See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/8946016

Let's Talk About Sex: How Comfortable Discussions About Sex

Impact Teen Sexual Behavior

Article  in  Journal of Health Communication · November 2003

DOI: 10.1080/716100416 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

123 2,162

6 authors, including:

Bianca Guzman Michele Schlehofer

California State University, Los Angeles Salisbury University
28 PUBLICATIONS   514 CITATIONS    22 PUBLICATIONS   449 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Mary Ellen Dello Stritto Bettina Casad

Oregon State University University of Missouri - St. Louis
10 PUBLICATIONS   390 CITATIONS    46 PUBLICATIONS   581 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

CAMP CHOICES View project

Computing with Relevance and Purpose: A Review of Culturally Relevant Education in Computing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bianca Guzman on 16 December 2013.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Health Communication, Volume 8: 583–598, 2003
Copyright # Taylor & Francis Inc.
ISSN: 1081-0730 print/1087-0415 online
DOI:10.1080/10810730390250425

Let’s Talk About Sex: How Comfortable

Discussions About Sex Impact
Teen Sexual Behavior

BIANCA L. GUZMÁN
Public Health Foundation Enterprises, CHOICES Program, La Puente, California, USA

MICHÈLE M. SCHLEHOFER-SUTTON
Department of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California, USA

CHRISTINA M. VILLANUEVA
Department of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California, USA

MARY ELLEN DELLO STRITTO

Department of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California, USA

BETTINA J. CASAD
Department of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California, USA

AIDA FERIA
Public Health Foundation Enterprises, CHOICES Program, La Puente, California, USA

A secondary analysis of data from 1,039 Latino adolescents who participated in a

study of a sex education program was conducted to examine the impact of comfortable
communication about sex on intended and actual sexual behavior. Results indicate
that Latino adolescents have a broad communicative network, including friends,
dating partners, and extended family members, with whom they talk about sex. Re-
gression analyses suggest comfortable sexual communication is predictive of less
likelihood of being sexually active, older at first intercourse, and increased intentions
to delay intercourse.

Mary Ellen Dello Stritto is now an assistant professor at Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana.
We would like to thank the adolescents involved in the C.A.M.P. project for their participation
in this study, as well as the CHOICES staff for their hard work and commitment to the issues of
adolescent sexual health. In addition we thank Melbourne Hovell for his insightful feedback on
an earlier draft of this manuscript.
Address correspondence to Bianca L. Guzmán, Director of Research, CHOICES, 15701 E. Hill
Street, La Puente, California 91744, USA. E-mail: dr.bee@verizon.net

583
584 B. L. Guzman et al.

In 1999, over 50% of high school students in the United States reported having had sex
(Centers for Disease Control [CDC], 2000c). Although fewer adolescents each year are
choosing to have sex (CDC, 2000a), those who do become sexually active at increasingly
younger ages (CDC, 1997, 2000c). This is especially true for Latino youth, with
10% becoming sexually active before age 13, compared to only 5% of EuroAmericans
(CDC, 2000c).
Additionally, U.S. adolescents infrequently use contraceptives, with 42% reporting
not using a condom during their last sexual intercourse (CDC, 2000c). The CDC con-
sistently reports that Latino adolescents are significantly less likely to use contraceptives
than any other ethnic group (CDC, 1997, 2000b, 2000c). Combined rates of early sexual
activity and low rates of consistent contraceptive use among Latino adolescents have
serious public health implications for this population.
Early sexual activity and inconsistent contraceptive use translate into high rates of
adolescent pregnancy. One million adolescent women in the U.S. become pregnant
annually (CDC, 2000b), the majority (78%) of whom do so unintentionally (Alan
Guttmacher Institute, 1999). It should be noted that Latinas have the highest teen pregnancy
rate across all ethnic groups in the U.S. (National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy,
2000). In addition, four million adolescents become infected with a sexually transmitted
infection (STI) annually (Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 1999). The
CDC (1998) also reports that approximately 656,900 adolescents (or 3.2% of the adoles-
cent population in the U.S.) are currently infected with the HIV virus.1 Latinos and other
ethnic groups such as African Americans have a proportionately greater risk of HIV
infection than EuroAmericans (CDC, 1998). In response to these health concerns, research
in recent years has focused on exploring how adolescents can be encouraged to make safer
sex decisions, including practicing abstinence or consistent condom use. One factor that
may influence adolescent sexual behaviors is communication about sexual issues.

The Role of Sexual Communication

Many researchers suggest adolescent sexual behavior is partly influenced by the family
members and peers with whom they interact (Christopher, Johnson, & Roosa, 1993;
Pistella & Bonati, 1998). Dittus, Jaccard, and Gordon (1999), advocates of the family-
based approach,2 suggest parents play a major role in adolescent sexual socialization. As
an accessible source of information (Lefkowitz, Sigman, & Au, 2000), parents influence
their adolescent’s intended and actual sexual behavior directly by communicating their
values about sexuality to their adolescent (Fisher, 1986b; Fox & Inazu, 1980; Leland &
Barth, 1993; Miller, Kotchick, Dorsey, Forehand, & Ham, 1998; Moore, Peterson, &
Furstenberg, 1986; Shoop & Davidson, 1994). Currently, the majority of research on
adolescent sexual communication patterns has examined the role that parents play in
transmitting values and rules of sexual conduct.

