This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
Studies have reported on the proportion of the population looking for potential sexual partners using internet sites and smartphone apps, but few have investigated those who have sex with these partners, arguably a more important target group for health promotion.
This study aimed to determine the proportion of people who have had sex with someone they met on an internet site or a smartphone app in the previous year.
We analyzed data from the 2012-2013 Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships, a nationally representative telephone survey of Australian residents aged 16-69 years (N=20,091). The participation rate for the telephone survey was 66.22%. The prevalence of looking for a potential partner, physically meeting, and having sex with someone first met through an internet site or a smartphone app was estimated. Multivariate logistic regression was used for men and women separately to determine demographic and behavioral factors associated with having had sex with someone met on an internet site or a smartphone app in the last year.
Overall, 12.09% of respondents had looked for potential partners using these technologies and 5.40% had done so in the last year. In the last year, 2.98% had met someone in person and 1.95% reported having had sex with someone first met on an internet site or a smartphone app. The prevalence of all behaviors was greater in men than in women and in younger respondents than in older respondents. Among sexually active men, factors associated with having had sex with someone met using internet sites or smartphone apps included identifying as gay or bisexual (adjusted odds ratio, AOR: 15.37, 95% CI 8.34-28.35), having either 2-3 or >3 sexual partners in the last year (AOR: 9.20, 95% CI 9.20-34.68 and AOR: 35.77, 95% CI 18.04-70.94, respectively), having had a sexually transmissible infection (STI) test in the past year (AOR: 2.02, 95% CI 1.21-3.38), or an STI in the last year (AOR: 3.15, 95% CI 1.25-7.97). Among sexually active women, factors associated with having had sex with someone met on an internet site or a smartphone app were as follows: having either 2-3 or >3 sexual partners in the last year (AOR: 32.01, 95% CI 13.17-77.78 and AOR: 71:03, 95 % CI 27.48-183.57, respectively), very low and low income (vs very high AOR: 3.40, 95% CI 1.12-10.35), and identifying as lesbian or bisexual (AOR: 2.27, 95% CI 1.04-4.49).
More than a third of adults who had looked for potential partners using websites and apps each year had sex with such partners, and those who had done so were more sexually active, suggesting that dating and hookup websites and applications are suitable settings for targeted sexual health interventions.
A range of dating websites, accessible via the internet or smartphone apps, are now available to search for potential sexual partners. These sites first surfaced in 1995 with match.com and eHarmony in 2000; in 2009, Grindr was launched, targeting men who have sex with men, followed by Tinder in late 2012 (targeted more toward heterosexually active adults). Since then, increasing numbers of these apps have become available. People have various motivations for using these sites and apps; some may be searching for a life partner and others for just a one-off encounter. The platforms enable selection of partners based on preferred personal characteristics, and some sites use geospatial technology to allow the user to determine the geographical proximity of a potential partner (eg, both Grindr and Tinder are location-based hookup apps). Sites are also available for particular cultural groups, and some focus on certain sexual preferences. The sites are generally open to people aged ≥18 years.
Beyond that, dating sites have the potential to provide sexual health promotion interventions. However, there is little available information on how many people access these sites and what their characteristics are. To date, most studies of meeting partners online have recruited specific populations and used convenience-sampling strategies, such as targeting online users, gay venues, or health care settings [
Furthermore, earlier studies reported on the proportion and characteristics of people who looked for partners using Web-based technologies (but may not have intended to have sex with them or actually have done so). However, the characteristics of people who have sex with these partners are of the greatest relevance for health promotion. Of the two population-level studies conducted to date, a study among Norwegian young people (aged 15-20 years) in 2009 found that 30% reported ever having had sex with someone they met online (but did not ask about the last year), and a British survey of adults (aged 16-74 years), conducted from 2010 to 2012, focused only on respondents looking for sexual partners in the last year, not whether respondents had sex with them [
In 2012-2013, the Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships (ASHR2) survey was conducted just after the introduction of Tinder and other geosocial dating apps [
This study was a cross-sectional analysis of data from ASHR2. The methods of ASHR2 have been described elsewhere [
To allocate resources efficiently and gather more information from those with potentially higher HIV and sexually transmissible infection (STI) risk, we administered interviews in two forms [
The estimates of prevalence included sexually active and sexually inactive respondents. However, the predictor analysis of factors associated with meeting and having had sex with someone met on websites or smartphone apps was restricted to sexually active respondents because many sexual health outcomes were queried only of sexually active survey respondents. For this study, people were considered sexually active if they had ≥1 partners (for vaginal or anal intercourse or oral or manual sex) of the same or other sex in the previous 12 months. Respondents who reported no lifetime sexual experience were coded as not sexually active.
