Sexual Attitudes Scale and Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale

Abstract

The Sexual Attitudes Scale (SAS), developed by Susan S. Hendrick and Clyde Hendrick in 1987, was created to broaden the assessment of sexual attitudes. Moving beyond a sole reliance on sexual permissiveness, the SAS adopted a comprehensive and multidimensional approach. The scale was designed to assess attitudes generically, applicable across various relationship statuses, including marital, premarital, and nonmarital couples. Initial work involved item generation and reduction via Principal Components Analysis (PCA), resulting in a 43-item instrument across four orthogonal factors: Permissiveness, Sexual Practices, Communion, and Sexual Instrumentality.

Over two decades of widespread use, minor shifts in the factor structure and changes in language usage necessitated a revision. This led to the creation of the 23-item Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale (BSAS; Hendrick, Hendrick, & Reich, 2006). The BSAS maintains a four-factor structure (Permissiveness, Birth Control, Communion, and Instrumentality) and offers greater practicality for research and clinical settings, demonstrating superior fit indices in Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) compared to the original SAS.

Keywords

Sexual attitudes, Sexual Permissiveness, Sexual Communion, Sexual Instrumentality, Sexual Practices, Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale, SAS, BSAS, psychometrics, relationship assessment, Principal Components Analysis.

Authors

Susan S. Hendrick, Clyde Hendrick, David A. Reich.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Sexual Attitudes Scale (SAS) was to establish a psychometrically sound measure that provided a multidimensional view of sexual attitudes. This design was intended to complement existing measures by capturing the complexity of sexual orientations—including attitudes toward casual sex, responsibility, idealism, and biological function—rather than just focusing on permissiveness.

The subsequent Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale (BSAS) served to update the measurement in response to evolving societal norms and observed shifts in the scale’s factor structure across different cohorts and languages. The BSAS aimed to retain the core conceptual dimensions of the SAS while increasing efficiency and practicality through a shorter, 23-item format.

Construct

Both the SAS (43 items) and the BSAS (23 items) measure sexual attitudes across four relatively independent dimensions. These dimensions represent distinct psychological orientations toward sexuality:

• Permissiveness: Measures attitudes reflecting openness toward casual sex, non-commitment, and multiple partners. (SAS: 21 items; BSAS: 10 items)

• Sexual Practices / Birth Control: In the SAS, this factor assessed responsible and tolerant attitudes toward various sexual behaviors (e.g., birth control and masturbation). In the BSAS, this factor was refined and narrowed to focus specifically on Birth Control as a measure of responsible sexuality. (SAS: 7 items; BSAS: 3 items)

• Communion: Defines sex as an idealistic, profound, or “peak experience,” emphasizing emotional intimacy, communication, and the merging of two individuals. (SAS: 9 items; BSAS: 5 items)

• Sexual Instrumentality: Reflects a view of sex as a natural, biological activity primarily focused on physical release, self-gratification, and enjoyment. (SAS: 6 items; BSAS: 5 items)

Validity

Initial criterion validity for the SAS (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1987) was established through significant correlations with external measures, notably the Reiss Male and Female Sexual Permissiveness Scales and the Revised Mosher Guilt Inventory. This demonstrated that the SAS measured constructs aligned with established concepts of sexual behavior and affect.

Further construct validity was provided by consistent findings regarding gender differences, with men endorsing more permissive and instrumental attitudes than women. Relating sexual attitudes to love attitudes using the Love Attitudes Scale, Permissiveness was positively associated with game-playing love and negatively associated with friendship, practical, and altruistic love styles. Communion positively correlated with passionate, possessive, and altruistic love. The BSAS maintained similar correlations with love attitudes and relationship satisfaction, demonstrating its effectiveness as a shortened measure.

The SAS and BSAS have been used in a wide variety of studies exploring topics such as relationship infidelity, sexual assault, religious influences on sexuality, and online dating behavior, further supporting their external validity across diverse research applications.

Reliability

Reliability for the SAS, measured by internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), showed strong results, ranging from .71 for Sexual Practices to .94 for Permissiveness in Study I. Test-retest correlations (Study I) ranged from .66 (Instrumentality) to .88 (Permissiveness). Low intersubscale correlations (e.g., r = .00 between Permissiveness and Sexual Practices, up to r = .44 between Permissiveness and Instrumentality) supported the relative independence of the four orientations.

