Sexual Activity Questionnaire

1. Abstract

The Sexual Activity Questionnaire (SAQ), conceptualized and validated by E. Sandra Byers and colleagues (Byers & Heinlein, 1989; O’Sullivan & Byers, 1992), is a specialized behavioral self-monitoring instrument and daily diary methodology designed to assess the precise sequential processes, verbal and nonverbal behavioral strategies, and cognitive-affective evaluations that govern sexual initiation and refusal within intimate relationships. Rather than treating sexual interactions as static, single-point occurrences, the SAQ captures sexual activity as an ongoing dyadic sequence composed of micro-behavioral events: initiation attempts, immediate partner responses, conflict negotiation, sexual decision-making, behavioral execution across multiple sexual practices, and subjective post-interaction evaluations. The instrument comprises three core architectural components: Part I (a daily tracking log monitoring initiation occurrence, initiator identity, initial partner reaction, and unexpressed sexual desires over a 7-day period), Part II (an in-depth event-level record completed upon the occurrence of an initial negative response or refusal), and Part III (an event-level record completed upon an initial positive response or mutual interest).

Across its modules, the SAQ incorporates objective categorical inventories (such as a 22-item checklist of initiation behaviors categorized into five structural domains), open-ended behavioral narrative descriptions, objective latency and duration metrics, and 6-point Likert-type evaluative scales assessing subjective pleasure, relationship satisfaction, conflict resolution efficacy, and respondent confidence. Psychometric investigations across cohabiting, married, and dating cohorts have substantiated robust reliability, characterized by high interrater agreement on qualitative behavioral codings (κ and percentage agreement ranging from .86 to .87), substantial inter-partner concordance among couples (.75 for initiation identification and .90 for partner response characterization), and high self-reported participant accuracy ratings (means exceeding 5.2 to 5.5 on a 6-point continuum). Construct, convergent, and discriminant validity are demonstrated through systematic associations with relationship duration, dyadic adjustment, sexual pleasure, frequency of dating, and global sexual satisfaction, establishing the SAQ as a foundational paradigm in clinical sexology and empirical dyadic relationship research.

2. Keywords

Sexual Activity Questionnaire, sexual initiation, sexual refusal, dyadic interaction, sexual scripts, sexual communication, self-monitoring diary, relationship satisfaction, Sandra Byers, behavioral coding

3. Authors

The Sexual Activity Questionnaire was developed by E. Sandra Byers, Ph.D., an internationally recognized clinical psychologist, researcher, and Professor Emerita in the Department of Psychology at the University of New Brunswick (Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada). Dr. Byers has served as a leading authority in human sexuality, having published extensively on sexual communication, sexual satisfaction, sexual consent, sexual aggression, and relationship dynamics. Key collaborators in the empirical operationalization and validation of the instrument include Lucia Heinlein (co-investigator on the initial 1989 marital and cohabiting investigation), Lucia F. O’Sullivan (co-author on the 1992 dating cohort validation study), and Rachel Eno (whose 1994 doctoral dissertation expanded the couple-level concordance and temporal stability profiles of the measure).

Institutional Correspondence Address:
Dr. E. Sandra Byers
Department of Psychology, University of New Brunswick
P.O. Box 4400, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada, E3B 5A3
Electronic mail: [email protected]

4. Purpose

The primary purpose of the Sexual Activity Questionnaire is to operationalize, deconstruct, and quantify the behavioral sequences that precede, accompany, and follow sexual interactions in intimate couples. For decades, sexological research relied predominantly on global, retrospective questionnaires that asked respondents to estimate aggregate frequencies of sexual intercourse or broad ratings of sexual satisfaction over long recall windows (e.g., the past month, six months, or past year). Such retrospective self-report designs are subject to substantial cognitive distortions, including availability heuristics, recall decay, recency effects, and social desirability biases. More fundamentally, global indices obscure the complex transactional mechanics of sexual encounters—specifically, how partners navigate the boundary between sexual desire and sexual action, how consent or refusal is communicated, and how dyadic disagreements are negotiated in real time.

