Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Sexual Satisfaction Scale for Women
- 2 Downloads
Although several validated sexual satisfaction scales are globally relevant, none has demonstrated sufficient validity and reliability for use in Turkish populations, particularly women. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Sexual Satisfaction Scale for Women (SSS-W) in the Turkish version. A descriptive study was conducted involving 300 women. The scale’s validity and reliability were analyzed in two phases: phase I involved the translation and adaptation of the scale into Turkish and pilot testing; and phase II involved psychometric assessment. Content validity index was calculated and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to test the scale’s validity. To establish reliability we calculated Cronbach’s alpha, item-total and subscale-total correlations, and test–retest reliability that indicated time invariance. The scale’s content validity was reviewed by eight experts. Construct validity was established via confirmatory factor analysis; item factor loadings ranged .71–.93. Item-total score correlations ranged .49–.82; item-subscale score correlations ranged .58–.88; and subscale-total score correlations ranged .55–.92. Statistically significant correlations were found between each of these results (p < .001). Cronbach’s alpha was .96 for the complete scale and ranged .89–.91 for subscales. The test–retest reliability analysis yielded no significant difference (p < .05). The results indicate that the Turkish version of the SSS-W is valid and reliable for determining sexual life quality in research and clinical practice.
KeywordsWomen Sexual satisfaction Psychometrics Validity Reliability Scale
All authors contributed to the development of the study framework, interpretation of the results, and revision of draft of the manuscript and approved the version submitted for publication. SAC conducted the data analyses. SAC and EA drafted the manuscript. EA finalized the manuscript with inputs from all authors.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures (surveys) performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards (ethics committee of the Istanbul University Istanbul School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey reference number No. 1565). This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Basson, R. (2001). Female sexual response: The role of drugs in the management of sexual dysfunction. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 98, 350–352.Google Scholar
- Belanger, C., Laughrea, K., & Lafontaine, M. (2001). The impact of anger on sexual satisfaction in marriage. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 10, 91–99.Google Scholar
- DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications (2nd ed.). California: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Harrington, D. (2009). Confirmatory factor analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, R. M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60. www.ejbrm.com. Accessed December 3, 2017.
- Offman, A., & Matheson, K. (2005). Sexual compatibility and sexual functioning in intimate relationships. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 14, 31–39.Google Scholar
- Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2010). Essentials of nursing research: appraising evidence for nursing practice (7th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar