POSTER TEMPLATE BY: Poster-within-a-poster: Improving Male-female Communication Regarding Sexual Overtures Sarah Frost 1, Carol Weisfeld 1, Steve Keiser 2 1 University of Detroit Mercy, USA 2 Steve Keiser Graphics, USA A BSTRACT C ONCLUSIONS R EFERENCES (1) Qualitative and quantitative results demonstrate Haselton and Buss (2000) are correct in their description of the types of errors males and females make. (2) Visual representation of male and female errors are easily recognized by students, readily generating constructive dialogue in a supervised setting. (3) Students self-assessment post-discussion shows growth in thinking about things in a new way.” (see examples below) (4) Additional applications of these types are worthy of investigation, particularly applications which measure level of cognitive functioning in participants. Participants responded to this prompt, “ I will probably think more carefully about male and female communication. One think I will keep in mind is…” (1)“how I say things and act around men and what my body language is.” (2)“’Too nice’ isn’t always a good thing. Also, people should avoid putting themselves in situations that make them vulnerable.” (3)“Both the male and female have the responsibility of demonstrating a clear thought process.” (4)“to be upfront with a guy that is too persistent with me. Don’t lead him on by accident or send mixed messages.” (5)“I do think men who pressure women simply don’t care about their autonomy and are only interested in women for sexual means. This does not represent all men.” (6)“You don’t always have to let guys down softly. You are allowed to be frank about your feelings.” R ESULTS AND D ISCUSSION Buss, D. M. (2003). The Evolution of Desire. New York: Basic Books. Haselton, M.G. & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective in biases in cross-sex mind reading, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78, Error management theory proposes that humans predictably commit decision making errors based on the premise that some errors are less costly than others (Haselton & Buss, 2000). There are two types of errors: Type I error which creates a false-positive and Type II errors which creates a false-negative. Over time, human have adapted due to natural selection to commit errors that are less costly. Males tend to make false-positive errors, by over-inferring a female's sexual interest to minimized missed opportunities. Conversely, females are more likely to commit a Type II error, that is to under-infer a male’s commitment and therefore minimizing the risk of becoming pregnant by a male who might later abandon her. This results in males being more eager for sex and females being more choosey and likely to reject male advances. These adaptive decision-making errors contribute to the misunderstanding between males and females in the area of sexual interest (Buss, 2005). Course review from multiple sections of an undergraduate Human Sexuality class support wide-spread occurrence of errors in communication. The present project is an attempt at an intervention using evolutionary psychology ideas to assist males and females in improving skills of cross-sex communication. The goal is to prevent problems by helping students think about sexual communication in broader, more accurate way. An artist assisted us in designing a poster showing four scenarios in which sexual overtures are misinterpreted by one or both sexes. Twenty five “Consent is Unambiguous” posters were posted in buildings throughout a small liberal arts college one week before the discussion took place. Participants were given a subject information sheet to inform them of confidentiality and the study. Then, participants completed paper-and-pencil questionnaire about the poster. Next, the authors held a discussion about the miscommunication between males and females. Discussion points include: do you communicate differently with members of the opposite sex? No means no, but what else means no? Are female's responses meant to be a rejection? Then, a follow-up questionnaire was administered to the participants. Two undergraduate classes participated in the study for a total of 50 participants (32% male, 68% female). The participants ranged in age from 18 to 32 years. I NTRODUCTION Poster Seventy percent of the students noticed the poster on campus within one week of it being displayed. Seventy seven percent of students indicated that the poster was a useful way to introduce the subject of miscommunication between males and females. Group Discussion Eighty eight percent of the students indicated that the group discussion was helpful to discuss miscommunication between males and females. Only 32% of students indicated that they often have the opportunity to discuss these issues, and 46% said that they do not often have opportunities to discuss these issues. This demonstrates a need for more opportunities for discussion about male and female communication. Both Poster and Discussion There is a significant positive correlation between item PD3 (the poster made me think about something in a new way) and a number of follow up items: item F4 (The discussion helped me change my mind about miscommunication between males and females), r =.46, p <.001; follow- up item 4 “the discussion and poster allowed me to think more critically about miscommunication between ethnic groups” (r =.53, p <.001); and item 7 “I will think more carefully about male and female communication (r =.50, p <.001). These findings suggest that the combination of two interventions (poster and discussion) had a strong impact. Ethnic Groups Ninety Percent said that they were aware of the diverse ethnic groups presented on the poster. Sixty eight percent said that the poster and discussion allowed them to think more critically about miscommunication between ethnic groups. In the free response section of the survey, many students mentioned the diverse ethnic groups, see sample quotes below. A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project was made possible in part to an internal grant the first and second authors received from University of Detroit Mercy. M ETHOD From a Darwinian viewpoint, sex differences in reproductive strategies likely cause misunderstandings. males often misinterpret friendliness as sexual interest whereas females misunderstand male’s sexual interest as friendship. Our project is a pilot intervention on a college campus, providing an opportunity to discuss sources of misunderstanding around dating issues. A cartoon poster depicting miscommunication between males and females around sexual overtures was mounted on campus buildings for one week. Then 50 students participated in an hour-long discussion, completing pre- and post-discussion surveys. The discussion disclosed strategies which females utilize to put males off, without understanding complications caused by ambiguity. While 88% of students responded that the discussion helped them reflect on their intentions, only 32% said they regularly have opportunities to discuss these issues. L IMITATIONS AND F UTURE D IRECTION A limitation is that baseline data were not collected before posters were placed on campus. Despite the fact that we devoted one hour to the discussion, students were so involved in the discussion of gender issues, ethnic dimensions were not covered. Future research should focus on sex differences in responsiveness to the poster and determine if the message of the poster stands out alone, or only after a supervised discussion?