH YLHZ HJ VH[ DV ORYH DQG FRPPLWPHQWf 7KH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH KDV EHHQ DSSURDFKHG IURP VHYHUDO GLIIHUHQW WKHRUHWLFDO DQG HPSLULFDO SHUVSHFWLYHV $ IHZ WKHRULHV SURYLGH VRPH XQLILFDWLRQ RI WKH YDULRXV DVSHFWV FRQFHUQLQJ VH[XDO PHDQLQJ EXW D FRPSUHKHQVLYH PRGHO WKDW FDQ HIIHFWLYHO\ SUHGLFW EHKDYLRU LQ D FRQVLVWHQW PDQQHU KDV QRW EHHQ GHYHORSHG 7KH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ DOVR DSSHDUV WR FKDQJH RYHU WLPH ZKLFK QHFHVVLWDWHV D GHYHORSPHQWDO WKHRU\ LQ RUGHU WR DFFRXQW IRU DQ LQGLYLGXDOn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f ZKR VWDWHV WKDW 7HUPV VXFK DV TXHHU IDJ IDLU\ DQG SHUYHUW KDYH EHHQ DSSOLHG WR WKHP DV LQGLYLGXDOV DQG DW YDULRXV WLPHV LQ KLVWRU\ WKH\ KDYH EHHQ SXW LQ DV\OXPV LPSULVRQHG H[HFXWHG PHGLFDWHG SV\FKRDQDO\]HG DQG RVWUDFL]HG \HW WKH\ KDYH FRQWLQXHG WR H[LVW 0RVW VXUYLYHG E\ UHPDLQLQJ LQ WKH FORVHWf§WKDW LV WKH\ QHYHU SXEOLFO\ SURFODLPHG WKHPVHOYHV EXW VRXJKW WR PDVN WKHLU VH[XDO SUHIHUHQFH E\ OLYLQJ DQG DFWLQJ DV GLG WKHLU QHLJKERUV S f 7KH QHJDWLYH YLHZ RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ LPSOLHV WKDW JD\ LQGLYLGXDOV DUH VLFN SHUYHUWHG XQQDWXUDO DQG D WKUHDW WR VRFLHWDO YDOXHV :LHQEHUJ f

PAGE 78

&RQVHTXHQWO\ QHJDWLYH PHDQLQJV LQYROYLQJ JXLOW VKDPH IHDU DQ[LHW\DQG LQDGHTXDF\ DUH SRVVLEOH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI VDPHVH[ VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ .DXIPDQ DQG .UXSND f YLHZ KRPRVH[XDOLW\ IURP D GHSULYDWLRQ SHUn VSHFWLYH 7KH\ VWDWH WKDW W\SLFDOO\ PDOHV ZLWK KRPRVH[XDO FRQFHUQV KDYH H[SHULHQFHG GHSULYDWLRQ IURP WKHLU IDWKHUV 0DQ\ RI WKHVH LQGLYLGn XDOV QHYHU UHFHLYHG H[SUHVVLRQV RI WHQGHUQHVV RU FORVHQHVV IURP WKHLU IDWKHUV S f 7KH DXWKRUV DVVHUW WKDW KRPRVH[XDO EHKDYLRU LV D TXHVW IRU DIIHFWLRQ LQ FRPSHQVDWLRQ IRU ORVW SDWHUQDO WHQGHUQHVV 6H[XDO DFWLYLW\ KHUH LV VHHQ DV PLVGLUHFWHG DQG D VXUURJDWH IRU WKH QHHG IRU IDWKHUO\ DIIHFWLRQ ,Q D SUHYLRXVO\ UHYLHZHG VWXG\ )DUOH\ HW DO f GHULYHG VH[XDOLW\ IDFWRUV IRU PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV $ PDOH DPELYDOHQW KRPRVH[XDO H[WUDYHUW IDFWRU FRQVLVWHG RI KRPRVH[XDO WHQGHQF\ ODFN RI VH[ UROH FRQILGHQFH VH[XDO PDODGMXVWPHQW DQG IUXVWUDWLRQ DQG H[WUD YHUVLRQ S f 7KLV LPSOLHV LQDGHTXDF\ IUXVWUDWLRQ DQG PDODGMXVWn PHQW DV PHDQLQJV RI JD\ PDOH VH[XDOLW\ )LQJHU f QRWHG D GHFOLQH DPRQJ PDOHV LQ KRPRVH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV RYHU WKH SDVW \HDUV DQG UHSRUWV WKDW WKH YDVW PDMRULW\ RI VWXGHQWV VWLOO UDWH KRPRVH[XDO RXWOHW DV WKH nPRVW KDUPIXOn DQG WKH nPRVW ZURQJn S f VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ 6H[ UROH SUHIHUHQFH FDQ SURYLGH RQH H[SODQDWLRQ IRU KRPRVH[XDO EHKDYLRU DFFRUGLQJ WR &DUULHU f +H XVHG +RRNHUV f GHILQLWLRQV VR WKDW WKH WHUP nVH[ UROHVn ZKHQ KRPRVH[XDO SUDFWLFHV DUH GHVFULEHG ZLOO UHIHU WR nW\SLFDO VH[XDO SHUIRUPDQFHn RQO\ n7KH JHQGHU FRQQRWDn WLRQV 0)f RI WKHVH SHUIRUPDQFHV QHHG QRW WKHQ EH LPSOLFLWO\ DVVXPHGn 7KH WHUP nJHQGHU UROHn ZLOO UHIHU WR WKH nH[SHFWHG DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRU WKDW GLVWLQJXLVK PDOHV IURP IHPDOHVn S f &DUULHU f LQYHVWLn JDWHG WKH FURVVFXOWXUDO GLIIHUHQFHV DPRQJ KRPRVH[XDO PDOHV DQG IRXQG

PAGE 79

WKDW f WKH LQVHUWHULQVHUWHH GLFKRWRP\ RI KRPRVH[XDO EHKDYLRU LV DFWLYH LQ WKH 0H[LFDQ %UD]LOLDQ 7XUNLVK *UHHN DQG &KLFDQR 0H[LFDQ $PHULFDQf FXOWXUHV ZLWK WKH LQVHUWHU DV PDVFXOLQH DQG WKH LQVHUWHH DV IHPLQLQH f ORZHU FODVV KRPRVH[XDO EHKDYLRU LQ 86 SULVRQV LQYROYHV WKH DJJUHVVRU DV PDVFXOLQH DQG QRQKRPRVH[XDO ZKLOH WKH SDVVLYH SDUWQHU LV YLHZHG DV KRPRVH[XDO f IHPDOH SULVRQHUV VWUXFWXUH WKHLU UHODWLRQn VKLSV LQ WHUPV RI PDUULDJH DQG NLQVKLS 7KXV PDOH VH[XDOLW\ LV EDVHG RQ GRPLQDQFHVXEPLVVLRQ ZKHUHDV IHPDOH VH[XDOLW\ LV EDVHG RQ DIILOLDWLRQ DQG FRPPLWPHQW 7ULSS f LPSOLHV WKDW KRPRVH[XDOLW\ FDQ UHVXOW IURP PDOH DGPLUn DWLRQ RI DQRWKHU PDOH KLJK DVSLUDWLRQV LGHDOLVP HQY\ RU HDUO\ VH[XDO PDWXUDWLRQ +H SXUSRUWV WKDW KRPRVH[XDO PHQ DUH DWWUDFWHG WR WKH VH[ UROH FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI WKHLU RZQ VH[ LGHQWLI\LQJ ZLWK WKH PDVFXOLQLW\ LQ RWKHUV 7ULSS f VWDWHV ,Q DOO RI WKHLU HVVHQWLDOV WKH VRXJKW DIWHU UHZDUGV RI KRPRVH[XDO DQG KHWHURVH[XDO FRPSOHPHQWDWLRQV DUH LGHQWLn FDO WKH V\PEROLF SRVVHVVLRQ RI WKRVH DWWULEXWHV RI D SDUWQHU ZKLFK ZKHQ DGGHG WR RQHnV RZQ ILOO RXW WKH LOOXVLRQ RI FRPSOHWHQHVV S f 7KH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ KHUH LQYROYHV WKH VHDUFK IRU WKH IXOILOOPHQW RI PLVVLQJ DWWULEXWHV WKURXJK RQHnV VH[ SDUWQHU /LNH PDQ\ RI WKH ZRUNV FRQFHUQLQJ KRPRVH[XDOLW\ WKH IRFXV LV RQ PDOHV 6HYHUDO DXWKRUV KDYH WDNHQ D VRFLRORJLFDO SHUVSHFWLYH LQ WKHLU LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ 6RQHQVFKHLQ f ORRNHG DW PDOH KRPRn VH[XDO UHODWLRQVKLSV LQ WHUPV RI SHUPDQHQFH DQG QRQSHUPDQHQFH +H GHVn FULEHV UHODWLRQVKLSV ZKHUH D \RXQJHU ER\ LV NHSW E\ DQ ROGHU PDOH WUDQVLHQW VH[XDO FRQWDFWV VXFK DV RQH QLJKW VWDQGV DQG EULHI DIIDLUV 6RQHQVFKHLQ f LGHQWLILHG WZR PDMRU V\VWHPV LQ WKH KRPRVH[XDO

PAGE 80

FRPPXQLW\ ZKLFK KDYH D GLUHFW HIIHFW RQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV f WKH FXOWXUDO V\VWHP ZKLFK ZDV FRPSULVHG RI D VHULHV RI LQVWLWXWLRQV HJ EDUV VWHDP EDWKV SDUWLHVf ZKHUH JD\V FDQ PHHW WHPSRUDU\ RU SHUPDQHQW SDUWQHUV DQG f D VRFLDO V\VWHP ZKLFK GLUHFWO\ LQYROYHG WKH VWUXFWXUH DQG EHKDYLRU RI JURXSV DQG WKH LQGLYLGXDOV LQ WKHP S f %RWK RI WKHVH V\VWHPV FDQ EH FRQFHSWXDOL]HG DV DIIHFWLQJ WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ HLWKHU GLUHFWO\ RU LQGLUHFWO\ WKURXJK WKHLU HIIHFWV RQ LQWHUn SHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV $ FURVVFXOWXUDO VWXG\ RQ PDOH KRPRVH[XDOLW\ ZDV FRQGXFWHG E\ :HLQEHUJ DQG :LOOLDPV f LQ DQ HIIRUW WR GHWHUPLQH WKH HIIHFWV RI ORFDOH RQ WKH VRFLDO DQG SV\FKRORJLFDO GLPHQVLRQV RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ 7KH FRPSDULVRQV LQYROYHG $PHULFDQ 'XWFK DQG 'DQLVK JD\V DQG ORZHU YHUVXV XSSHU FODVV $PHULFDQ KRPRVH[XDOV 7KH UHVXOWV UHIOHFW WKDW f JUHDWHU VRFLHWDO UHMHFWLRQ GLG QRW OHDG WR JUHDWHU SV\FKRORJLFDO GLIILFXOWLHV DPRQJ JD\ PHQ f VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ LV QRW QHFHVVDULO\ KLJKO\ FRUUHn ODWHG ZLWK SV\FKRORJLFDO SUREOHPV f WKRVH JD\ PHQ ZKR KDYH KLJK LQYROYHPHQW LQ WKH JD\ FRPPXQLW\ YV WKRVH ZKR GR QRWf VHHP WR EH OHVV LQWLPLGDWHG E\ WKH KHWHURVH[XDO ZRUOG DQG f WKHUH ZDV QR JHQHUDO UHODn WLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ UHOLJLRXV EDFNJURXQG DQG OLIHVW\OH RU SV\FKRORJLFDO SUREOHPV IRU KRPRVH[XDO PHQ H[FHSW IRU JUHDWHU JXLOW RU VKDPH DIWHU WKH ILUVW KRPRHURWLF H[SHULHQFH 7KH DERYH UHVXOWV WHQG WR UHIXWH WKH GHILFLW PRGHOV RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ HJ )DUOH\ HW DO )LQJHU .DXIPDQ t .UXSND f ,W DSSHDUV WKDW JD\V PD\ EH PRUH VLPLODU WR KHWHURVH[XDOV WKDQ SDVW WKHRULHV KDYH LPSOLHG DQG WKDW WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ PD\ DOVR EH PRUH VLPLODU WKDQ GLIIHUHQW

PAGE 81

,Q DGGUHVVLQJ WKH LVVXH RI KRPRVH[XDOV DV SDWLHQWV %HOO f QRWHV WKH GLYHUVLW\ LQ WKH YDULHW\ RI VRFLDO SV\FKRORJLFDO DQG VH[XDO FRUUHODWHV RI KRPRVH[XDO H[SHULHQFH +H VWDWHV WKHUH DUH DV PDQ\ GLIn IHUHQW NLQGV RI KRPRVH[XDOV DV KHWHURVH[XDOV DQG WKXV LW LV LPSRVVLEOH WR SUHGLFW WKH QDWXUH RI DQ\ SDWLHQWnV SHUVRQDOLW\ VRFLDO DGMXVWPHQW RU VH[XDO IXQFWLRQLQJ RQ WKH EDVLV RI KLV RU KHU VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ S f +XPSKUH\V f FRPPHQWV RQ HPHUJLQJ VW\OHV RI KRPRVH[XDO PDQOLQHVV +H VWDWHV WKDW WKHUH LV D GHFOLQH LQ FUXLVLQJ LH SLFNLQJ XS PHQ IRU EULHI VH[XDO FRQWDFWVf ZLWKLQ WKH JD\ FRPPXQLW\ GXH WR VHYHUDO IDFWRUV VXFK DV f D WUHQG DZD\ IURP LPSHUVRQDOL]DWLRQ f D YLULOL]DWLRQ RU DQ LQFUHDVLQJ HPSKDVLV RQ YLULOLW\ f VXEFXOn WXUDO GLYHUVLW\ DQG f UDGLFDOL]DWLRQ LQ WHUPV RI WKH JD\ ULJKWV PRYHPHQW 7KH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ DSSHDUV WR EH VKLIWLQJ IURP DQ LPSHUVRQDO JXLOWULGGHQ HIIHPLQDWH GHILQLWLRQ WR D PRUH YLULOH PDVFXOLQH DQG PLOLWDQW LGHQWLW\ ,Q WKHLU VWXG\ RQ KRPRVH[XDOV 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f QRWH WKDW JD\ FRXSOHV KDG D IUHHU IORZ RI YHUEDO DQG QRQYHUEDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ VWLPXODWRU DQG VWLPXODWHH ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR KHWHURVH[XDO FRXSOHV ,QIRUPDWLRQ UHODWLYH WR VH[XDO QHHGV OHYHOV RI VH[XDO LQYROYHPHQW ZKDW SOHDVHG RU ZKDW GLVSOHDVHG ZDV XVXDOO\ H[FKDQJHG RSHQO\ GXULQJ VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ RU GLVFXVVHG ZLWKRXW UHVHUYDWLRQ DIWHU DQ\ VSHFLILF VH[XDO HSLVRGH LQ DQWLFLSDWLRQ RI IXWXUH VH[XDO RSSRUWXQLW\ S f 7KH DXWKRUV WKHRUL]H WKDW WKLV RSHQQHVV UHVXOWV IURP QHFHVVLW\ VLQFH WKHUH DUH RQO\ WZR ZLGHO\ SRSXODU VWLPXODWLYH DSSURDFKHV LQ JD\ VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ HJ SDUWQHU PDQLSXn ODWLRQ IHOODWLRFXQQLOLQJXVf DQG WKRVH PXVW EH UHILQHG FRQVWDQWO\ WR

PAGE 82

SUHVHUYH WKHLU VWLPXODWLYH YDOXH $Q HTXDOO\ YLDEOH K\SRWKHVLV PLJKW EH WKDW VRFLHWDO SUHVVXUHV IRUFH JD\ LQGLYLGXDOV WR NHHS WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ KLGGHQ H[FHSW DPRQJ WKHPVHOYHV ZKHUH GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ HOLFLWV PXWXDO VXSSRUW DQG DFFHSWDQFH $QRWKHU VWXG\ RQ KRPRVH[XDO UHODWLRQVKLSV E\ 3HSODX f LQYHVWLn JDWHV ZKDW JD\V DUH VHDUFKLQJ IRU LQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV $ TXHVWLRQQDLUH ZDV DGPLQLVWHUHG WR JD\ PHQ DQG ZRPHQ HJ 1 1 f DQG KHWHURVH[XDO PHQ DQG ZRPHQ HJ 1 IRU ERWKf HOLFLWLQJ UHVSRQVHV RQ ORYH VDWLVIDFWLRQ LQ UHODWLRQVKLSV OLYLQJ DUUDQJHPHQWV VH[XDO DFWLYLWLHV DQG FRPPLWPHQW WR WKH UHODWLRQVKLS 7KH UHVXOWV ZHUH DV IROORZV f D PDMRULW\ RI WKH OHVELDQV DQG JD\ PHQ ZHUH QRW UHOLJLRXV HJ b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\f KDG D KHWHURVH[XDO UHODWLRQVKLS LQ WKH SDVW HJ b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\f DQG KDG PHGLDQ QXPEHUV RI SDVW RSSRVLWHVH[ SDUWQHUV ZKLFK UDQJHG IURP WKUHH WR ILYH UHVSHFWLYHO\ f PRVW RI WKH JD\ VDPSOH H[SRXVHG WKH HTXDO VKDULQJ RI UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV DQG SRZHU LQ WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLSV DOWKRXJK ZKHQ UROH SOD\LQJ H[LVWHG LW ZDV PRVW FRPPRQ DPRQJ ROGHU KRPRVH[XDOV RI ERWK VH[HV LQGLYLGXDOV DW ORZHU VRFLRHFRQRPLF OHYHOV DQG LQ PHQ f UHODWLRQVKLS YDOXHV FOXVWHUHG DURXQG WZR IDFWRUV G\QDPLF DWWDFKPHQW ZKLFK UHIOHFWV WKH YDOXH SODFHG RQ KDYLQJ HPRWLRQDOO\ FORVH DQG VHFXUH UHODWLRQVKLSV DQG GHVLUH IRU SHUVRQDO DXWRQRP\ ZKLFK YDOXHV PDMRU LQWHUHVWV RXWVLGH RI WKH UHODWLRQn VKLS DQG D VXSSRUWLYH JURXS RI IULHQGV f WKH KHWHURVH[XDOV HYLGHQFHG PRUH UROH SOD\LQJ LQ WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLSV f DOO IRXU JURXSV KDG VLPLODU SULRULWLHV IRU WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLSV HJ EHLQJ DEOH WR WDON DERXW P\ PRVW LQWLPDWH IHHOLQJVf f VH[XDO H[FOXVLYLW\ ZDV PRUH LPSRUWDQW WR KHWHURVH[XDOV WKDQ LW ZDV WR KRPRVH[XDOV f JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH

PAGE 83

JUHDWHU WKDQ VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ GLIIHUHQFHV ZLWK ZRPHQ YLHZLQJ HPRn WLRQDO H[SUHVVLYHQHVV HJDOLWDULDQ UHODWLRQVKLSV DQG VLPLODULW\ LQ DWWLWXGHV DQG SROLWLFDO EHOLHIV DV PRUH LPSRUWDQW WKDQ GLG WKH PHQ f DERXW b RI WKH OHVELDQV DQG b RI WKH JD\ PHQ ZHUH LQYROYHG LQ SHUPDQHQW UHODWLRQVKLSV f WKHUH ZHUH QR GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ JD\V DQG VWUDLJKWV LQ WKHLU FRQFHSWLRQV RI ORYH f DOPRVW KDOI RI WKH JD\V ZHUH FRPPLWWHG WR WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLSV DQG H[SHFWHG WKHP WR ODVW IRU DW OHDVW VL[ PRQWKV HJ b RI WKH PDOHV DQG b RI WKH OHVELDQVf f ERWK JD\ PHQ DQG ZRPHQ ZHUH VDWLVILHG ZLWK WKHLU VH[XDO UHODWLRQn VKLSV f JD\ PHQ ZHUH PRUH OLNHO\ WKDQ KHWHURVH[XDOV RU OHVELDQV WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQH RWKHU WKDQ WKHLU SDUWQHU 7KH UHVXOWV RI 3HSODXnV f VWXG\ LQGLFDWH WKDW WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ LV VLPLODU IRU KHWHURVH[XDOV DQG KRPRVH[XDOV %RWK YDOXH DIILOLDWLRQ DQG FORVHQHVV LQ WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLSV EXW DW WKH VDPH WLPH DOVR HPSKDVL]H DXWRQRP\ 7KH VWHUHRW\SH WKDW JD\ LQGLYLGXDOV KDYH VKRUWWHUP XQVDWLVIDFWRU\ UHODWLRQVKLSV DSSHDUV WR EH LQ HUURU $Q LPSRUWDQW ILQGLQJ LV WKDW JHQGHU VHHPV WR DIIHFW D UHODWLRQVKLS PRUH WKDQ VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ )UHHGPDQ f DUJXHV WKDW KRPRVH[XDOV PD\ EH KHDOWKLHU WKDQ KHWHURVH[XDOV +H VWDWHV WKDW JD\ LQGLYLGXDOV KDYH GHYHORSHG WKHLU RZQ YDOXHV EHFRPH PRUH H[SUHVVLYH DQG HJDOLWDULDQ LQ WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLSV EURNHQ RXW RI WKH VWDQGDUG PDOHIHPDOH VH[ UROHV DQG DUH PRUH RSHQ WR YDULDWLRQV LQ WKHLU VH[XDO EHKDYLRU HJ JURXS VH[ IRU JD\ PDOHVf 3HSODXnV f VWXG\ DSSHDUV WR FRQILUP VRPH RI )UHHGPDQnV DVVHUWLRQV 6RPH RI WKH UHVXOWV RI -D\ DQG
PAGE 84

OHVV WKDQ KDOI RI WKH JD\ PHQ bf DQG ZRPHQ bf WKRXJKW VH[ ZDV YHU\ LPSRUWDQW DQG PRVW RI WKH UHVW HJ b OHVELDQV b JD\ PHQf WKRXJKW LW ZDV VRPHZKDW LPSRUWDQW f ZKHQ DVNHG LI WKH\ SXW WRR PXFK LPSRUWDQFH RQ VH[ b RI WKH OHVELDQV DQG b RI WKH JD\ PHQ VDLG WKHLU HPSKDVLV ZDV MXVW ULJKW f FRQFHUQLQJ RWKHUVn HPSKDVLV RQ VH[ b RI WKH JD\ PHQ DQG b RI WKH *) LQGLFDWHG WRR PXFK f LQ WHUPV RI WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI HPRWLRQDO LQYROYHPHQW ZLWK WKHLU SDUWQHU D PDMRULW\ RI WKH OHVELDQV bf DQG OHVV WKDQ KDOI WKH JD\ PHQ bf UHVSRQGHG WKDW LW ZDV YHU\ LPSRUWDQW ZKLOH D PDMRULW\ RI ERWK WKRXJKW LW ZDV VRPHZKDW LPSRUWDQW HJ b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\f f b RI WKH OHVELDQV DQG b RI WKH JD\ PDOHV UHSRUWHG WKDW HPRWLRQDO LQYROYHPHQW ZDV DOZD\V SUHVHQW ZKHQ WKH\ KDG VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU f WR KDYH \RX HYHU EHHQ LQ ORYH" RYHU b RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH JD\V LQGLFDWHG \HV f DQ RYHUZKHOPLQJ PDMRULW\ RI JD\V HJ RYHU bf IHOW YHU\ SRVLn WLYH DERXW VKRZLQJ DIIHFWLRQ WR ORYHUV DQG VH[ SDUWQHUV f D PDMRULW\ RI WKH OHVELDQV DQG JD\ PHQ IHOW QHJDWLYH DERXW WKH XVH RI PDVFXOLQHIHPLQLQH VH[UROH ODEHOV HJ b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\f DQG QHYHU SOD\HG PDVFXOLQHIHPLQLQH VH[ UROHV LQ WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLSV HJ b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\f DQG f LQ WHUPV RI KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQH WKDW WKH\ MXVW PHW b RI WKH OHVELDQV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ GLG VR DW WKH PRVW YHU\ LQIUHTXHQWO\ ZKLOH RQO\ b RI WKH JD\ PHQ UHVSRQGHG LQ D VLPLODU IDVKLRQ 7KHVH UHVXOWV WHQG WR DSSUR[LPDWH WKH SUHYLRXV ILQGLQJV FRQFHUQLQJ KHWHURVH[XDOV DQG WKH JHQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ PDOHV DQG IHPDOHV

PAGE 85

$ %ULHI 6XPPDU\ DQG 6WDWHPHQW RI 7KHRUHWLFDO +\SRWKHVHV 6LQFH WKH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ LV WR LQYHVWLJDWH PDOH KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO GLIIHUHQFHV RQO\ WKH GDWD RQ PDOH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ ZLOO EH EULHIO\ VXPPDUL]HG $V SUHYLRXVO\ QRWHG 6WRUPV f K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW JD\ PDOHV *0f ZRXOG KDYH PRUH DQGURHURWLF LH PDOH DV VH[ REMHFWf DQG OHVV J\QR HURWLF LH IHPDOH DV VH[ REMHFWf VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR KHWHURVH[XDO PDOHV +0f 7KH UHYHUVH ZDV DOVR SUHGLFWHG +0V ZRXOG KDYH PRUH J\QRHURWLF DQG OHVV DQGURHURWLF IDQWDVLHV WKDQ *0V 6LQFH WKH REMHFW RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ LV XVXDOO\ D PDOH IRU JD\ LQGLYLGXDOV DQG D IHPDOH IRU KHWHURVH[XDO LQGLYLGXDOV WKHVH K\SRWKHVHV PDNH FRPPRQ VHQVH 3UHYLRXV GDWD RQ VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ DQG VH[XDO IDQWDV\ ZRXOG DOVR OHQG VXSn SRUW WR 6WRUPVn f DVVHUWLRQV HJ -D\ t
PAGE 86

IRU WKH WZR JURXSV LQYROYLQJ IDQWDV\ GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ HJ -D\ t
PAGE 87

DYDLODEOH WR *0V DQG DOWKRXJK DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH LV DQ DSSUR[LPDWLRQ WKH\ PXVW HQJDJH LQ RWKHU YDULHWLHV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ HJ IHOODWLR PXWXDO PDVWXUEDWLRQf 2WKHU FDWHJRULHV H[LVW IRU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ DQG HURWLF IDQWDV\ LQFOXGLQJ FKRLFH RI SDUWQHUVf GRPLQDQFHVXEPLVVLRQ FKRLFH RI VHWWLQJ YDULRXV VLWXDWLRQV HJ SD\LQJ IRU VH[ REVHUYLQJ RWKHUV KDYLQJ VH[f DQG YDULRXV WKRXJKW SDWWHUQV HJ UHFDOOLQJ SDVW H[SHULHQFHV LPDJLQDU\ ORYHUVf 'HSHQGLQJ RQ WKH WKHRUHWLFDO V\VWHP XQGHU FRQVLGHUDWLRQ WKH SUHGLFWLRQ RI WKH GLIIHUHQFHV RU VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI *0V DQG +0V ZLOO YDU\ 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH PRVW SUHYDOHQW VH[XDO IDQWDV\ IRU +0V ZDV WKH UHSODFHPHQW RI WKH FXUUHQW VH[ SDUWQHU ,Q 3DSHnV f VWXG\ +0V UHSRUWHG WKLQNLQJ DERXW WKHLU FXUUHQW SDUWQHU PRVW RIWHQ GXULQJ VH[ ZLWK WKDW SDUWQHUf DQG WKLQNLQJ DERXW VH[ ZLWK D SHUVRQ RWKHU WKDQ WKHLU SDUWQHU GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ DQG GD\GUHDPLQJ )RU *0V LG\OOLF HQFRXQWHUV ZLWK XQNQRZQ PHQ ZDV UDQNHG DV WKH IRXUWK PRVW SUHYDOHQW IDQWDV\ VLQFH *0V KDYH PRUH RSSRUWXQLWLHV IRU VH[ ZLWK GLIIHUHQW SDUWQHUV +XPSKUH\V f DQG LI IDQWDV\ LV FRQVWUXHG DV DQ LQGLFDWLRQ RI ORQJLQJ IRU XQIXOILOOHG VH[XDO GHVLUHV WKHQ +0V VKRXOG KDYH PRUH IDQWDVLHV DERXW GLIIHUHQW VH[ SDUWQHUV 6H[UROH GLVWXUEDQFHV KDYH EHHQ SRVWXODWHG DV FRQWULEXWLQJ WR WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ HJ 5HNHUV t /RYDDV f 7KH JD\ PDOH LV FRQVLGHUHG PRUH HIIHPLQDWH SDVVLYHDQG VXEPLVVLYH WKDQ WKH KHWHURVH[XDO PDOH 7KLV OLQH RI UHDVRQLQJ ZRXOG SUHGLFW WKDW *0V ZRXOG KDYH IHZHU IDQWDVLHV FRQFHUQLQJ DJJUHVVLYH VH[XDO DFWV LH IRUFLQJ VRPHRQH WR KDYH VH[f DQG PRUH SDVVLYH IDQWDVLHV LH EHLQJ IRUFHG WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQHf ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR +0V 6HYHUDO VWXGLHV KRZHYHU

PAGE 88

UHIXWH WKH SDVVLYH VH[XDO QDWXUH RI KRPRVH[XDOV HJ +DUU\ f DQG RWKHU VWXGLHV UHIOHFW WKDW JHQGHU KDV PRUH RI DQ LQIOXHQFH RQ VH[ IDQWDVLHV WKDQ GRHV VH[UROH HJ %HUQDUGL 3DSH 6WRUPV f 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f UHSRUW WKDW *0V KDYH DJJUHVVLYH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV DQG WKDW WKHVH IDQWDVLHV FRQWDLQHG PRUH YLROHQW FRQWHQW WKDQ WKH +0 IRUFHGVH[ IDQWDVLHV 6LQFH JD\V UHMHFW VH[UROH VWHUHRn W\SHV 3HSODX f WKH\ VKRXOG EH PRUH LQFOLQHG WR DFFHSW WKH SDVVLYH UROH WKDQ +0V ZKR DUH PRUH FRQFHUQHG ZLWK PDVFXOLQLW\ 7KHUHIRUH *0V VKRXOG KDYH PRUH SDVVLYH IDQWDVLHV WKDQ +0V EXW QRW IHZHU DJJUHVVLYH IDQWDVLHV *URXS VH[ ZDV WKH ILIWK PRVW SUHYDOHQW VH[ IDQWDV\ UHSRUWHG E\ ERWK *0V DQG +0V LQ 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQnV f VWXG\ 2WKHU UHSRUWV RQ JURXS VH[ IDQWDVLHV IRU +0V UDQJH IURP b 3LHWURSLQWR t 6LPHQDXHUf WR b +HVVHOODQG f $OWKRXJK VH[ ZLWK PRUH WKDQ RQH SHUVRQ ZDV D IDQWDV\ FDWHJRU\ IRU WKH *0V LQ -D\ DQG
PAGE 89

WKHLU *0 VDPSOH EXW GLG QRW JLYH DQ\ ILJXUHV RQ LQFLGHQFH RU IUHTXHQF\ +0V UHSRUWHG YHU\ ORZ LQFLGHQFHV bf RI VDGRPDVRFKLVWLF IDQWDV\ 7KHUHIRUH *0V VKRXOG KDYH D KLJKHU UDWH RI VDGRPDVRFKLVWLF IDQWDV\ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR +0V %HUQVWHLQnV f GHYHORSPHQW RI ILYH FDWHJRULHV IRU WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLOO DOORZ IRU D FRPSDULVRQ RI *0 DQG +0 VH[XDO PHDQLQJV 7KH IDFWRUV LQFOXGH f DIILOLDWLRQ f LQDGHTXDWH XQGHVLUDEOH f DFKLHYHPHQW f PRUDO DQG f HURWLF GRPLQDQFH $OWKRXJK WKHUH KDV EHHQ OLWWOH GLUHFW VWXG\ RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH IRU JD\V VRPH K\SRWKHVHV FDQ EH JHQHUDWHG IURP WKH DYDLODEOH LWHUDWXUH *LYHQ WKH SV\FKRDQDO\WLF LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ %HUJOHU )HQLFKHO )UHXG f *0V VKRXOG UHIOHFW PRUH PDODGMXVWn PHQW LQ WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ DQG FRQVHTXHQWO\ WKH\ VKRXOG IHHO PRUH QHJDn WLYHO\ DERXW WKHLU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH 6HYHUDO DXWKRUV UHIXWH WKLV K\SRWKHVLV HJ %HOO &KXUFKLOO +RIIPDQ :HLQn EHUJ f DQG FODLP WKDW JD\V DUH QRW PRUH PDODGMXVWHG WKDQ KHWHURn VH[XDOV $FFRUGLQJ WR WKH IRUPHU DXWKRUV *0V VKRXOG YLHZ WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ DV PRUH LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR +0V ZKHUHDV WKH ODWWHU WKHRULVWV ZRXOG SUHGLFW QR GLIIHUHQFHV $ UHYHUVHG SUHGLFn WLRQ VKRXOG KROG IRU DIIL LDWLRQf§*0V VKRXOG EH OHVV DIILOLDWLYH WKDQ +0V DFFRUGLQJ WR SV\FKRDQDO\WLF WKHRU\ 3HSODXnV f ILQGLQJV RQ JD\ UHODWLRQVKLSV ZRXOG OHDG WR D SUHGLFWLRQ RI QR GLIIHUHQFHV ,Q WKH PRUDO FDWHJRU\ GLIIHUHQFHV ZRXOG EH SUHGLFWHG E\ WUDGLn WLRQDO YHUVXV PRGHUQ YLHZV RI VH[XDOLW\ ,Q RUGHU WR DGRSW D JD\ OLIHVW\OH DQ LQGLYLGXDO PXVW UHMHFW WKH WUDGLWLRQDO PRUDO YDOXHV DQG

PAGE 90

GHYHORS KLV RZQ )UHHGPDQ 3HSODX f 7KHUHIRUH +0V VKRXOG VFRUH KLJKHU RQ PRUDOLW\ WKDQ WKH *0V 6LQFH *0V DOVR UHMHFW VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SHV )UHHGPDQ 3HSODX f WKH\ VKRXOG VFRUH ORZHU RQ DFKLHYHPHQW LQ WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR +0V 7KH HURWLF GRPLQDQFH FDWHJRU\ LV FRQIXVLQJ DQG FRQWDLQV ERWK HURWLF DQG FRQTXHVWUHODWHG YDULDEOHV WKHUHIRUH QR SUHGLFWLRQV ZLOO EH PDGH DERXW WKLV FDWHJRU\ 7KH IROORZLQJ K\SRWKHVHV ZHUH WHVWHG IRU VH[XDO IDQWDV\ *0V ZLOO UHSRUW DQGURHURWLF IDQWDVLHV PRUH RIWHQ DQG J\QRHURWLF IDQWDVLHV OHVV RIWHQ WKDQ +0V *0V ZLOO UHSRUW J\QRHURWLF IDQWDVLHV PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V ZLOO UHSRUW DQGURHURWLF IDQWDVLHV *0V ZLOO UHSRUW KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V *0V ZLOO UHSRUW KDYLQJ RUDO VH[ IDQWDVLHV PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V *0V ZLOO UHSRUW KDYLQJ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH IDQWDVLHV PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V +0V ZLOO KDYH IDQWDVLHV DERXW KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQH RWKHU WKDQ WKHLU FXUUHQW SDUWQHU PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ *0V *0V ZLOO KDYH IDQWDVLHV RI EHLQJ IRUFHG WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQH PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V *0V ZLOO KDYH IDQWDVLHV DERXW KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK PRUH WKDQ RQH SHUVRQ DW D WLPH DQG REVHUYLQJ RWKHUV KDYLQJ VH[ PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V *0V ZLOO KDYH IDQWDVLHV DERXW KXUWLQJ VRPHRQH RU EHLQJ KXUW E\ VRPHRQH PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V 7KH IROORZLQJ K\SRWKHVHV ZHUH WHVWHG IRU WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ *0V ZLOO UHSRUW WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ DV LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V +0V ZLOO UHSRUW WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ DV DIILOLDWLRQ RULHQWHG PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ *0V

PAGE 91

+0V ZLOO UHSRUW WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ DV PRUDO PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ ZLOO *0V +0V ZLOO UHSRUW WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ DV DFKLHYHPHQW RULHQWHG PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ *0V $ OHYHO RI VLJQLILFDQFH ZLOO EH DGRSWHG DV WKH FULWHULRQ RI UHMHFWLRQ IRU WKH QXOO K\SRWKHVLV HJ + QR GLIIHUHQFHVf

PAGE 92

&+$37(5 ,, 0(7+2' 6XEMHFWV 7KH VXEMHFWV LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO PDOH FROOHJH VWXGHQWV $OO RI WKH VXEMHFWV ZHUH &DXFDVLDQ ZLWK DJH UDQJHV RI WR \HDUV ; \HDUVf IRU WKH KHWHURVH[XDOV DQG WR \HDUV ; \HDUVf IRU WKH KRPRVH[XDOV 5HOLJLRXV DIILOLDWLRQ YDULHG EHWZHHQ WKH KHWHURVH[XDO +0f DQG KRPRVH[XDO *0f VXEMHFWV DV IROORZV 3URWHVWDQW b +0V b *0Vf &DWKROLF b +0V b *0Vf -HZLVK b +0V b *0Vf RWKHU b +0V b *0Vf DQG QRQH b +0V b *0Vf $ PDMRULW\ RI WKH +0 VXEMHFWV bf UHSRUWHG KDYLQJ D VWHDG\ VH[XDO SDUWQHU ZKHUHDV D PDMRULW\ RI WKH *0 VXEMHFWV UHSRUWHG QRW KDYLQJ D VWHDG\ VH[XDO SDUWQHU bf %RWK JURXSV GHVFULEHG WKHLU FXUUHQW VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ LQ DSSUR[LPDWHO\ HTXDO SURSRUWLRQV DV IROORZV YHU\ VDWLVIDFWRU\ +0V b *0V bf PRGHUDWHO\ VDWLVIDFWRU\ +0V b *0V bf PLOGO\ VDWLVIDFWRU\ +0V b *0V bf DQG XQVDWLVIDFWRU\ b +0V b *0Vf 3URFHGXUH 7KH +0 VXEMHFWV ZHUH UHFUXLWHG IURP JHQHUDO SV\FKRORJ\ FODVVHV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD DQG WKH ,OOLQRLV 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ DV ZHOO DV IURP FRRSHUDWLYH KRXVLQJ DVVRFLDWLRQV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 7H[DV DW $XVWLQ 7KH *0 VXEMHFWV ZHUH UHFUXLWHG WKURXJK FDPSXV JD\ RUJDQL]DWLRQV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLWLHV RI )ORULGD 7H[DV DW $XVWLQ DQG ,OOLQRLV 6WDWH

PAGE 93

8QLYHUVLW\ 7KH +0 VXEMHFWV DW WKH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD ZHUH DGPLQLVn WHUHG WKH (526 6)4 DQG 026(f§ VHH $SSHQGLFHV $ % DQG &f LQ D ODUJH JURXS 7KH ,OOLQRLV 6WDWH +0V ZHUH DGPLQLVWHUHG WKH LQVWUXPHQWV LQ VPDOO JURXSV RI ILYH DQG VRPH VXEMHFWV WRRN WKH LQVWUXPHQWV KRPH IRU IULHQGV WR UHWXUQ YLD PDLO 7KH LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH GHOLYHUHG WR WKH FRRSHUDWLYH KRXVLQJ HVWDEOLVKPHQWV LQ $XVWLQ 7H[DV DQG SLFNHG XS LQ VHDOHG HQYHORSHV DW D ODWHU GDWH $ WRWDO RI LQVWUXPHQWV YLHUH GLVVHPLQDWHG WR +0 VXEMHFWV ZLWK DGPLQLVWHUHG WR SV\FKRORJ\ VWXGHQWV ZKR UHFHLYHG RQH KRXU RI UHVHDUFK FUHGLWf DQG WR EH UHWXUQHG YLD PDLO RU SLFNHG XS DW WKH FRRSHUDWLYH KRXVHV ZLWK D UHWXUQ UDWH RI bf 7KH LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH GLVVHPLQDWHG DW FDPSXV JD\ RUJDQL]DWLRQ PHHWLQJV LQ DOO JHRJUDSKLF ORFDWLRQV DQG ZHUH UHWXUQHG LQ VHOI DGGUHVVHG VWDPSHG HQYHORSHV $ WRWDO RI LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH JLYHQ RXW WR WKH RUJDQL]DWLRQ PHPEHUV IRU WKHPVHYOHV DQG WKHLU IULHQGV ZLWK D b UHWXUQ UDWH ,Q RUGHU WR FRQWURO IRU VH[XDO DQG IDQWDV\ DFWLYLW\ RQO\ WKRVH VXEMHFWV ZKR LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ KDG HQJDJHG LQ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU ZLWK IDQWDV\f PDVWXUEDWLRQ ZLWK IDQWDV\ DQG VH[XDO GD\GUHDPLQJ LQ WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKV VHH $SSHQGL[ % 6)4 LWHPV t f ZHUH LQFOXGHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ 6XEMHFWV ZKR RQO\ SDUWLDOO\ FRPSOHWHG WKH LQVWUXPHQWV ZHUH HWKQLF PLQRULWLHV *0V +0Vf RU ZHUH ROGHU WKDQ DYHUDJH *0V +0Vf ZHUH DOVR H[FOXGHG IURP WKH VWXG\

PAGE 94

,QVWUXPHQWV (URWLF 5HVSRQVH DQG 2ULHQWDWLRQ 6FDOH (526f 7KH (526 ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ 6WRUPV f WR PHDVXUH WKH HURWLF IDQWDn VLHV RI KHWHURVH[XDO DQG KRPRVH[XDO LQGLYLGXDOV 7KH TXHVWLRQQDLUH FRQWDLQV LWHPV ZLWK WZR VXEVFDOHV RI HLJKW EDVLF W\SHV RI HURWLF IDQWDVLHV LQ HDFK VFDOH VHH $SSHQGL[ $f 7KH DQGURHURWLF VFDOH GHVn FULEHV IDQWDVLHV ZLWK PHQ DV WKH VH[XDO REMHFW DQG WKH J\QRHURWLF VFDOH GHVFULEHV WKH VDPH IDQWDVLHV ZLWK D IHPDOH VH[XDO REMHFW 6XEMHFWV ZHUH DVNHG WR LQGLFDWH KRZ RIWHQ WKH\ KDYH KDG WKH HURWLF IDQWDV\ LQ HDFK LWHP GXULQJ WKH SDVW \HDU $ *XWWPDQ SRLQW VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP QHYHU f WR DOPRVW GDLO\ f ZDV DYDLODEOH IRU WKH VXEMHFWnV UHVSRQVHV WR HDFK LWHP 7KH VFDOH LWHPV IRU HDFK VFDOH UDQJH IURP ORZ LQWHQVLW\ IDQWDVLHV WKLQNLQJ VRPHRQH LV VH[XDOO\ DWWUDFWLYHf WKURXJK PRGHUDWH LQWHQVLW\ IDQWDVLHV GD\GUHDPLQJ DERXW KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQHf WR KLJK LQWHQVLW\ IDQWDVLHV PDVWXUEDWLQJ ZKLOH IDQWDVL]LQJ VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQHf S f 8WLOL]LQJ D *XWWPDQ VFDORJUDP 6WRUPV f GHWHUPLQHG WKH LQWHUQDO UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKH VFDOHV FRHIILFLHQWV RI UHSURGXFHDELOLW\ ZHUH IRU WKH DQGURHURWLF VFDOH DQG IRU WKH J\QRHURWLF VFDOH +H DOVR GHWHUPLQHG WKDW WKH LQWHUQDO YDOLGLW\ RI WKH VFDOHV LQ WKH VHQVH RI FRKHUHQFH DQG FXPXODWLYLW\ ZDV JRRG FRHIILFLHQWV RI VFDODELOLW\ ZHUH IRU WKH DQGURHURWLF VFDOH DQG IRU WKH J\QRHURWLF VFDOHf $ FRPSDULVRQ RI VFDORJUDP YDOXHV EHWZHHQ WKH WRWDO VXEMHFW VDPSOH 1 f DQG WKH KHWHURVH[XDO VXEMHFWV 1 f SURYHG WR EH DOPRVW LGHQWLFDO GHPRQVWUDWn LQJ FRQVLVWHQW UHOLDELOLW\ DFURVV VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ JURXSV

PAGE 95

7KH 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 6)4f 7KH 6)4 ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ 3DSH f LQ RUGHU WR VWXG\ WKH LQFLGHQFH IUHTXHQF\ YDULHW\ DQG FRQWHQW RI VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV XQGHU WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV f VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU f PDVWXUEDWLRQ DQG f GD\GUHDPLQJ 0HGQLFN f 3DUW VHH $SSHQGL[ %f HOLFLWV WKH IROORZLQJ GHPRJUDSKLF GDWD f DJH f HWKQLF EDFNJURXQG f UHOLJLRXV DIILOLDWLRQ f VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ HJ .LQVH\W\SH VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP fH[FOXVLYHO\ KHWHURn VH[XDO WR H[FOXVLYHO\ KRPRVH[XDOf f DYDLODELOLW\ RI FXUUHQW VH[ SDUWQHU HJ \HV RU QRf DQG f GHVFULSWLRQ RI FXUUHQW VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ HJ SRLQW VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP YHU\ VDWLVIDFWRU\ WR YHU\ XQVDWLVIDFWRU\f 3DUW ,, LV FRPSULVHG RI WKUHH VHFWLRQV ZKLFK UHIOHFW WKH DIRUHn PHQWLRQHG WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV ZLWK WKH VDPH VH[XDO IDQWDV\ VXEWKHPHV XQGHU HDFK FRQGLWLRQ $Q RWKHU VXEWKHPH ZDV DOVR SURYLGHG XQGHU HDFK FRQGLWLRQ WR DOORZ WKH VXEMHFWV WR ZULWH LQ DQG UDWH DQ\ IDQWDV\ WKHPH QRW LQFOXGHG ZLWKLQ WKH VXEWKHPHV 7KH ILUVW WZR VHFWLRQV HJ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DQG PDVWXUEDWLRQf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f WR DOZD\V f IRU HDFK VXEWKHPH ZLWKLQ WKH