The BSAS exhibited strong reliability. Alphas for the BSAS subscales were high: .95 for Permissiveness, .88 for Birth Control, .73 for Communion, and .77 for Instrumentality. Test-retest reliability demonstrated high stability, including .92 for Permissiveness and .86 for Communion, confirming the BSAS as a robust and consistent measure of sexual attitudes.

Factor Analysis

The development of the 43-item SAS was based on extensive Principal Components Analysis (PCA) employing Varimax rotation across a large sample of university students. This resulted in the retention of four orthogonal factors: Permissiveness, Sexual Practices, Communion, and Sexual Instrumentality (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1987).

The subsequent development of the BSAS (Hendrick et al., 2006) was driven by observations of slight shifts in the factor structure over time (e.g., Le Gall et al., 2002). The BSAS refinement utilized both PCA and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). The CFA indices for the 23-item BSAS demonstrated a significantly better model fit than the original SAS, confirming the stability and appropriateness of the revised four-factor structure (Permissiveness, Birth Control, Communion, and Instrumentality). Key CFA fit indices for the BSAS included a Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) of .98 and a Comparative Fit Index (CFI) of .99.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychological scale measuring multidimensional sexual attitudes.

Format: The scale uses a 5-point Likert format, where respondents rate their degree of agreement with statements.

Language Available: English (original), with reported translations into a variety of other languages due to its wide usage.

Population Group: Appropriate for partnered couples of all types whose relationships include a sexual component, as well as general adult populations.

Age Group: Typically used with university students and adults.

Population Details: Initial validation studies included nearly 1,400 university students from Florida and Texas. The scale is designed for generic assessment of sexual attitudes.

Test Methodology: Items are rated on a 5-point scale: 1 = strongly agree, 2 = moderately agree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = moderately disagree, and 5 = strongly disagree. Scoring involves calculating mean scores for each subscale by totaling item scores and dividing by the number of items. A total scale score is not recommended due to the independence of the subscales. The SAS generally takes 10 minutes or less to complete, while the BSAS takes 5–10 minutes.

Keywords

Psychological assessment, sexology, relationship quality, attitude measurement, Permissiveness, Communion, Instrumentality, factor structure, test-retest reliability, Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected] (Susan S. Hendrick)

Correspondence Address: Susan S. Hendrick, Department of Psychology, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409–2051.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Sexual Attitudes Scale (SAS, 1987) and the Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale (BSAS, 2006) are in the public domain and are available free of charge for research and clinical utilization.

Reference’s

• Abbey, A., Parkhill, M. R., Clinton-Sherrod, A. M., & Zawacki, T. (2007). A comparison of men who committed different types of sexual assault in a community sample. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 1567– 1580.

• Cann, A., Mangum, J. L., & Wells, M. (2001). Distress in response to relationship infidelity: The roles of gender and attitudes about relationships. The Journal of Sex Research, 38, 185–190.

• Evans, L., & Wertheim, E. H. (1998). Intimacy patterns and relationship satisfaction of women with eating problems and the mediating effects of depression, trait anxiety, and social anxiety. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 44, 355–365.

• Green, S. E., & Mosher, D. L. (1985). A causal model of sexual arousal to erotic fantasies. The Journal of Sex Research, 21, 1–23.

• Grey, I. M., & Swain, R. B. (1996). Sexual and religious attitudes of Irish students. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 17, 213–227.

• Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. S. (1986). A theory and method of love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 392–402.

• Hendrick, C., Hendrick, S. S., & Reich, D. A. (2006). The Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale. The Journal of Sex Research, 43, 76–86.

• Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (1987). Multidimensionality of sexual attitudes. The Journal of Sex Research, 23, 502–526.

• Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (1995). Gender differences and similarities in sex and love. Personal Relationships, 2, 55–65.

• Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (2006). Measuring respect in close relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 881– 899.

• Hendrick, S. S., Hendrick, C., Slapion-Foote, M. J., & Foote, F. H. (1985). Gender differences in sexual attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1630–1642.

• Le Gall, A, Mullet, E., & Shafighi, S. R. (2002). Age, religious beliefs, and sexual attitudes. The Journal of Sex Research, 39, 207–216.

• Murray, K. M., Ciarrocchi, J. W., & Murray-Swank, N. A. (2007). Spirituality, religiosity, shame and guilt as predictors of sexual attitudes and experiences. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 35, 222–234.

• Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2007). Who looks for casual dates on the internet? A test of the compensation and the recreation hypotheses. New Media & Society, 9, 455–474.

• Rathus, S. A., Nevid, J. S., & Fichner-Rathus, L. (2007). Human sexuality in a world of diversity (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

• Reiss, I. L. (1967). The social context of premarital sexual permissiveness. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

• Shafer, A. B. (2001). The Big Five and sexuality trait terms as predictors of relationships and sex. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 313–338.

Items of the Sexual Attitudes Scale and Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale

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

Listed below are several statements that reflect different attitudes about sex. For each statement fill in the response on the answer sheet that indicates how much you agree or disagree with that statement. Some of the items refer to a specific sexual relationship, while others refer to general attitudes and beliefs about sex. Whenever possible, answer the questions with your current partner in mind. If you are not currently dating anyone, answer the questions with your most recent partner in mind. If you have never had a sexual relationship, answer in terms of what you think your responses would most likely be.

For each statement:

A = Strongly Agree with the Statement

B = Moderately Agree with the Statement

C = Neutral—Neither Agree nor Disagree

D = Moderately Disagree with the Statement

E = Strongly Disagree with the Statement

1. I do not need to be committed to a person to have sex with him/her.

2. Casual sex is acceptable.

3. I would like to have sex with many partners.

4. One-night stands are sometimes very enjoyable.

5. It is okay to have ongoing sexual relationships with more than one person at a time.

6. It is okay to manipulate someone into having sex as long as no future promises are made.

7. Sex as a simple exchange of favors is okay if both people agree to it.

8. The best sex is with no strings attached.

9. Life would have fewer problems if people could have sex more freely.

10. It is possible to enjoy sex with a person and not like that person very much.

11. Sex is more fun with someone you don’t love.

12. It is all right to pressure someone into having sex. P Extensive premarital sexual experience is fine.

13. Premarital affairs are all right as long as one’s partner doesn’t know about them. P Sex for its own sake is perfectly all right.

14. I would feel comfortable having intercourse with my partner in the presence of other people. P Prostitution is acceptable.

15. It is okay for sex to be just good physical release.

16. Sex without love is meaningless.

17. People should at least be friends before they have sex together. P In order for sex to be good, it must also be meaningful.

18. Birth control is part of responsible sexuality.

19. A woman should share responsibility for birth control.

20. A man should share responsibility for birth control.

21. Sex education is important for young people.

22. Using “sex toys” during lovemaking is acceptable. SP Masturbation is all right.

23. Masturbating one’s partner during intercourse can increase the pleasure of sex. C Sex gets better as a relationship progresses.

24. Sex is the closest form of communication between two people.

25. A sexual encounter between two people deeply in love is the ultimate human interaction.

26. Orgasm is the greatest experience in the world.

27. At its best, sex seems to be the merging of two souls.

28. Sex is a very important part of life.

29. Sex is usually an intensive, almost overwhelming experience.

30. During sexual intercourse, intense awareness of the partner is the best frame of mind. C Sex is fundamentally good.

31. Sex is best when you let yourself go and focus on your own pleasure.

32. Sex is primarily the taking of pleasure from another person.

33. The main purpose of sex is to enjoy oneself.

34. Sex is primarily physical.

35. Sex is primarily a bodily function, like eating.

36. Sex is mostly a game between males and females.

Note: Items included in the original SAS have a letter denoting their subscale (P = Permissiveness; SP = Sexual Practices; C = Communion; I = Instrumentality) and are not individually numbered in the full list. The BSAS items are numbered sequentially from 1 to 23 (Items 1–10 = Permissiveness; 11–13 = Birth Control; 14–18 = Communion; 19–23 = Instrumentality).