1
It is important to note that this number only considers individuals who have been tested
and found positive to have the virus. Therefore, this number may actually be an underestimate
because it does not include adolescents who have been tested, or who were tested but scored falsely
negative.
2
It should be noted that several other approaches to teen sexual communication exist, such as
Widmer’s (1997) sibling referent theory, which posits older siblings’ sexual behavior as a primary
influential determinant of adolescent sexual behavior, Kotchick, Shaffer, Forehand, and Miller’s
(2001) multisystemic approach, which suggests the self, family system, and culture all interact
to predict sexual behavior, and Rodger and Rowe’s (1993) EMOSA model (social contagion
theory), in which contact with social networks increase rates of sexual activity among adolescents.
 Comfortable Communication About Sex 585

Most of the research in this area suggests that parents do talk about sex to their ado-
lescent children. In an early study, Fox and Inazu (1980) found parents first talk about sex
to their children when they are between the ages of 10 and 13 years. Mothers generally play
a greater role in discussing sexual issues with both male and female children than fathers,
even when both parents are present in the household (DiIorio, Kelley, & Hokenberry-
Eaton, 1999; Fisher, 1986a, 1986b; Miller, Kotchick, et al., 1998; Nolin & Petersen,
1992).3 Females are also more likely than male adolescents to be the recipients of parental
communication about sex (DiIorio et al., 2000; Jaccard, Dittus, & Gordon, 2000; Nolin &
Petersen, 1992). Research with EuroAmerican adolescents finds that both male and female
adolescents see their mother as the more appropriate parent with whom to discuss sexual
issues (Nolin & Petersen, 1992). However, research conducted with ethnically diverse
samples suggests a pattern of same-sex communicative dyads (DiIorio et al., 2000;
Miller, Kotchick, et al., 1998).
Although some conflicting research exists (Christopher et al., 1993; O’Sullivan,
Jaramillo, Moreau, & Meyer-Bahlberg, 1999; Tucker, 1989), possibly partly due to dif-
ferent operationalizations of ‘‘sexual behavior,’’ the majority of research conducted in
EuroAmerican and African American households suggests that communication about sex
translates into safer adolescent sexual behavior. Adolescents whose parents frequently talk
to them about sex seem to adopt their parents’ values and beliefs about sexuality, thus
supporting the family-based approach (Dittus et al., 1999; Fisher, 1986a). Adolescents
who talk frequently about sex with their parents are less likely to be sexually active
(DiIorio et al., 1999; Fisher, 1986b; Leland & Barth, 1993), have fewer sexual partners
(Holtzman & Rubinson, 1995), report increased condom use once sexually active (Fox &
Inazu, 1980; Holtzman & Rubinson, 1995; Miller, Kotchick, et al., 1998; Miller, Levin,
Whitaker, & Xu, 1998; Shoop & Davidson, 1994), and are more likely to subsequently talk
to their sexual partners about sex (Shoop & Davidson). These studies suggest that parental-
adolescent communication about sex sets the stage for safer adolescent sexual behavior.
The aforementioned research has primarily been conducted with EuroAmerican and
African American adolescents. Although much research exists on parental-adolescent
sexual communication, especially among mother-daughter dyads, there is a shortage of
work conducted specifically with Latino adolescents (Christopher et al., 1993). This is
despite the fact that Latino adolescents often become sexually active at a younger age,
and report lower rates of reliable condom use, than EuroAmerican and African American
adolescents (CDC, 1997, 2000b, 2000c). The few studies that have been conducted with
Latino adolescents have generally studied high-risk populations (e.g., O’Sullivan et al.’s
1999 study with psychiatric outpatient Latina adolescents), or have examined Latinos as a
sub-sample of a larger population (e.g., Christopher et al.’s 1993 study). Clearly, ado-
lescents from high-risk populations are not typical of the average Latino adolescent.
Therefore, further research should be conducted with Latino adolescents who are not
high-risk.
The few existing studies suggest that Latino adolescents most often communicate
with their same-sex parent (DiIorio et al., 2000; Miller, Kotchik, et al. 1998). Furthermore,
research suggests that Latinas are less likely to become pregnant if they frequently dis-
cuss sex with their mothers (Adolph, Ramos, Linton, & Grimes, 1995). However, some
researchers find that parental communication is not associated with increased safer sex
behavior among Latino adolescents. Christopher and associates (1993) found the level of

3
The majority of studies have limited themselves to examining only mother-adolescent com-
munication about sex. Because little is known about father-adolescent communication about sex,
this finding may be the result of a bias in the literature.
586 B. L. Guzman et al.

parent-adolescent sexual communication was unrelated to whether Latino adolescents

were sexually active. In O’Sullivan et al., (1999) study of Latina adolescents in an
outpatient psychiatric facility, no relationship was found between communication about
sex and condom use.
However, even these few studies do not fully explain how communication about sex
impacts the sexual behavior of Latino adolescents. Because previous studies have only
examined the impact of parental-adolescent sexual communication, they have provided a
limited view of Latino adolescents’ sexual discussion patterns. Latino adolescents, just
like any other adolescent group, have the opportunity to discuss sexual issues with
individuals other than their parents. These others can include individuals such as peers,
dating partners, and the extended family, all of whom can potentially play a role in value
transmission, thereby influencing adolescent sexual behavior. Indeed, Latinos may
actually discuss sex with non-parental-others more than adolescents of other ethnicities.
The cultural norm of familismo present in Latino culture, which places a high importance
on interfamilial bonds (Stycos, 1952), often results in the formation of broad social
networks of close friends and extended family members as a social support resource
(Delgado & Humme-Delgado, 1992; Salgado de Snyder & Padilla, 1987). The notion of
familismo highlights the important role these other individuals can play in the sexual
socialization of Latino adolescents. The current literature’s focus on parental-adolescent
communication leaves questions as to who else Latino adolescents may be accessing for
sexual discussion and how these others might influence their sexual behaviors.
Finally, many existing studies examine frequency, but not comfort, of parental-
adolescent communication. Numerous researchers have noted that parents and adoles-
cents are often inconsistent, with themselves and with each other, in reporting how
frequently they discuss sexual issues (Jaccard et al., 2000; Newcomer & Udry, 1985).
Unfortunately, little is known about with whom adolescents feel most comfortable dis-
cussing sex, and what impact comfortable sexual discussion has on their adolescent
sexual behavior. Because both parents and adolescents sometimes feel uncomfortable
talking about sex (Nolin & Petersen, 1992), comfort may indeed be an additional
important indicator of the impact of parental-adolescent communication.

