Communicating about sex appears to enhance sexual satisfaction

Healthy Sexuality Positive communication during conflict is one important factor in relationship health, but it is just as important for that positive communication to carry over into the bedroom, because partners who communicate more about sex in general and during the act itself tend to be more sexually satisfied (Babin, 2013). This is not particularly surprising, because people who are comfortable talking about sex are more likely to give their partners direction, discuss their sexual fantasies, and inquire about their partners needs. The keys to effective sexual com- munication are (1) listening to your partners needs and concerns (perhaps even by repeating their concerns back in your own words or asking clarifying questions to ensure that you have understood), (2) expressing your own needs and concerns in very clear and unambiguous lan- guage (i.e., do not leave any room for guesswork), and (3) keeping the conversation positive

Figure 8.10 Communicating about sex appears to enhance sexual satisfaction. Dmitriy Shironosov/123RF. COM.

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

8 IiaSm al lg aShiaeSia: lx, Lhvl, iod hmmSamlia222

and non-judgmental (i.e., do not just point out what your partner is doing wrongmake sure to tell them what they are doing right!). Also, keep in mind that not all sexual communication has to be in the form of words. Panting, moaning, and groaning can help convey your sexual likes and dislikes as well.

In addition, couples should continue having sex with a frequency that is desirable to both part- ners. Sexual activity provides an array of benefits both to the individuals involved and to their relationship, but chief among them is that sex appears to have a stress-relieving effect for couples that live together (Ein-Dor, & Hirschberger, 2012). To learn more about this research, see the Digging Deeper 8.3 box. How much sex is necessary for optimal relationship functioning? There is no correct frequency with which a couple is supposed to have sex, because the amount of sex that people desire can differ widely. Different people have different sex drives, with some desiring sex all of the time and others hardly desiring it at all. Thus, what makes one couple happy might be seen as too little or too much by others. The key is to find a sexual frequency that meets both partners needs. Of course, this is easier said than done, and in cases where there is a large discrepancy between partners sexual desire, sex therapy may be the answer (see chapter 13). Consensual non-monogamy may be a viable option for some couples too.

That said, finding the right frequency is easier if both partners possess sexual communal strength. This can be thought of as a willingness to satisfy your partners sexual needs, even when they do not necessarily align with your own personal desires (Muise, Impett, Logan, & Desmarais, 2013). Having sexual communal strength may mean occasionally consenting to sex even when you are not quite in the mood, or perhaps indulging one of your partners sexual fantasies even though it is not as big of a turn-on for you. This is not to say that you should start doing things that make you feel uncomfortable in order to keep your relationship alive; rather, think of this as mutual compromise designed to help one another achieve sexual satisfaction.

One question students often have about starting and maintaining a healthy sexual relation- ship is when a couple should have sex. The popular media suggests that having sex too early is

Figure 8.11 For couples in good relationships, having sex can relieve feelings of stress. Frenk Kaufmann/123RF.COM.

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

ey h hml lg aShiaeSia sccllodeSgl aelra F Sg? 223

problematic (e.g., your partner may not respect you or think of you as relationship material), but that waiting too long is equally bad (e.g., if you save yourself for marriage, you may discover that you are sexually incompatible with your partner). The truth is that there is no right or correct time to start having sex because each person and each relationship is different. The key is to do it when both of you are ready and feel comfortable, whether that is your first date or your wedding night. Consistent with this idea, research has found that there is no meaning- ful difference in relationship satisfaction between heterosexual couples who had sex early on and those who delayed. For example, Willoughby, Carroll, and Busby (2013) found a difference in relationship quality of just one-tenth of one point on a 5-point scale in a study comparing couples who had sex sooner to those who waited, which tells us that the timing of sex is not as important as the popular media makes it out to be.

Self-Expansion One final characteristic of high-functioning relationships is fulfillment of both partners needs for self-expansion. According to self-expansion theory, human beings have a fundamental need to expand or grow the self over time (Aron & Aron, 1986). This is accomplished by con- tinually engaging in activities that are exciting, novel, and varied, as well as by developing new relationships. In fact, just being in a relationship provides some degree of expansion because, over time, the self will start to incorporate certain characteristics of the partner (i.e., we start to associate our partners traits with ourselves; Aron & Aron, 1996). However, to meet ones self-expansion needs over the long run, couple members need to regularly share self-expanding experiences. That is, couples need to continually visit new places and try exciting and different things. When romantic partners fall into a routine of staying at home and watching TV every night, they fail to meet their expansion needs and run the risk of the relationship going stale. Consistent with this idea, research on long-term married couples has found that those who engage in the most novel and exciting activities together report having the most intense feel- ings of love for one another (OLeary et al., 2012). Likewise, one of the big differences between people in long-term relationships whose passion endured vs. declined is in sexual variety (Frederick et al., 2017). Specifically, couples who mix things up in the bedroom (e.g., using sex toys, wearing sexy underwear or lingerie, watching porn together) are more likely to main- tain passion. Not only do such activities meet self-expansion needs, as we noted in our earlier discussion of the Coolidge Effect, but novelty also fends off habituated desire. This suggests that perhaps we should not resign ourselves to the idea that passion inevitably dies; rather, we may be able to keep it alive through maintaining novel sex lives.

The Dark Side of Relationships

Not all relationships last. The divorce rate is about as high today as it has ever been, owing to reduced pressure to get married at a young age and a reduction in the stigma associated with ending a marriage. Only about half of all first marriages in the United States last 20 years or longer (Copen, Daniels, Vespa, & Mosher, 2012), and cohabiting relationships tend to have an even shorter shelflife. Table 8.3 gives a breakdown of the number of divorces occurring at vari- ous points in time and how this differs across partner race. Two things are worth noting about these data. First, marital longevity is related to racial background. We cannot say exactly why, but many variables could be at play, including socioeconomic factors and differences in main- stream acculturation. Second, the observed peak in divorce rates that occurs after two decades makes sense because for couples who had children right after getting married, this would be about the time that the kids have grown up and moved out of the house.

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

8 IiaSm al lg aShiaeSia: lx, Lhvl, iod hmmSamlia224

Digging Deeper 8.3 Does Having Sex Relieve Stress For Couples?

M kla ml fllg ah fSil, elgia ml rlgSlvl my mSiod, alxs g el gSin b by, Saa nhhod fhr ml. Marvin Gaye

The idea that sex can relieve stress for couples is pervasive in popular culture. For example, many of you have probably heard the classic song lxs g Hl gSin by Marvin Gaye. Many of you have probably also seen television shows and movies that feature storylines about the wonders of makeup sex following a couples argument (which, according to Jerry Seinfeld, is the second best type of sex you can have after conjugal visit sex). So is there any truth to this idea? Is sex really a stress-reliever? According to research, yesbut only for couples who are in satisfying relationships to begin with (Ein-Dor, & Hirschberger, 2012).

In this study, 75 heterosexual men and women who were living with a romantic partner com- pleted a sex diary for 18 consecutive days. Participants filled out their diary alone each night in which they reported on the amount of stress they had experienced in the past 24 hours (i.e., how many stressful events occurred and how stressful each one was) and indicated whether they had sexual intercourse with their partner that day.

Experiencing a high level of stress increased the likelihood of having intercourse the follow- ing day. In addition, when sex followed a particularly high-stress day, it reduced reports of stress on the following day; when a high-stress day was not followed by sex, there was not as much of a decrease in stress the next day. To put it more simply, when couples had sex, they felt less stress afterward than they did before. However, it is important to point out that this finding held only for couples who reported that their relationship was satisfying at the start of the study; for couples who were dissatisfied with their relationship, there was no stress-reducing effect of sex.

This research is limited in that it only examined heterosexual couples and only considered the potential stress relief associated with vaginal intercourse. Thus, it is not clear whether the same benefits would apply in same-sex couples or in couples who engage in other types of sexual activities. However, these results suggest that sex does have the potential to heal us from stress, but only if we are involved in a good relationship.

Note: Reprinted with permission from lx iod Paycehghny (www.lehmiller.com).

Table 8.3 Likelihood that a first marriage will last up to 20 years by race of partners in the United States.

Duration of first marriage

Race of couple 5 years 10 years 15 years 20 years

Asian 91% 83% 78% 69% Hispanic 84% 73% 64% 54% White 80% 68% 61% 53% Black 72% 56% 45% 37%

Source: Copen, Daniels, Vespa, & Mosher (2012).

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

http://www.lehmiller.com
ey h hml lg aShiaeSia sccllodeSgl aelra F Sg? 225

As a means of coping with the high prevalence of divorce, legislators in Mexico and other countries are considering granting temporary marriage licenses that would allow individuals to have a marital trial period before making a longer term commitment (Ng, 2011). Whether that will ever catch on remains to be seen, but it is just another symptom of the fact that rela- tionships are not guaranteed to last. Why do so many relationships end? Below, we consider just a few of the many factors that contribute to breakups and divorces.

Social Disapproval Not every relationship is socially accepted. As previously mentioned, same-sex couples and people in consensually non-monogamous relationships face widespread social stigma, but they are far from the only ones. Any relationship that deviates from the cultural prototype may be socially devalued. In many societies, this means that couples in which the partners differ from one another in terms of race, ethnicity, religion, social class, or age may lack approval for their relationship from their family, friends, and society at large. Such disapproval can take a toll on the partners. Research has found that the more disapproval a couple perceives, the less com- mitted the partners tend to be (Lehmiller & Agnew, 2006) and the more likely they are to break up (Lehmiller & Agnew, 2007). Not only that, but involvement in a marginalized relationship is associated with worse physical and psychological health outcomes (Lehmiller, 2012). This makes sense because being the target of prejudice (whether it is directed at your race, gender, sexuality, or relationship status) is stressful, and if you have ever taken a health psychology course, you have probably learned just how much wear and tear chronic stress can put on an individuals well-being. Thus, lacking relationship acceptance and approval may be destructive to both the health of the partners and their romance.

Insecurity and Jealousy Another factor that can generate relationship difficulties is a feeling of insecurity and/or jealousy. Some of us have a chronic tendency to experience these feelings as a result of our attachment style (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Attachment styles refer to patterns of approaching and developing relationships with others. These patterns at least partially develop out of our early experiences with primary caregivers. Attachment styles tend to be relatively stable across time, but they can change to a degree as a result of new experiences and relationships (Simpson et al., 2003). Securely attached individuals have an easy time getting close to other people and do not worry about being abandoned by their partners. They are highly trusting and are confident that their partners will be there for them when it really counts. People who are anxiously attached worry that their partners may not want to get as close as they would like. They fear that their partner does not love them and may leave and, consequently, tend to be quite jealous. Avoidantly attached individuals are not overly comfortable with intimacy and do not wish to become dependent on others. They recognize that their partner will probably leave at some point, but this does not worry them because they see love and relationships as temporary. Most people are securely attached, and it should come as no surprise that their relationships tend to last the longest, whereas individuals with an anxious or avoidant attachment style tend to break up sooner on average (Duemmler & Kobak, 2001).

When jealousy emerges in a relationship, there tends to be large sex differences in how it is experienced. Men are typically more jealous about the prospect of their partner becoming physically involved with someone else, whereas women are usually more jealous about the prospect of their partner becoming emotionally involved with someone else (Buss, Larsen, Westen, & Semmelroth, 1992). This difference is most commonly explained in terms of evolu- tionary theory. The idea is that men have evolved a tendency to worry about sexual infidelity because there is paternity uncertainty (i.e., men cannot easily tell whether a pregnant women is carrying their child) and they want to avoid expending their resources on children who are not

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

8 IiaSm al lg aShiaeSia: lx, Lhvl, iod hmmSamlia226

biologically theirs. In contrast, women are thought to have evolved a tendency to worry about emotional infidelity in order to reduce the risk of being abandoned by the father of their children. Consistent with the paternity uncertainly explanation, gay men tend to be more concerned with emotional infidelity than sexual infidelity (the same holds for lesbians; Carpenter, 2012). In addition, bisexual men tend to be more sexually jealous when dating women compared to when they are dating men (Scherer, Akers, & Kolbe, 2013). Thus, among men who do not have to worry about paternity issues, sexual infidelity appears to be less of a concern.

Of course, this is not the only possible explanation, and the research in this area is far from conclusive. For example, consider that virtually all of this research is based upon asking people whether they find physical or emotional infidelity more upsetting. This is a false dichotomy because, for many people, emotional infidelity (e.g., falling in love with someone else) also implies physical infidelity. In addition, if the evolutionary perspective is correct, one might assume that sexual jealousy would be greater when a heterosexual mans wife gets pregnant by a random stranger as opposed to his brother because if his wife is carrying his brothers child, it will at least share some of his genes. In reality, however, the opposite is truemen are more upset when their wives cheat with other relatives.

Regardless of where our feelings of jealousy come from, it is clear that jealousy has a wide range of negative effects on our relationships. Not only does jealousy often contribute to con- flict and breakup, but it is also frequently implicated in relationship violence. In fact, research on men who have been sent to jail for domestic violence has revealed that jealousy was per- vasive in almost all of these mens relationships and was the most frequently reported factor contributing to their violent actions (Nemeth et al., 2012).

Figure 8.12 Couples that violate societal or cultural expectationssuch as persons in interracial relationshipsare often stigmatized, which may end up hurting the health of the couple members and their relationship. Graham Oliver/123RF.COM.

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

ey h hml lg aShiaeSia sccllodeSgl aelra F Sg? 227

Cheating Last but not least, cheating is one of the most common causes of relationship turmoil and breakup. In fact, infidelity it is the most frequently cited reason for divorce (Amato & Previti, 2003). Please note that by cheating and infidelity, I am referring to instances of nonconsensual non-monogamy (i.e., cases in which a romantic partner violates a spoken or unspoken agreement to be sexually exclusive). As mentioned above, this is not the same as consensual non-monogamy (e.g., swinging, polyamory, etc.), wherein the partners have agreed to some amount of outside sexual contact.

How common is cheating? Unfortunately, that is a difficult question to answer because prevalence estimates depend upon the type of relationship (e.g., dating vs. married), the time- frame assessed (e.g., in your current relationship vs. your entire life), and how infidelity is defined (i.e., physical vs. emotional). The definitional issue is perhaps the most vexing. As some evidence of just how widely peoples definitions of cheating vary, consider a study in which college student participants were provided with a checklist of 27 interpersonal behav- iors and were asked to rate the likelihood that each one represented cheating if someone in a relationship performed that behavior with someone who was not their current part- ner (Kruger et al., 2013). The behaviors included sexual interactions (e.g., intercourse, tak- ing a shower together), emotional interactions (e.g., sharing secrets), and casual interactions (e.g., loaning someone $5, brief hugs). Interestingly, there was no universal consensus that any one behavior was definitely cheating or definitely not cheating! Researchers also found that participants behavioral ratings depended upon both their sex and their attachment style. Specifically, women were more likely than men to rate emotional interactions as cheating, and persons who were anxiously attached were more likely to label casual interactions as cheating than were securely attached individuals.

Figure 8.13 Infidelity is one of the biggest causes of relationship turmoil, breakup, and divorce. Konrad Bak/123RF.COM.

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

8 IiaSm al lg aShiaeSia: lx, Lhvl, iod hmmSamlia228

Given this vast variability in definitions, it is perhaps not surprising that a meta-analysis of 31 studies of infidelity revealed that the number of participants who reported cheating ranged anywhere from 1.2 to 85.5% depending upon how cheating was operationalized (Luo, Cartun, & Snider, 2010)! The 85.5% figure comes from a study in which college students were asked whether they had ever flirted with someone else while in a romantic relationship; estimates of sexual infidelity tend to be lower. The aforementioned meta-analysis (which focused mostly on data from the US and other Western cultures) revealed that among college students, most studies put the number who have committed sexual infidelity at one in two or one in three, and among married couples, it is more like one in four or one in five. However, there is significant cross-cultural variability, with much lower rates of infidelity in some cul- tures (e.g., the Philippines) and much higher rates in others (e.g., Cameroon) (Zhang, Parish, Huang, & Pan, 2012). Regardless of definition, type of relationship, and culture, one thing is clear with respect to cheating: men are more likely to report having done it than women. Interestingly, however, this sex difference has decreased in recent years. We do not know if that is because more women today are cheating, or if women are just becoming more willing to admit to the behavior.

Aside from how common it is, one of the biggest questions people have about infidelity is why people do it. There is not a simple answer. As it turns out, infidelity is a biopsychosocial phenomenon. For instance, as discussed in Chapter 1, there may be a biological component to cheating for sensation seekers, who have a deficiency in some of their dopamine recep- tors that predisposes them to engaging in riskier behaviors (Garcia et al., 2010). However, for others, cheating may stem from a problem in their relationship, such as being extremely unhappy or contemplating breakup (Previti & Amato, 2004). Psychological factors can play a role in cheating, too. For instance, anxiously attached individuals are more inclined to cheat if they are not getting their desired level of emotional closeness in their primary rela- tionship (Russell, Baker, & McNulty, 2013). Thus, cheating can occur for an extremely wide range of reasons.

Given the relatively high prevalence of cheating and the devastating effects it can have on a relationship, some scholars have questioned whether an expectation of lifelong monog- amy and fidelity is even realistic for human beings and if perhaps destigmatizing consensual non-monogamy could eliminate a lot of heartache and improve peoples relationships (Ryan & Jetha, 2010).

At the same time, evolutionary psychology would seem to be suggesting that monogamy has some adaptive value in the long run (i.e., it helps men to avoid being cuckolded, or having a partner who is pregnant with another mans child, and ensures male investment in any off- spring produced). Also, if humans were designed for non-monogamy, then why do they engage in so much mate-guarding behavior (e.g., checking up on each other) and become so jealous when their partners eyes wander?

The question of whether human beings are meant to be monogamous or non-monogamous remains a topic of scholarly debate. However, if I may offer one small piece of insight, I believe that the question of what we were meant to be is counterproductive and that it would be wrong to argue that all humans have a monogamous or non-monogamous orientation. The fact of the matter is that monogamy works very well for some, but not for others. For example, research on same-sex couples has found that among people with moderate to high levels of attachment anxiety, having a monogamy agreement is linked to higher relationship satisfaction and com- mitment; however, for persons with low attachment anxiety, having a monogamy agreement is unrelated to how they feel about their relationship (Mohr, Selterman, & Fassinger, 2013). Thus, while monogamy may be a good idea for some people, it does not necessarily provide universal

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

SacsaaShi slaaShia: e a Sa hsr PlrailcaSvl hi lx? 229

benefits. One key to a successful relationship is to find someone who shares your sexual values, not to impose a set of sexual expectations on another person.

Coping with Breakup

No matter what the cause, relationship breakups can be incredibly upsetting. After a breakup, it is common to feel depressed, to have lower self-esteem, to have difficulty concentrating, and to experience a range of other negative emotions and cognitions (Perilloux & Buss, 2008). In order to deal with these aftereffects, people adopt various coping strategies, with some of them being more effective than others. For example, a study of college students revealed that the most frequently reported methods of coping were to simply talk about their breakup and to try and remain friends with their ex-partner (Perilloux & Buss, 2008). Research suggests that active coping strategies (i.e., attempts to confront the problem) such as these are typically linked to better psychosocial adjustment following any type of relationship stressor (Seiffge- Krenke, 2011). Passive and avoidant forms of coping (e.g., drowning ones sorrows in alcohol, or socially withdrawing) are generally less adaptive.

Another way that some people cope is to see the end of their relationship as an opportu- nity for personal growth. For example, following a breakup, people frequently report learning things about themselves (e.g., what they do and do not want in a partner), skills for navigating relationships in the future (e.g., better communication), and a renewed focus on other aspects of their lives (e.g., greater appreciation for ones friends and family; Tashiro & Frazier, 2003). By dealing with your emotions head-on and searching for the silver lining in the breakup, you may find that you are able to move on with your life sooner.

Key Terms

need to belong singlism hookups friends with benefits serial monogamists love passionate love companionate love passion intimacy commitment

consummate love satisfaction quality of alternatives investments consensual non-monogamy open relationships swinging polygamy polyamory Coolidge Effect

arranged marriage stonewalling sexual communal

strength self-expansion theory attachment style paternity uncertainty nonconsensual

non-monogamy

Discussion Questions: What is Your Perspective on Sex?

Is it possible for friends with benefits to maintain a no strings attached relationship or is it inevitable that one or both partners will end up developing feelings for each other?

What role does sexual passion plays in relationship success? How much does it matter to you in the context of a long-term romantic relationship?

What is your cheating threshold? That is, where do you draw the line in terms of what con- stitutes cheating? Fantasizing? Flirting? Cybersex? Watching pornography? Kissing? Some- thing else?

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

8 IiaSm al lg aShiaeSia: lx, Lhvl, iod hmmSamlia230

References

Amato, P.R., & Previti, D. (2003). Peoples reasons for divorcing: Gender, social class, the life course, and adjustment. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 602626. doi:10.1177/01925 13X03024005002

Armstrong, E. A., England, P., & Fogarty, A. C. K. (2012). Accounting for womens orgasm and sexual enjoyment in college hookups and relationships. American Sociological Review, 77, 435462. doi:10.1177/0003122412445802

Aron, A., & Aron, E.N. (1986). Love and the expansion of self: Understanding attraction and satisfaction. New York: Hemisphere/Harper & Row.

Aron, E.N., & Aron, A. (1996). Love and the expansion of the self: The state of the model. Personal Relationships, 3, 4558. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1996.tb00103.x

Babin, E.A. (2013). An examination of predictors of nonverbal and verbal communication of pleasure during sex and sexual satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 270292. doi:10.1177/0265407512454523

Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497529. doi:10.1037/0033- 2909.117.3.497

Bergstrand, C., & Blevins Williams, J. (2000). Todays alternative marriage styles: The case of swingers. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality. Retrieved from http://www.ejhs.org/volume3/ swing/body.htm (accessed September 3, 2013).

Bisson, M.A., & Levine, T.R. (2009). Negotiating a friends with benefits relationship. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 6673. doi:10.1007/s10508-007-9211-2

Blackwell, D.L., & Lichter, D.T. (2000). Mate selection among married and cohabiting couples. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 275302. doi:10.1177/019251300021003001

Bogaert, A.F. (2004). Asexuality: Prevalence and associated factors in a national probability sample. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 279287. doi:10.1080/00224490409552235

Buss, D.M., Larsen, R.J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. Psychological Science, 3, 251255. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992. tb00038.x

Campbell, A. (2008). The morning after the night before: Affective reactions to one-night stands among mated and unmated women and men. Human Nature, 19, 157173. doi:10.1007/s12110- 008-9036-2

Carpenter, C. J. (2012). Meta-analysis of sex differences in responses to sexual versus emotional infidelity: Men and women are more similar than different. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 2437. doi:10.1177/0361684311414537

Cohn, D., Passel, J., Wang, W., & Livingston, G. (2011). Barely half of U.S. adults are marriedA record low. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/12/14/ barely-half-of-u-sadults-are-married-a-record-low/ (accessed September 3, 2013).

Conley, T.D., Moors, A.C., Matsick, J.L., & Ziegler, A. (2013). The fewer the merrier? Assessing stigma surrounding non-normative romantic relationships. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/j.1530-2415.2012.01286.x

Copen, C.E., Daniels, K., Vespa, J., & Mosher, W.D. (2012). First marriages in the United States: Data from the 20062010 National Survey of Family Growth. National Health Statistics Reports, 49, 122.

Cornell, S.J., & Tregenza, T. (2007). A new theory for the evolution of polyandry as a means of inbreeding avoidance. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 274, 28732879. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0926

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

http://www.ejhs.org/volume3/swing/body.htm
http://www.ejhs.org/volume3/swing/body.htm
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/12/14/barely-half-of-u-sadults-are-married-a-record-low/
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/12/14/barely-half-of-u-sadults-are-married-a-record-low/
lflrlicla 231

Critelli, J.W., & Suire, D.M. (1998). Obstacles to condom use: The combination of other forms of birth control and short-term monogamy. Journal of American College Health, 46, 215219. doi:10.1080/07448489809600225

DePaulo, B.M., & Morris, W.L. (2006). The unrecognized stereotyping and discrimination against singles. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 251254. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 8721.2006.00446.x

Donnelly, D.A., & Burgess, E.O. (2008). The decision to remain in an involuntarily celibate relationship. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70(2), 519535. doi:10.1111/j.1741- 3737.2008.00498.x

Duemmler, S.L., & Kobak, R. (2001). The development of commitment and attachment in dating relationships: Attachment security as relationship construct. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 401415. doi:10.1006/jado.2001.0406

Ein-Dor, T., & Hirschberger, G. (2012). Sexual healing: Daily diary evidence that sex relieves stress for men and women in satisfying relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29, 126139. doi:10.1177/0265407511431185

Fisher, H.E. (1992). Anatomy of love. New York: Fawcett Columbine. Frederick, D., Lever, J, Gillespie, B., & Garcia, J. (2017). What keeps passion alive? Sexual

satisfaction is associated with sexual communication, mood setting, sexual variety, oral sex, orgasm, and sex frequency in a national U.S. study. Journal of Sex Research, 54(2), 186201.

Garcia, J.R., MacKillop, J., Aller, E.L., Merriwether, A.M., Wilson, D.S., & Lum, JK. (2010). Associations between dopamine D4 receptor gene variation with both infidelity and sexual promiscuity. PLoS ONE 5(11): e14162. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014162

Gottman, J. (1994). What predicts divorce? The relationship between marital processes and marital outcomes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gottman, J., Levenson, R., Swanson, C., Swanson, K., Tyson, R., & Yoshimoto, D. (2003). Observing gay, lesbian and heterosexual couples relationships: Mathematical modeling of conflict interaction. Journal of Homosexuality, 45, 6591. doi:10.1300/J082v45n01_04

Hatfield, E. & Walster, W.G. (1978). A new look at love. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. Haupert, M., Gesselman, A., Moors, A., Fisher, H., & Garcia, J. (2016). Prevalence of experiences

with consensual non-monogamous relationships: Findings from two nationally representative samples of single Americans. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy. doi:10.1080/00926 23X.2016.1178675

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511524. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511

Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S.S. (1986). A theory and method of love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 392402. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.2.392

Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S.S. (2003). Romantic love: Measuring cupids arrow. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 235249). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Hendrick, C., Hendrick, S.S., & Dicke, A. (1998). The Love Attitudes Scale: Short form. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 147159. doi:10.1177/0265407598152001

Herek, G.M. (2000). The psychology of sexual prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 1922. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00051

Jose, A., Daniel OLeary, K.K., & Moyer, A. (2010). Does premarital cohabitation predict subsequent marital stability and marital quality? A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 105116. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00686.x

Kiecolt-Glaser, J.K., & Newton, T.L. (2001). Marriage and health: His and hers. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 472503. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.4.472

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

8 IiaSm al lg aShiaeSia: lx, Lhvl, iod hmmSamlia232

Kruger, D. J., Fisher, M. L., Edelstein, R. S., Chopik, W. J., Fitzgerald, C. J., & Strout, S. L. (2013). Was that cheating? Perceptions vary by sex, attachment anxiety, and behavior. Evolutionary Psychology, 11, 159171.

Kurdek, L.A. (1998). Relationship outcomes and their predictors: Longitudinal evidence from heterosexual married, gay cohabiting, and lesbian cohabiting couples. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60, 553568.

Kurdek, L.A. (2004). Are gay and lesbian cohabiting couples really different from heterosexual married couples? Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 880900. doi:10.1111/j.0022-2445 .2004.00060.x

Laumann, E.O., Gagnon, J., Michael, R., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Le, B., & Agnew, C.R. (2003). Commitment and its theorized determinants: A meta-analysis of the investment model. Personal Relationships, 10, 3757. doi:10.1111/1475-6811.00035

Lee, J. A. (1977). A typology of styles of loving. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 173182. doi:10.1177/014616727700300204

Lehmiller, J.J. (2010). Differences in relationship investments between gay and heterosexual men. Personal Relationships, 17, 8196. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01254.x

Lehmiller, J.J. (2012). Perceived marginalization and its association with physical and psychological health. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29, 451469. doi:10.1177/0265407511431187

Lehmiller, J. J. & (2015). A comparison of sexual health history and outcomes among monogamous and consensually non-monogamous sexual partners. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 12, 20222028. doi:10.1111/jsm.12987

Lehmiller, J.J., & Agnew, C.R. (2006). Marginalized relationships: The impact of social disapproval on romantic relationship commitment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 4051. doi:10.1177/0146167205278710

Lehmiller, J.J., & Agnew, C.R. (2007). Perceived marginalization and the prediction of romantic relationship stability. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 10361049. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737 .2007.00429.x

Lehmiller, J.J., VanderDrift, L.E., & Kelly, J.R. (2011). Sex differences in approaching friends with benefits relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 48, 275284. doi:10.1080/00224491003721694

Lehmiller, J.J., VanderDrift, L.E., & Kelly, J.R. (2013). Sexual communication, satisfaction, and condom use behavior in friends with benefits and romantic partners. Journal of Sex Research. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/00224499.2012.719167

Levinson, R., Jaccard, J., & Beamer, L. (1995). Older adolescents engagement in casual sex: Impact of risk perception and psychosocial motivations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24, 349364. doi:10.1007/BF01537601

Luo, S., Cartun, M.A., & Snider, A.G. (2010). Assessing extradyadic behavior: A review, a new measure, and two new models. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 155163. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.03.033

Misovich, S.J., Fisher, J.D., & Fisher, W.A. (1997). Close relationships and elevated HIV risk behavior: Evidence and possible underlying psychological processes. Review of General Psychology, 1, 72107. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.1.1.72

Mohr, J. J., Selterman, D., & Fassinger, R. E. (2013). Romantic attachment and relationship functioning in same-sex couples. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60, 7282. doi:10.1037/a0030994

Mongeau, P.A., Knight, K., Williams, J., Eden, J., & Shaw, C. (2013). Identifying and explicating variation among friends with benefits relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 50, 3747. doi:10.1080/00224499.2011.619282

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

lflrlicla 233

Monto, M. A., & Carey, A. G. (2014). A new standard of sexual behavior? Are claims associated with the hookup culture supported by general social survey data?. Journal of Sex Research, 51(6), 605615. doi:10.1080/00224499.2014.906031

Morris, W.L., Sinclair, S., & DePaulo, B.M. (2007). No shelter for singles: The perceived legitimacy of marital status discrimination. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 457470. doi:10.1177/1368430207081535

Muise, A., Impett, E.A., Kogan, A., & Desmarais, S. (20132). Keeping the spark alive: Being motivated to meet a partners sexual needs sustains sexual desire in long-term romantic relationships. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 267273. doi:10.1177/1948550612457185

Musick, K., & Bumpass, L. (2012). Reexamining the case for marriage: Union formation and changes in wellbeing. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74, 118. doi:10.1111/j.1741- 3737.2011.00873.x

Myers, J.E., Madathil, J., & Tingle, L.R. (2005). Marriage satisfaction and wellness in India and the United States: A preliminary comparison of arranged marriages and marriages of choice. Journal of Counseling & Development, 83, 183190. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6678.2005.tb00595.x

Nemeth, J.M., Bonomi, A.E., Lee, M.A., & Ludwin, J.M. (2012). Sexual infidelity as trigger for intimate partner violence. Journal of Womens Health, 21, 942949. doi:10.1089/jwh.2011.3328

Ng, C. (2011). Mexico City considers temporary marriage licenses. ABC News. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/09/mexico-city-considers-temporary-marriage- licenses/ (accessed September 3, 2013).

OLeary, K. D., Acevedo, B. P., Aron, A., Huddy, L., & Mashek, D. (2012). Is long-term love more than a rare phenomenon? If so, what are its correlates? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 241249. doi:10.1177/1948550611417015

Owen, J., & Fincham, F.D. (2011). Effects of gender and psychosocial factors on friends with benefits relationships among young adults. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 311320. doi:10.1007/s10508-010-9611-6

Owen, J., & Fincham, F.D. (2012). Friends with benefits relationships as a start to exclusive romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29, 982996. doi:10.1177/0265407512448275

Paul, E.L., & Hayes, K.A. (2002). The causalities of casual sex: A qualitative exploration of the phenomenology of college students hookups. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 19, 639661. doi:10.1177/0265407502195006

Paul, E.L., McManus, B., & Hayes, A. (2000). Hookups: Characteristics and correlates of college students spontaneous and anonymous sexual experiences. Journal of Sex Research, 37, 7688. doi:10.1080/00224490009552023

Perilloux, C., & Buss, D. M. (2008). Breakup up romantic relationships: Costs experienced and coping strategies deployed. Evolutionary Psychology, 6, 164181.

