Sexually Assertive Behavior Scale

Abstract

The Sexually Assertive Behavior Scale (SABS) is a 19-item self-report instrument developed by Peter B. Anderson and Maria Newton to comprehensively assess women’s behaviors and associated motives regarding the initiation of sexual contact with men. The scale is designed to capture a wide spectrum of behaviors, ranging from mutually consensual initiation to potentially coercive or aggressive tactics. The SABS is structured around six distinct factors: Sexual Arousal, Hidden Motives, Verbal Pressure, Retaliation or Gain, Physical Force, and Exploitation. The scale utilizes a frequency count response mode, asking respondents “How many times have you…” engaged in specific behaviors, a methodology adapted from the interviewing style of Kinsey, Pomeroy, and Martin (1948). The scale has undergone revisions since its introduction, but the original SABS remains recognized as the most parsimonious measure for assessing female sexual aggression toward men.

Keywords

Sexually Assertive Behavior Scale, SABS, female sexual initiation, sexual aggression, sexual coercion, psychometric scale, Hidden Motives, Sexual Experiences Survey, Peter B. Anderson, Maria Newton.

Authors

Peter B. Anderson, Maria Newton

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Sexually Assertive Behavior Scale (SABS) is to systematically measure the frequency of various behaviors and underlying motives employed by women when initiating sexual contact with men. Unlike scales focused solely on male aggression or female victimization, the SABS was specifically created to assess the active role women play in initiating sexual encounters, encompassing both consensual and non-consensual (coercive or aggressive) contexts.

The scale was developed partially through the adaptation of items from the established Sexual Experiences Survey (SES), originally focused on male aggression. By adapting these items and adding new ones generated by expert panels, the SABS successfully broadened the scope of inquiry to include tactics such as verbal pressure, exploitation of vulnerability, and the use of physical force by women.

Construct

The SABS measures the multifaceted construct of female sexual assertiveness and aggression through 19 items grouped into six empirically derived factors:

• Sexual Arousal (Factor 1): This factor relates to mutually consenting sexual contact and genuine attempts by the woman to arouse her partner, representing benign or positive sexual initiation.
• Hidden Motives (Factor 2): Items in this factor assess initiation driven by ulterior relational motives, such as attempting to make a primary partner jealous, causing emotional pain to a partner, or intentionally seeking to terminate a relationship.
• Verbal Pressure (Factor 3): This factor captures the use of verbally persuasive tactics or arguments employed to initiate sexual contact.
• Retaliation or Gain (Factor 4): This subscale measures initiation motivated by anger, a desire to retaliate against a partner for a perceived wrong, or initiating contact specifically to gain favor or better one’s situation.
• Physical Force (Factor 5): This factor focuses on the most overt forms of aggression, specifying the threat and/or actual use of physical force during attempted sexual contact.
• Exploitation (Factor 6): Items in this factor relate to initiating sexual contact by taking advantage of the partner’s vulnerability, such as when the partner’s judgment is impaired by drugs or alcohol, or when the partner is in a compromising position.

Validity

The validity of the Sexually Assertive Behavior Scale was established through a rigorous, multi-stage process prior to and following its initial publication. The scale was reviewed for both face validity and content validity, ensuring that the items appeared relevant and covered the intended domain of female sexual initiation behaviors.

The instrument underwent pretesting and pilot testing, and was formally reviewed twice by a panel of experts specializing in sexual aggression to achieve consensual validation (Anderson, 1990). Furthermore, construct validity, specifically concerning the scale’s underlying dimensional structure, was supported through robust factor analyses conducted by Anderson and Newton (1997), confirming the existence of the six hypothesized factors.

Reliability

The internal consistency reliability of the SABS subscales was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients (Anderson & Newton, 1997). Results indicated varying levels of reliability across the six factors:

• The Hidden Motives subscale demonstrated satisfactory reliability with an alpha coefficient of .75.
• Subscales for Sexual Arousal (alpha = .64), Retaliation or Gain (alpha = .56), and Verbal Pressure (alpha = .61) yielded marginally acceptable internal consistency.
• The Physical Force subscale, which contained only two items, showed an alpha of .58.
• The Exploitation subscale yielded low reliability (alpha = .43), suggesting that scores derived from this factor should be interpreted with significant caution.

