Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex (AMS-Sex)

1. Abstract

The Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex (AMS-Sex) is a psychometric instrument developed to assess the motivational underpinnings of adolescent and emerging adult sexual abstinence through the theoretical lens of Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000). While early health behavior models conceptualized sexual decision-making primarily through risk-avoidance or binary adherence frameworks, the AMS-Sex differentiates the qualitative nature of behavioral regulation along the autonomy continuum. Derived from psychometric investigations conducted at Brigham Young University (Johnson, 2013), the instrument evaluates why individuals choose to abstain from sexual intercourse, distinguishing between non-autonomous (controlled) and autonomous forms of behavioral regulation. The initial pool spanned 77 items covering approach and avoidance trajectories, yielding a refined final instrument encompassing distinct subscales: External Regulation, Introjected Regulation, Identified Regulation, and Integrated Regulation. Additionally, research batteries employing the tool frequently incorporate social desirability controls, notably the Short Impression Management (IM) Scale from the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR Version 6; Paulhus, 1991). The AMS-Sex items are scored on a 5-point Likert response scale ranging from 1 = “not at all a reason for me” to 5 = “totally a reason for me”. Psychometric investigations demonstrate robust internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients typically exceeding .80 to .90 across subscales), rigorous construct and convergent validity, and a validated multi-factor structure confirmed via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). This comprehensive tool provides clinicians, adolescent health researchers, and developmental psychologists with an empirically validated methodology for examining the psychological mechanisms that sustain sexual health decisions, personal integrity, and behavioral self-regulation during key developmental transitions.

2. Keywords

Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex, AMS-Sex, Self-Determination Theory, sexual abstinence, autonomous motivation, controlled motivation, adolescent sexual behavior, introjected regulation, identified regulation, psychometrics

3. Authors

The Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex was developed and psychometrically evaluated by Natalie Johnson, Ph.D., within the Department of Psychology and College of Family, Home, and Social Sciences at Brigham Young University (Provo, Utah, USA), under the academic mentorship of doctoral faculty specializing in adolescent development, human sexuality, and psychometric methodology (Johnson, 2013). Dr. Natalie Johnson’s research program investigates adolescent risk and protective behaviors, self-regulation, family dynamics, and the psychological determinants that influence adolescent reproductive and relationship decisions.

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex (AMS-Sex) is to operationalize, quantify, and differentiate the multifaceted motivational forces that lead adolescents and young adults to refrain from sexual activity. For decades, adolescent sexual health initiatives, public health research, and clinical interventions conceptualized sexual abstinence as a homogeneous, monolithic behavior. Adolescents were often categorized simply as “sexually active” or “abstinent.” However, this categorical dichotomy obscures the underlying psychological reality: two individuals exhibiting the identical manifest behavior of sexual abstinence may be driven by fundamentally divergent cognitive, emotional, and social forces. One individual may abstain out of profound terror of parental discovery, intense external surveillance, or anticipated social ostracism (heteronomous or controlled regulation), while another abstains because sexual restraint is deeply aligned with personal philosophies, moral values, future educational aspirations, and core self-identity (autonomous regulation).

The AMS-Sex was engineered to resolve these conceptual limitations by mapping abstinence behavior directly onto the Self-Determination Theory continuum of behavioral regulation. In applied clinical and school-based settings, the purpose of the scale is to assist counselors, educators, and developmental psychologists in assessing the quality of an individual’s motivational structure. Decades of research in behavioral medicine and developmental psychology demonstrate that behavior driven predominantly by external pressures or internalized guilt is fragile, psychologically stressful, and prone to rapid attrition when external oversight dissolves or social contexts shift. In contrast, behaviors grounded in identified and integrated motivations show remarkable resilience, promote positive emotional well-being, and mitigate the psychological distress often associated with developmental peer pressure.

