Table 3

Most Commonly Used Instruments to Quantify Sexual Addiction (Partly Based on Hook et al., 2010)83

InstrumentType of QuestionnaireScoring and ResultsSamples StudiedPsychometric PropertiesComments
Sexual Addiction Screening Test (SAST)28,84Self-Report Checklist (25 questions)Yes/No
Scores 0-25
Cutoff of 13 suggests sexual addiction
Psychotherapy patients, college students, community sample, physicians. Mostly heterosexual males.Internal consistency 0.89–0.95
Good evidence of convergent validity (to other questionnaires) and discriminant validity with normal controls
Widely used in practice and research
Validated in heterosexual male samples. Variants for women and gay men lack sufficient evidence.
New version (SAST-R, 2010) has been validated across gender and orientation (N = 1604)84
Sexual Compulsivity Scale (SCS)85Self-Report Rating Scale (10 questions)Likert scales
Scores 10-40
Cutoff of 24 indicates a problem with sexual addiction
More than 30 samples, including community samples, college students, patients with HIV, heterosexual and homosexual male and female samplesInternal consistency 0.59-0.92 (mostly above 0.7)
Good evidence of convergent and discriminant validity
Most widely used in research
Sexual Addiction Scale (SAS) of the Disorder Screening Inventory (SDI)86Self-Reports Rating Scale (5 questions)Likert scale
Scores 0-20
0-5: Low risk
5-11: Moderate risk
12-20: High risk
1 sample of 34 heterosexual male psychotherapy patientsInternal Consistency 0.83
Some evidence for discriminant validity with controls
Examines five components of sexual addiction: compulsive use, loss of control, negative consequences, covertness of use, codependent response
Sexual Dependence Inventory-Revised (SDI-R, 1998)87Self-Report Rating Scale (179 questions)Likert scale
Each question has 2 answers:
Frequency (0-5)
Power (0-5)
3 scores:
Total score
2 composite scores
10 subscale scores for subdivisions of sexual addiction
Multiple samples including psychotherapy patients, community samples, sex offenders.
Mostly studied in heterosexual males.
Internal consistency 0.99 for total scores (Power and Frequency), and 0.9-0.99 for subscale scores
Some evidence for convergent and discriminant validity
Some evidence of criterion-related validity
Long, in-depth
10 subscales: fantasy, seductive role playing, voyeurism, exhibitionism, paying for sex, trading sex, pain exchange, intrusive sex, exploitive sex, and anonymous sex
Compulsive Sexual Behavior Inventory (CSBI)88Self-Report Rating Scale (28 questions)Likert scale (1 indicates highest frequency)
Scores 28-140 (28 being most severe)
3 subscale scores:
Loss of control
Violence
Abuse
Heterosexual males, heterosexual females, homosexual males, community samples, college students, psychotherapy patientsInternal consistency 0.68-0.87
Substantial psychometric support: good convergent and discriminant validity
Used in several studies
Focuses on past abuse and connection to violence
Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale— Compulsive Sexual Behavior (YBOCS—CSB)14Clinician Rating Scale (10 questions)Likert scale
Scores 0-40
Higher scores indicating higher risk
Samples of gay and bisexual menInternal consistency 0.66-0.99
Some convergent validity
Sensitive to change over time
Limited initial evidence for reliability and validity
Not studied in other populations
PATHOS89Self-Report Checklist (6)Yes/No
Scores 0-6
Cutoff of 3 suggests sexual addiction
2 Studies done by Carnes et al.(95)
Study 1: Inpatients receiving treatment for sexual addiction N = 1908 (30% females)
Study 2: Outpatients receiving treatment for sexual addiction (N = 646, 86.8% males), college students (N = 203, 23.2% males), inpatients receiving treatment for sexual addiction (N= 64, 100% females)
Internal consistency 0.94
Good convergent and discriminant validity
Questions extracted from SAST:PreoccupiedAshamedTreatment soughtHurt othersOut of controlSad as a result
Designed to resemble CAGE questionnaire for alcohol use disorder (desire to Cut down, Annoyed with people’s comments, Guilt about use, Eye-opener drinks)