[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-136586-105":59,"doc-detail-136586-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","romantic-partners-friends-friends-with-benefits-and-casual-acquaintances-as-sexual-partners","Romantic Partners, Friends, Friends with Benefits, and Casual Acquaintances as Sexual Partners","","Examines sexual behavior patterns across multiple partner types among young adults, comparing romantic partners, friends, friends with benefits, and casual acquaintances. A sample of 163 participants reported frequencies of light nongenital, heavy nongenital, and genital sexual activity with each partner category. Results indicate the highest likelihood of sexual behavior with romantic partners, yet nonromantic partners also contribute substantially. Friends with benefits show greater sexual behavior frequency than other nonromantic categories. Nonsexual activities were less common with friends with benefits, supporting the need to differentiate both partner types and sexual behavior levels.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/romantic-partners-friends-friends-with-benefits-and-casual-acquaintances-as-sexual-partners/136586/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/romantic-partners-friends-friends-with-benefits-and-casual-acquaintances-as-sexual-partners/136586.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Bintang","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-09-19","2026-08-22",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":44},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What partner types does the study compare for sexual behavior?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The study compares romantic partners, friends, friends with benefits, and casual acquaintances, treating them as distinct relationship contexts for sexual activity.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How did young adults’ likelihood of sexual behavior vary by partner type?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Young adults were most likely to engage in sexual behavior with romantic partners, but sexual behavior also occurred with nonromantic partners in meaningful proportions.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What did the study find about friends with benefits versus other nonromantic partners?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Sexual behavior frequencies were greater with friends with benefits than with friends or casual acquaintances, and nonsexual activities were less common in friends with benefits relationships.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},136586,1787389502,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":44,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":129,"read_time":41},962085564381,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","JOURNAL OF SEX RESEARCH, 48(6), 554–564, 2011 Copyright \\# The Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality ISSN: 0022-4499 print=1559-8519 online  \nDOI: 10.1080/00224499.2010.535623  \nRomantic Partners, Friends, Friends with Benefits, and Casual Acquaintances as Sexual Partners  \nWyndol Furman  \nDepartment of Psychology, University of Denver  \nLaura Shaffer  \nDepartment of Psychology, University of Louisville School of Medicine  \nThe purpose of this study was to provide a detailed examination of sexual behavior with different types of partners. A sample of 163 young adults reported on their light nongenital, heavy nongenital, and genital sexual activity with romantic partners, friends, and casual acquaintances. They described their sexual activity with ‘‘friends with benefits,’’ as well as with friends in general. Young adults were most likely to engage in sexual behavior with romantic partners, but sexual behavior also often occurred with some type of nonromantic partner. More young adults engaged in some form of sexual behavior with casual acquaintances than with friends with benefits. The frequencies of sexual behavior, however, were greater with friends with benefits than with friends or casual acquaintances. Interview and questionnaire data revealed that friends with benefits were typically friends, but not necessarily. Nonsexual activities were also less common with friends with benefits than other friends. Taken together, the findings illustrate the value of differentiating among different types of nonromantic partners and different levels of sexual behavior.  \nMost research on sexual behavior has not considered the nature of the relationship in which it occurs. When the context of the relationship has been considered, the research has focused on sexual behavior in romantic relationships or some subset of romantic relationships, such as marriages or cohabitating couples (e.g., Kaestle & Halpern, 2007; O’Sullivan, Mantsun, Harris, & Brooks-Gunn, 2007) . Yet, the sexual behavior of young adults and adolescents often occurs in other contexts. Such sexual activity has been commonly described as casual sex, nonromantic sexual behavior, or ‘‘hookups.’’The details of the definitions vary, but they have the common denominator of referring to sexual behavior in uncommitted relationships (Weaver & Herold, 2000) .  \nSexual intercourse usually occurs first in a romantic or committed relationship, but approximately 25% of the time, it first occurs with a friend, stranger, or someone the person is occasionally dating (Elo, King, &  \nThis research was supported by Grant 50106 from the National Institute of Mental Health (to Wyndol Furman, Primary Investigator) and Grant HD049080 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (to Wyndol Furman, Primary Investigator) . Appreciation is expressed to the Project STAR staff for their contribution to the data collection and to the individuals, families, and schools who are participating in Project STAR.  \nCorrespondence should be addressed to Wyndol Furman, Department of Psychology, University of Denver, 2155 S. Race St., Denver, [CO 80208. E-mail: wfurman@nova.psy.du.edu](CO 80208. E-mail: wfurman@nova.psy.du.edu)  \nFurstenberg, 1999; Manning, Longmore, & Giordano, 2000) . Moreover, approximately one half of sexually active adolescents have had intercourse with a nonromantic partner (Grello, Welsh, & Harper, 2006; Manning, Giordano, & Longmore, 2006; Manning, Longmore, & Giordano, 2005) . About one half of these incidents with a nonromantic partner occurred only once (Manning et al., 2006) . Similarly, approximately 75% to 80% of college students reported ‘‘hooking up’’or engaging in some form of sexual activity with someone for just one night (England, Shafer, & Fogarty, 2008; Paul, McManus, & Hayes, 2000); 30% reported hooking up with someone for the night and having intercourse (Paul et al., 2000) .  \nMost investigators have not differentiated among different partners within th","cbCaifaAj2BZXKx3","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaifaAj2BZXKx3","pdf",116809,12,"English","# Background\n## Limitations of prior partner-focused research\n## Hookups and uncommitted relationships\n# Study Approach\n## Participants and reported sexual activities\n# Results\n## Likelihood of sexual behavior by partner type\n## Frequency differences across partner categories\n## Patterns for friends with benefits\n# Discussion\n## Differentiating partner types and levels of sexual behavior","[{\"question\":\"What partner types does the study compare for sexual behavior?\",\"answer\":\"The study compares romantic partners, friends, friends with benefits, and casual acquaintances, treating them as distinct relationship contexts for sexual activity.\"},{\"question\":\"How did young adults’ likelihood of sexual behavior vary by partner type?\",\"answer\":\"Young adults were most likely to engage in sexual behavior with romantic partners, but sexual behavior also occurred with nonromantic partners in meaningful proportions.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the study find about friends with benefits versus other nonromantic partners?\",\"answer\":\"Sexual behavior frequencies were greater with friends with benefits than with friends or casual acquaintances, and nonsexual activities were less common in friends with benefits relationships.\"}]","Romantic Partners, Friends, Friends with Benefits, and Casual Acquaintances as Sexual Partners | PDF"]