The SAQ addresses this methodological gap by deploying an ecological self-monitoring framework. It aims to achieve three principal objectives: first, to map the temporal distribution of sexual initiations within intimate dyads, establishing precise baseline rates of who initiates (male vs. female partners), how often initiations are met with immediate acceptance versus reluctance, and how frequently individuals experience covert sexual desire that they deliberately choose not to act upon. Second, the SAQ aims to catalog the exact verbal and nonverbal behavioral repertoires used by initiators (e.g., direct requests, ambiguous cues, seductive touch, atmospheric staging) and by noninitiators (e.g., outright refusal, mood-based excuses, somatic reasons, or counter-proposals for lower-intensity intimacy). Third, the tool measures the psychological and relational aftermath of these interactions, examining conflict resolution satisfaction, personal and perceived partner sexual pleasure, and the dyadic determinants of sexual compliance (i.e., why an initially disinterested individual ultimately consents to engage in sexual behavior).

In clinical practice, the SAQ serves as an assessment and psychoeducational diagnostic tool for couples experiencing sexual desire discrepancies, sexual communication avoidance, hypoactive sexual desire, or persistent sexual dissatisfaction. By tracking daily micro-interactions, sex therapists can identify dysfunctional behavioral sequences, such as chronic reliance on ambiguous nonverbal cues, unassertive refusal strategies, or coercive conflict escalation. In academic research, the instrument provides an empirical bridge linking intra-individual psychological variables (e.g., attachment orientations, gender role socialization, sexual attitudes) to dyadic behavioral outcomes within married, cohabiting, and dating populations.

5. Psychological Construct

The SAQ measures the multi-stage, dyadic construct of sexual interaction sequencing. Within this overarching construct, several distinct behavioral and cognitive dimensions are systematically evaluated:

1. Sexual Initiation and Proceptive Behavior

Sexual initiation is defined as any verbal statement or nonverbal action executed by an individual to signal desire for sexual contact at a moment when the couple is not actively engaged in sexual activity. Initiation is conceptualized as an explicit or implicit invitation along a behavioral continuum. The SAQ captures five distinct modalities of initiation behavior:

• Direct Verbal Initiation: Clear, unambiguous explicit statements articulating a desire for sex (e.g., asking directly, explicitly stating physical wants).
• Ambiguous Verbal Cues: Indirect communications that imply erotic interest without making an explicit demand (e.g., teasing, double entendres, code words known to the dyad, subtle compliments, pet names).
• Physical Contact: Non-genital tactile behaviors used to establish physical intimacy (e.g., snuggling, cuddling, kissing, stroking, hugging, massaging).
• Sexual Cues: Overt physical actions that directly signal sexual readiness or genital focus (e.g., removing or loosening clothing, allowing hands to wander, fondling, lying down provocatively).
• Suggestive Movements and Actions: Contextual and postural maneuvers aimed at creating an erotic environment (e.g., suggestive body posturing, sustained eye contact, altering vocal tone, playing romantic music, dimming lights, pouring drinks, sharing erotic media).

2. Receptivity and Refusal Dynamics

The noninitiator’s initial reaction is conceptualized as a critical branching node in the sexual interaction. Receptivity encompasses immediate enthusiasm, affirmative verbal statements, and physical reciprocating behaviors. Conversely, refusal encompasses a spectrum of verbal and nonverbal gatekeeping behaviors:

• Verbal Refusal Modes: Categorized into flat refusal without elaboration, somatic/physical justifications (e.g., fatigue, headache, illness), environmental/temporal constraints (e.g., lack of time, impending obligations, presence of children), and mood-related barriers (e.g., stress, negative affect, emotional disconnect).
• Nonverbal Refusal Modes: Physical resistance strategies, including passive non-responsiveness, pulling away, disengaging physical contact, or negotiating a regression to a lower tier of sexual expression (e.g., offering affectionate cuddling while disallowing genital touch).

3. Dyadic Conflict Resolution and Sexual Compliance

When an initiation is met with disinterest, a state of dyadic disagreement ensues. The SAQ captures the duration of this tension (in minutes), the communicative pathway used to resolve the impasse, and the subjective satisfaction felt by both partners regarding their own and each other’s conduct during resolution. Furthermore, when sexual activity occurs despite initial reluctance, the SAQ operationalizes sexual compliance—the motivational rationale driving an initially reluctant individual to yield to the initiation (e.g., partner pleasing, avoidance of conflict, gradual arousal induction, guilt reduction).

4. Covert/Unenacted Sexual Desire

The SAQ uniquely tracks unexpressed sexual intent—instances where an individual experiences subjective sexual interest or contemplates initiating sexual contact but elects not to do so. The qualitative taxonomy of non-initiation reasons includes anticipated partner rejection, fear of negative emotional responses, fatigue, perceived situational inappropriateness, or lingering relationship resentment.

