The effects of translating the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire from English to Mandarin: a test of reliability and validity

Article

<< Previous

Next >>

Contents Vol 9(4)

doi:10.1071/SH11008

Publishing on sexual health from the widest perspective

	Search




	Advanced Search



	Journal Home

	About the Journal

	Editorial Committee

	Contacts



	Content

	Online Early

	Current Issue

	Just Accepted

	All Issues

	Online Early

	Special Issues

	Sample Issue



	For Authors

	General Information

	Instructions to Authors

	Submit Article

	Open Access



	For Referees

	Referee Guidelines

	Review Article

	Annual Referee Index



	For Advertisers



	For Subscribers

	Subscription Prices

	Customer Service

	Print Publication Dates

e-Alerts

Subscribe to our Email Alert or

feeds for the latest journal papers.

Connect with us

Interview with Kit Fairley

Hear Kit Fairley speak about what is sexual health.

The effects of translating the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire from English to Mandarin: a test of reliability and validity

Peng Tao ^A ^B ^E, Rosemary Coates ^B, Yun Zhao ^C and Bruce Maycock ^D

^A Research and Education Center in Sexual Health, Harbin Medical University, Hei Longjiang 15001, China.
^B Department of Sexology, School of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
^C Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
^D Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.
^E Corresponding author. Email: pengtao1@china.com

Sexual Health 9(4) 304-313 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/SH11008
Submitted: 21 January 2011 Accepted: 30 October 2011 Published: 13 January 2012





	PDF (265 KB) $25



	Export Citation

Print

Abstract

Background: In China, sexuality studies using validated psychosexual instruments are limited, with no valid Mandarin language version of a sexuality inventory with psychometric properties available for use. Thus, the Mandarin version of the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire (M-MSQ), comprising four subscales, originating from the Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire, was tested for its psychometric properties. Methods: A convenience sampling technique was employed to recruit 200 oil workers (100 males and 100 females) in northern China. Originally, 158 participants (84 males and 74 females) completed the questionnaire; these accounted for 79% of the total study sample. From this group, a subsample of 50 participants (25 males and 25 females) was randomly selected to investigate the test–retest reliability. Of these, the responses of 33 participants (18 males and 15 females) were valid. The analysis on reliability was based on Cronbach’s α, Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) and the intraclass correlation coefficient, also including evaluation on criterion validity and discriminatory validity. Results: The M-MSQ was found to be homogeneous in factor structure, comparing well with the original questionnaire. Both the discriminatory validity and the criterion-related validity were satisfactory in the total sample and gender groups, in addition, the overall reliability of the M-MSQ was sound in internal consistency with Cronbach’s α = 0.900–0.931. The results of the test–retest showed that the stability of the M-MSQ achieved a positive statistically significant standard assessed by Pearson’s coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Conclusion: The M-MSQ is reliable in these four subscales, and may be used as a measure of sexual esteem, sexual conscious, sexual motivation and sexual satisfaction in Mandarin speakers.

Additional keywords: China, psychometrics, sexuality studies.

References

[1] McCabe MP, Cummins RA, Romeo Y. Relationship status, relationship quality, and health. J Fam Stud 1996; 2: 109–20.
| CrossRef |

[2] McCarthy BW, Bodnar EL. The equity model of sexuality: navigating and negotiating the similarities and differences between men and women in sexual behaviour, roles and values. Sex Relationship Ther 2005; 20: 225–35.
| CrossRef |

[3] World Health Organization (WHO). Report of a technical consultation on sexual health. Geneva: WHO; 2002. Available online at: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/sexual_health/defining_sexual_health.pdf [verified August 2011].

[4] Bouchard S, Godbout N, Sabourin S. Sexual attitudes and activities in women with borderline personality disorder involved in romantic relationships. J Sex Marital Ther 2009; 35: 106–21.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[5] Gatti C, Del Rossi C, Lombardi L, Caravaggi F, Casolari E, Casadio G. Sexuality and psychosocial functioning in young women after colovaginoplasty. J Urol 2010; 184: 1799–803.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[6] Kaptein AA, van Klink RC, de Kok F, Scharloo M, Snoei L, Broadbent E, et al Sexuality in patients with asthma and COPD. Respir Med 2008; 102: 198–204.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[7] Lachowsky M, Grivel T, Lemaire A, Elia D. Couple, sexuality and sexual health. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2005; 33: 326–30.
| CrossRef | CAS | PubMed |

[8] Launaz E. Sexuality, discussion and family planning. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1994; 255: S323–8.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[9] Slob AK, Koster J, Radder JK, van der Werff ten Bosch JJ. Sexuality and psychophysiological functioning in women with diabetes mellitus. J Sex Marital Ther 1990; 16: 59–69.
| CrossRef | CAS | PubMed |

[10] Snell WE, Fisher TD, Walters AS. The Multidimensional Sexuality Questionnaire: an objective self-report measure of psychological tendencies associated with human sexuality. Ann Sex Res 1993; 6: 27–55.
| CrossRef |

[11] Anderson PB, Newton M. Predicting the use of sexual initiation tactics in a sample of college women. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality 2004; 7: 1–15.