Have you ever used an internet site or smartphone application to look for potential partners? Have you done so in the past year?
In the last year have you met someone in person that you first met on an internet site?
And did you have sex with that person?
The primary outcome of this study was having sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app in the past year. We also calculated the proportion of people looking for partners and meeting someone in person who they first met on a website or mobile app. These outcomes were ascertained using the following questions collected in the long-form questionnaire. The questions’ exact wording is shown in
The proportion of people searching for, meeting, and having sex with partners on websites and smartphone apps were calculated separately using descriptive statistics. Data were weighted according to the Australian population and the probability of being selected for the long-form questionnaire. The characteristics of respondents who reported searching for partners using these technologies were compared with respondents who reported having sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app. A chi-square test was used to compare differences in distributions between groups for a range of covariates.
Univariate and multivariate logistic regression, weighted in accordance with study procedures, were used to examine factors associated with having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app in the last year. All data were analyzed using Stata statistical software version 14. Variables significant at the
The demographic covariates included in the models were age group (16-29 years, and then 10-year age groups up to 69 years), language spoken at home (English or other), annual household income: very low or low (<Aus $52,000), middle (Aus $52,001- Aus $83,000), high (Aus $83,001-Aus $125,000), and very high (>Aus $125,000), and area of residence (urban or rural and remote) according to the Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia [
The behavioral covariates included in models were levels of alcohol consumption (high or not, with high alcohol consumption classified as >28 standard drinks per week for men and >14 standard drinks per week for women), injecting drug use in the last year (yes or no), smoking status (never and former, or current), sexual identity (heterosexual or gay, lesbian, bisexual, and other), condom use at last event (used or did not use condoms), STI history the last year (no STI test, STI test, or STI diagnosis), and sexual partner numbers in the previous year (1, 2-3, or >3). The numbers of sexual partners included both male and female partners. In relation to STIs, respondents were asked whether they had had an STI in the past year and whether they had an STI test; these two questions were combined to provide the composite variable. The STIs included were pubic lice, genital warts, chlamydia, genital herpes, gonorrhea, and syphilis; in addition, for women, warts virus on Pap smear, pelvic inflammatory disease, bacterial vaginosis or gardnerella, and trichomoniasis were included and for men, nonspecific urethritis and anal warts were included [
The study received La Trobe University’s (HEC 11-040) ethical approval, which was ratified by the ethics committees of the University of New South Wales, the University of Sydney, and the University of Sussex.
Overall, 12.09% (2346/19,398) of respondents reported ever searching for potential partners on websites and smartphone apps (13.52% men [1320/9761], 10.65% women [1026/9637]) and 5.40% (1048/19,398) of respondents (7.01% men [685/9637] and 3.77% women [364/9636]) reported doing so in the last year.
Prevalence of looking for potential partners on websites and smartphone apps and prevalence of having sex with these partners.
