Does Question Format Matter in Assessing the Prevalence of Sexual Aggression? A Methodological Study

Figures & data

Table 1. Women’s reports of sexual victimization since age 14 by coercive tactic, victim–perpetrator relationship, type of sexual act, and condition; % (n)

					Coercive Tactic
		Use/Threat of Physical Force			Exploitation of Inability to Resist			Verbal Pressure
Victim-Perpetrator Relationship	Sexual act	Tactic first	Sexual act first	Diff	Tactic first	Sexual act first	Diff	Tactic first	Sexual act first	Diff
(Ex-)Partner	Sexual touch	21.0 (63)	15.3 (48)	5.7	12.6 (38)	14.4 (45)	-1.8	23.6 (71)	22.8 (71)	0.8
	Attempted sex. inter.	17.1 (51)	9.9 (31)	7.2	10.3 (31)	9.2 (29)	1.1	21.3 (64)	13.5 (42)	7.8
	Completed sex. inter.	10.7 (32)	7.7 (24)	3.0	6.0 (18)	8.3 (26)	-2.3	18.0 (54)	11.5 (36)	6.5
	Other (e.g., oral sex)	13.7 (41)	8.3 (26)	5.4	5.3 (16)	6.1 (19)	-0.8	17.9 (54)	14.4 (45)	3.5
Friend/ Acquaintance	Sexual touch	32.5 (98)	15.5 (48)	17.0*	31.5 (94)	28.9 (90)	2.6	21.9 (66)	17.4 (54)	4.5
	Attempted sex. inter.	16.3 (49)	12.5 (39)	3.8	18.1 (54)	18.3 (57)	-0.2	14.6 (44)	14.1 (44)	0.5
	Completed sex. inter.	8.3 (25)	6.1 (19)	2.2	14.0 (42)	13.4 (42)	0.6	8.9 (27)	9.9 (31)	-1.0
	Other (e.g., oral sex)	12.6 (38)	7.7 (24)	4.9	10.0 (30)	12.6 (39)	-2.6	12.0 (36)	11.6 (36)	0.4
Stranger	Sexual touch	42.3(127)	23.1 (72)	19.2*	34.1(102)	28.1 (87)	6.0	19.9 (60)	9.4 (29)	10.5*
	Attempted sex. inter.	9.8 (29)	13.1 (41)	-3.3	10.7 (32)	16.7 (52)	-6.0	8.3 (25)	6.4 (20)	1.9
	Completed sex. inter.	4.4 (13)	4.8 (15)	-0.4	6.7 (20)	8.7 (27)	-2.0	4.7 (14)	2.9 (9)	1.8
	Other (e.g., oral sex)	9.8 (29)	5.8 (18)	4.0	11.0 (33)	8.3 (26)	2.7	5.6 (17)	3.8 (12)	1.8

Note. Diff = difference between the two versions. Multiple responses were possible. Figures in italics denote items below the minimum frequency of n > 20, for which no comparisons were made.

*p < .05 (based on Holm adjustment)

Table 2. Sexual victimization of women and men since age 14 based on scoring proposed by Koss et al. (2007, 2008), % (n)

	Women (n = 616)			Men (n = 605)
	Tactic first (n = 301)	Sexual act first (n = 315)	Diff	Tactic first (n = 275)	Sexual act first (n = 330)	Diff
(0) No victimization	14.3 (43)	24.4 (77)	-10.1*	50.2 (138)	56.1 (185)	-5.9
(1) Nonconsensual sexual contact	23.3 (70)	19.7 (62)	3.6	25.1 (69)	13.6 (45)	11.5*
(2) Sexual coercion	9.0 (27)	9.5 (30)	-0.5	4.7 (13)	7.6 (25)	-2.9
(3) Attempted rape	21.6 (65)	16.2 (51)	5.4	8.4 (23)	8.5 (28)	-0.1
(4) Rape	31.9 (96)	30.2 (95)	1.7	11.6 (32)	14.2 (47)	-2.6

Note. Diff = difference between the two versions. No comparison was made for the sexual coercion category for men because one cell size did not meet the minimum number of > 20 cases.

*p < .05 (based on Holm adjustment).

Table 3. Sexual victimization by sexual experience background since age 14 based on scoring proposed by Koss et al. (2007, 2008), % (n)

	Opposite-sex contacts only (n = 803)			Same‐sex and opposite-sex contacts (n = 316)
	Tactic first (n = 372)	Sexual act first (n = 431)	Diff	Tactic first (n = 162)	Sexual act first (n = 154)	Diff
(0) No victimization	32.5 (121)	44.3 (191)	-11.8*	22.8 (37)	18.8 (29)	4.0
(1) Nonconsensual sexual contact	24.5 (91)	15.3 (66)	9.2*	22.8 (37)	20.1 (31)	2.7
(2) Sexual coercion	7.8 (29)	9.0 (39)	-1.2	6.2 (10)	9.7 (15)	-3.5
(3) Attempted rape	16.7 (62)	12.8 (55)	3.9	14.8 (24)	13.0 (20)	1.8
(4) Rape	18.5 (69)	18.6 (80)	-0.1	33.3 (54)	38.3 (59)	-5.0

Note. Diff = difference between the two versions. No comparisons were made for the sexual coercion and attempted rape categories in the group with both same- and opposite-sex contacts because the overall Chi² test was not significant.

*p < .05 (based on Holm adjustment)

Koss, M. P., Abbey, A., Campbell, R., Cook, S. L., Norris, J., Testa, M., Ullman, S., West, C., & White, J. W. (2007). Revising the SES: A collaborative process to improve assessment of sexual aggression and victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31(4), 357–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00385.x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Koss, M. P., Abbey, A., Campbell, R., Cook, S. L., Norris, J., Testa, M., & White, J. W. (2008). Erratum: Revising the SES: A collaborative process to improve assessment of sexual aggression and victimization. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32(4), 493. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00468.x

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar