FindArticles > Journal of Sex Research > Feb, 2000 > Article > Print friendly
Sociocultural Correlates of Permissive Sexual Attitudes: A Test of Reiss's Hypotheses About Sweden and the United States - Statistical Data Included
Martin S. WeinbergOver the last 30 years, many sociologists have identified Sweden as a leader in the trend toward egalitarian and permissive sexuality (O'Kelly & Carney, 1986; Popenoe, 1988). Popenoe (1988) wrote that during the 1960s and 1970s, Sweden developed a worldwide reputation as a "center of sex, or, as it more commonly was put, of sin." Further, Popenoe stated that the Swedish people shocked the world "in keeping with the idea of gender equality" in their disavowal of the double standard: "The attitude became widespread that both men and women have an equal right to sexual experience before marriage" (p. 153). Such a view has been promoted in books for adolescents and sex education materials since the mid-1960s (Linner, 1967; National Swedish Board of Education, 1986, 1977; Trost & Bergstrom-Walan, 1997).
In terms of research, Zetterberg (1969) found that 90% of a national sample in Sweden felt premarital coitus was acceptable if a couple were in love, and that 70% of the men and 40% of the women thought it acceptable even if the couple were not in love. In addition, Zetterberg reported that only 2% of married men and women had not had premarital coitus. In the United States, results of the General Social Surveys by the National Opinion Research Center have shown that despite an increase in approval rates since the 1970s, acceptance of premarital sex has never reached the level of support that exists in Sweden (Smith, 1990). This was confirmed in a comparative study done in 1994 (Widmer, Treas, & Newcomb, 1998). Social scientists (e.g., Lottes, 1993; Reiss, 1990) also report that although gender convergence with respect to some sexual attitudes and behaviors has occurred in the United States, evidence exists for persistence of restrictive sexual patterns and the traditional double standard that privileges men (Komarovsky, 1985; Oliver & Hyde, 1993; Sprecher & Zeiss, 1987).
Few social scientists have attempted to provide an explanation for Sweden's allegedly greater degree of permissiveness and egalitarianism. An exception is Reiss (1980) who--based on his observations, library research, and consultation with knowledgeable professionals while on sabbatical in Sweden--theorized that sociocultural characteristics account for an egalitarian and tolerant perspective in sexual matters. Characteristics proposed by Reiss that differentiate Sweden from other non-Scandinavian Western countries in general and from the United States in particular include (a) a lower level of religiosity, (b) a greater egalitarianism with respect to gender roles in general, (c) a more widespread naturalistic conception of sexuality, and (d) a more private-autonomous nonregulatory view of sexuality that is reflected in legal and social policy. All of these characteristics are said to exist in individual attitudes as well as in institutional practices. In addition, Reiss predicted that the trend observed in the 1970s toward increased gender egalitarianism and greater sexual permissiveness in Western societies would continue.
Despite Reiss's continued work in the area of sexuality (e.g., Reiss, 1986, 1990) and a general concurrence on the part of other sex researchers on the validity of his theoretical perspectives (Lottes, 1993; McCormick & Jessor, 1983), Reiss's conclusions have not been tested. Thus we refer to them as hypotheses. In his own words, "[My work] is not definitive, but rather intended to put forth some propositions and ideas that may stimulate future research" (Reiss, 1980, p. 216). In the present paper we test the extent to which the sociocultural characteristics discussed by Reiss in his 1980 article currently affect sexual attitudes in Sweden and the United States. Because Reiss stated that his formulation may apply most to the highly educated, to heterosexuality, and to premarital sexuality, we have used heterosexual university students in these two countries to provide one test of these hypotheses.
THE SOCIOCULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS
Reiss's arguments about sociocultural characteristics surrounding sexual customs follow, along with a review of the literature related to these arguments.
Religiosity/General Gender Egalitarianism
Reiss argues that three key factors contribute to Sweden's leadership with respect to general gender egalitarianism: Sweden's labor shortages during much of the 20th century (which encouraged the employment of women), less religiosity (which undermined gender segregated and nonegalitarian views), and a relative lack of militarism (which decreased male dominance). Reiss challenges his readers to test the efficacy of these factors in facilitating egalitarianism. The influence of religiosity in shaping gender roles and sexuality has been documented and illustrated by Popenoe (1988). Consistent with the Reiss view, Popenoe described the United States as one of the most religious countries in the West, whereas in Sweden, religion and God are rarely mentioned in public discourse and few Swedish citizens attend religious services regularly. Although all Swedish citizens are automatically members of the Lutheran church-unless they fill out a form to resign--the function of the church is primarily one of bureaucratic record keeping. Other writers have provided similar evidence (e.g., Bullough & Bullough, 1977; Francoeur, 1994).