PAGE 96

FRQGLWLRQ XQGHU FRQVLGHUDWLRQ %RWK VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ TXHVWLRQV HJ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DQG PDVWXUEDWLRQf DVNHG KRZ RIWHQ WKH VXEMHFW HQJDJHG LQ WKH DFWLYLW\ RYHU WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKV ZLWK UHVSRQVH FDWHJRULHV UDQJLQJ IURP f WR RYHU f WLPHV 7KH WKUHH IDQWDV\ ILOWHU TXHVWLRQV DVNHG KRZ RIWHQ WKH VXEMHFW KDG IDQWDVL]HG GXULQJ WKH DFWLYLW\ XQGHU FRQVLGHUDWLRQ RYHU WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKVf ZLWK D SRLQW UDWLQJ VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP QHYHU f WR DOZD\V f 7ZR ILQDO TXHVWLRQV ZHUH LQFOXGHG DW WKH HQG RI 3DUW ,, 2QH TXHVn WLRQ DVNHG DERXW WKH VXEMHFWnV OHYHO RI FRPIRUW LQ ILOOLQJ RXW WKH 6)4 ZLWK D SRLQW UDWLQJ VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP YHU\ FRPIRUWDEOH f WR YHU\ XQFRPIRUWDEOH f 3DSH f FRQVLGHUHG WKLV LWHP D URXJK LQGLFDn WRU RI ZLOOLQJQHVV WR GLVFORVH $ ILQDO TXHVWLRQ ZDV RSHQHQGHG DQG LQTXLUHG DERXW WKH VXEMHFWnV FRPPHQWV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH VWXG\ 3DSH f GHWHUPLQHG WKH UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKH 6)4 E\ FRPSXWLQJ WHVW UHWHVW FRUUHODWLRQV IRU WKH LQLWLDO VXEMHFWVf DIWHU D WZRZHHN SHULRG IRU WKH WKUHH VLWXDWLRQDO IDQWDV\ VXEVFDOH VFRUHV DQG IRU WKH LQGLYLGXDO WKHPH UHVSRQVHV LQ HDFK RI WKH WKUHH VLWXDWLRQDO FRQGLWLRQV S f ,Q WKH VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU FRQGLWLRQ WKH VLWXDWLRQDO VXEn VFDOH VFRUH LH VXP RI VXEWKHPH UHVSRQVHVf VKRZHG D WHVWUHWHVW FRUUHODWLRQ ZKLFK ZDV VLJQLILFDQW S f 7KH VXEWKHPH UDWLQJV KDG WHVWUHWHVW FRUUHODWLRQV UDQJLQJ IURP WR DQG DOO ZHUH VLJn QLILFDQW S f H[FHSW IRU WKH LPDJLQLQJ WKDW \RX DUH D SURVWLWXWH WKHPH 7KLV LWHP ZDV FKDQJHG IRU WKLV VWXG\ WR UHDG LPDJLQLQJ WKDW \RX DUH EHLQJ SDLG WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQH LQ RUGHU WR UHPRYH DQ\ VWLJPD FRQFHUQLQJ WKH ZRUG SURVWLWXWH )RU WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ DQG GD\n GUHDPLQJ FRQGLWLRQV WKH VXEVFDOH WHVWUHWHVW FRUUHODWLRQV ZHUH DQG

PAGE 97

UHVSHFWLYHO\ ERWK VLJQLILFDQW DW WKH S OHYHOf 7KH LQGLYLGn XDO WKHPH WHVWUHWHVW FRUUHODWLRQ FRHIILFLHQWV UDQJHG IURP WR IRU WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ FRQGLWLRQ DQG IURP WR IRU WKH GD\GUHDPLQJ FRQGLn WLRQ S IRU DOO FRUUHODWLRQVf &URQEDFKnV f DOSKD ZDV XVHG WR PHDVXUH WKH LQWHUQDO FRQVLVWHQF\ VFRUHV RI WKH VLWXDWLRQDO VXEVFDOHV DQG WKH UHVXOWV ZHUH IRU WKH fVH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU FRQGLWLRQ IRU WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ FRQGLWLRQ DQG IRU WKH GD\GUHDPLQJ FRQGLWLRQ 7KH 0HDQLQJ RI 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUHf§,,, 026(f§,,,f 7KH 026(f§,,, ZDV GHYHORSHG E\ %HUQVWHLQ f LQ RUGHU WR DWWHPSW DQ DVVHVVPHQW RI WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO PHDQLQJV RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH $V SUHYLRXVO\ PHQWLRQHG KH DGPLQLVWHUHG WKH DGMHFWLYHV 026(f§,,f LGHQWLILHG E\ *UDWHU DQG 'RZQLQJ FXUUHQWO\ XQGHU UHYLHZf ZKLFK ZHUH SXUSRUWHG WR SHUWDLQ WR WKH PHDQLQJ GLPHQVLRQV RI PRUDOLW\ DIILOLDWLRQ SOHDVXUH DFKLHYHPHQW DQG GRPLQDQFH WR FROOHJH VWXGHQWV $ SRLQW UDWLQJ VFDOH ZDV XVHG WR UDWH HDFK DGMHFWLYH LQ WHUPV RI WKH VXEMHFWnV PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH UDQJLQJ IURP QHYHU RU DOPRVW QHYHU f WR DOZD\V RU DOPRVW DOZD\V f 6HYHUDO IDFWRU DQDO\VHV ZHUH SHUIRUPHG RQ WKH GDWD LQ RUGHU WR GHWHUPLQH WKH PRVW PHDQLQJIXO IDFWRUV ERWK VWDWLVWLFDOO\ DQG FRQFHSWXDOO\ 7KH FULWHULD OHYHOV IRU PDLQWDLQLQJ LWHPV ZHUH IDFWRU UDWLQJV RI DW OHDVW RQ RQH IDFWRU DQG OHVV WKDQ RQ HYHU\ RWKHU IDFWRU ,Q DGGLWLRQ REOLTXH IDFWRU URWDWLRQ ZDV SHUPLWWHG DV ORQJ DV WKH FRUUHODWLRQ EHWZHHQ IDFWRUV ZDV QRW VXEVWDQWLDOO\ JUHDWHU WKDQ IRU DQ\ WZR IDFWRUV %HUQVWHLQ S f $ QHZ OLVW RI DGMHFWLYHV ZDV WKHQ FRQVWUXFWHG E\ %HUQVWHLQ f UHWDLQLQJ LWHPV IURP WKH 026(f§,, DQG JHQHUDWLQJ LWHPV WKDW WKH DXWKRU MXGJHG WR EH UHIOHFWLYH RI WKH HPHUJLQJ IDFWRUV 7KH 026(f§,,, VHH

PAGE 98

$SSHQGL[ &f LQFOXGHV DGMHFWLYHV ZLWK D SRLQW UDWLQJ VFDOH UDQJLQJ IURP QRW DW DOO GHVFULSWLYH f WR FRPSOHWHO\ GHVFULSWLYH f LH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI WKH VXEMHFWnV VH[XDO H[SHULHQFHf 7KH 026(f§,,, ZDV DGPLQLVWHUHG WR FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DQG VHYHUDO IDFWRU DQDO\VHV ZHUH UXQ XWLOL]LQJ WKH VDPH FULWHULD OHYHOV WKDW ZHUH PHQWLRQHG DERYH IRU WKH 026(f§,, DQDO\VLV $ WRWDO RI ILYH IDFWRUV HPHUJHG IURP WKH ILQDO DQDO\VLV ZLWK D WRWDO RI DGMHFWLYHV DQG WKHVH IDFWRUV LQFOXGH f DIILOLDWLRQ f LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH f DFKLHYHPHQW f PRUDO DQG f HURWLF GRPLQDQFH ,Q WKLV FDVH DQ RUWKRJRQDO DQDO\VLV ZDV UXQ XWLOL]LQJ WKH FULWHULD OHYHOV PHQWLRQHG IRU WKH 026(f§,, WR GHWHUPLQH LI WKH IDFWRUV ZRXOG REWDLQ ZLWK QR LQWHUFRUUHODWLRQV 1RQH RI WKH DGMHFWLYHV ORDGHG RQ D GLIIHUHQW IDFWRU IURP WKH IDFWRU RQ ZKLFK WKH\ RULJLQDOO\ ORDGHG LQ WKH REOLTXH DQDO\VLV %HUQVWHLQ f DVVHVVHG WKH UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKH 026(f§,,, E\ XVLQJ &URQEDFKnV f FRHIILFLHQW DOSKD HJ WKH DYHUDJH RI DOO SRVVLEOH VSOLWKDOI UHOLDELOLW\ FRHIILFLHQWVf $ FULWHULRQ OHYHO RI ZDV DGRSWHG DV SHU 1XQQDOO\nV f VXJJHVWLRQ 7KH DOSKD FRHIn ILFLHQWV IRU WKH ILYH IDFWRUV ZHUH DV IROORZV f IRU DIILOLDWLRQ f IRU LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH f IRU DFKLHYHPHQW f IRU PRUDO DQG f IRU HURWLF GRPLQDQFH 6HYHUDO GLIIHUHQW DSSURDFKHV ZHUH WDNHQ LQ RUGHU WR DVVHVV WKH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 026( f§,,, 7KH DGMHFWLYHV ZHUH DGPLQLVWHUHG WR VWXGHQWV ZKR ZHUH DVNHG WR FDWHJRUL]H WKH LWHPV LQ WHUPV RI GRQnW XQGHUVWDQG DW DOO KDYH VRPH LGHD DQG NQRZ ZKDW LW PHDQV 2I WKH ZRUGV RQO\ WZR ZHUH FDWHJRUL]HG DV GRQnW XQGHUVWDQG DW DOO E\ PRUH WKDQ WZR VWXGHQWV HJ DPRURXV WLWLOODWLQJf 7KLV SUHFOXGHG GHILQLWLRQ SUREOHPV DV SRVVLEOH WKUHDWV

PAGE 99

WR WKH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 026(f§,,, &RQWHQW YDOLGLW\ DFFRUGLQJ WR %HUQVWHLQ f ZDV GHPRQVWUDWHG E\ WKH VHOHFWLRQ RI DGMHFWLYHV DORQJ FRQFHSWXDO JXLGHOLQHV DQG E\ WKH VXFFHVVIXO SUHGLFWLRQ RI WKUHH RXW RI WKH ILYH K\SRWKHVL]HG GLPHQVLRQV HJ DIILOLDWLRQ PRUDOLW\ DQG DFKLHYHPHQWf 7KH RWKHU WZR HPHUJHQW IDFWRUV HJ LQDGHTXDWH XQGHVLUDEOH DQG HURWLF GRPLQDQFHf ZHUH VHHQ DV FRQFHSWXDOO\ FRKHVLYH DQG WKHUHIRUH DOVR VXSSRUWLYH RI FRQWHQW DQG SDUWLDOO\ FRQVWUXFW YDOLGLW\ 1HOVRQnV f SUHYLRXVO\ UHYLHZHG 6H[XDO )XQFWLRQV 0HDVXUH 6)0f ZDV XWLOL]HG WR DVVHVV WKH FRQYHUJHQW YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 026(f§,,, $ VDPSOH RI VWXGHQWV LH IHPDOHV DQG PDOHVf ZHUH DGPLQLVWHUHG WKH 6)0 DQG WKH 026(f§,,, ZLWK SUHGLFWHG FRUUHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKH IROn ORZLQJ IDFWRUV RQ WKH LQVWUXPHQWV f DIILOLDWLRQ 026(f ZLWK SHUn VRQDO ORYH DQG DIIHFWLRQ 6)0f f DFKLHYHPHQW 026(f ZLWK SRZHU UHFRJQLWLRQ DQG FRPSHWLWLRQ 6)0f DQG f HURWLF GRPLQDQFH 026(f ZLWK SOHDVXUDEOH VWLPXODWLRQ 6)0f %HUQVWHLQ S f 7KH FRUUHODWLRQV ZHUH VLJQLILFDQW IRU JHQGHU LQ VRPH FDVHV EXW RYHUDOO RQO\ ZHDN VXSSRUW IRU WKH FRQYHUJHQW YDOLGLW\ RI WKH 026(f§,,, ZDV GHPRQVWUDWHG 6WDWLVWLFDO +\SRWKHVHV 7KH VWDWLVWLFDO K\SRWKHVHV IRU VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DUH DV IROORZV 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH D VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUH RQ WKH (526 DQGURHURWLF VFDOH WKDQ WKH +0V DQG WKH +0V ZLOO KDYH D VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU PHDQ VFRUH RQ WKH (526 J\QRHURWLF VFDOH WKDQ WKH *0V 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH D VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUH RQ IDQWDVLHV DERXW WKH RSSRVLWH VH[ HJ LWHPV t RQ WKH 6)4f WKDQ WKH +0V ZLOO KDYH DERXW WKH VDPH VH[ 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH D VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUH RQ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU HJ LWHP RQ WKH 6)4f WKDQ ZLOO WKH +0V

PAGE 100

7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ IDQWDVLHV DERXW RUDO VH[ HJ LWHPV t RQ WKH 6)4f WKDQ ZLOO WKH +0V 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ IDQWDVLHV DERXW DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH HJ LWHPV t RQ WKH 6)4f WKDQ ZLOO WKH +0V 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ IDQWDVLHV DERXW UHSODFLQJ WKHLU FXUUHQW SDUWQHU HJ LWHPV t RQ WKH 6)4f WKDQ ZLOO WKH +0V 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ IDQWDVLHV DERXW EHLQJ RYHUSRZHUHG RU IRUFHG WR VXUn UHQGHU WR VRPHRQH HJ LWHPV t RQ WKH 6)4f WKDQ ZLOO WKH +0V 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ IDQWDVLHV DERXW KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK PRUH WKDQ RQH SHUVRQ DW D WLPH DQG REVHUYLQJ RWKHUV KDYLQJ VH[ HJ LWHPV t RQ WKH 6)4f WKDQ ZLOO WKH +0V 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ IDQWDVLHV DERXW HQMR\PHQW RI EHLQJ KXUW DQG RI KXUWLQJ DQRWKHU GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU HJ LWHPV t RQ WKH 6)4f WKDQ ZLOO WKH +0V 7KH VWDWLVWLFDO K\SRWKHVHV IRU WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH DUH DV IROORZV 7KH *0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ WKH LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH IDFWRU HJ DGMHFWLYHVf RI WKH 026(f§,,, WKDQ ZLOO WKH +0V 7KH +0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ WKH DIILOLDWLRQ IDFWRU HJ DGMHFWLYHVf RI WKH 026(f§,,, WKDQ ZLOO WKH *0V 7KH +0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ WKH PRUDOLW\ IDFWRU HJ DGMHFWLYHVf RI WKH 026( f§ ,,, WKDQ ZLOO WKH *0V 7KH +0V ZLOO KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ WKH DFKLHYHPHQW IDFWRU HJ DGMHFWLYHVf RI WKH 026( f§,,, WKDQ ZLOO WKH *0V

PAGE 101

&+$37(5 ,,, 5(68/76 $QDO\VLV RI WKH (URWLF 5HVSRQVH DQG 2ULHQWDWLRQ 6FDOH (526f 7KH (526 6WRUPV f FRQWDLQV D J\QRHURWLF LH IHPDOH DV VH[ REMHFWf VFDOH DQG DQ DQGURHURWLF LH PDOH DV VH[ REMHFWf VFDOH *URXS PHDQ VFDOH VFRUHV ZHUH FRPSXWHG IRU HDFK VXEMHFW JURXS LH *0 +0f E\ VXPPLQJ HDFK VXEMHFWnV VFDOH VFRUH DQG GLYLGLQJ E\ WKH QXPEHU RI VXEMHFWV LQ HDFK JURXS HJ 1 f +\SRWKHVLV ZDV VXSSRUWHG ZLWK *0V ; f VFRULQJ VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU RQ WKH DQGURHURWLF VFDOH ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0V ; f WBf MG &RQn YHUVHO\ +0V ; f VFRUHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU RQ WKH J\QRHURWLF VFDOH ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH *0V ; f WBf S f %RWK RI WKHVH UHVXOWV DUH KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQW DQG VHUYH WR DGG IXUWKHU VXSSRUW WR 6WRUPVn f K\SRWKHVLV WKDW *0V KDYH PRUH VH[ IDQWDVLHV DERXW PHQ WKDQ +0V DQG WKDW +0V KDYH PRUH VH[ IDQWDVLHV DERXW ZRPHQ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR *0V 6RPH LQWHUHVWLQJ ILJXUHV DUH UHIOHFWHG LQ WKH IUHTXHQFLHV UHSRUWHG E\ ERWK JURXSV RQ VHOHFWHG LWHPV RI WKH (526 ,Q UHVSRQVH WR +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX KDG D SDUWLFXODU GHVLUH WR KDYH D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D PDQ \RX NQRZ b RI WKH +0V UHVSRQGHG ZLWK QHYHUf ZKHUHDV RQO\ b RI WKH *0V UHVSRQGHG ZLWK QHYHUf WR D VLPLODU TXHVWLRQ DERXW D ZRPDQ WKDW WKH\ NQRZ :KHQ DVNHG DERXW GD\GUHDPV FRQFHUQLQJ VH[ ZLWK PHPEHUV RI WKH VDPH VH[ b RI WKH +0V UHVSRQGHG ZLWK DQG ZKHQ

PAGE 102

DVNHG WKH VDPH TXHVWLRQ DERXW WKH RSSRVLWH VH[ b RI WKH *0V UHVSRQGHG ZLWK QHYHUf ,Q WHUPV RI PDVWXUEDWLRQ IDQWDVLHV b RI WKH +0V KDG QHYHU KDG D PDOH VH[ REMHFW IDQWDV\ DQG b RI *0V KDG QHYHU KDG D IHPDOH VH[ REMHFW IDQWDV\ $QDO\VLV RI WKH 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ 4XHVWLRQQDLUH 6)4f $QDO\VLV RI WKH ILYH ILOWHU LWHPV HJ LWHPV f DQG WKH LWHP RQ FRPIRUW OHYHO LQ ILOOLQJ RXW WKH 6)4 HJ LWHP f ZDV DFFRPSOLVKHG E\ XWLOL]LQJ 0DQQ:KLWQH\ M7HVWV +\SRWKHVLV ZDV QRW VXSSRUWHG 7KHUH ZDV QR VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH IUHTXHQF\ UHSRUWV RI VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU IRU WKH +0V DQG *0V 7KH DYHUDJH QXPEHU RI VH[XDO HSLVRGHV ZLWK D SDUWQHU RYHU WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKV UDQJHG EHWZHHQ WR IRU WKH +0V DQG IURP WR IRU WKH *0V 1R SUHGLFWLRQ ZDV PDGH FRQFHUQLQJ WKH IUHTXHQF\ RI IDQWDV\ GXULQJ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU EXW WKH IUHTXHQFLHV DUH RI LQWHUHVW VHH 7DEOH f $OWKRXJK QR SUHGLFn WLRQ ZDV PDGH WKHUH ZDV D VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH LQ WHUPV RI PDVWXUEDn WLRQ IUHTXHQF\ 8f e f ZLWK WKH *0V PDVWXUEDWRU\ HSLn VRGHV UDQJLQJ IURP WR DQG WKH +0V UDQJLQJ IURP WR GXULQJ WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKV 7KH IUHTXHQFLHV RI IDQWDV\ GXULQJ PDVWXUEDWLRQ IRU ERWK JURXSV DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH ZLWK QR VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV 6H[XDO IDQWDV\ GXULQJ GD\GUHDPLQJ DOVR SURGXFHG QR VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV VHH 7DEOH f ,Q UHVSRQVH WR ZKHWKHU WKH\ KDG D VWHDG\ VH[XDO SDUWQHU b RI WKH +0V LQGLFDWHG \HV DQG b RI WKH *0V LQGLFDWHG QR ,Q WHUPV RI GHVFULELQJ WKHLU FXUUHQW VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ ERWK JURXSV ZHUH YHU\ VLPLODU LQ WKHLU UHVSRQVHV ZKLFK LQFOXGHG f YHU\ VDWLVIDFWRU\

PAGE 103

7$%/( 3(5&(17$*(6 2) )$17$6< '85,1* 6(; :,7+ $ 3$571(5 0$6785%$7,21 $1' '$<'5($0,1* )25 +0V $1' *0V 6H[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU 0DVWXUn EDWLRQ 'D\ GUHDPLQJ +0V 1HYHU 5DUHO\ 6RPHWLPHV 2IWHQ )UHTXHQWO\ $OZD\V *0V 1HYHU 5DUHO\ 6RPHWLPHV 2IWHQ )UHTXHQWO\ $OZD\V b IRU ERWK JURXSVf f PRGHUDWHO\ VDWLVIDFWRU\ b +0V b *0Vf f PLOGO\ VDWLVIDFWRU\ b IRU ERWK JURXSVf DQG f XQVDWLVn IDFWRU\ b +0V b *0Vf &RPIRUW OHYHO FRQFHUQLQJ WKH TXHVWLRQn QDLUH DOVR KDG VLPLODU UHVSRQVHV IURP ERWK JURXSV LQFOXGLQJ f YHU\ FRPIRUWDEOH b +0V b *0Vf f VRPHZKDW FRPIRUWDEOH b +06 b *0Vf f VRPHZKDW XQFRPIRUWDEOH b IRU ERWK JURXSVf DQG f YHU\ XQFRPIRUWDEOH QR UHVSRQVHV IRU HLWKHU JURXSf 7KH DQDO\VLV RI WKH IDQWDV\ VXEWKHPHV XQGHU HDFK RI WKH WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV LQYROYHG VHYHUDO GHFLVLRQV WKDW ZLOO EH HOXFLGDWHG EULHIO\ 6LQFH WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH HJ VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQf ZDV FDWHJRULFDO DQG VLQFH WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV HJ VXEWKHPHVf ZHUH FRQWLQXRXV D

PAGE 104

0$129$ ZDV FKRVHQ DV WKH EHVW VWDWLVWLFDO DQDO\VLV IRU WKLV SRUWLRQ RI WKH VWXG\ ,W ZRXOG KDYH EHHQ SRVVLEOH WR SHUIRUP $129$6 IRU HDFK FRQGLWLRQ EXW WKLV SURFHGXUH ZRXOG KDYH LQFXUUHG WKH ULVN RI SUREDELOn LW\ S\UDPLGLQJ $V H[SODLQHG E\ %DJJDOH\ f LQ DQ H[DPSOH XVLQJ VL[ FRPSDULVRQV ,I DQ LQYHVWLJDWRU UXQV VL[ W WHVWV XVLQJ WKH FRQYHQn WLRQDO FRPSXWLQJ SURFHGXUH DQG WDEOHV DQG D FXW RII DOSKD YDOXH RI WKH HIIHFWLYH nH[SHULPHQWRUZLVH HUURU UDWHn 5\DQ f ZLOO XQIRUWXQn DWHO\ EH KLJKHU WKDQ S f $ 0$129$ WDNHV LQWR DFFRXQW WKH FRUUHODWLRQV DPRQJ WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV DV ZHOO DV KHOSLQJ WR FRQWURO 7\SH HUURUV LH UHMHFWLQJ WKH QXOO K\SRWKHVLV ZKHQ LW LV WUXHf 7KH 0$129$ ZLOO JHQHUDWH $129$6 IRU HDFK RI WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV DQG WKH DQDO\VLV FRXOG HQG DW WKLV SRLQW ZLWK WKH VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV EHLQJ UHSRUWHG 7KLV SURFHGXUH ZRXOG KDYH LQKHUHQW OLPLWDWLRQV IRU WKLV VWXG\ EHFDXVH WKH UHODWLYHO\ VPDOO QXPEHU RI VXEMHFWV DQG WKH ODUJH QXPEHU RI YDULDEOHV UHQGHUV WKH SRZHU RI WKH VWDWLVWLFDO WHVW WR DQ XQDFFHSWDEO\ ORZ OHYHO 1HOVRQ DQG =DLFKNRZVN\ f VWDWH :KHWKHU RU QRW D VLJQLILFDQW eWHVW LV REWDLQHG RQH VKRXOG DOVR GHYLVH VRPH HVWLPDWH RI WKH PDJQLWXGH RI WKH HIIHFW RU WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHLQJ LQYHVWLJDWHG S f $ GLVFULPLQDQW DQDO\VLV ZLOO SURYLGH DQ LQGLFDWLRQ RI KRZ ZHOO HDFK VLJQLILFDQW GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH GLVFULPLQDWHV EHWZHHQ WKH WZR JURXSV RI PDOH VXEMHFWV ,Q WKLV FDVH WKH VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQV RI WKH VXEMHFWV EHFRPH WKH GHSHQGHQW YDULDEOHV LH FDWHJRULFDOf DQG WKH VSHFLILF IDQWDV\ WKHPH EHFRPHV WKH LQGHSHQGHQW YDULDEOH LH FRQWLQXRXVf $ GLVFULPLQDQW VFRUH LV GHULYHG IRU HDFK IDFWRU LQ WKLV FDVH LW ZLOO EH D VWDQGDUGL]HG FDQRQLFDO GLVFULPLQDQW IXQFWLRQ $ EULHI VXPPDU\ RI WKH

PAGE 105

DERYH SURFHVV LV SURYLGHG E\ 1LH 1XOO -HQNLQV 6WHLQEUHQQHU DQG %HQW f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n VHQWV WKH UHODWLYH FRQWULEXWLRQ RI LWV DVVRFLDWHG YDOXH WR WKDW IXQFWLRQ 7KH VLJQ PHUHO\ GHQRWHV ZKHWKHU WKH IXQFn WLRQ LV PDNLQJ D SRVLWLYH RU QHJDWLYH FRQWULEXWLRQ S f ,Q JHQHUDO WKH ODUJHU WKH DEVROXWH YDOXH RI WKH GLVFULPLQDQW IXQFWLRQ WKH JUHDWHU WKH GLVFULPLQDWRU\ SRZHU RI WKH YDULDEOH LQ TXHVWLRQ 7KHUHn IRUH WKH VWDQGDUG FDQRQLFDO GLVFULPLQDQW IXQFWLRQV ZLOO EH XVHG WR HYDOXn DWH WKH WUXH VLJQLILFDQFH RI WKH GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH UHSRUWHG $129$6 ,Q HDFK FRQGLWLRQ WKH FRUUHVSRQGLQJ 0$129$ ZDV KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQW VHH 7DEOH f 7KH UHVXOWV ZHUH DV IROORZV f VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU e f e f f PDVWXUEDWLRQ e f e f DQG f GD\GUHDPLQJ e f e f 7KHVH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH VRPH KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQW JURXS GLIIHUHQFHV DQG XQLYDULDWH $129$6 ZHUH FRPSXWHG IRU DOO VXEWKHPHV ZLWKLQ HDFK FRQGLWLRQ 7KH SUREOHP EHFRPHV RQH RI GHWHUPLQLQJ ZKLFK $129$6 DUH UHDOO\ LQGLFDWLYH RI VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV DQG ZKLFK DUH D IXQFWLRQ RI WKH ODUJH QXPEHU RI FRPSDULVRQV ZLWKLQ HDFK FRQGLWLRQ ,Q WKH VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU FRQGLWLRQ ILYH VLJQLILFDQW $129$6 ZHUH FRPSXWHG (QJDJLQJ LQ VH[XDO LQWHUFRXUVH LWHP f ZDV KLJKO\ VLJn QLILFDQW DQG VXSSRUWHG WKH ILIWK K\SRWKHVLV e f MD f

PAGE 106

7$%/( 0$129$6 )25 &203$5,6216 2) +0V $1' *0V 21 7+5(( &21',7,216 2) 6)4 &RQGLWLRQ 1 ) +\SRWKHVLV GI (UURU GI 3 6H[ ZLWK SDUWQHU 0DVWXUEDWLRQ 'D\GUHDPLQJ 7KH *0V ; 6n f KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV WKDQ GLG WKH +0V ; 6n f 7KH FDQRQLFDO GLVFULPLQDQW IXQFn WLRQ FRHIILFLHQW &')&f LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKLV IDQWDV\ WKHPH KDV KLJK GLVFULPLQDWRU\ YDOXH EHWZHHQ WKH JURXSV VHH 7DEOH f +DYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ LWHP f ZDV WKH VHFRQG VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH ZLWK D UHODWLYHO\ KLJK &')& e f e f DOWKRXJK WKLV GLIn IHUHQFH ZDV QRW K\SRWKHVL]HG 7KH +0 JURXS ; 6n f KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH *0 JURXS ; 6n f 7KH ILQDO IDQWDV\ WKHPH ZLWK VLJQLILFDQW JURXS PHDQ VFRUH GLIIHUHQFHV DQG D UHODWLYHO\ KLJK &')& ZDV KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK DQLPDOV LWHP f e f e 7KH +0V KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH *0V ; 6n ; 6n UHVSHFWLYHO\f $ WRWDO RI ILYH bf RI WKH +0V 1 f LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ UDUHO\ KDG WKLV IDQWDV\ $ VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH e f e f ZDV IRXQG IRU WKH HQMR\PHQW RI EHLQJ KXUW GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU IDQWDV\ LWHP f ZLWK WKH *0V

PAGE 107

7$%/( 21(:$< $129$6 )25 &203$5,6216 2) +0V $1' *0V 21 6(; :,7+ $ 3$571(5 &21',7,21 2) 6)4 $1' ',6&5,0,1$17 $1$/<6,6 )81&7,216 ,WHP QXPEHU GI 0HDQ VTXDUH HUURU ) 3 YDOXH &DQRQLFDO 'LVFULPLQDQW )XQFWLRQ &RHIILFLHQWVD D$EVROXWH YDOXHV LH _&')&_f ; 6n f VFRULQJ KLJKHU WKDQ WKH +0V ; 6n f $OWKRXJK WKLV ILQGLQJ OHQGV VXSSRUW WR K\SRWKHVLV WKH &')& ZDV UHODn WLYHO\ ORZ DQG WKH GLIIHUHQFH PD\ EH GXH WR WKH ODUJH QXPEHU RI REVHUn YDWLRQV LQ WKLV VWXG\ VHH 7DEOH f $ VLPLODU ILQGLQJ RFFXUUHG IRU WKH EHLQJ RYHUSRZHUHG RU IRUFHG WR VXUUHQGHU E\ VRPHRQH IDQWDV\ LWHP f 7KH *0 JURXS ; 6n f KDG D VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUH ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0 JURXS ; 6n f e f e 7KH &')& IRU WKLV GLIIHUHQFH ZDV UHODWLYHO\ ORZ DQG DOWKRXJK WKH UHVXOW WHQGV WR VXSSRUW K\SRWKHVLV DQ\ FRQFOXVLRQV ZRXOG EH WHQXRXV LQ QDWXUH ,Q WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ FRQGLWLRQ VL[ VLJQLILFDQW $129$6 UHVXOWHG IURP WKH GDWD DQDO\VLV VHH 7DEOH f (QJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH LWHP f

PAGE 108

7$%/( 21(:$< $129$6 )25 &203$5,6216 2) +0V $1' *0V 21 0$6785%$7,21 &21',7,21 $1' ',6&5,0,1$17 $1$/<6,6 )81&7,216 ,WHP QXPEHU GI 0HDQ VTXDUH HUURU ) 3 YDOXH &DQRQLFDO 'LVFULPLQDQW )XQFWLRQ &RHIILFLHQWV D$EVROXWH YDOXHV LH _&')&_f ZDV KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQW eB f e f ZLWK WKH *0V ; 6n f KDYLQJ VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0V ; 6n f +\SRWKHVLV ZDV VXSSRUWHG DJDLQ LQ WKLV FRQGLWLRQ DQG WKH &')&nV UHODWLYHO\ KLJK YDOXH SRLQWV WR WKH GLVFULPLQDWLRQ SRZHU RI WKLV IDQWDV\ WKHPH 7KH HQMR\PHQW RI EHLQJ KXUW GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU LWHP f ZDV KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQW e f S f ZLWK *0V VFRULQJ VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU ZKHQ FRPn SDUHG WR WKH +0V ; 6n ; 6n UHVSHFWLYHO\f 7KH &')& ZDV UHODWLYHO\ KLJK DQG WKHUHIRUH K\SRWKHVLV ZDV SDUWLDOO\ VXSSRUWHG 7KH *0V ; 6n f KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ WKH JLYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW LWHP f IDQWDV\

PAGE 109

e f e f ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0V ; 6n f *LYHQ WKH UHODWLYHO\ KLJK &')& WKLV IDQWDV\ WKHPH LV D JRRG GLVFULPLQDWRU EHWZHHQ JURXSV DQG OHQGV SDUWLDO VXSSRUW WR K\SRWKHVLV $ VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH ZDV IRXQG RQ WKH HQMR\PHQW RI KXUWLQJ DQRWKHU GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU LWHP f IDQWDV\ e f e f +\SRWKHVLV DOVR IRXQG VXSSRUW LQ WKDW WKH *0V KDG KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV RQ WKLV IDQWDV\ WKHPH WKDQ GLG WKH +0V ; 6n ; 6n UHVSHFWLYHO\f 7KH &')& ZDV UHODWLYHO\ KLJK EXW WKH OHYHO RI VLJQLILFDQFH ZDV ORZHU WKDQ LQ WKH EHLQJ KXUW IDQWDV\ LH e f $ QRQ SUHGLFWHG VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH KDYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ LWHP f ZDV IRXQG e f S f ZKHQ FRPSDULQJ +0 ; 6n f JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV ZLWK *0 ; 6n f VFRUHV 7KH &')& ZDV UHODWLYHO\ PRGHUDWH EXW OHQGV FUHGHQFH WR WKH GLVFULPLQDWRU\ SRZHU RI WKLV IDQWDV\ WKHPH 7KH ILQDO VLJQLILFDQWO\ GLIIHUHQW IDQWDV\ WKHPH IRU WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ FRQGLWLRQ ZDV SUHWHQGLQJ WKDW \RX DUH KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK DQ LUUHVLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQ LWHP f e f e 7KH *0V ; 6n f KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0V ; 6n f DOWKRXJK WKH &')& ZDV UHODWLYHO\ ORZ DQG WKH GLIIHUHQFH PD\ EH GXH WR FKDQFH ,Q WKH GD\GUHDPLQJ FRQGLWLRQ WKHUH ZHUH IRXU VLJQLILFDQW $19$6 VHH 7DEOH f 7KH HQJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH IDQWDV\ WKHPH LWHP f ZDV KLJKO\ VLJQLILFDQW IRU WKH WKLUG WLPH e f e f WKDW LV LQ HDFK RI WKH FRQGLWLRQV 7KH *0V a; 6n f KDG VLJn QLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0 ; 6n f JURXS 7KLV ILQGLQJ OHQGV VXSSRUW WR K\SRWKHVLV LQ WKDW WKH &')& ZDV UHODWLYHO\ KLJK DQG WKH GLIIHUHQFH ZDV LQ WKH SUHGLFWHG GLUHFWLRQ

PAGE 110

7$%/( 21(:$< $129$6 )25 &203$5,6216 2) +0V $1' *0V 21 '$<'5($0,1* &21',7,21 $1' ',6&5,0,1$17 $1$/<6,6 )81&7,216 ,WHP QXPEHU GI 0HDQ VTXDUH HUURU ) 3 YDOXH &DQRQLFDO 'L VFULPL QDQW IXQFWLRQ &RHIILFLHQWV D$EVROXWH YDOXHV HJ _&')&_f 7KH HQMR\PHQW RI EHLQJ KXUW GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU LWHP f IDQWDV\ ZDV DOVR VLJQLILFDQW )BO f e f ZLWK *0V ; 6n f KDYLQJ VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV WKDQ WKH +0V ; 6n f 7KLV ILQGLQJ OHQGV SDUWLDO VXSSRUW IRU K\SRWKHVLV DQG WKH UHODWLYHO\ KLJK &')& KHOSV WR VXSSRUW WKLV IDQWDV\ WKHPHnV GLVn FULPLQDWRU\ DELOLW\ EHWZHHQ WKH WZR JURXSV 7KH RSSRVLWH IDQWDV\ WKHPH HQMR\PHQW RI KXUWLQJ DQRWKHU GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU LWHP f ZDV DOVR VLJQLILFDQW ) f S f *0V ; 6n f KDG VLJQLILFDQW JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0V ; 6n f OHQGLQJ IXUWKHU VXSSRUW WR K\SRWKHVLV 7KH &')& ZDV UHODn WLYHO\ ORZ KRZHYHU VR WKDW WKLV ILQGLQJ PD\ KDYH UHVXOWHG E\ FKDQFH UDWKHU WKDQ DV DQ LQGLFDWLRQ RI JURXS GLIIHUHQFHV +\SRWKHVLV UHFHLYHG SDUWLDO VXSSRUW LQ WKDW WKH JLYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW LWHP f

PAGE 111

IDQWDV\ WKHPH ZDV VLJQLILFDQWO\ GLIIHUHQW B) f MG f EHWZHHQ WKH WZR JURXSV 7KH *0V ; 6n f KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV WKDQ GLG WKH +0V ; 6n f ZLWK D PRGHUDWHO\ KLJK &')& 6LQFH WKH GLIIHUHQFH ZDV LQ WKH SUHGLFWHG GLUHFn WLRQ WKH VWUHQJWK RI WKH GLVFULPLQDWRU\ SRZHU RI WKLV IDQWDV\ WKHPH DSSHDUV WR EH VRXQG 7KH IROORZLQJ K\SRWKHVHV GLG QRW UHFHLYH VXSSRUW LQ DQ\ RI WKH WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV f *0V GLG QRW UHSRUW VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU J\QRHURWLF IDQWDVLHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0V UHSRUWV RI DQGURHURWLF IDQWDVLHV LWHPV DQG f DV SUHGLFWHG f +0V GLG QRW UHSRUW VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU IDQWDVLHV DERXW KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQH RWKHU WKDQ WKHLU FXUUHQW SDUWQHU LWHPV DQG f ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR *0V 7KH VLJQLILFDQW ILQGLQJ RQ LWHP LQ WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ FRQGLWLRQ GLG QRW SURYLGH VWURQJ VXSSRUW IRU WKLV K\SRWKHVLV VHH 7DEOH f DQG WKHUHn IRUH QR FODLPV RI VXSSRUW ZLOO EH PDGH f *0V GLG QRW KDYH VLJQLILn FDQWO\ KLJKHU VFRUHV RQ WKH JURXS VH[ DQG REVHUYLQJ RWKHUV KDYLQJ VH[ LWHPV LH DQG f WKDQ GLG WKH +0V 7KH RWKHU K\SRWKHVHV HJ DQG f UHFHLYHG DW OHDVW SDUWLDO VXSn SRUW LQ RQH FRQGLWLRQ 7KH JURXS GLIIHUHQFHV VWDWHG DERYH GR QRW JLYH D FOHDU LQGLFDWLRQ RI WKH PRVW IUHTXHQW IDQWDVLHV IRU HDFK JURXS 7KH WRSUDQNHG IDQWDVLHV IRU KHWHURVH[XDO PDOHV LQ WKLV VWXG\ DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH 7KH WRSUDQNHG IDQWDVLHV IRU KRPRVH[XDO PDOHV DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH 8QOLNH SUHYLRXV VWXGLHV ZKHUH QR ILJXUHV ZHUH SURYLGHG IRU WKH FDWHn JRULHV WKH PHDQV DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQV DUH LQFOXGHG ZLWKLQ WKH WDEOHV 7KH UHDGHU LV UHPLQGHG WKDW WKH UDWLQJ VFDOHV IRU HDFK LWHP DUH DV

PAGE 112

IROORZV QHYHU f UDUHO\ f VRPHWLPHV f RIWHQ f IUHTXHQWO\ f DQG DOZD\V f $ PHDQ RI LQGLFDWHV WKDW D SDUWLFXODU IDQWDV\ ZDV UDWHG EHWZHHQ RIWHQ DQG IUHTXHQWO\ RQ WKH DYHUDJH IRU D JURXS 7$%/( 0267 )5(48(17 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 7+(0(6 )25 +0V ,1 ($&+ &21',7,21 2) 6)4 6H[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU 0DVWXUEDWLRQ 'D\GUHDPLQJ 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU ; 6n f 7KRXJKWV RI VRPHn RQH \RX NQRZ ; 6n f 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU ; 6n f 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f 7KRXJKWV RI VRPHRQH \RX NQRZ ; 6n f *LYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU ; 6n f 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f +DYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ ; 6n f 5HOLYLQJ SDVW VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ; 6n f +DYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ ; 6n f 6H[ ZLWK DQ LUUH VLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQ ; 6n f +DYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ ; 6n f *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f

PAGE 113

7$%/( 0267 )5(48(17 6(;8$/ )$17$6< 7+(0(6 )25 *0V ,1 ($&+ &21',7,21 2) 6)4 6H[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU 0DVWXUEDWLRQ 'D\GUHDPLQJ *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f (QJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH ; 6n f *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f 5HFHLYLQJ RUDO JHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f (QJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH ; 6n f *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW ; 6n f (QJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH ; 6n f 7KLQNLQJ DERXW FXUUHQW SDUWQHU ; 6n f 7KRXJKWV RI VRPHRQH \RX NQRZ ; 6n f 7KRXJKWV RI VRPHRQH \RX NQRZ ; 6n f 7KRXJKWV RI VRPHRQH \RX NQRZ ; 6n f 6H[ ZLWK DQ LUUH VLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQ ; 6n f 6H[ ZLWK DQ LUUH VLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQ ; 6n f $QDO\VLV RI WKH 0HDQLQT RI 6H[XDO ([SHUOHQFH 4XHVWLRQQDLUHf§7P26( f§,,,f 7KH 026(f§,,, %HUQVWHLQ f FRQWDLQV ILYH FDWHJRULHV UHODWLQJ WR WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDOLW\ LH DIILOLDWLRQ LQDGHTXDWH XQGHVLUDEOH DFKLHYHPHQW PRUDO HURWLF GRPLQDQFHf 7KH VXEMHFWVn VFRUHV RQ HDFK FDWHJRU\ IRU HDFK JURXS ZHUH VXPPHG DQG GLYLGHG E\ WKH QXPEHU RI VXEMHFWV SHU JURXS 1 f LQ RUGHU WR GHYHORS D JURXS PHDQ VFRUH 7KH UDQJH RI JURXS PHDQ VFRUHV YDULHG GHSHQGLQJ RQ WKH QXPEHU RI DGMHFWLYHV LQ HDFK IDFWRU 7KH UDWLQJ VFDOH IRU HDFK DGMHFWLYH UDQJHG

PAGE 114

IURP QRW DW DOO GHVFULSWLYH f WR FRPSOHWHO\ GHVFULSWLYH f *URXS PHDQ VFRUHV FRXOG UDQJH IRU HDFK FDWHJRU\ IURP f WR f WR f WR f WR f WR UHVSHFWLYHO\ $ VWXGHQWnV WB WHVW ZDV UXQ RQ HDFK FDWHJRU\ WR H[DPLQH WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ JURXSV 7KH BW WHVWV IRU HDFK IDFWRU WXUQHG RXW WR EH QRQVLJn QLILFDQW 7KH PHDQV DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQV IRU HDFK IDFWRU ZLWKLQ HDFK JURXS DUH UHSRUWHG EHORZ f DIILOLDWLRQ +0 ; 6n *0 ; 6n f f LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH +0 ; 6n *0 ; 6n f f DFKLHYHPHQW +0 ; 6n *0 ; 6n f f PRUDO +0 ; 6n *0 ; 6n f DQG f HURWLF GRPLQDQFH +0 ; 6n *0 ; 6n f 7KH LPSOLFDWLRQV RI QRW ILQGLQJ VXSSRUW IRU DQ\ RI WKH K\SRWKHVHV ZLOO EH GLVFXVVHG LQ WKH QH[W FKDSWHU

PAGE 115

&+$37(5 ,9 ',6&866,21 6H[XDO )DQWDV\ 7KH LQWHQW RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR LQYHVWLJDWH WKH GLIIHUHQFHV DQG VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ KHWHURVH[XDO PDOH +0f DQG KRPRVH[XDO PDOH *0f VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 7KH K\SRWKHVLV WKDW *0V ZRXOG KDYH PRUH HURWLF IDQn WDVLHV DERXW PHQ DQG WKDW +0V ZRXOG KDYH PRUH HURWLF IDQWDVLHV DERXW ZRPHQ ZDV VXSSRUWHG DW WKH BS OHYHO RI VLJQLILFDQFH 7KLV ILQGLQJ VHUYHV WR FRQILUP 6WRUPVn f FRQWHQWLRQ WKDW VH[XDO RULHQn WDWLRQ UHODWHV WR D SHUVRQnV HURWLF IDQWDVLHV S f YHUVXV WKHLU VH[ UROH RULHQWDWLRQ ,W DOVR FRQILUPV WKH REVHUYDWLRQV RI .LQVH\ HW DO f DQG 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f WKDW *0 VXEMHFWV UHSRUWHG KLJKHU OHYHOV RI KRPRHURWLF IDQWDV\ WKDQ GLG WKH +0 VXEMHFWV 6XSSRUW FDQ DOVR EH H[WHQGHG WR 6WRUPVnf WKHRU\ IURP SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK RQ VH[UROH RULHQWDWLRQ DQG VH[XDO IDQWDV\ %HUQDUGL 3DSH f ZKHUH VH[UROH LGHQWLW\ GLG QRW KHOS LQ SUHGLFWLQJ WKH FRQWHQW RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 7KH K\SRWKHVLV WKDW *0V ZRXOG UHSRUW J\QRHURWLF IDQWDVLHV PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V ZRXOG UHSRUW DQGURHURWLF IDQWDVLHV ZDV VXSSRUWHG LQ 6WRUPVn f VWXG\ 6LQFH KH IRXQG WKLV GLIIHUHQFH XWLOL]LQJ FURVVn VFDOH FRPSDULVRQV DQG LQGLFDWHG WKH SRVVLELOLW\ RI UHVSRQVH FRQVLVWHQF\ RQ WKH (526 DQ LWHP RQ WKH 6)2 ZDV HPSOR\HG LQ WKLV VWXG\ WR WHVW WKH K\SRWKHVLV 7KH LWHP VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ ZLWK D PHPEHU RI \RXU RZQ

PAGE 116

VH[ RU RSSRVLWH VH[ LI \RX DUH JD\f ZDV RQH RI WKH VXEWKHPHV XQGHU HDFK FRQGLWLRQ 1R VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ WKH JURXSV LQ DQ\ FRQGLWLRQ $V SUHYLRXVO\ UHSRUWHG RQ WKH (526 PRUH +0V bf LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ KDG QHYHU KDG D GHVLUH WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK D PDQ WKDW WKH\ NQHZ LQ FRPSDULVRQ WR WKH *0V bf UHVSRQVHV WR D VLPLODU LWHP DERXW D ZRPDQ WKDW WKH\ NQHZ 'LIIHUHQFHV ZHUH DOVR QRWHG LQ WHUPV RI WKH DQGURHURWLF IDQWDVLHV IRU WKH +0 JURXS DQG IRU WKH J\QRHURWLF IDQWDVLHV RI WKH *0 JURXS GXULQJ GD\GUHDPLQJ b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\f DQG PDVWXUEDWLRQ b DQG b UHVSHFWLYHO\f +RZHYHU RQ WKH 6)4 LWHPV WKH PHDQV DQG VWDQGDUG GHYLDWLRQV FRQFHUQLQJ DQGURHURWLF IDQWDVLHV IRU +0V DQG J\QRHURWLF IDQWDVLHV IRU WKH *0V LQ HDFK FRQGLWLRQ ZHUH DV IROORZV f VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU +0 ; 6n *0 ; 6n f f PDVWXUEDWLRQ +0 ; 6n *0 ; 6n f DQG f GD\GUHDPLQJ +0 ; 6n *0 ; 6n f 7KH GLIIHUHQW UHVSRQVH VFDOHV IRU WKH (526 DQG WKH 6)4 FRXOG DFFRXQW IRU WKH VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV RQ RQH LQVWUXPHQW EXW QRW RQ WKH RWKHU HJ WR GDLO\ RQ (526 DQG QHYHU WR DOZD\V RQ WKH 6)4f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

PAGE 117

FRQFHUQLQJ *0V LV WKDW WKH\ DUH PRUH VH[XDOO\ DFWLYH WKDQ WKHLU +0 FRXQWHUSDUWV 7KH KHLJKWHQHG RSSRUWXQLW\ IRU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ LQ WKH JD\ PDOH FRPPXQLW\ KDV EHHQ DGGUHVVHG E\ +XPSKUH\V f $SSDUHQWO\ ZKHQ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU LV FRQWUROOHG IRU HJ DOO VXEMHFWV KDG VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DW OHDVW RQFH LQ WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKVf WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH WZR JURXSV LV QRQVLJQLILFDQW 7KH *0V GLG UHSRUW KDYLQJ D VWHDG\ VH[XDO SDUWQHU OHVV RIWHQ bf WKDQ GLG WKH +0V bf EXW WKLV PD\ UHIOHFW WKH FRQVHUYDWLYH HQYLURQPHQW LQ ZKLFK WKH PLGZHVWHUQ SRUWLRQ RI WKH VDPSOH OLYH 7KH ,OOLQRLV 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ VXEMHFWV OLYH LQ DQ HQYLURQPHQW ZKHUH KRPRVH[XDOLW\ LV IURZQHG XSRQ DQG FRQVHTXHQWO\ PRVW JD\V DUH LQ WKH FORVHW 7KLV PDNHV WKH LGHQWLILFDWLRQ RI RWKHU JD\V GLIILFXOW DQG PD\ OHDG WR D OLPLWDWLRQ RQ WKH IRUPDWLRQ RI VWHDG\ UHODn WLRQVKLSV $ VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH ZDV IRXQG LQ WHUPV RI WKH IUHTXHQF\ RI PDVWXUEDWLRQ 7KH *0V UHSRUWHG PDVWXUEDWLRQ PRUH RIWHQ WR WLPHV LQ WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKVf WKDQ GLG WKH +0V WR WLPHV LQ WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKVf 7KLV ILQGLQJ PD\ UHIOHFW WKH IDFW WKDW *0V KDYH KDG WR UHIXWH WKH VRFLDO WDERRV FRQFHUQLQJ WKHLU VH[XDOLW\ LQ JHQHUDO DQG WKHUHIRUH WKH\ KDYH UHIXWHG WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ WDERR LQ SDUWLFXODU 7KH ORZHU LQFLGHQFH RI D VWHDG\ VH[XDO SDUWQHU LQ WKH *0 JURXS FRXOG DOVR KHOS WR DFFRXQW IRU WKLV GLIIHUHQFH $SSDUHQWO\ WKH GLIIHUHQFH LQ PDVWXUEDWLRQ IUHTXHQF\ EHWZHHQ *0V -D\ t
PAGE 118

QR LQFLGHQFH RI IDQWDV\ ZDV FRQWUROOHG IRU E\ LQFOXGLQJ RQO\ WKRVH VXEMHFWV ZKR KDG IDQWDVLHV DW OHDVW UDUHO\ LQ DOO WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV WKH DSSOLFDn WLRQ RI WKHVH UHVXOWV LV OLPLWHG WR +0V DQG *0V ZKR LQLWLDOO\ DGPLW WR IDQWDVL]LQJ :KHWKHU VH[XDO IDQWDV\ LV YLHZHG DV DQ HVFDSH PHFKDQLVP +ROOHQGHU f UHSUHVVHG GHVLUHV 6XOOLYDQ f D VH[XDO VFULSW *DJQRQ t 6LPRQ f D WRRO IRU HQKDQFLQJ VH[XDO DURXVDO &DPSDJQD f SOD\OLNH VWLPXODWLRQ &DUOVRQ t &ROHPDQ f RU D UHIOHFWLRQ RI RQHnV VHOIFRQFHSW .OLQJHU f WKHUH DSSHDU WR EH QR VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH IUHTXHQF\ ZLWK ZKLFK WKH WZR JURXSV HQJDJH LQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ 6HYHUDO GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH QRWHG LQ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV WKDW LQYROYH WKH PHFKDQLFDODQDWRPLFDO DVSHFWV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ *0V DUH OLPLWHG LQ WKH W\SHV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLWLHV WKDW WKH\ FDQ HQJDJH LQ GXH WR WKHLU SK\VLFDO PDNHXS HJ WKH ODFN RI D YDJLQD LQ PDOHVf )HOODWLR DQG SDUWQHU PDQLSXODWLRQ ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV WKH WZR PRVW SRSXODU VH[XDO DFWLYLWLHV IRU *0V E\ 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f 6LQFH DQDO LQWHUn FRXUVH LV WKH RQO\ FRLWDO DSSUR[LPDWLRQ DYDLODEOH WR *0V RQH ZRXOG H[SHFW WKHP WR IDQWDVL]H DERXW WKLV DFWLYLW\ PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ +0V ZKR KDYH FRLWXV DV D VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ RSWLRQ 6LJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG DFURVV DOO WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV RI WKH 6)4 EHWZHHQ WKH WZR JURXSV IRU WKLV IDQWDV\ FDWHJRU\ 7KLV VHUYHV WR FRQILUP WKH GLIIHUHQFHV WKDW ZHUH QRWHG LQ SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK RQ WKH VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ FDWHJRULHV RI *0V -D\ t
PAGE 119

,OO 7KH JURXSV GLG QRW GLIIHU VLJQLILFDQWO\ RQ WKH UHFHLYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW IDQWDVLHV $SSDUHQWO\ +0V ILQG IDQWDVLHV DERXW EHLQJ IHOODWHG WR EH DV HTXDOO\ DSSHDOLQJ DV GR WKH *0V 2Q WKH RWKHU KDQG IDQWDVLHV DERXW SHUIRUPLQJ FXQQLOLQJXV DUH QRW DV SUHYDOHQW DPRQJ WKH +0 JURXS DV IDQWDVLHV DERXW SHUIRUPLQJ IHOODWLR DUH DPRQJ WKH *0 JURXS 7KH DQDWRPLn FDO OLPLWDWLRQV RQ *0 VH[XDOLW\ PD\ EH RSHUDWLQJ LQ WKLV LQVWDQFH DQG FRXOG DFFRXQW IRU WKH REVHUYHG JURXS GLIIHUHQFHV $V VWDWHG SUHYLRXVO\ UHVHDUFK RQ VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ KDV GHPRQVWUDWHG WKDW *0V KDYH HQJDJHG LQ RUDO VH[ b -D\ t
PAGE 120

VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU IDQWDV\ FDWHJRU\ DFURVV DOO WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV 7KH\ DOVR UHSRUWHG KLJKHU IUHTXHQFLHV LQ WKH HQMR\PHQW RI KXUWLQJ DQRWKHU GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU IDQWDV\ FDWHJRU\ XQGHU WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ DQG GD\GUHDPLQJ FRQGLWLRQV 7KHVH ILQGLQJV VXSSRUW WKH UHVXOWV RI 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQnV f VWXG\ DQG WKH UHVXOWV RI -D\ DQG
PAGE 121

2QO\ RQH VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFH ZDV IRXQG LQ WKH VXEPLVVLYH IDQWDV\ FDWHJRU\ *0V KDG KLJKHU VFRUHV RQ WKH EHLQJ RYHUSRZHUHG RU IRUFHG WR VXUUHQGHU E\ VRPHRQH IDQWDV\ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0V LQ WKH VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU FRQGLWLRQ +RZHYHU WKH OHYHO RI VLJQLILFDQFH ZDV ORZ S f DQG WKH &')& ZDV DOVR ORZ 1R VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH WZR JURXSV ZHUH QRWHG LQ WKH GRPLQDQFH IDQWDV\ FDWHJRU\ HJ RYHUSRZHULQJ RU IRUFLQJ VRPHRQH HOVH WR VXUUHQGHUf 7KH ODFN RI VXSSRUW IRU WKH K\SRWKHVLV WKDW *0V ZRXOG KDYH D VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU IUHTXHQF\ RI VXEn PLVVLYH IDQWDVLHV VHUYHV WR UHIXWH WKH VH[UROH GLVWXUEDQFHV WKDW DUH DVVHUWHG IRU *0V E\ 5HNHUV DQG /RYDDV f 7KHVH ILQGLQJV OHQG VXSn SRUW WR WKH UHVXOWV RI SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFKHUV ZKR KDYH IRXQG WKDW JHQGHU UDWKHU WKDQ VH[ UROH RULHQWDWLRQ LV D SULPH GHWHUPLQDQW RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ %HUQDUGL 3DSH 6WRUPV f 7KH\ DOVR OHQG VXSSRUW WR WKH QRWLRQ WKDW *0V KDYH UHMHFWHG VH[UROH VWHUHRW\SHV HJ +DUU\ 3HSODX 5RVV f 7KH *0 JURXS DOVR KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU VFRUHV RQ WKH SUHWHQGn LQJ \RX DUH KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK DQ LUUHVLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQ IDQWDV\ FDWHJRU\ LQ WKH PDVWXUEDWLRQ FRQGLWLRQ 7KLV RXWFRPH FRLQFLGHV ZLWK 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQnV f ILQGLQJ WKDW *0V IDQWDVL]HG DERXW LG\OOLF HQFRXQWHUV ZLWK XQNQRZQ PHQ VXFK DV HQWHUWDLQHUV DQG PHQ WKH\ KDG VHHQ LQ SXEOLF SODFHV PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ GLG WKH +0V LQ WKHLU VWXG\ 2QH FDQ YLHZ WKLV UHVXOW DV VXSSRUWLYH RI WKH FRQWHQWLRQ WKDW PHQ DUH PRUH LQFOLQHG WRZDUG LPSHUVRQDO VH[ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR ZRPHQ HJ (\VHQFN E 0RUULV f ,W DOVR UHIOHFWV -D\ DQG
PAGE 122

LPSHUVRQDO VH[ LQ VRPH RI WKH JD\ LQVWLWXWLRQV HJ JD\ EDWKV EDUVf PD\ EH FRQWULEXWLQJ WR WKLV UHVXOW +XPSKUH\V f DV ZHOO DV WKH VRFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKDW RFFXUV DV DQ LQGLYLGXDO EHFRPHV D PHPEHU RI WKH JD\ FRPPXQLW\ %DQGXUD f 7KH +0V KDG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU VFRUHV RQ WKH KDYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ IDQWDV\ FDWHJRU\ LQ ERWK WKH VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DQG PDVWXUEDWLRQ FRQGLWLRQV 7KH LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI WKLV ILQGLQJ LV GLIILn FXOW 6LQFH *0V KDYH PRUH RSSRUWXQLWLHV IRU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV LQ GLIn IHUHQW VHWWLQJV HJ JD\ EDWKV EDUVf WKDQ +0V GR WKH DERYH PD\ VLPSO\ UHIOHFW D ODFN RI RSSRUWXQLW\ RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH +0V IRU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ LQ D YDULHW\ RI VHWWLQJV 7KH SUROLIHUDWLRQ RI VH[KRWHOV HJ 6DQGVWRQHf LQ WKH SDVW \HDUV LV RQH LQGLFDWLRQ RI D VHDUFK IRU QHZ VHWWLQJV DQG VH[XDO HQYLURQPHQWV &RPIRUW f 7KH QRQVLJQLILFDQW ILQGLQJV FDQ EH FRQVWUXHG DV VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ WKH *0 DQG +0 JURXSV 7KH +0V GLG QRW KDYH PRUH IDQWDVLHV DERXW UHSODFLQJ WKHLU FXUUHQW SDUWQHUV 7KLV ILQGLQJ PDNHV FRPPRQ VHQVH VLQFH WKH +0Vn WRSUDQNHG IDQWDV\ WKHPHV GXULQJ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DQG GD\GUHDPLQJ FRQFHUQHG WKLQNLQJ DERXW WKHLU FXUUHQW SDUWQHU VHH 7DEOH f 7KH OHYHO RI VDWLVIDFWLRQ ZLWK WKHLU FXUUHQW VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ ZDV DOVR KLJK IRU D PDMRULW\ RI WKH +0 JURXS LH b LQGLFDWHG PRGHUDWHO\ VDWLVILHGf VR WKDW FKDQJLQJ WKHLU FXUUHQW SDUWQHU PD\ EH D ORZ SULRULW\ 7KH *0 JURXS GLG QRW KDYH VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU VFRUHV RQ WKH JURXS VH[ RU REVHUYLQJ RWKHUV KDYLQJ VH[ IDQWDV\ WKHPHV ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +0 JURXS $OWKRXJK *0V VHHP WR HQJDJH LQ WKHVH DFWLYLWLHV PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ GR +0V -D\ t
PAGE 123

WKH 0DVWHUV DQG -RKQVRQ f REVHUYDWLRQ WKDW *0V DQG +0V UDQNHG JURXS VH[ IDQWDVLHV HTXDOO\ 1HLWKHU RQH RI WKHVH IDQWDVLHV ZHUH LQFOXGHG LQ WKH ILYH WRSUDQNHG IDQWDVLHV IRU HDFK JURXS VHH 7DEOHV DQG f $ SHUXVDO RI WKH WRSUDQNHG IDQWDV\ WKHPHV IRU +0V 7DEOH f DQG *0V 7DEOH f LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZLOO LQGLFDWH WKDW WKH PDLQ GLIIHUHQFHV OLH LQ WKH PHFKDQLFDODQDWRPLFDO DUHDV RI VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ 7KDW LV *0V UDQNHG DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH DQG RUDOJHQLWDO IDQWDVLHV KLJKHU WKDQ GLG WKH +0V DFURVV DOO WKUHH FRQGLWLRQV +RZHYHU WKH RWKHU IDQWDV\ FDWHJRULHV ZHUH HVVHQWLDOO\ VLPLODU /RRNLQJ DW WKH WRSUDQNHG IDQWDVLHV IRU +0V LQ WKLV VWXG\ 7DEOH f DQG LQ 3DSHnV f VWXG\ 7DEOH f WKH VLPLODULWLHV DUH VWULNLQJ DQG OHQG VXSSRUW WR 3DSHnV ILQGLQJV $ IXUWKHU SHUXVDO RI WKH WRSUDQNHG IDQWDVLHV IRU WKH +0V 7DEOH f DQG *0V 7DEOH f LQ WKLV VWXG\ ZKHQ FRPSDUHG WR WKH +)V LQ 3DSHnV f VWXG\ 7DEOH f ZLOO WHQG WR LQGLFDWH WKDW WKH +0V DUH PRUH VLPLODU WR WKH +)V WKDQ DUH WKH *0V 3DSHnV f ILQGLQJV WKDW +0V VFRUHG KLJKHU WKDQ +)V RQ JURXS VH[ IRUFLQJ VRPHRQH WR VXUUHQGHU HQJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH DQG HQMR\PHQW RI KXUWLQJ DQRWKHU GXULQJ VH[ SRLQW WR WKH VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ *0V DQG +0V DQG WR WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ *0V DQG +)V 3UHYLRXV FRQWHQWLRQV WKDW *0V DUH PRUH OLNH +)V HJ 5HNHUV t /RYDDV 5HNHUV HW DO 5HNHUV HW DO f WKDQ OLNH +0V DUH QRW VXSSRUWHG E\ WKH DERYH ILQGLQJV 7KH WHQWDWLYH FRQFOXVLRQV WKDW FDQ EH PDGH FRQFHUQLQJ WKH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI *0 DQG +0 LQGLYLGXDOV EDVHG RQ WKH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ DUH DV IROORZV f WKH HIIHFWV RI VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ DSSHDU WR LQYROYH WKRVH IDQWDVLHV ZKLFK UHIOHFW WKH PHFKDQLFDODQDWRPLFDO VH[XDO DFWLYLWLHV HJ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFWf DQG f WKH

PAGE 124

HIIHFWV RI JHQGHU DQG QRW VH[UROH RULHQWDWLRQ DUH UHIOHFWHG LQ WKH VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ *0 DQG +0 IDQWDV\ DQG WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ *0 DQG +) IDQWDV\ ,Q WKRVH IDQWDV\ FDWHJRULHV ZKHUH WKH *0V VFRUHG VLJn QLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU WKDQ WKH +0V HJ VH[ ZLWK DQ LUUHVLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQf WKH +0V KDG SUHYLRXVO\ VFRUHG VLJQLILFDQWO\ KLJKHU WKDQ WKH +)V $QRWKHU ZD\ RI VWDWLQJ WKH VHFRQG FRQFOXVLRQ LV WKDW WKH *0 DQG +0 IDQWDVLHV ZHUH PRUH VLPLODU WKDQ WKH PDOHIHPDOH IDQWDVLHV 7KH DERYH FRQFOXVLRQV DUH RQO\ WHQWDWLYH DQG DUH WR EH YLHZHG ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI WKH OLPLWDWLRQV RI WKLV VWXG\ VHH VHFWLRQ RI /LPLWDWLRQV LQ WKLV FKDSWHUf 7KH 0HDQLQJ RI 6H[XDO ([SHULHQFH $ VHFRQG LQWHQW RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR FRPSDUH WKH *0 DQG +0 JURXSV RQ WKH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH XWLOL]LQJ %HUQVWHLQnV f ILYH FDWHJRULHV IURP WKH 026(f§,,, 1R VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV ZHUH IRXQG EHWZHHQ WKH WZR JURXSV RQ DQ\ RI WKH IDFWRUV LH DIILOLDWLRQ LQ DGHn TXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH DFKLHYHPHQW PRUDO HURWLF GRPLQDQFHf 7KH ODFN RI VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUHQFHV FDQ EH LQWHUSUHWHG DV DQ LQGLFDWLRQ RI WKH VLPLODULWLHV EHWZHHQ +0 DQG *0 VH[XDO PHDQLQJV 7KH ODFN RI D GLIIHUn HQFH LQ WKH LQDGHTXDWHXQGHVLUDEOH FDWHJRU\ FDQ EH YLHZHG DV D UHIXWDWLRQ RI WKH WKHRU\ WKDW *0V DUH PRUH PDODGMXVWHG WKDQ +0V HJ %HUJOHU )HQLFKHO )UHXG f DQG DV FRQILUPDWLRQ IRU WKRVH DXWKRUV ZKR FRQWHQG WKDW *0V DUH QR PRUH PDODGMXVWHG WKDQ DUH WKHLU KHWHURVH[XDO FRXQWHUSDUWV HJ %HOO &KXUFKLOO +RIIPDQ :HLQn EHUJ f 7KH VLPLODULWLHV LQ WKH DFKLHYHPHQW DIILOLDWLRQ DQG PRUDO FDWHJRULHV DOVR SRLQW WR D JHQGHU HIIHFW LQ WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI WKH

PAGE 125

PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH %HUQVWHLQ f IRXQG VLJQLILFDQW GLIIHUn HQFHV EHWZHHQ KLV +0 DQG +) VXEMHFWV VHH 7DEOH f ZLWK +0V VFRULQJ KLJKHU RQ DFKLHYHPHQW DQG HURWLF GRPLQDQFH FDWHJRULHV DQG +)V VFRULQJ KLJKHU RQ WKH DIILOLDWLRQ DQG PRUDO FDWHJRULHV ,I *0V DUH PRUH VLPLn ODU WR +)V HJ 5HNHUV t /RYDDV 5HNHUV HW DO 5HNHUV HW DO f WKDQ WR +0V WKHVH GLIIHUHQFHV VKRXOG KDYH PDQLIHVWHG WKHPVHOYHV LQ WKH DERYH FRPSDULVRQV 6LQFH %HUQVWHLQnV f +0 VDPSOH ZDV ODUJHU 1 f WKDQ WKH +0 VDPSOH LQ WKLV VWXG\ 1 f WKHUH ZDV D WHPSWDWLRQ WR FRPSDUH WKH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKHVH WZR JURXSV +RZHYHU VLQFH WKH +0V LQ WKLV VDPSOH FDPH IURP WKUHH GLVWLQFW JHRJUDSKLF ORFDWLRQV LH )ORULGD ,OOLQRLV DQG 7H[DVf ZHUH VHOHFWHG RQ WKH EDVLV RI SUHYLRXV VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ HJ VH[ ZLWK D SDUWQHU DQG PDVWXUEDWLRQf DQG KDG GLIIHUHQW LQVWUXPHQWV DGPLQLVWHUHG WR WKHP LW ZDV GHFLGHG WKDW WKHUH ZDV QR EDVLV IRU FRPSDULVRQ 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKH 026(f§,,, VKRXOG EH YLHZHG ZLWKLQ WKH FRQWH[W RI WKH OLPLWDWLRQV LQKHUHQW LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ 7KRVH OLPLWDWLRQV DUH SUHVHQWHG EHORZ /LPLWDWLRQV 6WUHQJWKV DQG $SSOLFDWLRQV RI WKH 3UHVHQW 6WXG\ 7KH OLPLWDWLRQV RI WKLV VWXG\ LQFOXGH f D UHODWLYHO\ ORZ QXPEHU RI VXEMHFWV LQ ERWK WKH *0 1 f DQG +0 1 f JURXSV f WKH SRVVLELOLW\ RI KLJK HUURU YDULDQFH GXH WR WKH ODUJH QXPEHU RI REVHUYDWLRQV HJ IDQWDV\ VXEWKHPHV LQ WKUHH FRQGLWLRQVf SHU VXEMHFW WKH SRVVLEOH LPSUHFLVLRQ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQWV DQG WKH SRVVLELOLW\ WKDW WKH VXEMHFWV LQ HDFK JURXS ZHUH PRUH KHWHURJHQRXV WKDQ H[SHFWHG HJ GHPRn JUDSKLF IDFWRUVf

PAGE 126

f WKH IDFW WKDW WKH VDPSOH LQFOXGHG RQO\ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DQG WKDW WKH *0 VDPSOH ZDV FRPSULVHG RI YROXQWHHUV ZKR GR QRW QHFHVVDULO\ UHSUHVHQW WKH *0 SRSXODWLRQ DW ODUJH 7KH VWUHQJWKV RI WKLV VWXG\ LQFOXGH f 7KH IDFWRUV RI SUHYLRXV VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ DQG VH[XDO IDQWDV\ ZHUH FRQWUROOHG IRU HJ DW OHDVW UDUHO\ LQ WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKVf LQ ERWK JURXSV f 7KH JURXSV ZHUH FRPSULVHG RI QRQFOLQLFDO SRSXODWLRQV DQG WKH VWXG\ ZDV SODQQHG WR DYRLG WKH KHWHURVH[XDO ELDV WKDW ZDV UHIHUUHG WR E\ 0RULQ f FRQFHUQLQJ SUHYLRXV UHVHDUFK RQ *0 SRSXODWLRQV f 7KH TXHVWLRQQDLUH DSSURDFK SURYLGHG DQ HQYLURQPHQW RI DQRQ\PLW\ DQG WKH TXHVWLRQ RQ FRPIRUW OHYHO LQGLFDWHG WKDW PRVW RI WKH VXEMHFWV IHOW DW OHDVW VRPHZKDW FRPIRUWDEOH LQ ILOOLQJ RXW WKH (526 DQG 6)4 LH b RI +0V DQG b RI *0Vf f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t 0RVKHU %HUQDUGL &DUOVRQ t &ROHPDQ *HOOHV 0HGQLFN 3DSH f DQG WKH UHVXOWV RI WKLV VWXG\ VXSSRUW WKHVH ILQGLQJV 7KLV KDV LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI WKHRULHV RQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ DQG IDQWDV\ LQ JHQHUDO 7KH

PAGE 127

FRQFHSW RI VH[UROH RQ WKH RWKHU KDQG KDV QRW EHHQ KHOSIXO LQ WKH SUHn GLFWLRQ RI VH[XDO IDQWDV\ FRQWHQW $V ZLWK DOO UHVHDUFK LQ D UHODWLYHO\ QHZ DUHD WKLV WRSLF UHTXLUHV IXUWKHU VWXG\ 6RFLDO FODVV GLIIHUHQFHV KDYH EHHQ GHPRQVWUDWHG DPRQJ KRPRVH[XDOV &DUULHU f DQG FURVVFXOWXUDO GLIIHUHQFHV KDYH DOVR EHHQ LQYHVWLJDWHG :HLQEHUJ t :LOOLDPV f 6WXGLHV DFURVV VHYHUDO DJH JURXSV DOVR QHHG WR EH GRQH HJ *LDPEUD *LDPEUD t 0DUWLQ f LQ RUGHU WR GHWHUPLQH WKH HIIHFW RI DJH RQ WKH IDQWDVLHV RI *0V DQG +0V 7KH IDQWDVLHV RI JD\ DQG VWUDLJKW ZRPHQ DOVR QHHG WR EH LQYHVn WLJDWHG $ UHSOLFDWLRQ RI WKLV VWXG\ ZLWK ODUJHU VDPSOHV LQ HDFK JURXS ZRXOG VHUYH WR YHULI\ RU GLVFRQILUP WKH UHVXOWV LQ WHUPV RI D PRUH QRUPDn WLYH VDPSOH 7KH DXWKRU KRSHV WR KDYH VWLPXODWHG LQWHUHVW LQ WKLV WRSLF DQG WR KDYH SURYLGHG VRPH SRVVLEOH GLUHFWLRQV IRU IXWXUH UHVHDUFK

PAGE 128

$33(1',; $ (527,& 5(63216( $1' 25,(17$7,21 6&$/( 7KH IROORZLQJ TXHVWLRQV DVN DERXW \RXU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV DQG IHHOLQJV WRZDUG PHQ DQG ZRPHQ RYHU WKH SDVW PRQWKV 3OHDVH UHDG HDFK TXHVn WLRQ FDUHIXOO\ DQG LQGLFDWH ZKHWKHU \RX KDYH KDG WKH H[SHULHQFH RU IHHOLQJ EHLQJ DVNHG DERXWf§QHYHU f RQO\ RQFH RU WZLFH f WKUHH WR VL[ WLPHV f VHYHQ WR WZHOYH LWHPV f DQ DYHUDJH RI RQFH RU WZLFH D PRQWK PRQWKO\f RU DQ DYHUDJH RI RQFH RU WZLFH D ZHHN ZHHNO\f RU DOPRVW GDLO\ RU PRUH GDLO\f GXULQT WKH SDVW PRQWKV 3OHDVH FLUFOH \RXU DQVZHUV 1XPEHU RI 7LPHV 'XULQJ WKH 3DVW 0RQWKV +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX QRWLFHG WKDW D PDQ \RXnYH VHHQ RU PHW IRU WKH ILUVW WLPH LV SK\VLFDOO\ DWWUDFWLYH WR \RX" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX QRWLFHG WKDW D ZRPDQ \RXnYH VHHQ RU PHW IRU WKH ILUVW WLPH LV SK\VLFDOO\ DWWUDFWLYH WR \RX" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX KDG DQ\ VH[XDO IHHOLQJV HYHQ WKH VOLJKWHVWf ZKLOH ORRNLQJ DW D PDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX KDG DQ\ VH[XDO IHHOLQJV HYHQ WKH VOLJKWHVWf ZKLOH ORRNLQJ DW D ZRPDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX IHOW VRPH VH[XDO DURXVDO IURP WRXFKLQJ RU EHLQJ WRXFKHG E\ D PDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX IHOW VRPH VH[XDO DURXVDO IURP WRXFKLQJ RU EHLQJ WRXFKHG E\ D ZRPDQ" PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ GDLO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ GDLO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ GDLO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ GDLO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ GDLO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ GDLO\ 4

PAGE 129

1XPEHU RI 7LPHV 'XULQJ WKH 3DVW 0RQWKV +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX WKRXJKW DERXW ZKDW LW ZRXOG EH OLNH WR KDYH D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D PDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX WKRXJKW DERXW ZKDW LW ZRXOG EH OLNH WR KDYH D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D ZRPDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX IHOW D GHVLUH WR KDYH D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D SDUWLFXODU PDQ \RX NQRZ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX IHOW D GHVLUH WR KDYH D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D SDUWLFXODU ZRPDQ \RX NQRZ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX GD\n GUHDPHG DERXW KDYLQJ D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D PDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX GD\n GUHDPHG DERXW KDYLQJ D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D ZRPDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX GUHDPHG DW QLJKW DERXW KDYLQJ D VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFH ZLWK D PDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX GUHDPHG DW QLJKW DERXW KDYLQJ D VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFH ZLWK D ZRPDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX PDVn WXUEDWHG ZKLOH IDQWD VL]LQJ D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D PDQ" +RZ RIWHQ KDYH \RX PDVn WXUEDWHG ZKLOH IDQWDVL] LQJ D VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH ZLWK D ZRPDQ" PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ PRQWKO\ ZHHNO\ GDLO\ GDLO\ GDLO\ GDLO\ GDLO\ GDLO\ GD L O\ GDL O\ GDLO\ GDLO\

PAGE 130

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f WKH DSSURSULDWH DQVZHU f $JH B BM (WKQLF %DFNJURXQG %ODFN :KLWH +LVSDQLF 2WKHU :KDW LV \RXU UHOLJLRXV DIILOLDWLRQ" 3URWHVWDQW &DWKROLF -HZLVK 2WKHU 1RQH +RZ ZRXOG \RX GHVFULEH \RXU VH[XDO RULHQWDWLRQ" ([FOXVLYHO\ KHWHURVH[XDO 0RVWO\ KHWHURVH[XDO %LVH[XDO 0RVWO\ KRPRVH[XDO ([FOXVLYHO\ KRPRVH[XDO

PAGE 131

'R \RX FXUUHQWO\ KDYH D VWHDG\ VH[XDO SDUWQHU"
PAGE 132

7KRXJKWV RI DQ LPDJLQDU\ ORYHU HJ D VWUDQJHU PRYLH VWDU HWFf %HLQJ RYHUSRZHUHG RU IRUFHG WR VXUUHQGHU E\ VRPHRQH 2YHUSRZHULQJ RU IRUFLQJ VRPHRQH HOVH WR VXUUHQGHU +DYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ FDU PRWHO EHDFK ZRRGV HWFf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f +DYLQJ VH[ ZLWK DQLPDOV ,PDJLQLQJ WKDW \RX DUH SK\VLFDOO\ GLIIHUHQW ODUJHU SHQLV HWFf (QJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH 5HFDOOLQJ VFHQHV IURP SRUQRJUDSKLF RU HURWLF OLWHUDWXUH RU ILOPV 2WKHU VSHFLILF WKHPH QRW OLVWHG DERYH 'HVFULEH %DVHG XSRQ \RXU VH[XDO DFWLYLW\ IRU WKH SDVW PRQWKV RQO\ KRZ PDQ\ WLPHV GLG \RX HQJDJH LQ PDVWXUEDWLRQ" 2YHU r,) <285 $16:(5 72 ,7(0 :$6 6.,3 72 ,7(0

PAGE 133

%DVHG XSRQ WKH SDVW WKUHH PRQWKV RQO\ KRZ RIWHQ GLG \RX KDYH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZKLOH HQJDJLQJ LQ PDVWXUEDWLRQ" 1HYHU 2IWHQ 5DUHO\ )UHTXHQWO\ 6RPHWLPHV $OZD\V r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f 7KRXJKWV RI VRPHRQH \RX NQRZ RWKHU WKDQ \RXU FXUUHQW SDUWQHUf 5HOLYLQJ D SUHYLRXV VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH HJ WKLQNLQJ DERXW DQ H[SHULHQFH WKDW DFWXDOO\ RFFXUUHG LQ WKH SDVWf 7KRXJKWV RI DQ LPDJLQDU\ ORYHU HJ D VWUDQJHU PRYLH VWDU HWFf %HLQJ RYHUSRZHUHG RU IRUFHG WR VXUUHQGHU E\ VRPHRQH 2YHUSRZHULQJ RU IRUFLQJ VRPHRQH HOVH WR VXUUHQGHU +DYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ FDU PRWHO EHDFK ZRRGV HWFf 2EVHUYLQJ \RXUVHOI RU RWKHUV KDYLQJ VH[ 3UHWHQGLQJ WKDW \RX DUH DQRWKHU LUUHVLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQ 3UHWHQGLQJ WKDW \RX DUH KDYLQJ VH[ ZLWK DQ LUUHVLVWDEO\ VH[\ SHUVRQ +DYLQJ VH[ ZLWK PRUH WKDQ RQH SHUVRQ DW D WLPH ,PDJLQLQJ WKDW \RX DUH EHLQJ SDLG WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK VRPHRQH ,PDJLQLQJ WKDW \RX DUH SD\LQJ VRPHRQH WR KDYH VH[ ZLWK \RX *LYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW 5HFHLYLQJ RUDOJHQLWDO FRQWDFW

PAGE 134

(QMR\PHQW RI EHLQJ KXUW GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU (QMR\PHQW RI KXUWLQJ DQRWKHU GXULQJ D VH[XDO HQFRXQWHU 6H[XDO DFWLYLW\ ZLWK D PHPEHU RI \RXU RZQ VH[ RU WKH RSSRVLWH VH[ LI \RX DUH JD\f +DYLQJ VH[ ZLWK DQLPDOV ,PDJLQLQJ WKDW \RX DUH SK\VLFDOO\ GLIIHUHQW ODUJHU SHQLV HWFf (QJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH 5HFDOOLQJ VFHQHV IURP SRUQRJUDSKLF RU HURWLF OLWHUDWXUH RU ILOPV 2WKHU VSHFLILF WKHPH QRW OLVWHG DERYH 'HVFULEH %DVHG XSRQ WKH SDVW PRQWKV RQO\ KRZ RIWHQ GLG \RX KDYH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV ZKLOH GD\GUHDPLQJ" 1HYHU 2IWHQ 5DUHO\ )UHTXHQWO\ 6RPHWLPHV $OZD\V r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f 7KRXJKWV RI VRPHRQH \RX NQRZ RWKHU WKDQ \RXU FXUUHQW SDUWQHUf 5HOLYLQJ D SUHYLRXV VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH HJ WKLQNLQJ DERXW DQ H[SHULHQFH WKDW DFWXDOO\ RFFXUUHG LQ WKH SDVWf 7KRXJKWV RI DQ LPDJLQDU\ ORYHU HJ D VWUDQJHU PRYLH VWDU HWFf %HLQJ RYHUSRZHUHG RU IRUFHG WR VXUUHQGHU E\ VRPHRQH

PAGE 135

2YHUSRZHULQJ RU IRUFLQJ VRPHRQH HOVH WR VXUUHQGHU +DYLQJ VH[ LQ D GLIIHUHQW VHWWLQJ FDU PRWHO EHDFK ZRRGV HWFf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f +DYLQJ VH[ ZLWK DQLPDOV ,PDJLQLQJ WKDW \RX DUH SK\VLFDOO\ GLIIHUHQW ODUJHU SHQLV HWFf (QJDJLQJ LQ DQDO LQWHUFRXUVH 5HFDOOLQJ VFHQHV IURP SRUQRJUDSKLF RU HURWLF OLWHUDWXUH RU ILOPV 2WKHU VSHFLILF WKHPH QRW OLVWHG DERYH 'HVFULEH ,Q ILOOLQJ RXW WKLV TXHVWLRQQDLUH \RX KDYH EHHQ DVNHG WR SURYLGH LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW VRPH RI \RXU PRVW LQWLPDWH SHUVRQDO VH[XDO H[SHULn HQFHV 7R ZKDW H[WHQW GLG \RX IHHO FRPIRUWDEOH DERXW UHYHDOLQJ WKLV LQIRUPDWLRQ" &LUFOH RQH DQVZHUf 9HU\ FRPIRUWDEOH 6RPHZKDW XQFRPIRUWDEOH 6RPHZKDW FRPIRUWDEOH 9HU\ XQFRPIRUWDEOH 3OHDVH IHHO IUHH WR ZULWH DQ\ FRPPHQWV \RX KDYH UHJDUGLQJ WKLV VWXG\

PAGE 136

$33(1',; & 7+( 0($1,1* 2) 6(;8$/ (;3(5,(1&( 48(67,211$,5(f§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k &LUFOH LI LQIRUPDO LV 127 $7 $// GHVFULSWLYH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI \RXU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH k &LUFOH LI LQIRUPDO LV 5$5(/< GHVFULSWLYH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI \RXU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH k &LUFOH LI LQIRUPDO LV ,1)5(48(17/< GHVFULS WLYH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI \RXU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH k &LUFOH LI LQIRUPDO LV 620(:+$7 GHVFULSWLYH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI \RXU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH k &LUFOH LI LQIRUPDO LV )5(48(17/< GHVFULSWLYH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI \RXU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH k &LUFOH LI LQIRUPDO LV 868$//< GHVFULSWLYH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI \RXU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH k &LUFOH LI LQIRUPDO LV &203/(7(/< GHVFULSWLYH RI WKH PHDQLQJ RI \RXU VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH $UH WKHUH DQ\ TXHVWLRQV 5HPHPEHU 'RQnW OHDYH DQ\ DGMHFWLYHV XQPDUNHG

PAGE 137

LQHSW 1RW DW DOO 'HVFULSWLYH In 5DUHO\ Z ,QIUHTXHQWO\ Sr 6RPHZKDW !! F 2f FU &' 6 /OB t 8VXDOO\ KRQRUDEOH PDVWHUIXO WLWLOODWLQJ GHPDQGLQJ PXWHG VXEPLVVLYH XQVHOILVK GLJQLILHG UHPRWH HURWLF DJJUHVVLYH IULJLG YLFWRULRXV IXWLH SURSHU KRW IRUFHIXO ULJKWHRXV RIIHQVLYH GRPLQDQW PRUDO FO HDQ &RPSOHWHO\ 'HVFULSWL YH

PAGE 138

&' Lf§ ! Uf§ fUa F Uf§ &2 &' ! &/ & !! U !! FU -& &' L &' & Lf§ 2 &' V &' FU &2 W2 6 ( &' 2 &' &2 F 2 6 WR T &G Wf§ *2 /OB =' LQIDQWLOH WLPLG DIIHFWLRQDWH FDSDEOH XQLQKLELWHG GLVWUXVWIXO DSSURSULDWH IO DW SRWHQW HFVWDWLF ZLQQLQJ GLVWDQW YLUWXRXV LQKLELWHG DZNZDUG SXUH RXWJRLQJ LQDGHTXDWH FRUUHFW PLJKW\ VLQFHUH HYDVLYH DPRURXV &RPSOHWHO\ 'HVFULSWLYH

PAGE 139

VXFFHVVIXO 1RW DW DOO r 'HVFULSWLYH FX VB I2 &V/ A ,QIUHTXHQWO\ A 6RPHZKDW !f & /f = FU &' OB/B 2 =' &RPSOHWHO\ A 'HVFULSWLYH IRQG FDULQJ H[FLWLQJ JHQWOH GLVFUHWH GLVDJUHHDEOH DVVHUWLYH LQWLPDWH PDWXUH GDUL QJ ORYLQJ LPDJLQDWLYH NLQG XQGHVLUDEOH VHQVXDO VDFUHG WDFWIXO UHVHQWIXO LQYHQWLYH WUXVWLQJ GHWHUPLQHG VHULRXV ZDUP 'HVFULSWLYH

PAGE 140

5()(5(1&(6 $EUDPVRQ 3 5 t 0RVKHU / $Q HPSLULFDO LQYHVWLJDWLRQ RI H[SHULn PHQWDOO\ LQGXFHG PDVWXUEDWRU\ IDQWDVLHV $UFKLYHV RI 6H[XDO %HKDYLRU f $FRVWD ) ; (WLRORJ\ DQG WUHDWPHQW RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ $ UHYLHZ $UFKLYHV RI 6H[XDO %HKDYLRU f %DJJDOH\ $ 5 0XOWLYDULDWH DQDO\VLV 7KH 3HUVRQQHO DQG *XLGDQFH -RXUQDO f %DQFURIW $YHUVLRQ WKHUDS\ RI KRPRVH[XDOLW\ $ SLORW VWXG\ RI FDVHV %ULWLVK -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKLDWU\ %DQGXUD $ 6RFLDO OHDUQLQJ WKHRU\ RI LGHQWLILFDWRU\ SURFHVVHV ,Q $ *RVOLQ HGf +DQGERRN RI VRFLDOL]DWLRQ WKHRU\ DQG UHVHDUFK &KLFDJR 5DQG 0F1DOO\ %DUFOD\ $ /LQNLQJ VH[XDO DQG DJJUHVVLYH PRWLYHV &RQWULEXWLRQV RI LUUHOHYDQW DURXVDOV -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ %DUFOD\ $ 0 6H[XDO IDQWDVLHV LQ PHQ DQG ZRPHQ 0HGLFDO $VSHFWV RI +XPDQ 6H[XDOLW\ Bf %HOO $ 3 7KH KRPRVH[XDO DV SDWLHQW ,Q 0 6 :HLQEHUJ HGf 6H[ UHVHDUFK 6WXGLHV IURP WKH .LQVH\ ,QVWLWXWH 1HZ
PAGE 141

%LHEHU 'DLQ + 'LQFH 3 5 'UHOOLFK 0 *UDQG 1 *XQGODFK 5 + .UHPHU 0 : 5LINLQ $ + :LOEXU & % t %LHEHU 7 % +RPRVH[XDOLW\ $ SV\FKRDQDO\WLF VWXG\ 1HZ
PAGE 142

'DYLGVRQ & +RPRVH[XDOLW\ 7KH HWKLFDO FKDOOHQJH -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ DQG &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ f 'DYLGVRQ &t :LOVRQ 7 $WWLWXGHV RI EHKDYLRU WKHUDSLVWV WRZDUG KRPRVH[XDOLW\ %HKDYLRU 7KHUDS\ 'HDUWK 3t &DVVHOO & &RPSDULQJ DWWLWXGHV RI PDOH DQG IHPDOH XQLYHUn VLW\ VWXGHQWV EHIRUH DQG DIWHU D VHPHVWHU FRXUVH RQ KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ -RXUQDO RI 6FKRRO +HDOWK 'H0DUWLQR 0 ) 6H[ DQG WKH LQWHOOLJHQW ZRPDQ 1HZ
PAGE 143

)RUW 6WHLQHU & 0 t &RQUDG ) $WWLWXGHV RI PHQWDO KHDOWK SURn IHVVLRQDOV WRZDUG KRPRVH[XDOLW\ DQG LWV WUHDWPHQW 3V\FKRORJLFDO 5HSRUWV )UHHGPDQ 0 +RPRVH[XDOV PD\ EH KHDOWKLHU WKDQ VWUDLJKWV 3V\FKRORJ\ 7RGD\ 0DUFK SS )UHXG 6 7KUHH HVVD\V RQ WKH WKHRU\ RI VH[XDOLW\ 1HZ
PAGE 144

*UDWHU +t 'RZQLQJ 1 7KH PHDQLQJ RI VH[XDO H[SHULHQFH 8QGHU UHYLHZ *URVV $ 7KH PDOH UROH DQG KHWHURVH[XDO EHKDYLRU -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO ,VVXHV *XQGODFK 5 +t %HUQDUG ) 5 %LUWK RUGHU DQG VH[ RI VLEOLQJV LQ D VDPSOH RI OHVELDQV DQG QRQOHVELDQV 3V\FKRORJLFDO 5HSRUWV +DULWRQ % ( 7KH VH[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI ZRPHQ ,Q & *RUGRQ t -RKQVRQ HGVf 5HDGLQJV LQ KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ &RQWHPSRUDU\ SHUVSHFWLYHV 1HZ
PAGE 145

+XQW 0 6H[XDO EHKDYLRU LQ WKH V 3UHPDULWDO VH[ ,Q & *RUGRQ t -RKQVRQ HGVf 5HDGLQJV LQ KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ &RQWHPSRUDU\ SHUVSHFWLYHV 1HZ
PAGE 146

/DQHU 5 3HUPDQHQW SDUWQHU SULRULWLHV *D\ DQG VWUDLJKW -RXUQDO RI +RPRVH[XDOLW\ MOf /D3ODQWH 0 0F&RUPLFN 1 t %UDQQLJDQ /LYLQJ WKH VH[XDO VFULSW &ROOHJH VWXGHQWVn YLHZV RI LQIOXHQFH LQ VH[XDO HQFRXQWHUV 7KH -RXUQDO RI 6H[ 5HVHDUFK B /HXQHU + *XLGHG DIIHFWLYH HPDJHU\ *$,f $PHULFDQ -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKRn WKHUDS\ = /LEE\ 5 t 6WUDXV 0 0DNH ORYH QRW ZDU" 6H[ VH[XDO PHDQLQJV DQG YLROHQFH LQ D VDPSOH RI XQLYHUVLW\ VWXGHQWV $UFKLYHV RI 6H[XDO %HKDYLRU B /RQH\ $Q 003, PHDVXUH RI PDODGMXVWPHQW LQ D VDPSOH RI QRUPDO KRPRVH[XDO PHQ -RXUQDO RI &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ f /R3LFFROR t +HUPDQ &XOWXUDO YDOXHV DQG WKH WKHUDSHXWLF GHILQLn WLRQ RI VH[XDO IXQFWLRQ DQG G\VIXQFWLRQ -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO ,VVXHV /R3LFFROR t 6WHJHU 7KH VH[XDO LQWHUDFWLRQ LQYHQWRU\ $ QHZ LQVWUXPHQW IRU DVVHVVPHQW RI VH[XDO G\VIXQFWLRQ $UFKLYHV RI 6H[XDO %HKDYLRU B 0DF'RQDOG $ 3 +RPRSKRELD ,WV URRWV DQG PHDQLQJV +RPRVH[XDO &RXQVHOLQJ -RXUQDO MOf 0DVWHUV : + t -RKQVRQ 9 ( +XPDQ VH[XDO UHVSRQVH %RVWRQ /LWWOH %URZQ t &R 0DVWHUV : + t -RKQVRQ 9 ( +XPDQ VH[XDO LQDGHTXDF\ %RVWRQ /LWWOH %URZQ t &RPSDQ\ 0DVWHUV : + t -RKQVRQ 9 ( +RPRVH[XDOLW\ LQ SHUVSHFWLYH %RVWRQ /LWWOH %URZQ t &RPSDQ\ 0F%ULGH 0 t (QGHU 6H[XDO DWWLWXGHV DQG VH[XDO EHKDYLRU DPRQJ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV -RXUQDO RI &ROOHJH 6WXGHQW 3HUVRQQHO 0F&UDU\ +LVWRULF GHYHORSPHQW RI URPDQWLF ORYH ,Q & *RUGRQ t -RKQVRQ HGVf 5HDGLQJV LQ KXPDQ VH[XDOLW\ &RQWHPSRUDU\ SHUVSHFWLYHV 1HZ
PAGE 147

0HGQLFN 5 $ *HQGHUVSHFLILF YDULDQFHV LQ VH[XDO IDQWDV\ -RXUQDO RI 3HUVRQDOLW\ $VVHVVPHQW Bf 0HUFHU t .RKQ 3 *HQGHU GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH LQWHJUDWLRQ RI FRQn VHUYDWLVP VH[ XUJH DQG VH[XDO EHKDYLRUV DPRQJ FROOHJH VWXGHQWV 7KH -RXUQDO RI 6H[ 5HVHDUFK B 0LWFKHOO 6RPH SV\FKRORJLFDO GLPHQVLRQV RI DGROHVFHQW VH[XDOLW\ $GROHVFHQFH B 0RQH\ %LVH[XDO KRPRVH[XDO DQG KHWHURVH[XDO 6RFLHW\ ODZ DQG PHGLFLQH -RXUQDO RI +RPRVH[XDOLW\ Af 0RQH\ t 7XFNHU 3 6H[XDO VLJQDWXUHV %RVWRQ /LWWOH %URZQ t &R 0RUHDXOW t )ROOLQJVWDG 5 6H[XDO IDQWDVLHV RI IHPDOHV DV D IXQFn WLRQ RI VH[ JXLOW DQG H[SHULPHQWDO UHVSRQVH FXHV -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ DQG &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ f 0RUJDQ t 6NRYKROW 7 0 8VLQJ LQQHU H[SHULHQFH )DQWDV\ DQG GD\GUHDPV LQ FDUHHU FRXQVHOLQJ -RXUQDO RI &RXQVHOLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ f 0RULQ 6 ) +HWHURVH[XDO ELDV LQ SV\FKRORJLFDO UHVHDUFK RQ OHVELDQLVP DQG PDOH KRPRVH[XDOLW\ $PHULFDQ 3V\FKRORJLVW Mf 0RUULV 0 7KH WKUHH 5nV RI VH[ -RXUQDO RI 5HOLJLRQ DQG +HDOWK B 0RUULV 3 $ 'RFWRUV DWWLWXGHV WR KRPRVH[XDOLW\ %ULWLVK -RXUQDO RI 3V\FKLDWU\ 0RVKHU / 0HDVXUHPHQW RI JXLOW LQ IHPDOHV E\ VHOIUHSRUW LQYHQWRULHV -RXUQDO RI &RQVXOWLQJ DQG &OLQLFDO 3V\FKRORJ\ 0RVKHU / 6H[ GLIIHUHQFHV VH[ H[SHULHQFH VH[ JXLOW DQG H[SOLFLWO\ VH[XDO ILOPV -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO ,VVXHV B 0RVKHU / 7KUHH GLPHQVLRQV RI LQYROYHPHQW LQ KXPDQ VH[XDO UHVSRQVH 7KH -RXUQDO RI 6H[ 5HVHDUFK B 0RVKHU / t $EUDPVRQ 3 5 6XEMHFWLYH VH[XDO DURXVDO WR ILOPV RI PDVWXUEDWLRQ -RXUQDO RI &OLQLFDO DQG &RQVXOWLQJ 3V\FKRORJ\ 1HOVRQ 3 3HUVRQDOLW\ VH[XDO IXQFWLRQV DQG VH[XDO EHKDYLRU $Q H[SHULPHQW LQ PHWKRGRORJ\ 'RFWRUDO GLVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO %f 1HOVRQ / 5 t =DLFKNRZVN\ / $ FDVH IRU XVLQJ PXOWLSOH UHJUHVVLRQ LQVWHDG RI $129$ LQ HGXFDWLRQDO UHVHDUFK -RXUQDO RI ([SHULPHQWDO (GXFDWLRQ f

PAGE 148

1LH 1 + +XOO & -HQNLQV 6WHLQEUHQQHU t %HQW + 6WDWLVWLFDO SDFNDJH IRU WKH VRFLDO VFLHQFHV 6366f QG HGf 1HZ
PAGE 149

6FKLOGP\HU $Q H[SORUDWRU\ VWXG\ &RUUHODWHV DQG YDULDEOHV RI SRVLn WLYH VH[XDO H[SHULHQFHV 'RFWRUDO GLVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 0LVVRXUL.DQVDV &LW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO B $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOPV 1R 6FKRRI7DPV 6FKODHJHO t :DOF]DN / 'LIIHUHQWLDWLRQ RI VH[XDO PRUDOLW\ EHWZHHQ DQG \HDUV $UFKLYHV RI 6H[XDO %HKDYLRU 6FKZDUW] $ $QGURJ\Q\ DQG WKH DUW RI ORYLQJ 3V\FKRWKHUDS\ 7KHRU\ 5HVHDUFK DQG 3UDFWLFH A 6LJXVXFK 9 6FKPLGW 5HLQIHOG $ t :LHGHUPDQQ6XWRU 3V\FKRVH[XDO VWLPXODWLRQ 6H[ GLIIHUHQFHV 7KH -RXUQDO RI 6H[ 5HVHDUFK 6LQJHU / 'D\GUHDPLQJ $Q LQWURGXFWLRQ WR WKH H[SHULPHQWDO VWXG\ RI LQQHU H[SHULHQFH 1HZ
PAGE 150

6XOOLYDQ 3 5 0DVWXUEDWLRQ IDQWDVLHV DV LQGLFDWRUV RI GHHSHVW VH[XDO ORQJLQJV 0HGLFDO $VSHFWV RI +XPDQ 6H[XDOLW\ -DQf B 7DQQDKLOO 5 6H[ LQ KLVWRU\ 1HZ
PAGE 151

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

PAGE 152

, FHUWLI\ WKDW KDYH UHDG WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKDW LQ P\ RSLQLRQ LW FRQIRUPV WR DFFHSWDEOH VWDQGDUGV RI VFKRODUO\ SUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG LV IXOO\ DGHTXDWH LQ VFRSH DQG TXDOLW\ DV D GLVVHUWDWLRQ IRU WKH GHJUHH RI 'RFWRU RI 3KLORVRSK\ LUU\ *UDWHU&KDLUPDQ 3URIHVVRU RIn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

PAGE 153

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

PAGE 154

81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E5HFCEBQS_X50DHA INGEST_TIME 2011-08-29T16:21:23Z PACKAGE AA00003457_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES


A COMPARISON OF MALE HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL
SEXUAL FANTASIES AND TENTATIVE NORMS FOR
THE MEANING OF SEXUAL EXPERIENCE
By
GABRIEL J. RODRIGUEZ
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1981

Dedicated to my mother who always wanted a doctor
in the family and to my step-father and uncle,
both of whom believed in me.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to thank Dr. Harry Grater for his mentoring and support
throughout my graduate education. To Dr. Milan Kolarik I offer my
thanks for all of his influence upon me as my therapist and friend.
Dr. Rod McDavis served to inspire me through his encouragement and
role modeling. I also wish to thank Drs. Froming, Ziller, Nevill,
Epting, Suchman and Morgan for the things that I learned from them
and the open environment that they provided in our program. We were
allowed to think, to question and to explore in the spirit of true
education.
To Cheryl Phillips I can only say thank you again. She is the
hub around which our program revolves, and she has touched me deeply
as a warm, caring person. I am also indebted to all of the friends
who laughed and cried with me over the past five years. They are
too numerous to list, but each one holds a special place in my heart.
i i i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ü i
LIST OF TABLES vi
ABSTRACT vii
CHAPTER
I.INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 1
An Historical Overview 3
Theory and Research on Fantasy 13
Research on Heterosexual Sexual Fantasy 18
Research on Homosexuality and Homosexual
Sexual Fantasy 36
Research and Theory on the Meaning of
Heterosexual Sexual Experience 52
Research and Theory on the Meaning of
Homosexual Sexual Experience 69
A Brief Summary and Statement of
Theoretical Hypotheses 77
II.METHOD 84
Subjects 84
Procedure 84
Instruments 86
Erotic Response and Orientation Scale .... 86
The Sexual Fantasy Questionnaire 87
The Meaning of Sexual Experience
Questionnaire—III 89
Statistical Hypotheses 91
III.RESULTS 93
Analysis of the Erotic Response and
Orientation Scale (EROS) 93
Analysis of the Sexual Fantasy
Questionnaire (SFQ) 94
Analysis of the Meaning of Sexual Experience
Questionnaire—III (MOSE—III) 105
TV

Page
IV. DISCUSSION 107
Sexual Fantasy 107
The Meaning of Sexual Experience 116
Limitations, Strengths, and Applications
of the Present Study 117
APPENDIX A: EROTIC RESPONSE AND ORIENTATION SCALE 120
APPENDIX B: SEXUAL FANTASY QUESTIONNAIRE 122
APPENDIX C: THE MEANING OF SEXUAL EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE—111. 128
REFERENCES 132
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 143
v

LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. TOP-RANKED SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES DURING SEX WITH
A PARTNER, MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING (MALES) 34
2. TOP-RANKED SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES DURING SEX WITH
A PARTNER, MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING (FEMALES) 35
3. SEX DIFFERENCES FOR MOSE FACTOR ANALYSIS SAMPLE 65
4. PERCENTAGES OF FANTASY DURING SEX WITH A PARTNER,
MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING FOR HMs AND GMs 95
5. MANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON THREE
CONDITIONS OF SFQ 98
6. ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON SEX
WITH A PARTNER CONDITION OF SFQ AND DISCRIMINANT
ANALYSIS FUNCTIONS 99
7. ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON
MASTURBATION CONDITION AND DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS
FUNCTIONS 100
8. ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON
DAYDREAMING CONDITION AND DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS
FUNCTIONS 102
9. MOST FREQUENT SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES FOR HMs IN EACH
CONDITION OF SFQ 104
10.MOST FREQUENT SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES FOR GMs IN EACH
CONDITION OF SFQ 105
vi

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Council
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
A COMPARISON OF MALE HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL
SEXUAL FANTASIES AND TENTATIVE NORMS FOR
THE MEANING OF SEXUAL EXPERIENCE
By
Gabriel J. Rodriguez
December 1981
Chairman: Harry Grater
Major Department: Psychology
This study attempted to compare the sexual fantasies and the
interpersonal meaning of sexual experience between heterosexual (N=32)
and homosexual (N=32) male college students. The empirical research
on sexual fantasy is sporadic in focus with few consistent results.
The meaning of sexual experience has received scant attention especially
for homosexual individuals. A review of the history and current litera¬
ture on both topics is presented with a focus on relevant theory.
Several hypotheses were generated for both topics. Sexual fantasies
were investigated using the Erotic Response and Orientation Scale, which
inquires about male and female as sex object fantasies, and the Sexual
Fantasy Questionnaire, which contains three sexual fantasy conditions
(e.g., sex with partner, masturbation, daydreaming) with 22 fantasy
subthemes under each condition. The Meaning of Sexual Experience Ques¬
tionnaire—II I was utilized to compare the two groups and contains the

following categories: affiliation, inadequate/undesirable, achievement,
moral, and erotic dominance.
A data analysis (MANOVA) of the results indicated that homosexual
students fantasized significantly more frequently about males, anal
intercourse, oral sex, sadomasochistic activities, and being forced to
have sex (submission). They also tended to masturbate more frequently.
The heterosexual males had significantly more frequent fantasies about
females, having sex in different settings, and sex with animals. Tables
of the five top-ranked sexual fantasy categories for each group were
presented. No significant differences were found between the groups on
the five meaning of sexual experience categories. The author concluded
that sexual orientation has an effect on those fantasies which relate
to the "mechanical-anatomical" aspects of sexual activity (e.g., anal
intercourse and oral sex). The similarities between the male hetero¬
sexual and homosexual samples were seen as resulting from the effects
of gender.
v i i i

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION AND REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Research on human sexuality has been a difficult prospect for those
individuals who have dared to address the challenge. Along with the
theoretical and empirical questions with which all researchers are faced,
the sex researcher must also contend with social taboos and the emotion¬
laden nature of the topic at hand. Wrightsman (1977) sums up the issue
succinctly when he states:
Even if a researcher is courageous enough to study sexual
behavior while accepting the stigma of doing so, he or she
then faces the very likely outcome that the project's
findings may overturn people's assumptions about sex and
challenge deeply held values and beliefs. Such new
findings are not always popular, and society has a tendency
to punish the bearer of tidings that conflict with cherished
assumptions, (p. 179)
Several pioneers in the area of human sexuality helped to establish
the legitimacy of research on human sexual functioning as well as lay
the groundwork for the methods by which the sexual attitudes, behavior
and physiology of men and women could be investigated (Ellis, 1936, 1942;
Freud, 1962, 1963; Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948; Kinsey, Pomeroy,
Martin, & Gebhard, 1953; Masters & Johnson, 1966). Since the 1960's
research on human sexuality has pro!iferated, much of it concerning
sexual attitudes (Eysenck, 1971b; Finger, 1975; Gerrard, 1980; Glassner
& Owen, 1976; McBride & Ender, 1977), sexual behaviors (Bentler, 1968;
Finger, 1975; Gross, 1978; Haynes & Oziel, 1976; Peplau, Rubin,& Hill,
1977; Schafer, 1977), and the identification and treatment of sexual
1

2
dysfunctions or sexual aberrations (Acosta, 1975; Bancroft, 1969; Masters
& Johnson, 1966, 1970; Kaplan, 1974; Kraft, 1967; LoPiccalo & Steger,
1974).
Two areas of human sexuality which have received little attention
from sex researchers concern sexual fantasies and the meaning of an
individual's sexual experiences. Sexual fantasy can be defined as "Any
mental image or imagination which contains sexual matter and/or is
sexually arousing to the person having the sexual fantasy" (Mednick, 1977,
p. 250). Much of the literature on sexual fantasy has been theoretical
in nature, using a psychodynamic interpretive scheme (Hoilender, 1963;
Kronhausen & Knonhausen, 1969). Those authors who have approached sexual
fantasy from an empirical basis have relied on one or two items which
were buried within a broader study of sexual behavior (Kinsey et al.,
1948, 1953; Pietropinto & Simenauer, 1977). Women's sexual fantasies
comprise a major portion of sex fantasy research, followed by men's sex
fantasies, with homosexual sex fantasy receiving almost no attention.
The meaning of sexual experience has been approached tangentialy
from several directions, but as Bernstein (1982) states, "Although
inferences from some studies are possible, the meaning of sexual experi¬
ence has rarely been directly assessed. . ." (p. 18). Again, there are
few studies on the meaning of homosexual sexual experience, and those
studies that do exist must be evaluated in terms of Morin's (1977)
caution against a heterosexual bias in psychological research on homo¬
sexuality.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the differences and
similarities between heterosexual and homosexual sexual fantasy and the

3
meaning of sexuality. The sexual fantasies will be studied in terms of
same-sex, opposite-sex, sexual activity, and various other subtheme
fantasies. The fantasy themes will be compared during three distinct
conditions: sex with a partner, masturbation, and daydreaming. Although
very few studies have been done on the meaning of sexual experience,
there is some basis for comparison due to the recent development of an
assessment instrument (e.g., Bernstein, 1982). The author hopes that
tentative norms will emerge for the meaning of homosexual sexual experi¬
ence. Care has been taken to present the data on heterosexual and homo¬
sexual subjects, both in the historical overview and in the literature
review. Pertinent information, that will provide a context in which to
view the existing data, will be presented.
A Historical Overview
The history of sexual fantasy was addressed by Taylor (1970) who
found references on the topic dating back to the 12th century. Indi¬
viduals who expressed having sexual fantasies were considered to be
possessed by demons called an "incubus," if the victim was a female, or
a "succubus," if the victim was a male. The underlying assumption, to
the attribution of possession, was that "normal" individuals did not
have sexual fantasies. In the 1600's the Malleus Maléficarum was pub¬
lished and endorsed by the senate at the University of Cologne, in an
effort to provide a manual by which the practitioners of witchcraft
could be identified and punished. Taylor (1970) describes the manual's
covert function in the following manner: "It is, in many respects, a
case book of sexual psychopathy, and is concerned principally with three

4
subjects: impotence, sexual fantasies, and conversion hysterias" (p. 111).
Once a practitioner of witchcraft was found, he or she was tortured into a
"confession" and burned at the stake. Two prime indications of witchcraft
were impotence and sexual fantasy. Consequently, to admit to having
sexual fantasies was to invite the wrath of the inquisitors.
Kronhausen and Kronhausen (1969) reviewed the early erotic literature
in search of literary expressions of sexual fantasy. The authors document
a reference on January 13, 1668, in Samuel Pepys1 Diary, where Mr. Pepys
recounts his discovery of a French book that ". . . is the most bawdy,
lewd book that 1 ever saw. . ." (p. 3). The authors go on to document
erotic tales throughout the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, providing
psychoanalytic interpretations as to the motives and longings of the
authors and of their readers. Kronhausen and Kronhausen (1969) comment
on their review of the psychiatric and psychoanalytic literature in
preparation for their own work, as emphasizing deviant behavior rather
than fantasy. To quote the authors:
Contemporary clinicians seem to have given the subject little
attention, and what we found, even in psychoanalytically
oriented articles and monographs, mostly in the 1920's and
19301s, was not particularly enlightening, although there are
several isolated descriptions in some of Freud's own cases.
(p. xv)
Thus it appears that sexual fantasy was considered to be a reflection
of psychopathology from its earliest references up to the present day.
In Three Essays on Sexuality, Freud (1962) comments on "phantasies"
as being rooted in the infantile period of human development, where they
persist unconsciously. Nocturnal phantasies are then the unconscious
phantasies rising into consciousness. Freud stressed that the importance

5
of phantasies derived from their connection with the Oedipus complex and
the effect that the struggle to resolve the complex has on adult
sexuality. He states, "They [phantasies] are of great importance in the
origin of many symptoms, since they precisely constitute preliminary
stages of these symptoms and thus lay down the forms in which the
repressed libidinal components find satisfaction" (p. 92). Most of
Freud's comments on phantasies dealt with the sexually symbolic represen¬
tations within the dreams of his patients and the repressed Oedipal
longings that they represented. Again there is a focus on the patho¬
logical or maladaptive nature of sexual fantasies, the precursors of
neurotic symptomology.
In an attempt to systematically study the sexual attitudes, beliefs
and behaviors of the American public, Kinsey et al. (1948, 1953)
gathered large samples of male and female subjects. Unfortunately there
is little mention of sexual fantasy in the studies, and what does exist
is related to masturbation. Kinsey et al. (1953) reported that males
masturbate more often than do females and that of those subjects who did
masturbate, 72% of the males and 50% of the females almost always
fantasized during masturbation. Concerning nocturnal emissions, Kinsey
et al. (1948) report that:
The parallel between the content of the nocturnal dream and
one's overt daytime experience has been recognized by all
peoples, primitive and civilized, since the dawn of history.
The present study confirms the usual interpretations, although
it has nothing to contribute to the symbolism in dreams. The
dream is usually a reflection of the individual's overt
experience or of his desire for experience, (p. 526)
The authors further state that heterosexuals tend to have heterosexually
oriented fantasies and homosexuals tend to have homosexually oriented

6
fantasies. It is apparent that apart from a move away from the super¬
natural influences that were purported to exist in sexual fantasies
during the Middle Ages, the reflection of psychopathology within the
content of sexual fantasies, and the verification of the occurrence of
sexual fantasy with those males and females who admitted to fantasy and
masturbation, little was really known about sexual fantasies until the
1960's.
The meaning of sexual experience has undergone many historical
transitions. Tannahil (1980) traces human sexual development back to
the prehistoric world, where the major transitions of the paleolithic
era were a shift from a rear-entry coital position to the face-to-face
"missionary" position, the development of intertribal marriages and,
consequently, the taboo against incest. The major focus of this era
was sex as a means of procreation and a symbol of fertility. During
the neolithic era man emerged as master of his family and superior to
women. The second major sexual taboo developed during this era. Men
were not allowed to have sex with women during their menstrual period
due to attributions of supernatural powers and witchcraft concerning
the blood in the menstrual fluid. Bullough (1976) refers to the
Mesopotamian civilization (3000 to 300 B.C.) where sexual attitudes
derived from the assumption that women were basically the property of
the man. Adultery was not a moral transgression but rather a vio¬
lation of another man's property. The purpose of marriage was still
procreation, not companionship. Bullough (1976) also delineates the
Jewish contribution in the formation of Western sexual attitudes,
through their effect on the subsequent development of Christianity.

7
Early Judaism (before 600 B.C.) had a relatively simple sex code. During
the Talmudic period a permissive attitude predominated in which the
rabbis legitimized the pleasures of sex to such an extent that coitus
between a married couple became a religious duty on Friday nights. Later
periods of sexual repression developed as a result of pressure upon the
Jews to assimilate with other cultures and the hostility of the new-found
Christians toward the Jews. Women's sexual drive was conceptualized as
being more constant and aggressive than that of their male counterparts.
Adultery was only applied in terms of a married woman having sex with an
unmarried man and the penalty was death. Rape was considered to be at
least instinctually consented to by the woman, since her role was an
inferior one in Jewish society.
The Greek culture was the wellspring for the concept of romantic
love according to McCary (1976). There was a schism between sexual
love (eros) and spiritual love (agape). McCrary states,
Spiritual love was an idealized love between men, and was
considered an emotion so pure that women could not attain
it. The ideal of Greek love was therefore homosexual, since
the female was regarded as too lowly and imperfect for the
emotion of love. The essence of beauty and the realization
of love were found only in the male, and therefore usually
existed between an older man and a younger boy. (1976, p. 46)
Consequently marriage was solely for the purpose of producing children
and neither concept of love applied to married couples. In Christianity
the purity of love was idealized as love of God, separate from sexuality.
Sexual expression underwent suppression and through the ideal of the
wedding of nuns to Christ in a spiritual sense, women were idealized
(e.g., the Immaculate Conception). Courtly love arose in the south of
France during the end of the 11th century, according to McCrary (1976).

8
The nobility adopted an adolescent-like conceptualization of love where
"sexual desire is denied satisfaction." Knights maintained spiritual
romantic relationships with ladies whose husbands were crusading, rather
than with their own spouses. Sexual intercourse was not incorporated
into those affairs but tests of the "purity" of the relationships
involved sexual foreplay in bed that would be stopped just short of
intercourse. McCary states that:
Marriage at that time was contracted for reasons of familial
benefits, property rights, personal protection, and procrea¬
tion, but courtly romantic love was devoid of burdens and
responsibilities. Thus romantic love and marriage were two
separate entities that fulfilled entirely separate needs,
and so long as the lovers remained sexually "virtuous," the
husband's marital rights were safeguarded and the rules of
chivalry upheld. (1976, p. 46)
During the Baroque and Rococo periods sexual favors were granted
for gallant acts, and the fusion (or confusion) of sex and love was
established. McCary (1976) notes that during the Renaissance the
platonic doctrine, of earthly love transformed into a path toward
spiritual beauty (i.e., God-like), was adopted but quickly degenerated
until in the 16th century platonic academies were "nothing but courts
of free love" (p. 46). The concept of romantic love in marriage was
born in the 19th century, since the common man did not have the
resources to be both married and in love with a mistress. American
Puritans viewed marriage as a civil contract, where romantic love and
sex between young Puritans was acceptable unless it violated the
sanctity of the family. During the industrial revolution our society
became more mobile, familial ties were weakened and romantic themes
began to appear in the mass media. McCary (1976) states, "in the

9
United States, especially, an attempt was made to combine sex, love and
marriage into one unique experience between one man and one woman" (p. 47).
The Puritan view of sexuality gave way to a Victorian reinstitution
of courtly love. According to Tannahill (1980), middle class ladies were
transformed "into sweet, untouchable guardians of morality, whose dis¬
taste for sex led to an explosive increase in prostitution, an epidemic
spread of venereal disease, and a morbid taste for masochism" (p. 347).
The 1800‘s became a period in which women were the guardians of purity
and chastity, while men had to struggle with their "base" sexual needs
and the search for sources of sexual expression. Some of the effects
of this period on human sexuality are addressed by Bullough (1976) and
include the following: (1) the portrayal of men as sexual aggressors
and women as reluctant victims; (2) the emergence of the woman's role
as one of child rearer and homemaker while simultaneously mystifying
her existence and confining her to the home; (3) the condemnation of
masturbation by medical authorities due to the draining of vital energy
and the threat of resulting insanity; and (4) the increases in prostitu¬
tion, the incidence of venereal disease, the search for "clean" virgins
and medical procedures (e.g., ring insertion in the foreskin of the
penis) to limit one's sexual functioning. In effect, it was a period
of sexual repression and the propagation of sexual myths, some of which
persist to the present day. The dominance of the male and the submis-
siveness of the female were reinforced, with procreation becoming the
only justification for sexual activity.
Havelock Ellis (1964) began the study of human sexuality due to
his own discomfort with the ignorance and anxiety surrounding human

10
sexuality during his medical training and because "a man's sexual tempera¬
ment is too intimate and essential a part of him to be viewed with
indifference" (p. vi). Ellis believed that sexuality should be studied
as a scientific discipline rather than leaving the topic to be defined
according to the whims of moralists and theologians. He was careful to
separate the concepts of "love" and "lust," lust being the physiological
sexual impulse and love being "that impulse in association with other
impulses" (p. 323). On the sexuality of women, Ellis (1964) pointed out
several disadvantages created by past definitions of human sexuality.
Women were not different beings than men, but of essentially the same
sexual composition. Women suffer more than men concerning sexuality due
to ignorance and prejudice on the part of society, which leads to more
dissatisfaction on the women's part in marriage. Ellis also outlined
three main channels through which human sexual impulse could be dis¬
charged :
(1) We may avoid all overt manifestations, leaving the impulse
to expend its dynamic energy along whatever paths, normal or
abnormal, the organism may lend itself to; (2) We may be
content with temporary or merely casual relationships, of which
prostitution is the familiar type; (3) We may enter into
marriage, that is to say, a sexual relationship set up with the
intention of, if possible, making it permanent, and involving a
community of more than sexual interests. (1936, p. 353)
Ellis' observations of the options for sexual expression cover the range
of contemporary sexual behaviors in a nonjudgmental fashion. It is
important to note that morality has been separated from sexual function¬
ing in Ellis' work, and that the problems women face in expressing their
sexuality have been addressed.
Sex as a primary human motivator was one of the results of Sigmund
Freud's (1962, 1963) development of psychoanalysis. Freud dispelled the

11
notion of women as nonsexual beings and challenged the notion of procrea¬
tion and submission as the only sexual roles which women could fulfill.
Freud (1962) proposed a distinction between the sexual object (i.e., the
person we are sexually attracted to) and the sexual aim (i.e., the
sexual act chosen to express the sexual instinct). Concerning adult
sexual development, Freud stated that,
A person's final sexual attitude is not decided until after
puberty and is the result of a number of factors, not all
of which are yet known; some are of a constitutional nature
but others are accidental . . .in general the multiplicity
of determining factors is reflected in the variety of mani¬
fest sexual attitudes in which they find their issue in
mankind. (1962, p. 12)
The sexual instinct (e.g., libido), according to Freud, is connected
with aggression and cruelty and is opposed by pain, disgust, and shame.
Undoubtedly the Victorian repression during Freud's development of a
theory of human sexuality influenced his conceptualizations of the human
sexual instinct and the barriers to its expression.
Despite Freud's theories, the systematic study of human sexuality
did not begin until 1947 with the Kinsey studies on sexual behavior and
attitudes (Kinsey et al., 1948, 1953). Kinsey's work detailed the sexual
behaviors of males. The female orgasmic response was also studied in and
out of marriage. Although the Kinsey studies provided important norms
for sexual behavior within the American population, they failed to
address the issue of the meaning of sexual experience (Gecas & Libby,
1976). This limitation does not serve to mitigate the enormous contri¬
bution that Kinsey's studies brought the area of human sexuality,
especially the bringing to light of sexuality as a topic for systematic
study and open discussion.

12
The study of human sexuality, or sexology, has proliferated in the
past two decades. Masters and Johnson's (1966) study of the physiology
and anatomy of sexuality helped to (1) delineate healthy sexual function¬
ing, (2) identify male and female sexual dysfunctions and to establish
treatment strategies for dysfunctional individuals/couples, and
(3) dispel sexual myths (e.g., the female vaginal orgasm). Several
other sexologists have conducted research and published works on the
topic of human sexual functioning (Kaplan, 1974; LoPiccolo & Herman,
1977; LoPiccolo & Steger, 1974; Money & Tucker, 1975). One drawback to
the scientific study of sexuality has been an overconcern about sexual
performance among the general public (Masters & Johnson, 1970).
Bernstein (1982) notes that the interpersonal meaning of sexual experi¬
ence must now include competence, mastery and achievement.
The limited nature of the information concerning sexual fantasies
from a historical perspective tends to reflect the taboo associated
with the expression of sexual fantasy, except in isolated literary
references. In the next section, a review of the current literature
on heterosexual and homosexual erotic fantasies will be presented. The
current literature on the meaning of sexual experience for heterosexuals
and homosexuals will follow the above. Sexual fantasies and the meaning
of sexual experience are related in that the individual's attributions
of meaning concerning his/her sexual experience are bound to be
reflected in the schemes of his/her sexual fantasies (e.g., dominance
or submission).

13
Theory and Research on Fantasy
The study of fantasy processes, according to Klinger (1971),
suffered from a moratorium on the study of inner experience within the
United States from 1920 until 1960. Saint Augustine is credited with
providing a major impetus for the study of inner experience when he
reasoned that man's knowledge of his inner experience could serve as a
guide to his knowledge of God. Klinger (1971) states that John of
Salisbury, the 12th century philosopher, developed "a description for
the categories of inner experience and applied the unifying associative
principle expounded earlier by Aristotle, that ideas experienced con¬
tiguously come to be linked in future thought" (p. 11). The work of
Thomas Hobbes, and later, the British Associationist School of Psychology
led to the development of sophisticated techniques for the study of inner
events (i.e., introspection). Although several schools of introspective
psychology developed at the turn of the century, the American psychologi¬
cal movement turned to the study of individual differences and the
behavioristic techniques that were derived from the Darwinian method of
study. As Klinger (1971) states,
The very success of the introspectionist psychologists in
formulating increasingly precise and revealing questions
placed increasing demands on the observational and judg¬
mental capacities of their highly trained observer-subjects.
Eventually, the demands proved too great, and the methods
then available for the further empirical investigation of
inner experience were shown to be inadequate, (pp. 11-12)
Klinger (1971) notes that until 1966 not a single volume was pub¬
lished in the United States that was totally devoted to the systematic
study of fantasy. The authors of the 1920's focused on Jungian or
psychoanalytic concepts in their theoretical work on fantasies.

14
Singer (1966) was one of the first modern authors to attempt to define
daydreaming. According to Singer, daydreaming "is used to mean a shift
of attention away from an ongoing physical or mental task or from a
perceptual response to external stimulation towards a response to some
internal stimulus" (1966, p. 3). Although proposed definitions of
fantasy help to conceptualize the fantasy process, Klinger (1971) notes
that there are several problems associated with providing a comprehen¬
sive definition of fantasy. The problems include (1) a set of
generally accepted criteria for determining the boundries of fantasy
does not exist; (2) fantasy is similar to related processes (i.e., plan¬
ning, reminiscing, analyzing past events, etc.) which serve to obfuscate
the true boundries of fantasy; (3) since fantasy is primarily a mental
process it is necessarily covert in nature and the researcher is com¬
pelled to rely on subjects' verbal reports; and (4) the problem of
differentiating verbal reports reflecting problems in the subject's life
(i.e., task-directed ideation) from reports of actual fantasy ideation.
Despite the aforementioned problems, Klinger (1971) proposes the
following definition of fantasy:
Verbal reports of all mentation whose ideational products
are not evaluated by the subject in terms of their useful¬
ness in advancing some immediate goal extrinsic to the men¬
tation itself; that is, fantasy is defined as report of
mentation other than orienting responses to, or scanning
of, external stimuli, or operant activity such as problem¬
solving in a task situation, (pp. 9-10)
Through a comparison of the similarities between play and fantasy,
Klinger conceptualizes a transition from an infant's undifferentiated
mastery of play and fantasy to the sharp decline of play and dramatic
increase in fantasy during puberty. Dreams and fantasy become

15
manifestations of an individual's diurnal cycle, where there is a shift
from one to the other depending on the sleep-waking cycle. Klinger
(1971) sees this as a continuous stream of activity which represents a
baseline of activity to which individuals return when they are not
"engaged in scanning or acting upon their environment" (p. 48). Utiliz¬
ing this conceptualization, fantasy and dreaming occur when the mind is
not occupied with the necessity of monitoring the environment.
The reader may have noticed a behavioristic bent to Klinger’s
(1971) theory. In elucidating the components of fantasy, Klinger pro¬
poses that fantasy is a "response process" and that segments of fantasy
can be regarded as "sequences of responses." The response segments are
integrated due to the unitary, organized nature of lower-order fantasy
segments which flow smoothly, rapidly and automatically while allowing
for novelty. Klinger (1971) points out that conceptualizing fantasy as
a form of response integration enables the researcher to explain the
erratic course of fantasies where environmental feedback is "largely
irrelevant" and does not serve to modify the fantasy content. This
would help to explain the unrealistic or surrealistic nature of
fantasies and the lack of reality testing involved in an individual's
fantasy life. This is not to say that fantasies are totally unrelated
to an individual's perceptions of his environment, since "the effect of
current concerns on fantasy content is best described as a potentiating
influence, increasing the probability that ideation relevant to the
incentives that are the object of the concern will occur in fantasy"
(Klinger, 1971, p. 353). At the same time the thematic content of a
fantasy segment is only "loosely related" to the individual's learned

16
patterns of overt behavior and, therefore, attempts to predict overt
behavior from fantasy content are risky propositions. The thematic
content of a person's fantasies, according to Klinger (1971), seems to
be more closely associated with that individual's self-concept and the
fantasy themes may actually help to shape part of the self-concept.
Several of the functions or uses of fantasy have been outlined by
psychotherapists and counselors. Kelly (1972) lists several uses for
employing a guided fantasy technique in the counseling of adolescents.
It can be used (1) to encourage relatively freely associated, un¬
censored communication, (2) to alleviate impasses, (3) to encourage
preliminary expression, (4) to focus more deeply, (5) to open new
avenues of insight, and (6) to gain insight into physiological reactions
or complaints. Kelly (1974) also advocates the counselors use of their
own fantasies during sessions with a client in order to "bring a new
dimension of creativity to the counseling relationship" (p. 113). He
also notes that imagery in counseling may help clients to manipulate
their images in creative ways, tap unrealized potentials, and mobilize
the energies of the will. Klinger (1977) mentions the fantasy-like
process in psychoanalytic free association and the use of fantasy in
diagnostic work where a patient's "cognitive maps, semantics, expec¬
tancies, coping repertories and incentive commitments" (p. 228) can be
gleaned from imagery that a patient reports. Klinger goes on to list
the following functions of fantasy for clients: (1) to steer them away
from overtly threatening content, (2) to allow for the rehearsal of
themes which can eventually become a part of the client's inner reality
(e.g., self-worth), (3) to improve mental health by reducing dependency

17
on outside sources of stimulation, fostering patience and improving
coping capabilities, and (4) to prevent a build-up of hostility and
anxiety, strengthen or undermine resistance to temptation and improve
a client's self-communication by increasing awareness of the meaning
of his/her inner life.
A complete therapy system based on the use of fantasy, guided
affective imagery (GAI), was developed by Leuner (1969). The basic
procedure of GAI is for the therapist to induce relaxation in the
client and then to guide the client through 10 standard imaginary situ¬
ations. There is an emphasis on the symbolism of the imagery situations
and on enhancement of the client's emotions. Leuner (1969) goes on to
list five general methods for evoking and interpreting the client's
imagery. GAI is primarily grounded in psychoanalytic theory and can be
viewed as a structured extension of the basic techniques of free associ¬
ation and/or dream interpretation.
Guided fantasy has also been used in career counseling and sex
therapy. Skovholt and Hoenninger (1974) state that guided fantasy can
be used to address sex role conflicts as they relate to career develop¬
ment, and the indirect expression of a client's emotions, goals and
beliefs, which are useful in helping the client to make career decisions.
An extension of this work was developed by Morgan and Skovholt (1977),
who cite research which demonstrated that occupational daydreams are
important in predicting future occupational choice and that "an individ¬
ual 's top occupational daydream tends to be more predictive [of future
occupational choice] than that individual's self-directed search summary
code" (p. 392). Sex therapists have outlined the use of fantasy in the

18
treatment of sexual dysfunctions either through systematic desensitiza¬
tion or the enhancement of sexual arousal (e.g., Kaplan, 1974; Masters &
Johnson, 1970).
The above summary of the theory and functions of general fantasy
provides a frame of reference for the following review of the literature
on heterosexual sexual fantasy. Similar problems exist in formulating
a comprehensive definition of sexual fantasy, devising methods with which
to study an inner experience such as fantasy, and determining the moti¬
vations, beliefs and values embedded within an individual's sex fantasy
themes.
Research on Heterosexual Sexual Fantasy
The area of heterosexual erotic or sexual fantasy is still in its
infancy in terms of systematic, empirical study. The same limitations
that apply to the study of the more general fantasies also pertain to
the study of erotic fantasy. The first obstacle that a sex fantasy
researcher must contend with is to define the phenomenon of erotic
fantasy in a comprehensive manner. Klinger (1971) addressed the issue
of defining fantasy and stated that "such a definition should encompass
the phenomenon of fantasy not only conceptually but also operationally,
or at least provide means for employing operations to distinguish it
from other forms of activity" (p. 7). At the same time, Klinger also
concedes that the lack of theoretical development concerning the concept
of fantasy is necessary at this juncture in time because of the paucity
of research on the topic. He stated,
Lack of theoretical commitment is desirable at this early
stage, since it avoids too greatly constraining the

19
theoretical development which the definition is intended to
foster. In any case scientific taxonomies depend upon the
state of relevant knowledge, and the relevant behavioral
domain has simply been insufficiently mapped to support the
setting or rigorous positive boundaries on the concept of
fantasy. (Klinger, 1971, p. 9)
Current definitions of sexual fantasy range from the simplistic to
the more complex, depending on the experimental sophistication of the
author in question. Faraday (1974) utilizes the term "sex dreams to
denote dreams depicting overt sexual activity or explicit sexual
feelings" (p. 84). A more specific definition with psychoanalytic
leanings is provided by Friday (1980). She states, "a fantasy is a map
of desire, mastery, escape, and obscurations; the navigational path we
invent to steer ourselves between the reefs and shoals of anxiety,
guilt, and inhibition. It is a work of consciousness, but in reaction
to unconscious pressures" (Friday, 1980, p. 1). Inherent in Friday's
definition are some of the possible functions of sex fantasy (e.g.,
escape). Masters and Johnson (1979) define sexual fantasy by developing
two categories within which to classify them. Free-floating fantasies
are "fantasies spontaneously evolved by men and women in response to
sexual feelings or needs without restraints of time or place" (p. 176).
"Short-term fantasies are stimulant mechanisms frequently in response to
imminent sexual opportunity" (p. 176). These fantasies tend to serve an
arousal function.
The most comprehensive definition of sexual fantasy is provided by
Mednick (1977). He defines fantasy in the following manner:
General—"Sexual fantasy": any mental image or imagination
which contains sexual matter and/or is sexually arousing to
the person having the fantasy.

20
I."Daydream" sexual fantasy: any sexual fantasy which is
experienced at any time, day or night (except in
nocturnal dreaming), other than during masturbation or
sexual relations.
II."Masturbatory" sexual fantasy: any sexual fantasy
experienced during masturbation which is sexually
arousing.
III.Sexual fantasy "during sexual relations": any sexual
fantasy experienced during sexual relations with another
person, usually leading up to and/or occurring during
sexual intercourse, (p. 250)
Mednick's definition allows for the classification of sexual fantasies
into three activity categories (e.g., sex with a partner, masturbation,
daydreaming).
Several authors have commented on the functions or uses of sexual
fantasy. These functions can be categorized according to the positive
or negative connotations that they imply concerning an individual's sex
fantasies. The positive functions of sex fantasy include (1) fantasies
as initial rehearsals and vicarious organizations of sociosexual dramas
which incorporate symbolic representations from a particular maturational
stage in which the fantasies occur (Gagnon & Simon, 1973); (2) fantasies
as tools for eliciting or enhancing sexual arousal (Campagna, 1976;
Hariton, 1976; Hariton & Singer, 1974; Masters & Johnson, 1979; Sullivan,
1976); (3) fantasies as safety valves for sexual strivings that could be
harmful to the individual or the intended sex partner (Kronhausen &
Kronhausen, 1969); (4) to recall previous sexual experiences which were
pleasurable (Masters & Johnson, 1979; Slattery, 1976); and (5) fantasy
as a way to introduce variety and playlike stimulation into the sex life
of the individual (Carlson & Coleman, 1977).

