Sexual Arousability Inventory and Sexual Arousability Inventory—Expanded

Abstract

The Sexual Arousability Inventory (SAI) and its revised iteration, the Sexual Arousability Inventory—Expanded (SAI-E), represent foundational psychometric instruments developed to evaluate self-reported sexual arousability and sexual anxiety across diverse clinical and empirical contexts. Originally authored by Emily Franck Hoon, Peter W. Hoon, and John P. Wincze in 1976, the original SAI was designed as a 28-item self-report questionnaire assessing subjective arousability across an array of erotic behaviors, interpersonal intimacies, and sensory stimuli. Recognizing that sexual difficulties frequently stem from an interplay between erotic responsivity and conditioned distress, Dianne L. Chambless and Jacqueline L. Lifshitz (1984) developed the SAI-E by incorporating a parallel 28-item rating system measuring situational sexual anxiety across identical behavioral cues. Both dimensions are evaluated using a 7-point bipolar Likert-type metric ranging from −1 (adversely affects arousal / relaxing, calming) to 5 (always causes sexual arousal / always causes anxiety). Psychometric evaluations demonstrate robust internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging between .91 and .92 for arousability, and .94 for anxiety; split-half coefficients of .92 to .94) and notable temporal stability across brief test-retest windows (.97–.98 for 14-item short forms). Factor-analytic investigations reveal clear structural dimensionality: five distinct factors underpin heterosexual female arousability, six factors characterize lesbian sexual practices, and three principal components govern sexual anxiety. The scale demonstrates high discriminant validity, reliably differentiating non-dysfunctional cohorts from clinical populations presenting with sexual dysfunction (whose scores average at the fifth percentile of normative distributions). The SAI and SAI-E serve as vital assessment tools within cognitive-behavioral sex therapy, couples counseling, and empirical sexology research.

Keywords

Sexual Arousability Inventory, SAI, Sexual Arousability Inventory Expanded, SAI-E, sexual arousability, sexual anxiety, psychometrics, sexual dysfunction, female sexual arousal disorder, erotic stimuli, sex therapy, factor analysis, sensate focus, clinical sexology

Authors

The Sexual Arousability Inventory and its expanded counterpart were conceptualized and validated by prominent figures in clinical psychology, behavioral medicine, and empirical sexology:

• Emily Franck Hoon, Ph.D. — Clinical Psychologist based in Gainesville, Florida; lead researcher in female sexual responsiveness, marital interaction, and the behavioral assessment of sexual behaviors. (Correspondence address: 2531-C NW 41st Street, Gainesville, FL 32606; Email: efhoon@remconsults).
• Peter W. Hoon, Ph.D. — Co-investigator and clinical psychologist, renowned for his work on autonomic conditioning, sexual psychophysiology, and the application of multivariate behavioral assessment methodologies to human sexuality.
• John P. Wincze, Ph.D. — Professor of Psychiatry and Human Behavior at the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University; pioneer in the physiological assessment of sexual arousal (e.g., vaginal photoplethysmography) and the clinical treatment of sexual dysfunctions.
• Dianne L. Chambless, Ph.D. — Late Professor Emerita of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania; world-renowned authority on anxiety disorders, agoraphobia, evidence-based psychological interventions, and co-developer of the anxiety dimension for the SAI-E.
• Jacqueline L. Lifshitz, Ph.D. — Clinical psychologist and researcher who collaborated with Dr. Chambless in validating the dual-axis structure of the Sexual Arousability Inventory—Expanded within collegiate and community populations.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Sexual Arousability Inventory (SAI) and the Sexual Arousability Inventory—Expanded (SAI-E) is to provide an empirically grounded, nuanced, and psychometrically sound measurement of an individual’s subjective capacity for sexual arousal and situational sexual anxiety. Human sexual responding represents a complex integration of neurobiological, cognitive, and affective processes. Prior to the introduction of the SAI, clinical sexologists and behavioral researchers were heavily reliant upon rudimentary behavioral checklists, retrospective global satisfaction surveys, or invasive laboratory psychophysiological recordings (such as vaginal photoplethysmography or penile strain gauges) that offered limited insight into the broad ecological spectrum of an individual’s erotic repertoire. The SAI was engineered to address this methodological gap by systematically measuring perceived erotic responsivity across 28 ecologically valid erotic, romantic, tactile, auditory, and visual encounters.

