Cross-sectional survey uncovers distinct adaptive and indecisive sexual rejection profiles in young adults, highlighting psychological targets to improve consent communication.
Background: Sexual rejection is central to sexual communication and consent, yet little is known about whether individuals display distinct patterns of rejection behaviors. This study identified profiles of sexual rejection behaviors and their predictors using a person-centered approach. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 649 French young adults (18–25 years). Participants completed measures of sexual rejection behaviors, attachment, sexual communal strength, sexual self-esteem, sexual and relationship satisfaction, and sociodemographic characteristics. K-means cluster analysis identified sexual rejection profiles, and binomial logistic regression examined predictors of profile membership. Results: Two profiles emerged. The first (61.8%) was characterized by frequent assertive and reassuring rejection behaviors and infrequent hostile and deflecting strategies, reflecting an adaptive rejection style. The second (38.2%) showed moderate levels across all behaviors, suggesting an indecisive rejection style. Compared with the adaptive profile, membership in the indecisive profile was associated with higher attachment avoidance. Greater sexual communal strength, sexual self-esteem, relationship satisfaction, religious engagement, male gender, and homosexual orientation predicted membership in the adaptive profile. Conclusions: Sexual rejection behaviors form distinct profiles associated with psychological, relational, and sociodemographic factors. Interventions promoting attachment security, sexual self-esteem, and communication skills may foster more assertive and reassuring sexual rejection and strengthen sexual consent communication.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cruz et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: