Studies Rebut Earlier Report on Pledges of Virginity

On Tuesday, Heritage Foundation authors presented studies that they said contradicted an earlier Journal of Adolescent Health report that concluded abstinence-only students mostly broke their virginity pledges and had similar STD rates to non-pledgers, though they delayed intercourse by 18 months.

Heritage authors Robert Rector and Kirk A. Johnson found instead that virginity pledgers were less likely to have sex; engaged in fewer risky behaviors if they broke their pledge; and self-reported acquiring STDs at lower rates than non-pledgers.

The Heritage findings used statistical methods that differed from those used earlier by the Yale University and Columbia University researchers, making direct comparison difficult. However, the new research was based on the same national survey carried out by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which sponsored the Arlington, Va., meeting at which Heritage data were presented.

Independent experts said the Heritage analysis was flawed; lacked a statistically significant basis; and likely would not be published in its current form in peer-reviewed journals, as had the earlier, widely published research by Yale's Hannah Brückner and Columbia's Peter Bearman.

Johnson defended his teams' findings, saying that many journal articles used results of a statistical test at a 0.10 level of significance, rather than the much more rigorous 0.05 level, and let readers decide for themselves the study findings' merits.

"Our analyses showed that pledgers are less likely to get tested for STDs, be diagnosed as having an STD, and to see a doctor because they are worried about having an STD," said Bearman. "The use of self-report data for STDs is therefore extremely problematic."

A spokesperson for CDC, which helped pay for the Heritage study, said the agency did not analyze data from the earlier study and does not plan on analyzing the new study's findings.

Incongruously for a scientific report, the Heritage researchers said Bearman's team "deliberately misled the press and the public" about some of its findings, a statement Bearman found "offensive."

Back to other news for June 15, 2005