Reiss conceptualizes general gender egalitarianism in terms of equal gender roles within the major institutions of society (political, economic, religious, familial). It may be measured at either the institutional or attitudinal level. Reiss provides ample evidence to demonstrate that a high degree of general gender egalitarianism is reflected in Sweden's official institutions. He cites materials showing that the official position in Sweden favors human liberation, the condition where "both males and females are considered equal and both must be treated in a way that promotes their liberation from restrictive forces" (Reiss, 1980, p. 195). This position is reflected in the laws regarding the institution of marriage: For example, the husband's guardianship rights over the wife were revoked sooner than elsewhere in the Western world, and divorce by mutual consent is available by law. He also points to the strong government support for flex-time, child-care centers, and maternal and parental leave. The Reiss claim that policies promoting general gender egalitarianism are much weaker in the U.S. is still supported (see, for example, Baxter & Kane, 1995; Casper, McLanahan, & Garfinkel, 1994; Intons-Peterson, 1988; Qvarfort, McCrea, & Kolenda, 1988; Rosenthal, 1990; United Nations Development Programme, 1995; Wennemo, 1992).(1)
Reiss notes that differences in gender equality also exist on an individual attitudinal level. He states that "... at the attitudinal level there is a large difference between Sweden and America on the equality of men's and women's roles" (Reiss, 1980, p. 195). He also states that the way people relate sexually and evaluate sexuality reflects the degree of egalitarianism in their culture: "We [in the U.S.] made sexuality different for males and females as part of our distinct gender roles" (Reiss, 1980, p. 214). Accordingly, he theorizes that compared to individuals in the U.S., individuals in Sweden are more likely to believe in general gender egalitarianism and that this greater egalitarianism with respect to the basic societal institutions promotes greater equality in the area of sexuality. If we assume that sexual permissiveness for men is already generally accepted, then egalitarianism would tend to promote the acceptance of the same degree of permissiveness for women as for men (Reiss, 1980). Data from a recent five-nation study by Baxter and Kane (1995) support the first part of this proposition: Swedish women and men reported the greatest level of egalitarianism in attitudes while the lowest levels of egalitarianism were among women and men in the U.S.
Naturalism
Reiss discusses a country's level of naturalism in terms of the attitudes of its citizens. He argues that the Swedish people have a more naturalistic perspective on sexuality: Because sexual expression is seen as natural, its "normality" is less often called into question than in the U.S. According to Reiss, the Swedes are therefore less rigid, less idealistic, less negative, and less demanding than people in the U. S. Moreover, acceptance of naturalistic views leads to a more permissive and tolerant attitude toward sexual expression. Also, because of less religiosity, most Swedes do not adopt a "sex is sin" or "sex is bad" perspective (Reiss, 1980). In a more recent publication, Reiss (1990) makes it clear that he believes the greater influence of religiosity in the U.S.--particularly through the power of the Religious Right--contributes to the acceptance of intolerant, rigid attitudes with respect to sexuality. With respect to one aspect of naturalism, Schwartz (1993) reports that compared to women in the U.S., Swedish women reported a higher frequency of self-masturbation.
Nonregulatory Perspective
Reiss theorizes that the more naturalistic view of sexuality held by Swedes compared to Americans contributes to a more nonregulatory approach to sexuality. He states that Sweden "has much less in the way of a puritanical set of laws defining `normal sexuality'" (Reiss, 1980, p. 210). In describing the nonregulatory perspective, Reiss says that the Swedish people hold a private-autonomous view of sexuality. In contrast, he argues that sexuality in the U.S.--although in some sense viewed as private--is still seen as an area that the state can enter into via laws (i.e., people have a regulatory view). In Sweden, the sense of privacy is stronger and laws regarding sexuality are fewer: The primary laws concern the legal age for nonmarital coitus (it is 15) and restrictions against incest.
In addition, Sweden has been one of the world's leaders in promoting comprehensive sex education as a compulsory part of its school curriculum. The program supports a private-autonomous, egalitarian, naturalistic, and responsible view of sexual interactions (Jones et al., 1986; Reiss, 1980). Also, Grano (1986) emphasizes that in Sweden, in contrast to many other countries (including the U.S.), there are no noticeable political, religious, or cultural obstacles to the provision of contraceptive and abortion services. Holmgren (1989) writes that abortion in Sweden is regarded as an emergency measure and presents women seeking abortions as having a complex moral dilemma. These women most often make their decision after considering relationships, responsibility, and the long-term welfare of the child, rather than absolute rules and rights. Thus, with respect to legal restrictions surrounding abortion and contraception, there is support for the Reiss depiction of a nonregulatory privacy perspective in Sweden.
The area of homosexuality also illustrates differences in sexual regulation. Since the decriminalization of homosexuality in Sweden in 1944, same-sex behavior has been subjected to fewer restrictions than in the U.S. Further, in 1978 the minimum legal age for engaging in homosexual acts was lowered in Sweden from 18 to 15, the same age as for heterosexual acts. In addition, the ethical principles guiding sex education programs in Sweden promote tolerance of homosexuality, although Trost and Bergtrom-Wallen (1997) point out that even though laws and the media support tolerance of homosexuality, homosexuals are often subjected to discrimination in their private interactions. With regard to sex work, however, Sweden is currently showing less of a nonregulatory perspective than in the past, and has recently passed a law called the Prostitution Act. In this law the customer of a prostitute, but not the prostitute, is criminalized.
According to Reiss, institutionalized supports for the privacy perspective encourage individuals to tolerate a wide variety of sexual behaviors. Nevertheless, he observes that tolerance does not necessarily lead to behavioral enactment or a full endorsement of all activities. For example, Reiss proposes that the Swedish rate of extramarital coitus is lower than the U.S. rate. When interpreting the available data he speculates that many people in the U.S. engage in extramarital coitus despite their belief that this behavior is not morally acceptable. He suspects that extramarital activity exceeds levels of its acceptance in the U.S., while the reverse is true for Sweden.
Thus, Reiss focuses on the examination of variations in religiosity, gender egalitarianism, naturalism, and a nonregulatory perspective as factors accounting for differences in conceptions of sexuality between Sweden and the United States. At no time does he theorize about the relative importance of each factor: He simply posits that their greater presence in Sweden facilitated the development and maintenance of more egalitarian and permissive views of sexuality.
Permissive and Egalitarian Sexuality
Prior studies supporting the existence of more permissive and egalitarian sexuality are limited. Although we found no recent studies comparing both women and men in Sweden and the U.S., one study (Schwartz, 1993) did compare aspects of the sexuality of undergraduate women in the two countries. Swedish women reported significantly more permissive attitudes toward premarital coitus and lower mean ages of social acceptance of both female and male adolescents engaging in premarital sex than did U.S. women. Women in the United States not only endorsed older ages of social acceptance for coitus, but also supported a traditional double standard that approved of an older acceptable age of sexual debut for women than for men. In this same study, Swedish women engaged in their first intercourse at an earlier time in a relationship and reported a greater number of lifetime sex partners than did women in the U.S. With respect to level of emotional involvement with first coital partner and age of first intercourse, no significant differences were found between the women students in Sweden and the United States.
Reiss states that he is able to argue more convincingly with respect to country differences in attitudes (regarding sexual permissiveness and egalitarianism) than to country differences in actual sexual behaviors. For example, as already noted, he states that despite the more tolerant attitude toward extramarital sexual activity, the rate of such activity seemed to be lower in Sweden than the U.S. More recently Popenoe agreed, and wrote that "Swedish adults are on the whole less `promiscuous' than their American counterparts and `recreational sex' does not exist in Sweden to any extent resembling that in the U.S." (1988, p. 179). So there is less support for hypotheses involving sexual behavior than those involving sexual attitudes. Nevertheless, if Reiss is correct in stating that premarital sex in Sweden has been not only a universal occurrence but also a universal expectation, it suggests that young adults in Sweden would have a more permissive sexual profile than those in the United States.
However, as reported in a prior paper from the present study (Weinberg, Lottes, & Shaver, 1995), there is little support for this view. The data did not show greater permissiveness in sexual behavior by Swedes than by Americans. Indeed, the data showed the opposite for the men. Compared to the Swedish men, the U.S. men reported a higher incidence of intercourse, an earlier age of first intercourse, a greater number of coital partners both in the last year and in their lifetime, and greater frequencies of coitus and any partner-related sexual activities within the last year. The Swedish men indicated a greater involvement in sexual activity than U.S. men on only one measure--frequency of self-masturbation.
The responses of the women also generally did not support a hypothesis about greater permissiveness in sexual behavior in Sweden. Differences between the responses of the U.S. and the Swedish university women were not statistically significant with respect to age of first intercourse, number of coital partners, and frequency of partner-related sexual activities in general. Only for frequency of self-masturbation (similar to the country differences for the men) and frequency of coitus did the Swedish women report significantly higher rates than the U.S. women.
In addition, there is no clear support for a hypothesis that the sexual behavior of the genders is more egalitarian (i.e., similar between the genders) for the university students in Sweden than in the U.S. In general, compared to the U.S., the gender differences in sexual behavior were greater in Sweden and were reversed, with the Swedish women reporting a younger age of first intercourse than the men (replicated by Helmius, 1998), greater frequencies of coitus and any partner-related sexual activity, and a higher incidence of coitus within the last year. This was explained by a greater age gap between sex partners in Sweden (i.e., the male partners being older). Although the Swedish students reported a greater frequency of self-masturbation than did the U.S. students, the within-country differences between the genders in this activity were similar.
Thus, the current paper does not examine sexual behaviors and is limited to a focus on sexual attitudes. The first stage of the research is to test the degree of support in our data for the country-difference hypotheses proposed by Reiss. These hypotheses are that, compared to university students in the United States, those in Sweden:
1. are lower in religiosity. 2. have more egalitarian attitudes about gender roles. 3. have more egalitarian sexual attitudes. 4. have a more naturalistic view of sexuality. 5. favor fewer governmental regulations in areas related to sexuality. 6. have more permissive sexual attitudes.
After investigating these country-difference hypotheses, the next question is the degree to which the country differences in sexual permissiveness are explained by the other variables, which Reiss posits as mediating variables. These are the variables of religiosity, gender egalitarianism, sexual egalitarianism, a naturalistic view, and a nonregulatory perspective.
