See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/346207965

Development of Sexual Orientation Scale

Article  in  Journal of Psychosexual Health · October 2020

DOI: 10.1177/2631831820939807

CITATIONS READS
0 671

2 authors:

Sagayaraj Kanagaraj C. N. Ram Gopal

Chettinad Hospital & Research Institute Chettinad Hospital & Research Institute
17 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS    22 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Autism and Emotions View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sagayaraj Kanagaraj on 10 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Original Article

Development of Sexual Orientation Scale Journal of Psychosexual Health

2(3-4) 224–232, 2020
© 2020 Karnataka Sexual Sciences Academy
Reprints and permissions:
in.sagepub.com/journals-permissions-india
DOI: 10.1177/2631831820939807
journals.sagepub.com/home/ssh

K. Sagayaraj1 and C. N. Ram Gopal1

Abstract
Background: Sexual orientation is a continuing amorous pattern of attraction toward the opposite sex (heterosexual),
same sex (homosexual), or both sexes (bisexual) or it is lack of sexual desire toward anyone (asexual). Psychosocial and
biological explanations regarding the development of an individual’s sexual orientation are related to life incidents, parenting
patterns, psychological attributes of the individual, or may also be related to an imbalance in sex hormones. There is no
strong evidence-based scientific research revealing the exact causes for one’s sexual orientation for it is not static but
dynamic in nature.
Aim: The purpose of the study is to develop a psychological assessment scale which identifies an individual’s sexual orientation,
particularly when he/she denies to reveal his/her sexual preference in the marital life.
Methodology: A tool with 32 items was developed by conducting focus group discussion, interviewing the experts in
the relevant fields and reviewing the literature. Test-retest and split half reliability were established with Cronbach’s alpha
to analyze the internal consistency. Both logical-based validity (face, content, and focus group) and empirical-based validity
(criterion, concurrent, convergent, and divergent) were established. These methodologies were standardized by a sample of
506 participants (217 males and 289 females) between the age range of 18 and 50 years.
Results: The test-retest reliability was found to be r = 0.96, Spearman-Brown and Guttman split half reliability was 0.73, and
Cronbach’s alpha ranged from (α) 0.71 to 0.88.
Implications: This scale would be beneficial for premarital counselors and mental health professionals to understand the
sexual orientation of their clients explicitly.

Keywords
Asexual, bisexual, heterosexual, homosexual, LGBTQ, sexual orientation

Introduction and Background different from gender identity. Gender identity is defined as a
personal impression of oneself as a male or female. It can be
The term orientation is widely referred as having relation the same as the sex assigned at birth or it can differ from it. It
with something or with someone. Sexual orientation is said to is not completely identified that why somebody may be
be the continuing amorous pattern of attraction toward the lesbian, gay, straight, or bisexual;2-4 however, analysis does
opposite sex or same sex or to both sexes. The psychological show that sexual orientation can be probably caused by
and social aspects on these pattern of attractions are majorly biological factors.5 Coleman proposed that one’s sexual
categorized under heterosexuality (attraction toward opposite
sex), homosexuality (attraction toward same sex), bisexuality 1
Counseling Psychology, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Chettinad
(attraction toward both sex), and asexuality (lack of sexual Academy of Research and Education, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
attraction to anyone) by the American Psychological
Corresponding author:
Association, 2008.1 Sexual orientation is about the following: K. Sagayaraj, Counseling Psychology, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Chettinad
with whom you are attracted to and toward whom you feel Academy of Research and Education, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 603103, India.
drawn to romantically, emotionally, and sexually. It is E-mail: [email protected]

Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-
NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-Commercial use, reproduction
and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages
(https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
Sagayaraj and Gopal 225

orientation is primarily determined by the objects of one’s preliminary 45 items scale was sent to 22 different university
sexual fantasies and desires.6 After a decade of research in professors, research scholars, and psychology graduates in
human sexual behavior, Alfred Kinsey quoted that there have India for content analysis and feedback. Their suggestions
not been sufficient answers to the questions regarding human and modification were noted for further development of the
sexual behavior and orientation that itself is represented as scale. Focus group validity was established by conducting a
one of the least explored segments of biology, psychology, focus group discussion with various experts in the sexual
and sociology.7 In his research, Alfred had also developed the medicine field.
heterosexual-homosexual rating scale which later influenced
the multidimensional scale of sexuality,8 sell-assessment of
sexual orientation,9 and Klein sexual orientation grid.10 These Selection of Items
scales are in the form of direct questions, are easily predictable, After the logical-based validation, the items were cut down
and applicable in the Western context. Hence, developing a from 45 to 32 items and principal component analysis
new standardized scale which is suitable and relevant in the computation was done. As a rule of thumb any item with the
Asia Pacific context, specifically for Indian culture, is much extraction value of above 0.5 could be included in the final
needed in the sexual medicine field. scale. The extraction values for the developed scale ranged
In diverse countries like India, it had been considered from 0.501 to 0.900 and also no 2 items had similar correlation;
that lesbian, gay, and bisexual are taboo subjects in the civil hence, all the 32 items were included for the final assessment.
society. There is no official data available for lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ) population in India;
however, the administration of India submitted figures to the Sampling Technique
Supreme Court in 2012, as indicated by which, there were
Convenient sampling method was opted for the study, to
about 2.5 million gay individuals recorded in India. These
figures are just founded on those people who have self- collect the required samples. The participants were selected
proclaimed to the Ministry of Health.11 International human across India by the willingness and voluntary consent to the
rights law indicates that all human beings are persons before study. The corresponding author collected hard copy of
the law, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender samples in and around Chennai and soft copy of data was
identity, entitled to freedoms deriving from the inherent collected by using Google forms from major cities such as
dignity of the human person (universal declaration of human Pondicherry, Cochin, Bangalore, Mysore, Hyderabad,
rights; article 26 of the ICCPR).12 Mumbai, and Delhi-NCR. A formal telephonic discussion
To annihilate the myths and misconceptions about sexual was made for the further clarification on the study.
orientation in India, it is important to have evidence-based
research in the sexual orientation which is lacking in the Sample Selection Criteria
area of psychological assessment. Hence, the purpose of the
study is to develop the psychological assessment scale which To standardize the scale in the Indian context, the following
identifies the individual sexual orientation, especially when inclusion and exclusion criteria were followed.
they deny to reveal their sexual preference in the marital life.
It will be useful in the field of sexual medicine and marital Inclusion Criteria
counseling for proper diagnosis and further management. It
Both males and females with age between 18 and 50 years,
will assess an individual’s predominate sexual orientation in
who could speak and write in English, were included.
the aspects of being heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, and
asexual. The aim of the study is to develop a psychological
Exclusion Criteria
scale to identify the sexual orientation of the individual and
statistically standardize the reliability and validity of the Transgenders, people aged below 18 years and who could not
developed sexual orientation scale. understand English were excluded.

Methodology Sample Description

A sample of 506 participants from all over India took part in
Research Design
this study. The age of the participants ranged from 18 to 50
Scale validation research design was adopted for this study. years. Out of 506 participants, 217 were males and 289 were
females. For all samples, the minimum educational level
ranged from high school or post high school to maximum of
Development of Scale doctor of philosophy level. Age, gender, educational
The scale items were developed by reviewing the supportive qualification, and current relationship status were the major
literature and existing scales in the Western context. The demographic details collected for the study.
226 Journal of Psychosexual Health 2(3-4)

Administration 21, 26; (b) Homosexual: 1, 5, 10, 13, 18, 22, 25; (c) Bisexual:
3, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27; (d) Asexual: 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28.
The participants who took part in this study were from For part II, item numbers 29, 30, 31, 32 scoring need to
different workplaces such as colleges, universities, and be done, as done for the male population. By adding part I and
corporate offices. They were approached individually and in part II scores together the final score can be calculated.
group form. An introduction about the background and need For Item numbers 29, 30, 31, 32, sexual orientation
for the study were addressed by the researcher. Also, details dimensions as follows: (a) Option A indicates homosexual;
regarding voluntary participation and the right to withdraw (b) Option B indicates heterosexual; (c) Option C indicates
from the study were informed. Anonymity and confidentiality bisexual; (d) Option D indicates asexual.
were assured for all the participants. After building the rapport The maximum possible score for each dimension is as
the instructions were given. follows: Heterosexual, 29; Homosexual, 37; Bisexual, 45;
Asexual, 53.
Ethical Considerations
As sexual orientation is a sensitive topic which may create Statistical Analysis
misunderstanding of the study, the researcher ensured about Descriptive statistics was used to find out the mean (M),
giving the introduction including explanations of the standard deviation (SD) of the data; Pearson’s correlation was
procedures involved and its corresponding benefits to the used to find out the relationships between the variables;
society. The participants were included in the study after Cronbach’s alpha was used to test the internal consistency of
obtaining informed consent from them. This research study the tool; principal component analysis was done to find out
was approved with modifications suggested by Institutional the factors that emerge out of the variables; and independent
Human Ethics Committee of Chettinad Academy of Research t test was used to find out the significant difference in
and Education, Kelambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. demographic variables.

Scoring Statistical Validation

The scoring procedure for Sexual Orientation Scale is very
objective and separate scoring pattern strictly needs to be
Reliability
followed for both males and females for an accurate 1. Test-Retest Reliability: The developed scale was
evaluation. A higher score in the particular dimension administered on group of 40 people (20 males and
indicates the ultimate sexual orientation of the subject. 20 females) with age ranging from 20 to 30 in the
time period of 20 days of interval. By computing the
Pearson correlation coefficient between the test and
Scoring for Males retest results, it was found to be as r = 0.945 which is
From item numbers 1 to 28 (part I) are Likert types which are highly correlated and dependable.
rated in 4-point scale as follows: Always, 3; Sometimes, 2; 2. Cronbach’s Alpha: This scale was developed in
Rarely, 1; Never, 0. a unique way to assess the male and female sexual
The respective dimensions for male participants for part orientation in 4 different dimensions (heterosexual,
1 scoring as follows: (a) Heterosexual: 1, 5, 10, 13, 18, 22, 25; homosexual, bisexual, and asexual). The items in
(b) Homosexual: 2, 6, 9, 14, 17, 21, 26; (c) Bisexual: 3, 7, 11, one particular dimension will not measure similar to
15, 19, 23, 27; (d) Asexual: 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28. the other dimensions in any form; hence, dimension-
For part II, item numbers 29, 30, 31, 32 need to be scored wise detailed Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure
as option A, 4; option B, 2; option C, 6; and option D, 8. the internal consistency of the overall scale. The value
By adding part I and part II scores together the final ranged from 0.71 to 0.88 and indicated that all the
score can be calculated to identify the predominate sexual items were found to be highly reliable dimension-wise.
orientation of the subject. Hence, all the items were included (refer to Table 1).

Table 1. Item-Wise Cronbach’s Alpha Value (506 Samples: 217

Scoring for Female Males and 289 Females)

From item numbers 1 to 28 (part I) are Likert types which are Cronbach’s
rated in 4-point scale as follows: Always, 3; Sometimes, 2; S. No. Dimensions No. of Items Alpha
Rarely, 1; Never, 0. 1 Male heterosexual 7 0.77
The respective dimensions for female participants for 2 Male homosexual 7 0.88
part 1 scoring are as follows: (a) Heterosexual: 2, 6, 9, 14, 17, (Table 1 Continued)
Sagayaraj and Gopal 227

(Table 1 Continued) (Table 3 Continued)