Characteristics | Searched for potential partner (ever), %a (95% CI) | Searched for potential partner (last year), %a (95% CI) | Met in person (last year), %a (95% CI) | Had sex (last year), %a (95% CI) | |
All participantsb,c | 12.09 (11.24-13.00) | 5.40 (4.89-5.97) | 2.98 (2.63-3.37) | 1.95 (1.69-2.25) | |
Men | 13.52 (12.26-14.88) | 7.01 (6.20-7.93) | 3.70 (3.14-4.36) | 2.54 (2.14-3.02) | |
Women | 10.65 (9.54-11.87) | 3.77 (3.17-4.48) | 2.19 (1.81-2.65) | 1.35 (1.04-1.74) | |
Yes | 11.41 (10.46-12.44) | 4.92 (4.35-5.55) | 2.97 (2.58-3.42) | N/Ad | |
No | 16.10 (14.58-17.74) | 8.28 (7.16-9.56) | 3.01 (2.36-3.85) | N/A | |
16-29 | 14.24 (12.25-16.50) | 8.42 (7.05-10.02) | 4.73 (3.85-5.79) | 3.03 (2.41-3.81) | |
30-39 | 15.89 (13.71-18.35) | 6.30 (5.07-7.80) | 3.57 (2.68-4.73) | 2.25 (1.66-3.05) | |
40-49 | 11.83 (10.21-13.67) | 4.78 (3.92-5.82) | 2.40 (1.87-3.08) | 1.79 (1.33-2.42) | |
50-59 | 10.0 (8.54-11.67) | 3.52 (2.78-4.45) | 2.00 (1.42-2.80) | 1.23 (0.79-1.92) | |
60-69 | 5.84 (4.74-7.17) | 1.87 (1.43-2.44) | 0.98 (0.66-1.47) | 0.54 (0.29-0.99) | |
Heterosexual | 10.98 (10.12-11.90) | 4.68 (4.17-5.25) | 2.40 (2.07-2.78) | 1.45 (1.21-1.73) | |
Homosexual or lesbian or bisexual | 42.80 (37.97.0-47.78) | 25.32 (21.40-29.69) | 18.9 (15.48-22.87) | 15.8 (12.66-19.55) | |
English only | 12.14 (11.27-3.06) | 5.26 (4.76-5.81) | 2.98 (2.63-3.37) | 2.02 (1.75-2.29) | |
Other | 11.44 (7.95-16.19) | 7.47 (4.66-11.76) | 2.94 (1.37-6.17) | 0.89 (0.380-2.10) | |
Very low or low | 11.89 (10.08-13.98) | 6.60 (5.21-8.32) | 3.98 (2.43-3.19) | 2.49 (1.77-3.46) | |
Middle | 10.48 (8.57-12.75) | 4.65 (3.62-5.96) | 1.92 (1.39-2.64) | 1.12 (0.75-1.73) | |
High | 9.52 (7.72-11.68) | 2.43 (1.65-3.55) | 0.94 (0.62-1.40) | 0.55 (0.33-0.93) | |
Very high | 9.76 (7.98-11.) | 2.70 (1.94-3.75) | 1.58 (1.04-2.41) | 1.03 (0.72-1.46) | |
Urban | 12.92 (11.82-14.09) | 5.62 (4.97-6.36) | 3.37 (2.90-3.91) | 2.11 (1.78-2.51) | |
Regional or remote | 10.25 (8.98-11.7) | 4.94 (4.14-5.88) | 2.13 (1.71-2.64) | 1.52 (1.17-1.96) | |
No | 12.47 (11.45-13.56) | 5.51 (4.89-6.21) | 2.91 (2.51-3.36) | 1.86 (1.57-2.20) | |
Yes | 11.20 (9.72-12.87) | 5.14 (4.27-6.18) | 3.15 (2.28-3.99) | 2.10 (1.61-2.75) | |
No | 11.93 (11.07-12.85) | 5.28(4.76-5.86) | 2.93 (2.57-3.33) | 191 (1.65-2.22) | |
Yes | 19.08 (14.21-25.13) | 10.50 (7.43-14.63) | 4.90 (3.00-7.90) | 3.6 (2.00-6.43) | |
Never smoked/former | 11.09 (10.15-12.10) | 4.65 (4.10-5.27) | 2.6 (2.25-3.01) | 1.79 (1.51- 2.12) | |
Current smoker | 16.75 (14.63-19.12) | 9.07 (7.63-10.74) | 4.86 (3.79-6.21) | 2.88 (2.20-3.77) | |
No test | 9.13 (8.20-10.14) | 3.32 (2.81-3.92) | 1.70 (1.38-2.09) | 1.18 (0.94-1.48) | |
STI test | 23.86 (20.38-27.73) | 13.57 (11.20-16.35) | 9.55 (7.73-11.76) | 7.24 (5.84-8.93) | |
STI diagnosis | 36.96 (26.46-17.39) | 26.00 (18.05-35.92) | 21.13 (14.21-30.23) | 16.88 (10.89-25.25) | |
Used condoms | 14.69 (12.50-17.18) | 9.35 (7.79-11.17) | 5.78 (4.69-7.13) | 4.52 (3.55-5.74) | |
Did not use | 12.11 (10.49-13.94) | 4.51 (3.66-5.54) | 2.70 (2.12-3.45) | 1.92 (1.51-2.44) | |
1 | 9.66 (8.80-10.61) | 3.0 (2.6-3.6) | 1.20 (0.93-1.54) | 0.47 (0.31-0.69) | |
2-3 | 33.99 (30.57-37.51) | 25.4 (22.3-28.7) | 16.9 (14.31-19.85) | 12.40 (10.19-15.00) | |
>3 | 39.44 (34.53-44.58) | 33.0 (28.4-38.0) | 27.32 (22.99-32.12) | 23.91 (19.87-28.49) |
aAll proportions have been weighted to match the Australian population.
