1. Abstract
The Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents (ASA) is an objective, situational-scenario psychometric instrument developed by Rathus Assertiveness Schedule (RAS) or the College Self-Expression Scale (CSES)—or on generic child social competence scales that lacked ecological relevance for teenage life. Adult scales frequently feature scenarios involving professional workplaces, commercial disputes with landlords, or adult marital friction, which fail to resonate with middle school and high school students. Conversely, generic child scales often focus on broad compliance with classroom rules rather than the nuanced balancing act required when resisting negative peer pressure, responding to academic unfairness, or maintaining personal boundaries without provoking interpersonal hostility.
The ASA directly resolves these psychometric limitations by grounding every test item in naturalistic adolescent environments: school hallways, sports team locker rooms, family dinner tables, shopping centers, bus stops, and neighborhood social interactions. The instrument’s primary applications encompass:
- Clinical and Diagnostic Assessment: Identifying maladaptive behavioral communication styles (chronic submission vs. overt hostility) among youth referred for clinical counseling, anxiety disorders, social phobia, conduct issues, or trauma-related interpersonal passivity.
- School-Based Psychoeducational Screening: Providing school counselors, guidance personnel, and educational psychologists with an objective group-administered or individual screening tool to identify students vulnerable to peer bullying, relational victimization, or academic disengagement.
- Intervention Planning and Evaluation: Establishing baseline profiles and measuring pre-to-post treatment outcomes for social skills training (SST), cognitive-behavioral assertiveness training, anger management workshops, and bullying prevention curricula.
- Empirical Developmental Research: Serving as a standardized criterion measure in academic investigations exploring the intersections of adolescent attachment styles, Five-Factor personality dimensions, emotional intelligence, and interpersonal competence across diverse cultural contexts.
5. Psychological Construct
The Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents assesses assertive behavior, theoretically operationalized as the direct, honest, and socially appropriate expression of one’s personal rights, feelings, beliefs, and opinions without denying or violating the fundamental rights of others. The construct exists within a tripartite behavioral taxonomy that delineates three distinct interpersonal response styles:
1. The Tripartite Behavioral Spectrum
- Assertive Behavior (Adaptive Competence): The individual openly and calmly communicates personal boundaries, validates their own needs, addresses mistreatment or errors directly, and negotiates solutions while demonstrating basic respect for the interlocutor. For instance, when confronted with an unfair grading decision (Item 6), the assertive response involves approaching the teacher respectfully to review the paper collaboratively: “Hello. By the way, I believe that one of my answers was not graded fairly. Could we go over this together?”
- Unassertive / Passive Behavior (Submissive Inhibition): The individual surrenders their own rights, suppresses authentic emotional reactions, accommodates unreasonable demands, avoids conflict through evasion or deceit, or silently accepts exploitation due to fear of confrontation, rejection, or disapproval. For example, when an acquaintance refuses to share proceeds from selling an extra ticket (Item 1), the passive response involves rationalizing the unfairness: “You accept your friend’s actions because you think that your friend earned the extra money by selling your ticket.” Similarly, passive avoidance manifests as making excuses, escaping the room, or suffering physical discomfort in silence (e.g., enduring secondhand smoke on a bus in Item 13).
- Aggressive Behavior (Hostile Coercion): The individual defends their personal desires or demands through intimidation, verbal abuse, name-calling, physical outbursts, destructive acts, or vindictive threats that infringe upon the dignity and rights of others. In Item 1, the aggressive reaction is characterized by hostile escalation: “You say ‘You crook. I am telling you now that if you don’t give me the money it will be the end of our friendship.'” Other aggressive manifestations on the ASA include swearing at a coach (Item 5), throwing merchandise on the floor (Item 11), or vindictively vandalizing property (Item 23).
2. Contextual Dimensions of Adolescent Assertiveness
The ASA embeds this tripartite behavioral spectrum across four essential adolescent social domains:
- Peer Relations and Friendship Maintenance: Managing requests to borrow prized possessions, setting limits on one-sided friendships, confronting friends who spread harmful rumors, resisting peer pressure to smoke cigarettes, and negotiating fair reciprocity in group projects.
- Authority Figure Interactions: Navigating disagreements, perceived unfairness, or sudden demands from institutional authorities, including schoolteachers, athletic coaches, and parental figures, while maintaining constructive communication.
- Consumer and Public Encounters: Interfacing with service personnel, store clerks, and strangers in community settings (e.g., returning defective goods, insisting on correct financial change, addressing line-cutters at movie theaters or supermarket check-outs, and asserting passenger rights on public transit).