METHOD
Participants
Questionnaires were mailed to undergraduate students in one university in the U.S. and one in Sweden in 1992. The U.S. site was a large state university in the Midwest that was not in a major urban center nor characterized by a radical or ultraconservative ethos. The data were collected through the assistance of the Registrar's Office and under the supervision of the university's Institute for Social Research. The initial target population in the U.S. was students between the ages of 19 and 22 who defined themselves as heterosexual. This orientation restriction--based on Reiss's formulation--was noted at the beginning of the questionnaire. The 14-page questionnaire was sent with a postage-paid return envelope to a random selection of students within the age frame. The cover letter assured the anonymity of individual responses. A follow-up postcard was sent 10 days after the initial mailing to remind students to complete the questionnaire. Two weeks after sending the reminder postcard, a second copy of the questionnaire was mailed to them. The final U.S. group included 560 students with a gender distribution of 69% women and 31% men. The group was 91% White, 2% Asian, 2% Black, 1% Hispanic, and 4% Other. The religious distribution was 40% Protestant, 31% Catholic, 7% Jewish, 10% other religion, and 12% no religion. The response rate was 43%.
The Swedish data were collected at a comparable university in Sweden (a public university that was large in size but not located in a metropolis nor considered to be socially or politically atypical). The questionnaire was initially translated and then checked and reworked. The distribution procedure was similar to the one in the U.S. except that the initial target population included students between the ages of 20 and 23. This difference in initial age strata was necessary because most 19 year old males in Sweden fulfill a year of compulsory military service. Thus, Swedish men are a year older than U.S. men when they begin their university education. The Swedish group included 736 students with a gender distribution of 65% women and 35% men--parallel to the group in the U.S. The distribution with respect to religious affiliation was 63% Church of Sweden (Evangelical-Lutheran), 6% Swedish Free Church, 1% Catholic, 4% other religion, and 26% no religion. The response rate was 52%. This is comparable to the response rate of 59% in the 1996 national interview and questionnaire study of Swedish adults described by Helmius (1998).
To eliminate a possible bias due to the age differences of students in the two countries, only students in the 20 to 22 year old age interval from both universities were included in the analyses for this paper. This included 570 Swedish students (359 women, 211 men) and 407 U.S. students (278 women, 129 men). Their mean ages were 21.0, 21.1, 21.0, and 21.1 respectively. For the U.S., 2% were married and 3% were in cohabiting relationships. For Sweden, no one was married and 9% were in cohabiting relationships.
Limitations
There were two major limitations in the data collection. One was that the study was restricted to students at a single university within each country. Second, there was the high rate of nonresponse (common in studies using mailed questionnaires). These limitations were considered in delineating the probability level required for statistical significance (cf. the analysis section). Questions regarding generalizability are addressed in the conclusion.
Measures
Because in some cases we were measuring new concepts defined by Reiss, we could not use established measures. Further, although several concepts could be considered multidimensional, we used only a few items when measuring the concepts due to constraints on the length of the questionnaire. As a consequence--since scales usually need more items to achieve a high alpha--some of our Cronbach alphas were in the low or middle range. In these cases, the scale items were used individually rather than in a composite form.(2)
Permissive sexual attitudes. To measure the dependent variable sexual permissiveness, we used six items. Respondents answered on a 5-point Likert continuum (fully approve, approve somewhat, tolerant toward, disapprove somewhat, fully disapprove). The items were: "15-year-old girls engaging in sexual intercourse with a steady boyfriend," "15-year-old boys engaging in sexual intercourse with a steady girlfriend," "15-year-old girls engaging in sexual intercourse with a person they're not significantly involved with," "15-year-old boys engaging in sexual intercourse with a person they're not significantly involved with," "18-year-old women having 10 or more sex partners in a year," "18- year-old men having 10 or more sex partners in a year." The items in a gendered pair were not placed in juxtaposition to one another. These topics covered the major subjects denoted by the traditional double standard: male privilege with regard to sex at a young age, sex outside a significant relationship, and number of partners. The age chosen for the items was based on the 15-year-old age of consent in Sweden and the result of pretests (testing 15- to 18-year-old age specifications) investigating what age produced the greatest variation in responses. Similar pretesting was also the basis for designing the specifics in the number of partners item. The average of these six items was used as a composite measure (Cronbach alpha = .91).
Religiosity. Two questions employed in prior research (Weinberg & Williams, 1974) were used to measure religiosity. One asked respondents to indicate how important religion was to them (not important at all, not very important, somewhat important, or very important), and another asked about the frequency of their religious attendance in the last 12 months (never, 1-3 times a year, 4-11 times a year, monthly, or weekly or more). For the latter question, the last two frequency possibilities were combined into monthly or more so that both religiosity items would have a 4-point range. The average of these items was used to constitute the composite measure (Cronbach alpha = .81).
