Partner Communication Scale

Abstract

The Partner Communication Scale (PCS) is a concise, 5-item psychological instrument designed to quantify the frequency of communication regarding critical sexual topics between an individual and their male sex partner. Originally developed as part of an NIMH-funded intervention grant, the scale focuses specifically on domains essential for sexual health and risk reduction, including pregnancy, STDs, HIV/AIDS, condom use, and partner’s sexual history.

Initial development involved a comprehensive review of empirical literature to define key communication domains, followed by focus groups with the target population—African American adolescent females (aged 14 to 18)—to ensure relevance. The final scale was derived from an initial pool of 36 items, refined through pilot testing for enhanced reading comprehension (requiring a fourth-grade reading level) and validated across three distinct studies (Milhausen et al., 2007). Although validated primarily within this specific demographic, the PCS items are considered broadly applicable across diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds, age groups, and genders, making it a valuable tool for sexual health intervention research.

Keywords

Sexual communication, adolescent females, HIV prevention, STD prevention, condom use, relationship communication, psychometric scale, African American health, sexual health intervention.

Authors

Robin R. Milhausen, Jessica McDermott Sales, Ralph J. DiClemente.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Partner Communication Scale (PCS) is to objectively measure the frequency with which individuals engage in discussions about key sexual health topics with their male sexual partners. This measurement is crucial for evaluating the effectiveness of sexual health and HIV/AIDS prevention interventions, as open communication is a significant predictor of safer sexual behaviors, such as consistent condom use.

The scale was specifically tailored to assess communication frequency concerning five critical domains: prevention of pregnancy, prevention of STDs (Sexually Transmitted Diseases), prevention of HIV/AIDS, proper use of condoms, and discussion of the partner’s sexual history. The brevity and low-literacy requirement of the PCS make it particularly useful for large-scale studies and community-based health education programs targeting vulnerable populations.

Construct

The PCS measures the psychological construct of sexual communication frequency within a partnered relationship. This construct reflects the behavioral aspect of discussing sensitive sexual topics that are directly related to risk reduction and sexual safety, specifically focusing on discussions related to disease prevention and sexual history.

The scale operationalizes sexual communication not as a measure of quality or comfort, but purely as a measure of quantity—how often these key protective conversations occurred over a defined six-month period. This focus on verifiable behavioral frequency makes the PCS an effective outcome measure in intervention studies aimed at increasing assertive and protective communication skills among adolescent females and other at-risk groups.

Validity

The validity of the PCS was established through three validation studies, demonstrating both convergent and discriminant validity in predicted directions (Milhausen et al., 2007). Convergent validity was supported by moderate correlations with several related constructs.

• In Study 1, the PCS correlated positively with frequency of sexual communication with a parent (Sales et al., 2008) and sexual communication self-efficacy (with new partner and boyfriend), with effect sizes deemed moderate (Cohen, 1988).

• Small but significant positive correlations were observed between the PCS and measures of relationship satisfaction and self-esteem. Furthermore, the PCS correlated positively with multiple measures of actual condom use, including use at last vaginal sex, use during the past 30 days, and use over the previous six months, across both steady and nonsteady partners.

• Significant negative correlations were found between the PCS and measures representing barriers to safe sex, such as fear of consequences of condom negotiation and partner-related barriers to condom use (St. Lawrence et al., 1999).

• Discriminant validity was confirmed by the lack of significant correlation between PCS scores and unrelated behavioral measures, such as the frequency of watching movies or television.

Reliability

The reliability of the PCS was assessed using measures of internal consistency and stability (test-retest reliability) across multiple administration points, demonstrating strong internal consistency.

• Internal Consistency: The scale consistently demonstrated high internal consistency across the three validation studies. Cronbach’s alpha values ranged from .80 at baseline (Study 1, N=522) to a high of .90 (Study 2, N=243). Follow-up measurements at 6 and 12 months also maintained high reliability, with alpha values of .87 and .89, respectively (Milhausen et al., 2007).

• Measurement Stability: Stability was assessed using Pearson correlations between administrations separated by 6 and 12 months, aligning with typical intervention study durations (Gliner, Morgan, & Harmon, 2001). Correlations were measured at .44 between baseline and 6-month follow-up (Study 1) and .38 between baseline and 12-month follow-up. The authors noted that these moderate stability correlations might be due to participants potentially referring to different sexual partners at subsequent administration points.

Factor Analysis

While the source content does not provide specific results from a formal factor analysis, the scale development methodology focused heavily on ensuring the measure assessed a single, cohesive construct. The process involved deleting items that were highly correlated or that decreased the overall internal consistency, specifically items that lowered the Cronbach’s alpha below the threshold of .90. This suggests that the final 5-item scale is strongly intended to function as a unidimensional measure of sexual communication frequency.

Instrument

Test Type: Behavioral self-report scale

Format: 5 items using a 4-point Likert-type scale. The scale is brief, typically taking less than 5 minutes to complete.

Language Available: English (Original development language)

Population Group: Individuals in sexual relationships with male partners

Age Group: Adolescents (14–18 years) and applicable to older age groups

Population Details: Originally validated on samples of African American adolescent females. The scale is self-administered and suitable for low-literate samples, requiring approximately a fourth-grade reading level. It is suggested to be broadly applicable to other demographic groups, including males.

Test Methodology: Respondents answer based on the frequency of discussion with their sex partner during the preceding six months. The response options are coded 0 (Never), 1 (Sometimes, 1–3 Times), 2 (Often, 4–6 Times), and 3 (A Lot, 7 or More Times). Scores are summed, ranging from 0 to 15, with higher scores indicating more frequent sexual communication.

Keywords

Sexual communication frequency, risk behavior, psychometrics, intervention efficacy, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, adolescent sexuality, relationship satisfaction.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected] (Robin R. Milhausen)

Correspondence Address: Robin R. Milhausen, Department of Family Relations and Applied Nutrition, Room 217 MINS Building, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1, Canada.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The scale was validated and published in 2007 (Milhausen et al.). The authors generally permit academic use of the PCS and request that researchers inform the corresponding author, Robin R. Milhausen, about the results obtained with the measure.

Reference’s

• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

• Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & Harmon, J. J. (2001). Measurement reliability. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 4, 486–488.

• Milhausen, R. R., Sales, J. M., Wingood, G. M., DiClemente, R. J., Salazar, L. F., & Crosby, R. A. (2007). Validation of a partner communication scale for use in HIV/AIDS prevention interventions. Journal of HIV/AIDS Prevention in Children and Youth, 8, 11–33.

• Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

• Rosenberg, M. (1989). Society and the adolescent self-image (Rev. ed.). Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.

• Sales, J. M., Milhausen, R. R., Wingood, G. M., DiClemente, R. J., Salazar, L. F., & Crosby, R. A. (2008). Validation of a parent-adolescent communication scale for use in STD/HIV prevention interventions. Health Education and Behavior, 35, 332–345.

• St. Lawrence, J. S., Chapdelaine, A. P., Devieux, J. G., O’Bannon, R. E., III, Brasfield, T. L., & Eldridge, G. D. (1999). Measuring perceived barriers to condom use: Psychometric evaluation of the Condom Barriers Scale. Assessment, 6, 391–404.

Items of the Partner Communication Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

The scale stem is: “During the past six months, how many times have you and your sex partner discussed . . .”