Search

Effects of mode of assessment, person, and situational variables on the accuracy of self-reports of sexual behavior remain uncertain. To evaluate these influences, 190 young women completed measures of erotophilia and social desirability and then monitored their health-related behaviors with a diary for 8 weeks. They returned on two occasions to complete either a face-to-face interview (FTFI) or a self-administered questionnaire (SAQ) regarding their behavior over the same interval. To check the apparent accuracy of participants' retrospective self-reports, a difference score was calculated by subtracting responses obtained on the FTFI or SAQ from the diary card. Results indicated that both modes of assessment were reliable; reliability did not differ as a function of mode of assessment. However, SAQs elicited less discrepant responses for protected vaginal sex; SAQ and FTFI reports for unprotected sexual behaviors were equivalent. Situational and person variables did not predict accuracy scores, which were impaired at higher frequencies of behavior. Results suggest that both modes of assessment were reliable and SAQs may be more accurate for some sexual behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The trustworthiness of self-reported sexual behavior data has been questioned since Kinsey's pioneering surveys of sexuality in the United States (Kinsey et al., 1948, 1953). In the era of HIV and AIDS, researchers and practitioners have employed a diversity of assessment techniques but they have not escaped the fundamental problem of measurement error. We review the empirical literature produced since Catania et al.'s (1990) review regarding reliability and validity of self-administered and automated questionnaires, face-to-face interviews, telephone interviews, and self-monitoring approaches. We also provide specific recommendations for improving sexual behavior assessment. It is imperative that standardized self-report instruments be developed and used for sexual risk-behavior assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]