- Self-Defense Against False Accusations: Defending one’s personal integrity when wrongfully accused of cheating on an examination, copying homework, or breaking a neighbor’s window, without resorting to submissive acceptance of guilt or hostile defiance.
6. Theoretical Framework
The conceptual framework of the Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents is grounded in Social Learning Theory, formulated by Albert Bandura (1977), along with early cognitive-behavioral assertiveness paradigms pioneered by Joseph Wolpe (1958), Arnold Lazarus (1971), and Robert Alberti and Michael Emmons (1974). Under Wolpe’s reciprocal inhibition model, assertive responses are physiologically and emotionally incompatible with social anxiety; actively fostering assertive behavior directly inhibits conditioned interpersonal fear responses.
Bandura’s social cognitive framework conceptualizes assertiveness not as a static, genetically predetermined personality trait, but as a complex behavioral repertoire acquired, maintained, and refined through observational modeling, vicarious reinforcement, direct behavioral practice, and self-efficacy appraisals. According to this framework, an adolescent’s choice to respond assertively, passively, or aggressively in any given situation is governed by three interacting mechanisms:
- Cognitive Mediational Processes: The adolescent’s cognitive appraisal of the situation, including outcome expectancies (e.g., “If I refuse this unreasonable favor, will my peer abandon me?”) and self-efficacy beliefs regarding their capability to deliver an assertive message under social duress.
- Behavioral Repertoire and Response Availability: Whether the adolescent possesses the specific verbal, paralinguistic, and nonverbal communication skills needed to articulate a clear refusal, request, or boundary without resorting to submissive silence or hostile attack.
- Environmental and Reinforcement Contingencies: The immediate social feedback provided by parents, teachers, and peer reference groups. In unsupportive or authoritarian environments, assertive communication may be mischaracterized as disrespect or defiance, which can condition adolescents toward either passive withdrawal or explosive rebellion.
Lee, Hallberg, Slemon, and Haase (1985) built upon these foundations by adopting a situational-analytic model of assessment (Goldfried & D’Zurilla, 1969). Traditional trait theories posited that an individual is globally “assertive” or “non-assertive.” In contrast, situational psychometrics recognizes that assertiveness is highly context-dependent. An adolescent may demonstrate exemplary assertiveness when interacting with close peers, yet exhibit complete behavioral inhibition when addressing a school teacher, or vice versa. By utilizing 33 distinct ecological vignettes, the ASA captures cross-situational behavioral tendencies, yielding an accurate composite index of the respondent’s functional social adaptation.
7. Validity
The psychometric validity of the Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents has been established across multiple empirical studies encompassing diverse adolescent cohorts, clinical populations, and international cross-cultural adaptations.
1. Content and Face Validity
During the initial development of the instrument by Lee et al. (1985), an extensive pool of real-life conflict situations was generated through direct behavioral interviews, critical-incident logging, and focus groups with junior high and high school students. Expert panels comprising clinical psychologists, counseling professionals, and secondary educators systematically evaluated the scenarios. Vignettes were refined or eliminated based on developmental authenticity, clarity, and thematic representativeness. The resulting 33 items demonstrated exceptional face validity, reflecting situations that adolescents encounter in day-to-day scholastic, familial, and community environments.
2. Criterion-Related and Behavioral Validity
To establish empirical criterion validity, Lee et al. (1985) correlated ASA test scores with behavioral role-play assessments and observational ratings. Adolescents completing the ASA were placed in standardized, simulated behavioral role-play scenarios involving confederates who made unreasonable requests, delivered unfair criticisms, or exerted peer pressure. Independent raters—blind to the participants’ written ASA scores—evaluated behavioral role-play performance on dimensions of verbal assertiveness, latency of response, eye contact, and emotional firmness. The correlation between overall ASA score and objective behavioral ratings reached statistically significant levels (r values ranging from .48 to .62, p < .001), indicating that written responses on the ASA reliably predict actual overt behavioral responses in vivo.
3. Convergent and Discriminant Validity
Convergent validity has been repeatedly corroborated through significant correlations with validated personality and psychological adjustment measures. Studies examining the relationship between the ASA and the Rathus Assertiveness Schedule (adapted for youth) documented robust convergent coefficients (r = .55 to .68). Furthermore, empirical research by Amani Hafshejani, Fatehizade, and Yousefi (2013) demonstrated that ASA scores correlate positively with secure attachment styles and adaptive Five-Factor personality traits—notably Extraversion (r = .38, p < .01), Conscientiousness (r = .31, p < .01), and Openness to Experience—while correlating negatively with Neuroticism (r = -.42, p < .001). Conversely, discriminant validity has been verified through non-significant correlations with general cognitive ability (IQ) and academic aptitude scores (r < .12, p > .05), confirming that the ASA measures social-behavioral competence rather than academic or cognitive performance.
