Scale of Myths about Sexuality (Guerra et al., 2018)

Acceptance or rejection of myths regarding sexual matters in adolescents; 27 Items / 2-8 Item subscales, Age M = 15.07
  • Populations: Adolescents
  • Age ranges: M = 15.07, SD = 1.20
  • Languages: Spanish, English
  • Countries: Spain

Items

Subscales

  • Intolerance, 8 Items
  • Romantic Love, 6 Items
  • Sexist Myths, 6 Items
  • Generational Myths, 5 Items
  • Contraception, 4 Items
  • Pregnancy, 2 Items

Items / examples not reported, subscale descriptions reported as:

  • Intolerance
    • intolerance for sexualities
  • Romantic Love
    • the concept of love most deeply entrenched in our society 
  • Sexist Myths
    • double standards and ambivalent sexism still present in our population
  • Generational Myths
    • myths transmitted in socialization and the education of a generation
  • Contraception
    • correct knowledge of contraceptive methods and the rejection of false ideas that negate safe sex
  • Pregnancy
    • knowing how it really occurs and what are the risk behaviors that can lead to it

 

Responses

Items used a 5-point Likert-type scale, where 1 indicated ‘‘strongly disagree’’, 2 ‘‘disagree’’, 3  ‘’neutral’’, 4 ‘‘agree’’ and 5 ‘‘strongly agree’’

Scoring

“The correction is made by adding all the scores for the items. The total scores will range from 27 (less adherence to myths) to 135 (greater adherence to sexual myths), that occurs when adding each of the scores. Where at a lower score, adolescents have fewer myths and the ideas they have are more true.”

Citations

Guerra, C., Del Río, F. J., Cabello, F., & Morales, I. M. (2019). Creation and validation of a scale of sexuality for adolescents: Scale of myths about sexuality. Revista Internacional De Andrologia, 17(4), 123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.androl.2018.06.001

Scoring breakdown

Measure development

  • Significant design input from young people
  • Cognitive interviews with young people
  • Expert input

Validity

  • Green: Face validity
  • Unknown: 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

Categories

Start a new search

Loading