Validation of the Multidimensional Sexual Communication Questionnaires: A Framework for Assessing Content and Process Domains

IF 2.6 2区社会学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Archives of Sexual Behavior Pub Date : 2026-07-26 DOI:10.1007/s10508-026-03479-1

Kendra S. Wasson, Beáta Bőthe, Natalie O. Rosen, Sophie Bergeron, Uzma S. Rehman

{"title":"Validation of the Multidimensional Sexual Communication Questionnaires: A Framework for Assessing Content and Process Domains","authors":"Kendra S. Wasson, Beáta Bőthe, Natalie O. Rosen, Sophie Bergeron, Uzma S. Rehman","doi":"10.1007/s10508-026-03479-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Existing measures of sexual communication often overlook its multidimensional nature. This study aimed to develop and validate a multidimensional framework for assessing sexual communication through the development and validation of two measures: the Multidimensional Sexual Communication Questionnaire–Sexual Preferences (MSC-SP) and the Multidimensional Sexual Communication Questionnaire–Safer Sex Communication (MSC-SS). Items were generated based on existing literature and validated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses across two online samples (<i>N</i> = 684). Both the MSC-SP and MSC-SS demonstrated strong psychometric properties, including high internal consistency, evidence of convergent and divergent validity, and measurement invariance across multiple identity groups. These findings support the MSC framework as a reliable and adaptable approach for capturing the complexity of sexual communication, specifically, the dynamic interplay between content (what is communicated) and process (how it is communicated).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8327,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Sexual Behavior","volume":"55 5","pages":"2195 - 2220"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Sexual Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-026-03479-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Existing measures of sexual communication often overlook its multidimensional nature. This study aimed to develop and validate a multidimensional framework for assessing sexual communication through the development and validation of two measures: the Multidimensional Sexual Communication Questionnaire–Sexual Preferences (MSC-SP) and the Multidimensional Sexual Communication Questionnaire–Safer Sex Communication (MSC-SS). Items were generated based on existing literature and validated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses across two online samples (N = 684). Both the MSC-SP and MSC-SS demonstrated strong psychometric properties, including high internal consistency, evidence of convergent and divergent validity, and measurement invariance across multiple identity groups. These findings support the MSC framework as a reliable and adaptable approach for capturing the complexity of sexual communication, specifically, the dynamic interplay between content (what is communicated) and process (how it is communicated).

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

多维性交流问卷的验证：评估内容和过程域的框架。

现有的性交流措施往往忽视了它的多维性。本研究旨在通过开发和验证两种测量方法：多维性交流问卷-性偏好（MSC-SP）和多维性交流问卷-安全性交流（MSC-SS），来开发和验证评估性交流的多维框架。项目基于现有文献生成，并在两个在线样本（N = 684）中使用探索性和验证性因素分析进行验证。MSC-SP和MSC-SS均表现出较强的心理测量特性，包括高内部一致性、收敛效度和发散效度的证据，以及跨多个身份群体的测量不变性。这些发现支持MSC框架作为一种可靠且适应性强的方法来捕捉性交流的复杂性，特别是内容（沟通的内容）和过程（沟通的方式）之间的动态相互作用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Archives of Sexual Behavior Multiple-

CiteScore

5.60

自引率

13.20%

发文量

299

期刊介绍： The official publication of the International Academy of Sex Research, the journal is dedicated to the dissemination of information in the field of sexual science, broadly defined. Contributions consist of empirical research (both quantitative and qualitative), theoretical reviews and essays, clinical case reports, letters to the editor, and book reviews.