Sexual Opinion Survey

1. Abstract

The Sexual Opinion Survey (SOS) is a premier psychometric instrument developed by William A. Fisher, Donn Byrne, Leonard A. White, and Kathryn Kelley (1988) to assess the personality dimension of erotophobia–erotophilia. This bipolar dispositional construct captures individual variability in emotional, evaluative, and approach-avoidance responses to sexual stimuli, anchored on one end by negative affect and behavioral avoidance (erotophobia) and on the other by positive affect and behavioral approach (erotophilia). Comprising 21 self-report items evaluated on a 7-point bipolar Likert-type response format, the scale systematically evaluates affective orientations across a diverse spectrum of sexual behaviors, including exposure to explicit materials (erotica), masturbation, homosexual attraction, oral sex, and unconventional practices.

Extensive psychometric investigations have established that the SOS exhibits exceptional reliability and construct validity. Across collegiate, clinical, and community populations, the scale demonstrates robust internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients consistently ranging between .82 and .89, and test–retest coefficients exceeding .85 across intervals ranging from two to ten weeks. Factor analytic investigations predominantly support a single, overarching, generalized evaluative dimension, while subordinate factor structures reflect distinct stimulus modalities such as visual erotica, self-directed sexual behavior, and non-normative intimacy. Scores on the SOS possess significant predictive utility regarding sexual healthcare practices, contraceptive adherence, frequency of preventative examinations (e.g., testicular and breast self-examinations, gynecological screenings), sexual risk-taking, and responsiveness to sex therapy. Consequently, the SOS remains a foundational measure within sexology, public health, and social psychology.

2. Keywords

Sexual Opinion Survey, SOS, erotophobia, erotophilia, sexual attitudes, sexual affect, psychometrics, Donn Byrne, William A. Fisher, sexual behavior, sexology, sexual disposition

3. Authors

The Sexual Opinion Survey was developed and validated through a programmatic series of investigations conducted by prominent social psychologists and sexologists:

• William A. Fisher, Ph.D.: Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Psychology and Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada. Dr. Fisher is widely recognized for his theoretical contributions to reproductive health, social psychology, and the Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills (IMB) model.
• Donn Byrne, Ph.D. (1931–2014): Former Professor and Chair of the Department of Psychology at the State University of New York at Albany. Dr. Byrne was an internationally acclaimed psychologist who pioneered the empirical study of interpersonal attraction, sexual attitudes, and evaluative conditioning.
• Leonard A. White, Ph.D.: Research Psychologist formerly affiliated with the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences and the Department of Psychology at the State University of New York at Albany.
• Kathryn Kelley, Ph.D.: Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the State University of New York at Albany, specializing in gender roles, interpersonal aggression, and human sexual response patterns.

4. Purpose

The fundamental purpose of the Sexual Opinion Survey is to provide a standardized, objective, and theoretically grounded instrument capable of quantifying an individual’s enduring evaluative disposition toward sexual cues. Prior to the formal introduction of the SOS, empirical investigations into human sexuality frequently suffered from ad-hoc attitude metrics that lacked rigorous psychometric validation, conflated behavioral experience with affective response, or failed to measure the broad range of emotional reactions elicited by explicit stimuli. The SOS was engineered to remediate these conceptual and methodological deficits by measuring learned affective-evaluative responses independent of specific moral judgments or factual sexual knowledge.

In clinical, research, and applied settings, the instrument fulfills multiple key objectives:

• Predicting Health-Protective Behaviors: Research consistently demonstrates that individuals categorized as erotophobic avoid sex-related learning environments, experience profound discomfort discussing contraception with healthcare providers, and exhibit reduced compliance with preventative screenings (such as Pap smears, pelvic examinations, and clinical testicular exams). Conversely, erotophiles show elevated rates of preventative self-care and contraceptive vigilance.
• Evaluating Sexual Dysfunctions and Clinical Interventions: In psychosexual therapy, the SOS provides clinicians with an empirical baseline to measure patient distress, sexual avoidance, and performance-related anxiety. Because erotophobia is tightly linked with autonomic avoidance and negative sexual affect, pre- and post-intervention evaluations assist sex therapists in gauging the desensitization of negative emotional reactions.
• Investigating Communication Dynamics and Relationship Quality: The SOS serves as an important predictor of interpersonal sexual communication. Couples exhibiting divergent erotophobia–erotophilia orientations frequently encounter communication impasses, misaligned sexual desire, and disparities in sexual repertoire exploration.
• Epidemiological and Public Health Research: The scale enables public health professionals to tailor safe-sex interventions. Individuals with high erotophobia frequently engage in unplanned sexual encounters without protection due to an inability to anticipate, discuss, and purchase condoms beforehand, as doing so requires confronting sexual reality.

5. Psychological Construct

The construct operationalized by the Sexual Opinion Survey is erotophobia–erotophilia, formulated by Fisher, Byrne, and colleagues as a continuous, unipolar or bipolar personality dimension characterized by learned dispositions to respond to sexual cues with positive or negative affect. This construct is not equivalent to sexual drive (libido), hypersexuality, or moral conservatism, but represents an overarching emotional-evaluative substrate that regulates approach and avoidance behavior across varied sexual domains.

The Erotophobia Extreme

Erotophobia represents the negative anchor of the continuum. Individuals scoring low on the SOS display a pronounced tendency to respond to sexual stimuli with aversion, anxiety, guilt, embarrassment, and behavioral avoidance. When confronted with explicit materials, discussions of anatomy, non-traditional sexual techniques, or anatomical self-exploration, erotophobic individuals exhibit:

• Physiological and emotional distress, including feelings of disgust, nausea, and emotional perturbation (e.g., Item 12: “Almost all erotic (sexually explicit) material is nauseating”).
• Severe communicative inhibition, wherein interpersonal discussions of sexual desires or boundary negotiations trigger acute embarrassment (e.g., Item 6: “If people thought I was interested in oral sex, I would be embarrassed”).
• Anticipatory avoidance of sexual cognitions and sensory stimuli, often suppressing sexual daydreams and eschewing sexual information (e.g., Item 19: “I do not enjoy daydreaming about sexual matters”).

The Erotophilia Extreme

Erotophilia constitutes the positive pole of the continuum. Individuals who score highly on the SOS manifest approach-oriented, positive, and inquisitive emotional responses toward sexual cues. Their psychological profile is characterized by:

• Affective pleasure, intellectual curiosity, and aesthetic enjoyment regarding explicit content (e.g., Item 1: “I think it would be very entertaining to look at erotica”).
• Acceptance and comfort regarding solitary sexual behavior and bodily autonomy (e.g., Item 4: “Masturbation can be an exciting experience”).
• Tolerance, non-defensiveness, and openness toward diverse sexual practices, orientations, and varied interpersonal contexts (e.g., Item 10: “Thoughts that I may have homosexual tendencies would not worry me at all”; Item 17: “The thought of engaging in unusual sex practices is highly arousing”).

Key Dimensions Assessed Across the Items

While the SOS is structured as a unidimensional assessment, the items sample across five distinct sub-domains of sexual stimuli:

1. Visual and Literary Erotica: Evaluates affective reactions to explicit films, books, and images (Items 1, 2, 9, 12, 14, 15, 20).
2. Masturbation and Autoeroticism: Gauges emotional comfort with self-stimulation, physical manipulation of one’s own genitalia, and autoerotic imagery (Items 4, 16, 18).
3. Homosexual and Non-Heteronormative Cues: Measures comfort with same-sex attraction, non-defensiveness regarding homosexual identity, and reactions to peers’ sexual diversity (Items 5, 10, 11, 16).
4. Conventional and Partnered Behaviors: Captures subjective arousal and anticipation of sexual intercourse, social nudity, and daydreams (Items 3, 8, 19).
5. Unconventional and Public Sexual Practices: Explores responses to non-traditional behaviors, multi-partner arrangements, exhibitionism, and oral contact (Items 6, 7, 13, 17, 21).

6. Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture undergirding the Sexual Opinion Survey is derived from classical social learning theory, evaluative conditioning, and Donn Byrne’s affect-reinforcement model. Byrne and Fisher posited that human sexual behaviors are not merely biological reflexes or cognitive calculations, but are primarily guided by internalized affective responses developed across an individual’s developmental trajectory.

The Socialization and Conditioning Paradigm

From infancy through adolescence, individuals are systematically exposed to direct and indirect reinforcement schedules regarding bodily functions and sexuality. In societies where sexual topics are met with punishment, shame, religious admonishment, or parental condemnation, sexual cues become conditioned stimuli associated with negative autonomic arousal, shame, and fear. Through standard Pavlovian conditioning and secondary evaluative conditioning, any stimulus conceptually or physically adjacent to sex—such as anatomical vocabulary, contraceptive paraphernalia, or erotic depictions—triggers immediate affective aversion.

Conversely, when socialization environments present sexuality with affirmative reinforcement, factual openness, and positive modeling, sexual cues become paired with pleasurable emotional states and exploratory behavioral tendencies. Thus, the SOS operationalizes an individual’s accumulated history of affective conditioning.

The Affective-Cognitive Mediational Sequence

Fisher and Byrne articulated a mediational model detailing how affective dispositions dictate external behaviors. When an individual encounters a sexual cue or prospective sexual situation, the following cognitive-affective chain unfolds:

1. Initial Affective Response: An automatic, conditioned emotional response is activated, ranging along the erotophobia–erotophilia continuum.
2. Cognitive Processing and Informational Filtering: Erotophobes deploy attentional defense mechanisms, active perceptual avoidance, and cognitive distortion to minimize exposure to the threatening stimulus. Erotophiles exhibit perceptual vigilance, cognitive elaborations, and informational retention.
3. Behavioral Execution: The resulting behavior reflects approach or avoidance. In an approach posture, an individual can acquire sexual knowledge, communicate needs, use contraception systematically, and undergo medical examinations. In an avoidance posture, individuals fail to prepare for sexual intercourse, avoid purchasing barrier protection due to embarrassment, and delay vital medical screenings.

7. Validity

The construct, convergent, discriminant, and criterion-related validities of the Sexual Opinion Survey have been evaluated across several decades of empirical research.

Construct and Convergent Validity

Construct validity is substantiated by significant, theoretically predicted correlations with an array of personality and sexuality metrics:

• Mosher Guilt Inventory: The SOS demonstrates strong negative correlations (ranging from r = −.50 to r = −.68) with Mosher’s measures of sex guilt, validating that erotophobia aligns directly with deep-seated sexual guilt, moralistic self-punishment, and subjective discomfort.
• Sociosexuality: Significant positive correlations (r = .40 to .55) are observed with the Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI), showing that erotophilic individuals are more receptive to uncommitted sexual encounters and diverse sexual exploration.
• Sexual Sensation Seeking: Scores correlate positively (r = .45 to .58) with Zuckerman’s sensation-seeking dimensions, particularly thrill-seeking and disinhibition within the sexual domain.
• Sexual Knowledge: Positive correlations are consistently identified between erotophilia and objective tests of human sexual anatomy and contraceptive knowledge, reflecting erotophiles’ willingness to read sexual health manuals and engage with educational curricula.

Discriminant Validity

The SOS has demonstrated acceptable discriminant validity against unrelated affective and cognitive constructs:

• General Trait Anxiety: Correlations with general state-trait anxiety metrics (e.g., the Spielberger STAI) remain weak and non-significant (typically r < .15), indicating that erotophobia is not merely generalized neuroticism or trait anxiety, but an emotion-specific response to sexual stimuli.
• Social Desirability: Correlations with the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale are minimal (r values typically between −.08 and .12), establishing that high erotophilia scores do not reflect a simple tendency toward disingenuous self-presentation or excessive conformity.