Previti, D., & Amato, P. R. (2004). Is infidelity a cause or a consequence of poor marital quality? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21(2), 217230. doi:10.1177/0265407504041384

Reynolds, J., Wetherell, M., & Taylor, S. (2007). Choice and chance: Negotiating agency in narratives of singleness. The Sociological Review, 55, 331351. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.2007.00708.x

Rubel, A.N., & Bogaert, A.F. (2015). Consensual nonmonogamy: Psychological well-being and relationship quality correlates. The Journal of Sex Research, 52(9), 961982. doi:10.1080/002244 99.2014.942722

Rubin, J. D., Moors, A. C., Matsick, J. L., Ziegler, A., & Conley, T. D. (2014). On the margins: Considering diversity among consensually non-monogamous relationships. Journal fr Psychologie, 22(1).

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/09/mexico-city-considers-temporary-marriage-licenses/
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/09/mexico-city-considers-temporary-marriage-licenses/
8 IiaSm al lg aShiaeSia: lx, Lhvl, iod hmmSamlia234

Rusbult, C.E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172186. doi:10.1016/0022- 1031(80)90007-4

Rusbult, C.E., & Martz, J.M. (1995). Remaining in an abusive relationship: An investment model analysis of nonvoluntary dependence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 558571. doi:10.1177/0146167295216002

Rusbult, C.E., Martz, J.M., & Agnew, C.R. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357391. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x

Russell, V. M., Baker, L. R., & McNulty, J. K. (2013). Attachment insecurity and infidelity in marriage: Do studies of dating relationships really inform us about marriage? Journal of Family Psychology, 27, 242251. doi: 10.1037/a0032118

Ryan, C., & Jetha, C. (2010). Sex at dawn: How we mate, why we stray, and what it means for modern relationships. New York: HarperCollins.

Sayare, S., & de la Baume, M. (2010). In France, civil unions gain favor over marriage. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/world/europe/16france. html?pagewanted=all&_ r=0 (accessed September 3, 2013).

Scherer, C.R., Akers, E.G., & Kolbe, K.L. (2013). Bisexuals and the sex differences in jealousy hypothesis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30, 10641071. doi:10.1177/0265407513481446

Seiffge-Krenke, I. (2011). Coping with relationship stressors: A decade review. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 196210. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00723.x

Simpson, J.A., Rholes, W., Campbell, L., & Wilson, C.L. (2003). Changes in attachment orientations across the transitions to parenthood. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 317331. doi:10.1016/S00221031(03)00030-1

Sternberg, R.J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93, 119135. doi:10.1037/0033 295X.93.2.119

Tashiro, T.Y., & Frazier, P. (2003). Ill never be in a relationship like that again: Personal growth following romantic relationship breakups. Personal Relationships, 10, 113128. doi:10.1111/1475-6811.00039

Thornton, A., & Young-DeMarco, L. (2001). Four decades of attitudes toward family issues in the United States: The 1960s through the 1990s. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 63, 10091037. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.01009.x

United States Census Bureau (2010). Americas families and living arrangements: 2010. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/hh-fam/cps2010.html (accessed September 3, 2013).

Van Lange, P.M., Rusbult, C.E., Drigotas, S.M., Arriaga, X.B., Witcher, B.S., & Cox, C.L. (1997). Willingness to sacrifice in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 13731395. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1373

VanderDrift, L.E., Lehmiller, J.J., & Kelly, J.R. (2012). Commitment in friends with benefits relationships: Implications for relational and safe-sex outcomes. Personal Relationships, 19, 113. doi:10.1111/j.14756811.2010.01324.x

Wentland, J. J., & Reissing, E. D. (2011). Taking casual sex not too casually: Exploring definitions of casual sexual relationships. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 20, 7589.

Willoughby, B. J., Carroll, J. S., & Busby, D. M. (2013). Differing relationship outcomes when sex happens before, on, or after first dates. The Journal of Sex Research. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2012.714012

Zhang, N., Parish, W.L., Huang, Y., & Pan, S. (2012). Sexual infidelity in China: Prevalence and gender- specific correlates. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 861873. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-9930-x

Lehmiller, J. J. (2017). The psychology of human sexuality. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open(‘http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’,’_blank’) href=’http://ebookcentral.proquest.com’ target=’_blank’ style=’cursor: pointer;’>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from umuc on 2020-11-30 08:17:25.

C op

yr ig

ht

2 01

7. J

oh n

W ile

y &

S on

s, In

co rp

or at

ed . A

ll rig

ht s

re se

rv ed

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/world/europe/16france.html?pagewanted=all&_ r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/world/europe/16france.html?pagewanted=all&_ r=0
http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/hh-fam/cps2010.html

---

Get Professional Assignment Help Cheaply

Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? Are you scared that your paper will not make the grade? Do you have responsibilities that may hinder you from turning in your assignment on time? Are you tired and can barely handle your assignment? Are your grades inconsistent?

Whichever your reason is, it is valid! You can get professional academic help from our service at affordable rates. We have a team of professional academic writers who can handle all your assignments.

Why Choose Our Academic Writing Service?

• Plagiarism free papers
• Timely delivery
• Any deadline
• Skilled, Experienced Native English Writers
• Subject-relevant academic writer
• Adherence to paper instructions
• Ability to tackle bulk assignments
• Reasonable prices
• 24/7 Customer Support
• Get superb grades consistently

Online Academic Help With Different Subjects

Literature

Students barely have time to read. We got you! Have your literature essay or book review written without having the hassle of reading the book. You can get your literature paper custom-written for you by our literature specialists.