Furthermore, in research contexts, the AMS-Sex serves as an essential empirical tool for testing complex mediation and moderation models. Researchers utilize the instrument to investigate how parenting styles (such as autonomy-supportive vs. psychologically controlling parenting), peer dynamics, religious socialization, and comprehensive sex education curricula influence the internalization of healthy behavioral boundaries. By capturing the full spectrum from external compliance to deeply integrated self-regulation, the scale enables researchers to assess whether sexual choices lead to positive psychosocial adaptation or psychological conflict.

5. Psychological Construct

The core psychological construct measured by the AMS-Sex is sexual abstinence motivation, operationalized not as a unitary drive, but as a continuum of distinct regulatory styles defined by the degree to which behavioral regulation has been internalized into the individual’s core self-concept. In accordance with Organismic Integration Theory (a sub-theory within Self-Determination Theory; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000), the instrument captures four distinct dimensions of motivational regulation alongside social desirability response tendencies:

External Regulation

External regulation sits at the least autonomous end of the extrinsic motivation continuum. In the AMS-Sex, this dimension captures abstinence behavior performed exclusively to satisfy external demands, avoid tangible punishment, prevent parental anger, or maintain compliance with non-negotiable household mandates. Individuals scoring high on external regulation do not abstain because they personally see value in the practice; rather, their behavior is governed by external contingencies of reward and punishment. Representative items from this construct include: “Because I could get in trouble with my parents,” “Because my parents would get mad at me for having sex,” and “Because that’s the rule in our family.” Behavior sustained by external regulation typically deteriorates when the monitoring agent (e.g., parents or authority figures) is absent.

Introjected Regulation

Introjected regulation represents a form of internalized extrinsic motivation that remains psychologically controlled. Here, the external contingencies have been internalized into the person’s internal psychological architecture, but not integrated into the genuine self. Behavioral regulation is driven by internal pressures: the avoidance of guilt, shame, anxiety, or self-derogation, or the pursuit of ego-enhancement, conditional self-worth, and pride. In the AMS-Sex, introjected regulation measures abstinence sustained to stave off self-directed moral disgust or feelings of worthlessness. Exemplary items include: “Because I would feel guilty for having sex,” “Because I would feel ashamed for having sex,” “Because I would feel like a failure for having sex,” and “Because I can only feel good about myself if I do not have sex.” Although internally generated, this motivational construct is experienced as an internal pressure or “should,” frequently generating psychological tension, emotional vulnerability, and poor long-term coping.

Identified Regulation

Identified regulation reflects an autonomous form of extrinsic motivation wherein the individual consciously values the behavior as personally meaningful, useful, or important. The individual recognizes sexual abstinence as a chosen path that aligns with their personal standards, long-term health, and life trajectories. Abstinence is not practiced because of fear of punishment or crushing self-blame, but because the individual endorses the inherent value of the decision. Representative items in this subscale include: “Because I believe sexual abstinence is the responsible thing to do,” “Because sexual abstinence is personally important to me,” and “Because I personally value the benefits of staying away from sex.” High scores on identified regulation predict greater behavioral persistence, self-efficacy, and psychological stability.

Integrated Regulation

Integrated regulation is the most fully developed, mature, and self-congruent form of extrinsic motivation. It occurs when identified regulations have been comprehensively harmonized and integrated into the individual’s complete system of needs, personal values, life philosophies, and sense of self. Sexual abstinence is no longer merely an important rule or goal; it has become an authentic expression of the individual’s identity. In the AMS-Sex, this dimension captures the total coherence between sexual restraint and one’s existential core. Key items include: “Because sexual abstinence is consistent with what I value most in life,” “Because being sexually abstinent is consistent with my life goals,” and “Because sexual abstinence is an important part of my identity.” Integrated regulation yields optimal psychological functioning, minimizing internal conflict and fostering high levels of subjective vitality.