With the subsequent introduction of the SAI-E, the functional scope of the instrument was substantially widened. Sexual dysfunction rarely presents as a unidimensional deficit in physiological capacity; rather, it often reflects an intricate interplay wherein physiological arousal is suppressed, interrupted, or superseded by autonomic anxiety, anticipatory performance demands, or internalized guilt. By requiring respondents to evaluate the exact same 28 behavioral descriptions along both an arousability axis and an anxiety axis, the SAI-E illuminates the precise behavioral and interpersonal contexts that trigger autonomic distress or erotic facilitation. Clinicians can determine whether a presenting problem—such as Female Sexual Arousal Disorder (FSAD), Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD), or secondary anorgasmia—is driven by general hypo-arousability, localized conditioned anxiety to specific acts (e.g., cunnilingus, visual nudity, explicit erotica), or a simultaneous clash of high arousability coupled with severe performance distress.

In clinical intervention paradigms, the SAI and SAI-E function as highly sensitive metrics for tracking therapeutic progress. In behavioral interventions such as Master and Johnson’s sensate focus therapy, systematic desensitization, or cognitive restructuring, the instruments permit pre-, mid-, and post-treatment evaluations to quantify decrements in sexual anxiety alongside corresponding increases in subjective arousability. The availability of two statistically equivalent 14-item short forms (Forms A and B) enables repeated administration without inducing measurement fatigue or practice effects. In academic and empirical research, the SAI-E serves as an indispensable tool for investigating the correlates of sexual health across diverse cohorts, including heterosexual women, lesbian populations, heterosexual men, individuals recovering from severe medical procedures (such as ileostomy or hysterectomy), and clinical populations navigating substance use disorders.

Psychological Construct

The foundational constructs operationalized by the SAI and SAI-E are sexual arousability and sexual anxiety. In contemporary psychometrics, these constructs are conceptualized as functionally distinct, orthogonal dimensions that operate simultaneously across the experiential landscape of human eroticism.

Sexual Arousability

Sexual arousability refers to an individual’s psychological and physiological disposition or reactivity to perceive, experience, and amplify sexual excitement in response to specific erotic cues. Within the framework developed by Hoon et al. (1976), arousability is distinct from both biological sexual capacity (the mere physiological capability to achieve pelvic vasocongestion or lubrication) and current sexual frequency. Instead, it reflects the subjective, cognitive-affective valuation of a stimulus as sexually stimulating. Arousability spans multiple modalities, encompassing:

• Interpersonal Tactile Behaviors: Direct manual or oral tactile contact with primary and secondary erogenous zones (e.g., oral-genital stimulation, manual breast fondling, passionate kissing).
• Visual and Auditory Erotic Cues: Exposure to partner nudity, gazing into a lover’s eyes, hearing vocalizations of pleasure, or consuming visual pornography and erotica.
• Solitary and Self-Directed Practices: Masturbation and self-initiated sexual fantasy.
• Contextual and Environmental Novelty: Engaging in sexual intimacy within unusual, adventurous, or semi-public locations.

Importantly, the SAI scoring structure accounts for inhibitory aversion by incorporating negative valence anchors (−1 indicating that a stimulus actively diminishes arousal or is perceived as repulsive), thereby capturing the spectrum between erotic revulsion, neutral indifference, and intense sexual excitement.

Sexual Anxiety

Sexual anxiety, as operationalized in the SAI-E by Chambless and Lifshitz (1984), refers to a state of emotional unease, cognitive apprehension, tension, or physiological distress experienced in anticipation of, or during, specific sexual experiences. Sexual anxiety is characterized by negative affect and excessive autonomic sympathetic activation. Under normal physiological circumstances, sexual arousal requires predominant autonomic parasympathetic tone to facilitate pelvic vasocongestion, lubrication, and tumescence. Severe sexual anxiety induces sympathetic dominance, activating the fight-or-flight response, which actively constricts peripheral blood vessels and inhibits genital vasocongestion.

