Skip to main content
NCBI home page
International Journal of Sexual Health logoLink to International Journal of Sexual Health
. 2023 Mar 11;35(2):209–217. doi: 10.1080/19317611.2023.2184898

Dating App Use and Sexual Risk: Understanding the Associations between Casual Sex Motivation, Number of Sexual Partners, and STI Diagnoses

Kexin Wang a, Shuang Chen b,✉, Fei Wu a
PMCID: PMC10903589  PMID: 38595862

Abstract

Objective: This study focused on casual sex motivation to explore why some users tend to have more sexual partners and are more likely to take risks in sexual practices, thereby raising their chances of contracting sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Methods: We recruited Chinese heterosexual dating app users (N = 582) online to investigate the serial mediation model. Results: Casual sex motivation for dating app use was not directly related to the diagnoses of STIs. Number of sexual partners and frequency of risky sexual behavior serially mediated the relationship between casual sex motivation and STI diagnoses. Conclusions: Using dating apps for casual sex motivation is not necessarily associated with higher incidences of STIs, provided that users do not engage in risky sexual practices.

Keywords: Casual sex motivation for dating app use, number of sexual partners, risky sexual behavior, STIs

Introduction

According to the 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) report on sexual health, there is a high prevalence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) across the globe, with more than 1 million people worldwide contracting an STI every day, although the majority of these infections are asymptomatic (WHO, 2021). The popularity of dating apps has been noted as one reason for this high prevalence of STIs, as using them may encourage risky sexual behavior which can ultimately lead to a higher incidence of STIs (Pennise et al., 2015). For instance, the United States Department of Health and Human Services has attributed the domestic increase of STIs to the increased proliferation of dating apps (Enomoto et al., 2017). The United Nations has also suggested that the upsurge of HIV infections in the Asia-Pacific region could be due to an increase in dating app use (Clark, 2015). Despite these large-scale institutional reports, however, the overall research evidence on dating app use and STIs nonetheless appears to still be inconclusive (Hahn et al., 2018; Tsai et al., 2019).

China has become the country with the largest number of dating app users in recent years. The local dating app Momo alone reported having over 115 million users by September 2021 in mainland China (MOMO, 2021). Increased insight into the relationship between Chinese dating app use, unsafe sexual practices, and the risk of contracting STIs can offer guidance in the development of more effective health interventions.

Dating app use and sexual risk

Empirical evidence regarding the relationship between dating app use, risky sexual behavior, and the contraction of STIs remains inconclusive or even controversial (Hahn et al., 2018; Tsai et al., 2019). Regarding the most frequently investigated sex practice with regards to risk, condom use, several studies have found that dating app use is associated with increased inconsistent use of condoms or a higher frequency of having sex without using a condom at all (Choi et al., 2016a, 2016b, 2018; Sawyer et al., 2018). However, another study found that dating app use is associated with increased practice of protected sex and condom use (Luo et al., 2019). Still, others found no significant association between dating app use and condom use (Shapiro et al., 2017; Whitfield et al., 2017). Dating app use has also been found to be related to other risky sexual behaviors, such as having sex while using drugs or alcohol. While Sawyer et al. (2018) found that dating app use was associated with higher rates of having sex after using drugs or alcohol, Choi et al. (2017) found a correlation between dating app use in conjunction with sexual activities and recreational drug use, but not with alcohol use.

Taken together, despite findings suggesting a consistent relationship between risky sexual behavior and the incidence of STIs, the question of whether dating app use facilitates risky behavior is still inconclusive (Flesia et al., 2021). Furthermore, empirical evidence on whether there is a serial relationship between dating app use, risky sexual behavior, and STIs incidence is also inconclusive.

Casual sex motivation and risky sexual behavior

One reason for the inconclusive findings regarding dating app use and sexual health might be that the motivations to use a dating app may differ from those related to various sexual behaviors and, subsequently, to the risk of contracting STIs (Flesia et al., 2021). For instance, Sumter et al. (2017) explored Tinder users’ primary motivations: Love, Casual Sex, Ease of Communication, Self-Worth Validation, Thrill of Excitement, and Trendiness. They found that casual sex motivation was a predictor of risky sexual intercourse (i.e., having a one-night stand). Similarly, Fielder et al. (2014) found that having sex without being in a committed relationship leads to a greater risk of contracting STIs. Notably, a recent study found that, compared to those who use dating apps to find romantic partners, app users seeking sexual partners were more likely to report an STI diagnosis (Flesia et al., 2021).

Users who use dating apps for casual sex are more likely to have a higher number of sexual partners. This can lead to issues in sexual health, for example, the United Nations attributed a rise in new HIV infections to an increase in individuals’ sexual partners, which was facilitated by dating app use because it expanded the options for spontaneous casual sex (Clark, 2015). In fact, a recent study found that those using a dating app specifically to seek out sex reported having more sexual partners (Phan et al., 2021). Finally, having more sexual partners is believed to increase one’s likelihood of conducting unsafe sexual practices, with several studies confirming that having multiple sexual partners is associated with using drugs recreationally, consuming alcohol, and also contracting STIs (Choi et al., 2016a; Howard & Wang, 2004; Valois et al., 1999). Although the existing research hints at the serial association between using dating apps for sexual relationships, having more sexual partners, engaging in riskier sexual behavior, and having a higher chance of contracting STIs (Queiroz et al., 2020), no research to date has empirically investigated these three variables together.

The present study

In response to the uncertainty surrounding the possible mechanism that may explain the relationship between dating app use and sexual health (Choi et al., 2016a), as well as in consideration of the role of dating app use motivation (Tsai et al., 2019), the current study aimed to investigate the serial association between casual sex motivation for dating app use, the number of sexual partners met via dating apps, the frequency of risky sexual behavior, and STI diagnoses.

The present research contributes to the existing literature in three ways. First, we investigated the association between casual sex motivation for dating app use and STI contraction among heterosexual dating app users. Previous yet limited research has mainly focused on male dating app users who have sex with men, as these users are believed to be particularly vulnerable to contracting STIs, while only a small number of studies have focused on heterosexual users (Rogge et al., 2020). However, the odds of contracting STIs have increased among all demographics (Bowen et al., 2019), suggesting that the contraction of STIs may also be on an increase among heterosexual users. It is therefore important to investigate dating app use and STI diagnoses among heterosexual users as well. Second, we sought to use a more comprehensive assessment scale when assessing risky sexual behavior (Flesia et al., 2021). Previous research has tended to focus either on condom use during sex or on substance use before sex (Tsai et al., 2019). However, these behaviors should be assessed using an integrated measurement in order to provide a more comprehensive understanding of risky sexual practices. Finally, we integrated these closely related constructs in an integrative model to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the associations between dating app use motivation, dating app use behavior, risky sexual behavior, and dating app user sexual health status rather than simply considering one or two of these aspects.

Based on the findings that using dating apps for casual sex is likely to increase one’s sexual health risks (Flesia et al., 2021), we first proposed that casual sex motivation for dating app use is positively associated with STI diagnoses (H1). Second, we expected that the number of sexual partners met through dating apps and the frequency of risky sexual behavior are two serial mediators that can explain the indirect association between casual sex motivation for dating app use and STI diagnoses (H2).

Specifically, we proposed three pathways: (1) Based on the findings that those using dating apps for casual sex have more sexual partners (Phan et al., 2021) and that having multiple sexual partners increases one’s risk of contracting STIs (Choi et al., 2016a), we assumed that casual sex motivation for dating app use is positively associated with the number of sexual partners met through dating apps, which may in turn relate to a higher incidence of STIs (H2a); (2) Empirical research also suggests that users who have a stronger motivation for casual sex tend to take more risks in sexual practices (Rogge et al., 2020; Sawyer et al., 2018) and that unsafe sexual practices lead to a higher risk of contracting STIs (Taylor-Seehafer & Rew, 2000). Thus, we assumed that casual sex motivation for dating app use is positively associated with more frequent risky sexual behavior, which in turn relates to a higher incidence of STIs (H2b); (3) In addition, number of sexual partners and frequency of risky sexual behavior are likely to work sequentially to make users more likely to contract STIs. Indeed, existing evidence suggests that dating app users with more sexual partners tend to conduct more unsafe sexual practices (Choi et al., 2016a). Therefore, we expected that a serial mediation path in that casual sex motivation for dating app use is related to meeting more sexual partners via dating apps, which in turn leads to more risky sexual behavior and, eventually, to a higher incidence of STIs (H2c). Our hypotheses are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Hypothesis model.

