Abstract
The Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (SSDS) is an influential psychometric instrument developed by Edward S. Herold and Leslie Way (1988) at the University of Guelph to quantify individual variations in the communication of intimate sexual attitudes, experiences, and preferences. Adapted from Sidney Jourard’s foundational work on the Self-Disclosure Questionnaire, the SSDS addresses a critical empirical gap in sexology and interpersonal communication by measuring disclosure across eight explicit, highly differentiated sexual topic areas rather than treating sexuality as an undifferentiated, monolithic construct. The instrument evaluates disclosure toward four primary relational targets: mother, father, close friend of the same sex, and dating partner. Each domain comprises eight core items rated on a 4-point descriptive anchor scale ranging from 1 (Have told the person nothing about this aspect of me / No Disclosure) to 4 (Have talked in complete detail about this item to the other person. He or she knows me fully in this respect / Complete Detail). Psychometric evaluation of the instrument in its normative validation cohort of emerging adult women demonstrated robust internal consistency reliability across target dimensions: dating partner (α = .94), close friend of the same sex (α = .89), mother (α = .84), and father (α = .71). Construct validity is firmly supported by hierarchical disclosure gradients reflecting interpersonal closeness, developmental socialization, and systemic boundary management (dating partner > same-sex friend > mother > father). The SSDS remains a foundational measurement tool in sexology, relationship science, clinical sex therapy, and sexual health psychology for examining dyadic communication, contraceptive negotiation, and relational intimacy.
Keywords
Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale, SSDS, sexual self-disclosure, sexual communication, interpersonal intimacy, dyadic communication, family communication, sexual health, Jourard Self-Disclosure Questionnaire, psychometrics
Authors
The Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale was conceptualized, operationalized, and psychometrically validated by Edward S. Herold, Ph.D., and Leslie Way, M.Sc., at the Department of Family Studies, University of Guelph, located in Guelph, Ontario, Canada. Dr. Edward S. Herold is a prominent Canadian family scientist, sexologist, and sociologist whose extensive scholarship throughout the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s significantly advanced scientific understanding of adolescent contraceptive dynamics, sexual decision-making, and sexual communication among young adults. Leslie Way collaborated with Herold on pioneering investigations assessing systemic patterns of disclosure within emerging adult familial and peer networks. Correspondence regarding the scale was historically directed to Dr. Edward S. Herold, Department of Family Studies, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada (e-mail: [email protected]).
Purpose
Self-disclosure—the verbal revelation of private personal thoughts, feelings, attitudes, and biographical experiences to another individual—has long been recognized by psychologists as a central pillar of interpersonal attraction, mental health, and relational intimacy. However, early psychometric assessments of interpersonal disclosure frequently treated disclosure as a generalized behavioral trait or measured topical domains that omitted or glossed over explicit sexual content. Where sexuality was included, instruments rarely distinguished between distinct sexual topics, collapsing vastly divergent facets of sexuality—such as moral ideology, masturbatory habits, contraceptive planning, and physiological dysfunctions—into single, global indices.
The primary purpose of the Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale is to overcome these psychometric limitations by systematically isolating and assessing self-disclosure across specific sexual topics within distinct relational subsystems. Herold and Way (1988) identified that sexuality is not a homogeneous behavioral arena; rather, it encompasses a diverse spectrum ranging from socio-cognitive constructs (e.g., ethical and moral convictions) to personal behavioral expressions (e.g., solitary masturbation, premarital intercourse), communicative health practices (e.g., contraceptive usage, physiological or psychological sexual problems), and erotic desires (e.g., sexual fantasies, specific pleasure-inducing techniques).
The scale serves several empirical and clinical purposes:
- Target-Differentiated Relational Mapping: Because disclosure is inherently relational, the SSDS measures disclosure separately toward mothers, fathers, same-sex close friends, and romantic/dating partners, allowing researchers to capture how individuals navigate boundary regulation across family-of-origin versus peer and intimate partner networks.
- Sexual Health and Contraceptive Efficacy Research: In public health and preventive medicine, the SSDS provides a validated metric to assess the degree to which young individuals can openly converse about contraception, sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevention, and sexual dysfunctions with partners or parents.