Gender egalitarianism. We did not use an established measure of egalitarian gender role attitudes. First, most of these scales were too long to include in the questionnaire. Second, many of them have yielded very little variability, especially for women (e.g., Lottes, 1985, 1991; Lottes & Kuriloff, 1994). In an attempt to rectify these limitations, we designed three items that respondents were asked to respond to in terms of their degree of agreement (strongly agree, agree somewhat, undecided, disagree somewhat, or strongly disagree). Three areas of gender egalitarianism were selected: politics, the workplace, and social situations. Thus, the political item dealt with views about having a woman in their country's highest governmental position: "I would feel totally comfortable having a woman as president/prime minister of my country." The workplace item was: "I would rather have a male boss than a female boss" (reverse scored). The social item was: "I can accept `assertiveness' in women at least to the same extent as I can on the part of men." Because the Cronbach alpha was not high (.47), the items were used individually.(3)
Sexual egalitarianism. As noted above, to measure the dependent variable (permissiveness of sexual attitudes), we used three sets of items requiring respondents to indicate their degree of approval/disapproval of a series of sexual behaviors engaged in by young women in one case and by young men in another. To transform these responses into a measure of sexual egalitarianism, we calculated the difference between each of the three pairs of corresponding women/men items. Each difference was then subtracted from five so that as it increases, the egalitarianism score decreases. The values from the three sets of items were then averaged to create an index of egalitarian sexual attitudes (Cronbach alpha = .67). Naturalistic views. To assess naturalistic views of sexuality, we constructed three items that dealt with areas identified by Reiss or others (e.g., Schwartz, 1993; Weinberg et al., 1995) with regard to Sweden's naturalism. One item dealt with the naturalness of the nude body: "In the family, adult nudity should be hidden from children who are 78 years old" (reverse scored). The second dealt with self-masturbation: "Self-masturbating every day is psychologically abnormal (even if the person has no other sexual outlets)" (reverse scored). The final item related to the naturalness of having a sexual interest in many people: "It is perfectly normal for people to see at least a half-dozen persons in one day they would like to have sex with." As with general gender egalitarianism, respondents answered on a 5-point Likert continuum from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The items were used individually because the Cronbach alpha was not high (.48).
Nonregulatory perspective. Using topics described by Reiss--which are still timely today-- we designed three items to measure the level of support for governmental interference in realms related to adult sexuality: "an adult's right to obtain adult pornography," "adult consensual homosexual behavior," and "a woman's right to have an abortion in the first trimester." Respondents were queried as to whether these activities should or should not be a matter for the law if they were kept private and were not imposed on unwilling people. They answered on a 5-point continuum from strongly agree to strongly disagree with regard to governmental interference. Since the Cronbach alpha was only .61, the items were used individually.
Analyses
First, simple regressions were run to test Reiss's country-difference hypotheses (the independent variable being country and the dependent variables being religiosity, gender egalitarianism, sexual egalitarianism, naturalism, a nonregulatory perspective, and sexually permissive attitudes). Then multiple regressions were run to test for the effect of the various variables above in mediating any relationship between country and sexually permissive attitudes. The order of entry was based on the level of causation implied by Reiss. The stepwise sequence of entry was as follows: Model 1 was the simple regression of sexually permissive attitudes on country, Model 2 brought in religiosity as a control, Model 3 added the gender egalitarianism items to country and religiosity, and Model 4 then entered the naturalism items. Model 5 added the nonregulatory items and represented the full regression equation.
The sexual egalitarian measure was not included in the regression because the sexual permissiveness and sexual egalitarianism measures were composed of various linear combinations of the same variables. Thus, the correlations between these two measures would be difficult to interpret and would provide a poor indication of the empirical correlation between these two constructs. Furthermore, the sexual egalitarian measure did not have much variation: Most of the responses were egalitarian. This was true of nearly all of the women's responses. A minority of the Swedish men and a larger minority of U.S. men had traditional double standard views.
Because of the limitations of the data, the Bonferroni correction factor was used to determine the appropriate probability level for statistical significance. It placed the required level of significance at .003.
RESULTS
Simple Regressions
Simple regressions were run to test for the relationships between country and the dependent variables of religiosity, gender egalitarianism, sexual egalitarianism, naturalism, a nonregulatory perspective, and sexually permissive attitudes. The significant results (p = .003) that support Reiss's bivariate hypotheses were as follows. First, compared to the American students, the Swedish students reported less religiosity; the standardized regression coefficient for the relationship was [Beta] = -.34. Second, the Swedish students also showed more egalitarianism about gender roles. The relationships between country and the three measures of egalitarianism were: for government, [Beta] = .28; for work, [Beta] =. 18; and for social situations, [Beta] = .40. Third, the Swedish students were more naturalistic in their views of sexuality. The [Beta] between country and attitude toward the normality of nudity was .53; toward the normality of daily masturbation, [Beta] =. 18; and toward the normality of sexual desire toward a half-dozen people in one day, [Beta] = .48. Fourth, the Swedish students showed more of a nonregulatory perspective on two of the three items. The [Beta] between country and a nonregulatory perspective on homosexuality was .27, and on abortion was [Beta] = .18. Finally, the Swedish students had more permissive sexual attitudes ([Beta] = .48).
The relationship between country and a nonregulatory perspective toward pornography did not reach statistical significance at the .003 level ([Beta] = .09, p = .01). Neither did the relationship between country and egalitarian sexual attitudes ([Beta] = .08, p = .01).
Multiple Regressions
The results of the stepwise regression examining the hypothesized effects of the mediating variables on the relationship between country and sexually permissive attitudes are presented in Table 1. The standardized regression coefficients that follow were all significant at the .003 level. Model I shows a [Beta] = .48 for the country-permissiveness relationship. Model 2 demonstrates that controlling for religiosity had a sizeable effect on this relationship, decreasing the [Beta] to .36. However, the inclusion of gender egalitarianism (Model 3) had a negligible effect ([Beta] = .35). In Model 4, naturalistic views of sexuality had a substantial effect, reducing the country-permissiveness [Beta] to .23. Model 5 shows that a nonregulatory perspective had no additional explanatory effect ([Beta] = .25). Finally, shifting the order of variable entry did not affect the overall results.