Methods

Participants

This survey was conducted using Sojump (http://www.sojump.com), an online crowdsourcing platform in China. To ensure the validity of the data, we utilized Sojump’s paid sample service, which boasts 6.2 million samples from various cities in China from diverse demographics. The survey used a filtering question to determine that all included respondents were currently using dating apps. Each valid respondent was awarded 20 Chinese Yuan for their involvement. In total, 1,046 Chinese dating app users were recruited from Sojump. Of the initial sample, 55.64% (N = 582) reported being heterosexual and having had sexual experiences, and were therefore retained as part of the analytical sample for this study. The majority of the analytical sample (80.07%) was using Tantan (the Chinese version of Tinder) or Momo (a Chinese counterpart to Tinder).

Measures

Control variables

Respondents reported their sex, age, and marital status.

Casual sex motivation for dating app use

We adapted one of the motivation subscales from the dating app use scale as developed by Sumter et al. (2017) to reflect potential casual sex motivations in using dating apps, which included four items: “to talk about sex,” “to have a one-night stand,” “to find someone to have sex with,” and “to exchange sexy pictures.” Respondents rated how much they agreed or disagreed with each statement, ranking each item on a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The casual sex motivation for dating app use score was created by averaging the ratings of the four items (α = .84).

Number of sexual partners met via dating app

The scale developed by Timmermans et al. (2018) was used, in which respondents used a scale ranging from 1 (none) to 10 (more than 50 people) to indicate the number of people they had met through dating apps which had led to the respondent having sex with them.

Risky sexual behavior

Respondents indicated their frequency of having sex with someone who was not their committed partner in riskier circumstances, which included three items: without using condoms, under the effect of alcohol, or under the effect of drugs. Respondents rated each item using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (more than 10 times). The risky sexual behavior score was created by averaging all three items (α = .60).

Sexually transmitted infections

Respondents reported whether they had been diagnosed with having any of the top five most common STIs: chlamydia, genital warts, genital herpes, gonorrhea, and HIV (1 = no, 2 = yes, 3 = not sure; Whiteley et al., 2018). The responses to the STIs questions were recoded into one dummy dichotomous variable (0 = no, 1 = yes) according to their skewness.

Data analysis

We used the PROCESS macro (model 6, version 4.0) for SPSS (version 26.0) with bootstrapping (95% CI, 5,000 resamples) to analyze the data. Under most circumstances, bootstrapping is the most powerful and reasonable method of determining confidence limits for specific indirect effects (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). The model included the following control variables as covariates: sex, age, and marital status.

Results

The descriptive analysis results for casual sex motivation showed that, 158 respondents (27.15%) responded “agree” or “strongly agree” with regards to talking about sex, 51 (8.76%) to having a one-night stand, 59 (10.14%) to finding someone to have sex with, and 112 (19.24%) to exchanging sexy pictures. Respondents further reported that, on average, they have had sex with only one dating app partner. The mean frequency of risky sexual behavior, therefore, was one. Respondents also reported limited STI diagnoses. A percentile distribution revealed that only 14.8% of respondents had contracted at least one of the STIs. See Table 1 for descriptive statistics.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics of full sample and according to STI diagnoses.

  Full sample (N = 582) Sexually transmitted infection diagnoses (N = 81) No sexually transmitted infection diagnoses (N = 501)
Sex n (%) Female
271 (46.56%)		 Male
311 (53.44%)		 Female
57 (70.37%)		 Male
24 (29.63%)		 Female
214 (42.71%)		 Male
287 (57.29%)
Marital status n (%) Single
400 (68.73%)		 Non-singlea
182 (31.27%)		 Single
53(65.43%)		 Non-single
28 (34.57%)		 Single
347 (69.26%)		 Non-single
154 (30.74%)
  M SD M SD M SD
Age 25.39 3.66 25.66 3.06 25.34 3.75
Casual sex motivation for dating app use 2.25 0.92 2.12 0.80 2.27 0.94
Number of sexual partners met via dating apps 1.42 0.88 1.54 1.30 1.40 0.79
Risky sexual behavior 1.41 0.60 1.54 0.71 1.39 0.58
Open in a new tab

Note. a non-single = married, cohabitating, separated, remarried, divorced, or widowed.

Zero-order intercorrelations among the key variables are presented in Table 2. Results showed that casual sex motivation for dating app use, number of sexual partners met via dating apps, and risky sexual behavior were all positively associated with one another and were all negatively associated with respondents’ sex.

Table 2.

Correlations (r).