21
The negative functions of sexual fantasy include the need (1) to
avoid acknowledgment of wanting sexual intercourse (e.g., rape fantasy)
among women (Hawkins, 1974; Hollender, 1963); (2) to avoid anxiety or
panic during sexual relations (Friday, 1980; Hollender, 1963); (3) to
cope with feelings of guilt (Friday, 1980; Hollender, 1963); (4) to
express women's masochistic nature and their need for submission in
order to suppress their strivings for dominance (Hollender, 1963); and
(5) to serve as a stimulus for conflict (Freud, 1962). It is important
to note that the majority of the negative functions of sexual fantasy
have been attributed to the fantasy life of women.
Some of the literature on sexual fantasy is of a non-empirical
nature and belongs in the category of "pop" psychology. Slattery (1976)
conducted interviews with men of different socioeconomic status over a
five-year period. He divided fantasies into five categories including
(1) heterosexual fantasies, (2) homosexual fantasies, (3) bisexual
fantasies, (4) sadomasochistic fantasies, and (5) assorted fantasies.
Due to the nonsystematic nature of the interviewing and the lack of
insightful commentary, Slattery's work is best considered an addition
to erotic literature. Kronhausen and Kronhausen (1966) completed
"a systematic review of erotic underground literature, both ancient
and modern, and from all parts of the world" (p. xv). Although
they provide some psychoanalytic interpretations for the fantasies that
they found in the literature, the authors do not provide a coherent,
concise scheme for the evaluation or explication of sexual fantasy
content. In a study of men's sexual fantasies, Friday (1980) collected
3,000 letters from the readers of a national men's magazine. Friday's

22
sample is self-admittedly nonrepresentative and the comments that she
makes concerning the contents of the fantasies are speculative and
general in nature.
Several articles on sexual fantasy have been written by clinicians,
drawing on their experiences with patient populations. Hollender (1963)
discussed women's coital fantasies and the implications of fantasizing
on the interpersonal dynamics of sexual intercourse. He hypothesizes
that women have fantasies more often than men do and that the function of
the fantasy is to remove the woman psychologically from both the sexual
act and the person with whom she is engaged. There are two basic themes
inherent in thecontentof women’s fantasies during intercourse, accord¬
ing to Hollender (1963): "(1) anxiety concerning a sadomasochistic
orientation to sexuality and (2) guilt stemming from forbidden feelings,
mainly Oedipal" (p. 87). In 1970 Hollender interviewed eight "normal"
(i.e., nonpatient) women and modified his views by stating that fantasies
during sex may not be signs of neurosis but attempts to resolve broader
conflicts. In a similar view, Hawkins (1974) addressed the issue of
disturbing erotic fantasies. His main thesis is that sexually deprived
individuals may engage in erotic fantasies during masturbation to the
point of having vivid hallucinations. In his scheme, Hawkins views
women's rape fantasies as their way of seeking absolution from the
responsibility of engaging in coitus willingly. Men's fantasies of
physically and sexually overpowering women are representative of re¬
pressed sadistic impulses. Ego-alien fantasies are indications of
shame, disgust, and guilt concerning the individual's sexual longings
(e.g., homosexual fantasies).

23
Erotic fantasies during masturbation can be viewed as indicators of
an individual's deepest sexual desires. Sullivan (1976) views fantasy
as a technique which allows for the expression of "desires unlimited by
reality" (p. 155). He explores several determinants of specific mastur¬
bation fantasies, including (1) an individual's personal experience;
(2) deep stirrings of a nonsexual nature (e.g., women's societal status);
(3) a lack of sexual knowledge; and (4) an individual's own internal
disapproval (e.g., Oedipal fantasies). The task of the psychotherapist
is to help the client by being an understanding listener and to reassure
him/her that the sexual fantasy occurs commonly among "normal" individ¬
uals. A study of the sexual fantasies of men and women was conducted by
Barclay (1973), although no mention is made of the demographic character¬
istics of the subject population or the method of data collection. Sex
differences were predicted due to hormonal differences and the differ¬
ences in socialization between males and females in our culture. Barclay
(1973) states, "in short, our male fantasies were stereotyped in that
they all resembled stories of sex without interpersonal involvement. . .
women are always seductive and forward [in men's fantasies], ready to
have intercourse at any time . . . men's fantasies have in common a
major emphasis on highly visual imagery" (p. 205). Concerning women's
fantasies, Barclay (1973) states, "even though the fantasy was vivid,
the female subjects appeared to be more involved with their own emo¬
tional responses than with the characteristics of their partners" (p. 210).
The implications of the study are that men and women have different moti¬
vations for, and goals in, their sexuality.

24
Although the issues raised in these articles are provocative, the
lack of a systematic approach (e.g., the specification of subject char¬
acteristics, experimental methods and a comprehensive bib!iography)
relegates the hypotheses to the realm of "educated guesses." Studies of
this type have come under criticism because they represent negative
interpretations of sexual fantasy and have assumed a "deficiency state
or conflictual model of the nature of daydreams" (Hariton & Singer,
1974, p. 314).
Fortunately, not all of the studies on sexual fantasy have been of
a nonempirical nature. Klinger (1971) reviews some early studies on
sexual fantasy and proposes different ways to interpret the results.
In 1952, Clark (in Klinger, 1971, pp. 283-285) studied the effects of
sexual arousal on fantasy. Male students were presented with slides on
nude females in three conditions: in a classroom, in the presence of a
male or female representative from the dean's office, and during a
fraternity beer party. Clark's interpretation of the results involved
stating that sexual arousal induces sexual fantasy but that in guilt-
producing situations (e.g., dean's office), the subjects surpress their
sexual fantasies. Klinger (1971) disagreed and pointed out that the
experiment failed to control for several variables (e.g., incentive,
drive stimuli) so that the results are confounded. Leiman and Epstein
conducted a study in 1961 (in Klinger, 1971, pp. 285-287) on male sub¬
jects' attitudes and personal reactions to sexual activity. They con¬
cluded that high sex drive serves to produce sexual fantasy but that
guilt about the high sex drive caused subjects to suppress their sexual
fantasies. Klinger (1971) noted differences in the sexual incentives

25
among the subjects and that this could account for the increases in the
sexual fantasizing of some subjects. The gist of Klinger's comments
reflects the lack of adequate controls within the experimental design.
The more recent studies on the erotic fantasies of heterosexual
males vary from the results of one item embedded within a questionnaire
to longitudinal studies covering a lifetime. Pietropinto and Simenauer
(1977) sampled 4,066 males across the country with a two-part question¬
naire concerning their sexual behaviors and attitudes. One item asked,
"What sort of thoughts do you having during intercourse or masturbation?"
(p. 335). The majority of the responses (36%) fell into three categories
(1) thoughts about the current sex partner (64%); (2) thoughts about a
person other than the current partner (11%); and (3) recalling a past
sexual experience (11%). In a two-part study of male college students,
Campagna (1976) found that erotic masturbatory fantasies appear to be
related to self-reports of sexual activity. He also found that a higher
incidence of masturbation lead to more sexual fantasies during masturba¬
tion. Campagna also found that sexual arousal increased as the fantasy
stimulus progressed from nonerotic stories to sexually vivid stories to
the subjects' self-generated fantasies.
Male fantasy life was measured across a life span by Giambra (1977)
using 218 subjects whose ages ranged from 17 to 91 years of age. He
found that "daydreams about sexual activity and love are most dominant
for the 17-23 year olds then most rapidly drop-off with increasing age
groups so that they largely disappear after the 75th year" (p. 225). In
another study of 277 men who ranged in age from 24 to 91 years, Giambra
and Martin (1977) analyzed the subjects' retrospective reports of sexual

26
daydreaming and their relationship to three behavioral aspects of their
sexual history (i.e., number of coital partners, early marital coitus,
quantity of sexual activity between ages 20 and 40). They found that
the three behavioral aspects of sexual life history were directly related
to current levels of sexual daydreaming. The authors state,
Thus on a comparative basis men aged 24-64 years with more
coital partners and/or greater customary coital frequency
in the first two years of marriage were found to currently
have higher levels of sexual daydreaming. Also, on a
comparative basis, men 45-65 years of age who had greater
overall levels of sexual activity from age 20 to 40 years
were found to have more sexual daydreaming at time of report.
(Giambra & Martin, 1977, p. 504)
Giambra and Martin (1977) state that high or low frequencies of
sexual activity among males tend to persist over a good deal of their
lifetime. The results are seen as supportive of the points of view that
sexual fantasies vary in relation to sexual drive and that sexual day¬
dreams reflect the current concerns of the individual (e.g., Klinger,
1971). Thus the general conclusion can be made that men between the
ages of 17 to 23 years with a high sexual drive and frequent sexual
activity have the highest frequency of erotic daydreams.
There have also been studies focusing exclusively on women's sexual
fantasies. Some of the articles based on clinical impressions (Hawkins,
1974; Hollender, 1963; Sullivan, 1976) or studies with no report of the
experimental method (Barclay, 1973) have already been presented. In a
study of 102 university women students, Brown and Hart (1977) looked at
incidence of sexual fantasy and they related age, sexual experience,
anxiety, independence,and liberal attitudes toward women to the frequency
of sexual fantasy. The results indicated that 99% of the subjects

27
reported having one or more erotic fantasies during the prior 12-month
period. Women in the 22 to 35-year-old age group reported the highest
quantity of sexual fantasy, as did women who were sexually experienced
(i.e., vs. virgins). Brown and Hart (1977) also found that women who
were more anxious, independent, and held more liberal views reported
more sexual fantasies when compared to their counterparts who scored
low on these attributes. Marital status, religious affiliation (authori¬
tarian, nonauthoritarian), introversion and emotionality did not corre¬
late with the quantity of sexual fantasy reported by the subjects.
DeMartino (1974) studied 327 women who were members of Mensa and who
had a mean age of 32 and a mean IQ of 151. He found that 39% of the
respondents reported fantasizing once or more during intercourse and
70% reported fantasizing at some point during masturbation.
The effects of response cues (i.e., erotic, romantic, or neutral)
and the level of sex guilt on the erotic fantasies of women were studied
by Moreault and Follingstad (1978). Their findings indicate that
(1) 98% of the sample reported at least one sexual fantasy and all sub¬
jects indicated having had at least two fantasy themes in their past
sexual fantasies; (2) "low sex guilt (LSG) subjects demonstrated less
sexual inhibition than high sex guilt (HSG) subjects in terms of sexual
explicitness, expressiveness, and responsiveness to stimuli; for total
number of fantasies; for variety of sex acts; for variety of content;
and for number of fantasy themes checked" (p. 1390); (3) HSG subjects
reported more embarrassment and less vivid fantasies than did the LSG
subjects; (4) in the response cue condition subjects exposed to erotic

28
response cues reported longer fantasies, more explicit fantasies (i.e.,
number of sex acts and sex organs), a greater degree of physiological
arousal. However LSG and HSG subjects did not differ on levels of
physiological arousal and the number of fantasies and number of themes
checked were not affected by the experimental response cues. Those
results were seen as supportive of Mosher's (1973) data that sex guilt
subjects do not differ significantly in self-reported sexual arousal
and that sexual arousal during fantasy production seems to be a function
of the sexual explictness of the stimuli versus the sex guilt of the
subject. The authors conclude that "sexual fantasy may be more
accurately viewed as being under stimulus control rather than as a
stable trait" (Moreault & Follingstad, 1978, p. 1392).
Hariton and Singer (1974) studied 141 suburban housewives (age
range 25-54 years) by using a questionnaire that elicited information
on "general daydreaming tendencies, fantasies, and other ideation
during coitus, sexual patterns, marital adjustment" (p. 313). Measures
of intelligence, personality, and personal adjustment were also included
in the study. The results indicated that (1) 65% of the subjects
reported having sexual fantasies at "least some of the time" during
coitus and 37% had fantasies "very often" during sexual intercourse;
(2) 65% of the sample reported moderate to high levels of fantasy; and
(3) the three most common sex fantasy themes in terms of frequency and
recurrence were (a) thoughts of an imaginary lover (56%), (b) being over¬
powered or forced to surrender by someone (48.9%), and (c) pretending to
do something wicked and forbidden (49.6%). A factor analysis of the
items in the questionnaire was performed in order to test three models

29
of sexual fantasy. The models include fantasy as a drive-reduction
mechanism, fantasy as an adaptive mechanism, and fantasy as a personality-
cognitive process which is an extension of the individual's overall per¬
sonality. The results were seen as supporting the adaptive and person¬
ality-cognitive models, but not the drive-reduction model.
The sexual fantasies of males and females have been studied in order
to determine if any differences exist and, if so, in what directions and
on what variables? In a study of sex differences in daydreaming, Wagman
(1967) distributed a fantasy questionnaire to 105 male and 101 female
college students. Of the 24 daydream categories, only one category
pertained to sexual fantasies, with one other category for sexually
"perverse" fantasies. He found that men exceeded women in the proportion
of daydreaming about sexual and aggressive themes. No sex difference was
found for the sexually "perverse" theme. Gelles (1975) looked at the
relationship of sex and violence in the fantasy production of 40 male and
40 female college students, interpreting TAT responses collected from
students in 1959 by Lindzey and Silverman (in Gelles, 1975). Men and
women did not differ in the production of sexual imagery, but men with
higher levels of sexual imagery also tended to produce more violent
imagery than did the women.
Carlson and Coleman (1977) investigated the possible influences of
past fantasy and sexual experience on the induced sexual fantasies of 73
male and 123 female subjects. They found that (1) males had signifi¬
cantly higher scores on sexual media experience and current sexual
interest scale when compared to women; (2) women had significantly higher
scores on sexual fantasy complexity and sexual arousal in fantasy scales;

30
(3) measures of general daydreaming experience, sexual fantasy experience,
and sexual interest produced greater richness in the induced fantasies of
subjects who had high scores on these variables; and (4) men with high sex
guilt experienced less richness in their induced fantasies, but there was
no such effect on the richness of the women's fantasies.
The masturbation fantasies of married couples and the sexual
fantasies of each group of men and women (i.e., 38 Danish couples) were
examined by Hesselland (1976) utilizing an interview technique. He found
that men reported a higher occurrence of erotic fantasies than did the
women. Men also seem to have more fantasies involving several persons
(37.5%) than did women (7.1%). Women (42.8%) had fantasies exclusively
about coitus with a spouse more often when compared to men (25%).
Husselland interprets the results as indicating that masturbation and
sexual fantasies are coital supplements for men but are coital substitutes
for women because women were more satisfied with the intercourse frequency
in the relationship and because they masturbated less often than the men.
Another study on masturbatory fantasies required the subjects (i.e., 96
males, 102 females) to view an explicitly sexual film of either a man or
a woman masturbating to orgasm and then to write fantasies concerning the
protagonist in the film. Abramson and Mosher (1979) found that women
could positively identify with a same-sex protagonist while the men could
not. This finding was related to a Mosher and Abramson (1977) finding
that both males and females can be sexually aroused by a female protagon¬
ist, whereas only women were aroused by a film of a male protagonist.
The authors state that sex guilt and negative attitudes toward masturba¬
tion can account for the variability in the subject's attributions of

31
the protagonist's affective tone, motive for masturbation, predicted
future masturbation, feelings about orgasm, and mood as reflected in
their written fantasies, as well as the amount of erotic elaboration
in the content of the subject's written fantasies.
Mednick (1977) proposed a definition of sexual fantasy and divided
the study of erotic fantasies into three conditions under which the
fantasies occur: daydream,masturbatory, and during sexual relations.
In a study of 48 male and 45 female college students, narrative descrip¬
tions of sexual fantasies were elicited through the administration of a
sexual fantasy questionnaire. Mednick (1977) completed an inductive
content analysis of the subjects' written sexual fantasies and derived
the following categories: "(1) respondent as recipient; (2) sexual
object(s) as recipient; (3) respondent as both recipient and object of
sexual activity; (4) no sexual fantasy reported; (5) insufficient data;
(6) sexual fantasies referencing the past" (p. 250). He found that
significantly more females imagined themselves to be the recipients of
sexual activity from a sexual object (category 1), whereas, significantly
more males fantasized the sexual object as the recipient of their sexual
activity (category 2), within the "daydream" and "sexual relations"
fantasy conditions. For the "masturbatory" sexual fantasy condition,
marginal tendencies toward reversal of the above gender pattern were
obtained (i.e., category 2 for females, category 1 for males).
A few studies have investigated the effects of psychological
androgyny and gender on the sexual fantasies of males and females. Bern
(1974) hypothesized that strongly sex-typed individuals, as determined
by a high score on the Bern Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI) dimensions of

32
masculinity or feminity, may be limited in the range of behaviors that
they would exhibit in varying situations. According to Bern (1974),
Thus, whereas a narrowly masculine self-concept might inhibit
behaviors that are stereotyped as feminine, and a narrowly
feminine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are
stereotyped as masculine, a mixed, or androgynous, self-
concept might allow an individual to freely engage in both
"masculine" and "feminine" behaviors, (p. 155)
The question arises as to whether the effects of sex-role affect sexual
fantasy and, if so, whether they override the effects of gender on sexual
fantasy.
Bernardi (1977) investigated the effects of psychological androgyny
and gender on the sexual fantasies and experiences of 36 male and 36 female
college students. The subjects were given the BSRI, viewed slides of a
partially-clad man and woman, and wrote an imaginative story about the
individuals portrayed. The results supported the stereotyped notion that
men were perceived as more masculine and less feminine than women, within
the heterosexual behavior portrayed in the subject's sexual fantasies.
No support was found for the androgynous conception of sex-role and no
significant relationship was found between sex-role orientation and
gender for the subject's reported sexual experiences.
Another study on the effects of sex-role identity on the sexual
fantasies of male (N=83) and female (N=139) college students was con¬
ducted by Pape (1980). The BSRI was utilized to categorize the subjects
into three sex-role categories: sex-typed, androgynous and undifferenti¬
ated. A sexual fantasy questionnaire (SFQ) was designed (see Methods
section and Appendix B) employing Mednick's (1977) three conditions of
sexual fantasy (i.e., daydream, masturbatory, sex with partner), with

33
22 sexual fantasy themes within each condition. Measures of social
desirability and sexual experience were also elicited from the subjects
(Ss). Statistical analyses of the male/female differences yielded the
following results: (1) males reported a significantly higher incidence
and a greater variety of fantasies, when compared to women, in the sex
with a partner and daydreaming conditions; (2) males reported higher
frequencies of sexual fantasy when compared to women on almost all of
the 22 sexual fantasy themes when sex differences occurred; and (3)
males engaged more in sex with a partner and masturbation when compared
to females (e.g., 84% and 82% for males, 72% and 63% for females,
respectively). No significant differences were found for (1) sex dif¬
ferences on the masturbation scale, (2) overall incidence of erotic
fantasies for any of the three conditions, and (3) the main effect of
sex-role in the prediction of sexual fantasy behavior. Pape (1980)
also ranked the sexual fantasy themes during the three fantasy condi¬
tions for males (see Table 1) and for females (see Table 2).
The studies on sex differences indicate that gender, but not sex-
role identity, has an effect on the sex fantasy behavior of individuals.
If this hypothesis holds true, then one wonders about the effects of
sexual orientation on the sexual fantasy behavior of individuals within
each gender category (i.e., heterosexual vs. homosexual males, hetero¬
sexual vs. homosexual females). A review of the research on homosexuality
and homosexual erotic fantasy will be presented in the next section.

34
TABLE 1
TOP-RANKED SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES DURING SEX WITH
A PARTNER, MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING
Sex with a Partner
Masturbation
Daydreaming
(n=52)
MALES
(n=62)
(n=67)
Thinking about
current partner
Person other than
current partner
Person other than
current partner
Receiving oral-
genital contact
Receiving oral-
genital contact
Receiving oral-
genital contact
Giving oral-
genital contact
Thinking about
current partner
Thinking about
current partner
Being in a differ¬
ent setting
Reliving a previous
experience
Giving oral-genital
contact
Sex with an irre-
sistably sexy
person
Giving oral-genital
contact
Reliving a previous
experience
NOTE: From "Sex Role Identity and Sexual Fantasy," by N. Pape,
Master's Thesis, University of South Florida, 1980.

35
TABLE 2
TOP-RANKED SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES DURING SEX WITH
A PARTNER, MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING
Sex with a Partner
Masturbation
Daydreaming
(n=63)
FEMALES
(n=58)
(n=99)
Thinking about
current partner
Thinking about
current partner
Thinking about
current partner
Receiving oral-
genital contact
Receiving oral-
genital contact
Reliving a previous
experience
Being in a differ¬
ent setting
Being in a differ¬
ent setting
Being in a differ¬
ent setting
Giving oral-genital
contact
Reliving a previous
experience
Person other than
current partner
Person other than
current partner
Giving oral-genital
contact
Receiving oral-
genital contact
NOTE: From "Sex Role Identity and Sexual Fantasy," by N. Pape,
Master's Thesis, University of South Florida, 1980.

36
Research on Homosexuality and
Homosexual Sexual Fantasy
A review of the theory and general research on the topic of homo¬
sexuality is necessary in order to provide a context in which to view
the current research on homosexual fantasy, or the lack of it. Research
on homosexual individuals up until the 1960's focused mainly on clinical
populations and the psychopathological nature of the homosexual person¬
ality (e.g., Bergler, 1956; Fenichel, 1945). These studies reflect
Morin's (1977) criticism of a heterosexual bias in psychological research
on homosexuality. This bias is defined as a belief system that hetero¬
sexuality is superior to and/or more "natural" than homosexuality. He
argues that if homosexuality were to be reconceptualized as a valid
option for an adult lifestyle, changes in the questions formulated, the
data collected, and the interpretations offered would be forthcoming
with respect to research on homosexuality.
Generally the etiological explanations for homosexuality fit into
one of the three following categories: biological, psychoanalytic, or
social learning. Acosta (1975) reviewed the literature on the etiology
and treatment of homosexuality. The biological basis for homosexuality
postulates that there are genetic, hormonal, or chromosomal factors
that contribute to the development of a homosexual individual. Accord¬
ing to Acosta (1975), "no substantial evidence" has been found to sup¬
port the biological basis for the etiology of homosexuality. The
psychoanalytic school focuses on faulty parent-child interactions as
the basis for homosexuality. The basic tenet to this theory is that
the child fails to resolve the Oedipal complex successfully and does

37
not undergo "anaclitic" and "defensive" identification (Fenichel, 1945).
A neurotic fear of heterosexuality occurs in the individual, who then
turns to homosexuality for need gratification. The disturbed relation¬
ship is between mother and child with mother-fixation for the males and
mother-hatred for females. Acosta (1975) sums up the current status of
the psychoanalytic theory with the statement, "Unfortunately, there are
few comprehensive empirical studies on homosexuals which test psycho¬
analytic hypotheses, and in general these suffer from methodological
deficiencies" (p. 15).
Social learning theory postulates that both heterosexual and homo¬
sexual individuals learn their sexual preferences through social
reinforcements and conditioning patterns (Bandura, 1969). The child
develops the appropriate sex-typed behaviors and gender identity through
observational learning and/or modeling processes, either from their
parents or other adult and peer models. Bandura (1969) also points out
that direct reinforcement is not always necessary in order for a child
to learn appropriate sex-typed behaviors, the attractiveness of a model
may be enough. Although Acosta (1975) indicates that social learning
theory presents the most consistent evidence, he cites the failure of
empirical evidence which demonstrates a direct link between the child¬
hood learning of gender identity and sex-typed behaviors and the later
development of homosexuality.
Societal attitudes toward homosexuality have been negative as a
perusal of pertinent attitudinal research will indicate (e.g., Glassner
& Owen, 1976; Nyberg & Alston, 1976-77; Turnbull & Brown, 1977).
G. Wienberg (1973) attributes the negativity to homophobia, which he

38
defines as "the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals" (p. 4).
MacDonald (1976) argues that anxiety, and not fear, is a more valid term
for the effects of homophobia. He lists some of the beliefs underpinning
homophobia, such as sex is only for procreation; only heterosexual
activity is "natural"; homosexuals are child abusers; promiscuity is
characteristic of homosexual relationships; and the need to maintain
behavioral differences between the sexes. Several authors have stated
that therapists and counselors may share society's negative attitudes
toward homosexuality and homosexual clients (e.g., Davidson, 1976;
Kramer, Wiggers,& Zimpfer, 1975; Money, 1977; G. Wienberg, 1973; M. Wien-
berg, 1970). Studies on the attitudes of therapists toward homosexuals
(e.g., Davidson & Wilson, 1973; Fort, Steiner,& Conrad, 1971; Morris,
1973) tend to reflect both positive and negative attitudes, but social
desirability effects were not controlled for in these studies. Conse¬
quently, therapists may hold public attitudes which are positive and
private attitudes which are negative.
The treatment strategies employed in attempts to "reorient" or
change the sexual preference of homosexual individuals also tend to
reflect the negative conceptualizations the psychoanalytic and behav¬
ioristic practitioners hold concerning homosexuality (i.e., as a
pathological condition). In their efforts to change a homosexual
client's sexual orientation several behavior therapists have employed
techniques such as systematic desensitization, aversive conditioning,
classical conditioning, and covert sensitization (e.g., Bancroft, 1969;
Feldman & MacCulloch, 1971; Kraft, 1967; McConageny, 1971; Stevenson &
Wolpe, 1960). Severe aversive agents, including electric shock and

39
emetics, have been included in the reorientation of homosexuals (Acosta,
1975; G. Wienberg, 1973). Psychoanalytic efforts to reorient homo¬
sexuals through the use of insights and catharsis, while not severe in
nature, tend to connote that the patient is neurotic. In his review of
the studies attempting to reorient homosexuals, Acosta (1975) points to
poor success rates (e.g., Conrad & Wincze, 1973; Feldman & MacCulloch,
1971) and the diversity of individuals within the homosexual community,
and cautions against believing claims of high success rates without
longitudinal evidence.
Several authors have viewed homosexuality as a viable lifestyle
and/or refuted the claim that homosexuality is automatically indicative
of psychopathology (e.g., Bell, 1976; Churchill, 1967; Hoffman, 1968;
Hooker, 1965; Money, 1977; G. Weinberg, 1973; M. Weinberg, 1970; Wein¬
berg & Williams, 1974). Several current studies tend to support this
view and to refute some of the stereotypes about homosexuals. Haynes
and Oziel (1976) found that individuals with homosexual experiences
(among college students) had a similar amount of heterosexual contacts
and did manifest more anxiety or guilt about their sexual behavior than
did their nonexperienced counterparts. In a study of gay males, Harry
(1976-77) found that, contrary to the stereotype, both the "active" and
"passive" (i.e., inserter-insertee) sexual roles were preferred by a
majority of their homosexual subjects. The sexual behavior of lesbians
was found to be influenced more by being a woman (i.e., gender) than by
being a homosexual (i.e., sexual orientation) in a study by Schafer (1977).
Homosexual family relationships have also been investigated with
some positive results. Weeks, Derdeyn, and Langman (1975) found that the

40
sexual conflicts of homosexual parents, as expressed in attitudes and
behavior toward their children, did not differ from those of hetero¬
sexual parents who are conflicted sexually. Townes, Ferguson, and
Gillam (1976) suggest that variations in sexual lifestyle are attribut¬
able to different facets of psychological sex, rather than to familial
influences in particular. Studies that report the traditional view of
negative familial influences in the etiology of homosexuality (e.g.,
Gundlach & Bernard, 1967; Snortum, Gillespie, Marshall, McLaughlin, &
Mosberg, 1969) have been criticized for poor methodology and overlook¬
ing important variables (e.g., Acosta, 1975; G. Wienberg, 1973;
Wrightsman, 1977). Sex-role disturbances, as a result of faulty
familial modeling (e.g., Rekers & Lovaas, 1974; Rekers, Hortensia,&
Benson, 1 977; Rekers, Lovaas, & Benson, 1974), are thought to be at the
root of a homosexual orientation. Ross (1975) found conflicting
results which suggest that sex-role has no necessary correlation to
sexual orientation.
The ultimate vindication of homosexuality may be reflected in its
exclusion, as a diagnostic category, from the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders (DMS III) of the American Psychiatric Associ-
tion. The above literature tends to reflect that homosexuals may not be
that different from their heterosexual counterparts, except for sexual
preference and the possible effects of societal disapproval and discrim¬
ination.
Although actual sexual behavior may not directly influence the
content of sexual fantasy (Klinger, 1971), there are studies indicating
that individuals with high levels of sexual activity fantasize more

41
often than individuals who report lower levels of sexual activity (i.e.,
Brown & Hart, 1977; Campagna, 1976; Carlson & Coleman, 1977; Giambra &
Martin, 1977; Hessellund, 1976). Therefore a comparison of heterosexual
and homosexual sexual activity frequency will be presented below:
1. Masturbation. The incidence of at least one masturbatory epi¬
sode ranges from 89% (Gagnon & Simon, 1973) to 95.4% (Finger, 1975) for
heterosexual males (HM). The incidence for heterosexual females (HF)
ranged from 40% (Gagnon & Simon, 1973) to 63% (Hunt, 1976). The fre¬
quency of masturbation episodes ranged from 52 per year (Hunt, 1976) to
49 per year (Kinsey et al., 1948) for HMs and from 37 per year (Hunt,
1976) to 21 per year (Kinsey et al., 1953) for HFs. The incidence of at
least one masturbatory episode is 99% (Jay & Young, 1979) for homosexual
males (GM) and 94% (Jay & Young, 1979) for homosexual females (GF). The
frequency of masturbatory episodes is at least once per month for 93%
and once per week for 80% of the GMs, and at least once per month for
80% and once per week for 49% of the GFs (Jay & Young, 1979).
2. Oral sex (mouth-genital contact). From 45% (Kinsey et al.,
1948) to 66% (Hunt, 1976) of the HMs had engaged in oral sex at least
once, compared to from 58% (Kinsey et al., 1953) to 72% (Hunt, 1976) of
the HFs. Comparatively, 99.5% of the GMs had engaged in oral sex at
least once, as had 94.5% of the GFs (Jay & Young, 1979).
3. Anal sex. Kinsey et al. (1948) found the incidence so low
that no figures were provided. Hunt (1976) found that 16% of the HMs
and 16% of the HFs had tried anal intercourse at least once, and that
9% of the HMs and 6% of the HFs had used the technique occasionally in
the past year. For the GMs, 91% had engaged in anal intercourse at

42
least once and 65% use the technique somewhat frequently (Jay & Young,
1979). There are no figures available for GFs, since they would need
to use an artificial device to engage in this activity and frequencies
are low.
4. Homosexual experiences. The incidence of at least one homo¬
sexual experience ranges from 13.7% (Finger, 1975) to 37% (Kinsey et al.,
1948) for HMs, and from 20% (Hunt, 1976) to 28% (Kinsey et al., 1953) for
HFs. The incidence of "at least one" heterosexual experience is 66% for
GMs and 84% for GFs (Jay & Young, 1979).
The above figures show that (1) homosexual and heterosexual men
and women masturbate with approximately the same frequency; (2) almost
all of the GMs and GFs had engaged in oral sex versus a little over one-
half of the HMs and three-quarters of the HFs; (3) a majority of the gay
men had engaged in and use anal intercourse "somewhat frequently" versus
less than 20% of the HMs and HFs, in either category. Pietropinto and
Simenauer (1977) report that only 4.2% of their samples of HMs wanted
to engage in anal intercourse more often; and (4) GMs were almost twice
as likely to have experienced a heterosexual sex act as were the HMs to
have experienced a homosexual encounter. For the women, GFs were
almost three times as likely to have had a heterosexual encounter as
were the HFs to have had a homosexual sexual experience.
The literature on homosexual erotic fantasy is sparse and much of
it is of a nonempirical nature. Both Friday (1980) and Slattery (1976)
include a chapter on male homosexual fantasies, but neither one provides
any insight into the function, frequency, or themes of the fantasy
material. Kronhausen and Kronhausen (1969) provided psychoanalytic

43
interpretations for the homosexual fantasies that they discovered in
their review of erotic literature. Freud's (1962) basic position of
phantasies as the precursors of neurosis is reflected in his statement
that,
The unconscious mental life of all neurotics (without exception)
shows inverted impulses, fixation of their libido upon persons
of their own sex. It would be impossible without deep discus¬
sion to give any adequate appreciation of the importance of
this factor in determining the form taken by the symptoms of
the illness. I can only insist that an unconscious tendency
to inversion [homosexuality] is never absent and is of particu¬
lar value in throwing light upon the hysteria of men. (p. 32)
He claimed that inverts repressed their heterosexual desires and "trans¬
posed" those sexual desires onto men.
Homosexual fantasies may make the homosexual alternative more
viable for young boys according to Tripp (1975). The excitement gener¬
ated by the fantasies, coupled with masturbation and the self-observa¬
tion of his genitals, may serve to build an association between
"maleness, male genitalia, and all that is sexually valuable and
exciting" (Tripp, 1975, p. 77). According to Tripp,
These associations amount to an eroticism which is "ready" to
extend itself to other male attributes, particularly to those
of a later same-sex partner. This associative pattern some¬
times manages to preempt heterosexual interests, not only by
coming first, but by vitalizing a nearby thought-chain most
boys entertain to some extent: that since girls have no
penis, they are sexless and thus sexually uninteresting.
(1975, p. 77)
Part of his theory seems to be the complement to "penis envy" in girls,
that is, that boys devalue girls due to their lack of a penis.
In a different view, Gagnon and Simon (1973) note that homosexual
experiences in early adolescence result from curiosity, mutual instruc¬
tion between friends, and the influence of slightly older males, but

44
these experiences are not "integrated into the mainstream" of the
individual's development. They conceptualize sexual fantasies as
reflections of an individual's sexual scripts. One possible example
of the above is an adult homosexual's fantasies representing "the man¬
agement of dominance or aggression in nonsexual spheres of life, or the
management of ideologies and moralities of social mobility [and that
these], may be the underlying and organizing sources of fantasies whose
sexual content provides an accessible and powerful imagery through
which these other social tensions may be vicariously acted upon" (Gagnon
& Simon, 1973, p. 272). This point of view reflects the concept of
fantasies as symbolic representations of the individual's current con¬
cerns .
As stated previously, Masters and Johnson (1979) categorized sexual
fantasies into either "free-floating" (i.e., those in response to sexual
feelings or needs) or "short-term" (i.e., those employed as short-term,
stimulative mechanisms) variations. They studied the sexual fantasy
patterns of male heterosexuals (HM), homosexuals (GM), and ambisexuals,
as well as female heterosexuals (HF), homosexuals (GF), and ambisexuals
(e.g., N = 30 for each group except ambisexuals). The study was con¬
ducted from 1957 to 1970 using volunteers from a pool of sexually func¬
tional volunteers representing each category, at the Masters and Johnson
Institute in St. Louis, Missouri. Only the data from the HM, GM, HF and
GF groups will be reported here in the interest of brevity.
The sexual fantasy themes of HMs, listed by incidence, were
"(1) replacement of established partner; (2) forced sexual encounter;
(3) observation of sexual activity; (4) cross-preference [homosexual]

45
encounters; (5) group sex-experiences" (Masters & Johnson, 1979, p.178).
The replacement partners were usually well known to the fantasizing HM
and were always willing to comply. The forced sexual encounters involved
forcing a woman who was known to the individual or being forced to have
sex by a group of unidentified women. Fantasies involving the observa¬
tion of the individual's sexual behavior by a group of people was tied
to the research team's actual observations of the HM subject's sexual
activity, and may not obtain for nonclinical populations in more
"natural" settings. These fantasies were of the short-term variety and
as they lost their stimulation value over time, the HMs reverted to rape
fantasies for stimulation effects. The homosexual activity fantasies
were generally confined to physical attributes (e.g., facial attrac¬
tiveness, muscular development, penile erection, shape of buttocks);
free-floating in nature, and involved with fellatio as the preferred
activity. The group sex fantasies of HMs were free-floating and involved
mixed groups of faceless individuals, with women's breasts and buttocks
as focal points and women as the receptors of sexual activity. The final
category involved the current partner, although these were free-floating
and never of the short-term stimulative variety. The familiarity of
current partners may serve to undermine their stimulative value in HMs
sexual fantasies.
For the GMS, the incidence of sexual fantasy themes were as follows:
"(1) imagery of sexual anatomy; (2) forced sexual encounters; (3) cross¬
preference encounters; (4) idyllic encounters with unknown men; (5) group
sex experiences" (Masters & Johnson, 1979, p. 178). The GMs reported a
higher incidence of free-floating fantasy than did the HMs. The

46
fantasies involving sexual anatomy imagery concentrated on the penis and
buttocks of males and, to a lesser extent, on their shoulders and facial
characteristics. The GMs fantasies also contained more violence than
those of the HMs. The forced sex fantasies were free-floating and
involved almost as many male victims as there were female victims. The
GMs almost always took the role of rapist and imagined the rape to be
noxious to the "rapee," who was usually restrained and forced into
sexual submission by whippings or beatings. This finding appears to
reflect some repressed hostility and/or sadism within the GM subject
pool and can be taken as support for the higher incidence of violence
in male sexual fantasy (e.g., Gelles, 1975). The high incidence of
cross-preference (heterosexual) relationships among the GMs involved
forced sexual participation of a psychosocial versus physical origin
(e.g., pressure from a dominant older woman or the seduction of a
resisting younger woman). These fantasies were free-floating in nature
and when they involved a woman known to the subject, forced sexual
participation was replaced by sexual curiosity or anticipated pleasure.
Some theorists might interpret the above as an indication of GMs
hostility toward and fear of women. An equally tenable hypothesis would
involve rebellion and anger against the pressures that society imposes
on GMs to conform and engage in "normal" heterosexual activity, expressed
through forced sexuality in fantasy (e.g., G. Wienberg, 1973), especially
since GFs had similar cross-sex fantasies.
Fantasies of idealized sexual encounters were in the free-floating
category and involved one-time chance encounters, on a specific occasion,
with entertainers or men seen in public places. The group sex fantasies

47
were of the short-term variety and involved observing rather than par¬
ticipating in a mixed group sexual encounter. The idealized sexual
encounters parallel HM fantasies of unknown women who grant them sexual
favors. The difference in group sex fantasies between GMs and HMs
involves observation versus participation and short-term stimulation
versus free-floating indicators of a desired experience, respectively.
These differences may be a reflection of the varying incidence rates of
group sex among the HMs and the GMs. Hunt (1976) reports that 40% of
his HM subjects had experienced some sort of group sex at least once,
while 14% of Pietropinto and Simenauers (1977) HM subjects indicated
that they would like to have sex with more than one woman. In contrast,
Jay and Young (1979) found that 58% of their GM sample had engaged in
group sex and that 27% engage in group sex on a "somewhat infrequent"
basis. In terms of "threesomes," 76% of the GMs had participated at
least once and 36% engage in this activity somewhat infrequently. There
appear to be more opportunities for group sex in the homosexual community
and this may lead to less free-floating, desire-based fantasies and more
short-term, curiosity-based fantasies of mixed (heterosexual and homo¬
sexual) sexual activity.
Since this study involves a comparison of HM and GM sexual fantasy,
only a summary of the HF and GF fantasy categories will be presented.
Interested readers should consult Masters and Johnson (1979) for greater
detail. The top-ranked sexual fantasies of HFs were as follows:
"(1) replacement of established partner; (2) forced sexual encounter;
(3) observation of sexual activity; (4) idyllic encounters with unknown
men; (5) cross-preference encounters" (p. 178). The GFs fantasized

48
about "(1) forced sexual encounters; (2) idyllic encounter with estab¬
lished partner; (3) cross-preference encounters; (4) recall of past
sexual experience; (5) sadistic imagery" (p. 178). In general, HF and
GF subjects reported more active sexual patterning than did their HM
and GM counterparts. The homosexual subjects described more active and
diverse sexual fantasy patterns in comparison to the heterosexual group.
The limitations of the Masters and Johnson (1979) study include
(1) the use of nonrandomly selected subject population; (2) the lack
of statistical analysis of the data; and (3) the lack of controls for
experimentor bias. The data are of value in that they provide some
indicators of heterosexual and homosexual fantasy incidence and areas of
content.
Storms (1980) investigated the relationship of sex-role orientation
and erotic orientation to the sexual orientation of 86 male and 99 female
subjects. Demographic data were collected (e.g., sex, age) and a self¬
rating of the subjects' sexual orientation was elicited on Kinsey's et
al. (1948) 7-point scale. The subjects were also asked to assign them¬
selves to a common sexual category, either "straight" (heterosexual),
"gay" (homosexual) or "bisexual." Sex role orientation refers to an
individual's masculinity or feminity, as measured by Spence and Helmreich's
(1978) Personal Attributes Questionnaire (PAQ), in this study. Erotic
orientation is defined as the erotic responses of an individual within
a particular sexual orientation. Storms (1980) developed the Erotic
Response and Orientation Scale (EROS) in order to measure the subject's
erotic fantasy experiences. EROS contains two subscales: (1) a
gynoerotic scale eliciting fantasies with women as the sexual object; and

49
(2) an androerotic scale eliciting fantasies with men as the sexual
object (see Methods section and Appendix A).
The results of Storms' (1980) study did not support the hypotheses
"that homosexual men are less masculine and/or more feminine and that
homosexual women are more masculine and/or less feminine than their
heterosexual counterparts" (p. 786). These were hypotheses based on
Freudian theory which postulated that sex-role identity had a direct
effect on sexual orientation (e.g., sexual attraction toward women was
associated with a masculine sex role orientation). In terms of sexual
fantasy several findings were significant: "(1) homosexuals have more
fantasies about their own sex and fewer fantasies about the opposite sex
than heterosexuals; (2) homosexual men reported significantly more
androerotic fantasy and less gynoerotic fantasy than heterosexual men;
(3) homosexual women reported significantly more gynoerotic fantasy and
less androerotic fantasy than heterosexual women did; (4) homosexual men
and women reported higher levels of fantasy about the opposite sex than
heterosexuals reported about the same sex" (Storms, 1980, p. 788).
Storms (1980) also proposed reconceptualizing Kinsey's (1948) uni¬
dimensional model of sexual orientation into a two-dimensional model
where an individual's homoerotic (homosexual) and heteroerotic (hetero¬
sexual) are "separate, orthogonal erotic dimensions rather than opposite
extremes of a single, bipolar dimension." Along with the above results,
the two-dimensional model predicts that "bisexuals will report as much
heteroerotic fantasy as heterosexuals and as much homoerotic fantasy as
homosexuals" (p. 786). The hypothesis was supported in that for same-sex
fantasies, bisexuals scored higher than heterosexuals and were

50
indistinguishable from homosexuals. For opposite-sex fantasies, bisexuals
were identical to heterosexuals and higher than homosexuals. In summation
bisexuals scored high on both the gynoerotic (female object) and andro-
erotic (male object) scales. The implications of this study are that sex-
role identity is not a good predictor of sexual preference or of sex
fantasy patterns, which tend to confirm the results of Bernardi (1977) and
Pape (1980). Erotic orientation, on the other hand, appears to be a good
predictor of the level of sex fantasy involving homoerotic and hetero¬
erotic content within the homosexual and heterosexual populations. In
conjunction with the above conclusions, several studies reflect the strong
influence of gender in the fantasy content of individuals (i.e., Abramson
& Mosher, 1979; Bernardi, 1977; Carlson & Coleman, 1977; Gelles, 1975;
Mednick, 1977; Pape, 1980). This leads to the possibility that gender
may override sexual preference in influencing some of the content of an
individual's sexual fantasies.
In a massive study of male and female homosexual lifestyles, Jay and
Young (1979) collected data through questionnaires sent out by mail and
also recruited subjects through gay organizations, periodicals, and indi¬
viduals. The demographic data on the subjects are as follows: (1) the
age of the respondents ranged from 14 to 81 years; (2) the subjects were
from all 50 of the United States and Canada; (3) all of the major ethnic
or racial groups were represented (e.g., Black, Oriental, Spanish Ameri¬
can, American Indian, Caucasian); (4) all religious affiliations were
represented; (5) all educational levels were represented (e.g., grade
school through graduate degree). A total of 4,329 homosexual males (GM)
and 962 homosexual females (GF) participated in the survey.

51
In response to items concerning the sexual fantasies of the GMs,
the following results were obtained: (1) 82% of the respondents had
fantasized during sex with a partner at "least once" and 47% did so
"somewhat frequently"; (2) the GMs were divided about their feelings
toward fantasy with a sex partner, with 56% expressing positive feelings
and 17% expressing negative feelings; (3) fantasy during masturbation
was utilized "at least once" by 98% of the GMs and 92% reported fanta¬
sizing "somewhat frequently" during masturbation; and (4) an overwhelm¬
ing majority of the GM respondents (91%) felt positive about fantasizing
while masturbating. The fantasy categories of the respondents included
recalling past experiences, extending a nonsexual real experience into a
sexual one, imagining sex with celebrities and pornography stars,
memories of boyhood loves, special settings, body parts, group sex,
incest, dominance and submission (including rape and sadomasochistic
activities) and various uncatalogued themes. Unfortunately Jay and
Young (1979) do not provide any indication of the frequency with which
each fantasy theme is used by the GMs in the sample.
The GF respondents reported the following incidence rates of, and
attitudes toward, erotic fantasy: (1) fantasy was used during sex with a
partner "at least once" by 84% of the GFs and 41% fantasized"somewhat
frequently" during sexual activity; (2) the GFs were also divided about
their attitudes toward fantasy during sex with 56% feeling positive and
21% feeling negative about it; (3) concerning the use of fantasy during
masturbation, 92% of the GFs had used it "at least once" and 77% used it
"somewhat frequently"; and (4) a large proportion of the respondents
(86%) felt positive about fantasy during masturbation. Fantasy theme

52
categories for the GFs included: celebrities; current, past and "future"
lovers; observation of others having sex, sadomasochistic and rape
fantasies; exhibitionistic fantasies, fantasies about sex with men and
other miscellaneous fantasies.
It appears from the above data that a high percentage of gay indi¬
viduals fantasize during masturbation and feel positive about it. A
little less than half of the gay respondents fantasize during sex with a
partner and feel positive about it. The individuals who do not report
fantasies or feel negative about their use remain a mystery, since there
is no way to determine why they abstain or feel the way that they do.
Sexual fantasies can be considered one type of indicator of the
meaning of sexual experience. The content of the various themes can be
related to sexual scripts (Gagnon & Simon, 1973), reflections of
repressed desires (Hawkins, 1974), self-concept (Klinger, 1971), dominance-
submission (Hollender, 1963), sex guilt (Moreault & Follingstad, 1978),
adaptation (Hariton & Singer, 1974), violence (Gelles, 1975), and sexual
activity preferences (Giambra & Martin, 1977; Jay & Young, 1979). How¬
ever, this is an indirect method that is subject to misinterpretation.
A review of the literature pertaining to the meaning of sexual experi¬
ence is presented in the next section.
Research and Theory on the Meaning of
Heterosexual Sexual Experience
The interpersonal meaning of sexual experience for heterosexual
individuals can often be inferred from research on the different aspects
of human sexuality. One source of information is the research on atti¬
tudes toward sexuality. Farley, Nelson, Knight,and Garcia-Colberg (1977)

53
investigated the influence of politics and personality on the sexual atti¬
tudes and behavior of 100 male and 100 female college students. A factor
analysis of the data was performed and resulted in emergence of three
sexuality factors for the female subjects: (1) "a ‘sick1 factor, 'con¬
sisting of sexual maladjustment and frustration, neurotic conflict over
sex, loss of sex controls, and sexual psychopathy'; (2) a 'Victorian'
factor, consisting of sexual repression, sexual frigidity, and low sex
drive and interest; (3) a homosexuality factor" (p. 115). The male data
also resulted in three factors related to sexuality: (1) "a 'sick' fac¬
tor, consisting of sexual maladjustment and frustration, neurotic con¬
flict over sex, loss of sex controls and lack of sex role confidence;
(2) an 'unrepressed heterosexual experience seeking factor', consisting
of high sex drive and interest, freedom from repressive attitudes, and
experience seeking, disinhibition, and boredom susceptibility; (3) an
'ambivalent homosexual extravert factor', consisting of homosexual
tendency, lack of sex-role confidence; sexual maladjustment and frustra¬
tion, and extraversión" (p. 116). Both males and females had a "stimu¬
lation-seeking" factor which includes sensation seeking, thrill and
adventure seeking and experience seeking, achievement motivation, extra-
version-introversion, and political orientation had little or no effect
on sexuality. The attitudes toward sexuality, of these subjects, ranged
from maladjusted (e.g., sick factor) to heterosexual experience seeking.
Other studies on sexual attitudes include Kelly's (1978) proposed
theory of human sexuality, based on sexual attitudes and behaviors.
Unfortunately the author does not address the meaning of sexual experi¬
ence, only the issue of whether sex is enjoyable to the participants. A

54
complex model of premarital sexual attitudes and behaviors is presented
by Hornick (1978), which includes demographic, family, peer group,
psychological, attitudinal, and behavioral variables. This study, how¬
ever, also omits the meaning of sexual experience. Intervention strate¬
gies have also been investigated to determine whether they produce
changes in sexual attitudes (e.g., Clement & Pfafflen, 1980; Dearth &
Cassell, 1976; Story, 1979; Zuckerman, Tushup,& Finner, 1976). An
attempt to reverse the interpersonal processes that contribute to the
existence of sexual dysfunctions is presented by Kaufman and Krupka
(1973). These processes include (1) the early deprivation of the need
for affection, which results in the sexualization of the need for inti¬
macy and confusion between sexual and affectional needs. Thus an indi¬
vidual may engage in sex when the real need is for closeness and warmth;
(2) permission and guilt are interrelated in that parents do not usually
give clear permission for their children to seek out sexual gratifica¬
tion. This is especially important in terms of guilt due to the "for¬
bidden" nature of sexuality and sexual repression; (3) power struggles
involve the battle over "being right" or "winning" and can override
closeness in the sexuality of a relationship; (4) hostility can be
translated into "impotence, avoidance of sex, or lack of orgasmic
response as a way of punishing or getting even" (p. 461) with one's
partner; (5) individuals' expectations of themselves, or the perceived
expectations of their partners, can lead to débilitative anxiety. This
parallels performance anxiety (e.g., Masters & Johnson, 1970); (6) a
related phenomenon is the individual's need to feel adequate and his/her
fear of potency. Inorgasmic responses in females can lead to male

conflicts in this area. Kaufman and Krupka (1973) believe that group
therapy can help individuals to "integrate their sexuality into the
remainder of their personal experience" (p. 463).
55
Walfish and Myerson (1980) studied the relationship between sex-
role identity and attitudes toward sexuality. The authors found that
males were more comfortable than females in their attitudes toward
sexuality; and individuals who adopted an androgynous sex role identity
were more comfortable with their sexuality than were individuals with
more traditional (e.g., masculine, feminine) sex roles. Thus it appears
that androgyny can affect an individual's comfort with his/her sexuality
but not the sex fantasy behaviors of an individual (e.g., Bernardi, 1977;
Pape, 1980).
In a study of sexual intimacy in dating relationships, Peplau,
Rubin,and Hill (1977) found that "sex role playing in which the man
encourages intercourse and the woman limits the couples sexual intimacy
was common" (p. 86). This coincides with the findings of other authors
(e.g., McCormick, 1979; LaPlante, McCormick,& Brannigan, 1980) and
implies that males are the aggressive sexual strategists while females
are the defensive sexual strategists. Love was not found to be more
closely associated with sexual satisfaction for females versus males as
had been hypothesized. Peplau et al. (1977) sum up the function of sex
role playing by stating,
In essence, our argument is that sexual role playing provides
dating partners with a common standard to use in interpreting
behavior and making inferences about a person' s motives and
dispositions. While some aspects of sexual role playing can
be modified—how quickly the game is played, with how many
different partners it is repeated, at what age the game first

56
began—the basic form remains unchanged. A consequence is
that male-female sex differences in sexual behavior are
perpetuated despite changing attitudes about the value of
traditional roles, (p. 107)
The sex practices and beliefs of male college students were viewed
in terms of the changes occurring over 30 years by Finger (1975). He
found that (1) the prevalence estimates of a particular type of behavior
tend to reflect the respondent's own sexual history; (2) the justifica¬
tions for premarital sexual activity changed from the acquisition of
knowledge and skill (1943-44 sample) to insuring future marital com-
patability and questioning the postponement of an enjoyable activity
(1969-73 sample); (3) the justifications for abstinence involving moral
or religious grounds (1943-44 sample) declined dramatically with only a
few subjects citing a weakened commitment and emotional damage as reasons
for self restraint (1969-73 sample). Finger (1975) sums up his study by
stating that, "the basis and personal meaning of patterns of sexual
behavior might be clarified if future investigators were to request not
only expression of the subject's own attitude toward a given practice and
his estimate of its prevalence in the reference group, but also his per¬
ception of the degree of approval by members of that group" (p. 315).
Apparently the author perceives approval as directly influencing the
meaning of an individual's sexuality.
A concept in direct opposition to approval of sexual conduct is
sex guilt. The ability to break guilt down into subcomponents such as
sex guilt was addressed by Mosher (1968). The relationships among moral
reasoning, sex guilt,and premarital sex were studied by D'Augelli and
Cross (1975) as well as other authors (Gerrard, 1980; Mercer & Kohn,

57
1979). In a study of sex guilt and the sexual behavior sequence, Kutner
(1971) found that sex guilt is negatively correlated with sexual desire,
responsiveness, orgasm frequency, orgasm ease, and arousal for female
subjects. He hypothesizes that different phases of the sexual behavior
sequence (e.g., motivation, instrumental act, goal response) may be
susceptible to sex guilt for any particular individual and can lead to
different effects (e.g., frustration) upon his/her sexual activity. Sex
guilt is related to morality and therefore to the meaning of sexual
experience.
A final study related to sexual attitudes involves Pietropinto and
Simenauer's (1977) survey of male sexuality. The results indicate that
(1) When asked how they felt about sex, 68% of the males indicated that
sex was important, but not the most important pleasure, while 19.8% said
it was the most important pleasure and 11.4% indicated it was only
important as a means of expressing love. Apparently only about one-fifth
of the males rate sex as the top pleasure, contradicting the stereotype
that "sex is all men are after." (2) When asked how they thought women
felt about sex, most men expressed the belief that women are as inter¬
ested in sex as men (i.e., for the inherent pleasure of it), while a
minority thought women enjoyed sex only if love was involved. This find¬
ing reflects Peplau et al.'s (1977) finding that women do not tie sex to
sexual satisfaction any more than men do. (3) Asked when they felt most
manly, most men answered in terms of having intercourse with women and
feeling that they have satisfied their partners. This finding supports
Peplau et al.'s (1977) finding of sex role playing. (4) An overwhelming
majority of the men (98%) felt that it was important for the woman to

58
have an orgasm during sexual intercourse and over half would become self-
critical if this were not to occur. This finding has implications for
performance anxiety within men concerning sexuality (e.g., Masters &
Johnson, 1970). (5) A related finding involved situations in which the
man was so "turned-off" that he could not complete the sex act. A
majority of the men (45.6%) listed a woman that seems unresponsive,
followed by recent quarreling (18.2%) and a physically unattractive
woman (12.5%). Unresponsiveness in the woman also accounted for what
irritated men most during sex (60.1%) and what was the most unpleasant
aspect of sex (58.5%). Female responsiveness has a lot of "meaning" for
men in terms of sexual adequacy, satisfaction and arousal. (6) When
asked how they felt after a climax, 45.2% indicated "contentment," 23.9%
stated "very loving," and 15.9% expressed being "exhilarated/high."
This finding indicates a high proportion of positive feeling among a
high proportion of the men after orgasm, connoting a pleasurable meaning
to orgasm.
The above studies highlight the effect of sexual attitudes on
sexual behavior and, indirectly, on the meaning of sexual experience.
Negative attitudes serve to inhibit sexuality and/or leave the individual
with negative feelings about any sexual experience. Positive attitudes
seem to lead to expression of sexual behavior and positive feelings about
sexual experiences. An individual may thus have a loving, intimate mean¬
ing to his/her sexuality or a guilt-ridden, immoral meaning for sexual
experience.
A study on positive sexual experiences was conducted by Schildmyer
(1977) using the reports of college students and community organization

59
members (N=257). The author identified variables related to a positive
sexual experience. The majority of the subjects listed more psychologi¬
cal versus physical variables, with the quality of the relationship
between the partners emerging as the primary factor. Meaning is a
cognitive-psychological concept which can, and often does, involve
affective/emotional correlates. Meaning is more reflective of psycho¬
logical processes and seems to be more of a determinant of the expres¬
sion of sexual behaviors rather than a result of physical sensations.
The sex differences of psychosexual stimulation were investigated
by Sigusch, Schmidt, Reinfeld,and Widemann-Sutor (1970). Slide presen¬
tations of sexual content were used as stimuli in order to elicit
ratings of sexual arousal and favorableness-unfavorableness from the
50 male and 50 female subjects. The results indicate that women tend
to react less favorably and report less arousal when viewing sexually
explicit slides than men do, but judged slides of romantic content more
favorably and equally arousing, when compared to the men. The authors
conclude,
Contrary to the sex-specific differences evident in emotional
reactions, there do not seem to be significant differences
with regard to the sexual-physiological reactions and the
sexual behavior after the experiment. Women reported, almost
as often as men, physiological reactions in the genital area
and activation of sexual behavior after the experiment.
(p. 22)
These findings imply that women report less arousal while evidencing
physiological arousal indices, as if they were not "supposed" to get
excited over erotic pictures, while men were open to their arousal.
Hessellund (1971) looked at how young men and woman felt about
their first coital experience. He found that (1) a majority of the

60
females (81.2%) had a negative reaction to their first coition compared
to less than a third (27.8%) of the men; (2) permissive attitudes (and
parents) do not have an obvious connection with an individual's reaction
to, and evaluation of, a first sexual experience. This finding contra¬
dicts the importance of parental permission in sexual adjustment as
proposed by Kaufman and Krupka (1973); (3) men tended to emphasize the
technical aspects of the coital experience when compared to women and
were the only subjects to mention that the sexual relationship affected
their self-image. The author concluded that "there is a great differ¬
ence in the meaning of sex for young men and women" (p. 272). Travis
and Offir (1977) attribute the sex differences between men and women to
the different meanings that they attribute to the sexual act. To quote
the authors, "Women, more often than men, use sex to get love; men use
love to get sex" (p. 68). In a similar fashion, Morris (1978) postulates
that women have a stronger commitment to the relational aspects of sex,
while males focus on its recreational aspects.
Personality variables also impact the meaning of sexual experience.
Eysenck (1971b) found that males were "more impersonal, aggressive, more
easily aroused, more excitable, more hedonistic, and less influenced by
traditional concepts of love and faithfulness" (p. 87) than are women.
He also found that extroverts had earlier and more varied sexual experi¬
ences than did introverts (Eysenck, 1971a). Barclay (1971) found that
increases in sex motivation and aggression motivation were related to
sexual arousal. The failure to consider the subjective meaning of
sexual acts, according to Libby and Straus (1980), has resulted in
conflicting results about the relationship of sex and aggression. They

61
proposed two meanings for sexual activity: "(1) dominant sex, where one
(traditionally man) competes for the sexual favors of a given person,
and (2) affectionate sex, which is loving, caring sex, usually associated
with women" (p. 137). A questionnaire survey of 190 college students
provided the following results: (1) subjects high in interpersonally
warm sex were low in aggression and violence of an interpersonal nature,
but not on large-scale, impersonal acts of aggression and violence (e.g.,
war, riot control); (2) that this relationship applies primarily to
males; and (3) interpersonally warm sex is available only to those males
who "break out of stereotypes of sexuality and for whom the meaning of
sex is an act of warmth and human bonding" (Libby & Straus, 1980, p. 145).
The reasons for having sexual relations were investigated by Nelson
(1978), through the use of an instrument listing 56 reasons for sexual
activity, with a 4-point rating scale (e.g., "not important at all" to
"very important"). The results of a factor analysis were five factors,
including (1) pleasurable stimulation, (2) conformity-acceptance,
(3) personal love and affection, (4) power, and (5) recognition-
competition. Apperson (1974) had derived four similar categories, which
are, respectively (from [2] through [5] above): deference, affiliation,
aggression, and dominance.
Grater and Downing (currently under review) selected five dimensions
of the meaning of sexual experience (i.e., morality, affiliation,
pleasure, achievement, dominance). They also selected 476 adjectives and
asked 302 single college students to rate them according to how well the
adjectives described the subject's personal meaning of sexual experience,
with "yes," "no," or "maybe" as response categories. Trained judges were

62
used to assign adjectives to the dimension that they represented, with a
requirement that two of the three judges agree on each assignment. The
authors hypothesized that males would describe the meaning of their
sexuality in terms of pleasure, dominance,and achievement, while the
females were expected to use words clustering around morality and affili¬
ation. Measures of sexual expedience and sex role (Bern, 1974) were also
collected. The results were supportive of the hypothesis that males
would use more achievement adjectives and that females would use more
affiliation adjectives. The other differences were not supported.
Sexually experienced subjects used more achievement adjectives, whereas
inexperienced subjects had more attributions of morality. Grater and
Downing concluded that further empirical confirmation is needed concern¬
ing whether the adjectives are indicative of the dimensions of meaning.
The Meaning of Sexual Experience Questionnaire—II (MOSE—II) with 16
adjectives for each of the five dimensions was developed as a result of
this study.
An extension of the above study was conducted by Bernstein (1982).
In an effort to develop an instrument to assess the interpersonal mean¬
ings of sexual experience, the author administered the 84 adjectives
identified by Grater and Downing (currently under review) to 256 stu¬
dents. A 7-point rating scale, from "never or almost never" to "always
or almost always", was used for each item, with the subjects indicating
whether each adjective was descriptive of the meaning of their sexual
experience. Several factor analyses were conducted on the data from
the MOSE—II and a new list of adjectives was prepared by the author,
using the retained items from the old form and some new ones that were

63
judged as fitting the emerging factors. A new questionnaire, the Meaning
of Sexual Experience Questionnaire—III (MOSE—III), including 70 adjec¬
tives (see Appendix C) with a 7-point rating scale from "not at all
descriptive" to "completely descriptive," was developed by the author.
The MOSE—III was then administered to 326 students and several fac¬
tor analyses were run, resulting in the emergence of five factors, with
54 descriptive adjectives out of the original 70. The five factors
include (1) affiliation which includes these 11 adjectives, "caring,"
"fond," "loving," and "affectionate" (i.e., emotional tone), "gentle,"
"warm," and "kind" (i.e., physical interaction), "intimate," "trusting,"
and "mature" (i.e., safety and respect for the other person);
(2) inadequate/undesirable contains 16 adjectives including "distant,"
"resentful," "flat," "disagreeable" (i.e., emotional tone), "futile,"
"inhibited," "awkward," "timid," "frigid," "inadequate," and "inept"
(i.e., physical interaction), "infantile," "distrustful," "remote,"
"evasive," and "undesirable" (i.e., anxiety and mistrust of self or
other person); (3) achievement with 11 adjectives including "successful,"
"capable" (i.e., achievement), "victorious," "mighty," "winning" (i.e.,
dominance), "daring," "imaginative," "inventive," "determined," "out¬
going," "assertive" (i.e., creative and persevering strategy); (4) moral
including nine adjectives connoting a reserved meaning of sexual experi¬
ence (e.g.,"proper," "moral," "clean," "pure," "dignified," "virtuous,"
"correct," "righteous," "honorable"); (5) erotic dominance contains
seven adjectives including "hot," "titillating," "erotic," "ecstatic"
(i.e., highly sensual, emotional tone), "forceful," "demanding,"
"aggressive" (i.e., physical interaction and dominance).

64
Bernstein (1982) compared the sex differences on the MOSE— III (see
Table 3) using 124 male and 202 female subjects and found that (1) the males'
average factor scores were significantly higher than the females' on
achievement and erotic dominance; (2) females scored significantly higher
on the affiliation and moral categories; and (3) no significant differ¬
ences were found on the inadequate/undesirable dimension. The signifi¬
cant male and female differences tend to support the findings of several
previous studies (e.g., McCormick, 1979; LePlante et al., 1980; Peplau et
al., 1977). The MOSE—III will be used in this study to compare the mean¬
ing of sexuality for heterosexual and homosexual males.
A brief review of the theories concerning the interpersonal meaning
of sexual experience will help to provide a context in which to inter¬
pret the results of this study. The functions of sexual behavior present
one option in theorizing about the meaning of sexual experience. Wrights-
man (1977) states that sexual behavior is "fundamentally social in that
it has a symbolic value, making it capable of fulfilling many other
desires and needs" (p. 178). He lists the following aspects of sexuality
(1) it helps to form our overall impressions of others (e.g., "healthy,"
"deviant"); (2) it can lead to crippling feelings such as guilt or shame
or positive feelings such as fulfillment, increased self-confidence and
some of the deepest human emotions; (3) it can be used in an aggressive
(e.g., rape), pathological (e.g., sexual psychopath), or utilitarian
(e.g., for material or social gains) fashion; (4) it is a way of prov¬
ing one's masculinity or feminity (e.g., ego); and (5) it can be used
for recreation or reproduction.

65
TABLE 3
SEX DIFFERENCES FOR MOSE FACTOR ANALYSIS SAMPLE
t-
Standard
Factor
Sex
Mean
Statistic
Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
Male
64.6
8.8
27
77
Affiliation
Female
68.4
-4.09
7.8
37
77
Inadequate/
Male
38.3
0.21
10.0
16
70
Undesirabie
Female
38.0
12.7
16
78
Male
53.9
9.7
31
76
Achievement
Female
51 .0
2.39
10.9
19
72
Male
40.8
9.5
10
57
Moral
Female
42.8
-1 .75
10.4
11
63
Erotic
Male
34.0
5.7
21
48
Dominance
Female
31.7
3.22
6.3
14
48
NOTE: From "The Formulation of an Instrument to Assess Interpersonal
Meaning of Sexual Experience" by D. Bernstein, Doctoral Disser¬
tation, University of Florida, 1982.
A similar approach was taken by Wilson, Strong, Robbins, and Johns
(1980) in listing the uses of sexual intercourse. The authors state
that,
Sexual intercourse can be used to: show love, have children,
give pleasure, receive pleasure, show tenderness, gain
acceptance, show rejection, prove masculinity/feminity, degrade
someone, gain revenge, make a commitment, end an argument,
degrade yourself, touch or be touched. Sex can be used to

66
keep a person interested in you, to relieve loneliness, to
dominate another, to make yourself or another feel guilty,
to relieve physical tension, to express liking or love.
(pp. 333-334)
Marriage, according to the authors, changes sexual motivation from ego
gratification to mutual gratification.
The male sex role, according to Pleck (1976), has two fundamental
themes, a stress on achievement and suppression of affect. He sees the
male role in transition from the traditional dominant male, who "expects
women to acknowledge and defer to his authority," to the modern male,
who "expects companionship and intimacy in his relationships with women"
(p. 157). The changes are not all positive and have led to performance
anxiety and the concept of frigidity in order to blame the woman for any
lack of sexual satisfaction. Gross (1978) states that "compared to
women, men tend not only to focus more on sexuality with cross-sex
partners, but also to isolate sex from other aspects of heterosexual
relating" (p. 92). Men are socialized to be goal oriented, controlling,
aggressive, violent,and power seeking. A similar hypothesis is put forth
by Reik (1960), who states that the meaning of sexual experience for men
involves a stronger sexual desire, while women have a stronger need for
affection in their meaning of sexuality. The author states that "The
sexual urge of the male has an aggressive and even sadistic character,
and the wish to intrude the female body amounts to a kind of forceful
incursion. . ." (p. 118). The above theories all involve some psycho¬
analytic leanings, especially when it comes to sex being paired with
aggression. The psychoanalytic viewpoint is represented in the work of
several other authors who state that (1) too much emphasis is being

67
placed on "achieving physiological-mechanical success" and that healthy
sexuality is an indicator of mental health (Gersham, 1978); (2) female
"emotionalism" is a mask for "economic dependency" and the male person¬
ality is founded in repression of affect and denial of relational needs"
(Chodorow, 1976); and (3) healthy sexuality is necessary for psychologi¬
cal health (Reich, 1973).
The concept of sexual scripts has been advanced by Gagnon and Simon
(1973). The authors explain:
Our use of the term script with reference to the sexual has two
major dimensions. One deals with the external, the inter¬
personal—the script as the organization of mutually shared
conventions that allows two or more actors to participate in a
complex act involving mutual dependence. The second deals with
the internal, the intrapsychic, the motivational elements that
produce arousal or at least a commitment to the activity.
(p. 20)
Young males, according to Gagnon (1974), are socialized to a male script
of male initiation and dominance. A more explicit elucidation of the
components of a sexual script is provided by Gagnon (1977), which
includes the who, what, when, where,and why of sexual behavior. A list
of the reasons for having sex includes having kids, pleasure, lust,
fun, passion, love, variety, intimacy, rebellion, degradation, instinct/
needs, exploitation, relaxation, achievement, and service. Further work
on sexual scripting has been done by several authors (e.g., Mosher, 1980;
Schwartz, 1979; Steiner, 1974).
Gecas and Libby (1976) conceptualize sexual experiences through the
constructs of symbolic interactionism and hypothesize that sexual
symbolism creates sexual experience. The authors ascribe four codes,
regarding sexual behavior, in contemporary American society. The codes

68
include (1) the romantic code which "emphasizes the value of love,"
(2) "the traditional—religious philosophy views sexual activity outside
of marriage as sinful, particularly for women" (p. 37); (3) "the recrea¬
tional philosophy is concerned with sex primarily as a pleasurable
activity" (p. 38); and (4) the utilitarian-preditory code "views sex as
a means to some other end, it can be used to gain money (as in prostitu¬
tion), or power(as in certain types of heterosexual bargaining) or pres¬
tige (status in one's peer group)" (p. 38). Slater (1976) comments on
the task-oriented nature of American society, with terms like "adequacy"
applied to a pleasurable act, and infers that men's value of physical
beauty is really a dislike for women. Sex is used for procreation,
intimacy, and physical play. According to Comfort (1976), a division
between the functions has been created by the inception of contracep¬
tion. Sex as play "generates its own morality and values" (p. 89),
according to Foote (1976). He further states, "exploration of the
morals and values which might emerge from a forthright public acceptance
of sex as play is obviously a task for extended research" (p. 89).
A list of the psychological dimensions of sexuality for adolescents
was proposed by Mitchell (1972). The list includes (1) the need for
intimacy, (2) the need to belong (e.g., affiliation), (3) the desire for
dominance, (4) the desire for submissiveness, (5) curiosity and compe¬
tence needs (e.g., achievement), (6) the desire for passion and inten¬
sity (e.g., erotic), (7) identification and imitation, and (8) rebel¬
liousness and negative identity (e.g., promiscuity). Schoof-Tams,
Schlaegal, and Walczak (1976) developed a cognitive-developmental model
of adolescent sexual morality (e.g., 11-16 years of age). They postulate

69
that the adolescent progresses from a traditional view of sexuality (e.g.,
sex for procreation) toward a more permissive view (e.g., sex as love and
commitment).
The meaning of sexual experience has been approached from several
different theoretical and empirical perspectives. A few theories provide
some unification of the various aspects concerning sexual meaning, but a
comprehensive model that can effectively predict behavior in a consistent
manner has not been developed. The meaning of sexuality also appears to
change over time, which necessitates a developmental theory in order to
account for an individual's progression through sexual maturation. The
above literature primarily applies to heterosexuals and a question arises
as to what the meaning of sexuality is for homosexuals or, a more accept-
able term, gays.
Research and Theory on the Meaning of
Homosexual Sexual Experience
There is a paucity of research when it comes to the gay meaning of
sexuality. Most of the concepts will have to be inferred from the
available data and theories concerning gay sexuality.
The plight of the homosexual in history has been documented by
Bullough (1979), who states that,
Terms such as "queer," "fag," "fairy," and "pervert" have been
applied to them as individuals, and at various times in history
they have been put in asylums, imprisoned, executed, medicated,
psychoanalyzed, and ostracized; yet they have continued to exist.
Most survived by remaining in the closet—that is, they never
publicly proclaimed themselves but sought to mask their sexual
preference by living and acting as did their neighbors, (p. 1)
The negative view of homosexuality implies that gay individuals are sick,
perverted, unnatural, and a threat to societal values (G. Wienberg, 1973).

70
Consequently negative meanings involving guilt, shame, fear, anxiety,and
inadequacy are possible consequences of same-sex sexual activity.
Kaufman and Krupka (1973) view homosexuality from a deprivation per¬
spective. They state that "typically, males with homosexual concerns
have experienced deprivation from their fathers. Many of these individ¬
uals never received expressions of tenderness or closeness from their
fathers" (p. 459). The authors assert that homosexual behavior is a
quest for affection in compensation for lost paternal tenderness. Sexual
activity here is seen as misdirected and a surrogate for the need for
fatherly affection. In a previously reviewed study, Farley et al. (1977)
derived sexuality factors for males and females. A male "ambivalent
homosexual extravert" factor consisted of "homosexual tendency, lack of
sex role confidence, sexual maladjustment and frustration, and extra-
version" (p. 116). This implies inadequacy, frustration, and maladjust¬
ment as meanings of gay male sexuality. Finger (1975) noted a decline
among males in homosexual experiences over the past 30 years and reports
that "the vast majority of students still rate homosexual outlet as the
'most harmful' and the 'most wrong'" (p. 315) sexual activity.
Sex role preference can provide one explanation for homosexual
behavior according to Carrier (1977). He used Hookers (1965) definitions
so that "the term 'sex roles', when homosexual practices are described,
will refer to 'typical sexual performance' only. 'The gender connota¬
tions (M-F) of these performances need not then be implicitly assumed.'
The term 'gender role' will refer to the 'expected attitudes and behavior
that distinguish males from females'" (p. 54). Carrier (1977) investi¬
gated the cross-cultural differences among homosexual males and found

71
that (1) the "inserter-insertee" dichotomy of homosexual behavior is
active in the Mexican, Brazilian, Turkish, Greek, and Chicano (Mexican-
American) cultures, with the inserter as masculine and the insertee as
feminine; (2) lower class homosexual behavior in U.S. prisons involves
the aggressor as masculine and nonhomosexual, while the passive partner
is viewed as homosexual; (3) female prisoners structure their relation¬
ships in terms of marriage and kinship. Thus, male sexuality is based
on dominance-submission whereas female sexuality is based on affiliation
and commitment.
Tripp (1975) implies that homosexuality can result from male admir¬
ation of another male, high aspirations, "idealism," envy or early sexual
maturation. He purports that homosexual men are attracted to the sex
role characteristics of their own sex, identifying with the masculinity
in others. Tripp (1975) states, "In all of their essentials, the sought
after rewards of homosexual and heterosexual complementations are identi¬
cal: the symbolic possession of those attributes of a partner, which,
when added to one's own, fill out the illusion of completeness" (p. 93).
The meaning of sexuality here involves the search for the fulfillment of
missing attributes through one's sex partner. Like many of the works
concerning homosexuality, the focus is on males.
Several authors have taken a sociological perspective in their
investigation of homosexuality. Sonenschein (1976) looked at male homo¬
sexual relationships in terms of permanence and nonpermanence. He des¬
cribes relationships where a younger "boy" is kept by an older male,
transient sexual contacts such as "one night stands," and brief affairs.
Sonenschein (1976) identified two major systems in the homosexual

72
community which have a direct effect on interpersonal relationships
(1) the cultural system which was comprised of a series of institutions
(e.g., bars, steam baths, parties) where gays can meet temporary or
permanent partners; and (2) a social system "which directly involved the
structure and behavior of groups and the individuals in them" (p. 150).
Both of these systems can be conceptualized as affecting the meaning of
sexuality, either directly or indirectly, through their effects on inter¬
personal relationships.
A cross-cultural study on male homosexuality was conducted by
Weinberg and Williams (1974) in an effort to determine the effects of
locale on the social and psychological dimensions of homosexuality. The
comparisons involved American, Dutch, and Danish gays, and lower versus
upper class American homosexuals. The results reflect that (1) greater
societal rejection did not lead to greater psychological difficulties
among gay men; (2) sexual orientation is not necessarily highly corre¬
lated with psychological problems; (3) those gay men who have high
involvement in the gay community (vs. those who do not) seem to be less
intimidated by the heterosexual world; and (4) there was no general rela¬
tionship between religious background and lifestyle or psychological
problems for homosexual men, except for greater guilt or shame after the
first homoerotic experience. The above results tend to refute the
deficit models of homosexuality (e.g., Farley et al., 1977; Finger, 1975;
Kaufman & Krupka, 1973). It appears that gays may be more similar to
heterosexuals than past theories have implied and that the meaning of
their sexuality may also be more similar than different.

73
In addressing the issue of homosexuals as patients, Bell (1976)
notes the diversity in the variety of social, psychological, and sexual
correlates of homosexual experience. He states, "there are as many dif¬
ferent kinds of homosexuals as heterosexuals, and thus it is impossible
to predict the nature of any patient's personality, social adjustment,
or sexual functioning on the basis of his or her sexual orientation"
(p. 202). Humphreys (1976) comments on emerging styles of homosexual
manliness. He states that there is a decline in "cruising" (i.e.,
picking up men for brief sexual contacts) within the gay community due
to several factors, such as (1) a trend away from impersonalization;
(2) a "virilization" or an increasing emphasis on virility; (3) subcul¬
tural diversity; and (4) "radicalization" in terms of the gay rights
movement. The meaning of sexuality appears to be shifting from an
impersonal, guilt-ridden, effeminate definition to a more virile,
masculine and militant identity.
In their study on homosexuals, Masters and Johnson (1979) note that
gay couples had a freer flow of verbal and nonverbal communication,
between "stimulator and stimulatee," when compared to heterosexual
couples. "Information relative to sexual needs, levels of sexual
involvement, what pleased or what displeased was usually exchanged
openly during sexual activity or discussed without reservation after
any specific sexual episode in anticipation of future sexual
opportunity" (p. 213). The authors theorize that this openness
results from necessity, since there are only two widely popular
stimulative approaches in gay sexual activity (e.g., partner manipu¬
lation, fellatio/cunnilingus) and those must be refined constantly to

74
preserve their stimulative value. An equally viable hypothesis might
be that societal pressures force gay individuals to keep their sexuality
hidden except among themselves, where discussion of their sexuality
elicits mutual support and acceptance.
Another study on homosexual relationships, by Peplau (1981), investi¬
gates what gays are searching for in interpersonal relationships. A
questionnaire was administered to gay men and women (e.g., N=128, N=127)
and heterosexual men and women (e.g., N= 65 for both) eliciting responses
on love, satisfaction in relationships, living arrangements, sexual
activities, and commitment to the relationship. The results were as
follows: (1) a majority of the lesbians and gay men were not religious
(e.g., 63% and 54%, respectively), had a heterosexual relationship in the
past (e.g., 80% and 66%, respectively), and had median numbers of past
opposite-sex partners which ranged from three to five, respectively,
(2) most of the gay sample expoused the equal sharing of responsibilities
and power in their relationships, although when role playing existed it
was most common among older homosexuals of both sexes, individuals at
lower socioeconomic levels, and in men; (3) relationship values clustered
around two factors, "dynamic attachment" which "reflects the value placed
on having emotionally close and secure relationships" and "desire for
personal autonomy" which values major interests outside of the relation¬
ship and a supportive group of friends; (4) the heterosexuals evidenced
more role playing in their relationships; (5) all four groups had similar
priorities for their relationships (e.g., "being able to talk about my
most intimate feelings"); (5) sexual exclusivity was more important to
heterosexuals than it was to homosexuals; (6) gender differences were

75
greater than sexual orientation differences, with women viewing emo¬
tional expressiveness, egalitarian relationships and similarity in
attitudes and political beliefs as more important than did the men;
(7) about 61% of the lesbians and 41% of the gay men were involved in
permanent relationships; (8) there were no differences between gays and
straights in their conceptions of "love"; (9) almost half of the gays
were committed to their relationships and expected them to last for at
least six months (e.g., 50% of the males and 44% of the lesbians);
(10) both gay men and women were satisfied with their sexual relation¬
ships; (11) gay men were more likely than heterosexuals or lesbians to
have sex with someone other than their partner. The results of
Peplau's (1981) study indicate that the meaning of sexuality is similar
for heterosexuals and homosexuals. Both value affiliation and closeness
in their relationships, but at the same time also emphasize autonomy.
The stereotype that gay individuals have short-term, unsatisfactory
relationships appears to be in error. An important finding is that
gender seems to affect a relationship more than sexual orientation.
Freedman (1975) argues that homosexuals may be healthier than
heterosexuals. He states that gay individuals have developed their own
values, become more expressive and egalitarian in their relationships,
broken out of the standard male-female sex roles, and are more open to
variations in their sexual behavior (e.g., group sex for gay males).
Peplau's (1981) study appears to confirm some of Freedman's assertions.
Some of the results of Jay and Young's (1979) results have pre¬
viously been reviewed, but other components of their survey are relevant
to the meaning of sexuality. The results indicate that: (1) a little

76
less than half of the gay men (46%) and women (42%) thought sex was
"very important" and most of the rest (e.g., 49% lesbians, 47% gay men)
thought it was "somewhat important"; (2) when asked if they put too much
importance on sex, 73% of the lesbians and 62% of the gay men said their
emphasis was "just right"; (3) concerning others' emphasis on sex, 48%
of the gay men and 37% of the GF indicated "too much"; (4) in terms of
the importance of emotional involvement with their partner, a majority
of the lesbians (86%) and less than half the gay men (47%) responded
that it was "very important"; while a majority of both thought it was
"somewhat important" (e.g., 97% and 83%, respectively); (5) 56% of the
lesbians and 13% of the gay males reported that emotional involvement
was always present when they had sex with a partner; (6) to "have you
ever been in love?" over 93% of male and female gays indicated "yes";
(7) an overwhelming majority of gays (e.g., over 88%) felt "very posi¬
tive" about showing affection to "lovers" and "sex partners"; (8) a
majority of the lesbians and gay men felt "negative" about the use of
masculine/feminine sex-role labels (e.g., 78% and 61%, respectively),
and "never" played masculine/feminine sex roles in their relationships
(e.g., 59% and 42%, respectively); and (9) in terms of having sex with
someone that they just met, 85% of the lesbians indicated that they
did so at the most "very infrequently," while only 31% of the gay men
responded in a similar fashion. These results tend to approximate the
previous findings concerning heterosexuals and the gender differences
between males and females.

77
A Brief Summary and Statement of
Theoretical Hypotheses
Since the purpose of this study is to investigate male heterosexual
and homosexual differences, only the data on male sexual fantasy and the
meaning of sexuality will be briefly summarized.
As previously noted, Storms (1980) hypothesized that gay males (GM)
would have more androerotic (i.e., male as sex object) and less gyno-
erotic (i.e., female as sex object) sexual fantasies when compared to
heterosexual males (HM). The reverse was also predicted, HMs would have
more gynoerotic and less androerotic fantasies than GMs. Since the
object of sexual activity is usually a male for gay individuals, and a
female for heterosexual individuals, these hypotheses make common sense.
Previous data on sexual activity and sexual fantasy would also lend sup¬
port to Storms' (1980) assertions (e.g., Jay & Young, 1979; Masters &
Johnson, 1979; Pietropinto & Simenauer, 1977). Although they have less
gynoerotic fantasies than HMs, gay individuals tend to have had more
heterosexual activity than HMs have had homosexual activity (e.g.,
Kinsey, et al., 1948; Hunt, 1976; Jay & Young, 1979). Gay individuals
also have less negative attitudes toward heterosexual sexual activity
(Jay & Young, 1979) than HMs have concerning homosexual sexual activity
(Finger, 1975) and should be more likely to report cross-sex fantasies
than HMs are to report same-sex fantasies.
In the area of sexual activity, several findings have been reported.
Both GMs and HMs report a high incidence of at least one episode of
masturbation, but GMs report a slightly higher frequency of masturbation
(e.g., Hunt, 1976; Jay & Young, 1979). No major differences were found

78
for the two groups involving fantasy during masturbation (e.g., Jay &
Young, 1979; Pape, 1980). In Pape's (1980) study, 84% of the HMs reported
having sex with a partner at least once in the past three months. In
contrast, 90% of the GMs in Jay and Young's (1979) sample had sex at
least once a month. Given the heightened opportunity for sexual activity
in the male gay community, it is predictable that the incidence of sex
with a partner will be greater for the GMs. Fantasy during sex with a
partner was reported in approximately equal frequencies by both GMs
(82%) and HMs (79%). There were no data on the frequency or incidence
of GM sexual daydreaming and, therefore, a hypothesis concerning any
differences in GM and HM erotic daydreaming cannot be formulated at this
time.
The data on the incidence and frequency of specific sexual techniques
do show differences between the two groups. A majority of the GMs
(99.5%) had engaged in oral sex in comparison to two-thirds of the HMs
(66%) (e.g., Hunt, 1976; Jay & Young, 1979), and since fellatio is a
primary sexual activity in the gay male community (Masters & Johnson),
one would expect them to fantasize about this activity more often. In
terms of anal intercourse, the two groups also vary widely for incidence,
with 91% of the GMs and only 16% of the HMs having engaged in it at least
once (Hunt, 1976; Jay & Young, 1979). Since anal intercourse is the only
approximation of coitus in the gay male community, there should be a
higher rate of fantasizing about it among GMs when compared to HMs.
The above categories involve the "mechanical-anatomical" aspects of
sexual activity, that is, the limitations of sexual activity due to
physical make-up (e.g., the lack of a vagina in males). Coitus is not

79
available to GMs and, although anal intercourse is an approximation,
they must engage in other varieties of sexual activity (e.g., fellatio,
mutual masturbation). Other categories exist for sexual activity and
erotic fantasy including choice of partner(s), dominance-submission,
choice of setting, various situations (e.g., paying for sex, observing
others having sex) and various thought patterns (e.g., recalling past
experiences, imaginary lovers). Depending on the theoretical system
under consideration, the prediction of the differences or similarities
between the sexual fantasies of GMs and HMs will vary.
Masters and Johnson (1979) reported that the most prevalent sexual
fantasy for HMs was the replacement of the current sex partner. In
Pape's (1980) study, HMs reported thinking about their current partner
most often during sex (with that partner), and thinking about sex with
a person other than their partner during masturbation and daydreaming.
For GMs, idyllic encounters with unknown men was ranked as the fourth
most prevalent fantasy since GMs have more opportunities for sex with
different partners (Humphreys, 1976), and if fantasy is construed as an
indication of longing for unfulfilled sexual desires, then HMs should
have more fantasies about different sex partners.
Sex-role disturbances have been postulated as contributing to the
development of homosexuality (e.g., Rekers & Lovaas, 1974). The gay
male is considered more effeminate, passive,and submissive than the
heterosexual male. This line of reasoning would predict that GMs would
have fewer fantasies concerning aggressive sexual acts (i.e., forcing
someone to have sex) and more passive fantasies (i.e., being forced to
have sex with someone) when compared to HMs. Several studies, however,

80
refute the passive sexual nature of homosexuals (e.g., Harry, 1976-77),
and other studies reflect that gender has more of an influence on sex
fantasies than does sex-role (e.g., Bernardi, 1977; Pape, 1980; Storms,
1980). Masters and Johnson (1979) report that GMs have aggressive
sexual fantasies and that these fantasies contained more violent content
than the HM forced-sex fantasies. Since gays reject sex-role stereo¬
types (Peplau, 1981), they should be more inclined to accept the passive
role than HMs who are more concerned with masculinity. Therefore, GMs
should have more passive fantasies than HMs, but not fewer aggressive
fantasies.
Group sex was the fifth most prevalent sex fantasy reported by both
GMs and HMs in Masters and Johnson's (1979) study. Other reports on
group sex fantasies for HMs range from 4.5% (Pietropinto & Simenauer) to
37.5% (Hesselland, 1976). Although sex with more than one person was a
fantasy category for the GMs in Jay and Young's (1979) study, they gave
no indication as to the frequency or incidence of these fantasies. More
than one-fourth of the GMs (27%), however, did report engaging in group
sex at least "somewhat frequently". Group sex provides the opportunity
to observe others having sex. Therefore, if fantasy is conceptualized
as a reflection of current concerns (Klinger, 1971), then GMs should
fantasize about sex with more than one person more often than HMs, as
well as fantasize about observing others during sexual activity.
Masters and Johnson (1979) found that GMs reported more sadomaso¬
chistic fantasies (i.e., hurting someone or being hurt by them) with a
higher incidence of violence, when compared to HMs. Jay and Young
(1979) also cited a high incidence of sadomasochistic fantasies among

81
their GM sample, but did not give any figures on incidence or frequency.
HMs reported very low incidences (2.2%) of sadomasochistic fantasy.
Therefore, GMs should have a higher rate of sadomasochistic fantasy when
compared to HMs.
Bernstein's (1982) development of five categories for the meaning
of sexual experience will allow for a comparison of GM and HM sexual
meanings. The factors include (1) affiliation; (2) inadequate/
undesirable; (3) achievement; (4) moral; and (5) erotic dominance.
Although there has been little direct study of the meaning of sexual
experience for gays, some hypotheses can be generated from the available
1iterature.
Given the psychoanalytic interpretation of homosexuality (Bergler,
1956; Fenichel, 1945; Freud, 1962), GMs should reflect more maladjust¬
ment in their sexuality and, consequently, they should feel more nega¬
tively about their sexual experience. Several authors refute this
hypothesis (e.g., Bell, 1976; Churchill, 1967; Hoffman, 1968; G. Wein¬
berg, 1973) and claim that gays are not more maladjusted than hetero¬
sexuals. According to the former authors, GMs should view their
sexuality as more inadequate/undesirable when compared to HMs, whereas
the latter theorists would predict no differences. A reversed predic¬
tion should hold for affi 1 iation—GMs should be less affiliative than
HMs according to psychoanalytic theory. Peplau's (1981) findings on
gay relationships would lead to a prediction of no differences.
In the moral category, differences would be predicted by tradi¬
tional versus modern views of sexuality. In order to adopt a gay
lifestyle an individual must reject the traditional moral values and

82
develop his own (Freedman, 1975; Peplau, 1981). Therefore, HMs should
score higher on morality than the GMs. Since GMs also reject sex-role
stereotypes (Freedman, 1975; Peplau, 1981), they should score lower on
achievement in the meaning of sexuality when compared to HMs. The
erotic dominance category is confusing and contains both erotic and
conquest-related variables, therefore no predictions will be made about
this category.
The following hypotheses were tested for sexual fantasy:
1. GMs will report androerotic fantasies more often and
gynoerotic fantasies less often than HMs.
2. GMs will report gynoerotic fantasies more often than
HMs will report androerotic fantasies.
3. GMs will report having sex with a partner more often
than HMs.
4. GMs will report having oral sex fantasies more often
than HMs.
5. GMs will report having anal intercourse fantasies
more often than HMs.
6. HMs will have fantasies about having sex with someone
other than their current partner more often than GMs.
7. GMs will have fantasies of being forced to have sex
with someone more often than HMs.
8. GMs will have fantasies about having sex with more
than one person at a time and observing others having
sex more often than HMs.
9. GMs will have fantasies about hurting someone or
being hurt by someone more often than HMs.
The following hypotheses were tested for the meaning of sexuality:
1. GMs will report the meaning of their sexuality as
inadequate/undesirable more often than HMs.
2. HMs will report the meaning of their sexuality as
affiliation oriented more often than GMs.