[12] Ismail-Pratt IS, Bikoo M, Liao LM, Conway GS, Creighton SM. Normalization of the vagina by dilator treatment alone in complete androgen insensitivity syndrome and Mayer–Rokitansky–Kuster–Hauser syndrome. Hum Reprod 2007; 22: 2020–4.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[13] Jellis JB. Attachment style, working models of sexuality and their relation to safer sex behaviour in young adults. Ottawa: National Library of Canada ; 2001. Available online at: http://library2.usask.ca/theses/available/etd-10212004-002330/unrestricted/NQ63881.pdf [verified August 2011].

[14] Liao L, Doyle J, Crouch NS, Creighton SM. Dilation as treatment for vaginal agenesis and hypoplasia: a pilot exploration of benefits and barriers as perceived by patients. J Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 26: 144–8.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[15] Suiming P. Sexual behavior and relationship in contemporary China. Beijing: Social Sciences Documentation Publishing House; 2003.

[16] Suiming P, Rui Y. Sexuality of Chinese college students: a ten-year longitudinal study. Beijing: Social Sciences Documentation Publishing House; 2004.

[17] Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: validating scales and indexes. BMJ 2002; 324: 606–7.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[18] Omotosho TB, Rogers RG. Shortcomings/strengths of specific sexual function questionnaires currently used in urogynecology: a literature review. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2009; 20: S51–6.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[19] Behling O, Law KS. Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: problems and solutions. London: Sage Publications Inc; 2002.

[20] Brody S. Body mass index but not pulse pressure is associated with lesser penile–vaginal Iitercourse frequency in healthy young men. J Sex Med 2010; 7: 1853–7.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[21] Beretvas SN, Meyers JL, Leite W. A reliability generalization study of the Marlowe–Crowne Social desirability scale. Educ Psychol Meas 2002; 62: 570–89.
| CrossRef |

[22] Neeleman AJ. The relevance of sexuality in the treatment of borderline personality disorder. Tijdschr Psychiatr 2007; 49: 233–40.
| CAS | PubMed |

[23] Tao P, Guoying D, Brody S. Preliminary study of a Chinese language short form of the Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Psychol Rep 2009; 105: 1039–46.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[24] Zulkosky K. Self-efficacy: a concept analysis. Nursing Forum 2009; 44: 93–102.
| CrossRef |

[25] Luszczynska A, Scholz U, Schwarzer R. The general self-efficacy scale: multicultural validation studies. J Psychol 2005; 139: 439–57.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[26] Caikang W, Zhongfeng H, Yong L. Evidences for reliability and validity of the Chinese version of general self-efficacy scale. Chinese Journal of Applied Psychology 2001; 7: 37–40.

[27] Hutcheson GD, Sofroniou N. The multivariate social science scientist: statistics using generalized linear models. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1999.

[28] Klonoff-Cohen H, Natarajan L, Klonoff E. Validation of a new scale for measuring concerns of women undergoing assisted reproductive technologies (CART). J Health Psychol 2007; 12: 352–6.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[29] Ismail K. Unravelling factor analysis. Evid Based Ment Health 2008; 11: 99–102.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[30] Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ 1997; 314: 572.
| CrossRef | CAS | PubMed |

[31] Yen M, Lo L.H. Examining test-retest reliability: an intra-class correlation approach. Nurs Res 2002; 51: 59–62.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[32] Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res 2005; 19: 231–40.
| PubMed |

[33] Wuyi Z, Bingyi H. Analysis on the reliability and validity of questionnaire. Statistics & Information Forum 2005; 20: 11–5.

[34] Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Pratap S, Wentz R, et al Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. BMJ 2002; 324: 1183–5.
| CrossRef | PubMed |

[35] van Agt HM, Essink-Bot ML, Krabbe PF, Bonsel GJ. Test–retest reliability of health state valuations collected with the EuroQol questionnaire. Soc Sci Med 1994; 39: 1537–44.
| CrossRef | CAS | PubMed |

Subscriber Login

	Username: Password:

Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help