Cronbach’s Initial Extraction
S. No. Dimensions No. of Items Alpha Q 10 1.000 0.904
3 Male bisexual 7 0.82 Q 11 1.000 0.501
4 Male asexual 7 0.76 Q 12 1.000 0.671
5 Female hetero- 7 0.72 Q 13 1.000 0.585
sexual
Q 14 1.000 0.669
6 Female homosexual 7 0.80
Q 15 1.000 0.599
7 Female bisexual 7 0.78
Q 16 1.000 0.718
8 Female asexual 7 0.71 Q 17 1.000 0.823
9 Gender preference 4 0.72 Q 18 1.000 0.759
(part II) Q 19 1.000 0.521
Q 20 1.000 0.605
3. Split Half Reliability: The Spearman-Brown and Q 21 1.000 0.601
Guttman split half coefficient was found to be 0.73 Q 22 1.000 0.900
to 0.73. Thus, the reliability of the tool was valid Q 23 1.000 0.666
once again. The 32 items were equally split into 2 Q 24 1.000 0.757
halves and the equal length value was found to be Q 25 1.000 0.606
0.73 (Table 2). Q 26 1.000 0.512
Table 3 shows the extraction value of each item, using Q 27 1.000 0.594
principal component analysis. As per statistical computation, Q 28 1.000 0.673
any item with the extraction value above 0.5 could be Q 29 1.000 0.628
included. Since the extraction values ranges from 0.501 to Q 30 1.000 0.662
0.900 and also no 2 items have similar correlation, all the Q 31 1.000 0.620
items were included for a final assessment. Q 32 1.000 0.681

Table 2. Split Half Reliability of 506 Participants P < 0.05

Table 4 indicates rotated component matrix of the items.
Part 1 No. of items 16 Each emerged value as per the highest relevance and factors
Part 2 No. of items 16 is as follows:
Total no. of items 32 1. Life partner choice: Q 22, Q 10, Q 9, Q 18, Q 17, Q
Spearman-Brown Equal length 0.73 14, Q 21, Q 13 (total no. of items 8).
coefficient 2. Sexual comfort: Q 26, Q 5, Q 25, Q 1 (total no. of
Unequal length 0.73 items 4).
Guttman split half 0.73 3. Sexual desire: Q 6, Q 2, Q 7, Q15 (total no. of
coefficient items4).
4. Socially preferred partner: Q 23, Q 3, Q 19, Q 11
(total no. of items 4).
Table 3. Extraction Value of Individual Items 5. Sexual opinion: Q 8, Q 20, Q 4, Q 12 (total no. of
items 4).
Initial Extraction
6. Physical intimacy: Q 16, Q 28, Q 24, Q 27 (total no.
Q1 1.000 0.621 of items 4).
Q2 1.000 0.686
The title of the each emerged dimensions was assigned by the
Q3 1.000 0.634 researcher based on the item relevance as the scale was
Q4 1.000 0.524 developed with the review of literature, recent trends, cultural
Q5 1.000 0.800 changes, and experts’ opinions.
Q6 1.000 0.765
Q7 1.000 0.654 Validity
Q8 1.000 0.612 Scale validation is the degree to which the scores generated
Q9 1.000 0.872 by the instrument accurately measure the purpose of the
(Table 3 Continued) assessment. In psychology, a scientifically validated scale
228 Journal of Psychosexual Health 2(3-4)

Table 4. Rotated Component Matrix (N = 506)

Q. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6
Q 22 –0.678 0.611 0.078 –0.014 0.139 0.154
Q 10 –0.666 0.636 0.074 –0.009 0.128 0.144
Q9 0.641 –0.637 0.039 –0.040 –0.166 –0.131
Q 18 –0.594 0.562 0.203 –0.054 0.073 0.161
Q 17 0.583 –0.562 0.201 –0.121 –0.188 –0.120
Q 14 0.579 –0.331 0.313 –0.173 –0.237 –0.025
Q 21 0.570 –0.488 0.142 –0.003 –0.076 0.004
Q 13 –0.551 0.087 0.319 –0.079 0.014 0.161
Q 26 0.076 –0.526 0.087 0.231 –0.397 0.045
Q5 –0.135 0.653 0.159 0.058 0.065 0.187
Q 25 –0.204 0.607 0.202 0.013 0.282 0.184
Q1 –0.431 0.576 0.267 0.029 0.025 0.130
Q6 0.560 –0.375 0.732 –0.087 –0.186 –0.144
Q2 0.487 –0.222 0.722 –0.145 –0.289 –0.045
Q7 –0.243 –0.022 0.641 0.086 –0.100 0.060
Q 15 0.154 0.027 0.575 –0.164 –0.131 0.004
Q 23 0.196 0.254 0.149 –0.673 –0.048 0.058
Q3 0.080 0.291 0.215 0.647 0.070 0.034
Q 19 –0.061 –0.223 0.641 0.503 0.014 0.202
Q 11 –0.202 –0.222 0.575 0.647 0.122 0.203
Q8 –0.015 0.121 –0.035 0.503 –0.624 –0.050
Q 20 –0.117 –0.089 0.166 0.087 0.576 –0.172
Q4 0.211 0.112 –0.101 0.047 0.457 –0.034
Q 12 –0.163 –0.454 0.127 0.060 0.787 0.230
Q 16 0.143 –0.117 0.004 0.137 0.624 0.416
Q 28 0.036 0.075 –0.033 0.049 0.132 –0.516
Q 24 0.002 –0.007 0.034 0.134 0.062 –0.859
Q 27 0.317 0.317 0.425 0.031 0.081 0.449

Note: Extraction method: Principal component analysis; Rotation method: Equamax with Kaiser normalization.

justifies the measured outcome which will be used for 2. Content Validity
betterment of individuals. The validation of the sexual Content validity is a form of validation that measures all
orientation scale was done by logical and empirical based the facts that need to be addressed in a particular administration.
(Figure 1) methods proposed by Cronbach and Meehl in the A 45 items scale was developed on sexual orientation and was
year 1955.13 given out to 22 different colleges and universities across India.
1. Face Validity Comments, suggestions, and feedback were collected from
The sexual orientation 32 items scale’s face validity graduates, postgraduates, research scholars, and professors
was found to be good. The participants found it easy to from psychology and psychiatric social work background. It
comprehend and respond. The words and sentences have was also circulated to 5 different institutionalized counseling
been made it in a simple way to benefit even the moderately psychologists and special educators. From the obtained
educated people. The scale items can be applicable to urban, responses, a modified version of the scale with 32 items was
semi-urban, and rural lifestyle of the population. developed, which also had high reliability.
Sagayaraj and Gopal 229

correlated with the developed 32 items sexual

orientation scale. The test-retest reliability found
to be as 0.94, indicating convergent validation.
b. 
Divergent Validity (the tests items that are not
supposed to be related)
The developed 32 items sexual orientation
scale’s divergent validity is established by
comparing the existing sexual identity scale with
the one developed by Stern et al.14 By using the
Campbell and Fiske15 test validity technique on
discriminant (divergent) validity, the average
interitem correlations between the 2 scales were
analyzed and the result obtained was 0.53 which
is less than 0.85, the accepted ratio, and hence,
we can conclude that divergent validity exists
between the sexual orientation scale and the
sexual identity scale. These 2 scales theoretically
Figure 1.  Shows the Validity Established for the Developed Scale measure different constructs.

3. Focus Group Validity Table 5 shows the comparison of the gender difference in the
Focus group validation involves people who are required 4 dimensions. The heterosexual and homosexual dimensions
to be unfamiliar with each other and from a homogeneous were found to be significantly different between male and
population, with whom a social-orientated procedure is female population at 0.01 confidence level. The bisexual and
conducted and further evaluated for qualitative research. asexual dimensions were found to be nonsignificant at 0.01
Along with the team of 10 panel experts from the fields of confidence level.
clinical, counseling, marital, and corporate psychological
services, external view-based focus group validation was
done. The session lasted for about 150 min. The influencing Discussion
modern trends, social factors, cultural changes, individual
freedom of choices, and related topics were covered and There are many scales available to assess one’s sexual
key points were noted down and modified accordingly in the disorder but very few notable tools exist to assess sexual
32-item tool. orientation in the Western context. Sexual orientation is a
4. Criterion Validity (Concurrent Validity) culture-related concept and hence developing and
Concurrent validity is an evidence-based method that
confirms the existing outcome. It is demonstrated when Table 5. Comparison Between Male and Female Samples (Males
the results of the current outcome correlate well with the 217, Females 289)
previously measured outcome. A group of 15 people who were
found to be heterosexual were administrated with the Kinsey Mean SD df t-Value
scale (1948)7 and all individuals were found to be exclusively Heterosexual
or predominantly heterosexual. The same population was Male 23.2 4.26 216 5.45**
assessed by using the 32 items sexual orientation scale and
Female 20.9 4.91 287
found to have heterosexual orientation. The results were well
correlated with the existing results, and hence, evidence- Homosexual
based validation was obtained. Male 2.6 4.51 216 2.84**
5. Construct Validity Female 3.8 4.37 287
a.  Convergent Validity (correlating the developed
Bisexual
tool with the exiting standardized tool that
measures the same construct) Male 4.2 4.64 216 –0.97NS
 The developed 32 items sexual orientation Female 4.7 6.26 287
scale’s convergent validity was examined by Asexual
correlating the results with sell assessment
of sexual orientation scale developed by Male 7.3 3.68 216 –2.27NS
Randall L. Sell.9 The test-retest reliability of Female 8.1 4.91 287
the heterosexual dimension of sell assessment Note: ** denotes that the result is significant at P < .01; NS refers to not
scale was found to be r = 0.93 and this is highly significant.
230 Journal of Psychosexual Health 2(3-4)