4. Treatment Sensitivity and Clinical Construct Validity
Construct validity is further substantiated by the scale’s sensitivity to psychotherapeutic and educational interventions. In a clinical intervention trial conducted by Ghavami, Emami, and Bonakdar (2014), the ASA was administered to female high school students before and after a narrative therapy intervention designed to bolster personal agency and self-assertiveness. The experimental group exhibited statistically significant increases in post-test ASA assertiveness scores compared to untreated control subjects (F = 18.74, p < .0001, partial η² = .39), proving that the ASA is highly responsive to therapeutic gains in clinical and school-based settings.
8. Reliability
The Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents possesses strong reliability, evidenced by robust internal consistency, stable test-retest reproducibility, and minimal measurement error.
1. Internal Consistency
In the original validation investigations reported by Lee, Hallberg, Slemon, and Haase (1985), the scale’s internal consistency was computed utilizing Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20) and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, given the dichotomous scoring system (Assertive = 1, Non-Assertive = 0). Across their primary standardization sample of secondary school adolescents (N = 384), the instrument yielded an overall internal consistency coefficient of α = .81. Subsequent replications and cross-cultural adaptations have reported comparable values:
- Standard normative adolescent cohorts consistently demonstrate alpha values ranging between .78 and .84.
- In clinical and counseling samples (e.g., adolescents receiving treatment for social anxiety or behavioral difficulties), Cronbach’s alpha has remained robust, averaging .80.
- Item-total correlations across the 33 items typically range from .24 to .52, demonstrating that while each situational vignette captures unique environmental nuances, all items contribute meaningfully to the overarching assertiveness construct.
2. Test-Retest Temporal Stability
The temporal stability of the ASA was evaluated by administering the scale twice across a two-week interval to a sample of 78 adolescent participants who received no intervening social skills training. The resulting Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient was r = .83 (p < .001), indicating high stability over time and confirming that the scale is not confounded by transient, short-term emotional fluctuations. Extended four-week test-retest evaluations have similarly demonstrated stable reliability coefficients exceeding r = .76.
3. Standard Error of Measurement
The Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) for the 33-item ASA is approximately 1.8 to 2.1 raw score points. This narrow error margin allows clinicians and researchers to establish narrow 95% confidence intervals around observed raw scores, facilitating precise identification of individual gains in pre-to-post behavioral intervention studies.
9. Factor Analysis
Factor-analytic investigations of the Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents have confirmed both a dominant overarching general dimension of assertiveness and coherent multi-dimensional sub-factors that reflect the social ecology of youth.
1. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
In the initial psychometric standardization by Lee et al. (1985), an Exploratory Factor Analysis using principal components extraction with varimax orthogonal and oblimin oblique rotations was conducted on the item correlation matrix. The scree test, alongside Kaiser’s eigenvalue-greater-than-one criterion (K1), identified a primary general factor accounting for the largest proportion of total variance (approximately 28.4%), affirming the validity of using a single global assertiveness composite score. In addition to this overarching factor, secondary sub-dimensions emerged reflecting specific interpersonal contexts:
- Factor 1: Peer Boundary Defense and Refusal Skills (Items 1, 3, 4, 7, 16, 18, 25, 26, 31). Items loading heavily on this factor (> .40) evaluate an adolescent’s ability to decline unreasonable peer favors, protect personal property, and confront deception or betrayal without resorting to verbal aggression.
- Factor 2: Assertion Toward Authority Figures (Items 5, 6, 8, 12, 14, 15, 21, 23, 24, 30, 33). Characterized by high loadings on scenarios involving teachers, parents, coaches, and adult neighbors. This factor measures an adolescent’s ability to articulate fair grievances and correct misunderstandings without engaging in submissive compliance or insubordinate defiance.
- Factor 3: Public, Commercial, and Stranger Negotiation (Items 2, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17, 19, 22, 27, 28). Captures interpersonal transactions in retail stores, public transportation, and community venues. Items evaluate the respondent’s willingness to rectify service errors, resist queue-cutting, and address disruptive public behaviors.
2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
Modern psychometric evaluations applying structural equation modeling (SEM) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis have evaluated the fit of both unidimensional and three-factor oblique structural models among adolescent samples. While a strict unidimensional model demonstrates acceptable fit, a hierarchical higher-order model—in which three first-order situational factors (Peer, Authority, and Public/Consumer) load onto a single second-order “Global Assertiveness” construct—consistently yields superior goodness-of-fit indices:
- Comparative Fit Index (CFI): .92 to .94
- Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): .91 to .93
- Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): .042 to .048 (90% CI [.036, .053])
- Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): .046
These findings substantiate the psychometric utility of using the global composite score for routine clinical and educational screening, while also permitting exploratory subscale analysis for targeted diagnostic profiles.