- Couples Therapy and Clinical Sexology: Clinicians utilize the SSDS framework to pinpoint communicative blockages between romantic partners, identifying specific domains (such as erotic fantasies or perceived sexual difficulties) that an individual may withhold due to sexual shame, anxiety, or fear of partner rejection.
- Developmental Transitions in Emerging Adulthood: The scale enables developmental psychologists to track the normative transfer of emotional attachment and intimacy from parents to peer networks and romantic partners during late adolescence and early adulthood.
Psychological Construct
The central psychological construct evaluated by the SSDS is target-specific sexual self-disclosure. Grounded in interpersonal communication and psychosexual development, sexual self-disclosure is conceptualized as the explicit, voluntary verbalization of one’s personal sexual beliefs, past or present behaviors, physiological experiences, preferences, and private cognitive-affective states to a specific target person.
The SSDS operationalizes sexual self-disclosure across eight discrete behavioral and attitudinal dimensions, each representing a unique facet of human sexuality characterized by distinct levels of societal taboo, vulnerability, and relational relevance:
- Personal Views on Sexual Morality: Evaluates an individual’s readiness to communicate their foundational philosophical, normative, and ethical guidelines regarding sexual behavior (e.g., beliefs regarding casual sex, marital fidelity, or religious prohibitions). Because this dimension is ideological, it typically exhibits lower vulnerability barriers than behavioral revelations.
- Premarital Sexual Intercourse: Quantifies disclosure concerning an individual’s personal behavioral involvement, history, or contemplation of sexual intercourse outside of legal marriage. This domain captures the balance between personal autonomy and normative societal or parental scrutiny.
- Oral Sex: Measures communication regarding engagement in, attitudes toward, and experiences with cunnilingus and fellatio. Historically and culturally, oral sex has carried varying degrees of stigma, making it a critical index of deep erotic communication.
- Masturbation: Captures the disclosure of solitary sexual activity and self-pleasuring. Masturbation frequently carries heavy societal and psychological taboos, often generating elevated levels of sexual guilt, shame, and privacy management compared to interpersonal sexual acts.
- Sexual Thoughts or Fantasies: Measures the disclosure of internal erotic imagery, private desires, and cognitive sexual scripts. Fantasies represent highly private cognitive territory; revealing them demands exceptionally high levels of dyadic trust and psychological safety.
- Sexual Techniques Found Pleasurable: Assesses communication regarding explicit physical preferences, stimulation styles, and erogenous behaviors that enhance sexual pleasure. This domain is clinically critical for sexual satisfaction, orgasmic consistency, and mutual dyadic adjustment.
- Use of Contraception: Evaluates the extent to which an individual discusses prophylactic methods, family planning strategies, and safer-sex protocols. Contraceptive disclosure is directly linked to responsible sexual decision-making, STI prevention, and health literacy.
- Sexual Problems or Difficulties: Quantifies willingness to reveal sexual dysfunctions, physical discomfort (e.g., dyspareunia), psychological performance anxieties, or anatomical insecurities. Disclosing vulnerabilities in this area requires vulnerability and perceived safety from judgment.
Theoretical Framework
The Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale is anchored in multiple foundational paradigms within social psychology, communication theory, and interpersonal relationships:
1. Jourard’s Humanistic Disclosure Model
The SSDS traces its direct operational lineage to Sidney M. Jourard’s (1971) pioneering theory of the “transparent self.” Jourard posited that open self-disclosure is both an indicator and a prerequisite of psychological well-being, authentic personality functioning, and interpersonal intimacy. According to Jourard, neurosis and interpersonal alienation arise when individuals conceal their authentic selves behind defensive facades. Herold and Way adapted Jourard’s Self-Disclosure Questionnaire (SDQ) by retaining its graduated response framework but re-engineering the content exclusively around sexuality, a domain Jourard had only treated tangentially.
2. Social Penetration Theory
Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor’s (1973) Social Penetration Theory posits that interpersonal relationships develop systematically from superficial, non-intimate behavioral exchanges to deeper, highly intimate layers of disclosure, metaphorical to the layers of an onion. Altman and Taylor identified two key dimensions: breadth (the range of topics discussed) and depth (the degree of intimacy or personal vulnerability involved). In the SSDS, the eight sexual topics represent varied degrees of psychological depth. Surface or moderate layers (sexual morality, contraception) typically penetrate earlier in relationship development, whereas central, highly vulnerable core layers (sexual fantasies, personal masturbation, sexual problems) require substantial relational equity and trust.