Table 1. Standardized Coefficients for the Regression of Permissive Sexual Attitudes on Reiss's Hypothesized Variables
Model
Variable 1 2 3
Country .48(a) .36(a) .35(a)
(16.70) (12.77) (11.37)
Religiosity .35(a) -.35(a)
(-12.27) (-12.20)
Gender egalitarianism
Government .05
(1.73)
Work -.05
(-1.67)
Social -.01
(.44)
Naturalistic view
Nudity
Masturbation
Desire
Nonregulatory view
Homosexuality
Abortion
Pornography
Adjusted [R.sup.2] .23 .34 .34
Model
Variable 4 5
Country .23(a) .25(a)
(6.59) (7.17)
Religiosity -.29(a) -.23(a)
(-10.17) (-7.31)
Gender egalitarianism
Government .05 .05
(1.60) (1.71)
Work -.07 0.05
(-2.54) (-1.96)
Social .00 -.01
(-.14) (-.48)
Naturalistic view
Nudity .08 .05
(2.46) (1.59)
Masturbation .15(a) .12(a)
(5.24) (4.35)
Desire .18(a) .17(a)
(6.10) (5.95)
Nonregulatory view
Homosexuality .02
(.76)
Abortion .05
(1.58)
Pornography .14(a)
(4.74)
Adjusted [R.sup.2] .39 .41
Note. t values in parentheses.
(a) p < .003.
Thus, contrary to Reiss's hypotheses, as operationalized in this study gender egalitarianism and a nonregulatory perspective played no role in the relationship between country and sexually permissive attitudes. In conformity with Reiss's hypotheses, however, religiosity and naturalism served to mediate the relationship. Taken together, all of the variables explained a total of 41% of the variance in sexually permissive attitudes. Even with the controls in place, country still showed a significant effect: About half the country effect still remained.
DISCUSSION
Using data from university students, we tested Reiss's hypotheses about characteristics that differentiate Sweden from the United States as well as his hypotheses about their ability to predict permissive sexual attitudes. Because of the limitations in the data collection, the question of generalizability must be addressed. First, limited funding precluded using additional universities or mailing a third questionnaire to raise response rates (Dillman, Christenson, Carpenter, & Brooks, 1974). Second, if sexually active individuals are the ones most likely to respond to sex surveys--as reported by Catania (1990); Catania, Gibson, Marin, Coates, and Greenblatt (1990); Wiederman (1993); and Wiederman, Weis, and Allgeier (1994)--the low response rates might be seen to provide an additional bias. However, the response rates were similar in the two countries and resulting biases (if any) are likely to be comparable. Third, although the response rates for the men in both countries were about half the rates for the women, we do not feel less confident about their data: An overall lack of gender interaction effects mitigates such a concern. Finally, the results are consistent not only with the data referred to in Reiss (1980) but also with findings of the other research discussed in the introduction. At the same time, to increase confidence in generalizability, we would like to see future research involving these countries which uses representative samples of the general population and which obtain higher response rates.
In summary, a number of findings were consistent with Reiss's ideas. We found lesser religiosity and a greater acceptance of gender egalitarianism in different domains by Swedish students than by U.S. students. Support was also found for Reiss's proposal that Swedish people have more naturalistic views of sexuality. More Swedish students than U.S. students scored highly on accepting nudity, masturbation, and the desire for sex with many people as a natural and normal phenomena. The substantially higher rates of masturbation reported by Swedish students in other papers (Schwartz, 1993; Weinberg et al., 1995) provide additional support for their more naturalistic view of sex. There was also support for Swedes being less accepting of governmental restrictions concerning two of the three issues presented: homosexual behavior between consenting adults and first trimester abortions. Finally, there was support for the Swedish being more accepting of permissive sexual attitudes with regard to premarital sexuality.
Findings that are inconsistent with Reiss's hypotheses include the failure of the sexual egalitarianism measure to show a significant relationship with country. This may reflect the limited variation on the sexual egalitarian measure--with most of the respondents in the study supporting such egalitarianism. Another finding that does not support Reiss is the lack of a country relationship with a nonregulatory perspective on pornography. In this regard, in present-day Sweden a broad nonregulatory perspective is being contested. This becomes the case in Sweden when nonregulation is seen as being in conflict with egalitarianism and the philosophy that it is the role of government to protect less powerful citizens such as women (illustrated in Sweden's restrictions on live sex shows and their new policy about prostitution, as well as in the results from the pornography question). Because of the alleged harm of commercialized sex to women, the Swedish radical feminists have promoted this regulatory stance. The promulgation of this attitude in Swedish society may account for the nonregulatory perspective not having an explanatory effect on the relationship between country and sexually permissive attitudes.
Reiss's model did account for 41% of the variance in permissive sexual attitudes.(4) The mediating variables explained about half of the relationship between country and sexual permissiveness. Religiosity and naturalistic views helped to explain the relationship between country and permissive sexual attitudes, but in addition to a nonregulatory perspective not doing this, the same was true for Reiss's featured variable of gender egalitarianism.