bN=19,398 (8184), weighted (unweighted) denominators
cIndividuals with missing data are not shown; this was <5% for all variables except for income, which was incomplete for 24.5% of participants.
dN/A: not applicable.
eAccessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia.
fSTI: sexually transmissible infection.
Having met in person was reported by 2.98% (578/19,398) of survey respondents (3.70% men [363/9761], 2.19% women [214/9637]), whereas having had sex with someone first met on a website or a smartphone app was reported by 1.95% (378/19,398) of respondents (2.54% men [248/9761], 1.35% women [130/9637]). Having had sex with someone met on an internet site or a smartphone app in the last year was the highest among respondents who identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (15.80%, 107/680) and also more frequent among people aged 16-29 years and 30-39 years, as well as those who had had an STI test or STI diagnosis in the past year, those with a higher number of sexual partners, and those who used a condom at their last sexual event (
When restricted to sexually active respondents,11.41% (1893/16586) had ever searched for potential partners online, 4.92% (815/16586) had done so in the last year, and 2.97% (493/16586) had met with someone in person in the last year (
Proportion of respondents reporting having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app among people who searched for partners on websites and smartphone apps.
Characteristics | %a (95% CI) | ||
All participantsb | 36.07 (31.64-40.75) | N/Ac | |
Men | 36.28 (30.90-42.02) | .90 | |
Women | 35.68 (28.20-43.93) | N/A | |
Heterosexual | 30.89 (26.19-36.03) | <.001 | |
Homosexual or lesbian or bisexual | 62.41 (53.24-70.75) | N/A | |
No test | 35.89 (28.86-43.59) | <.001 | |
STI test | 53.77 (43.94-63.31) | N/A | |
STI diagnosis | 64.94 (46.76-79.61) | N/A | |
Used condoms | 48.43 (39.7 57.2) | <.001 | |
Did not use | 42.85 (33.5-52.8) | N/A | |
Missing or don’t know or refused | 23.26 (18.0-29.5) | N/A | |
1 | 15.36 (10.50-21.94) | <.001 | |
2-3 | 48.82 (41.66-56.02) | N/A | |
>3 | 72.44 (63.95-79.57) | N/A |
aAll data have been weighted to match the Australian population.
bn=1048 (720) weighted (unweighted) denominators.
cN/A: not applicable.
dSTI: sexually transmissible infection.
Among the respondents who had had sex with someone they met on a website or a smartphone app, 62.88% (363/578) were male and 37.12% (214/578) were female. The majority of people who reported having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app identified as heterosexual (77.75%, 129/578). In terms of STI testing, 41.91% (242/578) reported not having had an STI test in the previous year, 38.81% (224/578) reported having had an STI test, and 7.24% (42/578) reported being diagnosed with an STI in the last year (12.03%, 70/578) of respondents either refused to answer, could not recall, or were not asked). Regarding the numbers of sexual partners, 36.45% (211/578) had 1 sexual partner in the last year, 35.28% (204/578) had 2 or 3 sexual partners, and 28.27% (163/578) had >3 sexual partners.
Among sexually active males, most respondents were heterosexual (97.34%, 8339/8567), spoke English at home (93.80% (8012/8526), and resided in an urban area (68.04%, 5788/8526). Age was distributed as follows: 24.24% (2077/8567) were aged 16-29 years, 21.03% (1802/8567) were aged 30-39 years, 22.12% (1896/8567) were aged 40-49 years, 18.66% (1599/8567) were aged 50-59 years, and 13.92% (1192/8567) were aged 60-69 years. Most respondents had either very high (30.61%, 2623/8567) or high (20.06%, 1719/8567) annual household incomes.
The peak reporting of having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app was among sexually active men aged 16-29 years (4.78%, 100/2077). This declined with increasing age to 0.81% (10/1192) among sexually active men aged 60-69 years. Reporting having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app was substantially higher among homosexual and bisexual men than among heterosexual men (36.23% [83/228] vs 1.86% [155/8339]). In terms of sexual practices, 1.43%(106/7468) of sexually active men with no STI test in the last year reported having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app, compared with 10.92% (111/1017) of men with an STI test in the last year and 31.09% (20/66) of men who reported having had an STI diagnosis in the last year. In addition, 0.61% (45/7352) of sexually active men with 1 sexual partner in the last year reported having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app, compared with 11.85% (91/772) of those with 2-3 sexual partners and 22.85% (101/444) of those with >3 sexual partners in the last year.
Sociodemographic and other behavioral characteristics of having sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app among sexually active men.
Characteristicsa,b | %c (95% CI) in subgroup | %c (95% CI) outcome | Odds ratio (95% CI) | Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI)d | |||
16-29 | 24.24 (22.01-26.61) | 4.78 (3.54-6.45) | 1.60 (0.95-2.68) | .08 | 0.43 (0.23-0.82) | .01 | |
30-39 | 21.03 (19.05-23.2) | 3.05 (2.06-4.55) | Referent | Referent | |||
40-49 | 22.12 (20.26-24.1) | 2.39 (1.68-3.41) | 0.78 (0.45 - 1.34) | .36 | 1.01 (0.51-2.01) | .97 | |
50-59 | 18.66 (17.03-20.41) | 1.76 (1.13-2.75) | 0.57 (0.31-1.05) | .07 | 0.62 (0.28-1.40) | .25 | |
60-69 | 13.96 (12.59-15.46) | 0.81(0.46-1.43) | 0.26 (0.13-0.52) | <.001 | 0.28 (0.12-0.65) | .003 | |
Heterosexual | 97.34 (96.86-97.75) | 1.86 (1.48-2.35) | Referent | Referent | |||
Homosexual, bisexual or other | 2.66 (2.25-3.14) | 36.23 (28.83-44.34) | 30.01 (19.88-45.31) | <.001 | 15.37 (8.34-28.35) | <.001 | |
English only | 93.80 (92.41-94.95) | 2.87 (2.44-3.50) | N/Ae | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other | 6.20 (5.05-7.59) | —f | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Very high | 30.65 (28.46- 32.92) | 30.61 (28.43-32.89) | Referent | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
High | 20.06 (18.20 -22.05) | 0.67 (0.34-1.32) | 0.49 (0.22-10.9) | .08 | N/A | N/A | |
Middle | 16.19 (14.45-18.10) | 1.79 (1.11-2.89) | 1.28 (0.67-2.45) | .45 | N/A | N/A | |
Very low or low | 13.52 (12.02-15.17) | 2.1(1.47-3.94) | 1.82 (0.93-3.56) | .08 | N/A | N/A | |
Urban | 68.04 (65.86-70.15) | 3.05 (2.46-3.76) | Referent | N/A | N/A | ||
Regional or remote | 30.34 (28.28-32.49) | 2.21 (1.56-3.10) | 0.72 (0.48-1.09) | .12 | N/A | N/A | |
No | N/A | 2.65(2.18-3.23) | Referent | N/A | N/A | ||
Yes | N/A | 3.22(2.18-4.74) | 1.22 (0.78-1.92) | .38 | N/A | N/A | |
No | N/A | 2.71 (2.26-3.27) | Referent | N/A | N/A | ||
Yes | N/A | 5.31(2.59-10.57) | 2.00 (0.93-4.33) | .08 | N/A | N/A | |
Never smoked or former smoker | N/A | 2.38 (1.92-2.95) | Referent | N/A | N/A | ||
Current smoker | N/A | 4.37 (3.14-6.05) | 1.87 (1.25-2.81) | .002 | N/A | N/A | |
No test | N/A | 1.43 (1.09-1.88) | Referent | Referent | |||
STI test | N/A | 10.98 (8.42-14.21) | 10.92 (8.37-14.12) | <.001 | 2.02 (1.12-3.38) | .008 | |
STI diagnosis | N/A | 31.09(17.57-48.86) | 31.30 (14.07- 69.69) | <.001 | 3.15 (1.25-7.97) | .02 |
|
Used condoms | N/A | 5.25(3.92-6.99) | 3.26 (2.11-5.04) | <.001 | N/A | N/A | |
Did not use | N/A | 1.65 (1.23-2.21) | Referent | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
1 | N/A | 0.61 (0.36-1.1) | Referent | Referent | |||
2-3 | N/A | 11.85 (9.12-15.24) | 24.40 (13.82- 43.07) | <.001 | 17.86 (9.20-34.68) | <.001 | |
>3 | N/A | 22.85 (18.3-28.14) | 69.64 (36.75- 131.97) | <.001 | 35.77 (18.04-70.94) | <.001 |
an=8567 (2735), weighted (unweighted) denominators.