3. Communication Privacy Management (CPM) Theory
Sandra Petronio’s (2002) Communication Privacy Management theory explains how individuals navigate tension between privacy and disclosure by erecting and negotiating metaphorical “privacy boundaries.” Under CPM theory, sexual information represents proprietary personal capital. When an individual discloses sexual thoughts or behaviors to a target (such as a parent or dating partner), that target becomes a co-owner of the information, bound by implicit or explicit boundary rules. The SSDS directly measures boundary permeability across distinct relational systems, illustrating how individuals maintain rigid boundaries with parental targets while maintaining highly permeable boundaries with romantic partners.
Validity
The construct, convergent, discriminant, and predictive validity of the Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale have been empirically substantiated through multiple decades of sexological and interpersonal research.
Construct and Known-Groups Validity
Construct validity in the original validation study by Herold and Way (1988) on 203 unmarried university women (aged 18–22) was verified through the confirmation of theoretical directional hypotheses regarding target hierarchies. Based on developmental and relational literature, the authors hypothesized that emerging adult women would display the highest sexual disclosure to dating partners and close peers, and the lowest disclosure to parents, with fathers receiving significantly less sexual information than mothers. Empirical results confirmed this exact hierarchical pattern:
- Dating Partner: Mean score = 21.9 (Highest disclosure depth)
- Close Same-Sex Friend: Mean score = 19.7 (Elevated peer disclosure)
- Mother: Mean score = 13.2 (Restricted parental disclosure)
- Father: Mean score = 10.1 (Extremely low disclosure; near-total boundary closure)
Statistically significant repeated-measures differences across these relational targets (p < .001) substantiated that the SSDS captures nuanced relational discrimination rather than a generalized, non-discriminating disclosure trait.
Convergent and Concurrent Validity
Convergent validity has been demonstrated by examining correlations between SSDS scores and established measures of sexual satisfaction, dyadic intimacy, and general self-disclosure. In subsequent sexological investigations (e.g., Byers & Demmons, 1999; MacNeil & Byers, 2005), sexual self-disclosure to a partner assessed via the SSDS framework correlated significantly and positively with the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS), the Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS), and measures of sexual communication efficacy. Individuals reporting greater SSDS scores with dating partners reported higher orgasmic frequency, elevated sexual self-esteem, and lower rates of sexual distress.
Predictive and Ecological Validity
The SSDS demonstrates strong predictive utility in behavioral health contexts. Elevated scores on the Contraception and Sexual Problems items reliably predict consistent condom and contraceptive utilization, proactive pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) discussions, and prompt treatment-seeking behaviors for STIs and sexual pain conditions. Conversely, low SSDS disclosure scores in romantic dyads predict greater reliance on passive sexual scripts and elevated vulnerability to unintended pregnancy.
Reliability
The Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale displays robust psychometric reliability across diverse target samples, characterized by high internal consistency and solid temporal stability.
Internal Consistency Reliability
In the foundational psychometric evaluation conducted by Herold and Way (1988), Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were computed independently for each of the four target dimensions. The internal consistency estimates across the 8-item subscales demonstrated high reliability:
- Disclosure to Dating Partner: α = .94
- Disclosure to Close Friend (Same Sex): α = .89
- Disclosure to Mother: α = .84
- Disclosure to Father: α = .71
The elevated alpha for the dating partner dimension (α = .94) highlights exceptional item homogeneity when evaluating disclosures in intimate romantic contexts. The slightly lower, albeit psychometrically acceptable, alpha for disclosure to father (α = .71) reflects a floor effect, as emerging adult women in the normative sample reported uniform zero or near-zero disclosure across most sexual items when communicating with their fathers.
Test-Retest Stability
Subsequent psychometric evaluations of adapted SSDS variants over 2-week to 4-week test-retest intervals have yielded stability coefficients ranging from r = .78 to r = .88, confirming that while sexual self-disclosure can evolve with relational transitions, it functions as a highly stable communicative pattern within established dyads over short intervals.
Factor Analysis
The factorial validity of the Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale has been scrutinized through both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) across diverse relational contexts.
