Sexual Experiences Survey (Cecil & Matson, 2006)
- Populations: African American Adolescent Females
- Age ranges: 14-19
- Languages: English
- Countries: United States
Items
Items as presented in Koss & Oros (1982)
- Had sexual intercourse with a man (woman) when you both wanted to?
- Had a man (woman) misinterpret the level of sexual intimacy you desired?
- Been in a situation where a man (you) became so sexually aroused that you felt it was useless to stop him even though you did not want to have sexual intercourse? (could not stop yourself even though the woman didn’t want to?)
- Had sexual intercourse with a man (woman) even though you (she) didn’t really want to because he (you) threatened to end your
relationship otherwise? - Had sexual intercourse with a man (woman) when you (she) didn’t really want to because you (she) felt pressured by his (your) continual arguments?
- Found out that a man had obtained sexual intercourse with you by saying things he didn’t really mean? (Obtained sexual intercourse by saying things you didn’t really mean?)
- Been in a situation where a man (you) used some degree of physical force (twisting your [her] arm, holding you [her] down, etc.) to try to make you (a woman) engage in kissing or petting when you (she) didn’t want to?
- Been in a situation where a man (you) tried to get sexual intercourse with you (a woman) when you (she) didn’t want to by threatening to use physical force (twisting your [her] arm, holding you [her] down, etc.) if you (she) didn’t cooperate, but for various reasons sexual intercourse did not occur?
- Been in a situation where a man (you) used some degree of physical force (twisting your [her] arm, holding you [her] down, etc.) to try to get you (a woman) to have sexual intercourse with him (you) when you (she) didn’t want to, but for various reasons sexual intercourse did not occur?
- Had sexual intercourse with a man (woman) when you (she) didn’t want to because he (you) threatened to use physical force (twisting your [her] arm, holding you [her] down, etc.) if you (she) didn’t cooperate?
- Had sexual intercourse with a man (woman) when you (she) didn’t want to because he (you) used some degree of physical force (twisting your [her] arm, holding you [her] down, etc.)?
- Been in a situation where a man (you) obtained sexual acts with you (a woman) such as anal or oral intercourse when you (she) didn’t want to by using threats or physical force (twisting your [her] arm, holding you [her] down, etc.)?
- Have you ever been raped? (women only)
Responses:
Responses were binary either endorsing or not endorsing an event as sexual victimization
Scoring
“Responses are coded as 1 to indicate endorsing the statement as representing sexual victimization. A total summary score was developed to test the psychometric properties of the instrument, which is in accordance with Koss and Gidycz (1985). Participants scores ranged from 0 to 11. M 2.44, SD 2.60” (Cecil & Matson, 2006)
Citations
Cecil, H., & Matson, S. C. (2006). Sexual Victimization Among African American Adolescent Females: Examination of the Reliability and Validity of the Sexual Experiences Survey. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21(1), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260505281606
Koss, M. P., & Gidycz, C. A. (1985). Sexual Experiences Survey: Reliability and validity. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53, 422-423
Koss, M. P., & Oros, C. J. (1982). Sexual Experiences Survey: A research instrument investigating sexual aggression and victimization. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 455-457
Scoring breakdown
Measure development
- Significant design input from young people
- Cognitive interviews with young people
- Expert input
Validity
- Unknown: Face validity
- Green: Convergent validity
- Unknown: 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