Reiss Extramarital Sexual Permissiveness Scale

Abstract

The Reiss Extramarital Sexual Permissiveness Scale (RESPS) is a concise, four-item instrument developed by Ira L. Reiss to quantify an individual’s degree of acceptance of extramarital sexual permissiveness. The scale is structured around four culturally relevant scenarios that combine two crucial dimensions of an extramarital relationship: the primary motivation (either love or physical pleasure) and the perceived attitude of the primary partner (mate acceptance or mate rejection). By assessing attitudes across these four relationship types, the scale provides a nuanced measure of permissive attitudes. Researchers typically administer the scale twice—once under the assumption of a happy marriage and once assuming an unhappy marriage—to assess the critical role of marital happiness in shaping sexual attitudes.

Keywords

Extramarital sexual permissiveness, Marital infidelity, Sexual attitudes, Marital happiness, Extradyadic relationships, Guttman scaling, Sexual behavior, Sociology of sex.

Authors

Ira L. Reiss

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Reiss Extramarital Sexual Permissiveness Scale is to measure the extent to which individuals accept extramarital coitus for themselves across varying relational and emotional contexts. The scale is designed to isolate the impact of situational factors—specifically, the emotional context of the affair (love-centered vs. pleasure-centered) and the knowledge/approval of the spouse—on overall permissive attitudes.

A secondary, but critical, methodological purpose of the scale is to measure the impact of marital satisfaction on sexual norms. By asking respondents (both married and unmarried) to complete the four items under two distinct hypothetical conditions—a happy marriage and an unhappy marriage—researchers can quantify the importance of internal relationship quality as a powerful predictor of permissive attitudes, allowing for a comparative analysis of responses.

Construct

The scale measures the psychological construct of Extramarital Sexual Permissiveness, which is the acceptance or rejection of sexual involvement outside of a primary marital relationship. This construct is operationalized through four distinct scenarios, derived from the combination of two core dichotomies:

• Focus of the Extramarital Relationship: Whether the relationship is primarily focused on physical pleasure or emotional love.
• Mate’s Attitude: Whether the primary partner (mate) accepts or rejects the extramarital involvement.

These two aspects yield four unique types of extramarital relationships, allowing the researcher to classify and measure the degree of acceptance across these variables, often correlating the results with gender and various demographic factors. The scale can also be adapted to measure Extradyadic Sexual Permissiveness by changing “marriage” to “committed relationship,” thereby allowing for the study of cohabitation and other intimate dyadic arrangements.

Validity

The validity of the scale has been extensively tested using nationally representative samples. Ira L. Reiss and colleagues analyzed four different national samples collected across different years by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) to identify the strongest predictors of extramarital sexual permissiveness.

Results from these studies consistently supported the scale’s ability to measure the construct, confirming that three factors have a direct impact on extramarital attitudes: educational level, attitude toward premarital sexuality, and level of marital happiness. Furthermore, construct validity was supported by finding expected differences in scale scores between key demographic groups, such as men versus women and religiously devout versus nondevout groups. Other researchers have also utilized and confirmed the relevance of the scale’s core dimensions (pleasure/love and mate acceptance/rejection) in measuring extramarital acceptance.

Reliability

Reliability for the Reiss Extramarital Sexual Permissiveness Scale is established through its adherence to specific non-parametric scaling standards. The scale has consistently met the general Guttman criteria, which are foundational for cumulative scales in sociology and psychology.

Specifically, the scale’s reliability is confirmed by successfully meeting the required standards concerning the coefficient of reproducibility and the coefficient of scalability. This demonstrates that the items form a cumulative hierarchy, meaning that accepting a more permissive item generally implies acceptance of less permissive items.

Factor Analysis

While the scale itself is a short, cumulative measure often analyzed via Guttman scaling rather than traditional factor analysis (EFA/CFA), the structure is inherently based on the combination of two underlying factors (Love/Pleasure and Mate Acceptance/Rejection) which define the four scenarios. Extensive research using the scale has focused on identifying external factors that powerfully predict the resulting scores. The primary predictors consistently identified across multiple national samples include the respondent’s educational level, their attitude toward premarital sexuality, and their self-reported level of marital happiness.

Instrument

Test Type: Attitude Scale / Self-Report Inventory

Format: 4 items, administered twice (under happy and unhappy marriage conditions). Each item uses a 4-point response category.

