Peer Sexual Cybervictimization (Sánchez, Munoz-Fernández, & Vega-Gea, 2017)
- Populations: Children, Adolescents
- Age ranges: 12-16
- Languages: Spanish
- Countries: Spain
Items
Subscales:
- Abiguous Sexual Cybervictimization
- Personal Sexual Cybervictimization
Items by Subscale
Abiguous Sexual Cybervictimization
- Made sexual comments, jokes or gestures towards you on your social networking profile or via WhatsApp
- Shown, given or left you sexual pictures, photographs or remarks
- Written you sexual messages or shown sexual drawings
- Talked about sex with you over the Internet
Personal Sexual Cybervictimization
- Made jokes or spread false rumours about your sexual behaviours on your social networking profile or via WhatsApp
- Called you a queer, lesbian, prostitute, homosexual etc. on your social networking profile or via WhatsApp.
- Shown you their behind or other parts of the body via photos.
- Hinted or asked that you send photos of a naked part of your body.
- Sent or shown you a personal photo of a provocative nature or showing a part of the body.
Responses
Items used a 5 point Likert-type scale, 0 = Never, 4 = Daily
Scoring
Not Reported
Citations
Sánchez, V., Muñoz-Fernández, N., & Vega-Gea, E. (2017). Peer sexual cybervictimization in adolescents: Development and validation of a scale. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 17(2), 171-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2017.04.001
Scoring breakdown
Measure development
- Significant design input from young people
- Cognitive interviews with young people
- Expert input
Validity
- Unknown: Face validity
- Green: Convergent validity
- Green: Construct validity
Reliability
- Green: Internal consistency
- Unknown: Test-retest
Ease of use
- Unknown: Readability
Definitions
Face validity: How well a measure appears to represent the construct it is supposed to be measuring.
Convergent validity: How well a measure correlates with other hypothetically-related measures.
Construct validity: The extent to which a measure reflects the construct it was designed to evaluate.
Internal consistency: The extent to which items in a scale capture aspects of the same construct.
Test-retest: The degree to which measurement scores are consistent over a short period of time (usually 2 weeks).
Readability: The ease with which a reader can understand the questionnaire items.
Key
- Green: Meets validation criteria
- Red: Does not meet validation criteria
- Unknown: Evidence not available
