4.4 Article

The Pornography Craving Questionnaire: Psychometric Properties

期刊

ARCHIVES OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR
卷 43, 期 3, 页码 451-462

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10508-013-0229-3

关键词

Craving; Pornography; University students; Sex; Internet

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the prevalence of pornography use, and recent conceptualization of problematic use as an addiction, we could find no published scale to measure craving for pornography. Therefore, we conducted three studies employing young male pornography users to develop and evaluate such a questionnaire. In Study 1, we had participants rate their agreement with 20 potential craving items after reading a control script or a script designed to induce craving to watch pornography. We dropped eight items because of low endorsement. In Study 2, we revised both the questionnaire and cue exposure stimuli and then evaluated several psychometric properties of the modified questionnaire. Item loadings from a principal components analysis, a high internal consistency reliability coefficient, and a moderate mean inter-item correlation supported interpreting the 12 revised items as a single scale. Correlations of craving scores with preoccupation with pornography, sexual history, compulsive internet use, and sensation seeking provided support for convergent validity, criterion validity, and discriminant validity, respectively. The enhanced imagery script did not impact reported craving; however, more frequent users of pornography reported higher craving than less frequent users regardless of script condition. In Study 3, craving scores demonstrated good one-week test-retest reliability and predicted the number of times participants used pornography during the following week. This questionnaire could be applied in clinical settings to plan and evaluate therapy for problematic users of pornography and as a research tool to assess the prevalence and contextual triggers of craving among different types of pornography users.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据