10. Instrument / Measurement Tool
The Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents (ASA) is structured as follows:
- Instrument Name: Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents (ASA)
- Authors: Dong Yul Lee, Ernest T. Hallberg, Alan G. Slemon, and Richard F. Haase (1985)
- Assessment Type: Objective, situational-scenario behavioral inventory; self-report questionnaire
- Target Population: Adolescents and youth aged 12 to 19 years (Grades 7 through 12)
- Item Count: 33 hypothetical interpersonal conflict vignettes
- Response Format: Forced-choice trichotomous format (Options A, B, and C) per item. Each option represents one of three distinct behavioral postures: Unassertive/Passive, Assertive, or Aggressive.
- Administration Time: Approximately 20 to 30 minutes for self-administration; can be administered individually or in group classroom settings.
- Scoring System and Procedure:
- Each item has exactly one correct assertive response based on empirical validation scoring standards.
- If the respondent selects the validated Assertive option, the item is scored 1 point.
- If the respondent selects either the Unassertive/Passive option or the Aggressive option, the item is scored 0 points.
- Total Score Range: 0 to 33 points. Higher cumulative scores indicate greater interpersonal assertiveness and adaptive social competence.
- Item Scoring Key (Assertive Option per Item):
- Items keyed to Option A: 6, 10, 14, 20, 21, 23, 26, 28, 29, 31, 32
- Items keyed to Option B: 1, 7, 9, 12, 15, 18, 19, 22, 25, 27, 30, 33
- Items keyed to Option C: 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 11, 13, 16, 17, 24
- Optional Qualitative Analysis: Clinicians and evaluators can compute separate sub-indices for passive and aggressive errors to determine whether an adolescent’s unassertiveness stems primarily from behavioral inhibition/fear (predominance of passive choices) or poor impulse control/hostility (predominance of aggressive choices).
11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year
The Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents was originally developed and published in 1985 in the peer-reviewed journal Clinical Psychology (Journal of Clinical Psychology; Lee et al., 1985). The instrument was subsequently reprinted with full administration instructions and scoring keys in the reference compendium Measures for Clinical Practice and Research: A Sourcebook (Fischer & Corcoran, 1994, 2007; Oxford University Press).
Licensing and Usage: The scale is considered an open-access psychometric instrument for non-commercial educational, clinical, and scholarly research purposes. Qualified clinicians, school psychologists, and academic researchers may reproduce and administer the scale provided appropriate intellectual attribution is maintained and the primary source publication (Lee et al., 1985) is cited. No licensing fees or royalty payments are required for standard academic, non-profit clinical, or classroom use. For commercial software integration, published test batteries, or for-profit clinical platforms, formal permissions must be requested from the copyright holder and Oxford University Press.
12. References
The following academic publications and clinical reference works document the development, validation, and empirical application of the Assertiveness Scale for Adolescents:
- Alberti, R. E., & Emmons, M. L. (1974). Your perfect right: A guide to assertive living. Impact Publishers.
- Amani Hafshejani, Z., Fatehizade, M., & Yousefi, Z. (2013). The multiple relations between attachment styles and big five personality traits with assertiveness in a sample of Iranian girl. Journal of Education Research and Behavioral Sciences, 2(10), 161–166.
- Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
- Fischer, J., & Corcoran, K. J. (2007). Measures for clinical practice and research: A sourcebook (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 427–434). Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/measures-for-clinical-practice-and-research-volume-1-9780195328226
- Ghavami, M., Emami, M., & Bonakdar, S. A. (2014). Effectiveness of narrative therapy on the increase of self-assertiveness in female high school students (Case study: Iran (Isfahan)). International Journal of Academic Research in Psychology, 1(2), 105–111. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARP/v1-i2/1202
- Goldfried, M. R., & D’Zurilla, T. J. (1969). A behavioral-analytic model for assessing competence. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Current topics in clinical and community psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 151–196). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-4832-5645-0.50010-0
- Lazarus, A. A. (1971). Behavior therapy and beyond. McGraw-Hill.
- Lee, D. Y., Hallberg, E. T., Slemon, A. G., & Haase, R. F. (1985). An assertiveness scale for adolescents. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 41(1), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(73)80120-0
- Wolpe, J. (1958). Psychotherapy by reciprocal inhibition. Stanford University Press.