5. Evaluative Outcomes and Experiential Dimensions

Following completed interactions, the SAQ captures behavioral breadth (inventories of behaviors ranging from kissing to oral-genital contact and coitus), interaction duration, individual subjective pleasure, perceived partner pleasure, and meta-cognitive reporting confidence.

6. Theoretical Framework

The Sexual Activity Questionnaire is anchored in three foundational paradigms of human sexuality and interpersonal psychology: Sexual Script Theory, Social Exchange Theory, and the Cognitive-Behavioral Dyadic Process Model.

Sexual Script Theory

Originally formulated by sociologists John Gagnon and William Simon (1973), sexual script theory posits that human sexual behavior is not an instinctual, reflex-driven drive, but a socially scripted performance structured across three hierarchical levels: cultural scenarios, interpersonal scripts, and intrapsychic scripts. Cultural scenarios dictate normative gender roles; historically, traditional Western heteronormative scripts assigned the male partner the active role of sexual “initiator” or pursuer, while assigning the female partner the reactive role of sexual “gatekeeper” or restrictor.

Interpersonal scripts represent the shared, negotiated rules that specific couples develop to translate cultural guidelines into behavioral reality. Intrapsychic scripts govern internal desires, fantasies, and private motives. Byers and colleagues developed the SAQ to empirically capture how these scripts are enacted, challenged, and renegotiated in daily life. For instance, Byers and Heinlein (1989) and O’Sullivan and Byers (1992) used the SAQ to demonstrate that while traditional gender scripts remain observable, contemporary couples exhibit substantial bilateral initiation, shifting away from rigid male-initiation/female-refusal archetypes.

Social Exchange and Interdependence Theories

Under Social Exchange Theory (Kelley & Thibaut, 1978), intimate interactions involve the exchange of interpersonal rewards and costs. Initiating sexual contact exposes an individual to the emotional cost of vulnerability and potential rejection. Conversely, refusing a partner’s initiation introduces relational friction and the risk of generating partner distress. The SAQ captures the micro-exchange dynamics of these scenarios, tracking how partners balance the interpersonal costs of sexual compliance against the costs of unresolved conflict.

The Byers and Heinlein Dyadic Process Model

The direct architectural blueprint of the SAQ stems from the dyadic process model articulated by Byers and Heinlein (1989). As illustrated below, sexual activity on any given occasion is the culmination of a reciprocal feedback loop connecting individual predispositions, situational contexts, and interactive communicative events:

[ Individual & Dyadic Factors ] 
  (Relationship Length, Satisfaction, Gender Roles)
                 ↓
[ Covert Decision Stage ] → [ Decision NOT to Initiate ] → (Internal Attribution / Motives)
                 ↓
[ Overt Initiation Stage ] → [ Verbal / Nonverbal Strategies Used ]
                 ↓
[ Partner Response Stage ]
       /                 
[ Acceptance ]      [ Refusal / Disinterest ]
      |                       |
      |             [ Conflict Negotiation ]
      |                /                     
      |      [ Sexual Compliance ]    [ Termination of Encounter ]
      |                |                     |
[ Sexual Interaction (Duration, Behaviors, Satisfaction, Pleasure) ]

7. Validity

Empirical investigations utilizing the SAQ have generated substantial evidence supporting its construct, convergent, criterion-related, and discriminant validity across married, cohabiting, and dating samples.

Construct and Criterion-Related Validity

The construct validity of the SAQ was established by Byers and Heinlein (1989) in their seminal investigation of married and cohabiting heterosexual couples. In accordance with theoretical hypotheses derived from family life-cycle and marital development models, younger participants and those in relationships of shorter duration exhibited significantly higher daily initiation frequencies than older, longer-partnered respondents. Furthermore, participants who reported higher global marital satisfaction and sexual satisfaction reported significantly more frequent sexual initiations.

Crucially, Byers and Heinlein demonstrated the discriminative utility of separating absolute initiation counts from proportional refusal rates: after statistically controlling for the total number of initiations, higher rates of partner refusal were significantly associated with lower experienced sexual pleasure, decreased global sexual satisfaction, and diminished dyadic adjustment (assessed via the Dyadic Adjustment Scale). Additionally, individuals in longer relationships who reported low sexual pleasure for the female partner exhibited significantly higher frequencies of considering sexual initiation without executing it, validating the SAQ’s covert desire module as an index of behavioral inhibition.

