2011
DOI: 10.1007/s12119-011-9122-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Marking Sexuality from 0–6: The Kinsey Scale in Online Culture

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Kinsey Heterosexual-Homosexual Likert-type Scale (Kinsey et al, 1948 ) was used to assess sexual orientation. Participants indicated their self-identified sexual orientation on a scale of zero to six: each item on the scale was labeled according to the original version, where zero indicated “exclusively heterosexual,” three indicated “equally heterosexual and homosexual” and at six indicated “exclusively homosexual.” While there are many ways to measure sexual orientation (Sell, 1997 ), the Kinsey scale remains a valid and parsimonious instrument, particularly for online surveys in Western cultures (Drucker, 2012 ). As noted, we created three categories for sexual orientation: heterosexual (0 and 1 on the scale), bisexual (2, 3, and 4 on the scale), and exclusively gay (5 and 6 on the scale).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Kinsey Heterosexual-Homosexual Likert-type Scale (Kinsey et al, 1948 ) was used to assess sexual orientation. Participants indicated their self-identified sexual orientation on a scale of zero to six: each item on the scale was labeled according to the original version, where zero indicated “exclusively heterosexual,” three indicated “equally heterosexual and homosexual” and at six indicated “exclusively homosexual.” While there are many ways to measure sexual orientation (Sell, 1997 ), the Kinsey scale remains a valid and parsimonious instrument, particularly for online surveys in Western cultures (Drucker, 2012 ). As noted, we created three categories for sexual orientation: heterosexual (0 and 1 on the scale), bisexual (2, 3, and 4 on the scale), and exclusively gay (5 and 6 on the scale).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(lesbian, genderqueer -trans * ) Sexuality researchers have long noted that sexual orientation and sexual orientation identity do not neatly map onto one another (Morgan, 2013;Sell, 1997;Worthington & Reynolds, 2009). In fact, a benefit of sexual orientation measurement is the ability to disaggregate such measurement from the stigma associated with sexual orientation identity labels (Drucker, 2010(Drucker, , 2012. Our participants' responses are consistent with this notion in that sociocultural attitudes and sexual prejudice were often the reasons behind the putative discrepancies between the scores on the scales and their sexual orientation identity.…”
Section: Social Identitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, sexual identity was measured with only one single item instead of a standardized scale (e.g., the Kinsey scale), preventing us from describing sexual identity comprehensively. Future studies are appreciated to mark participants’ sexual personhood with a flexible number on a scale rather than an arbitrary label ( Drucker, 2012 ). Second, we did not consider other types of stigmas related to social status or identities (e.g., race, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status) and examine the effect of intersectional stigma.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%