Goals of the Present Study

In light of the lack of literature on Latino adolescent sexual communication patterns and
the influence of comfortable communication on adolescent sexual behavior, the first goal
of the current study was to explore the broad range of individuals with whom Latino
adolescents communicate about sex, including peers, dating partners, and extended
family members in addition to parents, and how comfortable they feel when discussing
sexual issues with these individuals. In addition, the second goal of the current study was
to explore how comfortable communication with parents, friends, dating partners, and
others would influence Latino adolescents’ rates of sexual activity (H1), age at first
intercourse (H2), intentions to delay intercourse (H3), and intentions and rates of actual
contraceptive use (H4).

Method

Participants
Data for the current study were collected during the 2000 to 2001 academic school year
from eighth and ninth grade students in two school districts in Los Angeles County for
 Comfortable Communication About Sex 587

the purpose of evaluating a sex education program. The sampling frame consisted of
approximately 2,500 adolescents enrolled in the eighth and ninth grade in the two school
districts, of which consent forms were distributed to a convenience sample of 1,900
adolescents. A total of 1,613 adolescents returned consent forms and were included in the
study.
The majority of adolescents completing questionnaires were Latino (64%;
n ¼ 1,039); these participants were selected for the current analyses. The sample con-
sisted of approximately equal numbers of females (52.2%; n ¼ 537) and males (47.8%;
n ¼ 492). Five participants did not report their gender. Participants were 11 to 17 years
old (M ¼ 13.27, SD ¼ .75).
Participants were asked with whom they lived. The majority of participants (77.3%;
n ¼ 798) lived with both their parents. One hundred and ninety-five participants (18.9%)
lived with their mother, but not their father. Twenty-one participants (2%) lived with
their father but not their mother, and 19 (1.8%) reported living with neither parent. Only
six participants did not provide information regarding their living arrangements.
Participants were also asked to provide information on their parents’ highest level of
education. Of those who knew their parent’s educational level, the largest number said
that both their mothers (26.4%; n ¼ 267) and their fathers (23.8%; n ¼ 237) had less than
an eighth grade education. The data suggest that these participants might come from
communities of lower socio-economic status. However, this conclusion should be con-
sidered with caution, because many participants (about one-third) did not know their
parents’ educational level.

Materials
All participants were given a 30-minute questionnaire during their normal class time. The
first few items consisted of questions asking standard demographic information: ethni-
city, age, and gender.

Measures for Dependent Variables

Sexual activity. Students were asked whether or not they have had ‘‘sex’’ and asked
to provide their age at time of first intercourse if sexually active. Because the schools
targeted for data collection had stipulations against defining sexual intercourse, ‘‘sex’’
was left undefined on the questionnaire, and thus open to interpretation. Therefore, those
respondents who stated that they had had ‘‘sex’’ could have participated in any one of
several types of sexual activities.
Intended sexual behavior. Intended sexual behavior was measured with four ques-
tions. The items ‘‘I plan to wait to have sex until I am married’’ and ‘‘I plan to wait to
have sex until I am older’’ were both placed on 5-point Likert scales ranging from
‘‘strongly disagree’’ to ‘‘strongly agree.’’ Participants also answered either ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’
to two additional items, ‘‘Will you wait to have sex until you are ready to accept the
responsibilities and consequences?’’ and ‘‘Will you stop having sex until you are ready to
accept the responsibilities and consequences?’’ These four items were transformed into
standardized z-scores and averaged together to create one measure of intention to delay
intercourse (a ¼ .78).
Intended and actual condom use. Participants were asked a series of questions on
their current (for those sexually active) and intended condom use. Current condom use
was assessed by asking the question, ‘‘How often do you use condoms,’’ placed on a
5-point Likert scale (ranging from ‘‘never’’ to ‘‘always’’). Intended condom use was
588 B. L. Guzman et al.

assessed by the question, ‘‘If you decide to have sex, will you use birth control (i.e.,
condoms, the pill, the ‘‘shot’’, diaphragm, other)?’’ placed on a ‘‘yes/no’’ scale.
The response rate was high on the majority of the dependent measures, with between
85% and 95% of participants responding to any given question regarding sexual activity
or intention to use contraceptives. This response rate is typical for questionnaires on
adolescent sexual behavior and is considered an ‘‘acceptable’’ response rate (Catania,
Gibson, Marn, Coates, & Greenblatt, 1990). However, only 65% of the participants
answered the questions asking their intentions to delay intercourse.4 We suggest that the
high attrition rate for these items is partly due to participants’ uncertainty of their
intentions to delay intercourse.

Measures for Independent Variables

Extent and frequency of sexual communication. Participants were asked to indicate
the extent to which their mothers and fathers talk with them about sexual issues. This
extent of communication was measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from ‘‘never’’
to ‘‘always.’’ Participants also reported how comfortable they felt when discussing sexual
issues with their mothers, fathers, friends, boyfriends or girlfriends, and ‘‘other’’ in-
dividuals. Participants, if discussing sexual issues with an ‘‘other’’ individual, were asked
to describe their relationship with that individual (for example, ‘‘aunt’’ or ‘‘cousin’’) on
the line provided, and to indicate whether that person was an adult. Comfort level during
sexual communication was assessed with a four-point Likert scale, ranging from ‘‘un-
comfortable’’ to ‘‘comfortable.’’ An examination of the response rate for questions
concerning communication patterns indicated a low attrition rate, with 95% to 98% of
participants responding.

Design and Procedure

All eligible participants and their legal guardians were informed about the research study
and asked if they would participate. A consent form, written in both English and Spanish,
was distributed to the eligible participants’ classrooms. The consent form explained the
research study in detail. All students who returned a ‘‘yes’’ consent form signed by a
parent or guardian were eligible to participate in the project. Students were guaranteed
anonymity and assigned a code number.
Questionnaires were administered during participants’ physical education or health
and safety classes. Project staff read a protocol instructing the students how to fill out the
questionnaire. Steps were taken to ensure that participants were given privacy when
completing the questionnaire. For instance, participants were instructed to seat them-
selves apart from their peers and to only ask the research team (not their peers or
teachers) if they needed assistance. Questionnaires were written in English. However,
because some of the adolescents completing questionnaires might not be English
proficient, participants who needed assistance in question comprehension were read the
questionnaire (or portions of) out loud in English and/or Spanish.

4
A series of t-tests were conducted to examine whether participants who failed to answer the
items on intentions to delay intercourse had different communication patterns than those who com-
pleted the items on intentions to delay intercourse. Compared to adolescents who did report their
intentions to delay intercourse, those that didn’t report their intentions to delay intercourse reported
less comfortable communication with their mothers (t (1016) ¼
3.28, p < .001, and more com-
fortable sexual communication with their friends (t (1003) ¼ 4.60, p < .001) and ‘‘other’’ people
(t (417) ¼ 2.01, p < .001).
 Comfortable Communication About Sex 589

The data for this study was obtained as part of a larger study evaluating the impact of
a teen theater intervention on adolescent sexual knowledge, contraceptive use, and
intended sexual behavior, using pretest data only. Thus, the results are not confounded
with any intervention effects.

Results

Participant Characteristics: Rates of Sexual Activity

One hundred and nine (10.5%) participants reported being sexually active: 31 (28.4%)
females and 76 (71.6%) males. The distribution of participants who reported being
sexually active was significantly different based on gender (w2(2) ¼ 27.15, p < .01), with
more males than females reporting being sexually active. These findings are consistent
with CDC data that report 10% of Latino adolescents have intercourse by age 13, and
that Latino males are more likely to be sexually active than Latina females (2000c). The
average age at first intercourse was just over twelve years (M ¼ 12.45, SD ¼ 1.55). The
age of first intercourse was not significantly different for females (M ¼ 12.78, SD ¼ .64)
versus males (M ¼ 12.29, SD ¼ 1.79).

Study Goal 1: Exploration of Adolescent Communication Patterns About Sex

Adolescent-Parental Communication Patterns: Frequency and Comfort
Adolescents, although having moderately high rates of communication with their
mothers about sex, had low rates of communication with their fathers about sex. Forty-
seven percent (n ¼ 479) of the sample ‘‘rarely’’ or ‘‘never’’ spoke with their mothers
about sex, and 68.6% (n ¼ 682) ‘‘rarely’’ or ‘‘never’’ spoke with their fathers about sex.
As shown in Table 1, adolescents reported discussing sexual issues with their mothers
more than with their fathers; this difference was statistically significant (t(988) ¼ 14.78,
p < .001).
There were significant differences in male and female adolescents’ reported fre-
quency of discussing sex with their mothers (t(1003) ¼ 8.70, p < .001). Females were
significantly more likely than males to report frequently discussing sex with their
mothers; these results mirror prior findings by Nolin and Petersen (1992) and support the
notion of a stronger mother-daughter communicative dyad. Males and females also
reported different frequencies of sexual communication with their fathers (t(981) ¼ 4.60,
p < .001), with males reporting speaking with their father about sex significantly more
often than females. This finding is consistent with prior research with Latino adolescents
and suggests that within the family, same-sex communicative dyads form to discuss
sexual issues (DiIorio et al., 2000; Miller et al., 1998).

TABLE 1 Perceived Extent of Parental-Adolescent Communication by Parent

Frequently/
Never/Rarely Sometimes Always

n % n % n %

Mother (N ¼ 1024) 479 46.8 357 34.9 188 18.3

Father (N ¼ 994) 682 68.6 224 22.5 88 08.8
t(988) ¼ 14.78, p < .001.
590 B. L. Guzman et al.

As shown in Table 2, an examination of participants’ responses showed that both

male and female adolescents felt significantly more comfortable in discussing sex with
their mother than with their father (t(984) ¼ 11.31, p < .001). Although the majority of
adolescents (71.1%; n ¼ 703) felt uncomfortable discussing sex with their fathers, equal
numbers reported feeling comfortable (54.7%) and uncomfortable (45.3%) discussing
sex with their mothers.
Aside from more frequently discussing sexual issues with their same-sex parent,
adolescents also reported feeling more comfortable when talking with their same-sex
parent. Females felt significantly more comfortable than males when discussing sex with
their mothers (t(1006) ¼ 8.07, p < .001). Males felt significantly more comfortable than
females when discussing sex with their fathers (t(927) ¼ 9.40, p < .001).

Who Else Do Adolescents Talk to About Sex?

Adolescents reported feeling the most comfortable discussing sex with their friends.
About 70% (n ¼ 724) of adolescents reported feeling ‘‘comfortable’’ or ‘‘very comfor-
table’’ discussing sexual issues with their friends. Furthermore, 52% (n ¼ 502) of ado-
lescents sampled reported feeling comfortable talking about sex with their dating
partners. It is important to note that the percentage of teens who felt comfortable com-
municating about sex with their dating partners equals that of the respondents who felt
comfortable communicating with their mothers.

Who Are ‘‘Other’’ Recipients of Adolescent Sexual Communication?

As shown in Table 2, an additional 40% of the adolescents sampled reported that
there was an ‘‘other’’ individual, aside from parents, friends, and dating partners, with
whom they discussed sex. These adolescents (78.8%; n ¼ 330) reported feeling com-
fortable discussing sex with this other individual. Because the majority of adolescents did
not report discussing sex with another person, these adolescents should be considered an
important sub-set of the total sample.
Table 3 shows the relationship of the ‘‘other’’ individuals with whom adolescents
reported discussing sexual issues. The majority of the ‘‘other’’ individuals (aside from
parents, dating partners, and friends) with whom sexual issues were discussed were adults
(62.8%; n ¼ 194). There was no difference in the distribution of respondents who
reported discussing sexual issues with an adult-other based on gender, with both males
and females being equally likely to discuss sexual issues with adult-others than
non-adult-others.

TABLE 2 Perceived Comfort During Sexual Discussion by Recipient of Communication

Uncomfortable Comfortable

n % n %

Mother (N ¼ 1018) þ 557 54.7 461 45.3

Father (N ¼ 989) þ 703 71.1 286 28.9
Friends (N ¼ 1005) 281 27.9 724 72.1
Boy/Girlfriend (N ¼ 965) 462 47.8 502 52.2
Others (N ¼ 419) 89 21.2 330 78.8
þ
t (984) ¼ 11.31, p < .001.
 Comfortable Communication About Sex 591

TABLE 3 Relationship of the ‘‘Other’’ Recipient of Sexual Communication

Relationship N %

Aunts 53 5.7
Brothers 42 4.5
Cousins 82 8.9
Grandparents 17 1.8
Sisters/Sister in laws 82 8.9
Teachers/School counselors 9 .9
Uncles 38 4.1
Miscellaneous others1 47 5.0
Did not specify relationship 554 60.0
Total 924 100.0
1
Note: ‘‘Others’’ included individuals for whom participants listed a name, but not a relationship.

The relationships of the ‘‘others’’ whom participants most frequently communicated

with were sisters or sister-in-laws and cousins. (8.9%; n ¼ 82 of respondents each for
sisters/sister-in-laws, and cousins). These results indicate that this sub-sample of Latino
youth rely on their family and extended family for information about sexual issues in
addition to communicating with their parents, peers, and dating partners.

Study Goal 2: Exploration of the Relationship Between Comfortable Sexual

Communication and Sexual Behavior
A series of hierarchical regression analyses was conducted to explore the relationship
between the comfort level of communication with parents, friends, dating partners, and
others with adolescents’ sexual behaviors. A hierarchical regression framework was
chosen because it allows for the examination of the variables of interest independent from
any controlled variables. Because differences in the communication patterns of males and
females were found, gender was entered into the first model as a control variable in all
analyses. Furthermore, because age is a potentially confounding variable, with adoles-
cents who are older being more likely to report being sexually active (CDC, 2000c), age
was entered into the first model as a control variable in all analyses. For all analyses, the
second model consisted of the following predictor variables of interest: adolescents’
extent of comfort while talking to their mother, father, friend, dating partner, and others
about sex (entered into the model in that order).

H1: The Influence of Comfortable Communication on Rates of Sexual Activity

A binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine comfortable com-
munication as a predictor of whether or not adolescents have had sex. There was good
model fit (discrimination between groups) on the basis of gender and age (the first model)
alone, w2(2) ¼ 20.62, p < .001. After addition of the comfortable communication vari-
ables, w2(7) ¼ 53.99, p < .001, Nagelkerke R2 ¼ .258.
However, examination of the classification plots showed overall classification to be
poor. On the basis of the two demographic variables (age and gender) alone, correct
classification rates were 2.2% for sexually active participants and 99.7% for non-
sexually active participants. Adding comfortable communications about sex as pre-
dictors did not notably change these classification rates: only 11.1% of sexually active
592 B. L. Guzman et al.

participants, and 98.5% of non-sexually active participants, were correctly classified.

These results indicate that comfortable communication about sex does not predict
whether an adolescent is sexually active.
Table 4 shows the contribution of the individual predictors in the model. As shown in
the table, comfortable mother-adolescent communication about sex was a significant
positive predictor of not being sexually active (B ¼ .708, SE ¼ .207); adolescents who had
comfortable sexual discussions with their mother were less likely to report being sexually
active. As detailed in Table 4, comfortable dating partner-adolescent communication
about sex was a significant predictor of being sexually active (B ¼
.596, SE ¼ .212);
adolescents who had comfortable sexual discussions with their dating partners were more
likely to report being sexually active.

H2: The Influence of Comfortable Communication on Age at First Intercourse

A hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to determine whether comfortable
communication about sex was related to adolescents’ age at first intercourse. Comfortable
communication did not significantly predict age at first intercourse after controlling for
differences in age and gender (R2 change ¼ .146, F (7, 30) ¼ 2.14, p < .10), with the test
just missing the mark for statistical significance. Altogether, comfortable communication
about sex explained 14.6% of the variance on age at first intercourse, after controlling for
differences in gender and participants’ age. Although the model failed to reach statistical
significance, examination of the beta weights shown in Table 5 does suggest a rela-
tionship between adolescents’ reports of comfortable communication and age at first
intercourse. Comfortable sexual communication with a dating partner (B ¼ .623,
SE ¼ .345) and with other individuals (B ¼ .657 SE ¼ .346), predicted older age at first
intercourse. The comfort level of parental-adolescent communication did not predict
adolescents’ age at first intercourse.