Convergent Validity

In a comprehensive validity and dyadic concordance study, Eno (1994) administered the SAQ to 36 married couples over an extended self-monitoring period, comparing daily diary tracking directly against retrospective baseline recall measures administered prior to the diary phase. Significant positive correlations were established between retrospective recall of sexual initiation frequency and the prospective self-monitoring counts recorded during the week of daily logging (mean correlation r = .71), demonstrating strong convergent validity between real-time behavioral tracking and standardized retrospective indices.

O’Sullivan and Byers (1992) extended the validation of the SAQ to college dating relationships, exploring how behavioral initiation patterns converged with relationship status and dating history. Students who were involved in steady, exclusive dating relationships or who reported a higher frequency of dates in the month preceding the study reported significantly higher rates of sexual initiation and greater variety in their initiation repertoires than participants on initial or casual dates, demonstrating the instrument’s sensitivity to relational commitment and intimacy levels.

8. Reliability

Because the SAQ combines event-level self-monitoring, structured behavioral checklists, and qualitative narrative descriptions rather than functioning as a continuous psychological trait scale, classical internal consistency metrics (such as global Cronbach’s α across the entire instrument) are psychometrically inappropriate for the behavioral log components. Reliability for the SAQ has therefore been established via interrater reliability of qualitative coding, dyadic inter-partner concordance, and subjective respondent accuracy ratings.

Interrater Reliability of Behavioral Coding

The qualitative descriptions of verbal and nonverbal initiation behaviors, refusal explanations, and conflict resolution tactics are classified using standardized objective coding taxonomies. Byers and Heinlein (1989) evaluated inter-coder agreement by having independent, trained raters code participants’ narrative accounts across verbal and nonverbal categories. They demonstrated a mean interrater agreement of .86 (Cohen’s κ and percentage agreement equivalents), reflecting high stability in the operationalized classification system. In the dating validation study by O’Sullivan and Byers (1992), independent coding of verbal and nonverbal dating initiations yielded an average interrater agreement of .87.

Dyadic Concordance (Inter-Spousal Agreement)

A rigorous test of reliability in dyadic diary research involves examining whether both members of a couple, completing logs independently and blind to their partner’s entries, report identical behavioral events. Eno (1994) evaluated dyadic agreement across 36 married couples and found that inter-spouse agreement reached .75 for the identification of sexual initiations and .90 for the characterization of the noninitiator’s initial response (interest vs. disinterest). This high degree of concordance confirms that the SAQ captures verifiable dyadic events rather than idiosyncratic personal projections.

Respondent Confidence and Measurement Stability

At the conclusion of each detailed event record (Parts II and III), participants complete a 6-point meta-cognitive rating evaluating their confidence in the accuracy of their recalled reports (ranging from 1 = very unsure to 6 = very sure). Across all empirical administrations, participants have reported high confidence: Byers and Heinlein (1989) reported a mean confidence rating of 5.5 (SD ≈ 0.7), and O’Sullivan and Byers (1992) reported an average confidence rating of 5.2.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the initiation behavioral inventory within the SAQ was derived through empirical item grouping and exploratory structural analysis conducted by Byers and Heinlein (1989) and O’Sullivan and Byers (1992). The 22-item checklist of initiation behaviors was developed to comprehensively cover the behavioral domain of human proceptive actions without redundant item collinearity.

To reduce these 22 discrete behaviors into statistically manageable and conceptually coherent structural dimensions, data were subjected to empirical reduction and categorization. The behavioral checklist successfully clusters into five distinct structural categories. The empirical taxonomy and its behavioral constituent loadings are detailed below:

Confirmatory investigations by Eno (1994) affirmed that these five empirical categories maintain structural stability across independent couple cohorts, exhibiting distinct correlations with individual levels of sexual assertiveness, attachment security, and communication anxiety.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Sexual Activity Questionnaire is administered as an intensive 7-day self-monitoring diary accompanied by detailed situational episode logs. The architectural attributes of the instrument are summarized below:

