Search

People with intellectual disability (ID) are more vulnerable to being victims of sexual abuse (SA) because, in most cases, they are not able to detect the warning signs that abuse could occur. However, there is a lack of appropriate assessment tools to determine their vulnerability. To address this limitation, the current study tests the psychometric properties of the Detection of Sexual Abuse Risk Screening Scale (DSARss), a new scale developed to assess the ability of individuals with mild or moderate ID to detect the risk of SA. In all, 246 individuals with mild or moderate ID (55.3% males) completed the DSARss, along with other scales assessing related dimensions (e.g., psychopathological symptoms, quality of live). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) yielded a four-factor structure explaining 65.34% of the total variance in the DSARss. Two independent EFAs in males and females were also performed to confirm the suitability of this four-factor structure according to gender. The reliability of the total score and subscales ranged between .70 and .93. Likewise, correlations with other related scales were positive and significant. Temporal stability 6 months after the first application was .47. Finally, we explored the criterion-related validity of the DSARss across different SA indicators. These results, along with the absence of sound questionnaires to assess the risk of SA in people with ID, justify the use of the DSARss to assess this construct in both men and women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People with intellectual disability (ID) are more vulnerable to being victims of sexual abuse (SA) because, in most cases, they are not able to detect the warning signs that abuse could occur. However, there is a lack of appropriate assessment tools to determine their vulnerability. To address this limitation, the current study tests the psychometric properties of the Detection of Sexual Abuse Risk Screening Scale (DSARss), a new scale developed to assess the ability of individuals with mild or moderate ID to detect the risk of SA. In all, 246 individuals with mild or moderate ID (55.3% males) completed the DSARss, along with other scales assessing related dimensions (e.g., psychopathological symptoms, quality of live). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) yielded a four-factor structure explaining 65.34% of the total variance in the DSARss. Two independent EFAs in males and females were also performed to confirm the suitability of this four-factor structure according to gender. The reliability of the total score and subscales ranged between .70 and .93. Likewise, correlations with other related scales were positive and significant. Temporal stability 6 months after the first application was .47. Finally, we explored the criterion-related validity of the DSARss across different SA indicators. These results, along with the absence of sound questionnaires to assess the risk of SA in people with ID, justify the use of the DSARss to assess this construct in both men and women.