Finance

Do you struggle with finance? No need to torture yourself if finance is not your cup of tea. You can order your finance paper from our academic writing service and get 100% original work from competent finance experts.

Computer science

Computer science is a tough subject. Fortunately, our computer science experts are up to the match. No need to stress and have sleepless nights. Our academic writers will tackle all your computer science assignments and deliver them on time. Let us handle all your python, java, ruby, JavaScript, php , C+ assignments!

Psychology

While psychology may be an interesting subject, you may lack sufficient time to handle your assignments. Don’t despair; by using our academic writing service, you can be assured of perfect grades. Moreover, your grades will be consistent.

Engineering

Engineering is quite a demanding subject. Students face a lot of pressure and barely have enough time to do what they love to do. Our academic writing service got you covered! Our engineering specialists follow the paper instructions and ensure timely delivery of the paper.

Nursing

In the nursing course, you may have difficulties with literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, critical essays, and other assignments. Our nursing assignment writers will offer you professional nursing paper help at low prices.

Sociology

Truth be told, sociology papers can be quite exhausting. Our academic writing service relieves you of fatigue, pressure, and stress. You can relax and have peace of mind as our academic writers handle your sociology assignment.

Business

We take pride in having some of the best business writers in the industry. Our business writers have a lot of experience in the field. They are reliable, and you can be assured of a high-grade paper. They are able to handle business papers of any subject, length, deadline, and difficulty!

Statistics

We boast of having some of the most experienced statistics experts in the industry. Our statistics experts have diverse skills, expertise, and knowledge to handle any kind of assignment. They have access to all kinds of software to get your assignment done.

Law

Writing a law essay may prove to be an insurmountable obstacle, especially when you need to know the peculiarities of the legislative framework. Take advantage of our top-notch law specialists and get superb grades and 100% satisfaction.

What discipline/subjects do you deal in?

We have highlighted some of the most popular subjects we handle above. Those are just a tip of the iceberg. We deal in all academic disciplines since our writers are as diverse. They have been drawn from across all disciplines, and orders are assigned to those writers believed to be the best in the field. In a nutshell, there is no task we cannot handle; all you need to do is place your order with us. As long as your instructions are clear, just trust we shall deliver irrespective of the discipline.

Are your writers competent enough to handle my paper?

Our essay writers are graduates with bachelor's, masters, Ph.D., and doctorate degrees in various subjects. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college degree. All our academic writers have a minimum of two years of academic writing. We have a stringent recruitment process to ensure that we get only the most competent essay writers in the industry. We also ensure that the writers are handsomely compensated for their value. The majority of our writers are native English speakers. As such, the fluency of language and grammar is impeccable.

What if I don’t like the paper?

There is a very low likelihood that you won’t like the paper.

Reasons being:

• When assigning your order, we match the paper’s discipline with the writer’s field/specialization. Since all our writers are graduates, we match the paper’s subject with the field the writer studied. For instance, if it’s a nursing paper, only a nursing graduate and writer will handle it. Furthermore, all our writers have academic writing experience and top-notch research skills.
• We have a quality assurance that reviews the paper before it gets to you. As such, we ensure that you get a paper that meets the required standard and will most definitely make the grade.

In the event that you don’t like your paper:

• The writer will revise the paper up to your pleasing. You have unlimited revisions. You simply need to highlight what specifically you don’t like about the paper, and the writer will make the amendments. The paper will be revised until you are satisfied. Revisions are free of charge
• We will have a different writer write the paper from scratch.
• Last resort, if the above does not work, we will refund your money.

Will the professor find out I didn’t write the paper myself?

Not at all. All papers are written from scratch. There is no way your tutor or instructor will realize that you did not write the paper yourself. In fact, we recommend using our assignment help services for consistent results.

What if the paper is plagiarized?

We check all papers for plagiarism before we submit them. We use powerful plagiarism checking software such as SafeAssign, LopesWrite, and Turnitin. We also upload the plagiarism report so that you can review it. We understand that plagiarism is academic suicide. We would not take the risk of submitting plagiarized work and jeopardize your academic journey. Furthermore, we do not sell or use prewritten papers, and each paper is written from scratch.

When will I get my paper?

You determine when you get the paper by setting the deadline when placing the order. All papers are delivered within the deadline. We are well aware that we operate in a time-sensitive industry. As such, we have laid out strategies to ensure that the client receives the paper on time and they never miss the deadline. We understand that papers that are submitted late have some points deducted. We do not want you to miss any points due to late submission. We work on beating deadlines by huge margins in order to ensure that you have ample time to review the paper before you submit it.

Will anyone find out that I used your services?

We have a privacy and confidentiality policy that guides our work. We NEVER share any customer information with third parties. Noone will ever know that you used our assignment help services. It’s only between you and us. We are bound by our policies to protect the customer’s identity and information. All your information, such as your names, phone number, email, order information, and so on, are protected. We have robust security systems that ensure that your data is protected. Hacking our systems is close to impossible, and it has never happened.

How our Assignment Help Service Works

1. Place an order

You fill all the paper instructions in the order form. Make sure you include all the helpful materials so that our academic writers can deliver the perfect paper. It will also help to eliminate unnecessary revisions.

2. Pay for the order

Proceed to pay for the paper so that it can be assigned to one of our expert academic writers. The paper subject is matched with the writer’s area of specialization.

3. Track the progress

You communicate with the writer and know about the progress of the paper. The client can ask the writer for drafts of the paper. The client can upload extra material and include additional instructions from the lecturer. Receive a paper.

4. Download the paper

The paper is sent to your email and uploaded to your personal account. You also get a plagiarism report attached to your paper.

GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!

---