  1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Sex 1          
2. Marital status N/A 1        
3. Age −.07 .39*** 1      
4. Casual sex motivation for dating app use −.36*** .03 .13** 1    
5. Number of sexual partners met via dating apps −.22*** −.01 .05 .36*** 1  
6. Risky sexual behavior −.23*** .08 .09* .36*** .42*** 1
Open in a new tab

Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

As shown in Table 3, there were significant associations between the casual sex motivation for dating app use, number of sexual partners met via dating apps, risky sexual behaviors, and STI diagnoses, according to multiple regression analyses. The ordinary least squares regressions showed that causal sex motivation for dating app use was positively associated with both number of sexual partners met via dating apps and risky sexual behavior. Meanwhile, number of sexual partners met via dating apps was positively associated with risky sexual behavior. The percentages of variance explained were 14% in Model 1, 23% in Model 2, and 11% (Nagelkrk R2) in Model 3.

Table 3.

Regression model between casual sex motivation for dating app use, number of sexual partners met via dating apps, risky sexual behavior, and sexually transmitted infections.

Variables Model 1 (DV: number of sexual partners met via dating apps)
OLS regression
 Model 2 (DV: risky sexual behavior)
OLS regression
 Model 3 (DV: sexually transmitted infections)
Logistic regression
b (SE) 95% CI b (SE) 95% CI b (SE) OR b, 95% CI
Sex −0.19** (0.07) [−0.33, −0.04] −0.10* (0.05) [−0.19, −0.01] 1.38*** (0.30) 3.97 [0.79, 1.96]
Marital status −0.04 (0.08) [−0.19, 0.12] 0.09 (0.05) [−0.02, 0.19] −0.04 (0.29) 0.96 [−0.61, 0.53]
Age 0.003 (.01) [−0.017, 0.023] 0.003 (0.01) [−0.01, 0.02] 0.03 (0.04) 1.03 [−0.04, 0.10]
Casual sex motivation for dating app use 0.31*** (0.04) [0.23, 0.38] 0.13*** (0.03) [0.08, 0.19] −0.21 (0.16) 0.81 [−0.54, 0.11]
Number of sexual partners met via dating apps N/A N/A 0.22*** (0.03) [0.17, 0.27] 0.26 (0.14) 1.30 [−0.02, 0.53]
Risky sexual behavior N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.58**(0.21) 1.79 [0.16, 0.99]
R2 .14 .23 Nagelkrk R2 .11
F 23.47*** 34.91*** −2 Log likelihood 429.13***
Open in a new tab

Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001; OLS: ordinary least squares; OR: odds ratio; CI: confidence interval.

The results of logistic regression of STIs on other variables are also presented in Table 3. Risky sexual behavior was found to be a significant factor that increased one’s odds of contracting an STI (b = 0.58, SE = 0.21, OR = 1.79, p < .01, 95% CI of b = 0.16, 0.99). That is, compared to users who reported engaging in less risky sexual behavior, those engaged in more risky sexual behavior were at a greater risk of contracting STIs. In addition, the odds of having contracted STIs were higher for females than for males (sex: b = 1.38, SE = 0.30, p < .001, OR = 3.97, 95% CI of b = 0.79, 1.96). More specifically, there was a greater risk of STI diagnoses among females (STIs, female: N = 57 (70.37%); STIs, male: N = 24 (29.63%)).

Results of the serial mediation effects, including casual sex motivation for dating app use (X), number of sexual partners met via dating apps (M1), risky sexual behavior (M2), and STIs (Y), are displayed in Figure 2. Confirming hypothesis H2b, the specific indirect effect between casual sex motivation for dating app use and diagnoses of STIs through risky sexual behavior was significant (b = 0.08, bootstrap SE = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.15). Another significant indirect path was found between casual sex motivation for dating app use and diagnoses of STIs through number of sexual partners met via dating apps and risky sexual behavior (b = 0.04, bootstrap SE = 0.02, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.08), confirming hypothesis H2c. No other significant indirect or direct paths emerged. Therefore, H2a was not supported.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Model examining the relationships between casual sex motivation for dating app use and STIs through number of sexual partners met via dating apps and risky sexual behavior. Note: b = unstandardized path coefficient; CI = confidence interval for unstandardized path coefficients. All displayed paths were significant in the tested model at p < .05. For clarity, covariances are not shown.

Discussion

The present study sought to investigate the direct association between dating app users’ casual sex motivation and their STI diagnoses, with consideration of number of sexual partners users met on dating apps as well as risky sexual practices, to explain why dating app use for casual sex might lead to a higher chance of contracting STIs.

