School of Social Work, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.
J Sex Res. 2010 Jul;47(4):279-84. doi: 10.1080/00224490903050584.
This study examined the agreement between daily and retrospective reports of vaginal sex over a two-month period in a sample of 376 heterosexually active men and women. We also examined whether gender, age, or method of daily data collection (self-administered vs. interviewer administered) were related to agreement between daily and retrospective reports. Both counts and categorical measures of frequency of the behaviors were examined. There were no gender, age, or data collection method effects. When measured as a count, participants reported more instances of vaginal intercourse in the retrospective reports than on the daily reports. In contrast, comparison of retrospective categorical measures of frequency to daily reports showed considerable variability. Possible reasons for the over-reporting of counts of vaginal sex in retrospective reports are explored.
本研究调查了在 376 名异性活跃的男性和女性样本中,为期两个月的时间内,每日报告和回顾性报告的阴道性行为之间的一致性。我们还研究了性别、年龄或每日数据收集方式(自我管理与访谈管理)是否与每日报告和回顾性报告之间的一致性有关。对行为的频率进行了计数和分类测量。没有性别、年龄或数据收集方法的影响。当作为计数测量时,参与者在回顾性报告中报告的阴道性交次数多于每日报告。相比之下,将回顾性分类频率测量与每日报告进行比较显示出相当大的差异。探讨了回顾性报告中阴道性行为计数过度报告的可能原因。