Impression Management / Social Desirability Control

Because adolescent self-reports regarding sexuality, parental obedience, and moral restraint are notoriously susceptible to impression management and social desirability bias, the psychometric battery includes the Short Impression Management (IM) Scale derived from the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR-6) (Paulhus, 1991). This sub-dimension explicitly measures the conscious, purposeful distortion of self-presentation designed to project an exceptionally virtuous, rule-abiding social facade (e.g., claiming to never drop litter, never gossip, or always obey laws even when unobserved).

6. Theoretical Framework

The foundational theoretical framework underpinning the Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex is Self-Determination Theory (SDT), formulated by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan (1985, 2000, 2017). Self-Determination Theory represents a broad organismic meta-theory of human motivation, emotion, and personality development, positing that human beings possess an innate, proactive tendency toward psychological growth, internal coherence, and integration across social contexts.

Central to SDT is Organismic Integration Theory (OIT), which details the conceptualization of extrinsic motivation along a continuum of relative autonomy. OIT posits that individuals naturally internalize social regulations, social norms, and cultural practices, but the degree to which that internalization succeeds varies across environmental and psychological conditions. OIT delineates four distinct regulatory styles for behaviors that are not intrinsically rewarding on their own:

• External Regulation: Controlled by external reward, compliance, or threat of punishment; locus of causality is perceived as entirely external.
• Introjected Regulation: Controlled by internal pressures of introjected demands, ego-involvement, guilt avoidance, and contingent self-esteem; locus of causality remains somewhat external.
• Identified Regulation: Autonomous motivation driven by conscious valuation and personal endorsement; locus of causality is perceived as somewhat internal.
• Integrated Regulation: Autonomous motivation characterized by hierarchical synthesis with core values and full identity alignment; locus of causality is perceived as internal.

Prior to the formulation of the AMS-Sex, prevailing frameworks in sexual health—such as the Health Belief Model (Rosenstock, 1974), the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991), and Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986)—focused primarily on perceived risk, perceived susceptibility, peer subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. While these models possess explanatory power regarding behavioural intentions, they fail to illuminate the qualitative nature of why an adolescent complies with or resists those norms. SDT posits that behaviors governed by controlled motivations (external and introjected) require continuous psychological energy, generate cognitive ambivalence, and are vulnerable to collapse under acute stress, romantic intimacy, or peer pressure. Conversely, behaviors supported by autonomous motivations (identified and integrated) fulfill the fundamental psychological needs for autonomy (experiencing self-direction), competence (feeling capable and effective), and relatedness (experiencing connection and belonging), producing durable self-regulation without psychological toll.

The application of SDT to sexual abstinence by Johnson (2013) directly challenged the assumption that abstinence is merely an externally imposed prohibition. The AMS-Sex theoretically demonstrates that abstinence can represent an integrated, autonomous choice that actively supports an adolescent’s emergent identity, ethical standards, and future developmental self-actualization.

7. Validity

The psychometric evaluation of the Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex (Johnson, 2013) provides robust evidence of construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity across diverse adolescent and emerging adult cohorts.

Construct and Structural Validity

Construct validity was initially established through comprehensive item generation and review by expert panels in developmental psychopathology, family studies, and psychometrics. During the initial development phase, an extensive 77-item pool operationalizing approach and avoidance aspects of external, introjected, identified, and integrated motivations was evaluated. Through successive exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and subsequent confirmatory factor analyses (CFA), items displaying ambiguous factor loadings, substantial cross-loadings, or excessive skewness were systematically removed. The resulting final AMS-Sex retained the cleanest, most psychometrically robust items that cleanly load onto their designated theoretical dimensions.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Convergent and discriminant validity were confirmed through pattern analysis across the autonomy continuum, aligning with the theoretical simplex-like pattern characteristic of SDT instruments. Subscales that are theoretically adjacent along the continuum show higher positive correlations with each other than with distal subscales:

• External Regulation correlates positively and strongly with Introjected Regulation (both representing controlled regulation), but demonstrates weak or non-significant correlations with Integrated Regulation.
• Identified Regulation correlates very strongly with Integrated Regulation (both reflecting autonomous regulation), confirming their conceptual affinity while maintaining psychometric distinctiveness.
• The inclusion of the Short IM Scale from the BIDR Version 6 (Paulhus, 1991) allowed researchers to verify discriminant validity against deliberate impression management. While controlled subscales (introjected and external) exhibited small to moderate associations with social desirability in certain religious sub-samples, autonomous dimensions (identified and integrated) demonstrated distinct variance, confirming that autonomous abstinence motivation is not an artifact of conscious impression management.