standardizing a tool for the Indian perspective is much scale. In empirical-based validity, the convergent validity
needed. The items for this scale were developed by reviewing correlation value is r = 0.94, and the divergent validity
the supportive literature and existing scales in Western interitem correlation is 0.53.
context. The preliminary items were sent out to 22 different
university professors, research scholars, and psychology
graduates for content analysis. Their suggestions and Conclusion
modification are noted for further development. Focus group
The developed tool on sexual orientation is found to be highly
validity was established by conducting focus group discussion
reliable and valid. It concisely measures the individual’s
with various experts in the sexual medicine field. A pilot
study was done on a group of 40 people using the test-retest sexual orientation and categorizes them into heterosexual,
method with a gap of 20 days. 506 participants (217 males homosexual, bisexual, and asexual categories. The tool can
and 289 females) took part in the survey across India between be used by psychologists, counselors, and educationalists,
the age of 18 and 50 years. Gender, educational qualification, especially by clinical psychologists, rehabilitation
and current relationship status were the major demographic psychologists, and psychiatrists for the clinical assessment of
details collected. The test-retest reliability of the tool was one’s sexual orientation.
found to be r = 0.945, which indicates the high reliability of
the scale. Split half reliability value was found to be (λ3) 0.73 Suggestions for Future Research
and Cronbach’s alpha ranged from (α) 0.71 to 0.88; both
these values represent the high reliability and internal Further research can be done to standardize the tool in
consistency of the scale. The principal factor analysis different populations, especially in the LGBTQ community
(equamax rotation) emerged from the 32 items that were people. It is suggested to study in specific cultural settings
tabulated and each emerged values as per the dimension of and it can also be extended to specific age groups and
highest relevance were labeled accordingly. sociodemographic (socioeconomic, rural, and urban)
Logical- and empirical-based validities were established. background for the vast comparison.
The face and content validities of the scale were found
to be good and easily comprehendible. The developed 32
items sexual orientation scale’s convergent and divergent Limitation
validities were also established. From the gender comparison
analysis, the heterosexual and homosexual dimensions were This scale will not provide the causes for one’s sexual
found to be significantly different between male and female orientation and it is only administrable for people who are
population. The bisexual and asexual dimensions were found above the age of 18 years. It is not applicable for transgender/
to be nonsignificant. third gender population.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Results
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to
The test-retest reliability of the sexual orientation scale is r = the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
0.945, split half reliability is (λ3) 0.73. The scale in this study
has 32 items with high internal consistency of Cronbach’s Funding
alpha ranging from (α) 0.71 to 0.88. The logical-based The authors received no financial support for the research, author-
validities emphasize the theoretical-based justification of the ship, and/or publication of this article.

