Scale for the Assessment of Sexual Standards among Youth (Emmerink et al., 2005)

Endorsement of sexual double standards in heterosexual adolescents and young adults; 19 Items, Ages 16-20
  • Populations: Hetersexual Adolescents & Young Adults
  • Age ranges: 16-20
  • Languages: Dutch
  • Countries: Netherlands

Items

***Items first developed in Dutch, items listed in English for readability for international audience per (Emmerink et al., 2005). English language items not independently validated, translation process not described.

  • Once a boy is sexually aroused, a girl cannot really refuse sex anymore.
  • I think that a girl who takes the initiative in sex is pushy.
  • I think it is more appropriate for a boy than for a girl to date different people at the same time.
  • Girls should act in a more reserved way concerning sex than boys.
  • I think it is more appropriate for a boy than for a girl to have sex without love.
  • A boy should be more knowledgeable about sex than a girl.
  • I think sex is less important for girls than for boys.
  • I think it is normal for boys to take the dominant role in sex.
  • I think sexually explicit talk is more acceptable for a boy than for a girl.
  • Sometimes a boy should apply some pressure to a girl to get what he wants sexually.
  • It is more important for a girl to keep her virginity until marriage than it is for a boy.
  • Boys are more entitled to sexual pleasure than girls.
  • It is not becoming for a girl to have unusual sexual desires.
  • Sex is more important for boys than for girls.
  • It is more important for a girl to look attractive than it is for a boy.
  • Boys and girls want completely different things in sex.
  • I think cheating is to be expected more from boys than from girls.
  • I think it is important for a boy to act as if he is sexually active, even if it is not true.
  • I think it is more appropriate for a boy than for a girl to masturbate frequently.

 

Responses

Items used a 6 item ordinal scale: Completely Disagree, Disagree, Slightly Disagree, Slightly Agree, Agree, Completely Agree

Scoring

“No items are reversed scored and there are no subscales within the measure. The 19 items are averaged to create a total SDS Endorsement score. Higher scores indicate greater endorsement. Sample means range from 2.09 to 2.97 (see Table 1). We tend to find slightly but significantly higher SDS endorsement among men than among women (see Table 1).” (Emmerink et al., 2020)

Citations

Emmerink, P. M. J., van den Eijnden, Regina J. J. M., ter Bogt, Tom F. M., & Vanwesenbeeck, I. (2017). A scale for the assessment of sexual standards among youth: Psychometric properties. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(6), 1699-1709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-1001-x

 

Emmerink, P. M. J., van den Eijnden, Regina J. J. M., ter Bogt, Tom F. M., & Vanwesenbeeck, I. (2020). Scale for the Assessment of Sexual Standards among Youth. In R. R. Milhausen, J. K. Sakaluk, T. D. Fischer, C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures, 4th edition (646-649). Routledge.

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
  • Green: 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

Categories

Start a new search

Loading