TABLE 4 Summary of Binary Logistic Regression Analysis Examining Comfortable

Communication as a Predictor of Adolescent Sexual Activity

Variables B SE Model w2

Block 1
Gender 1.20** .335
Age
.549** .210
All Demographic Variables 20.617**
Block 2
Gender .696 þ .416
Age
.575* .240
Comfort of mother-adolescent communication .728** .207
Comfort of father-adolescent communication
.094 .210
Comfort of friend-adolescent communication
.214 .240
Comfort of dating partner-adolescent
.596* .212
communication
Comfort of ‘‘other’’-adolescent communication
.312 .216
All Variables 53.989**
þ
p < .10.
*p < .05.
**p < .001.
 Comfortable Communication About Sex 593

TABLE 5 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis Examining Comfortable

Communication as a Predictor of Age at First Intercourse
B SE B b

Model 1
Gender
.794 .547
.222
Age .745 .319 .356
Model 2
Gender
.611 .730
.171
Age .690 .333 .231
Comfort of mother-adolescent communication .459 .323 .231
Comfort of father-adolescent communication
.414 .348
.271
Comfort of friend-adolescent communication
.140 .392
.056
Comfort of dating partner-adolescent communication .623 .345 .301 þ
Comfort of ‘‘other’’-adolescent communication .657 .346 .327 þ
Note: R2 ¼ .188 for Model 1; R2 ¼ .334 for Model 2.
þ
p < .10.

H3: The Influence of Comfortable Communication on Delaying Intercourse

A hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to determine whether the perceived
comfort of adolescent communication about sex was related to greater intentions to delay
intercourse. The comfort level of sexual communication was significantly predictive of
adolescents’ intentions to delay intercourse (R2 change ¼ .036, F (7, 347) ¼ 9.10,
p < .001); see Table 6. Overall, after controlling for differences in gender and age, the
comfort level of communication with parents, friends, dating partners, and others
accounted for an additional 3.6% of the variance in adolescents’ intentions to delay
intercourse until older. An examination of the beta weights showed that the comfort of
mother-adolescent communication was a significant positive predictor of intention to

TABLE 6 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis Examining Comfortable

Communication as a Predictor of Adolescents’ Intentions to Delay Intercourse

B SE B b

Model 1
Gender
.484 .080
.305**
Age
.095 .055
.087
Model 2
Gender
.367 .095
.231**
Age
.095 .054
.087
Comfort of mother-adolescent communication .143 .042 .200**
Comfort of father-adolescent communication
.095 .048
.012
Comfort of friend-adolescent communication
.086 .052
.009
Comfort of dating partner-adolescent communication
.108 .045
.130*
Comfort of ‘‘other’’-adolescent communication
.041 .044
.005
Note: R2 ¼ .024 for Model 1; R2 ¼ .060 for Model 2.
*p < .05.
**p < .001.
594 B. L. Guzman et al.

delay intercourse (B ¼ .143, SE ¼ .042). Furthermore, comfortable communication about

sexuality with a dating partner predicted less intention to delay intercourse (B ¼
.108,
SE ¼ .045). Adolescents who felt comfortable discussing sexual issues with their mothers
expressed greater intentions to delay intercourse, but adolescents who felt more com-
fortable discussing sex with their dating partners had less intentions to delay intercourse.

H4: The Influence of Comfortable Communication on Actual and Intended Condom

Use
The potential influence of the comfort of sexual communication on sexually active
adolescents’ frequency of condom use was also explored with a hierarchical regression
analysis. The results indicate that the comfort of adolescent communication about sex
was not predictive of sexually active adolescents’ reports of condom use (R2
change ¼ .103, F (7, 31) ¼ 1.31); see Table 7. However, an examination of the beta
weights showed comfortable friend-adolescent communication was predictive of more
frequent condom use (B ¼ .778, SE ¼ .421).
The potential influence of the comfort of sexual communication on non-sexually
active adolescents’ intended condom use was also explored with a regression analysis.
The overall model was significant, R2 change ¼ .036, F (7, 311) ¼ 3.65, p < .001.
However, an examination of the individual beta weights showed that age and gender
explained most of the variance in intended contraceptive use, and comfortable commu-
nication about sexual issues with parents, friends, dating partners, and others was not
predictive of intentions to use contraceptives.

Discussion
The above results are an important contribution to the literature on adolescent sexual
communication in two notable ways. First, they suggest that the sexual communication
patterns of Latino youth, although similar to that reported in prior research of Euro-
American and African American youth, do differ. The results suggest a clear division of

TABLE 7 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis Examining Comfortable

Communication as a Predictor of Sexually Active Adolescents’ Condom Use

B SE B b

Model 1
Gender .564 .534 .165
Age .664 .322 .321*
Model 2
Gender .773 .682 .226
Age .834 .374 .404*
Comfort of mother-adolescent communication
.194 .309
.109
Comfort of father-adolescent communication
.138 .334
.095
Comfort of friend-adolescent communication .778 .421 .312 þ
Comfort of dating partner-adolescent communication .164 .359 .080
Comfort of ‘‘other’’-adolescent communication
.216 .383
.107
Note: R2 ¼ .126 for Model 1; R2 ¼ .229 for Model 2.
þ
p < .10.
*p < .05.
 Comfortable Communication About Sex 595

adolescent-parental communication into same-sex dyads, with daughters being more

likely to communicate and feel comfortable communicating with their mothers about sex,
and sons being more likely to communicate and feel comfortable communicating with
their fathers about sex; a finding consistent with prior research on Latino adolescents
(DiIorio et al., 2000; Miller, Kotchik, et al. 1998). Additionally, the adolescents in our
sample often accessed non-parental-others, including friends and dating partners, for
sexual discussion. Also, a large sub-sample of the participants (40%) reported discussing
sexual issues with extended family members. These findings suggest Latino youth have a
wide array of individuals in their social networks that serve as a resource for information
about sex.
Second, the results suggest the level of comfort while communicating about sexual
issues influences adolescent sexual behaviors. Most notably, the findings suggest com-
fortable mother-adolescent sexual discussions are related to abstinence among adoles-
cents. However, father-adolescent communication had no significant impact on Latino
adolescents’ intended and actual sexual activities in the current study. These results give
support to the family-based approach (Dittus et al., 1999). The findings suggest that,
looking at non-parental-others, comfortable sexual communication with friends, dating
partners, and other individuals in the adolescents’ lives influences adolescent sexual
behaviors in different ways than communication with parents. While comfortable
communication with some individuals was related to safer sexual behaviors (for instance,
comfortable discussions with friends were related to increased condom use among
sexually active teens), the current study found that adolescents who have comfortable
discussions with non-parental others may also be putting themselves at greater risk for
early pregnancy or STI contraction. Most notably, comfortable communication with
dating partners predicted being sexually active and was related to less intention to delay
intercourse.

