JUNE 2008 HOT TOPIC

Virginity Pledges May Help Some Teens Postpone Start of Sexual Activity

Virginity pledges may be a tool that helps to encourage some young people to postpone the start of sexual activity, according to a recent study led by RAND Health researcher Steven Martino. The study found that adolescents who made pledges to remain virgins until they are married were less likely to have initiated sexual intercourse after three years than were other, similar youth who also were inclined to delay sex but did not make a virginity pledge. Although earlier studies have examined the impact of virginity pledges, the RAND Health study was unique in gauging the effect of virginity pledges by comparing young people who were similarly predisposed to delay sexual activity because they shared particular characteristics, such as strong religious beliefs, parents who closely monitored their behavior, friends and parents who were opposed to their having sex, a high likelihood of joining clubs and participating in community activities, and a low likelihood of expecting that having sex will lead to positive consequences. The researchers surveyed more than 1,450 adolescent virgins aged 12 to 17 in 2001 and reinterviewed participants one year and three years later. About one-fourth of the group reported during the initial survey that they had signed a virginity pledge. About 42 percent of those who did not sign virginity pledges initiated sexual intercourse within three years, while just 34 percent of those who made a virginity pledge reported having sexual intercourse within that period.

The findings do not suggest that virginity pledges should substitute for comprehensive sexual education programs or that teens should be required to sign them; however, such pledges may be appropriate as one component of comprehensive sexual education for young people.

Read More »

Are People “Hard-Wired” to Overeat?

Obesity has become a global epidemic, and Congress is looking for ways to address the problem in the United States. What accounts for this trend and what can be done about it? A recent study by RAND researcher Deborah Cohen explores the causes of obesity and implications for reversing this trend. Although the dominant thinking about obesity prevention focuses on willpower and better food choices, it is unlikely that human nature or understanding of food has changed much in recent years. What has changed is the food environment: In many parts of the world, food has become more available and affordable. The research literature suggests that people are “hard-wired” to respond to the greater availability of food and to environmental cues regarding food in ways that lead them to overeat. Because people lack awareness of the factors that cause them to overeat, they have difficulty controlling overeating or preventing obesity. Cohen explores several human characteristics that could lead people to overeat. For example, numerous studies have shown that people have limited cognitive capacity to make decisions about food and that environmental cues, such as seeing or smelling food, can trigger hormonal responses that stimulate people to feel hungry even when they are not. In addition, recently discovered brain cells, known as mirror neurons, are responsible for imitative behavior and could cause people to imitate the eating behavior of others. Given limits on people’s awareness of and ability to control their responses to food, the author calls for more careful regulation of the food environment, including limits on portion sizes, food availability, and advertising.

Read the Fact Sheet »

Why Do Men and Women Vary in Their Ability to Create and Maintain Healthy Lifestyles?

Men and women differ markedly in patterns of illness and longevity. Their ability to create a healthy lifestyle has implications for the disease burden, spiraling costs associated with health care, and, especially, the growing population of aging citizens. Congress is continuously working to reduce health disparities, but little is known about gender differences in ambulatory care, such as screening, treatment with medication, and control of risk factors. In Gender and Health: The Effects of Constrained Choices and Social Policies, RAND sociologist Chloe Bird and Harvard Medical School sociologist Patricia Rieker explore how policies, individual choices, and biological mechanisms such as stress reactions interact to produce differences in men’s and women’s health risks. They introduce a model of “constrained choice” that shows how government policy, community decisions, workplace actions, and other factors shape the opportunities available to men and women to create a healthy lifestyle. For example, opportunities may be shaped by national-level social policies intended to be gender-neutral that unintentionally disadvantage one group, community decisions about neighborhoods that limit opportunities for walking and exercise, or workplace actions that limit employees’ ability to balance work and family responsibilities. Based on these opportunities and available options, men and women make choices—from where to live and what job to take to how to care for children and elderly parents—that affect their health risk. Bird and Rieker recommend that constrained choice serve as a platform for disease prevention, urging decisionmakers to increase opportunities for men and women to pursue better health by integrating gender-based analysis of potential health impacts as they draft public policies.

Read the Fact Sheet »

RAND Health conducts objective research on health, health behavior, and health policy. Access to all RAND Health research is available at www.rand.org/health/.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world.

Learn More »

Copyright © 2008 RAND Corporation. 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401-3208. RAND® is a registered trademark.

The RAND Health Congressional Newsletter is distributed on an opt-in basis only by visiting us at www.rand.org. We respect your privacy. If you do not wish to receive this periodic newsletter, please email ocr@rand.org or call (703) 413-1100 x5395.

This newsletter is also available on the RAND Congressional web site »