bIndividuals with missing data are not shown; this was <5% for all variables, except for income and condom use with last sexual partner (not available for 42%).
cAll data have been weighted to match the Australian population.
dAdjusted for age group, sexual identity, STI testing in the last year, and numbers of sexual partners in last year.
eN/A: not applicable.
fToo few responses for analysis (n<15).
gAccessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA).
h≥28 standard drinks per week.
iSTI: sexually transmissible infection.
In multivariate analyses, among sexually active men, several factors were associated with having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app (
Among sexually active women, most were heterosexual (96.09%, 7838/8158), spoke English at home (96.25%,7852/8158), and lived in urban areas (67.78%, 5530/8158). Furthermore, 28.86% (2355/8158) were aged 16-29 years, 23.45% (1913/8158) were aged 30-39 years, 20.74% (1692/8158) were aged 40-49 years, 17.12% (1397/8158) were aged 50-59 years, and 9.83% (802/8158) were aged 60-69 years. Most sexually active women reported very high (23.16%, 1890/8158]) or high (22.36%, 1824/8158) annual household income compared with middle (17.68%, 1442/8158) or low and very low (16.73%, 1265/8158) annual household income.
Among sexually active women, those aged 16-29 years (2.38%, 55/2355) were most likely to report having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app, and the least likely to report were those aged 60-69 years. Having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app was higher among lesbian and bisexual women than among heterosexual women (5.51% [111/7838] vs 1.42% [18/319]). Women with low and very low annual household income (3.25%, 44/1365) more frequently reported having had sex with someone met using these technologies, compared with women with middle (0.58%, 8/1442), high (0.41% ,7/1824), and very high incomes (0.51%, 10/1890). Those with either an STI test (4.25%, 56/1330) or an STI diagnosis (9.99%, 13/130) in the last year were more likely to report having had sex with someone met online than those who had not had an STI test in the last year (0.89%, 59/6667). Women with 2-3 (13.37%, 59/438) or >3 (25.30%, 37/147) sexual partners in the last year were substantially more likely to report having had sex with someone met online than women with 1 sexual partner (0.44%,33/7574).
Among sexually active women, several factors were associated with having had sex with someone met online (
Sociodemographic and behavioral correlates of having sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app among sexually active women.