A Note on Limitations of the Study

It should be mentioned that there are some limitations to the current study. Unfortunately,
due to stipulations in the schools where data was collected, ‘‘sex’’ was left undefined.
Therefore, adolescents who reported that they had had ‘‘sex’’ or their intentions to delay
‘‘sex’’ could have been reporting on any one of a number of heterosexual and homosexual
acts, including genital-genital, genital-anal, and genital-oral contact. Obviously, the
various sexual practices place adolescents at different levels of risk for early pregnancy,
STI, and HIV contraction. This caveat should be kept in mind when interpreting the
findings. Additionally, the current study was a cross-sectional correlational study.
Therefore, although the findings suggest that comfortable communication impacts ado-
lescent sexual behavior, more longitudinal research is needed. Nevertheless, the current
study does have potential broad applicability to extending future research as well as for
educators and other individuals who work in the area of sexual health communication.
Based on our findings, we offer the following recommendations for researchers and for
educators.

Recommendations for Researchers

Because our results conflict with prior research conducted with EuroAmerican and
African American adolescents, the findings suggest that there are important cultural
differences in parent-child sexual communication patterns. Interestingly, the adolescents
in our study reported very low rates of father-adolescent sexual communication, and
596 B. L. Guzman et al.

comfortable father-adolescent communication did not notably influence adolescent sex-

ual behavior. This finding may be due to differences in what mothers and fathers talk
about with their adolescent children and is an avenue for further research.
The diverse individuals with whom adolescents in the sample discussed sex suggests
that familismo might be a highly salient cultural norm in this population, working to
promote sexual discussions with individuals outside of the parental unit. We posit that
this extended network plays a role in disseminating knowledge and information about
sexuality and sexual conduct. Another area for future research is to explore cultural
differences in adolescent sexual communication.
Additionally, because the findings suggest different individuals in adolescents’ lives
have different effects on their sexual behaviors, another avenue for future research would
be to further explore why and how the different individuals in adolescents’ lives influence
their sexual behaviors. The finding that comfortable communication with mothers worked
to increase instances of abstinence but that comfortable communication with dating
partners worked to decrease instances of abstinence raises several questions as to the
different impact these individuals have on adolescent sexuality. In exploring the patterns
found in the current study, future researchers might want to specifically examine the
timing of conversations about sexuality and how the timing of conversations about
sexuality influences adolescents’ sexual decision making processes. Mother-adolescent
communication about sexual issues probably occurs early on, prior to adolescents’
initiation of sexual intercourse, while dating partner-adolescent and other-adolescent
communication might occur most frequently after adolescents choose to have sex (or,
while they critically are contemplating sexual intercourse), thus potentially accounting
for the differential effects of these individuals on adolescent sexual behavior. Addi-
tionally, these findings suggest that it might be important for mothers to discuss sexual
issues with their children before potential sexual partners do.

Recommendations for Educators and Others Involved in Sexual Health

Communication
Aside from offering suggestions for future research, the findings from this study are also of
great interest to educators and other individuals who work directly with adolescents in the
areas of sexual health communication. First and foremost, the finding that Latino ado-
lescents discuss sexual issues with a wide array of other individuals suggests that educators
(already mentioned this above) are some of the many individuals who influence teen sexual
decision-making. Educators in the field of adolescent sexuality have long acknowledged
the important role that parents play in adolescent sexual education (Kirby, Peterson, &
Brown, 1982). However, the findings in this study suggest that non-parental others also
strongly influence adolescent sexual behaviors. Therefore, it may be in the interests of
educators to focus efforts on understanding non-parental sources of sexual information. As
the current findings suggest, educators may want to include acknowledgement of these
others in future interventions and programming by developing components that seek to
educate adolescents about having comfortable sexual discussions with non-parental others.
Although the current study indicates that comfortable communication about sex can
lead to instances of safer sexual behaviors, it should be noted that communication might
not necessarily encourage safe sexual behavior if the information transmitted is inac-
curate or incomplete. Clearly not all parents, peers, dating partners, and extended family
members are fully knowledgeable communicators about sexuality. This might be espe-
cially true for parents and adult extended family members who are uninformed, or have
outdated information, about the risks of unprotected sexual intercourse. Communication
 Comfortable Communication About Sex 597

with dating partners, whose intentions might actually be sexual coercion, also may not
lead to safer adolescent sexual behavior.
This realization has potential implications for teaching Latino adolescents about the
benefits of safer sexual practices such as abstinence and consistent condom use. If
adolescents receive the majority of their information about sexual issues from individuals
other than their parents (such as their peers and extended family members), it would be
important for educators to reach those individuals to ensure that adolescents are receiving
the correct information about sexual behaviors, no matter the source. Involving indivi-
duals with whom adolescents talk about sex, such as peers, dating partners, and family
members, in sex education programs can increase the possibility that adolescents are
receiving accurate and consistent information about sexuality both within and among
these different informational sources.

