Men's and Women's Interpretation and Endorsement of Items Measuring Self-Reported Heterosexual Aggression

Abstract

Early research on sexual aggression (e.g., sexual coercion, sexual assault, and rape) mainly focused on men as perpetrators and women as victims; more recently, researchers have begun to investigate women as perpetrators of sexual aggression as well. However, most measures of sexual aggression perpetration were designed for use with men and have not been well validated with women. This study sought to examine two different measures of sexual aggression perpetration in terms of their convergent validity for both men and women and to examine gender differences and similarities in item interpretation using open-ended inquiries. Participants were 590 individuals (395 women, 195 men) with a mean age of 25 years (SD = 8.1) recruited from an undergraduate psychology subject pool and an online convenience sample. The majority of the sample was White (65.4%) and Black (20.3%). All measures were completed online anonymously. Results suggested that convergent validity for the two measures was less than optimal, particularly for women. Further, item interpretation analyses revealed that, compared to men, more than twice the percentage of women provided a false-positive response to one of the measures, suggesting that women may be more likely than men to endorse self-report perpetration items incorrectly.

The authors are grateful to Kristin Carbone-Lopez, Susan Kashubeck-West, and Matthew Taylor for their suggestions and feedback regarding this project. These data were collected as a part of the first author's dissertation while a student at the University of Missouri–Saint Louis.