Social Dating Goals Scale (Sanderson & Cantor, 1995)

Developmental tasks related to Identity and Intimacy in adolescents and young adults; 13 Items, Adolescents
  • Populations: Adolescents
  • Age ranges: Age not provided, participants described as "High School Students"
  • Languages: English
  • Countries: United States

Items

Item Stem: 

In my dating relationships, I try to

  • Maintain a strong sense of independence
  • Share my most intimate thoughts and feelings
  • Take care of my girl/boyfriend(s)
  • Date those who make my life more comfortable and stable
  • Date people with whom I might fall in love
  • Keep my individual identity
  • Consider my girl/boyfriend(s) my best friend(s)
  • Spend a substantial amount of time with my girl/boyfriend(s)
  • Consistently date someone
  • Determine what I want in a future relationship
  • Focus on possible future plans with my boy/girlfriend(s)
  • Date those whom I can count on
  • Maintain a focus on my other life goals

 

Responses 

Items used a 5 point Liker-type scale, 

  • 1 = Disagree Strongly
  • 2 = Disagree Somewhat
  • 3 = Neutral
  • 4 = Agree Somewhat
  • 5 = Agree Strongly

Scoring

“the final version of the Social Dating Goals Scale (see Appendix) consists of 13 items, with each item rated on a 1 to 5 scale (1 = disagree strongly and 5 = agree strongly). Each item begins “In my dating relationships, I try to . . .” in order to specify that these goals are pursued in social dating (as opposed to in other domains, such as making and maintaining friendships) and that participants are at least attempting to fulfill these goals (regardless of their success in achieving them). This continuous scale is positively keyed to greater intimacy: items assessing identity goals (1,6, 10, 13) are reverse scored and then summed with the items assessing intimacy goals” (Sanderson & Cantor, 1995)

Citations

Sanderson, C. A., & Cantor, N. (1995). Social dating goals in late adolescence: Implications for safer sexual activity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(6), 1121-1134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.6.1121

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

  • Red: 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