• Instrument Type: Event-contingent and daily self-monitoring diary with structured checklist and narrative qualitative coding modules.
• Administration Format: Self-administered paper-and-pencil booklet (originally organized using color-coded sheets: white for Part I, blue for Part II, and yellow for Part III) or secure electronic ecological momentary assessment (EMA) platforms.
• Target Population: Cohabiting, married, or dating couples (adaptable to both different-sex and same-sex partnerships).
• Administration Duration: Approximately 10 minutes total per daily entry; 10 to 15 minutes for detailed situational reports (Parts II and III).
• Structural Composition:
  • Part I (Daily Log): 7 daily records tracking (a) occurrence of initiation (Yes/No), (b) identity of initiator (Man/Woman/Mutual), (c) noninitiator’s immediate initial response (Interested/Uninterested), and (d) non-initiated sexual contemplation (Considered initiating? Yes/No, plus qualitative attribution for non-initiation).
  • Part II (Detailed Disagreement/Refusal Episode): 14 structured and open-ended items completed for the first occasion during the tracking week where an initiation was met with initial partner disinterest. Assesses setting, preceding activity, verbal/nonverbal behaviors, 22-item checklist, duration of disagreement, resolution mechanism, resolution satisfaction, compliance motives, sexual behaviors enacted, duration, pleasure ratings, and reporting confidence.
  • Part III (Detailed Agreement/Mutual Interest Episode): 11 structured and open-ended items (Questions 15–25) completed for the first occasion during the tracking week where an initiation was met with mutual interest. Assesses setting, preceding activity, initiation behaviors, 22-item checklist, initiation satisfaction, sexual behaviors enacted, duration, personal pleasure, perceived partner pleasure, and reporting confidence.
• Response Scales and Scoring:
  • Categorical and Checklist Scales: Binary (Yes/No), nominal categories for initiator identity and behavioral checklists (22 initiation items, 9 sexual behavior items).
  • Satisfaction Ratings: 5-point Likert scales (1 = Very Dissatisfied, 2 = Dissatisfied, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Satisfied, 5 = Very Satisfied).
  • Enjoyment/Pleasure Ratings: 6-point balanced Likert scales (1 = Extremely Unpleasant, 2 = Moderately Unpleasant, 3 = Slightly Unpleasant, 4 = Slightly Pleasant, 5 = Moderately Pleasant, 6 = Extremely Pleasant).
  • Recall Accuracy Confidence: 6-point Likert scales (1 = Very Unsure, 2 = Moderately Unsure, 3 = Slightly Unsure, 4 = Slightly Sure, 5 = Moderately Sure, 6 = Very Sure).
  • Open-Ended Coding: Qualitative responses coded using validated coding keys for location, interactive state, verbal initiation type (4 codes), nonverbal initiation type (4 codes), verbal refusal type (5 codes), and nonverbal refusal type (4 codes).

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Sexual Activity Questionnaire was first published in 1989 by Dr. E. Sandra Byers and Lucia Heinlein in The Journal of Sex Research, with substantial adaptations for dating populations published in 1992 by Dr. Lucia F. O’Sullivan and Dr. E. Sandra Byers. The questionnaire is considered an open-access academic research instrument available for non-commercial educational, clinical, and scholarly research purposes without payment of royalty fees, provided appropriate scholarly citation and authorship attribution are maintained.

Investigators intending to use, adapt, or digitize the SAQ for clinical trials or research studies are encouraged to contact Dr. E. Sandra Byers directly via the Department of Psychology at the University of New Brunswick ([email protected]) to request coding manuals, standardized scoring criteria, and guidelines for adapting the tool for diverse gender identities and sexual orientations.

12. References

The following citations document the primary psychometric validation, methodological conceptualization, and theoretical foundations of the Sexual Activity Questionnaire:

• Byers, E. S., & Heinlein, L. (1989). Predicting initiations and refusals of sexual activity in married and cohabiting heterosexual couples. The Journal of Sex Research, 26(2), 210–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224498909551507
• Eno, R. (1994). Factors related to sexual initiations and responses to initiations within long-term heterosexual relationships (Doctoral dissertation). Department of Psychology, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB, Canada.
• Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Aldine Publishing Company.
• Kelley, H. H., & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. John Wiley & Sons.
• O’Sullivan, L. F., & Byers, E. S. (1992). College students’ incorporation of initiator and restrictor roles in sexual dating interactions. The Journal of Sex Research, 29(3), 435–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499209551656
• Spanier, G. B. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/350547

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)