ABSTRACT
Objective:
Sexting is emerged as a result of the frequent use of internet and social media to send messages, photos and videos quickly and easily and it became a common concept nowadays. In this sense, the aim of the study is to determine the rate of sexting for the research sample, identifying the factors which affects the perspective towards sexting and to investigate whether there is a relationship between victimization and sexting.
Methods:
The sample of this research is consisted of 565 participants who are 18 years and older. Theory of Reasoned Action has been used as a background theory to predict and determine the perspective towards sexting and sexting behavior. The data were collected by using demographic information form and sexting scale which are prepared by researchers.
Results:
The rate of women participants is 70.4% (398) and for men 29.6% (167). For age distribution, 61.4% (347) of the participants are in the age group of 18-25, 38.6% (218) of them are in the age group of 26 and above, and the average age is 25.2. It was determined that a great majority of the participants engaged in sexting, men had more positive attitude and more frequent behavior compared to women, and being a victim of sexting did not make a significant difference on the perspective towards sexting. The proportion of individuals who became a victim because of sexting is 22.5% and most of them were women. According to types of victimization, individuals mostly experience emotional and psychological problems; however, it has been determined that the victimization is not limited to a single form.
Conclusion:
The prevalence of sexting, perspectives of the individuals and their motivation to act are determined to a certain extent. In this way, the case of unconsidered sexting in Turkey is identified and it is asserted that it can cause serious problems worth considering.
Keywords: Sexting, victimization, theory of reasoned action
References
1
Dake JA, Price JH, Mariarz L, Ward B. Prevalence and correlates of sexting behavior in adolescents. American Journal of Sexuality Education. 2012;7(1):1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15546128.2012.650959
2
Ostrager B. SMS. Omg! Lol! Ttyl: Translating the law to accommodate today’s teens and the evolution from texting to sexting. Family Court Review. 2010;48(4):712-726. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2010.01345.x
3
Hudson HK. Factors affecting sexting behaviors among selected undergraduate students [doctoral dissertation]. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University; 2011.
4
Bianchi D, Morelli M, Baiocco R, Chirumbolo, A. Psychometric properties of the Sexting Motivations Questionnaire for adolescents and young adults. Rassegna di Psicologia. 2018;33(3):5-18.
5
Döring N. Consensual sexting among adolescents: Risk prevention through abstinence education or safer sexting. Cyberpsychology. 2014;8(1):1-18. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2014-1-9
6
Karaian L, Van Meyl K. Reframing risqué/risky: Queer temporalities, teenage sexting, and freedom of expression. Laws. 2015;4(1):18-36. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws4010018
7
Walrave M, Ponnet K, Van Ouytsel J, Van Gool E, Heirman W, Verbeek A. Whether or not to engage in sexting: Explaining adolescent sexting behaviour by applying the prototype willingness model. Telematics and Informatics. 2015;32(4):796-808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.03.008
8
Lippman JR, Campbell SW. Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t…If You’re a Girl: Relational and Normative Contexts of Adolescent Sexting in the United States. Journal of Children and Media. 2014;8(4):371-386. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2014.923009
9
Dodaj A, Sesar K, Jerinić S. Relationship between sexting and psychological difficulties: prospective research. Proceedings of the XVI European Congress of Psychology 2019, July 2-5; Moscow, Russia.
10
Klettke B, Hallford DJ, Mellor DJ. Sexting prevalence and correlates: A systematic literature review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2014;34(1):44-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.10.007
11
Mitchell KJ, Finkelhor D, Jones LM, Wolak J. Prevalence and characteristics of youth sexting: A national study. Pediatrics. 2012;129(1):13-20. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-1730
12
Cox Communications [Internet]. Teen online and wireless safety survey: Cyberbullying, sexting, and parental controls. 2009. [cited 2020 July 7] Available from: https://www.scribd.com/doc/20023365/2009-Cox-Teen-Online-Wireless-Safety-Survey-Cyberbullying-Sexting-and-Parental-Controls
13
Henderson L. Sexting and sexual relationships among teens and young adults. McNair Scholars Research Journal. 2011;7(1):31-39.
14
Henson B, Reyns BW, Fisher BS. Fear of crime online? Examining the effect of risk, previous victimization, and exposure on fear of online interpersonal victimization. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. 2013;29(4):475-497. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043986213507403
15
Howard T. Sextortion: Psychological Effects Experienced and Seeking Help and Reporting Among Emerging Adults [doctoral dissertation]. Walden University; 2019.