Crucially, empirical investigations confirm that sexual anxiety is largely orthogonal to sexual arousability; that is, the presence of erotic excitement does not inherently preclude anxiety, nor does the absence of anxiety guarantee arousal. For example, a stimulus such as “When a loved one stimulates your genitals with mouth and tongue” may elicit strong subjective arousal (rating of 4 or 5) while concurrently triggering high sexual anxiety (rating of 4 or 5) due to body image concerns, performance expectations, or conditioned shame. Conversely, solitary stimuli such as “When you read a pornographic or ‘dirty’ story” may elicit neither arousal nor anxiety. By measuring both constructs in parallel, the SAI-E deconstructs these clinical profiles into actionable psychometric dimensions.

Theoretical Framework

The SAI and SAI-E are grounded in the convergence of behavioral psychology, social learning theory, and cognitive-affective models of sexual functioning. The foundational architecture reflects principles derived from Joseph Wolpe’s paradigm of reciprocal inhibition, William Masters and Virginia Johnson’s clinical models of sexual dysfunction, and David Barlow’s cognitive-affective model of sexual performance.

The Dual-Process and Reciprocal Inhibition Paradigms

Wolpe’s principle of reciprocal inhibition posited that an individual cannot comfortably experience two diametrically opposed physiological states simultaneously; specifically, deep relaxation and sexual arousal are physiologically incompatible with profound autonomic fear and anxiety. In the context of sex therapy, Masters and Johnson noted that the primary maintaining mechanisms of sexual dysfunction were “spectatoring”—a cognitive process wherein an individual becomes an anxious, hyper-vigilant third-party observer of their own sexual performance—and anticipatory performance fear. The SAI-E captures this mechanism by assessing whether specific sexual behaviors have been conditioned as elicitors of anxiety. When anxiety is repeatedly paired with erotic cues through maladaptive learning, religious guilt, interpersonal trauma, or physical discomfort, the conditioned anxiety response overrides the unconditioned erotic reflex.

Barlow’s Cognitive-Affective Model

The operationalization of the SAI-E aligns closely with Barlow’s (1986) cognitive-affective model of sexual dysfunction. According to Barlow, sexually functional individuals exposed to erotic cues experience positive affect, direct their attention toward erotic stimuli, interpret physiological vasocongestion accurately, and progress through escalating sexual arousal. In contrast, dysfunctional individuals exposed to erotic cues experience negative affect and heightened anxiety, redirect attentional focus toward performance failure or bodily insecurities, misinterpret or ignore physiological feedback, and suffer autonomic constriction. The SAI and SAI-E quantify this divergence across specific operational behaviors, demonstrating how different stimulus classes (partnered versus solitary, oral-genital versus affectionate) differentially engage these cognitive-affective processing pathways.

The Dual Control Model Antecedents

The simultaneous assessment of arousability and anxiety in the SAI-E presaged the later development of the Dual Control Model of Sexual Response formulated by John Bancroft and Erick Janssen. The Dual Control Model posits that sexual response is regulated by two neurobiologically independent systems: the Sexual Excitation System (SES) and the Sexual Inhibition System (SIS). The arousability dimension of the SAI corresponds directly to the behavioral expression of sexual excitation, capturing the individual’s sensitivity to erotic triggers. The anxiety dimension reflects the activation of the sexual inhibition system, capturing protective avoidance responses triggered by the perception of threat, moral transgressions, or performance demands. The psychometric orthogonality documented between the SAI arousability and anxiety scores provides structural evidence for this dual-system model.

Validity

The validity of both the SAI and SAI-E has been extensively demonstrated across criterion, construct, convergent, discriminant, and factorial domains in diverse clinical and non-clinical cohorts.

Criterion and Construct Validity

During the initial validation of the SAI by Hoon, Hoon, and Wincze (1976), construct validity was confirmed through significant, robust correlations with established physiological and behavioral markers of sexual functioning. Across female validation cohorts (N = 151 and N = 134), SAI arousability scores exhibited strong positive associations with:

• Subjective awareness of physiological bodily changes during sexual excitation (such as pelvic warmth, lubrication, and cardiovascular changes).
• Overall self-reported satisfaction with personal sexual responsiveness.
• Reported weekly and monthly frequency of sexual intercourse.
• Total lifetime episodes of coitus prior to marriage.

