COHORT DIFFERENCES IN LATE-MIDLIFE SEXUALITY 1 ONLINE SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
Perceived Importance and Enjoyment of Sexuality in Late Midlife:
Cohort Differences in the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA)
Karolina Kolodziejczak1, Johanna Drewelies1, Dorly J. H. Deeg2, Martijn Huisman2,3, & Denis Gerstorf1,4
1Department of Psychology, Humboldt University Berlin, Berlin, Germany
2Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
3Department of Sociology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
4Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, USA
Author Note
Correspondence regarding this manuscript to: Karolina Kolodziejczak, Humboldt University Berlin, Department of Psychology, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany. Phone number:
+49 (030) 2093-9424. Fax: +49 (030) 2093-9351. E-mail: karolina.kolodziejczak@hu-berlin.de.
COHORT DIFFERENCES IN LATE-MIDLIFE SEXUALITY 2
In follow-up analyses, we additionally included data collected in 2002–2003 from 55- to 65-year-old adults (born between 1938–1947) and tested the association between the year of birth as a predictor variable (numeric variable ranging from 1928 to 1957 instead of the categorical cohort variable) and (a) perceived importance and (b) enjoyment of sexuality, respectively.
Results are reported in Table S1. Later year of birth was related to higher ratings of the perceived importance of sexuality, which is consistent with the findings obtained from the analyses using the binary cohort variable, reported in the main text. However, when introducing a quadratic term for year of birth and simultaneously covarying for the socio-demographic, physical health, and psychosocial variables, the quadratic but not the linear effect of year of birth was reliably
different from zero (graphically illustrated in Figure S1). Specifically, an initial historical rise in the importance of sexuality occurred for adults in late midlife born in the 1930s and 1940s, followed by reaching a plateau for those born in the 1950s.
In turn, later year of birth was significantly related to experiencing sexuality as slightly less pleasant only when including into the analysis all other predictors. For the enjoyment of
sexuality, the quadratic term for year of birth as cohort variable was not statistically different from zero and thus omitted in the full model.
COHORT DIFFERENCES IN LATE-MIDLIFE SEXUALITY 3 Table S1
Standardized Betas () From Separate Regression Analyses of Perceived Importance of Sexuality and Enjoyment of Sexuality by Year of Birth and the Correlates Using LASA Cohorts 1, 2, 3
Importance of sexuality Enjoyment of sexuality
Predictors Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
Year of birth .08** .03 –.02 –.05*
Year of birth (quadratic) – –.04* – –
Age – –.06** – –.10**
Men – .28** – .15**
Education – .06** – .02
Salience of religion – –.01 – .05
Multimorbidity – –.01 – –.02
Functional limitations – –.05* – –.08**
Partnered – .19** – .02
Loneliness – –.03 – –.14**
Depressive symptoms – –.01 – –.08**
Perceived constraints – –.07** – –.08**
Men Partnered – –.09** – .04
Education Perceived constr. – .03 – –
Year of birth Men – –.03 – .00
Year of birth Education – .00 – –
Year of birth Partnered – –.03 – .00
Year of birth Perceived constr. – –.01 – –
Year of birth Men Partnered – .05* – –.01
Year of birth Education
Perceived constr. – –.05* – –
Total R2 < .01 .21 < .01 .12
F 17.14** 31.43** 0.75 17.69**
(dfs) (1, 2489) (20, 2440) (1, 2489) (15,1955)
Note. N = 2,490 (N1992–1993 = 711; N2002–2003 = 920; N2012–2013 = 859). Age centered at 60 years; all other predictors grand-mean centered.
*p < .05, **p < .01
COHORT DIFFERENCES IN LATE-MIDLIFE SEXUALITY 4 Figure S1
Associations Between Year of Birth and Perceived Importance (Quadratic Effect; Left-Hand Panel A) and Enjoyment of Sexuality (Linear Effect; Right-Hand Panel B) Among Adults in Late Midlife
(A) Importance of Sexuality (B) Evaluation of Sex Life
Importance of Sexuality (0-5) Enjoyment of Sexuality (0-5)
(A) Importance of Sexuality (B) Enjoyment of Sexuality
Year of Birth Year of Birth
Note. Data were obtained from all three Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA) cohorts of 55- to 65-year-old adults born between 1928 and 1957. For visual presentation, marker size was frequency weighted and confidence intervals (95%) were represented around the regression line.
