Religiosity and Premarital Sexual Permissiveness: Elaboration of the Relationship and Debate
The purpose of this article was to expand and perhaps clarify the relationship of religiosity to premarital sexual permissiveness and the Reiss-Heltsley and Broderick-Ruppel debate. Religiosity was assessed by the Ritualistic, Experiential, and Ideological scales from Faulkner and DeJong and a compo...
| Published in: | Sociological analysis |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
1971
|
| In: |
Sociological analysis
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | The purpose of this article was to expand and perhaps clarify the relationship of religiosity to premarital sexual permissiveness and the Reiss-Heltsley and Broderick-Ruppel debate. Religiosity was assessed by the Ritualistic, Experiential, and Ideological scales from Faulkner and DeJong and a composite scale developed for this study. The following three variables were used as test factors: (1) premarital coitus which was reported to have occurred during the year preceding the study; (2) lie propensity as measured by the Lie scale from the M.M.P.I.; and, (3) permissiveness norms perceived to be prevalent in the groups designated by the respondents as being of most importance to them (i.e., normative reference groups). In terms of its effect on the original relationship, premarital coitus consistently served as an intervening variable for females and seemed to be a specificaton variable for males. Lie propensity consistently specified the religiosity-permissiveness relationship for both sexes. For females N.R.G. norms of permissiveness consistently acted as an intervening variable while for males the results were not as consistent. Overall, these data seem to suggest that there are other variables which need to be considered before any final answer can be pronounced on the “traditionalism” proposition of Reiss. An alternative way of stating the proposition is offered. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2325-7873 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Sociological analysis
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.2307/3710137 |