Characteristicsa,b | %c (95% CI) in subgroup | %c (95% CI) outcome | Odds ratio (95% CI) | Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI)d | |||||||||
16-29 | 28.86 (26.36-31.51) | 2.38 (1.62-3.38) | 2.34 (1.62-3.38) | .29 | 0.43 (0.21 -0.86) | .02 | |||||||
30-39 | 23.45 (21.39-25.63) | 1.69 (1.04-2.72) | Referent | N/Ae | Referent | N/A | |||||||
40-49 | 20.74 (18.91-22.70) | 1.28 (0.68-2.38) | 0.75 (0.34 - 1.68) | .49 | 1.16 (0.45 - 3.01) | .75 | |||||||
50-59 | 17.12 (15.55-18.82) | 1.07 (0.38-2.98) | 0.63 (0.20-1.99) | .43 | 1.22 (0.36 -4.18) | .75 | |||||||
60-69 | 9.83 (8.65-11.14) | 0.60 (0.13-2.77) | 0.35 (0.07- 1.79) | .21 | 0.66 (0.11 -3.98) | .65 | |||||||
Heterosexual | 96.09 (95.35-96.72) | 1.42 (1.08 - 1.91) | Referent | N/A | Referent | N/A | |||||||
Lesbian, bisexual, or other | 3.91 (3.28-4.65) | 5.51 (3.12- 9.54) | 4.05 (2.09 - 7.84) | <.001 | 2.27 (1.04-4.94) | .04 | |||||||
English only | 96.25 (2.78-5.04) | 0.84 (0.20 - 3.88) | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Other | 3.75 (94.96-97.22) | —f | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Very high | 23.16 (21.15-25.31) | 0.51 (0.25-1.06) | Referent | N/A | Referent | N/A | |||||||
High | 22.36 (20.33-24.54) | 0.41 (0.17-1.00) | 0.79 (0.25 - 2.53) | .69 | 0.86 (0.28 - 2.67) | .80 | |||||||
Middle | 17.68 (15.83-19.69) | 0.58(0.25-1.31) | 1.12 (0.37 - 3.39) | .84 | 1.00 (0.31 - 3.23) | .99 | |||||||
Very low or low | 16.73 (14.95-18.68) |
3.25 (2.05) | 6.49 (2.71-15.55) | <.001 | 3.40 (1.12 - 10.35) | .03 | |||||||
Urban | 67.78 (65.44-70.03) | 1.74 (1.26 - 2.40) | Referent | N/A | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Regional or remote | 30.54 (28.34-32.82) | 1.19 (0.79 - 1.78) | 0.68 (0.40 - 1.14) | .12 | N/A | N/A | |||||||
No | N/A | 1.44 (1.02 - 2.05) | Referent | N/A | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Yes | N/A | 1.82 (1.24 - 2.67) | 1.27 (0.75 - 2.15) | .38 | N/A | N/A | |||||||
No | N/A | 1.57 (1.22 - 2.07) | Referent | N/A | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Yes | N/A | 2.09 (0.64 - 6.76) | 1.34 (0.39 - 4.62) | .65 | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Never smoked or former smoker | N/A | 1.56 (1.18 - 2.12) | Referent | N/A | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Current smoker | N/A | 1.69(1.03 - 2.81) | 1.08 (0.60 - 1.97) | .81 | N/A | N/A | |||||||
No test | N/A | 0.89 (0.59 - 1.36) | Referent | N/A | N/A | N/A | |||||||
STI test | N/A | 4.25 (2.97 - 6.16) | 4.94 (2.79 - 8.77) | <.001 | N/A | N/A | |||||||
STI diagnosis | N/A | 9.99 (4.93 - 19.20) | 12.38 (5.17 - 29.62) | <.001 | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Used condoms | N/A | 3.41 (2.24 -5.15) | 1.06 (0.57-1.96) | .86 | N/A | N/A | |||||||
Did not use | N/A | 3.60 (2.34 -5.48) | Referent | N/A | N/A | N/A | |||||||
1 | N/A | 0.44 (0.22-0.88) | Referent | N/A | Referent | N/A | |||||||
2-3 | N/A | 13.37 (9.93-17.77) | 35.13 (16.12-76.59) | <.001 | 32.01 (13.17-77.78) | <.001 | |||||||
>3 | N/A | 25.30 (17.20 -35.58) | 77.08 (32.75-181.43) | <.001 | 71.03 (27.48 -183.57) | <.001 |
an=8158 (2580), weighted (unweighted) denominators
bIndividuals with missing data are not shown; this was <5% for all variables, except for income and condom use with most recent partner (not available for 42%).
cAll data have been weighted to match the Australian population.
dAdjusted for age group, income, and numbers of sexual partners in the last year.
eN/A: not applicable.
fToo few responses for analysis (n<15).
gAccessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia.
h≥14 standard drinks per week (for women).
iSTI: sexually transmissible infection.
