Table 3.
Bivariate associations of variables among sexually-active YGBM (N = 376)
| Age | Ed | Int | Comm | Pass | DO | HUO | SE | Mono | Male Partners | URAI Partners | UIAI Partners | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education (Ed) | .58** | |||||||||||
| Intimacya (Int) | .10* | .06 | ||||||||||
| Commitmenta (Comm) | -.07 | -.11* | .07 | |||||||||
| Passiona (Pass) | .08 | .14** | .01 | .13** | ||||||||
| Time Dating Onlineb (DO) | .08 | -.09 | -.02 | .07 | .04 | |||||||
| Time Hooking-Up Onlineb (HUO) | .12* | -.01 | -.08 | -.07 | .004 | .45** | ||||||
| Sexual-exclusivitya (SE) | -.10 | -.02 | .24** | .42** | .32** | -.02 | -.25** | |||||
| Monogamya (Mono) | -.09 | -.05 | .22** | .43** | .31** | .06 | -.20** | .78** | ||||
| Male Partnersb | .06 | .02 | -.08 | -.14 | -.07 | .07 | .23** | -.28** | -.18** | |||
| URAI Partnersb | .02 | -.03 | -.005 | -.16** | .04 | .07 | .18** | -.24** | -.08 | .69** | ||
| UIAI Partnersb | .04 | -.03 | .01 | -.13* | .02 | .12* | .19** | -.19** | -.11* | .56** | .58** | |
| Relationship Exclusivitya | -.10* | -.04 | .24** | .45** | .34** | .02 | -.24** | .95** | .94** | -.26** | -.19** | -.17** |
Notes.
*
p < .05
**
p < .01
a
1 = Not at all important, 5 = Extremely important
b
Given skewed distribution, we used the variable's log-10 transformation in bivariate analyses.