Carpenter, D. (1), Janssen, E. (2), Graham, C. A. (3,1), Vorst, H. (4), & Wicherts, J. (4) (1) Department of Psychology, Christopher Newport University, Newport News, Virginia USA ( (2) The Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction, Morrison Hall 313, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN USA; (3) Oxford Doctoral Course in Clinical Psychology, Isis Education Centre, Warneford Hospital, Headington, Oxford, England OX3 7JX; (4) University of Amsterdam, Department of Psychology, Psychological Methodology, Roetersstraat 15, 1018wb Amsterdam, The Appendix Findings suggest that gender differences in factors that influence sexual excitation and inhibition do exist. However…many central themes are clearly shared. The primary advantage of the SIS/SES—Short Form…it highlights shared themes in sexual inhibition & sexual excitation. The complementary primary limitation…it eliminates potentially important differences between women & men. The Short Form SIS/SES:  Reflects our belief that the processes underlying men’s & women’s sexual arousal are more alike than different.  Can aid research on gender similarities in sexuality.  Complements recent suggestions (Hyde, 2005) for more research focus on such factors. Note: Depending on the project at hand, a measure of broader scope may be preferred. The original 45-item SIS/SES remains a good option when participants are only male or only female. Aims  To examine gender similarities in arousal themes  To identify SIS/SES items that represent the three-factor structure equally well for women & men.  To examine the reliability and convergent/discriminant validity of scores on a short form version of the SIS/SES comprised of gender-invariant items. Background The Sexual Inhibition/Sexual Excitation Scales (SIS/SES) consist of 45 items that assess individual propensities to become sexually aroused and to inhibit arousal. Prior research suggests:  Men’s and women’s data share a similar factor structure featuring one excitation factor (SES) & two inhibitory factors (SIS1/Threat of Performance Failure and SIS2/Threat of Performance Consequences.)  Women score higher on sexual inhibition & lower on sexual excitation compared with men.  Social Desirability Scale (SDSR-5). (Hays, Hayashi & Stewart, 1989).  Behavioral Inhibition/Behavioral Activation Scales (BIS/BAS). (Carver & White, 1994).  Sexual Opinion Survey (SOS). Measures erotophobia- erotophilia, or tendency to have positive or negative emotional and evaluative responses to sexual stimuli (Fisher, Byrne, White & Kelley, 1988).  Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI). Assesses attitudes toward and participation in “casual” sex, as well as condom use during sexual encounters (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). Analyses. Using a process of elimination, CFAs specifying equal factor loadings, residual variances, and item intercepts identified a subset of 14 SIS/SES items with similar psychometric properties in men and women. Test-retest data provided by a subset of female participants (N = 51) was used to examine the reliability of scores on a short form version of the SIS/SES. Correlations between SES, SIS1 & SIS2 and other theoretically- relevant measures were used to assess the validity of men’s & women’s short-form SIS/SES scores.  Correlations between the 45-item & Short Form SIS/SES were equal for men & women for SES (r = +.90), SIS1 (r = +.80) and SIS2 (r = +.80). Reliability:  Women’s scores appeared less stable on the 14-item SIS/SES [Short Form: (SES: r =.61, SIS1: r =.52; SIS2: r =.38) Original version: (SES: r =.76, SIS1: r =.67; SIS2: r =.74)]  Removing outliers increased women’s Short Form test-retest coefficients for SIS1 (r =.61) and SIS2 (r =.63). Criterion validity: The Short Form SIS/SES globally resembled the original version:  SES and SIS2 showed strongest associations with other sexuality-related measures for both men & women.  Men’s SIS/SES scores showed stronger relationships with some general measures (e.g., SES with BIS, BAS-Reward Responsiveness, and BAS-Drive; SIS1 with the Harm Avoidance subscale of the MPQ). However, there was a modest trend for women’s SIS1 scores to overlap more with other measures on the Short Form SIS/SES. Gender Similarities in Dual Control Model Processes: A Short Version of the Sexual Inhibition and Excitation Scales (SIS/SES-Short Form) Method Participants Indiana University undergraduates (1067 women & 978 men), aged (mean = 19.8 years). Participants reported having had sexual intercourse with a mean of 1.7 partners (SD = 2.86, range = 0-50, N = 2004) in the past year, and having had 1.4 unprotected intercourse partners during the past three years (SD = 2.08, range = 0-30, N = 1996). Measures.  Sexual Inhibition/Sexual Excitation Scales (SIS/SES) describe hypothetical situations, some of which incorporate elements of threat (e.g., risk of contracting an STD, being intruded upon, or being unable to perform sexually). The SIS/SES yields three scores: Excitation (SES), SIS1/Threat of Performance Failure, & SIS2/Threat of Consequences.  Background Questionnaire. Number of sexual partners, use of contraceptives, perceived importance of sex, history of sexual problems, etc.  Neuroticism and Extraversion/Introversion Scales of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ). (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975).  Harm Avoidance Scale of the Minnesota Personality Questionnaire (MPQ-H). (Tellegen & Waller, 1982). Results A 3-factor solution with equal factor loadings for men & women was obtained, using 19 out of 45 total SIS/SES items. Residual variances and item intercepts were not identical, preventing direct comparison of female and male SIS/SES scores. Specifying equal residual variances and item intercepts eliminated 5 items and solved the problem, resulting in a 14-item solution. (See Appendix.) Inhibition themes of shared relevance to men & women:  Threat of Performance Failure (SIS1): Distraction, focus on sexual performance, and tendency to lose arousal easily.  Threat of Performance Consequences (SIS2): Risk of getting caught or contracting an STD. Inhibition themes of differential relevance to men & women:  SIS1: Concerns about pleasing a partner sexually  SIS2: Concerns about pregnancy and pain Shared sexual excitation themes:  Arousal from social interactions, versus less relational activities (e.g., arousal from fantasies or sexually-explicit materials.) Conclusion Prior to this report, two measures assessing dual control model processes have been reported:  SIS/SES (validated in men by Janssen et al., 2002)  SESII-W (validated in women by Graham, Sanders & Milhausen, 2006). This study offers a third. The SIS/SES—Short Form:  Focuses on items with similar psychometric properties in women & men.  Exhibits reliability & convergent/discriminant validity that largely resemble the original version.