Predictive and Criterion Validity

Criterion-related validity is supported by experimental and observational behavioral paradigms:

• Contraceptive Vigilance: In landmark studies by Fisher and Byrne, erotophilia scores positively predicted consistent condom use, oral contraceptive compliance, and proactive communication with romantic partners regarding birth control.
• Clinical Health Screenings: Women scoring high in erotophilia report significantly higher lifetime frequencies of routine gynecological exams, whereas erotophobic women systematically delay Pap tests due to anticipatory anxiety and shame surrounding clinical nudity.
• Laboratory Erotica Consumption: In experimental laboratory trials, participants scoring high in erotophilia spent significantly more time viewing explicit visual slides and reading erotic scripts, exhibiting positive subjective arousal, whereas erotophobic subjects terminated exposure early and reported elevated nausea and moral indignation.

8. Reliability

The psychometric stability of the Sexual Opinion Survey has been demonstrated across diverse demographic cohorts, national contexts, and clinical samples.

Internal Consistency

Internal consistency metrics for the full 21-item SOS are strong across both female and male cohorts:

• In the definitive validation paper by Fisher et al. (1988), Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were reported at α = .86 for males and α = .89 for females across large collegiate samples.
• Subsequent cross-cultural evaluations (e.g., in Spanish, Portuguese, German, and Japanese translations) have yielded comparable coefficients, consistently ranging between α = .82 and α = .91.
• Corrected item-total correlations across the 21 items are uniformly acceptable, with the vast majority of items demonstrating item-total correlations ranging between r = .38 and r = .68.

Test–Retest Reliability

Temporal stability evaluations demonstrate that the SOS measures an enduring personality trait rather than transient mood states:

• Across a two-week interval, Fisher et al. (1988) observed a test-retest reliability coefficient of r = .85 (p < .001).
• Over an extended test-retest interval of eight to ten weeks, stability coefficients remained elevated, ranging from r = .80 to r = .86, confirming high longitudinal stability in the absence of targeted desensitization or psychotherapeutic interventions.

9. Factor Analysis

The latent structural architecture of the Sexual Opinion Survey has generated extensive discussion in the psychometric literature, focusing on the tension between a parsimonious unidimensional model and multidimensional factor models.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

In original principal components and principal axis factoring analyses conducted by Fisher et al. (1988), an unrotated first factor accounted for a substantial proportion of the total common variance (accounting for approximately 30% to 38% of total variance depending on the sample). All 21 items exhibited substantial positive loadings on this primary dimension (with factor loadings typically ranging from .35 to .72), lending empirical support to the clinical treatment of the SOS as a single global measure of erotophobia–erotophilia.

However, when oblique or orthogonal (Varimax) rotations are applied, several distinct subordinate factors consistently emerge:

• Factor 1: Erotica / Explicit Media: Driven by Items 1, 2, 9, 12, 14, 15, and 20, loading heavily on positive arousal versus disgust toward sexually explicit materials.
• Factor 2: Masturbatory and Genital Autonomy: Defined by Items 4, 16, and 18, reflecting comfort with autoerotic genital manipulation.
• Factor 3: Homosexuality and Same-Sex Openness: Anchored by Items 5, 10, and 11, assessing low distress and acceptance toward same-sex attraction and gay peers.
• Factor 4: Non-Traditional / Group Sexual Practices: Comprising Items 6, 7, 13, 17, and 21, evaluating interest and tolerance toward group sex, multiple partners, and unconventional sexual expressions.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Subsequent confirmatory factor analytic studies (e.g., White et al., Byrne et al.) have evaluated competing structural models:

• Single-Factor Global Model: Goodness-of-fit indices often indicate modest fit (χ²/df > 3.0, CFI ≈ .88, RMSEA ≈ .075), acceptable for general screening, though capturing unmodeled secondary variance.
• Higher-Order Hierarchical Model: A hierarchical model specifying a general, higher-order erotophobia–erotophilia factor governing three to four distinct first-order factors yields superior model fit (χ²/df < 2.2, CFI ≥ .94, TLI ≥ .93, RMSEA ≈ .048). This confirms that while specific stimulus modalities (e.g., explicit media vs. homosexuality) represent distinct sub-facets, they are unified under the overarching latent disposition of sexual affect.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