83
3. HMs will report the meaning of their sexuality as
moral more often than will GMs.
4. HMs will report the meaning of their sexuality as
achievement oriented more often than GMs.
A .05 level of significance will be adopted as the criterion of rejection
for the null hypothesis (e.g., H = no differences).

CHAPTER II
METHOD
Subjects
The subjects in this study were 32 heterosexual and 32 homosexual
male college students. All of the subjects were Caucasian with age
ranges of 17 to 26 years ("X = 19.3 years) for the heterosexuals and 19
to 29 years (X = 20.5 years) for the homosexuals. Religious affiliation
varied between the heterosexual (HM) and homosexual (GM) subjects as
follows: Protestant (28.1% HMs, 18.8% GMs); Catholic (25.0% HMs, 18.8%
GMs); Jewish (15.6% HMs, 3.1% GMs); "other" (6.3% HMs, 15.6% GMs); and
"none" (25.0% HMs, 43.8% GMs). A majority of the HM subjects (56.3%)
reported having a steady sexual partner, whereas a majority of the GM
subjects reported not having a steady sexual partner (65.6%). Both
groups described their current sexual activity in approximately equal
proportions, as follows: "very satisfactory" (HMs 25.0%, GMs 25.0%);
"moderately satisfactory" (HMs 43.8%, GMs 40.6%); "mildly satisfactory"
(HMs 15.6%, GMs 15.6%); and "unsatisfactory" (15.6% HMs, 18.8% GMs).
Procedure
The HM subjects were recruited from general psychology classes at
the University of Florida and the Illinois State University as well as
from cooperative housing associations at the University of Texas at
Austin. The GM subjects were recruited through campus gay organizations
at the Universities of Florida, Texas at Austin, and Illinois State
84

85
University. The HM subjects at the University of Florida were adminis¬
tered the EROS, SFQ, and MOSE—111 (see Appendices A, B, and C) in a
large group. The Illinois State HMs were administered the instruments
in small groups of five and some subjects took the instruments home
for friends to return via mail. The instruments were delivered to
the cooperative housing establishments in Austin, Texas, and picked
up, in sealed envelopes, at a later date. A total of 123 instruments
viere disseminated to HM subjects, with 74 administered to psychology
students (who received one hour of research credit) and 49 to be
returned via mail or picked up at the cooperative houses (with a
return rate of 53.6%).
The instruments were disseminated at campus gay organization
meetings in all geographic locations and were returned in self-
addressed, stamped envelopes. A total of 125 instruments were given
out to the organization members, for themsevles and their friends,
with a 39.2% return rate.
In order to control for sexual and fantasy activity, only those
subjects who indicated that they had engaged in sex with a partner
(with fantasy), masturbation with fantasy and sexual daydreaming in
the past three months (see Appendix B, SFQ items 7, 8, 32, 33, & 57)
were included in this study. Subjects who only partially completed
the instruments, were ethnic minorities (3 GMs, 2 HMs), or were older
than average (3 GMs, 2 HMs) were also excluded from the study.

86
Instruments
Erotic Response and Orientation Scale (EROS)
The EROS was developed by Storms (1980) to measure the erotic fanta¬
sies of heterosexual and homosexual individuals. The questionnaire
contains 16 items, with two subscales of eight basic types of erotic
fantasies in each scale (see Appendix A). The "androerotic" scale des¬
cribes fantasies with men as the sexual object, and the "gynoerotic"
scale describes the same fantasies with a female sexual object. Subjects
were asked to indicate how often they have had the erotic fantasy in each
item during the past year. A Guttman 7-point scale, ranging from "never"
(0) to "almost daily" (7), was available for the subject's responses to
each item. The scale items for each scale range from "low intensity
fantasies (thinking someone is sexually attractive) through moderate
intensity fantasies (daydreaming about having sex with someone) to high
intensity fantasies (masturbating while fantasizing sex with someone)"
(p. 786).
Utilizing a Guttman scalogram, Storms (1980) determined the internal
reliability of the scales; coefficients of reproduceability were .93 for the
androerotic scale and .92 for the gynoerotic scale. He also determined
that the internal validity of the scales, in the sense of coherence and
cumulativity, was good (coefficients of scalability were .74 for the
androerotic scale and .77 for the gynoerotic scale). A comparison of
scalogram values between the total subject sample (N = 185) and the
heterosexual subjects (N = 70) proved to be almost identical, demonstrat¬
ing consistent reliability across sexual orientation groups.

87
The Sexual Fantasy Questionnaire (SFQ)
The SFQ was developed by Pape (1980) in order to study the incidence,
frequency, variety, and content of sexual fantasies under three conditions
(1) sex with a partner, (2) masturbation, and (3) daydreaming (Mednick,
1977). Part I (see Appendix B) elicits the following demographic data:
(1) age; (2) ethnic background; (3) religious affiliation; (4) sexual
orientation (e.g., Kinsey-type scale ranging from “exclusively hetero¬
sexual" to "exclusively homosexual"); (5) availability of current sex
partner (e.g., "yes" or "no"); and (6) description of current sexual
activity (e.g., 4-point scale ranging from "very satisfactory" to "very
unsatisfactory").
Part II is comprised of three sections, which reflect the afore¬
mentioned three conditions, with the same 22 sexual fantasy subthemes
under each condition. An "other" subtheme was also provided under each
condition to allow the subjects to write in and rate any fantasy theme
not included within the 22 subthemes. The first two sections (e.g.,
sex with a partner and masturbation) begin with two filter questions
instructing the subject to complete the section only if they have engaged
in the required activity and have had sexual fantasies at least "rarely"
during that activity. Subjects who have not engaged in the activity, or
who have not fantasized during the activity, are instructed to go on to
the next section. In the daydreaming section only one filter question
inquires about sexual fantasy, since it is presumed that all individuals
engage in daydreaming of some sort. Each section inquired about the
activities and fantasies over the past three months, with a 6-point scale
ranging from "never" (1) to "always" (6) for each subtheme within the

88
condition under consideration. Both sexual activity questions (e.g.,
sex with a partner and masturbation) asked how often the subject engaged
in the activity, over the past three months, with 10 response categories
ranging from "0" (1) to "over 40" (10) times. The three fantasy filter
questions asked how often the subject had fantasized, during the activity
under consideration (over the past three months), with a 6-point rating
scale ranging from "never" (1) to "always" (6).
Two final questions were included at the end of Part II. One ques¬
tion asked about the subject's level of comfort in filling out the SFQ,
with a 4-point rating scale ranging from "very comfortable" (1) to "very
uncomfortable" (4). Pape (1980) considered this item a "rough" indica¬
tor of "willingness to disclose." A final question was open-ended and
inquired about the subject's comments concerning the study.
Pape (1980) determined the reliability of the SFQ by computing test-
retest correlations (for the 91 initial subjects), after a two-week
period, "for the three situational fantasy subscale scores and for the
individual theme responses in each of the three situational conditions"
(p. 34). In the "sex with a partner" condition, the situational sub¬
scale score (i.e., sum of 22 subtheme responses) showed a test-retest
correlation which was significant (p < .001). The 22 subtheme ratings
had test-retest correlations ranging from .50 to .88 and all were sig¬
nificant (p < .001) except for the "imagining that you are a prostitute"
theme. This item was changed, for this study, to read "imagining that
you are being paid to have sex with someone," in order to remove any
stigma concerning the word "prostitute." For the masturbation and day¬
dreaming conditions, the subscale test-retest correlations were .76 and

89
.78, respectively (both significant at the p < .001 level). The individ¬
ual theme test-retest correlation coefficients ranged from .48 to .95 for
the masturbation condition and from .44 to .86 for the daydreaming condi¬
tion (p < .001, for all correlations). Cronbach's (1951) alpha was used
to measure the internal consistency scores of the situational subscales
and the results were .84 for the “sex with a partner" condition, .84 for
the "masturbation" condition, and .85 for the "daydreaming" condition.
The Meaning of Sexual Experience
Questionnaire—III (MOSE—-III)
The MOSE—III was developed by Bernstein (1982) in order to attempt
an assessment of the interpersonal meanings of sexual experience. As
previously mentioned, he administered the 84 adjectives (MOSE—II),
identified by Grater and Downing (currently under review), which were
purported to pertain to the meaning dimensions of morality, affiliation,
pleasure, achievement, and dominance, to 255 college students. A 7-
point rating scale was used to rate each adjective, in terms of the
subject's meaning of sexual experience, ranging from "never or almost
never" (1) to "always or almost always" (7). Several factor analyses
were performed on the data in order to determine
. . . the most meaningful factors both statistically and
conceptually. The criteria levels for maintaining items
were factor ratings of at least .40 on one factor and less
than .30 on every other factor. In addition, oblique
factor rotation was permitted as long as the correlation
between factors was not substantially greater than .30 for
any two factors. (Bernstein, 1982, p. 34)
A new list of adjectives was then constructed by Bernstein (1982),
retaining items from the MOSE—II and generating items that the author
judged to be reflective of the emerging factors. The MOSE—III (see

90
Appendix C) includes 70 adjectives, with a 7-point rating scale ranging
from "not at all descriptive" (1) to "completely descriptive" (7) (i.e.,
of the meaning of the subject's sexual experience). The MOSE—III was
administered to 326 college students and several factor analyses were
run, utilizing the same criteria levels that were mentioned above for
the MOSE—II analysis. A total of five factors emerged from the final
analysis, with a total of 54 adjectives, and these factors include:
(1) affiliation; (2) inadequate/undesirable; (3) achievement; (4) moral;
and (5) erotic dominance. In this case, an orthogonal analysis was run,
utilizing the criteria levels mentioned for the MOSE—II, to determine
if the factors would obtain with no intercorrelations. None of the
adjectives loaded on a different factor from the factor on which they
originally loaded in the oblique analysis.
Bernstein (1982) assessed the reliability of the MOSE—III by
using Cronbach's (1951) coefficient alpha (e.g., the average of all
possible split-half reliability coefficients). A criterion level of
.70 was adopted, as per Nunnally's (1978) suggestion. The alpha coef¬
ficients for the five factors were as follows: (1) .91 for affiliation;
(2) .86 for inadequate/undesirable; (3) .84 for achievement; (4) .85 for
moral; and (5) .69 for erotic dominance. Several different approaches
were taken in order to assess the validity of the MOSE —III. The 70
adjectives were administered to 67 students, who were asked to categorize
the items in terms of "don't understand at all," "have some idea," and
"know what it means." Of the 70 words, only two were categorized as
"don't understand at all" by more than two students (e.g., "amorous,"
"titillating"). This precluded definition problems as possible threats

91
to the validity of the MOSE—III. Content validity, according to
Bernstein (1982) was demonstrated by the selection of adjectives along
conceptual guidelines and by the successful prediction of three out of
the five hypothesized dimensions (e.g., affiliation, morality, and
achievement). The other two emergent factors (e.g., inadequate/
undesirable and erotic dominance) were seen as "conceptually cohesive"
and, therefore, also supportive of content and, partially, construct
validity. Nelson's (1978) previously reviewed Sexual Functions Measure
(SFM) was utilized to assess the convergent validity of the MOSE—III.
A sample of 70 students (i.e., 33 females and 37 males) were administered
the SFM and the MOSE—III, with predicted correlations between the fol¬
lowing factors on the instruments: (1) "affiliation (MOSE) with per¬
sonal love and affection" (SFM); (2) "achievement (MOSE) with power,
recognition, and competition (SFM)"; and (3) "erotic dominance (MOSE)
with pleasurable stimulation (SFM)" (Bernstein, 1982, p. 53). The
correlations were significant for gender in some cases, but overall,
only weak support for the convergent validity of the MOSE—III was
demonstrated.
Statistical Hypotheses
The statistical hypotheses for sexual fantasy are as follows:
1. The GMs will have a significantly higher group mean score
on the EROS androerotic scale than the HMs and the HMs
will have a significantly higher mean score on the EROS
gynoerotic scale than the GMs.
2. The GMs will have a significantly higher group mean score
on fantasies about the opposite sex (e.g., items 26, 51,
& 75 on the SFQ) than the HMs will have about the same sex.
3. The GMs will have a significantly higher group mean score
on sex with a partner (e.g., item 7 on the SFQ) than will
the HMs.

92
4. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about oral sex (e.g., items 22, 23, 47, 48,
71, & 72 on the SFQ) than will the HMs.
5. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about anal intercourse (e.g., items 29, 54,
& 78 on the SFQ) than will the HMs.
6. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about replacing their current partner (e.g.,
items 10, 12, 35, 37, 59, & 62 on the SFQ) than will the
HMs.
7. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about being overpowered or forced to sur¬
render to someone (e.g., items 13, 38, & 62 on the SFQ)
than will the HMs.
8. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about having sex with more than one person
at a time and observing others having sex (e.g., items
16, 19, 41, 44, 65, & 68 on the SFQ) than will the HMs.
9. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on fantasies about enjoyment of being hurt and of hurting
another during a sexual encounter (e.g., items 24, 25,
49, 50, 73, & 74 on the SFQ) than will the HMs.
The statistical hypotheses for the meaning of sexual experience are as
follows:
1. The GMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on the inadequate/undesirable factor (e.g., 16 adjectives)
of the MOSE—III than will the HMs.
2. The HMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on the affiliation factor (e.g., 11 adjectives) of the
MOSE—III than will the GMs.
3. The HMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on the morality factor (e.g., 9 adjectives) of the MOSE —
III than will the GMs.
4. The HMs will have significantly higher group mean scores
on the achievement factor (e.g., 11 adjectives) of the
MOSE —III than will the GMs.

CHAPTER III
RESULTS
Analysis of the Erotic Response and
Orientation Scale (EROS)
The EROS (Storms, 1980) contains a gynoerotic (i.e., female as sex
object) scale and an androerotic (i.e., male as sex object) scale.
Group mean scale scores were computed, for each subject group (i.e., GM,
HM), by summing each subject's scale score and dividing by the number of
subjects in each group (e.g., N = 32). Hypothesis 1 was supported, with
GMs (X = 50.1) scoring significantly higher on the androerotic scale
when compared to the HMs (X = 12.7), t_(62) = -28.26, jd < .0001. Con¬
versely, HMs (X = 48.2) scored significantly higher on the gynoerotic
scale when compared to the GMs (X" = 22.6), t_(62) = 12.90, p < .0001 ).
Both of these results are highly significant and serve to add further
support to Storms' (1980) hypothesis that GMs have more sex fantasies
about men than HMs, and that HMs have more sex fantasies about women
when compared to GMs.
Some interesting figures are reflected in the frequencies reported
by both groups on selected items of the EROS. In response to "How often
have you had a particular desire to have a sexual experience with a man
you know", 81.3% of the HMs responded with "0" (never), whereas, only
18.8% of the GMs responded with "0" (never) to a similar question about
a woman that they know. When asked about daydreams concerning sex with
members of the same sex, 78.1% of the HMs responded with "0", and when
93

94
asked the same question about the opposite sex, 25% of the GMs responded
with "0" (never). In terms of masturbation fantasies, 87.5% of the HMs
had never had a male sex object fantasy, and 53.1% of GMs had never had
a female sex object fantasy.
Analysis of the Sexual Fantasy Questionnaire (SFQ)
Analysis of the five filter items (e.g., items 7, 8, 32, 33, 57)
and the item on comfort level in filling out the SFQ (e.g., item 81) was
accomplished by utilizing Mann-Whitney jJ Tests. Hypothesis 3 was not
supported. There was no significant difference between the frequency
reports of sex with a partner for the HMs and GMs. The average number
of sexual episodes with a partner, over the past three months, ranged
between 6 to 15 for the HMs and from 11 to 20 for the GMs. No prediction
was made concerning the frequency of fantasy during sex with a partner,
but the frequencies are of interest (see Table 4). Although no predic¬
tion was made, there was a significant difference in terms of masturba¬
tion frequency (U(62) = 253, £ < .001), with the GMs masturbatory epi¬
sodes ranging from 21 to 30 and the HMs ranging from 11 to 20, during
the past three months. The frequencies of fantasy during masturbation
for both groups are presented in Table 4, with no significant differences.
Sexual fantasy during daydreaming also produced no significant differences
(see Table 4).
In response to whether they had a "steady sexual partner," 58.3%
of the HMs indicated "yes" and 65.6% of the GMs indicated "no." In
terms of describing their current sexual activity, both groups were very
similar in their responses, which included (1) "very satisfactory"

95
TABLE 4
PERCENTAGES OF FANTASY DURING SEX WITH A PARTNER,
MASTURBATION, AND DAYDREAMING FOR HMs AND GMs
Sex with a
partner
Mastur¬
bation
Day-
dreaming
HMs
Never
0.0
0.0
0.0
Rarely
40.6
0.0
12.5
Sometimes
34.4
18.8
40.6
Often
15.6
15.6
28.1
Frequently
6.3
25.0
18.8
Always
3.1
40.6
0.0
GMs
Never
0.0
0.0
0.0
Rarely
34.4
3.1
12.5
Sometimes
40.6
3.1
53.1
Often
9.4
21 .9
15.6
Frequently
6.3
12.5
15.6
Always
9.4
59.4
3.1
(25% for both groups); (2) "moderately satisfactory" (43.8% HMs, 40.6%
GMs); (3) "mildly satisfactory" (15.6% for both groups); and (4) "unsatis¬
factory" (15.6% HMs, 18.8% GMs). Comfort level concerning the question¬
naire also had similar responses from both groups, including: (1) "very
comfortable" (53.1% HMs, 56.3% GMs); (2) "somewhat comfortable" (28.1%
HMS, 25.0% GMs); (3) "somewhat uncomfortable" (18.0% for both groups);
and (4) "very uncomfortable" (no responses for either group).
The analysis of the 22 fantasy subthemes, under each of the three
conditions, involved several decisions that will be elucidated briefly.
Since the independent variable (e.g., sexual orientation) was categorical
and since the dependent variables (e.g., 22 subthemes) were continuous, a

96
MANOVA was chosen as the best statistical analysis for this portion of
the study. It would have been possible to perform 22 ANOVAS for each
condition, but this procedure would have incurred the risk of "probabil¬
ity pyramiding." As explained by Baggaley (1981) in an example using
six comparisons, "If an investigator runs six t tests using the conven¬
tional computing procedure and tables and a cut off alpha value of .05,
the effective 'experimentor-wise error rate' (Ryan, 1959) will unfortun¬
ately be higher than .05" (p. 619). A MANOVA takes into account the
correlations among the dependent variables as well as helping to control
Type I errors (i.e., rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true).
The MANOVA will generate ANOVAS for each of the dependent variables and
the analysis could end at this point, with the significant differences
being reported. This procedure would have inherent limitations for this
study because the relatively small number of subjects and the large
number of variables renders the "power" of the statistical test to an
unacceptably low level. Nelson and Zaichkowsky (1981) state, "Whether
or not a significant £-test is obtained, one should also devise some
estimate of the magnitude of the effect or the relationship being
investigated" (p. 327).
A discriminant analysis will provide an indication of how well
each significant dependent variable discriminates between the two groups
of male subjects. In this case, the sexual orientations of the subjects
become the dependent variables (i.e., categorical) and the specific
fantasy theme becomes the independent variable (i.e., continuous). A
discriminant score is derived for each factor, in this case it will be
a standardized canonical discriminant function. A brief summary of the

97
above process is provided by Nie, Null, Jenkins, Steinbrenner and Bent
(1975):
By averaging the scores for the cases within a particular
group [GM or HM], we arrive at the group mean of the
respective function [fantasy subtheme]. For a single
group, the means of all of the functions are referred to
as the group centroid, which is the most typical location
of a case from that group in the discriminant function
space. A comparison of the group means on each function
tells us how far apart the groups are along that dimension.
. . . The standardized discriminant function coefficients
are of great analytic importance in and of themselves.
When the sign is ignored [+, -], each coefficient repre¬
sents the relative contribution of its associated value to
that function. The sign merely denotes whether the func¬
tion is making a positive or negative contribution, (p. 443)
In general, the larger the absolute value of the discriminant function,
the greater the discriminatory power of the variable in question. There¬
fore the standard canonical discriminant functions will be used to evalu¬
ate the true "significance" of the differences in the reported ANOVAS.
In each condition, the corresponding MANOVA was highly significant
(see Table 5). The results were as follows: (1) sex with a partner
(£ (22, 41 ) = 5.03, £ < .0001 ); (2) masturbation (£ (22, 41 ) = 8.26,
£< .0001 ); and (3) daydreaming (£ (22, 41 ) = 4.89, £< .0001 ). These
results indicate some highly significant group differences and univariate
ANOVAS were computed for all 22 subthemes within each condition. The
problem becomes one of determining which ANOVAS are really indicative
of significant differences and which are a function of the large number
of comparisons within each condition.
In the sex with a partner condition five significant ANOVAS were
computed. "Engaging in sexual intercourse" (item 29) was highly sig¬
nificant and supported the fifth hypothesis (£ (1 , 62) = 69.92, ja < .001).

98
TABLE 5
MANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs
ON THREE CONDITIONS OF SFQ
Condition
N
F
Hypothesis
df
Error
df
P
Sex with partner
64
5.029
22
41
<.001
Masturbation
64
8.285
22
41
<.001
Daydreaming
64
4.894
22
41
<.001
The GMs (X = 4.19, S' = 1.23) had significantly higher group mean scores
than did the HMs (X = 1.97, S' = 1.23). The canonical discriminant func¬
tion coefficient (CDFC) indicates that this fantasy theme has high
discriminatory value between the groups (see Table 6). "Having sex in a
different setting" (item 15) was the second significant difference with
a relatively high CDFC (£ (1, 62) = 11.30, £ < .001), although this dif¬
ference was not hypothesized. The HM group (X = 3.44, S' = 1.24) had
significantly higher group mean scores when compared to the GM group
(X = 2.44, S' = 1.13). The final fantasy theme with significant group
mean score differences and a relatively high CDFC was "having sex with
animals" (item 27), £ (1, 62) = 5.74, £ < .05. The HMs had significantly
higher group mean scores when compared to the GMs (X = 1.16, S' = 0.37;
X = 1.00, S' = 0.00, respectively). A total of five (15.6%) of the HMs
(N = 32) indicated that they "rarely" had this fantasy. A significant
difference (£ (1 , 62) = 4.73, £< .05) was found for the "enjoyment of
being hurt during a sexual encounter" fantasy (item 24), with the GMs

99
TABLE 6
ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON SEX
WITH A PARTNER CONDITION OF SFQ AND
DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS FUNCTIONS
Item
number
df
Mean
square
error
F
P value
Canonical
Discriminant
Function
Coefficientsa
13
1,
62
1 .508
4.144
<.05
0.022
15
1,
62
1 .415
11.304
<.001
0.499
24
1,
62
0.558
4.733
<.05
0.024
27
1,
62
0.680
5.741
<.05
0.315
29
1,
62
1 .126
69.919
<.0001
0.979
aAbsolute values (i.e., |CDFC|)
(X = 1.59, S' = 0.98) scoring higher than the HMs (X = 1.19, S' = 0.40).
Although this finding lends support to hypothesis 9, the CDFC was rela¬
tively low and the difference may be due to the large number of obser¬
vations in this study (see Table 6). A similar finding occurred for the
"being overpowered or forced to surrender by someone" fantasy (item 13).
The GM group (X = 2.50, S' = 1.34) had a significantly higher group mean
score when compared to the HM group ("X = 1.88, S' = 1.10); £ (1, 62) =
4.14, £ < .05. The CDFC for this difference was relatively low and,
although the result tends to support hypothesis 7, any conclusions would
be tenuous in nature.
In the masturbation condition six significant ANOVAS resulted from
the data analysis (see Table 7). "Engaging in anal intercourse" (item 54)

100
TABLE 7
ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON MASTURBATION
CONDITION AND DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS FUNCTIONS
Item
number
df
Mean
square
error
F
P value
Canonical
Discriminant
Function
Coefficients3
40
1,
62
1.503
6.495
<.05
0.296
43
1,
62
2.261
4.318
<.05
0.088
47
1,
62
1 .417
7.452
<.01
0.584
49
1,
62
0.451
11.235
<.001
0.884
50
1,
62
0.280
5.570
<.05
0.418
54
1,
62
1 .04
89.266
<.0001
1 .059
aAbsolute values (i.e., |CDFC|)
was highly significant (£_ (1, 62) = 89.3, £ < .0001) with the GMs (X =
4.18, S' = 1.12) having significantly higher group mean scores when
compared to the HMs (X = 1.78, S' = 0.91). Hypothesis 5 was supported
again in this condition and the CDFC's relatively high value points to
the discrimination power of this fantasy theme. The "enjoyment of being
hurt during a sexual encounter" (item 49) was highly significant (£ (1,
62) = 11.24, p < .001) with GMs scoring significantly higher when com¬
pared to the HMs (X = 1.65, S' = 0.90; X = 1.09, S' = 0.30, respectively).
The CDFC was relatively high and, therefore, hypothesis 9 was partially
supported. The GMs (X = 4.06, S' = 1.27) had significantly higher group
mean scores on the "giving oral-genital contact" (item 47) fantasy

101
(£ (1 , 62) = 7.45, £ < .01) when compared to the HMs (X- = 3.25, S' = 1.11).
Given the relatively high CDFC, this fantasy theme is a good discriminator
between groups and lends partial support to hypothesis 4. A significant
difference was found on the "enjoyment of hurting another during a sexual
encounter" (item 50) fantasy (£ (1 , 62) = 5.57, £< .05). Hypothesis 9
also found support in that the GMs had higher group mean scores on this
fantasy theme than did the HMs ("X = 1.44, S' = 0.67; X = 1.13, S' = 0.34,
respectively). The CDFC was relatively high but the level of significance
was lower than in the "being hurt" fantasy (i.e., £< .001). A non-
predicted significant difference, "having sex in a different setting"
(item 40), was found (£ (1 , 62) = 6.50, p < .05) when comparing HM ("X =
3.41, S' = 1.36) group mean scores with GM (X = 2.63, S' = 1.07) scores.
The CDFC was relatively moderate but lends credence to the discriminatory
power of this fantasy theme. The final significantly different fantasy
theme for the masturbation condition was "pretending that you are having
sex with an irresistably sexy person" (item 43); £ (1, 61) = 4.32, £< .05.
The GMs (X = 3.88, S' = 1.47) had significantly higher group mean scores
when compared to the HMs (X = 3.09, S' = 1.53), although the CDFC was
relatively low and the difference may be due to chance.
In the daydreaming condition there were four significant AN0VAS (see
Table 8). The "engaging in anal intercourse" fantasy theme (item 78) was
highly significant for the third time (£ (1, 62) = 59.5, £< .0001), that
is, in each of the conditions. The GMs (~X = 3.91, S' = 1.23) had sig¬
nificantly higher group mean scores when compared to the HM (X = 1.84,
S' = 0.88) group. This finding lends support to hypothesis 5 in that the
CDFC was relatively high and the difference was in the predicted direction.

102
TABLE 8
ONE-WAY ANOVAS FOR COMPARISONS OF HMs AND GMs ON DAYDREAMING
CONDITION AND DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS FUNCTIONS
Item
number
df
Mean
square
error
F
P value
Canonical
Di scrimi nant
function
Coefficients3
71
1,
61
1 .618
8.119
<.01
0.139
73
1,
61
0.318
12.557
<.001
0.433
74
1,
61
0.289
9.175
<.01
0.074
78
1,
61
1 .144
59.487
<.0001
0.895
aAbsolute values (e.g., |CDFC|)
The "enjoyment of being hurt during a sexual encounter" (item 73) fantasy
was also significant (F_(l, 62) = 12.56, £< .001), with GMs (X = 1.56,
S' = 0.76) having significantly higher group mean scores than the HMs
(X = 1.06, S' = 0.26). This finding lends partial support for hypothesis
9 and the relatively high CDFC helps to support this fantasy theme's dis¬
criminatory ability between the two groups. The opposite fantasy theme,
"enjoyment of hurting another during a sexual encounter" (item 74), was
also significant (F (1, 62) = 9.18, p < .01). GMs (X = 1.47, S' = 0.72)
had significant group mean scores when compared to the HMs (X = 1.06,
S' = 0.25), lending further support to hypothesis 9. The CDFC was rela¬
tively low, however, so that this finding may have resulted by chance
rather than as an indication of group differences. Hypothesis 4 received
partial support in that the "giving oral-genital contact" (item 71)

103
fantasy theme was significantly different (£_ (1, 62) = 8.12, j: < .01)
between the two groups. The GMs (X = 4.22, S' = 1.26) had significantly
higher group mean scores than did the HMs [J = 3.31, S' = 1.28), with a
moderately high CDFC. Since the difference was in the predicted direc¬
tion, the strength of the discriminatory power of this fantasy theme
appears to be sound.
The following hypotheses did not receive support in any of the
three conditions: (1) GMs did not report significantly higher gynoerotic
fantasies when compared to the HMs reports of androerotic fantasies
(items 26, 51, and 75) as predicted; (2) HMs did not report significantly
higher fantasies about having sex with someone other than their current
partner (items 10, 12, 18, 35, 37, 59, 61, and 67) when compared to GMs.
The significant finding on item 41, in the masturbation condition, did
not provide strong support for this hypothesis (see Table 7) and there¬
fore no claims of support will be made; (3) GMs did not have signifi¬
cantly higher scores on the "group sex" and "observing others having
sex" items (i.e., 16, 19, 41, 44, 65 and 68) than did the HMs. The
other hypotheses (e.g., 4, 5, 7, and 9) received at least partial sup¬
port in one condition.
The group differences stated above do not give a clear indication
of the most frequent fantasies for each group. The top-ranked fantasies
for heterosexual males, in this study, are presented in Table 9. The
top-ranked fantasies for homosexual males are presented in Table 10.
Unlike previous studies, where no figures were provided for the cate¬
gories, the means and standard deviations are included within the tables.
The reader is reminded that the rating scales for each item are as

104
follows: "never" (1); "rarely" (2); "sometimes" (3); "often" (4);
"frequently" (5); and "always" (6). A mean of 4.22 indicates that a
particular fantasy was rated between "often" and "frequently" on the
average for a group.
TABLE 9
MOST FREQUENT SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES FOR
HMs IN EACH CONDITION OF SFQ
Sex with a partner
Masturbation
Daydreaming
Thinking about
current partner
(X = 4.28, S' = 1 .53)
Thoughts of some¬
one you know
(X = 3.87, S' = 1.13)
Thinking about
current partner
(X = 3.72, S' = 1 .14)
Receiving oral-
genital contact
(X = 4.09, S' = 1 .20)
Receiving oral-
genital contact
(X = 3.87, S' = 1 .13)
Thoughts of someone
you know
(X = 3.72, S' =1.11)
Giving oral-
genital contact
(X = 3.81 , S' = 1 .45)
Thinking about
current partner
(X = 3.56, S' =1 .39)
Receiving oral-
genital contact
(X = 3.65, S' =1 .13)
Having sex in a
different setting
(X = 3.44, S' = 1.24)
Reliving past sexual
experience
(X = 3.56, S' =1 .32)
Having sex in a
different setting
(X = 3.31, S' =1 .40)
Sex with an irre-
sistably sexy person
(X = 2.94, S' = 1 .24)
Having sex in a
different setting
(X = 3.41, S' = 1 .37)
Giving oral-genital
contact
(X = 3.31 , S' = 1 .28)

105
TABLE 10
MOST FREQUENT SEXUAL FANTASY THEMES FOR
GMs IN EACH CONDITION OF SFQ
Sex with a partner
Masturbation
Daydreaming
Giving oral-genital
contact
(X = 4.22, S’ = 1 .70)
Engaging in anal
intercourse
(X = 4.19, S’ = 1.12)
Giving oral-genital
contact
(X = 4.22, S’ =1.26)
Receiving oral-
genital contact
(X = 4.22, S’ =1.52)
Receiving oral-
genital contact
(X = 4.13, S’ =1.10)
Receiving oral-
genital contact
(X = 4.16, S’ = 1 .27)
Engaging in anal
intercourse
(X = 4.18, S’ =1.23)
Giving oral-genital
contact
(X = 4.06, S’ = 1 .27)
Engaging in anal
intercourse
(X = 3.90, S’ =1.28)
Thinking about
current partner
(X = 3.88, S’ =1 .62)
Thoughts of someone
you know
(X = 4.00, S’ = 1 .39)
Thoughts of someone
you know
(X = 3.81, S’ =1 .26)
Thoughts of someone
you know
(X = 2.75, S’ = 1 .16)
Sex with an irre-
sistably sexy person
(X = 3.88, S’ = 1.48)
Sex with an irre-
sistably sexy person
(X = 2.03, S’ =1 .31)
Analysis of the Meaninq of Sexual Experlence
Questionnaire—'[MOSE —III)
The MOSE—III (Bernstein, 1982) contains five categories relating
to the interpersonal meaning of sexuality (i.e., affiliation, inadequate/
undesirable, achievement, moral, erotic dominance). The subjects’ scores
on each category, for each group, were summed and divided by the number
of subjects per group (N = 32) in order to develop a group mean score.
The range of group mean scores varied depending on the number of
adjectives in each factor. The rating scale for each adjective ranged

106
from "not at all descriptive" (1) to "completely descriptive" (7).
Group mean scores could range, for each category, from (1) 11 to 77,
(2) 16 to 112, (3) 11 to 77, (4) 9 to 63, (5) 7 to 49, respectively.
A student's t_ test was run on each category to examine the differences
between groups. The _t tests for each factor turned out to be nonsig¬
nificant. The means and standard deviations for each factor, within
each group, are reported below (1) affiliation (HM, X = 62.1, S' =
8.97; GM, X = 57.8, S' = 11.95), (2) inadequate/undesirable (HM, X =
37.22, S' = 14.54; GM, X = 35.19, S' = 15.50), (3) achievement (HM,
X = 37.28, S' = 14.54; GM, X = 35.19, S' = 15.50), (4) moral (HM,
X = 46.91, S' = 10.43; GM, X - 48.16, S' = 9.82), and (5) erotic
dominance (HM, X = 32.16, S' = 6.45; GM, X = 34.00, S' = 6.15). The
implications of not finding support for any of the hypotheses will be
discussed in the next chapter.

CHAPTER IV
DISCUSSION
Sexual Fantasy
The intent of this study was to investigate the differences and
similarities between heterosexual male (HM) and homosexual male (GM)
sexual fantasy. The hypothesis that GMs would have more erotic fan¬
tasies about men and that HMs would have more erotic fantasies about
women was supported at the _p < .0001 level of significance. This
finding serves to confirm Storms' (1980) contention that "sexual orien¬
tation relates to a person's erotic fantasies" (p. 789) versus their
sex role orientation. It also confirms the observations of Kinsey et
al. (1948) and Masters and Johnson (1979) that GM subjects reported
higher levels of homoerotic fantasy than did the HM subjects. Support
can also be extended to Storms'(1980) theory from previous research on
sex-role orientation and sexual fantasy (Bernardi, 1977; Pape, 1980)
where sex-role identity did not help in predicting the content of sexual
fantasy.
The hypothesis that GMs would report gynoerotic fantasies more
often than HMs would report androerotic fantasies was supported in
Storms' (1980) study. Since he found this difference utilizing cross¬
scale comparisons and indicated the possibility of response consistency
on the EROS, an item on the SFO was employed, in this study, to test
the hypothesis. The item, "sexual activity with a member of your own
107

108
sex (or opposite sex if you are gay)," was one of the 22 subthemes under
each condition. No significant differences were found between the groups
in any condition.
As previously reported, on the EROS more HMs (81.3%) indicated that
they had "never" had a desire to have sex with a man that they knew in
comparison to the GMs (18.8%) responses to a similar item about a woman
that they knew. Differences were also noted in terms of the androerotic
fantasies for the HM group and for the gynoerotic fantasies of the GM
group, during daydreaming (78.1% and 25%, respectively) and masturbation
(87.5% and 53.1%, respectively). However, on the SFQ items the means
and standard deviations concerning androerotic fantasies for HMs and
gynoerotic fantasies for the GMs, in each condition, were as follows:
(1) sex with a partner (HM, X = 1.34, S' = 0.97; GM, X = 1.53, S' = 1.02);
(2) masturbation (HM, X = 1.47, S' = 1.14; GM, X = 1.75, S' = 0.72); and
(3) daydreaming (HM, X = 1.50, S' = 1.02; GM, X = 1.84, S' = 1.02). The
different response scales for the EROS and the SFQ could account for the
significant differences on one instrument but not on the other (e.g.,
"0" to "daily" on EROS and "never" to "always" on the SFQ). The EROS
also asked for fantasies over the past 12 months, while the SFQ only
asked for fantasies over the past three months. The EROS asks about
similar fantasies concerning men and women, whereas the SFQ inquires
about 22 different fantasy themes. It is difficult to determine whether
the differing results are a function of the instruments or of the sample
in this study. Therefore, no firm conclusions can be formulated.
The hypothesis that GMs would report higher frequencies of sex with
a partner when compared to HMs was not supported. One of the stereotypes

109
concerning GMs is that they are more sexually active than their HM
counterparts. The heightened opportunity for sexual activity in the gay
male community has been addressed by Humphreys (1976). Apparently when
sex with a partner is controlled for (e.g., all subjects had sex with a
partner at least once in the past three months), the difference between
the two groups is nonsignificant. The GMs did report having "a steady
sexual partner" less often (34.4%) than did the HMs (58.3%), but this
may reflect the conservative environment in which the midwestern portion
of the sample live. The Illinois State University subjects live in an
environment where homosexuality is frowned upon and, consequently, most
gays are in the "closet." This makes the identification of other gays
difficult and may lead to a limitation on the formation of "steady" rela¬
tionships.
A significant difference was found in terms of the frequency of
masturbation. The GMs reported masturbation more often (21 to 30 times
in the past three months) than did the HMs (11 to 20 times in the past
three months). This finding may reflect the fact that GMs have had to
refute the social taboos concerning their sexuality in general, and
therefore they have refuted the masturbation taboo in particular. The
lower incidence of a steady sexual partner in the GM group could also
help to account for this difference. Apparently the difference in
masturbation frequency between GMs (Jay & Young, 1979) and HMs (Hunt,
1976) in previous studies is not as slight among these two groups of
subjects.
No significant differences were found in the frequency of fantasy
on any of the three conditions in the SFQ (see Table 4). Since the

no
incidence of fantasy was controlled for by including only those subjects
who had fantasies at least "rarely" in all three conditions, the applica¬
tion of these results is limited to HMs and GMs who initially admit to
fantasizing. Whether sexual fantasy is viewed as an escape mechanism
(Hollender, 1963), repressed desires (Sullivan, 1976), a sexual script
(Gagnon & Simon, 1973), a tool for enhancing sexual arousal (Campagna,
1976), play-like stimulation (Carlson & Coleman, 1977), or a reflection
of one's self-concept (Klinger, 1971), there appear to be no significant
differences in the frequency with which the two groups engage in sexual
fantasy.
Several differences were noted in the sexual fantasies that involve
the "mechanical-anatomical" aspects of sexual activity. GMs are limited
in the types of sexual activities that they can engage in due to their
physical make-up (e.g., the lack of a vagina in males). Fellatio and
partner manipulation were identified as the two most popular sexual
activities for GMs by Masters and Johnson (1979). Since anal inter¬
course is the only coital approximation available to GMs, one would
expect them to fantasize about this activity more often than HMs, who
have coitus as a sexual activity option. Significant differences were
found, across all three conditions of the SFQ, between the two groups,
for this fantasy category. This serves to confirm the differences that
were noted in previous research on the sexual activity categories of GMs
(Jay & Young, 1979) and HMs (Hunt, 1976). Significant differences were
also found in terms of oral-genital contact fantasies. The GMs had
significantly higher scores on "giving oral-genital contact" fantasies
when compared to the HMs, in the masturbation and daydreaming conditions.

Ill
The groups did not differ significantly on the "receiving oral-genital
contact" fantasies. Apparently HMs find fantasies about being fellated
to be as equally appealing as do the GMs. On the other hand, fantasies
about performing cunnilingus are not as prevalent among the HM group as
fantasies about performing fellatio are among the GM group. The anatomi¬
cal limitations on GM sexuality may be operating in this instance and
could account for the observed group differences. As stated previously,
research on sexual activity has demonstrated that GMs have engaged in
oral sex (99.5%, Jay & Young, 1979) more often than have HMs (66%, Hunt,
1976).
An unexpected significant difference involved the "having sex with
animals" category. HMs had significantly higher scores on this fantasy
category when compared to the GMs. A total of five of the HMs indicated
that they had this fantasy "rarely," in the sex with a partner condition.
One possible explanation might be that the HMs, who reported this fantasy,
may have come from the midwestern portion of the HM group and may have
grown up in rural settings. The occurrence of sex with animals during
puberty, in rural settings, is well known and may be influencing the
results of this study. However, no firm conclusions can be made concern¬
ing what may have caused this difference in fantasy between the two
groups.
Several significant differences between the GMs and HMs resulted
on fantasy categories that were not related to "mechanical-anatomical"
differences. The GM group reported significantly higher frequencies of
sadomasochistic (S/M) fantasies when compared to the HM group. The GMs
reported higher frequencies in the "enjoyment of being hurt during a

112
sexual encounter" fantasy category across all three conditions. They
also reported higher frequencies in the "enjoyment of hurting another
during a sexual encounter" fantasy category under the masturbation and
daydreaming conditions. These findings support the results of Masters
and Johnson's (1979) study and the results of Jay and Young's (1979)
survey of the gay community. Neither of the above authors put forth an
explanation of why homosexuals have S/M fantasies. Jay and Young (1979)
did point out that few gay individuals act on their S/M fantasies, with
63% of their GM sample indicating that they had "never" participated in
this type of sexual activity. One possible explanation is that the GMs
S/M fantasies reflect their own internal disapproval of themselves
(Sullivan, 1976) or of their lifestyles. Freud (1963) interprets maso¬
chism in terms of guilt and castration anxiety and implies that it is a
transformation of sadistic impulses. Sadism is the sexualization of
the inherent male aggressiveness. According to Gagnon and Simon's (1973)
sexual script theory, these GM S/M fantasies may reflect attempts to
manage dominance or aggression factors "in the nonsexual spheres" of the
GM's life. An example of this might be the GM's reaction to society's
rejection of them and the hostility that they have encountered from other
males in our society. Attributions of psychopathology because of the
higher frequency of S/M fantasies, however, are not necessarily indicated.
Several authors have indicated that homosexuals are not necessarily more
pathological than heterosexuals (e.g., Bell, 1976; Churchill, 1967;
Hoffman, 1968; Hooker, 1965; Money, 1977; G. Weinberg, 1973; M. Weinberg,
1970), and Klinger (1971) noted that attempts to predict an individual's
overt behavior from his fantasy patterns is a risky proposition at best.