Appendix

Sexual Orientation Scale

Instructions: This questionnaire pertains to how you have been feeling for most of the time about your sexual orientation.
Your honest answers will help us in understanding your sexual needs. There are no right or wrong answers. There is no time
limit to fill up the questionnaire but try to give your immediate response without thinking too much. The data gathered will
only be handled for research purposes and no individual identity will be revealed under any circumstances.
Sex: □ Male □ Female
Age:
Educational Level:
□ Middle/High School □ Post High School Certificate/Diploma
□ Technical/Vocational Certificate □ Graduate/Postgraduate
Sagayaraj and Gopal 231

□ M Phil/PhD/Honors/Above Postgraduate □ Others

Current Relationship Status:
□ Single □ Committed □ Married □ Divorced
□ Separated (Not Legally Divorced) □ Living Together
□ Long Distance Relationship □ Other

S. No. Questions Always Sometimes Rarely Never

1 I find myself attracted to woman
2 I have been infatuated with a man

3 I want to try an intimate kissing experience with both men

and women
4 I was not sexually attracted to anyone
5 I want to be in love with a beautiful woman
6 I prefer my sexual gratification from a man
7 I am very much comfortable with the intimate physical touch
of both men and women
8 I am not sexually aroused by anyone
9 I would be happy to marry a man
10 My lifelong partner should be a woman
11 I am comfortable in sharing my bedroom with both men and
women
12 I think sex is not required to lead a romantic life
13 In my leisure time, I would like to chat with a woman
14 I had woken up with a sexual dream about a man
15 I get aroused by seeing the private body parts of both men
and women
16 I do not like to get a romantic proposal
17 I prefer to be sexually active with a man
18 I had a crush on a woman
19 I like to impress both men and women
20 I never had the desire for dating anyone
21 For a romantic movie, my ideal company would be a man
22 My preferable dating partner is a woman
23 I have sexual feelings toward both men and women
24 I am not comfortable with anyone touching me with their
hands
25 After a shopping trip to a mall, I think of the woman whom I
found attractive
26 I admire men who have the muscular physique
27 I have engaged in a sex chat with both men and women
28 I do not like to be hugged by anyone
Part II

Choose Your Gender Preference Man Woman Both Men & Women Neither
29 I am interested in
30 I see my future life with
31 I would like to sleep with
32 My socially acceptable partner is
232 Journal of Psychosexual Health 2(3-4)

ORCID iD 8. Berkey BR, Perelman HT, Kurdek LA. The multidimensional

scale of sexuality. J Homosex. 1990;19(4):67-88.
K. Sagayaraj https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0081-5467
9. Sell RL. The sell assessment of sexual orientation:
References background and scoring. J Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Identity.
1996;1(4):295-310.
1. American Psychological Association resources page. What
is sexual orientation. 2008. https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/ 10. Klein F. Are you sure you’re heterosexual? or homosexual? or
orientation. Accessed April 04, 2020. even bisexual? J Bisex. 2014;14(3):341-346.
11. BBC resources page. World Asia India website. March 14,
2. LeVay S. Queer Science: The Use and Abuse of Research into
2012. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india–17363200.
Homosexuality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1996.
Accessed April 04, 2020.
3. Bohan JS. Psychology and Sexual Orientation: Coming to
12. Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 26 of the ICCPR.
Terms. New York, NY: Routledge; 1996.
International Commission of Jurists. Sexual Orientation, Gender
4. Kalra G, Gupta S, Bhugra D. Sexual variation in India: a view Identity and International Human Rights Law. International
from the west. Indian J Psychiatry. 2010;52(7):264-268. Commission of Jurists, Geneva, Switzerland; 2009.
5. Money J. Gay, Straight, and In-Between: The Sexology of 13. Cronbach LJ., Meehl PE. Construct validity in psychological
Sexual Orientation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; tests. Psychol Bull. 1955;52:281-302.
1988. 14. Stern BB, Barak B, Gould SJ. Sexual identity scale: a new self-
6. Coleman E. Assessment of Sexual Orientation in Men and assessment measure. Sex Roles. 1987;17:503-519.
Woman. New York, NY: Haworth; 1988. 15. Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant
7. Kinsey AC. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Bloomington, validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull.
Indiana: Indiana University Press; 1948. 1959;56(2):81-105.

View publication stats