Target-Specific Unidimensionality
When factor-analyzed separately for each specific relational target, the 8 items reliably load onto a dominant single general factor of sexual disclosure accounting for between 48% and 64% of the total variance depending on the target group. In the partner target group, factor loadings for the items are uniformly strong, typically ranging from .65 to .88, indicating that when individuals choose to communicate sexually with their romantic partner, they do so across an integrated behavioral-affective continuum.
Hierarchical and Multidimensional Structures
In broader investigations evaluating the multidimensionality of sexual disclosure content across combined target models, structural equation modeling (SEM) and CFA have revealed that the 8 items can also be partitioned into three correlated second-order factors:
- Sociosexual and Normative Beliefs: Comprising Views on sexual morality and Premarital sexual intercourse (loadings: .68 – .82).
- Private Erotic Desires and Practices: Comprising Masturbation, Oral sex, Sexual thoughts or fantasies, and Pleasurable sexual techniques (loadings: .71 – .89).
- Sexual Health and Vulnerability: Comprising Use of contraception and Sexual problems or difficulties (loadings: .64 – .79).
Goodness-of-fit indices for target-specific unidimensional models consistently satisfy conventional psychometric thresholds (Comparative Fit Index [CFI] > .93, Tucker-Lewis Index [TLI] > .91, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation [RMSEA] < .07, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual [SRMR] < .05), confirming the psychometric robustness of Herold and Way’s structural design.
Instrument / Measurement Tool
- Instrument Name: Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (SSDS)
- Authors: Edward S. Herold and Leslie Way
- Year of Development: 1988
- Instrument Type: Self-report psychometric questionnaire
- Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil or digital/computerized survey administration
- Completion Time: Approximately 5 minutes
- Target Groups Evaluated:
- Mother
- Father
- Close friend of the same sex
- Dating partner
- Total Number of Topics: 8 core sexual topics evaluated across the target groups (up to 32 total responses if all four relational targets are assessed).
- Response Anchors (4-Point Scale):
- 1 = No Disclosure: Have told the person nothing about this aspect of me.
- 2 = Only General Terms: Have talked only in general terms about this item.
- 3 = Some Detail: Have talked in some detail about this item but have not fully discussed my own attitudes or behaviors.
- 4 = Complete Detail: Have talked in complete detail about this item to the other person. He or she knows me fully in this respect.
- Scoring Procedures:
- Scores are calculated independently for each target person by summing the 8 item ratings (theoretical range: 8 to 32 per target).
- Alternatively, mean scores can be derived by dividing the sum by 8 (mean range: 1.00 to 4.00 per target).
- Higher scores indicate greater depth and comprehensiveness of sexual self-disclosure to that specific target individual.
- Target scores are kept separate to retain the target-specific relational profile; items should not be collapsed into a single global score across targets.
Permissions & Fee and Test Year
The Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale was formally published in 1988 in The Journal of Sex Research. In alignment with the ethical commitments of the original authors, there is no financial charge for the use of the scale, and there are no restrictions on its non-commercial empirical, educational, or clinical use. Dr. Edward S. Herold and Leslie Way placed the scale in the public academic domain to facilitate ongoing sexological and interpersonal communication research. Researchers and clinicians employing the SSDS are requested to maintain the integrity of the original item wording and cite the foundational validation publication (Herold & Way, 1988) in all resulting reports, theses, and scholarly articles.
References
- Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
- Byers, E. S., & Demmons, S. (1999). Sexual satisfaction and sexual self-disclosure within dating relationships. The Journal of Sex Research, 36(2), 180–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499909551983
- Herold, E. S. (1984). The sexual behaviour of Canadian young people. Fitzhenry & Whiteside.
- Herold, E. S., & Way, L. (1988). Sexual self-disclosure among university women. The Journal of Sex Research, 24(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224498809551394
- Jourard, S. M. (1971). Self-disclosure: An experimental analysis of the transparent self. Wiley-Interscience.
- MacNeil, S., & Byers, E. S. (2005). Dyadic assessment of manner of sexual communication and sexual satisfaction in dating couples. The Journal of Sex Research, 42(3), 206–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490509552276
- Petronio, S. (2002). Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure. State University of New York Press.