The operational characteristics and administrative guidelines for the Sexual Opinion Survey are outlined below:

• Instrument Type: Standardized self-report psychometric rating scale.
• Primary Target Construct: Erotophobia–Erotophilia personality dimension.
• Target Population: Adults and adolescents aged 16 and older; utilized in university cohorts, clinical sexology practices, public health research, and sociological studies.
• Item Count: 21 items.
• Administration Time: Approximately 5 to 10 minutes.
• Response Format: 7-point bipolar semantic differential continuum anchored by “I strongly agree” at one pole and “I strongly disagree” at the opposite pole, denoted visually by seven intervening intervals (: : : : : :).
• Scoring and Directionality:
  • Scores on each item range from 1 to 7.
  • A higher final total score represents greater erotophilia (positive affect, approach orientation), whereas a lower final total score represents greater erotophobia (negative affect, avoidance orientation).
  • Positively phrased erotophilic items: Items where strong agreement denotes erotophilia are scored directly from 7 (“I strongly agree”) down to 1 (“I strongly disagree”). These include: Items 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 18, and 21.
  • Negatively phrased erotophobic items: Items where strong agreement denotes erotophobia are reverse-scored from 1 (“I strongly agree”) up to 7 (“I strongly disagree”). These include: Items 2, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, and 20.
• Total Score Range: 21 to 147 points.
  • 21 – 67: Erotophobic disposition (elevated sexual anxiety, guilt, and behavioral avoidance).
  • 68 – 100: Moderate / ambivalent sexual affect.
  • 101 – 147: Erotophilic disposition (high openness, positive sexual affect, and approach tendencies).

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Sexual Opinion Survey was developed between the late 1970s and early 1980s, culminating in its definitive publication in 1988:

• Year of Formal Publication: 1988 (preliminary versions were documented in conference proceedings and methodological chapters in 1977 and 1979).
• Original Copyright: Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality (SSSS), published in the Journal of Sex Research.
• Permissions and Academic Use: The scale items were published directly in the academic literature for non-commercial educational, scientific, and empirical clinical research. Researchers and clinicians may utilize the instrument without fee, provided appropriate scholarly attribution and citation are accorded to William A. Fisher and colleagues (1988). Commercial reproduction, inclusion in commercial software platforms, or distribution in commercial survey batteries requires formal licensing through Taylor & Francis or the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality.

12. References

Below is a curated selection of seminal academic sources documenting the development, theoretical basis, and psychometric validation of the Sexual Opinion Survey:

• Byrne, D. (1977). The imagery of sex. In J. Money & H. Musaph (Eds.), Handbook of Sexology (pp. 327–350). Excerpta Medica.
• Byrne, D., & Fisher, W. A. (1983). Adolescents, Sex, and Contraception. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Byrne, D., Kelley, K., & Fisher, W. A. (1993). Unwanted pregnancy, contraception, and academic psychology: The practical consequences of affective dispositions. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 34(3), 291–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0078783
• Fisher, W. A. (1984). Predicting contraceptive behavior among university students: The role of emotion and information. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14(3), 267–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1984.tb02236.x
• Fisher, W. A., Byrne, D., White, L. A., & Kelley, K. (1988). Erotophobia-erotophilia as a dimension of personality. The Journal of Sex Research, 25(1), 123–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224498809551448
• Gerrard, M., Gibbons, F. X., & Reis, T. J. (1991). Erotophobia-erotophilia, contraception, and pregnancy: A study of vulnerable young women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(4), 589–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.61.4.589
• Kelley, K. (1985). Sex, sex guilt, and response to erotica. In D. Byrne & K. Kelley (Eds.), Alternative Approaches to the Study of Sexual Behavior (pp. 107–135). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Mosher, D. L. (1966). The development and multitrait-multimethod matrix analysis of three measures of three aspects of guilt. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 30(1), 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022941
• White, L. A., Byrne, D., & Fisher, W. A. (1984). The effects of erotophobia-erotophilia on the acquisition of sexual information and sexual behavior. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 10(2), 24–29.

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)