Language Available: English (Original)

Population Group: Adults (Married and Unmarried)

Age Group: Adult (No specific age range provided, but targeting individuals capable of marriage/committed relationships).

Population Details: Validated on four different nationally representative samples conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC).

Test Methodology: The respondent answers the four questions twice, once assuming a happy marriage and once assuming an unhappy marriage. Response categories are: (a) Definitely, (b) Probably, (c) Unlikely, (d) Never. For scoring purposes, the responses are typically dichotomized, with “Definitely” or “Probably” counted as an affirmative response (1 point), and “Unlikely” or “Never” counted as a rejecting response (0 points). The score for each condition (happy/unhappy) ranges from 0 to 4. Researchers may also ask married couples to compare scores and assess equalitarian attitudes regarding mutual permissiveness. The entire administration takes approximately 5 to 6 minutes.

Keywords

Extramarital coitus, Permissiveness, Guttman criteria, Coefficient of reproducibility, Construct validity, Sexual norms, Relationship dynamics.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided.

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected]

Correspondence Address: Ira L. Reiss, 5932 Medicine Lake Road, Minneapolis, MN 55422

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: The author, Ira L. Reiss, grants permission for the use of this scale in any research study, requesting only that researchers keep him informed of such use and the resulting findings.

Fee: No fee is specified for research use (implied free use with notification).

Test Year: Primary validation and research occurred around 1980 (Reiss, Anderson, & Sponaugle, 1980), with continued use and validation thereafter.

Reference’s

• Banfield, S., & McCabe, M. P. (2001). Extra relationship involvement among women: Are they different from men? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 30, 119–142.

• Buunk, B. P., & Bakker, A. B. (1995). Extradyadic sex: The role of descriptive and injunctive norms. The Journal of Sex Research, 32, 313–318. Glass, S. P., & Wright, T. L. (1992). Justifications for extramarital relationships: The association between attitudes, behaviors, and gender. The Journal of Sex Research, 29, 361–387.

• Hansen, G. L. (1987). Extradyadic relations during courtship. The Journal of Sex Research, 23, 382–390.

• Reiss, I. L. (2006). An insider’s view of sexual science since Kinsey. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

• Reiss, I. L., Anderson, R., & Sponaugle, G. C. (1980). A multivariate model of the determinants of extramarital sexual permissiveness. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 395–411.

• Reiss, I. L., & Miller, B. C. (1979). Heterosexual permissiveness: A theoretical analysis. In W. Burr, R. Hill, I. Nye and I. L. Reiss (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family (Vol. 1, pp. 55–100). New York: Free Press.

• Saunders, J. M., & Edwards, J. N. (1984). Extramarital sexuality: A predictive model of permissive attitudes. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 825–835.

• Sponaugle, G. C. (1993). A study of attitudes toward extramarital relations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

• Treas, J., & Giesen, D. (2000). Sexual infidelity among married and cohabiting Americans. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 48–60.

• Weis, D. L., & Jurich, J. (1985). Size of community of residence as a predictor of attitudes toward extramarital sexual relations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 173–178.

• Weis, D. L., & Slosnerick, M. (1981). Attitudes toward sexual and non sexual extramarital involvements among a sample of college students. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 349–358.

Items of the Reiss Extramarital Sexual Permissiveness Scale

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

Answer in terms of your personal values concerning what you would accept in your marriage under the conditions stated. If you are not currently married, answer in terms of a possible future marriage.

1. Would you accept extramarital sexual intercourse in which physical pleasure is your focus even though your mate would not accept your having such a relationship?

   1. Definitely b) Probably c) Unlikely d) Never

2. Would you accept extramarital sexual intercourse in which physical pleasure is your focus if your mate would accept your having this type of relationship?

   1. Definitely b) Probably c) Unlikely d) Never

3. Would you accept extramarital sexual intercourse in which love is emphasized even though your mate would not accept your having such a relationship?‌

   1. Definitely b) Probably c) Unlikely d) Never

4. Would you accept extramarital sexual intercourse in which love is emphasized if your mate would accept your having this type of relationship?

   a. Definitely b) Probably c) Unlikely d) Never

Note. Ask the single people to assume they are in a happy marriage when answering these four questions and then give them these same four questions again and ask them to assume they are in an unhappy marriage. Also ask married people to answer these questions twice—once for being in a happy marriage and once for being in an unhappy marriage. At the end, for married people, you should ask if in their own marriage they feel they are closer to a happy marriage or closer to an unhappy marriage.