The hypothesized model

Contrary to H1, our results showed that casual sex motivation for dating app use was not directly related to STI diagnoses. Similarly, H2a was also not supported, indicating that although casual sex motivation was positively related to meeting more sexual partners through dating apps, having more sexual partners was not related to a higher chance of contracting STIs. Supporting H2b and H2c, the variable of engaging in risky sexual behavior alone (H2b) or in tandem with having a higher number of sexual partners (H2c) did explain why users who use dating apps for casual sex may have a higher incidence of STIs.

Our results suggest that, in terms of physical health risks, using dating apps for casual sex motivation may not increase one’s risk of contracting STIs. The reason for this might be that those using dating apps for casual sex seem to be aware of the potential health risks of this, and are taking appropriate precautions to avoid contracting STIs. In fact, Chan and Ghose (2012) reported a similar finding, noting that some people who use online platforms such as Craigslist or Backpage for sexual relationships are actually more cautious in sexual practices because they are conscious of the health risks involved in the sex industry.

Nonetheless, dating apps can still be a dangerous virtual avenue to sex, as they enable users to discover a wide range of sexual partners. If users with multiple sexual partners engage in risky sexual behavior, they might pose a threat not only to themselves but also to their sexual partners because their unsafe practices could accelerate the transmission of STIs through their network of sexual partners.

Theoretical and practical implications

The current findings underscore the importance of considering dating app users’ motivations as a predictor of unsafe sexual practices. In this way, we contribute to the existing literature by highlighting the importance of considering an individual’s disposition when examining the association between media use—in this case, app use—and its effects (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013).

The current research has several practical implications for sexual health. Our results emphasize the importance of safe sex practices between sexual partners who encounter one another via dating apps. Dating apps should consider adding a function that reminds users not only of the potential risks of having intercourse with someone without knowing their STI history, but also of the danger of engaging in sex without using condoms, or when under the influence of alcohol or drugs. It is important to note that one recent study reported that dating app users tend to not discuss STI status with their sexual partners, with 38.5% reporting that they would never have a safe sex conversation about their health status and expectations (Garga et al., 2021). Special attention should be given to users with many sexual partners, possibly even suggesting that these users should ask potential sexual partners for a recent, reliable report about their health.

The current findings could also be used for clinical purposes, for example to encourage practitioners to ask patients about their dating app use patterns and related risky sexual behaviors, to potentially flag when someone is in need of more specific health interventions.

Limitations and future study

The current findings should be interpreted with consideration of several limitations. First, participants in the current study were recruited through an online crowdsourcing platform. Therefore, the convenience sample may not match the broader demographic characteristics of the entire dating app user population. Specifically, the sample was young; therefore, the findings may not generalize to older dating app users. Also, this study was conducted in the context of China, which, culturally, is relatively less sexually liberal than Western countries (Liu et al., 2020). The less liberal context may have inhibited dating app users from speaking freely about their casual sex motivation. Future studies should consider cultural differences in sexuality. Second, although we proposed a serial mediation path, the data were cross-sectional and cannot be used to determine causality. That is, it is very likely that sexually active people are both more likely to use dating apps and get an STI. It is also possible that individuals with STI diagnoses nonetheless choose to engage in sexual practices with sexual partners they encounter on dating apps which, in turn, may gradually cultivate users’ desires to use the dating app for sexual intercourse. In fact, prior research has theorized that technology may enhance multiple partnerships in young men who have sex with other men who already engage in risky sexual practices (Holloway et al., 2014). Future research should consider a longitudinal design to observe the impact of dating app use and behavioral change over time to verify causality. Finally, the data were all self-reported, which does not guarantee the validity of responses, particularly regarding the STI diagnoses in that the self-reported diagnoses might differ depending on one’s frequency of laboratory/clinic visits. However, using self-reported measurements to obtain behavioral health indicators can also protect participants’ privacy and facilitate more honest responses (Flesia et al., 2021). Future research should consider finding a balance between using accurate measurements and protecting participants’ privacy.

Conclusion

Although using dating apps for casual sex can lead to one having more sexual partners and ultimately a higher incidence of STI diagnoses, it is worth noting that as long as dating app users do not engage in unsafe sexual practices, their risk of contracting STIs does not necessarily increase. Dating apps should remind users of the potential risks of having sex without using condoms, or when under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Furthermore, practitioners should consider asking about patients’ dating app use and related risky sexual behavior when consulting regarding specific health interventions.

Funding Statement

This research was funded by National Natural Fund of China (grant number 72004198) and the key project of the National Social Science Fund, “Research on Ethics and Norms of Public Communication in the Context of New Media” (grant number 19AXW007).

References

  1. Bowen, V. B., Braxton, J., Davi, D. W., Flagg, E. W., Grey, J., Grier, L., Harvey, A., Kidd, S., Kreisel, K., Llata, E., Mauk, K., Pagaoa, M., Picchetti, V., Presley, R. J., Ricks, P., Shapiro, S., St. Cyr, S., Stenger, M., Torrone, E., … Llata, E. (2019). Sexually transmitted disease surveillance 2018. https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/79370.
  2. Chan, J., & Ghose, A. (2012). Internet’s dirty secret: Assessing the impact of online intermediaries on the outbreak of sexually transmitted diseases. Working Papers 12-07, NET Institute. [Google Scholar]
  3. Choi, E. P. H., Wong, J. Y. H., Lo, H. H. M., Wong, W., Chio, J. H. M., & Fong, D. Y. T. (2017). Association between using smartphone dating applications and alcohol and recreational drug use in conjunction with sexual activities in college students. Substance Use & Misuse, 52(4), 422–428. 10.1080/10826084.2016.1233566 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Choi, E. P.-H., Wong, J. Y.-H., Lo, H. H.-M., Wong, W., Chio, J. H.-M., & Fong, D. Y.-T. (2016a). The impacts of using smartphone dating applications on sexual risk behaviours in college students in Hong Kong. PLoS One, 11(11), e0165394. 10.1371/journal.pone.0165394 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Choi, E. P.-H., Wong, J. Y.-H., Lo, H. H.-M., Wong, W., Chio, J. H.-M., & Fong, D. Y.-T. (2016b). The association between smartphone dating applications and college students’ casual sex encounters and condom use. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare, 9, 38–41. 10.1016/j.srhc.2016.07.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Choi, E. P.-H., Wong, J. Y.-H., & Fong, D. Y.-T. (2018). An emerging risk factor of sexual abuse: the use of smartphone dating applications. Sexual Abuse, 30(4), 343–366. 10.1177/1079063216672168 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Clark, J. (2015). Mobile dating apps could be driving HIV epidemic among adolescents in Asia Pacific, report says. British Medical Journal Publishing Group. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Enomoto, C., Noor, S., & Widner, B. (2017). Is social media to blame for the sharp rise in STDs? Social Sciences, 6(3), 78. 10.3390/socsci6030078 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fielder, R. L., Walsh, J. L., Carey, K. B., & Carey, M. P. (2014). Sexual hookups and adverse health outcomes: A longitudinal study of first-year college women. Journal of Sex Research, 51(2), 131–144. 10.1080/00224499.2013.848255 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Flesia, L., Fietta, V., Foresta, C., & Monaro, M. (2021). “What are you looking for?” Investigating the association between dating app use and sexual risk behaviors. Sexual Medicine, 9(4), 100405. 10.1016/j.esxm.2021.100405 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Garga, S., Thomas, M. T., Bhatia, A., Sullivan, A., John-Leader, F., & Pit, S. W. (2021). Motivations, dating app relationships, unintended consequences and change in sexual behaviour in dating app users at an Australian music festival. Harm Reduction Journal, 18(1), 1–10. 10.1186/s12954-021-00493-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Hahn, H. A., You, D. S., Sferra, M., Hubbard, M., Thamotharan, S., & Fields, S. A. (2018). Is it too soon to meet? Examining differences in geosocial networking app use and sexual risk behavior of emerging adults. Sexuality & Culture, 22(1), 1–21. 10.1007/s12119-017-9449-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Holloway, I. W., Dunlap, S., Del Pino, H. E., Hermanstyne, K., Pulsipher, C., & Landovitz, R. J. (2014). Online social networking, sexual risk and protective behaviors: Considerations for clinicians and researchers. Current Addiction Reports, 1(3), 220–228. 10.1007/s40429-014-0029-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Howard, D. E., & Wang, M. Q. (2004). Multiple sexual-partner behavior among sexually active US adolescent girls. American Journal of Health Behavior, 28(1), 3–12. 10.5993/ajhb.28.1.1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Liu, J., Cheng, M., Wei, X., & Yu, N. N. (2020). The Internet-driven sexual revolution in China. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 153, 119911. 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119911 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Luo, Q., Wu, Z., Chen, Z., Ma, Y., Mi, G., Liu, X., Xu, J., Rou, K., Zhao, Y., & Scott, S. R. (2019). App use frequency and condomless anal intercourse among men who have sex with men in Beijing, China: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of STD & AIDS, 30(12), 1146–1155. 10.1177/0956462419860293 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. MOMO . (2021). Momo revenue of 3.7592 billion Yuan for the third quarter of 2021. http://www.immomo.com/newsroom/16232.html#more-16232.
  18. Pennise, M., Inscho, R., Herpin, K., Owens, J., Bedard, B. A., Weimer, A. C., Kennedy, B. S., & Younge, M. (2015). Using smartphone apps in STD interviews to find sexual partners. Public Health Reports, 130(3), 245–252. 10.1177/003335491513000311 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Phan, A., Seigfried-Spellar, K., & Choo, K.-K R. (2021). Threaten me softly: A review of potential dating app risks. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 3, 100055. 10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100055 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. 10.3758/brm.40.3.879 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Queiroz, J. F., Medeiros, K. S., Sarmento, A. C. A., Monteiro, M. N., Cobucci, R. N., Stransky, B., & Gonçalves, A. K. (2020). Use of dating sites and applications by women and their risk of sexually transmitted infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol. BMJ Open, 10(11), e038738. 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038738 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Rogge, R. D., Crasta, D., & Legate, N. (2020). Is Tinder–Grindr use risky? Distinguishing venue from individuals’ behavior as unique predictors of sexual risk. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 49(4), 1263–1277. 10.1007/s10508-019-01594-w [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Sawyer, A. N., Smith, E. R., & Benotsch, E. G. (2018). Dating application use and sexual risk behavior among young adults. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 15(2), 183–191. 10.1007/s13178-017-0297-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Shapiro, G. K., Tatar, O., Sutton, A., Fisher, W., Naz, A., Perez, S., & Rosberger, Z. (2017). Correlates of Tinder use and risky sexual behaviors in young adults. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 20(12), 727–734. 10.1089/cyber.2017.0279 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Sumter, S. R., Vandenbosch, L., & Ligtenberg, L. (2017). Love me Tinder: Untangling emerging adults’ motivations for using the dating application Tinder. Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 67–78. 10.1016/j.tele.2016.04.009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Taylor‐Seehafer, M., & Rew, L. (2000). Risky sexual behavior among adolescent women. Journal of the Society of Pediatric Nurses, 5(1), 15–25. 10.1111/j.1744-6155.2000.tb00082.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Timmermans, E., De Caluwé, E., & Alexopoulos, C. (2018). Why are you cheating on tinder? Exploring users’ motives and (dark) personality traits. Computers in Human Behavior, 89, 129–139. 10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.040 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Tsai, J. Y., Sussman, S., Pickering, T. A., & Rohrbach, L. A. (2019). Is online partner-seeking associated with increased risk of condomless sex and sexually transmitted infections among individuals who engage in heterosexual sex? A systematic narrative review. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(2), 533–555. 10.1007/s10508-018-1235-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2013). The differential susceptibility to media effects model. Journal of Communication, 63(2), 221–243. 10.1111/jcom.12024 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Valois, R. F., Oeltmann, J. E., Waller, J., & Hussey, J. R. (1999). Relationship between number of sexual intercourse partners and selected health risk behaviors among public high school adolescents. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 25(5), 328–335. 10.1016/s1054-139x(99)00051-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. WHO . (2021). Sexually transmitted infections (STIs). https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/sexually-transmitted-infections-(stis).
  32. Whiteley, L. B., Brown, L. K., Curtis, V., Ryoo, H. J., & Beausoleil, N. (2018). Publicly available internet content as a HIV/STI prevention intervention for urban youth. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 39(4), 361–370. 10.1007/s10935-018-0514-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Whitfield, D. L., Kattari, S. K., Walls, N. E., & Al-Tayyib, A. (2017). Grindr, Scruff, and on the hunt: Predictors of condomless anal sex, internet use, and mobile application use among men who have sex with men. American Journal of Men’s Health, 11(3), 775–784. 10.1177/1557988316687843 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of Sexual Health are provided here courtesy of Taylor & Francis

RESOURCES