16
Reyns BW, Burek MW, Henson B, Fisher BS. The unintended consequences of digital technology: Exploring the relationship between sexting and cybervictimization. Journal of Crime and Justice. 2013;36(1):1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0735648X.2011.641816
17
Walker K, Sleath E. A systematic review of the current knowledge regarding revenge pornography and non-consensual sharing of sexually explicit media. Aggression and violent behavior. 2017;36:9-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2017.06.010
18
Tungate A. Bare necessities: the argument for a ‘revenge porn’exception in Section 230 immunity. Information & Communications Technology Law. 2014;23(2):172-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2014.916936
19
Osterday M. Protecting minors from themselves: Expanding revenge porn laws to protect the most vulnerable. Ind L Rev. 2015; 49(2):555-577. https://doi.org/10.18060/4806.0075
20
Salter M. Privates in the online public: sex(ting) and reputation on social media. New Media and Society. 2016;18(11):2723-2739. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815604133
21
Kowalski RM, Giumetti GW, Schroeder AN, Lattanner MR. Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological bulletin. 2014;140(4):1073-1137. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035618
22
Morelli M, Bianchi D, Baiocco R, Pezzuti L, Chirumbolo A. Sexting, psychological distress and dating violence among adolescents and young adults. Psicothema. 2016;28(2):137-142. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2015.193
23
Lucero JL, Weisz AN, Smith-Darden J, Lucero SM. Exploring gender differences: Socially interactive technology use/abuse among dating teens. Affilia. 2014;29(4):478-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109914522627
24
Walker S, Sanci L, Temple-Smith M. Sexting: Young women’s and men’s views on its nature and origins. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(6):697-701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.01.026
25
Burén J, Lunde C. Sexting among adolescents: A nuanced and gendered online challenge for young people. Computers in Human Behavior. 2018;85:210-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.003
26
Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.
27
Ajzen I. Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Chicago, IL: Dorsey Press; 1988.
28
Fisher W, Fisher J, Rye B. Understanding and promoting AIDS preventive behavior: Insights from the theory of reasoned action. Health Psychology. 1995;3(14):255-264. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.14.3.255
29
Sheppard B, White K, Warshaw PR. The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research. 1988;15(3):325-343. https://doi.org/10.1086/209170
30
TUİK [Internet] Hanehalkı Bilişim Teknolojileri Kullanım Araştırması. “İstatistiki Bölge Birimleri Sınıflaması 1. Düzey’e ve cinsiyete göre bireylerin internet kullanım oranı, 2011-2019”; c2018. [cited: 2019 Sep 11]. Available from: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreIstatistikTablo.do?istab_id=2606
31
Ergül, D. Cinsel İçerikli Mesajlaşmaya Bakış Açısının Mağduriyet ve Suç Korkusu Üzerinden İncelenmesi [dissertation]. İstanbul Üniversitesi-Cerrahpaşa; 2021.
32
Dir AL, Coskunpinar A, Steiner JL, Cyders MA. Understanding differences in sexting behaviors across gender, relationship status, and sexual identity, and the role of expectancies in sexting. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2013;16(8):568-574. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0545
33
Drouin M, Landgraff C. Texting, sexting, and attachment in college students’ romantic relationships. Computers in Human Behavior. 2012;28(2):444-449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.10.015
34
Champion AR, Pedersen CL. Investigating differences between sexters and non-sexters on attitudes, subjective norms, and risky sexual behaviours. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality. 2015;24(3):205-214. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.243-A5
35
Reyns B, Henson B, Fisher B. Digital deviance: Low self-control and opportunity as explanations of sexting among college students. Sociological Spectrum. 2014;34(3):273-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/02732173.2014.895642
36
Stocker K. Young adults’ experience of sexting in America [doctoral dissertation]. Alliant International University; 2013.
37
Jewell JA, Brown CS. Sexting, catcalls, and butt slaps: How gender stereotypes and perceived group norms predict sexualized behavior. Sex Roles. 2013;69(11-12):594-604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0320-1
38
Clancy EM, Klettke B, Hallford DJ. The dark side of sexting–Factors predicting the dissemination of sexts. Computers in Human Behavior. 2019;92:266-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.023
39
Bates S. Revenge porn and mental health: A qualitative analysis of the mental health effects of revenge porn on female survivors. Feminist Criminology. 2017;12(1):22-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085116654565
40
Walrave M, Heirman W, Hallam L. Under pressure to sext? Applying the theory of planned behaviour to adolescent sexting. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2014;33(1):86-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2013.837099