113
Only one significant difference was found in the submissive fantasy
category. GMs had higher scores on the "being overpowered or forced to
surrender by someone" fantasy when compared to the HMs, in the sex with
a partner condition. However, the level of significance was low (p< .05)
and the CDFC was also low. No significant differences between the two
groups were noted in the dominance fantasy category (e.g., "overpowering
or forcing someone else to surrender"). The lack of support for the
hypothesis that GMs would have a significantly higher frequency of sub¬
missive fantasies serves to refute the sex-role disturbances that are
asserted for GMs by Rekers and Lovaas (1974). These findings lend sup¬
port to the results of previous researchers who have found that gender,
rather than sex role orientation, is a prime determinant of sexual
fantasy (Bernardi, 1977; Pape, 1980; Storms, 1980). They also lend
support to the notion that GMs have rejected sex-role stereotypes (e.g.,
Harry, 1976-77; Peplau, 1981; Ross, 1975).
The GM group also had significantly higher scores on the "pretend¬
ing you are having sex with an irresistably sexy person" fantasy category,
in the masturbation condition. This outcome coincides with Masters and
Johnson's (1979) finding that GMs fantasized about "idyllic encounters
with unknown men," such as entertainers and men they had seen in public
places, more often than did the HMs in their study. One can view this
result as supportive of the contention that men are more inclined toward
impersonal sex when compared to women (e.g., Eysenck, 1971b; Morris,
1978). It also reflects Jay and Young's (1979) finding that less than
half of their GM sample (47%) thought that emotional involvement with
their sex partner was "very important." The accessability of quick,

114
impersonal sex in some of the gay institutions (e.g., gay "baths," bars)
may be contributing to this result (Humphreys, 1976), as well as the
social learning that occurs as an individual becomes a member of the gay
community (Bandura, 1969).
The HMs had significantly higher scores on the "having sex in a
different setting" fantasy category, in both the "sex with a partner" and
"masturbation" conditions. The interpretation of this finding is diffi¬
cult. Since GMs have more opportunities for sexual experiences in dif¬
ferent settings (e.g., gay "baths," bars) than HMs do, the above may
simply reflect a lack of opportunity on the part of the HMs for sexual
activity in a variety of settings. The proliferation of sex-hotels (e.g.,
Sandstone) in the past 15 years is one indication of a search for new
settings and sexual environments (Comfort, 1976).
The nonsignificant findings can be construed as similarities between
the GM and HM groups. The HMs did not have more fantasies about replacing
their current partners. This finding makes common sense since the HMs'
top-ranked fantasy themes during "sex with a partner" and "daydreaming"
concerned "thinking about their current partner (see Table 9). The level
of satisfaction with their current sexual activity was also high for a
majority of the HM group (i.e., 68.8% indicated "moderately satisfied")
so that changing their current partner may be a low priority. The GM
group did not have significantly higher scores on the "group sex" or
"observing others having sex" fantasy themes, when compared to the HM
group. Although GMs seem to engage in these activities more often than
do HMs (Jay & Young, 1979), there are no differences in the frequency of
these fantasies between these two groups. This finding lends support to

115
the Masters and Johnson (1979) observation that GMs and HMs ranked group
sex fantasies equally. Neither one of these fantasies were included in
the five top-ranked fantasies for each group (see Tables 9 and 10).
A perusal of the top-ranked fantasy themes for HMs (Table 9) and
GMs (Table 10) in this study will indicate that the main differences lie
in the "mechanical-anatomical" areas of sexual activity. That is, GMs
ranked anal intercourse and oral-genital fantasies higher than did the
HMs, across all three conditions. However, the other fantasy categories
were essentially similar. Looking at the top-ranked fantasies for HMs
in this study (Table 9) and in Pape's (1980) study (Table 1), the
similarities are striking and lend support to Pape's findings. A
further perusal of the top-ranked fantasies for the HMs (Table 9) and
GMs (Table 10) in this study, when compared to the HFs in Pape's (1980)
study (Table 2), will tend to indicate that the HMs are more similar to
the HFs than are the GMs. Pape's (1980) findings that HMs scored higher
than HFs on group sex, forcing someone to surrender, engaging in anal
intercourse, and enjoyment of hurting another during sex point to the
similarities between GMs and HMs, and to the differences between GMs and
HFs. Previous contentions that GMs are more like HFs (e.g., Rekers &
Lovaas, 1974; Rekers et al., 1974; Rekers et al., 1977) than like HMs
are not supported by the above findings.
The tentative conclusions that can be made concerning the sexual
fantasies of GM and HM individuals, based on the results of this study,
are as follows: (1) the effects of sexual orientation appear to involve
those fantasies which reflect the "mechanical-anatomical" sexual
activities (e.g., anal intercourse, oral-genital contact), and (2) the

116
effects of gender, and not sex-role orientation, are reflected in the
similarities between GM and HM fantasy and the differences between GM
and HF fantasy. In those fantasy categories where the GMs scored sig¬
nificantly higher than the HMs (e.g., "sex with an irresistably sexy
person"), the HMs had previously scored significantly higher than the
HFs. Another way of stating the second conclusion is that the GM and
HM fantasies were more similar than the male-female fantasies. The
above conclusions are only tentative and are to be viewed within the
context of the limitations of this study (see section of Limitations in
this chapter).
The Meaning of Sexual Experience
A second intent of this study was to compare the GM and HM groups
on the meaning of sexual experience utilizing Bernstein's (1982) five
categories from the MOSE—-III. No significant differences were found
between the two groups on any of the factors (i.e., affiliation, in ade¬
quate/undesirable, achievement, moral, erotic dominance). The lack of
significant differences can be interpreted as an indication of the
similarities between HM and GM sexual meanings. The lack of a differ¬
ence in the inadequate/undesirable category can be viewed as a refutation
of the theory that GMs are more maladjusted than HMs (e.g., Bergler,
1956, Fenichel, 1945; Freud, 1962) and as confirmation for those authors
who contend that GMs are no more maladjusted than are their heterosexual
counterparts (e.g., Bell, 1976; Churchill, 1967; Hoffman, 1968; G. Wein¬
berg, 1973). The similarities in the achievement, affiliation, and moral
categories also point to a gender effect in the determination of the

117
meaning of sexual experience. Bernstein (1982) found significant differ¬
ences between his HM and HF subjects (see Table 3), with HMs scoring
higher on achievement and erotic dominance categories and HFs scoring
higher on the affiliation and moral categories. If GMs are more simi¬
lar to HFs (e.g., Rekers & Lovaas, 1974; Rekers et al., 1974; Rekers
et al., 1977) than to HMs, these differences should have manifested
themselves in the above comparisons.
Since Bernstein's (1982) HM sample was larger (N = 124) than the
HM sample in this study (N = 32), there was a temptation to compare the
differences between these two groups. However, since the HMs in this
sample came from three distinct geographic locations (i.e., Florida,
Illinois and Texas), were selected on the basis of previous sexual
activity (e.g., sex with a partner and masturbation), and had different
instruments administered to them, it was decided that there was no basis
for comparison. The results of the MOSE—III should be viewed within
the context of the limitations inherent in the present study. Those
limitations are presented below.
Limitations, Strengths, and Applications
of the Present Study
The limitations of this study include:
(1) a relatively low number of subjects in both the GM (N = 32)
and HM (N = 32) groups;
(2) the possibility of high error variance due to the large
number of observations (e.g., 66 fantasy subthemes in three
conditions) per subject, the possible imprecision of the
instruments, and the possibility that the subjects in each
group were more heterogenous than expected (e.g., demo¬
graphic factors);

118
(3) the fact that the sample included only college students
and that the GM sample was comprised of volunteers who
do not necessarily represent the GM population at large.
The strengths of this study include:
(1) The factors of previous sexual activity and sexual
fantasy were controlled for (e.g., at least rarely
in the past three months) in both groups.
(2) The groups were comprised of nonclinical populations
and the study was planned to avoid the heterosexual
bias that was referred to by Morin (1977) concerning
previous research on GM populations.
(3) The questionnaire approach provided an environment of
anonymity and the question on comfort level indicated
that most of the subjects felt at least "somewhat
comfortable" in filling out the EROS and SFQ (i.e.,
79.4% of HMs and 81.3% of GMs).
(4) An indication of the magnitude of the effect was
provided for all of the significant differences by
performing a discriminant analysis after the MANOVAs
and using the CDFCs as an indicator of the power of
each fantasy category in terms of discriminating
between the two groups.
The findings in this study can be applied to clinical practice.
A knowledge of the normative sexual fantasies of GMs and HMs can help
the clinician to determine which of his/her client fantasies are deviant
and which are not. For those clients who are confused about their
sexual orientation, an investigation of their sexual fantasies can
provide some indication of their sexual orientation. This would be
true of anal intercourse fantasies and fantasies involving the giving
of oral sex. The influence of gender on sexual fantasy has been well
documented (e.g., Abramson & Mosher, 1979; Bernardi, 1977; Carlson &
Coleman, 1977; Gelles, 1976; Mednick, 1977; Pape, 1980) and the results
of this study support these findings. This has implications for the
development of theories on sexual fantasy, and fantasy in general. The

119
concept of sex-role, on the other hand, has not been helpful in the pre¬
diction of sexual fantasy content.
As with all research in a relatively new area, this topic requires
further study. Social class differences have been demonstrated among
homosexuals (Carrier, 1977) and cross-cultural differences have also
been investigated (Weinberg & Williams, 1974). Studies across several
age groups also need to be done (e.g., Giambra, 1978; Giambra & Martin,
1977) in order to determine the effect of age on the fantasies of GMs
and HMs. The fantasies of gay and straight women also need to be inves¬
tigated. A replication of this study, with larger samples in each group,
would serve to verify or disconfirm the results in terms of a more norma¬
tive sample. The author hopes to have stimulated interest in this topic
and to have provided some possible directions for future research.

APPENDIX A
EROTIC RESPONSE AND ORIENTATION SCALE
The following questions ask about your sexual experiences and feelings
toward men and women over the past 12 months. Please read each ques¬
tion carefully and indicate whether you have had the experience or
feeling being asked about—never (0), only once or twice (1-2), three
to six times (3-6), seven to twelve items (7-12), an average of once
or twice a month (monthly), or an average of once or twice a week
(weekly), or almost daily or more (daily), durinq the past 12 months.
Please circle your answers.
Number of Times During the Past 12 Months
1. How often have you
noticed that a man 0
you've seen or met for
the first time is
physically attractive
to you?
2. How often have you
noticed that a woman 0
you've seen or met for
the first time is
physically attractive
to you?
3. How often have you had
any sexual feelings 0
(even the slightest)
while looking at a man?
4. How often have you had
any sexual feelings 0
(even the slightest)
while looking at a woman?
5. How often have you felt
some sexual arousal 0
from touching or being
touched by a man?
6. How often have you felt
some sexual arousal 0
from touching or being
touched by a woman?
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly daily
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly daily
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly daily
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly daily
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly daily
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly daily
12Q

121
Number of Times During the Past 12 Months
7. How often have you
thought about what it 0
would be like to have a
sexual experience with
a man?
8. How often have you
thought about what it 0
would be like to have a
sexual experience with
a woman?
9. How often have you felt
a desire to have a 0
sexual experience with a
particular man you know?
10. How often have you felt
a desire to have a 0
sexual experience with a
particular woman you know?
11. How often have you day¬
dreamed about having a 0
sexual experience with
a man?
12. How often have you day¬
dreamed about having a 0
sexual experience with
a woman?
13. How often have you
dreamed at night about 0
having a sexual experi¬
ence with a man?
14. How often have you
dreamed at night about 0
having a sexual experi¬
ence with a woman?
15. How often have you mas¬
turbated while fanta- 0
sizing a sexual
experience with a man?
16. How often have you mas¬
turbated while fantasiz- 0
ing a sexual experience
with a woman?
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
1-2 3-6 7-12 monthly weekly
daily
daily
daily
daily
daily
daily
da i ly
dai ly
daily
daily

APPENDIX B
SEXUAL FANTASY QUESTIONNAIRE
Introduction
We are interested in doing research on sexual fantasy. The following
questionnaire will ask you about some of your sexual experiences and
sexual fantasies. For the purposes of this study, a sexual fantasy
can be defined as "any thought or idea which contains sexual matter
and/or is sexually arousing to the person having the fantasy." There
has been little research on this topic to date, and we are interested
in studying the different types of sexual fantasies people have in
various situations.
If you feel offended, inhibited, or embarrassed by this topic, please
do not fill out a questionnaire. If you wish to participate, please
take as much time as you need and formulate your answers honestly.
This questionnaire is completely anonymous. Do not enter your name
or student identification number on this form.
Part I: Background Information
For each of the following items, circle (or fill in) the appropriate
answer.
1 • Age _/ _j
2. Ethnic Background /
1. Black
2. White
3. Hispanic
4. Other
3. What is your religious affiliation? /
1. Protestant
2. Catholic
3. Jewish
4. Other
5. None
4. How would you describe your sexual orientation? /
1. Exclusively heterosexual
2. Mostly heterosexual
3. Bisexual
4. Mostly homosexual
5. Exclusively homosexual
122

123
5. Do you currently have a steady sexual partner? /
1. Yes
2. No
6. How would you describe your current sexual activity? /
1. Very satisfactory
2. Moderately satisfactory
3. Mildly satisfactory
4. Unsatisfactory
Part II: Sexual Fantasy Themes
7. Based upon your sexual activity for the past 3 months only, how many
times did you engage
in sex with
a partner?
1. 0
6.
21-25
2. 1- 5
7.
26-30
3. 6-10
8.
31-35
4. 11-15
9.
36-40
5. 16-20
10.
Over 40
*IF YOUR ANSWER TO ITEM 7 WAS "1" SKIP TO ITEM 32.
8.Based upon the past 3 months only, how often did you have sexual
fantasies while engaging in sexual activity with a partner?
1. Never
2. Rarely
3. Sometimes
4. Often
5. Frequently
6. Always
*IF YOUR ANSWER TO ITEM 8 WAS "1" SKIP TO ITEM 32.
Listed below are some themes that are commonly reported as occurring
during sexual fantasies. Based upon your experiences during the past
3 months, please rate each theme as you have experienced it during any
sexual fantasies you have had while engaging in sex with a partner.
Read through each theme carefully, then write the number of your
response in the space provided, using the following scale:
1 .
Never
4.
Often
2.
Rarely
5.
Frequently
3.
Sometimes
6.
Always
9.Thinking about your current partner (e.g., the person you are
currently living with or dating)
10. Thoughts of someone you know (other than your current partner)
11. Reliving a previous sexual experience (e.g., thinking about an
experience that actually occurred in the past)

124
12. Thoughts of an imaginary lover (e.g., a stranger, movie star, etc.)
13. Being overpowered or forced to surrender by someone
14. Overpowering or forcing someone else to surrender
15. Having sex in a different setting (car, motel, beach, woods, etc.)
16. Observing yourself or others having sex
17. Pretending that you are another irresistably sexy person
18. Pretending that you are having sex with an irresistably sexy person
19. Having sex with more than one person at a time
20. Imagining that you are being paid to have sex with someone
21. Imagining that you are paying someone to have sex with you
22. Giving oral-genital contact
23. Receiving oral-genital contact
24. Enjoyment of being hurt during a sexual encounter
25. Enjoyment of hurting another during a sexual encounter
26. Sexual activity with a member of your own sex (or opposite sex
if you are gay)
27. Having sex with animals
28. Imagining that you are physically different (larger penis, etc.)
29. Engaging in anal intercourse
30. Recalling scenes from pornographic or erotic literature or films
31. Other specific theme not listed above. Describe
32. Based upon your sexual activity for the past 3 months only, how
many times did you engage in masturbation? / /
1.
0
6.
21-25
2.
1-5
7.
26-30
3.
6-10
8.
31-35
4.
11-15
9.
36-40
5.
16-20
10.
Over 40
*IF YOUR ANSWER TO ITEM 32 WAS "1" SKIP TO ITEM 57.

125
33. Based upon the past three months only, how often did you have
sexual fantasies while engaging in masturbation?
1.
Never
4.
Often
2.
Rarely
5.
Frequently
3.
Sometimes
6.
Always
*IF YOUR ANSWER TO ITEM 33 WAS "1" SKIP TO ITEM 57.
Listed below are some themes that are commonly reported as occurring
during sexual fantasies. Based upon your experiences during the past
3 months, please rate each theme as you have experienced it during any
sexual fantasies you have had during masturbation. Read through each
theme carefully, then write the number of your response in the space
provided, using the following scale:
1.
Never
4.
Often
2.
Rarely
5.
Frequently
3.
Sometimes
6.
Always
34. Thinking about your current partner (e.g., the person you are
currently living with or dating)
35. Thoughts of someone you know (other than your current partner)
36. Reliving a previous sexual experience (e.g., thinking about an
experience that actually occurred in the past)
37. Thoughts of an imaginary lover (e.g., a stranger, movie star, etc.)
38. Being overpowered or forced to surrender by someone
39. Overpowering or forcing someone else to surrender
40. Having sex in a different setting (car, motel, beach, woods, etc.)
41. Observing yourself or others having sex
42. Pretending that you are another irresistably sexy person
43. Pretending that you are having sex with an irresistably sexy person
44. Having sex with more than one person at a time
45. Imagining that you are being paid to have sex with someone
46. Imagining that you are paying someone to have sex with you
47. Giving oral-genital contact
48.Receiving oral-genital contact

126
49. Enjoyment of being hurt during a sexual encounter
50. Enjoyment of hurting another during a sexual encounter
51. Sexual activity with a member of your own sex (or the opposite
sex if you are gay)
52. Having sex with animals
53. Imagining that you are physically different (larger penis, etc.)
54. Engaging in anal intercourse
55. Recalling scenes from pornographic or erotic literature or films
56. Other specific theme not listed above. Describe
57. Based upon the past 3 months only, how often did you have sexual
fantasies while daydreaming? /
1.
Never
4. Often
2.
Rarely
5. Frequently
3.
Sometimes
6. Always
*IF
YOUR ANSWER TO ITEM 57 was "1
" SKIP TO ITEM 81
Listed below are some themes that are commonly reported as occurring
during sexual fantasies. Based upon your experiences during the past 3
months, please rate each theme as you have experienced it during any
sexual fantasies you have had while daydreaming. Read through each theme
carefully, then write the number of your response in the space provided,
using the following scale:
1.
Never
4.
Often
2.
Rarely
5.
Frequently
3.
Sometimes
6.
Always
58. Thinking about your current partner (e.g., the person you are
currently living with or dating)
59. Thoughts of someone you know (other than your current partner)
60. Reliving a previous sexual experience (e.g., thinking about an
experience that actually occurred in the past)
61. Thoughts of an imaginary lover (e.g., a stranger, movie
star, etc.)
62. Being overpowered or forced to surrender by someone

127
63. Overpowering or forcing someone else to surrender
64. Having sex in a different setting (car, motel, beach, woods, etc.)
65. Observing yourself or others having sex
_66. Pretending that you are another irresistably sexy person
67. Pretending that you are having sex with an irresistably sexy person
68. Having sex with more than one person at a time
69. Imagining that you are being paid to have sex with someone
70. Imagining that you are paying someone to have sex with you
71. Giving oral-genital contact
72. Receiving oral-genital contact
73. Enjoyment of being hurt during a sexual encounter
74. Enjoyment of hurting another during a sexual encounter
75. Sexual activity with a member of your own sex (or the opposite
sex if you are gay)
76. Having sex with animals
77. Imagining that you are physically different (larger penis, etc.)
78. Engaging in anal intercourse
79. Recalling scenes from pornographic or erotic literature or films
80. Other specific theme not listed above. Describe
81. In filling out this questionnaire, you have been asked to provide
information about some of your most intimate personal sexual experi¬
ences. To what extent did you feel comfortable about revealing this
information? (Circle one answer)
1. Very comfortable 3. Somewhat uncomfortable
2. Somewhat comfortable 4. Very uncomfortable
82. Please feel free to write any comments you have regarding this study:

APPENDIX C
THE MEANING OF SEXUAL EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE—111
Part II: On the following pages you will find a list of 70 adjectives.
We would like you to use these adjectives to describe the personal
meaning that sexual experience has for you. That is, we would like you
to indicate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how descriptive these adjectives are
of the unique meaning of your sexual experience, whether you have
derived the meaning from actual sexual experiences or your thoughts
about sexual experiences. Read these adjectives quickly and PLEASE DO
NOT LEAVE ANY ADJECTIVE UNMARKED!
Example^ For the adjective "informal":
© 2 3 4 5 6 7
Circle 1 if "informal" is NOT AT ALL descriptive
of the meaning of your sexual experience.
1© 3 4 5 6 7
Circle 2 if "informal" is RARELY descriptive of
the meaning of your sexual experience.
1 2 © 4 5 6 7
Circle 3 if "informal" is INFREQUENTLY descrip-
tive of the meaning of your sexual experience.
1 2 3 © 5 6 7
Circle 4 if "informal" is SOMEWHAT descriptive
of the meaning of your sexual experience.
1 2 3 4 ©67
Circle 5 if "informal" is FREQUENTLY descriptive
of the meaning of your sexual experience.
1 2 3 4 5 ©7
Circle 6 if "informal" is USUALLY descriptive of
the meaning of your sexual experience.
1 2 3 4 5 6 ©
Circle 7 if "informal" is COMPLETELY descriptive
of the meaning of your sexual experience.
Are there any questions:
Remember: Don't leave any adjectives unmarked.
128

129
1.
inept
Not at all
Descriptive
f'0 Rarely
w Infrequently
Somewhat
>>
+->
c
a;
cr
CD
S-
Ll_
5
^ Usually
2.
honorable
1
2
3
4
5
6
3.
masterful
1
2
3
4
5
6
4.
titillating
1
2
3
4
5
6
5.
demanding
1
2
3
4
5
6
6.
muted
1
2
3
4
5
6
7.
submissive
1
2
3
4
5
6
8.
unselfish
1
2
3
4
5
6
9.
dignified
1
2
3
4
5
6
10.
remote
1
2
3
4
5
6
11 .
erotic
1
2
3
4
5
6
12.
aggressive
1
2
3
4
5
6
13.
frigid
1
2
3
4
5
6
14.
victorious
1
2
3
4
5
6
15.
futi1e
1
2
3
4
5
6
16.
proper
1
2
3
4
5
6
17.
hot
1
2
3
4
5
6
18.
forceful
1
2
3
4
5
6
19.
righteous
1
2
3
4
5
6
20.
offensive
1
2
3
4
5
6
21 .
dominant
1
2
3
4
5
6
22.
moral
1
2
3
4
5
6
23.
cl ean
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Completely
Descripti ve

130
CD
i— >
4->
r— ‘t—
c
r—
CO 4->
CD
4->
4->
CL
=3
C
>>
4-> -r-
>>
cr
JC
CD
(0 i-
CD
C5
1—
O
CD
s-
CD
cr
CO
4-> tO
S-
<+-
E
CD
13
O CD
CO
c
O
to
q
Cd
t—1
GO
u_
ZD
24.
infantile
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
25.
timid
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
26.
affectionate
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
27.
capable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
28.
uninhibited
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
29.
distrustful
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
30.
appropriate
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
31 .
fl at
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
32.
potent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
33.
ecstatic
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
34.
winning
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
35.
distant
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
36.
virtuous
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
37.
inhibited
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
38.
awkward
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
39.
pure
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
40.
outgoing
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
41 .
inadequate
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
42.
correct
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
43.
mighty
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
44.
sincere
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
45.
evasive
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
46.
amorous
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Completely
Descriptive

131
47.
successful
Not at all
-* Descriptive
>,
a>
s_
ra
cc
2
^ Infrequently
^ Somewhat
>)
4->
C
CD
Z3
cr
CD
l_L_
5
(O
3

ZD
6
Completely
^ Descriptive
48.
fond
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
49.
caring
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
50.
exciting
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
51.
gentle
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
52.
discrete
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
53.
disagreeable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
54.
assertive
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
55.
intimate
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
56.
mature
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
57.
dari ng
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
58.
loving
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
59.
imaginative
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
60.
kind
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
61 .
undesirable
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
62.
sensual
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
63.
sacred
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
64.
tactful
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
65.
resentful
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
66.
inventive
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
67.
trusting
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
68.
determined
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
69.
serious
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
70.
warm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Descriptive

REFERENCES
Abramson, P. R., & Mosher, D. L. An empirical investigation of experi¬
mentally induced masturbatory fantasies. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 1979, 80 ), 27-39.
Acosta, F. X. Etiology and treatment of homosexuality: A review.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1975, <4(1), 9-30.
Baggaley, A. R. Multivariate analysis. The Personnel and Guidance
Journal, 1981, 59(10), 619-621.
Bancroft, J. Aversion therapy of homosexuality: A pilot study of 10
cases. British Journal of Psychiatry, 1969, 115, 1417-1431.
Bandura, A. Social learning theory of identificatory processes. In
D. A. Goslin (ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research.
Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969.
Barclay, A. Linking sexual and aggressive motives: Contributions of
"irrelevant" arousals. Journal of Personality, 1971, 39, 481-492.
Barclay, A. M. Sexual fantasies in men and women. Medical Aspects of
Human Sexuality, 1973, 7j5), 205-216.
Bell, A. P. The homosexual as patient. In M. S. Weinberg (ed.), Sex
research: Studies from the Kinsey Institute. New York: Oxford
Press, 1976.
Bern, S. L. The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1974, 42^(2), 155-162.
Bentler, P. Heterosexual behavior assessment —I: Males. Behavior
Research and Therapy, 1968, 6s 21-25.
Bergler, E. Homosexuality, disease or way of life. New York: Collier
Books, 1956.
Bernardi, A. L. The effects of psychological androgyny and gender on
sexual fantasy and experience. (Doctoral Dissertation, Ohio
University, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1977
(Feb.), 37(8-B), 4129^
Bernstein, D. N. The formulation of an instrument to assess the inter¬
personal meanings of sexual experience. Doctoral dissertation,
University of Florida, 1982.
132

133
Bieber, I., Dain, H. J., Dince, P. R., Drellich, M. G., Grand, N. G.,
Gundlach, R. H., Kremer, M. W., Rifkin, A. H., Wilbur, C. B., &
Bieber, T. B. Homosexuality: A psychoanalytic study. New York:
Basic Books, 1962.
Brown, J. J., & Hart, D. H. Correlates of females' sexual fantasies.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1977, 45_, 819-825.
Bullough, V. L. Sexual variance in society and history. New York:
John Wiley & Sons, 1976.
Bullough, V. L. Homosexuality: A history. New York: Garland STPM
Press, 1979.
Campagna, A. F. The function of men's erotic fantasies during mastur¬
bation. (Doctoral Dissertation, Yale University, 1976.)
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1976, 36_, 6373-B.
Carlson, E. R., & Coleman, C. E. H. Experiential and motivational
determinants of the richness of an induced sexual fantasy.
Journal of Personality, 1977, 45(4), 528-542.
Carrier, J. M. "Sex-role preference" as an explanatory variable in
homosexual behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1977, 6(1),
53-65.
Chodorow, N. Oedipal assymetries and heterosexual knots. Social
Problems, 1976, 23, 454-468.
Churchill, W. Homosexual behavior among males. New York: Hawthorn
Books, 1967.
Clement, U., & Pfafflen, F. Changes in personality scores among couples
subsequent to sex therapy. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1980, 9,
235-244.
Comfort, A. Sexuality in a zero growth society. In C. Gordon & G.
Johnson (eds.), Readings in human sexuality: Contemporary perspec¬
tives. New York: Harper & Row, 1976.
Conrad, S. R., & Wincze, J. P. Organismic reconditioning: A controlled
study of its effects upon sexual arousal and behavior of adult
male homosexuals. Behavior Therapy, 1973, £, 686-696.
Cronbach, L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.
Psychometrika, 1951, 1_6, 297-334.
Curran, D., & Parr, D. Homosexuality: An analysis of 100 male cases.
British Medical Journal, 1957, 1_, 797-801 .
D'Augelli, J., & Cross, H. Relationship of sex guilt and moral reason¬
ing to premarital sex in college women and in couples. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1975, 4_3, 40-47.

134
Davidson, G. C. Homosexuality: The ethical challenge. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1976, 44(2), 157-162.
Davidson, G. C.,& Wilson, G. T. Attitudes of behavior therapists toward
homosexuality. Behavior Therapy, 1973, 4, 686-696.
Dearth, P.,& Cassell, C. Comparing attitudes of male and female univer¬
sity students before and after a semester course on human sexuality.
Journal of School Health, 1976, 46, 593-598.
DeMartino, M. F. Sex and the intelligent woman. New York: Springer
Publishing Company, 1974.
Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.).
Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association, 1980.
Ellis, H. Studies on the psychology of sex (Vol. 4). New York: Random
House, 1936.
Ellis, H. Studies on the psychology of sex (Vol. 1). New York: Random
House, 1942.
Ellis, H. Psychology of sex. New York: Emerson Books, 1964.
Evans, R. B. Adjective checklist scores of homosexual men. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 1971, 3^(4), 344-349.
Eysenck, H. Personality and sexual adjustment. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 1971a, 118, 593-608.
Eysenck, H. Masculinity-femininity, personality and sexual attitudes.
The Journal of Sex Research, 1971b, ]_, 83-88.
Faraday, A. The dream game. New York: Harper & Row, 1974.
Farley, F., Nelson, J., Knight, W., & Garcia-Colberg, E. Sex, politics,
and personality: A multidimensional study of college students.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1977, 6, 105-119.
Feldman, M. P.,& MacCulloch, M. J. A systematic approach to the treat¬
ment of homosexuality by conditioned aversion: Preliminary report.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 1971, 1_27, 1221-1224.
Fenichel, 0. The psychoanalytic theory of neurosis. New York: Norton,
1945. “ ' “
Finger, F. Changes in sex practices and beliefs of male college students
over 30 years. The Journal of Sex Research, 1975, TJ_, 304-317.
Foote, N. Sex as play. In C. Gordon & G. Johnson (eds.), Readings in
human sexuality: Contemporary perspectives. New York: Harper &
Row, 1976.

135
Fort, J., Steiner, C. M., & Conrad, F. Attitudes of mental health pro¬
fessionals toward homosexuality and its treatment. Psychological
Reports, 1971, 29, 347-350.
Freedman, M. Homosexuals may be healthier than straights. Psychology
Today, March 1975, pp. 28-32.
Freud, S. Three essays on the theory of sexuality. New York: Basic
Books, 1962.
Freud, S. Sexuality and the psychology of love. New York: Macmillan
Publishing Co., 1963.
Friday, N. Men in love: Men's sexual fantasies. New York: Dell
Publishing Co., 1980.
Gagnon, J. Scripts and the coordination of sexual conduct. In J. Cole
& R. Dienstbier (eds.), Nebraska symposium on motivation 1973.
Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1974.
Gagnon, J. Human sexualities. Glenview: Scott, Foresman & Company,
1977.
Gagnon, J., & Simon, W. Sexual conduct: The social source of human
sexuality. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1973.
Gecas, V., & Libby, R. Sexual behavior as symbolic interaction. The
Journal of Sex Research, 1 976, 1_2, 33-49.
Gelles, R. On the association of sex and violence in the fantasy produc¬
tion of college students. Suicide, 1975, 5^, 78-84.
Gerrard, M. Sex guilt and attitudes toward sex in sexually active and
inactive female college students. Journal of Personality Assess¬
ment, 1980, 44, 258-261.
Gershman, H. A psychoanalyst's evaluation of the sexual revolution.
The American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 1978, 38, 143-154.
Giambra, L. M. Adult male daydreaming across the lifespan: A replica¬
tion, further analyses, and tentative norms based upon retrospec¬
tive reports. International Journal of Aging and Human Development,
1978, 8(3), 197-228.
Giambra, L. M., & Martin, C. E. Sexual daydreams and quantitative aspects
of sexual activity: Some relations for males across adulthood.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1977 , 6^(6), 497-505.
Glassner, B., & Owen, C. Variations in attitudes toward homosexuality.
Cornell Journal of Social Relations, 1976, 1J_(2), 161-176.

136
Grater, H.,& Downing, N. The meaning of sexual experience. Under review.
Gross, A. The male role and heterosexual behavior. Journal of Social
Issues, 1978, 34, 87-107.
Gundlach, R. H.,& Bernard, F. R. Birth order and sex of siblings in a
sample of lesbians and non-lesbians. Psychological Reports, 1967,
20, 61-62.
Hariton, B. E. The sexual fantasies of women. In C. Gordon & G. Johnson
(eds.), Readings in human sexuality: Contemporary perspectives.
New York: Harper & Row, 1976.
Hariton, E., & Singer, J. Women's fantasies during sexual intercourse:
Normative and theoretical implications. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 1974, 42, 313-322.
Harry, J. On the validity of typologies of gay males. Journal of
Homosexuality, 1976-77, 2(2), 143-152.
Hawkins, D. R. Disturbing erotic fantasies. Medical Aspects of Human
Sexuality, 1974, 8(Sept.), 177-178.
Haynes, S.,& Oziel, L. J. Homosexuality: Behaviors and attitudes.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1976, 5/4), 283-289.
Hessellund, H. On some sociosexual sex differences. The Journal of Sex
Research, 1971 , 7., 263-273.
Hessellund, H. Masturbation and sexual fantasies in married couples.
Archives on Sexual Behavior, 1976, 5/2), 133-147.
Hoffman, M. The gay world. New York: Basic Books, 1968.
Hollender, M. H. Women's fantasies during sexual intercourse. Archives
of General Psychiatry, 1963, 8, 86-90.
Hollender, M. H. Women's coital fantasies. Medical Aspects of Human
Sexuality, 1970, 4(2), 63-70.
Hooker, E. Male homosexuals and their worlds. In J. Marmor (ed.),
Sexual inversion. New York: Basic Books, 1965.
Hornick, J. Premarital sexual attitudes and behavior. Sociological
Quarterly, 1978, 1_9, 534-544.
Humphreys, L. New styles in homosexual manliness. In C. Gordon & G.
Johnson (eds.), Readings in human sexuality: Contemporary perspec¬
tives . New York: Harper & Row, 1976.

137
Hunt, M. Sexual behavior in the 1970s: Premarital sex. In C. Gordon &
G. Johnson (eds.), Readings in human sexuality: Contemporary
perspectives. New York: Harper & Row, 1976.
Hull, C. H.,& Nie, N. H. SPSS update 7-9. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.,
1981. ~ “
Jay, K.,& Young, A. The gay report. New York: Summit Books, 1979.
Kaplan, H. S. The new sex therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel, Inc., 1974.
Kaufman, G.,& Krupka, J. Integrating one's sexuality: Crisis and change.
International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 1973, 23_, 445-464.
Kelly, G. F. Guided fantasy as a counseling technique with youth. Journal
of Counseling Psychology, 1 972, 1_9, 355-361 .
Kelly, G. F. Mental imagery in counseling. Personnel and Guidance Journal,
1974, 53, 111-116.
Kelley, J. Sexual permissiveness: Evidence for a theory. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 1978, 40, 455-468.
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. Sexual behavior in the
human male. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company, 1948.
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., & Gebhard, P. H. Sexual
behavior in the human female. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company,
T953(
Kirkpatrick, J. S. Nonparametric statistics: Useful tools for counselors.
The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1981, 59(10), 627-630.
Klinger, E. The structure and function of fantasy. New York: Wiley
Interscience, 1971.
Klinger, E. The nature of fantasy and its clinical uses. Psychotherapy:
Theory, Research and Practice, 1977, Ij4(3), 223-231.
Kraft, T. A case of homosexuality treated by systematic desensitization.
American Journal of Psychotherapy, 1967, 21_, 815-821.
Kramer, E. B., Wiggers, T. T., & Zimpfer, D. G. Homosexuality, counsel¬
ing and the adolescent male. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1975,
54(2), 94-99.
Kronhausen, P., & Kronhausen, E. Erotic fantasies: A study of the male
sexual imagination. New YorRT Random House, 1969.
Kutner, S. J. Sex guilt and the sexual behavior sequence. The Journal
of Sex Research, 1971 (May), (7(2), 107-115.

138
Laner, J. R. Permanent partner priorities: Gay and straight. Journal
of Homosexuality, 1977, 3jl), 21-39.
LaPlante, M., McCormick, N., & Brannigan, G. Living the sexual script:
College students' views of influence in sexual encounters. The
Journal of Sex Research, 1980, 1_6, 338-355.
Leuner, H. Guided affective emagery (GAI). American Journal of Psycho¬
therapy, 1969, Z3, 4-22.
Libby, R., & Straus, M. Make love not war? Sex, sexual meanings, and
violence in a sample of university students. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 1980, 9_, 133-148.
Loney, J. An MMPI measure of maladjustment in a sample of "normal"
homosexual men. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1971, 27 (4),
486-488. ' ‘
LoPiccolo, J., & Herman, J. Cultural values and the therapeutic defini¬
tion of sexual function and dysfunction. Journal of Social Issues,
1977, 33, 166-183.
LoPiccolo, J., & Steger, J. The sexual interaction inventory: A new
instrument for assessment of sexual dysfunction. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 1974, 3_, 585-595.
MacDonald, A. P. Homophobia: Its roots and meanings. Homosexual
Counseling Journal , 1976, 3jl), 23-33.
Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. Human sexual response. Boston: Little,
Brown & Co., 1966.
Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. Human sexual inadequacy. Boston:
Little, Brown & Company, 1970.
Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. Homosexuality in perspective. Boston:
Little, Brown & Company, 1979.
McBride, M., & Ender, K. Sexual attitudes and sexual behavior among
college students. Journal of College Student Personnel, 1977, 18,
183-187.
McCrary, J. Historic development of romantic love. In C. Gordon &
G. Johnson (eds.), Readings in human sexuality: Contemporary
perspectives. New York: Harper & Row, 1976.
McConageny, N. Aversive therapy of homosexuality: Measures of efficacy.
American Journal of Psychiatry, 1971, 127, 1221-1224.
McCormick, N, Come-ons and put-offs: Unmarried students' strategies for
having and avoiding sexual intercourse. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 1979, 4, 194-211.

139
Mednick, R. A. Gender-specific variances in sexual fantasy. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 1977, 41_(3), 248-254.
Mercer, G., & Kohn, P. Gender differences in the integration of con¬
servatism, sex urge, and sexual behaviors among college students.
The Journal of Sex Research, 1979, 1_5, 129-142.
Mitchell, J. Some psychological dimensions of adolescent sexuality.
Adolescence, 1972, 7_, 447-458.
Money, J. Bisexual, homosexual and heterosexual: Society, law and
medicine. Journal of Homosexuality, 1977, 2^(3), 229-233.
Money, J., & Tucker, P. Sexual signatures. Boston: Little, Brown
& Co., 1975.
Moreault, D., & Follingstad, D. R. Sexual fantasies of females as a func¬
tion of sex guilt and experimental response cues. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46(6), 1385-1393
Morgan, J. I., & Skovholt, T. M. Using inner experience: Fantasy and
daydreams in career counseling. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
1977, 24(5), 391-397.
Morin, S. F. Heterosexual bias in psychological research on lesbianism
and male homosexuality. American Psychologist, 1977, 32j8), 629-637.
Morris, M. The "three R's" of sex. Journal of Religion and Health,
1978, 1_7, 48-56.
Morris, P. A. Doctors attitudes to homosexuality. British Journal of
Psychiatry, 1973, 122, 435-436.
Mosher, D. L. Measurement of guilt in females by self-report inventories.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1968, 32, 690-695.
Mosher, D. L. Sex differences, sex experience, sex guilt and explicitly
sexual films. Journal of Social Issues, 1973, 29_, 95-112.
Mosher, D. L. Three dimensions of involvement in human sexual response.
The Journal of Sex Research, 1980, 1_6, 1-42.
Mosher, D. L., & Abramson, P. R. Subjective sexual arousal to films of
masturbation. Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 1977,
45, 796-807.
Nelson, P. Personality, sexual functions, and sexual behavior: An
experiment in methodology. (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Florida, 1978.) Dissertation Abstracts International, 1978,
39(12B), 6134.
Nelson, L. R., & Zaichkowsky, L. D. A case for using multiple regression
instead of ANOVA in educational research. Journal of Experimental
Education, 1981, 50(1), 324-330.

140
Nie, N. H., Hull, C. D., Jenkins, J. G. Steinbrenner, K., & Bent, D. H.
Statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) (2nd ed.). New
York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1975.
Nunnally, J. Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill,
Inc., 1978.
Nyberg, K. L., & Alston, J. P. Analysis of public attitudes toward homo¬
sexual behavior. Journal of Homosexuality, 1976-77, 2_(2), 99-107.
Pape, N. Sex role identity and sexual fantasy. Master's thesis,
University of South Florida, 1980.
Peplau, L. What homosexuals want in relationships. Psychology Today,
March 1981, pp. 28-38.
Peplau, L., Rubin, Z., & Hill, C. Sexual intimacy in dating relation¬
ships. Journal of Social Issues, 1 977, 33_, 86-109.
Pietropinto, A., & Simenauer, J. Beyond the male myth. New York: New
American Library, Inc., 1977.
Pleck, J. The male sex role: Definitions, problems, and sources of
change. Journal of Social Issues, 1 976, 32_, 155-164.
Reich, W. The function of the orgasm. (Translated by V. Carfagno)
New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1973.
Reik, T. Sex in men and women: Its emotional variations. New York:
Noonday Press, 1960.
Rekers, G. A., Hortensia, D. A. P., & Benson, P. L. Sex-typed
"mannerisms" in normal boys and girls as a function of sex and
age. Child Development, 1977, 48^, 275-278.
Rekers, G. A., & Lovaas, 0. I. Behavioral treatment of deviant sex-role
behaviors in a male child. Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis,
1974, 7(2), 173-190.
Rekers, G. A., Lovaas, 0. I., & Benson, L. The behavioral treatment of
a "transsexual" preadolescent boy. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology, 1974, 2(2), 99-116.
Ross, M. W. Relationship between sex role and sex orientation in homo¬
sexual men. New Zealand Psychologist, 1 975, 4_(1 ), 25-29.
Schafer, S. Sociosexual behavior in male and female homosexuals: A
study in sex differences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1977, 6(5),
355-364.

141
Schildmyer, J. An exploratory study: Correlates and variables of posi¬
tive sexual experiences (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Missouri-Kansas City, 1976.) Dissertation Abstracts International,
1977, 38., 641A. (University Microfilms No. 77-16, 874.
Schoof-Tams, K., Schlaegel, J., & Walczak, L. Differentiation of sexual
morality between 11 and 16 years. Archives of Sexual Behavior,
1976, 5, 353-370.
Schwartz, A. Androgyny and the art of loving. Psychotherapy: Theory,
Research and Practice, 1979, ^6, 405-408.
Sigusuch, V., Schmidt, G., Reinfeld, A., & Wiedermann-Sutor, I.
Psychosexual stimulation: Sex differences. The Journal of Sex
Research, 1970, 6, 10-24.
Singer, J. L. Daydreaming: An introduction to the experimental study
of inner experience. New York: Random House, 1966.
Skovholt, T. M., & Hoenninger, R. W. Guided fantasy in career counseling.
Personnel and Guidance Journal , 1974, 52^, 693-696.
Slater, P. Sexual adequacy in America. In C. Gordon & G. Johnson (eds.),
Readings in human sexuality: Contemporary perspectives. New York:
Harper & Row, 1976.
Slattery, W. J. The erotic imagination: Sexual fantasies of the
adult male. New York: Bantom Books, 1976.
Snortum, J. R., Gillespie, J. F., Marshall, J. E., McLaughlin, J. P., &
Mosberg, L. Family dynamics and homosexuality. Psychological
Reports, 1969, 24, 763-770.
Sonenschein, D. Male homosexual relationships. In M. Weinberg (ed.),
Sex research: Studies from the Kinsey Institute. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1976.
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. Masculinity and femininity: Their
psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin:
University of Texas Press, 1978.
Steiner, C. Scripts people live: Transactional analysis of life scripts.
New York: Bantam Books, Inc., 1974.
Stevenson, I., & Wolpe, J. Recovery from sexual deviations through
overcoming non-sexual neurotic responses. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 1960, 116., 737-742.
Storms, M. D. Theories of sexual orientation. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 1980, 38(5), 783-792.
Story, M. A longitudinal study of the effects of a university human
sexuality course on sexual attitudes. Journal of Sex Research,
1979, 14, 184-204.

142
Sullivan, P. R. Masturbation fantasies as indicators of deepest sexual
longings. Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 1976(Jan.), 1_, 154-
Tannahill, R. Sex in history. New York: Stein and Day, 1980.
Tavris, C.,& Offir, C. The longest war: Sex differences in perspective.
New York: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1977.
Taylor, G. R. Sex in history. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.
Townes, B. D., Ferguson, W. D., & Gillam, S. Differences in psychologi¬
cal sex, adjustment, and familial influences among homosexual and
nonhomosexual populations. Journal of Homosexuality, 1976, 1(3),
261-272.
Tripp, C. A. The homosexual matrix. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
Turnbull, D.,& Brown, M. Attitudes towards homosexuality and male and
female reactions to homosexual and heterosexual slides. Canadian
Journal of Behavioral Science, 1977, 90 ), 68-80.
Wagman, M. Sex differences in types of daydreams. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 7_(3), 329-332.
Walfish, S.,& Myerson, M. Sex role identity and attitudes toward
sexuality. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1980, 9_, 199-203.
Weeks, R. B., Derdeyn, A. P., & Langman, M. Two cases of children of
homosexuals. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 1975, 6(1),
26-32.
Weinberg, G. Society and the healthy homosexual. New York: Anchor
Press/Doubleday, 1973.
Weinberg, M. S. The male homosexual: Age related variations in social
and psychological characteristics. Social Problems, 1970, 17(4),
527-537. —
Weinberg, M. S., & Williams, C. J. Male homosexuals. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1974.
Wilson, W. The distribution of selected sexual attitudes and behaviors
among the adult population of the United States. Journal of Sex
Research, 1975, V\_, 46-64.
Wrightsman, L. S. Social psychology. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Pub-
1ishing Co., 1977.
Zuckerman, M., Tushup, R., & Finner, S. Sexual attitudes and experience:
Attitude and personality correlates and changes produced by a course
in sexuality. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1976,
44, 7-19. '

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Gabriel J. Rodriguez was born on March 12, 1948, in Bogota,
Colombia, S.A. He came to America with his mother and four siblings
in 1952. In June of 1966 he graduated from Coral Gables Senior High
School and enlisted in the United States Air Force. After an honorable
discharge, he entered Miami-Dade Junior College and received his
Associate of Arts degree, with honors, in December of 1972. A transfer
to Florida State University, where he studied psychology, led to a
Bachelor of Science degree in December of 1974.
Mr. Rodriguez worked as a social worker for one and one-half years
and subsequently entered the graduate program in counseling psychology
in September of 1976. In December of 1979 he received a minority
fellowship from the American Psychological Association. From August of
1980 through August of 1981 Mr. Rodriguez completed his internship at
the Counseling-Psychological Services Center, University of Texas at
Austin. He is presently a staff counselor at the Student Counseling
Center, Illinois State University. The Doctor of Philosophy degree is
expected to be conferred in December, 1981.
143

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
irry Grater,/Chairman
Professor of'Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
William Froijiirig
Assistant Professor of Psychology
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
..n
kj/U t 1JJ
Rod McDavis
Associate Professor
Education
of Counselor
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
Milan Kolarik
Associate Professor of Psychology

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
Robert-Zi 11 er
Professor of Psychology
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Department of Psychology in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
and to the Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
December 1981
Dean for Graduate Studies and
Research

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
3 1262 08553 5820