Department of Psychology, University of Missouri–St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63121, USA.
J Sex Res. 2013;50(5):458-69. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2011.646393. Epub 2012 Feb 13.
Researchers have worked to refine the measurement of women's experiences with sexual victimization. Less is known about the validity and reliability of measures that assess men's use of sexual coercion and aggression. These studies explore the consistency of men's responses to two distinct, but similar, measures of sexual coercion and aggression. The two measures both assess historical use of verbal coercion, sexual assault involving drugs or alcohol, and sexual assault through threat or force. Study 1 used college men as participants (N = 398), whereas Study 2 used a mixed sample of college and community men (N = 184). In both studies, participants' responses were largely inconsistent across the two measures. This article explores potential measurement issues that may account for the observed reporting discrepancies and offers suggestions for future research.
研究人员一直在努力完善对女性性受害经历的测量。而对于评估男性使用性胁迫和侵犯行为的测量工具的有效性和可靠性,人们了解得较少。这些研究探讨了男性对两种不同但相似的性胁迫和侵犯行为测量工具的反应的一致性。这两种测量工具都评估了言语胁迫的历史使用情况、涉及毒品或酒精的性侵犯以及通过威胁或武力进行的性侵犯。研究 1 以大学生为参与者(N=398),而研究 2 则使用了大学生和社区男性的混合样本(N=184)。在这两项研究中,参与者的反应在两个测量工具上基本不一致。本文探讨了可能导致观察到的报告差异的潜在测量问题,并为未来的研究提供了建议。