Suppr超能文献

在评估年轻女性性行为方面,自我填写问卷与面对面访谈的比较

Self-administered questionnaires versus face-to-face interviews in assessing sexual behavior in young women.

作者信息

Durant L E, Carey M P

机构信息

Center for Health and Behavior, Syracuse University, NY, USA.

出版信息

Arch Sex Behav. 2000 Aug;29(4):309-22. doi: 10.1023/a:1001930202526.

Abstract

Effects of mode of assessment, person, and situational variables on the accuracy of self-reports of sexual behavior remain uncertain. To evaluate these influences, 190 young women completed measures of erotophilia and social desirability and then monitored their health-related behaviors with a diary for 8 weeks. They returned on two occasions to complete either a face-to-face interview (FTFI) or a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) regarding their behavior over the same interval. To check the apparent accuracy of participants' retrospective self-reports, a difference score was calculated by subtracting responses obtained on the FTFI or SAQ from the diary card. Results indicated that both modes of assessment were reliable; reliability did not differ as a function of mode of assessment. However, SAQs elicited less discrepant responses for protected vaginal sex; SAQ and FTFI reports for unprotected sexual behaviors were equivalent. Situational and person variables did not predict accuracy scores, which were impaired at higher frequencies of behavior. Results suggest that both modes of assessment were reliable and SAQs may be more accurate for some sexual behaviors.

摘要

评估方式、个体及情境变量对性行为自我报告准确性的影响仍不明确。为评估这些影响,190名年轻女性完成了对性爱的喜爱程度和社会期望性的测量,然后用日记记录她们与健康相关的行为,持续8周。她们分两次返回,就同一时间段内的行为完成一次面对面访谈(FTFI)或一份自填式问卷(SAQ)。为检验参与者回顾性自我报告的表面准确性,通过用日记卡上的回答减去在FTFI或SAQ上获得的回答来计算差异分数。结果表明,两种评估方式都是可靠的;可靠性并不因评估方式而异。然而,SAQ对有保护措施的阴道性行为引出的不一致回答较少;SAQ和FTFI对无保护措施性行为的报告相当。情境和个体变量无法预测准确性分数,行为频率较高时准确性分数会受损。结果表明,两种评估方式都是可靠的,并且SAQ对某些性行为可能更准确。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验