Some AU students say they doubt the results of a new that study found that teenagers who watch more sexual content on TV are more likely to become pregnant or impregnate a partner.
The study, which tracked 2,003 teenagers between the ages of 12-17 from 2001 to 2004, found that sexually active kids who saw the most sexual content had a 25 percent chance to be involved in a pregnancy, while those who watched the least had a 12 percent chance, according to The Washington Post.
The Research and Development Corporation (RAND) study monitored the amount of TV teens watched by pre-selecting the 23 most sexually explicit popular shows, like "Sex and the City" and "Friends," and carefully rated the average sexual content of those shows. RAND, a non-profit global policy think tank, defined sexual content as both depiction of sex and dialogue on sex.
Sexual content on TV has doubled over the past few years, a researcher for the study told the Post.
AU students have mixed views as to the direct correlation between sexual content watched and pregnancy.
Emily Heltzer, a freshman in the Kogod School of Business who watches shows that feature sexual activity, said she doesn't believe sex on TV is a major factor in the pregnancy rate.
Lauren Allen, a freshman in Kogod, said she was reluctant to concede a relationship.
"There are a lot of other factors," she said.
Heltzer and Allen said they both think there needs to be more testing to show that other factors are not contributing to the correlation.
Noel Klingler, a freshman in the College of Arts and Sciences, said he believes the relationship exists watching sex on TV and increased sexual activity. He said when sex is viewed causally it can lead to teens having more sex and therefore a greater chance of impregnation.
"If all you watch on TV is people having sex, it kind of becomes not a big deal to you," Klingler said.
Rachel Strohman, a sophomore in the CAS, said she thinks children who have only had abstinence-only sex education are more vulnerable to influence from sexual content.
"People who just see the sex, that don't see all the other pieces that are there, the issues of mental and physical health," are the ones affected in this way, Strohman said.
The study did not determine whether it was increased sexual activity or a decrease in the use of protection that was the cause for higher pregnancy rates, according to the study's Web site.
Groups are already using the results of the study as evidence for their agendas. The National Abstinence Education Association claims the study confirms the need for abstinence-only education, while an opposing group, Advocates for Youth, claims the study underscores the need for proper sex education, according to the Post.
Critics of the study claim that the sexual activity on TV does not cause increased pregnancies. The study also tried to address other potential criticisms by taking into account relevant factors, like single-parent households, teens who were trying to have a baby and parent education level, which were all found to have dismissible influence, according to the Post.
The study did not measure a teen's predisposition towards sex nor track how often sexually active teens had sex or if they did so unprotected, according to the study's Web site.
RAND suggested several practical implications of the results. In the corporation's opinion, children should be made aware of the biases and often unrealistic portrayals of sex in the media. Parents and TV networks also need to take more responsibility for the media's influence, according to RAND's Web site.
You can reach this writer at news@theeagleonline.com.