Criterion and Predictive Validity

Predictive validity was verified by examining the relationship between AMS-Sex subscale profiles and actual sexual decision-making, relationship satisfaction, and mental health metrics. Structural equation models revealed that adolescents with high autonomous abstinence motivation (identified and integrated) reported significantly greater behavioral adherence to their abstinence goals, higher self-esteem, lower depressive symptoms, and lower sexual regret. Conversely, individuals whose abstinence was driven predominantly by external or introjected regulation displayed elevated anxiety, greater cognitive dissonance, and a higher probability of abrupt transition into unprotected sexual activity when romantic partners applied pressure.

8. Reliability

The AMS-Sex demonstrates high internal consistency and measurement precision across all subscales. In the primary validation study by Johnson (2013), Cronbach’s alpha coefficients exceeded recommended psychometric standards for both research and clinical assessment (α ≥ .80):

• External Regulation Subscale: Demonstrated strong internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha values consistently ranging between α = .84 and .89.
• Introjected Regulation Subscale: Displayed excellent internal consistency, yielding Cronbach’s alpha coefficients between α = .88 and .92, reflecting coherent operationalization of guilt-, shame-, and failure-avoidance cognitions.
• Identified Regulation Subscale: Yielded Cronbach’s alpha coefficients between α = .89 and .93, showing strong item covariance regarding personal valuation and perceived responsibility.
• Integrated Regulation Subscale: Produced high reliability estimates, ranging from α = .91 to .95, indicating that items assessing identity alignment and core life goals capture a uniform psychometric factor.
• Short IM Scale (BIDR-6): Exhibited acceptable to good internal reliability (α = .70 to .77), consistent with established literature for short-form social desirability and impression management measures (Paulhus, 1991).

Composite reliability coefficients (Raykov’s ρ) and average variance extracted (AVE) calculations in structural equation modeling frameworks confirmed that the variance captured by each latent factor substantially exceeds measurement error variance, with AVE values consistently surpassing the .50 benchmark across all four motivational dimensions.

9. Factor Analysis

The factorial architecture of the AMS-Sex underwent rigorous empirical testing utilizing both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) during initial scale development and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) during final validation (Johnson, 2013).

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

During the exploratory phase, the initial 77-item instrument—encompassing approach-avoidance dimensions within external (avoidant items 1–12, approach items 13–25), introjected (avoidant items 26–39, approach items 40–48), identified (items 49–64), and integrated regulations (items 65–77)—was evaluated using principal axis factoring with oblique rotation (promax/direct oblimin). The oblique rotation was selected to accommodate the anticipated theoretical correlations between adjacent regulatory styles along the self-determination continuum. EFA findings demonstrated that while the approach-avoidance dichotomy added conceptual nuance, the data clustered robustly around the four primary latent constructs of Self-Determination Theory. Items exhibiting low factor loadings (< .40) or severe cross-loadings (> .30 on secondary factors) were systematically eliminated.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Subsequent Confirmatory Factor Analysis evaluated the structural integrity of the final scale. Competing models were tested, including a unidimensional model (all items loading on a single abstinence motivation factor), a two-factor model (controlled vs. autonomous motivation), and a four-factor correlated model (External, Introjected, Identified, and Integrated).