As for the failure of gender egalitarianism to have its hypothesized effect on sexually permissive attitudes, we further examined Reiss's thinking about a relationship between egalitarianism and permissive attitudes and compared them with additional aspects of our data. In this respect, the main assumption Reiss (1980, 1986) makes is that gender equality and the more permissive sexual attitudes covary. Indeed, for Swedish respondents, a common pattern was to endorse egalitarianism and sexual permissiveness. A pattern for U.S. men, however, was to have a nonegalitarian view but to support sexual permissiveness for both genders. In contrast, a common pattern for U.S. women (found in other studies as well; e.g., Lottes, 1985, 1993) was to support egalitarianism while endorsing low levels of sexual permissiveness for both women and men. This attitude endorses egalitarianism but with restrictions on sexual expression. Thus, it appears that Reiss overstates the connection between gender egalitarianism and sexual permissiveness. Such overstatement is also reflected in his conclusion, "... that the Western world, with Sweden as one of its leaders, is moving to a full endorsement of all forms of sexuality" (Reiss, 1980, p. 192).(5)
Because country has an effect on sexually permissive attitudes--even after all the hypothesized variables are considered--future research should consider the role of factors other than the ones proposed by Reiss. We hope that such further theorizing and research will be forthcoming.
(1) In a recent publication of the United Nations Development Programme (1995), Sweden was ranked number one, and the U.S. number five, on a Gender-Related Development Index which adjusts the Human Development Index for gender differences in life expectancy, educational attainment, and income. Sweden was also ranked first on the Gender Empowerment Measure which assesses women's participation in economic, political, and professional activities; the U.S. was ranked eighth. Evidence for the greater political power of women in Sweden is provided by their greater representation in parliament in 1994 (42% vs. 11% for the U.S.) and as national ministers (30% vs. 15% for the U.S.). This same United Nations report indicated that Swedish women also had a higher economic activity rate in 1994 than did U.S. women (77% vs. 65%). The major areas for which Swedish women fared poorly in comparison to U.S. women have been on measures of occupational gender segregation and workplace authority (Charles, 1992; leGrand, 1996; Rosenthal, 1990; Wright, Baxter, & Birkelund, 1995).
(2) The reliability of this measurement strategy is supported by the fact that we obtained similar results when they were treated as a composite.
(3) Baxter and Kane (1995) also found their gender egalitarianism scale to have a low alpha value.
(4) In discriminant analyses for which the group variable was country, we found that variables described by Reiss (1980), and operationalized as stated in this paper, correctly classified 81% of the sample.
(5) By "all forms of sexuality" Reiss usually means sexual interactions that do not involve force, fraud, or young children. In a later publication, Reiss (1990) made it clear that he is aware of his over-optimistic prediction about the U.S. and makes an argument for the acceptance of more tolerant sexual beliefs. Indeed, he believes that many of the social problems in the U.S. that are linked to sexuality--high rates of STDs, teen pregnancy, rape, and sexual abuse of children--will be reduced only by adopting a pluralistic approach to sexuality.
REFERENCES
Baxter, J., & Kane, E. W. (1995). Dependence and independence: A crossnational analysis of gender inequality and gender attitudes. Gender & Society 9, 193-215.
Bullough, V. L., & Bullough, B. (1977). Sin, sickness, and sanity: A history of sexual attitudes. New York: New American Library.
Casper, L. M., McLanahan, S. S., & Garfinkel, I. (1994). The gender-poverty gap. American Sociological Review, 59, 594-605.
Catania, J. A. (1990). The AIDS epidemic: Quantitative assessment in human sexuality research. In A. Chouinard & J. Albert (Eds.), Human sexualilty: Research perspectives in a world facing AIDS (pp. 69-91). Ottawa, Canada: The International Development Research Center.
Catania, J., Gibson, D., Marin, B., Coates, T., & Greenblatt, R. (1990). Response bias in assessing sexual behaviors relevant to HIV transmission. Evaluation Program Planning, 13, 19-29.
Charles, M. (1992). Cross-national variation in occupation sex segregation. American Sociological Review; 57, 483-502.
Dillman, D. A., Christenson, J. A., Carpenter, E. H., & Brooks, R. M. (1974). Increasing mail questionnaire response: A four state comparison. American Sociological Review, 39, 744-756.
Francoeur, R. T. (1994). Religion and sexuality. In V. Bullough & B. Bullough (Eds.), Human sexuality, an encyclopedia (pp. 514-520). New York: Garland.
Grano, M. (1986). RFSU's "open house." In P. Meredith (Ed.), Adolescents, planning contraceptive and counselling services (pp. 35-39). London: International Planned Parenthood Federation.
Helmius, G. (1998). The 1996 Swedish sex survey. An introduction and remarks on changes in early sexual experiences. Scandinavian Journal of Sexology, 1, 63-70.
Holmgren, K. (1989). Sweden, an open society. Planned Parenthood in Europe, 18, 15-17.
Intons-Peterson, M. J. (1988). Gender concepts of Swedish and American youth. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jones, E. F., Forrest, J. D., Goldman, N., Henshaw, S., Lincoln, R., Rosoff, J. I., Westoff, C. E, & Deirdre, W. (1986). Teenage pregnancy in industrialized countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Komarovsky, M. (1985). Women in college. New York: Basic Books.
le Grand, C. (1996, May). Occupational segregation and the gender wage gap in Sweden. Paper presented at the International Sociological Association Research Committee. Stockholm, Sweden.
Linner, B. (1967). Sex and society in Sweden. New York: Random House.
Lottes, I. L. (1985). The use of cluster analysis to determine belief patterns of sexual attitudes. The Journal of Sex Research, 21, 405-421.
Lottes, I. L. (1991). Belief systems: Sexuality and rape. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 4, 37-59.
Lottes, I. L. (1993). Nontraditional gender roles and the sexual experiences of heterosexual college students. Sex Roles, 29, 645-669.
Lottes, I. L., & Kuriloff, P. J. (1994). The impact of college experience on political and social attitudes. Sex Roles, 3, 31-54.
McCormick, N. B., & Jessor, C. J. (1983). The courtship game: Power in the sexual encounter. In E. R. Allgeier 8,: N. B. McCormick (Eds.), Changing boundaries, gender roles and sexual behavior (pp. 64-86). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.
National Swedish Board of Education. (1977). Instruction concerning interpersonal relations manual. Stockholm: IberUtbildnings-forlaget.
National Swedish Board of Education. (1986). Sex education in Swedish schools. Stockholm: Author.
O'Kelly, C. E., & Carney, L. S. (1986). Women and men in society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Oliver, M. B., & Hyde, J. S. (1993). Gender differences in sexuality: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 29-51.
Popenoe, D. (1988). Disturbing the nest: Family change and decline in modern societies. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Qvarfort, A. M., McCrea, J., & Kolenda, P. (1988). Sweden's national policy on equality between men and women. In P. Kolenda (Ed.), Cultural constructions of women (pp. 161-193). Salem, WI: Sheffield.
Reiss, I. L. (1980). Sexual customs and gender roles in Sweden and America: An analysis and interpretation. In H. Lopata (Ed.), Research on the interweave of social roles: Women and men (pp. 191-220). Greenwich, CT: JIA Press.
Reiss, I. L. (1986). Journey into sexuality: An exploratory voyage. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Reiss, I. L. (1990). An end to shame: Shaping our next sexual revolution. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Rosenthal, M. G. (1990). Sweden: Promise and paradox. In G. S. Goldberg & E. Kremen (Eds.), The feminization of poverty: Only in America? (pp. 129-155). New York: Praeger.
Schwartz, I. M. (1993). Affective reactions of American and Swedish women to their first premarital coitus: A cross-cultural comparison. The Journal of Sex Research, 30, 18-26.
Smith, T. W. (1990). The polls--a report: The sexual revolution. Public Opinion Quarterly, 54, 415-435.
Sprecher, S., & Zeiss, A. M. (1987). Sex roles and sexual dysfunction in college students. The Journal of Sex Research, 23, 338-347.
Trost, J., & Bergstrom-Walan, M. B. (1997). Sweden. In R. Francoeur (Ed.), International encyclopedia of sexuality, Vol. 3 (pp. 1170-1191). New York: Continuum Publishing Co.
United Nations Development Programme. (1995). Human development report 1995. New York: Oxford University Press.
Weinberg, M., Lottes, I., & Shaver, F. (1995). Swedish or American heterosexual college youth: Who is more permissive? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24, 409-437.
Weinberg, M., & Williams, C. (1974). Male homosexuals: Their problems and adaptations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wennemo, I. (1992). The development of family policy: A comparison of family benefits and tax reduction for families in 18 OECO countries. Acta Sociologica, 35, 201-217.
Widmer, E. D., Treas, J., & Newcomb, R. (1998). Attitudes toward nonmarital sex in 24 countries. The Journal of Sex Research, 35, 349-358.
Wiederman, M. W. (1993). Demographic and sexual characteristics of nonresponders to sexual experience items in a national survey. The Journal of Sex Research, 30, 27-35.
Wiederman, M. W., Weis, D. L., & Allgeier, E. R. (1994). The effect of question preface on response rates to a telephone survey of sexual experience. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23, 203-215.
Wright, E. O., Baxter, J., & Birkelund, G. E. (1995). The gender gap in workplace authority: A cross-national study. American Sociological Review, 60, 407-435.
Zetterberg, H. L. (1969). Om sexuallivet i sverige [On sexual life in Sweden]. Stockholm: Sweden Statens Offentiliga Utredningar.
Manuscript accepted August 5, 1999
Martin S. Weinberg Indiana University Ilsa Lottes University of Maryland-Baltimore County Frances M. Shaver Concordia University
The research reported here was supported in part with a grant from the Foundation for the Scientific Study of Sexuality.
The authors express their appreciation to Brian Powell, Marty Laubach, Rob Robinson, F. Scott Christopher, and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful assistance. Special thanks to Jan Trost who reworked the Swedish translation of the questionnaire and supervised its distribution, and to Kerstin Fegl-Meyer who did the initial translation.
Address correspondence to Martin S. Weinberg, Department of Sociology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405; e-mail: weinberm@indiana.edu.
COPYRIGHT 2000 Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2001 Gale Group