In the validation of the SAI-E anxiety scale by Chambless and Lifshitz (1984), construct validity was supported by theoretically predicted inverse associations with orgasmic frequency and sexual experience. In an undergraduate cohort (N = 252), sexual experience was significantly negatively correlated with sexual anxiety (τ = −.14, p < .01). In a community sample of women (N = 90), higher frequencies of coital orgasm were associated with significantly lower anxiety scores (τ = −.25, p < .01).

Discriminant and Clinical Validity

The SAI demonstrates pronounced discriminant validity between normal populations and clinical cohorts seeking psychological treatment for sexual dysfunctions. Hoon et al. (1976) demonstrated that women seeking sex therapy for sexual dysfunction scored dramatically lower than non-clinical peers. The mean arousability score of the sexually dysfunctional cohort fell at the fifth percentile of the normative control distribution, confirming that the scale is highly sensitive to clinically significant sexual impairment.

Discriminant validity from generalized personality constructs was demonstrated by Burgess and Krop (1978) in a sample of 74 heterosexual women. While SAI arousability scores were positively correlated with positive heterosexual attitudes and negatively correlated with sexual anxiety, generalized trait anxiety was not significantly correlated with sexual anxiety. This dissociation indicates that sexual anxiety, as measured by the SAI-E, is a domain-specific construct rather than a mere manifestation of generalized neuroticism or trait apprehension.

Group Comparisons and Sociodemographic Variations

The SAI and SAI-E have demonstrated sensitivity to group differences across sexual orientations, relationship structures, and clinical contexts:

• Sexual Orientation: Coleman, Hoon, and Hoon (1983) examined SAI properties in 371 lesbian women compared to heterosexual norms, identifying distinct profiles in which lesbian respondents exhibited higher mean arousability (M = 92.34, SD = 14.37) than heterosexual cohorts (M = 82.00, SD = 23.30), alongside differentiated factorial weighting on oral-genital intimacy.
• Cohabitation and Experience: Hoon and Hoon (1982) demonstrated that individuals with long-term cohabitation experience exhibited marked shifts in erotic responsiveness to specific intimate behaviors compared to dating counterparts.
• Medical and Clinical Cohorts: Flax (1980) successfully utilized the short forms to delineate changes in sexual anxiety and arousability among married women undergoing enterostomal surgery (ileostomy), while Murphy et al. (1980) documented the treatment sensitivity of the SAI among women undergoing multidisciplinary recovery from alcohol dependence.

Reliability

The psychometric evaluation of the SAI and SAI-E reveals high internal consistency, split-half reliability, and temporal stability across diverse participant populations.

Internal Consistency and Split-Half Reliability

In the original validation studies conducted by Hoon et al. (1976), the 28-item arousability dimension demonstrated high internal consistency across independent samples. In the primary validation sample of 151 women, Cronbach’s alpha was .91. In a subsequent cross-validation sample of 134 women, the alpha was .92. Split-half reliability, calculated using the Spearman-Brown correction formula, yielded a coefficient of .92 for both samples, indicating robust item homogeneity.

These findings were replicated by Chambless and Lifshitz (1984) in an independent geographic sample of 252 undergraduate women, yielding a Spearman-Brown corrected split-half coefficient of .91 for arousability. For the 28-item anxiety dimension of the SAI-E, Chambless and Lifshitz (1984) documented an internal consistency reliability coefficient of .94 using the Spearman-Brown corrected split-half method, demonstrating that the anxiety items possess strong internal coherence.

Test-Retest Stability

Temporal stability was evaluated across multiple intervals:

• Hoon et al. (1976) assessed an 8-week test-retest interval in a non-clinical subsample (n = 48), yielding a stability coefficient of r = .69. This moderate-to-high coefficient reflects both the underlying trait-like stability of erotic dispositions and the situational sensitivity of human sexual responding to life stressors.
• Flax (1980) investigated the 14-item short forms (Form A and Form B) in a sample of 158 married women. Over a 3-week test-retest interval (n = 39), Pearson correlation coefficients reached .97 for Form A and .98 for Form B, confirming exceptional short-term reliability when tracking clinical interventions.
• Internal consistency for the 14-item short forms was confirmed by Flax (1980), yielding Cronbach’s alphas of .88 for Form A and .86 for Form B.