Factor Analysis

The structural integrity of the SABS was confirmed through factor analyses (Anderson & Newton, 1997), which supported the proposed six-factor model. These factors, which define the distinct facets of female sexual initiation and potential aggression, are utilized for subscale scoring. The six factors and their corresponding item assignments are:

• Sexual Arousal: Items 1–5
• Hidden Motives: Items 9–11
• Verbal Pressure: Items 6–8
• Retaliation or Gain: Items 12–14
• Physical Force: Items 18–19
• Exploitation: Items 15–17

Instrument

Test Type: Psychometric Self-Report Questionnaire

Format: 19 items using frequency counts (How many times have you…?). The typical completion time is approximately 5 minutes.

Language Available: English (Original)

Population Group: Women (specifically assessing behaviors initiating contact with men)

Age Group: Adult (Primarily tested among university women in subsequent studies)

Population Details: The scale focuses on heterosexual contact and behaviors, particularly those related to assertive or aggressive initiation of sexual activity.

Test Methodology: Respondents write in the actual frequency count for each question. Although frequency counts are elicited, the standard scoring procedure involves transforming these into dichotomous scores (0 = no experience; 1 = engaged in the behavior one or more times). Alternative scoring methods, such as creating response distributions and subdividing them into quartiles, are also possible.

Keywords

SABS, female sexual assertiveness, sexual behavior, psychometrics, Cronbach’s alpha, validity, reliability, factor analysis, sexual coercion.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected] (Peter B. Anderson)

Correspondence Address: Peter B. Anderson, School of Counseling and Social Services, Walden University, 155 Fifth Ave. South, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The initial conceptualization and data presentation for the scale occurred in 1990 (Anderson, 1990), with the formal factor analysis and psychometric validation published in 1997 (Anderson & Newton). Subsequent versions and applications have been used by the principal authors and others (Anderson, Kontos, & Struckman-Johnson, 2008). Information regarding current permissions or usage fees is not detailed in the source material, but use for academic research is common.

Reference’s

Anderson, P. B. (1990, November). Aggressive sexual behavior by females: Incidence, correlates, and implications. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Anderson, P. B., Kontos, A. P., & Struckman-Johnson, C. (2008). Relationships between college women’s responses to the multidimensional sexuality questionnaire and the heterosexual contact scale. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, 11. http://www.ejhs.org/volume11/anderson.htm

Anderson, P. B., Kontos, A. P., Tanigoshi, H., & Struckman-Johnson, C. (2005). A comparison of sexual strategies used by urban southern and rural midwestern university women. The Journal of Sex Research, 42, 335–341.

Anderson, P., & Newton, M. (1997). The Initiating Heterosexual Contact Scale: A factor analysis. Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment, 9, 179–186.

Kinsey, A., Pomeroy W., & Martin, C. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: Saunders.

Koss, M., & Gidycz, C. (1985). Sexual Experiences Survey: Reliability and validity. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53, 422–423.

Koss, M., & Oros, C. (1982). Sexual Experiences Survey: A research instrument investigating sexual aggression and victimization. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 50, 455–457.

Items of the Sexually Assertive Behavior Scale

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

This portion of the questionnaire is an attempt to discover some of the behavior that you employ in your sexual activities. Sexual contact is defined as fondling, kissing, petting, or intercourse. There are no right or wrong answers to the questions. Please answer as honestly as you can.

1. How many times have you had sexual contact (fondling, kissing, petting, or intercourse) with a man when you both wanted to?
2. How many times have you initiated sexual contact (fondling, kissing, petting, or intercourse) with a man?
3. In initiating sexual contact with a man, how many times have you overestimated the level of sexual activity he desired to have with you?
4. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man because you were so sexually aroused you did not want to stop?
5. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man by getting him sexually aroused?
6. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact (fondling, kissing, petting, or intercourse) with a man by threatening to end your relationship?
7. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man by saying things that you didn’t mean?
8. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man by pressuring him with verbal arguments?
9. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man in order to make another man jealous?
10. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man in order to get even with or hurt another man?
11. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man in order to end a relationship with another man?
12. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man in a position of power or authority over you (boss, teacher, or supervisor) in order to better your situation or gain something?
13. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man because you were angry at him?
14. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man to retaliate for something he did to you?
15. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact (fondling, kissing, petting, or intercourse) with a man to gain power or control over him?
16. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man while his judgment was impaired by drugs or alcohol?
17. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man by taking advantage of a compromising position he was in (being where he did not belong or breaking some rule)?
18. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man by threatening to use some degree of physical force (hold- ing him down, hitting him, etc.)?
19. How many times have you attempted to have sexual contact with a man by using some degree of physical force?