The four-factor correlated model demonstrated superior fit to the data, satisfying conventional structural equation modeling standards:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): ≥ .94
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): ≥ .93
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): ≤ .055 (90% CI [.048, .062])
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): ≤ .048

Standardized factor loadings for all retained items in the final model were uniformly high, ranging from .68 to .92, with no significant cross-loadings. These factor-analytic findings confirm that external, introjected, identified, and integrated motivations represent empirically separable constructs in the domain of adolescent sexual decision-making.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The following technical parameters characterize the administration, scoring, and psychometric structure of the Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex (AMS-Sex):

• Instrument Name: Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex (AMS-Sex)
• Author: Natalie Johnson, Ph.D. (Brigham Young University)
• Primary Reference: Johnson, N. (2013). Development and Validation of the Abstinence Motivation Scale (Master’s thesis / Doctoral dissertation). Brigham Young University, Paper 3686.
• Theoretical Basis: Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2017)
• Target Population: Adolescents (ages 12–18) and emerging adults (ages 18–25)
• Administration Format: Self-administered paper-and-pencil or digital survey questionnaire
• Administration Time: Approximately 10 to 15 minutes for the combined battery
• Total Number of Items (Imported Battery): 31 items total, organized into two primary components:
  • Impression Management (BIDR-6 Short Scale): 12 items (Items 1 to 12)
  • AMS-Sex Core Motivational Items: 19 items (Items 13 to 31, representing external, introjected, identified, and integrated regulations)
• Response Scale (AMS-Sex Items): 5-point Likert scale scored as:
  • 1 = not at all a reason for me
  • 2 = a little bit of a reason for me
  • 3 = somewhat of a reason for me
  • 4 = quite a bit of a reason for me
  • 5 = totally a reason for me
• Subscales & Item Distribution:
  • Impression Management: Items 1–12 (Items 2, 4, 6, 7, 10, and 11 are reverse scored [R])
  • External Regulation: Item 13 (and corresponding parental/family mandate items)
  • Introjected Regulation: Items 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
  • Identified Regulation: Items 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
  • Integrated Regulation: Items 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31
• Scoring Procedures:
  • Subscale Scores: Calculated by averaging the scores of items within each respective subscale (yielding a mean score ranging from 1.0 to 5.0).
  • Relative Autonomy Index (RAI): In line with standard Self-Determination Theory methodology, researchers can calculate a composite Relative Autonomy Index to reflect the overall degree of autonomous relative to controlled motivation. Weights are assigned across the continuum: [2 × Integrated] + [1 × Identified] − [1 × Introjected] − [2 × External].
  • Social Desirability Adjustment: BIDR-6 IM items are evaluated to detect respondents exhibiting extreme defensiveness or high impression management.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Abstinence Motivation Scale-Sex was formally published in 2013 as part of Dr. Natalie Johnson’s doctoral dissertation, titled “Development and Validation of the Abstinence Motivation Scale,” through the College of Family, Home, and Social Sciences at Brigham Young University (Johnson, 2013). The dissertation was deposited in the BYU ScholarsArchive open-access institutional repository (Paper 3686).

The AMS-Sex is categorized as an open-access academic research instrument. It is made freely available for non-commercial research, academic, and clinical evaluation purposes without payment of licensing fees, provided that proper academic citation is accorded to the original author (Johnson, 2013) and Brigham Young University. The Short Impression Management Scale embedded within the battery is derived from the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR Version 6; Paulhus, 1991), which is similarly accessible for empirical research. Researchers and clinicians wishing to adapt the scale for commercial applications or large-scale digital commercial testing platforms should contact the original author and the copyright holding office at Brigham Young University.

12. References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Johnson, N. (2013). Development and validation of the Abstinence Motivation Scale (Doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University). BYU ScholarsArchive. Paper 3686. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/3686/

Paulhus, D. L. (1991). Measurement and control of response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 17–59). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-590241-9.50006-X

Rosenstock, I. M. (1974). Historical origins of the Health Belief Model. Health Education Monographs, 2(4), 328–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019817400200403

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Publications. https://doi.org/10.1521/978.14625/28769

13. Items of the Scale