References
Adolph, C., Ramos, D. E., Linton, K. L. P., & Grimes, D. A. (1995). Pregnancy among Hispanic
teenagers: Is good parental communication a deterrent? Contraception, 51, 303–306.
Alan Guttmacher Institute. (1999). Facts in brief: Teen sex and pregnancy. Retrieved December
2001 from Alan Guttmacher Institute website: http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/fb_teen_sex.html
Catania, J. A., Gibson, D. R., Marn, B., Coates, T. J., & Greenblatt, R. M. (1990). Response bias in
assessing sexual behaviors relevant to HIV trasmission. Evaluation and Program Planning,
13, 19–27.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1997). Vital health statistics: New data from the
1995 National Survey of Family Growth. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1998). U.S. AIDS and HIV cases reported through
December 1998. HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, 10, 1–43.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2000a). Health, United States, 2000, with adolescent
chart book. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2000b). National and state-specific pregnancy rates
among adolescents—United States, 1995–1997. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 49,
605–611.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2000c). Youth risk behavior surveillance—United
States, 1999. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 49, 1–96.
Christopher, F. S., Johnson, D. C., & Roosa, M. W. (1993). Family, individual, and social correlates
of early Hispanic adolescent sexual expression. Journal of Sex Research, 30, 54–61.
Delgado, M., & Humme-Delgado, D. (1992). Natural support systems: Source of strength in
Hispanic communities. Social Work, 1, 83–88.
DiIorio, C., Kelley, M., & Hockenberry-Eaton, M. (1999). Communication about sexual issues:
Mothers, fathers, and friends. Journal of Adolescent Health, 24, 181–189.
DiIorio, C., Resnicow, K., Dudley, W. N., Thomas, S., Wang, D. T., Van Marter, D. F., Manteuffel,
B., & Lipana, J. (2000). Social cognitive factors associated with mother-adolescent commu-
nication about sex. Journal of Health Communication, 5, 41–51.
Dittus, P. J., Jaccard, J., & Gordon, V. V. (1999). Direct and nondirect communication of mother
beliefs to adolescents: Adolescent motivations for premarital sexual activity. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1927–1963.
Fisher, T. D. (1986a). An exploratory study of parent-child communication about sex and the sexual
attitudes of early, middle, and late adolescents. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 147,
543–557.
Fisher, T. D. (1986b). Parent-child communication about sex and young adolescents’ sexual
knowledge and attitudes. Adolescence, 21, 517–527.
Fox, G. L., & Inazu, J. K. (1980). Patterns and outcomes of mother-daughter communication about
sexuality. Journal of Social Issues, 36, 7–29.
598 B. L. Guzman et al.

Holtzman, D., & Rubinson, R. (1995). Parent and peer communication effects on AIDS-related
behavior among U.S. high school students. Family Planning Perspectives, 27, 235–240.
Jaccard, J., Dittus, P. J., & Gordon, V. V. (2000). Parent-teen communication about premarital sex:
Factors associated with the extent of communication. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15,
187–208.
Kirby, D., Peterson, L., & Brown, J. G. (1982). A joint parent-child sex education program. Child
Welfare, 61, 105–114.
Kotchick, B. A., Shaffer, A., Forehand, R., & Miller, K. S. (2001). Adolescent sexual risk behavior:
A multi-system perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 21, 493–519.
Lefkowitz, E. S., Sigman, M., & Au, T. K. (2000). Helping mothers discuss sexuality and AIDS
with adolescents. Child Development, 71, 1383–1394.
Leland, N. L., & Barth, R. P. (1993). Characteristics of adolescents who have attempted to avoid
HIV and who have communicated with parents about sex. Journal of Adolescent Research, 8,
58–76.
Miller, K. S., Kotchick, B. A., Dorsey, S., Forehand, R., & Ham, A. Y. (1998). Family commu-
nication about sex: What are parents saying and are their adolescents listening? Family
Planning Perspectives, 30, 218–222.
Miller, K. S., Levin, M. L., Whitaker, D. J., & Xu, X. (1998). Patterns of condom use among
adolescents: The impact of mother-adolescent communication. American Journal of Public
Health, 88, 1542–1544.
Moore, K. A., Peterson, J. L., & Furstenberg, F. F. (1986). Parental attitudes and the occurrence of
early sexual activity. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 777–782.
National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. (2000). Facts in Brief. Washington, DC: Author.
Newcomer, S. F., & Udry, J. R. (1985). Parent-child communication and adolescent sexual
behavior. Family Planning Perspectives, 17, 169–174.
Nolin, M. J., & Petersen, K. K. (1992). Gender differences in parent-child communication about
sexuality: An exploratory study. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 59–79.
Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (1999). Healthy People 2010. Washington,
DC: Author
O’Sullivan, L. F., Jaramillo, B. M. S., Moreau, D., & Meyer-Bahlburg, H. F. L. (1999). Mother-
daughter communication about sexuality in a clinical sample of Hispanic adolescent girls.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 21, 447–469.
Pistella, C. L. Y., & Bonati, F. A. (1998). Communication about sexual behavior among adolescent
women, their family, and peers. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human
Services, 79, 206–211.
Rodgers, J. L., & Rowe, D. C. (1993). Social contagion and adolescent sexual behavior: A
developmental EMOSA model. Psychological Review, 100, 479–510.
Salgado de Snyder, N., & Padilla, A. M. (1987). Social support networks: Their availability and
effectiveness. In M. Gaviria & J. Arana (Eds.), Health and behavior: Research agenda for
Hispanics. The Simón Bolvar Research Monograph Series No. 1 (pp. 93–107). Chicago:
University of Illinois at Chicago.
Shoop, D. M., & Davidson, P. M. (1994). AIDS and adolescents: The relation of parent and partner
communication to adolescent condom use. Journal of Adolescence, 17, 137–148.
Stycos, J. M. (1952). Family and fertility in Puerto Rico. In F. Cordasco & E. Bucchioni
(Eds.), The Puerto Rican community and its children on the mainland: A source book for teach-
ers, social workers and other professionals. (pp. 76–88). Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow
Press.
Tucker, S. K. (1989). Adolescent patterns of communication about sexually related topics. Ado-
lescence, 24, 269–278.
Widmer, E. D. (1997). Influence of older siblings on initiation of sexual intercourse. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 59, 928–938.
View publication stats