Overall, our findings indicate that in 2012-2013, approximately 1 in 10 Australian adults aged from 16 to 69 years had ever looked for potential partners using websites or smartphone apps, of whom approximately half had done so in the in the last year. Among people who searched in the last year, over half had physically met with someone, and approximately two-thirds of these people had had sex with someone they met online in the last year, equating to 1.95% of the population.
These nationally representative estimates of looking for and having had sex with someone met on website and smartphone apps are lower than those of surveys focusing on specific subpopulations and using convenience-sampling frames, which have reported 6%-40% of the population meeting sexual partners using websites [
In this survey, 15.58% of gay, lesbian, and bisexual respondents reported meeting a sexual partner in the last year. Higher uptake of finding partners using websites among nonheterosexual respondents was also observed in a British population survey [
In general, people who met partners using websites and apps and had sex with them were more likely to engage in higher-risk practices than those who did not—except for condom use at the last sexual event, which was higher among people who met partners online. There was attenuation of the condom use variable in the multivariate analysis, meaning that the association was not significant in the adjusted analysis after controlling for the numbers of sexual partners and other demographic factors. Higher levels of condom use at the last event could reflect condom use with newer and less established partners, with whom STI prevention is prioritized. This explanation seems highly plausible because online tools are often used to facilitate new sexual partnerships and those who report using websites and apps to find sexual partners also report higher numbers of recent sexual partners. However, the finding contrasts with many other studies that tend to find meeting or seeking partners online is linked to condomless sexual intercourse [
In relation to STI history, both STI testing and diagnoses were higher among people who reported meeting partners using websites and smartphone apps and having sex with them. Again, adjusted analysis showed attenuation of STI history for women after adjusting for the number of sexual partners. This implies that women who reported either an STI test or diagnosis in the last year were also more likely to have multiple sexual partners in the last year. The relationship between STI history and meeting partners using websites and apps remained significant for men, even after adjusting for partner numbers and other demographic factors. Interestingly, this pattern has also been seen in the other two population studies with a significant relationship between STIs and searching for or meeting partners on websites and smartphone apps among men, but not among women [
In women, low annual household income was associated with meeting partners on websites and apps. Socioeconomic deprivation has been linked with poor health outcomes, including STI acquisition [
To our knowledge, this is the first study to report the prevalence of having had sex with someone met on a website or a mobile phone app in the past year from a representative survey of the general adult population. One of this study’s strengths is the capacity to assess the proportion of people who used internet dating and apps, met in person, and had sex with someone met online within the same population. Nonetheless, our study also has several limitations to consider when interpreting findings. First, the study was conducted in 2012-2013, and since that time, the technology landscape and behaviors related to the uptake of technology have changed. Very likely, the uptake of dating and hookup apps has substantially increased since the survey was conducted. Second, the sample of homosexual and bisexual men was not sufficiently large to enable analyses focused on this group. Third, all outcomes including STI outcomes were based on self-report, which is susceptible to recall and other reporting biases. Several similar studies have used biological measurement to ascertain STI prevalence, a more robust measure [
Understanding the number and characteristics of people most likely to use these technologies to meet new sexual partners assists organizations responsible for HIV and STI prevention programs in identifying places and populations wherein they can focus their health promotion and testing initiatives. Our study has also demonstrated that although the prevalence of having had sex with someone met on a website or a smartphone app was 3.03% in people aged 20-29 years, it remained at 2.25% in people aged 30-49 years, suggesting the need for promotional material to cover a broad range of ages, not just younger adults. Although STIs are most prevalent in people aged 16-29 years, recent studies have suggested an increased rate in people over 30 years [
Internet and smartphone technologies are a relatively common way of meeting new sexual partners among highly sexually active survey respondents, homosexual and bisexual men, and younger adults, suggesting that the use of in-app health promotion is a feasible approach to targeting these populations [
Prevalence of looking for potential partners on websites or smartphone apps and prevalence of having sex with these partners among males.
Prevalence of looking for potential partners on websites or smartphone apps and prevalence of having sex with these partners among females.
Second Australian Study of Health and Relationships
adjusted odds ratio
sexually transmissible infection
The Australian Study of Health and Relationships was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (project grant number 1002174).
None declared.