The Use of Couple Data to Determine the Reliability of Self-Reported Sexual Behavior - Statistical Data Included

Journal of Sex Research, Nov, 1999 by Eric P. Ochs, Yitzchak M. Binik

Cultural norms and ethical principles make it highly unlikely that human sexual behavior will ever be studied by direct observation of a representative sample of the general population. As a result, much sex research involves the use of questionnaires and interviews to obtain retrospective participant self-reports of the relevant behaviors. Recently, Lewontin (1995a, 1995b) has criticized the reliance on such data, and has argued that because sexual behavior is not value neutral, individuals will be motivated to lie, both to themselves and to their interviewers. Indeed, it is disturbing to find significant discrepancies in men's and women's reports of the number of their sexual partners (cf. Morris, 1993; Phillis & Gromko, 1985) and in the reporting of participation in oral-genital and anal-genital sexual behavior (Johnson, & Wadsworth, 1994; Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994; Wellings, Field, Messiah, Blin, Fiche, & ACSF group, 1995). For example, the Laumann et al. (1994) data show that for the most recent session more men than women reported anal sex (2.3% vs. 1.2%). Discrepancies like this may be due to a lack of participant honesty (Lewontin, 1995a), the limitations inherent in any retrospective reporting of behavior (Bradburn, Rips, & Shevell, 1987; Downey, Ryan, Roffman, & Kulich, 1995; Wheeler & Reis, 1991), or other systematic differences in how likely men and women are to report specific behaviors (Laumann et al., 1994). Whatever the reasons may be, the feasibility of a scientific basis for the study of sexual behavior is thrown into serious question if highly reliable data cannot be collected. Determining the reliability and validity of self-report data is, therefore, a major concern for all researchers in this area.

A variety of strategies and techniques have been developed to improve the reliability of self-reported sexual behavior (Catania, 1999; Catania, Binson, Van Der Straten, & Stone, 1995; Catania, Gibson, Chitwood, & Coates, 1990; Coates et al., 1986; Coates et al., 1988; Gribble, Miller, Rogers, & Turner, 1999; James, Bignell, & Gillies, 1991; Udry, 1980; Udry & Morris, 1967; Williams, Suen, & Baffi, 1993; Zimmerman & Langer, 1995); however, insufficient attention has been paid to assessing the sexual partner's reports. Purely practical and logistical considerations (e.g., contacting sexual partners would double the number of participants in a study) may be partly responsible for the relative paucity of analyses based on the sexual behavior reporting of both partners. Determining the appropriate methodology to follow in the analysis of the resultant data sets poses yet another challenge. It has been argued that partner based reporting does not "provide information on the validity of self-reported sexual events, ... [and they] still need to be validated against some objective index" (Catania et al., 1995, p. 84). Catania emphasizes the importance of assessing respondent influences on measurement error, test-retest indices, self-presentation bias, and so on. We agree that these factors represent important influences on report reliability, and thus have implications for validity as well. A careful analysis of couple-based self-reports would provide unique reliability data, as well as clarifying whether systematic dishonesty of the kind described by Lewontin (1995a) contributes to report discrepancies.

An early attempt at assessing the reliability of sexual behavior reports made by Kinsey (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948) revealed high correlations (Pearson's r = .61 -.93) in lifetime incidence statistics for a selection of eight foreplay behaviors and seven intercourse positions reported by 231 pairs of spouses. These participants' responses to very general questions (e.g., "Male above in coitus, has ever occurred": Yes/No) represent a modest starting point in assessing the reliability of reporting sexual behavior. More complex analyses of partner report data have only recently begun to appear (Julien, Bouchard, Gagnon, & Pomerleau, 1992; Seal, 1997). In addition, the onset of the AIDS crisis has encouraged systematic efforts to contact homosexual partners and thereby obtain comprehensive couple-based data on sexual behavior (e.g. Catania et al., 1995; Seage, Mayer, Horsburgh, Cai, & Lamb, 1992). Despite these studies, most research tends to limit its focus to overly simple constructs, such as the frequency of sexual intercourse (Call, Sprecher, & Schwartz, 1995; Clark & Wallin, 1964; Edwards & Booth, 1976; Levinger, 1970; Rao & DeMaris, 1995), or investigates only a very small set of behaviors (James et al., 1991; Seal, 1997; Upchurch et al., 1991). Participants are also typically asked to retrospect over four weeks, a period of time which limits the level of detail that can be obtained about sexual behavior (Coates et al., 1986; Edwards & Booth, 1976; Rao & DeMaris, 1995; Udry, 1980). Some researchers have used one partner's positive report of sexual activity to infer that this activity occurred even when the other partner did not report it or denied it (Call et al., 1995; Rao & DeMaris, 1995).