Normative Score Distribution

Normative evaluations across published validation samples show consistent performance parameters across demographic groups:

Factor Analysis

Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and principal components analyses (PCA) conducted across multiple independent cohorts have yielded stable latent structures for both the arousability and anxiety dimensions.

Factor Structure of the Arousability Scale

In the original factor analyses conducted by Hoon and Hoon (1978) and independently replicated by Chambless and Lifshitz (1984), a consistent five-factor orthogonal solution emerged for heterosexual female samples:

1. Factor 1: Explicit Partnered Oral-Genital Contact — Heavily loaded by items assessing cunnilingus, fellatio, and direct digital-genital manipulation (Items 1, 5, 21, 25).
2. Factor 2: Visual and Explicit Erotica / Media — Defined by exposure to external erotic stimuli, including pornographic literature, movies, slides, and strip shows (Items 8, 14, 19, 20, 23).
3. Factor 3: Sensual Affection and Foreplay — Encompassing kissing, romantic non-genital caressing, dancing, and lying closely in bed (Items 2, 4, 10, 13, 15, 16, 22).
4. Factor 4: Non-Coital and Novel Intimacy — Characterized by unconventional settings, auditory pleasure cues, and disrobing (Items 6, 9, 17, 24, 26).
5. Factor 5: Solitary Sex and Masturbation — Dominated by item 27 (masturbation) and independent fantasy generation.

When Coleman, Hoon, and Hoon (1983) analyzed SAI responses from a nationwide sample of 407 lesbian women, a six-factor oblique solution emerged. Three of these factors mirrored the heterosexual structure (Sensual Affection, Visual Erotica, and Solitary Masturbation), whereas three factors diverged in line with lesbian sexual practices. These included a distinct Oral Sex factor, a specific Genital Contact factor with unique item loadings, and a freestanding Visual Nudity factor reflecting body appreciation between female partners.

Factor Structure of the Anxiety Scale

Chambless and Lifshitz (1984) conducted a Principal Components Analysis with oblique rotation on the anxiety ratings of 252 undergraduate females. The analysis yielded a three-factor solution accounting for 61% of the total variance:

• Factor 1: Partnered Intercourse and Foreplay (45% of variance) — Characterized by general interactive heterosocial intimacy, coitus, kissing, and breast stimulation. It was defined largely by the absence or low loading of masturbation and pornography items.
• Factor 2: Pornography and Solitary Sex (12% of variance) — Defined by visual and literary erotica (stag films, dirty stories, suggestive poetry) and self-masturbation. Factors 1 and 2 exhibited a modest negative correlation, indicating that anxiety related to solitary pornography/masturbation functions independently from anxiety provoked by interpersonal, partnered sexual contact.
• Factor 3: Non-Coital Genital Stimulation (5% of variance) — Weighted primarily by explicit manual-genital and oral-genital contact (e.g., cunnilingus, digital manipulation).

These factorial solutions confirm that the dimensions of sexual arousability and sexual anxiety possess distinct, structurally coherent latent profiles that allow clinicians to profile patients beyond simple aggregate score totals.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Instrument Name: Sexual Arousability Inventory (SAI) and Sexual Arousability Inventory—Expanded (SAI-E).
• Original Authors: Emily Franck Hoon, Peter W. Hoon, and John P. Wincze (SAI, 1976); Dianne L. Chambless and Jacqueline L. Lifshitz (SAI-E, 1984).
• Format: Self-administered paper-and-pencil inventory, structured interactive assessment, or clinical card-sort administration.
• Item Count:
  • Full Inventory: 28 descriptive behavioral items.
  • Expanded Administration (SAI-E): The same 28 items rated twice (once for Arousability, once for Anxiety), yielding 56 total responses.
  • Short Forms: Two interchangeable 14-item scales (Form A consists of asterisked items 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 26; Form B consists of the remaining non-asterisked items).
• Target Population:
  • SAI: Originally developed for heterosexual and lesbian adult females.
  • SAI-E: Validated for adult women and men across all sexual orientations, marital statuses, and clinical backgrounds.
• Response Scales: 7-point bipolar Likert-type scales ranging from −1 to 5 for both dimensions.
  • Arousability Rating Anchors:
    
    −1 = adversely affects arousal; unthinkable, repulsive, distracting
    
    0 = doesn’t affect sexual arousal
    
    1 = possibly causes sexual arousal
    
    2 = sometimes causes sexual arousal; slightly arousing
    
    3 = usually causes sexual arousal; moderately arousing
    
    4 = almost always sexually arousing; very arousing
    
    5 = always causes sexual arousal; extremely arousing
  • Anxiety Rating Anchors:
    
    −1 = relaxing, calming
    
    0 = no anxiety
    
    1 = possibly causes some anxiety
    
    2 = sometimes causes anxiety; slightly anxiety producing
    
    3 = usually causes anxiety; moderately anxiety producing
    
    4 = almost always causes anxiety; very anxiety producing
    
    5 = always causes anxiety; extremely anxiety producing
• Administration Time: Approximately 10 minutes for the full 28-item dual SAI-E; less than 5 minutes for the 14-item short forms.
• Scoring Procedures:
  • The Total Arousability Score is the algebraic sum of all 28 arousability ratings (scores range from −28 to +140). Negative ratings (−1) are algebraically subtracted.
  • The Total Anxiety Score is the algebraic sum of all 28 anxiety ratings (scores range from −28 to +140). Negative ratings (−1) are algebraically subtracted.
  • Higher arousability scores reflect greater subjective capacity for sexual excitement. Higher anxiety scores denote severe situational sexual distress and autonomic apprehension.
  • Subscale scores may be derived based on established factor loadings (Partner Foreplay, Explicit Oral-Genital Contact, Media Erotica, Solitary Masturbation, and Novelty).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The original Sexual Arousability Inventory was published in 1976 by Emily Franck Hoon, Peter W. Hoon, and John P. Wincze in the Archives of Sexual Behavior. The expanded dual-axis version (SAI-E) was published in 1984 by Dianne L. Chambless and Jacqueline L. Lifshitz in The Journal of Sex Research.

Both instruments are considered non-commercial assessment measures historically provided for empirical and clinical applications in the public domain of clinical sexology research. In their published reports, the authors provided the complete scale item sets and administration protocols to facilitate research and clinical practice. Researchers and clinicians may utilize the scales without payment of licensing royalties for non-commercial academic research and diagnostic purposes. Scholars seeking original factor weighting keys, specialized item normative distributions, or standardized card-sort adaptations should address correspondence directly to Dr. Emily Franck Hoon (2531-C NW 41st Street, Gainesville, FL 32606; Email: efhoon@remconsults).

References

• Burgess, D., & Krop, H. (1978, October). The relationship between sexual arousability, heterosexual attitudes, sexual anxiety, and general anxiety in women. Paper presented at the South East Regional American Association of Sex Educators, Counselors and Therapists, Asheville, NC.
• Chambless, D. L., & Lifshitz, J. L. (1984). Self-reported sexual anxiety and arousal: The Expanded Sexual Arousability Inventory. The Journal of Sex Research, 20(3), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224498409551223
• Coleman, E., Hoon, P. W., & Hoon, E. F. (1983). Arousability and sexual satisfaction in lesbian and heterosexual women. The Journal of Sex Research, 19(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224498309551168
• Flax, C. C. (1980). Comparison between married women with ileostomies and married women without ileostomies on sexual anxiety, control, arousability and fantasy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). New York University, New York.
• Hoon, E. F., & Hoon, P. W. (1977, September). Sexual differences between males and females on a self-report measure. Paper presented at the Fifth Annual Canadian Sex Research Forum, Banff, Alberta.
• Hoon, E. F., & Hoon, P. W. (1978). Styles of sexual expression in women: Clinical implications of multivariate analyses. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 7(2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01542379
• Hoon, E. F., Hoon, P. W., & Wincze, J. P. (1976). The SAI: An inventory for the measurement of female sexual arousability. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 5(4), 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01542081
• Hoon, P. W., & Hoon, E. F. (1982). Effects of experience in cohabitation on erotic arousability. Psychological Reports, 50(1), 255–258. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1982.50.1.255
• Murphy, W., Coleman, E., Hoon, E. F., & Scott, C. (1980). Sexual dysfunction and treatment in alcoholic women. Sexuality and Disability, 3(4), 240–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01100728

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)