Cultural Validation of the Fear-of-Intimacy Scale for the Portuguese Population: Exploring Its Relationship with Sociosexual Orientation
Abstract
1. Introduction
1.1. Fear of Intimacy
1.2. Sociosexual Orientation
1.3. Relation Between Fear of Intimacy and Sociosexual Orientation
1.4. The Relationship Between Fear of Intimacy and Sociosexual Orientation as a Public Health Issue
2. Methods
2.1. Procedures
2.1.1. Ethics
2.1.2. Transcultural Adaptation of the Fear-of-Intimacy Scale (FoIS)
2.1.3. Sampling
2.2. Participants
2.3. Measures
2.3.1. Fear-of-Intimacy Scale (FoIS)
2.3.2. Revised Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI-R)
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Preliminary Analyses
3.2. Validation of the Fear-of-Intimacy Scale for the Portuguese Population
3.2.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis
3.2.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis
3.2.3. Measurement of Invariance
3.2.4. Model Reliability
3.3. Assessing the Revised Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI-R)
3.3.1. Confirmatory Factor Analysis
3.3.2. Model Reliability
3.4. Relation Between FoIS and SOI-R
4. Discussion
4.1. Public Health Implications
4.2. Limitations and Future Research
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
References
- Silva, R.C.P.C.D.; Amaral, A.C.S.; Quintanilha, A.K.S.; Almeida, V.A.R.D.; Rodrigues, M.V.F.; Oliveira, A.J.; Morgado, F.F.D.R. Cross-cultural adaptation of body image assessment instruments for university students: A systematic review. Psicol. Reflexão Crítica 2021, 34, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loewenthal, K.M.; Lewis, C.A. An Introduction to Psychological Tests and Scales; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Streiner, D.L.; Norman, G.R.; Cairney, J. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Luong, R.; Flake, J.K. Measurement invariance testing using confirmatory factor analysis and alignment optimization: A tutorial for transparent analysis planning and reporting. Psychol. Methods 2023, 28, 905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, F.F. Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. 2007, 14, 464–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnett, J.J. Emerging adulthood in Europe: A response to Bynner. J. Youth Stud. 2006, 9, 111–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hardesty, M.; Wilson, S.E.; Wasserman, L.; Young, S.; Massey, S.; Merriwether, A. What Are College Students Talking About When They Say They’re “Just Talking?”. Emerg. Adulthood 2024, 12, 372–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weaver, S.J.; Herold, E.S. Casual sex and women: Measurement and motivational issues. J. Psychol. Hum. Sex. 2000, 12, 23–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamilton, L.; Armstrong, E.A. Gendered sexuality in young adulthood: Double binds and flawed options. Gend. Soc. 2009, 23, 589–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luz, R.; Alvarez, M.J.; Godinho, C.A.; Pereira, C.R. A fertile ground for ambiguities: Casual sexual relationships among Portuguese emerging adults. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 823102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kennedy, S.; Balderrama-Durbin, C. Risky casual sex and posttraumatic stress in college females: An examination of assault history, self-esteem, and social support. Violence Against Women 2021, 27, 3074–3092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Traeen, B. Breaking the speed of loneliness: Sexual partner change and the fear of intimacy. Cult. Health Sex. 2000, 2, 287–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wade, L. Doing casual sex: A sexual fields approach to the emotional force of hookup culture. Soc. Probl. 2021, 68, 185–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erikson, E.H. Childhood and Society; W. W. Norton & Company: New York, NY, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Bergeron, S.; Brassard, A.; Mondor, J.; Péloquin, K. Under, over, or optimal commitment? Attachment insecurities and commitment issues in relationally distressed couples. J. Sex Marital Ther. 2020, 46, 246–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Carreno, D.F.; Eisenbeck, N.; Cangas, A.J.; García-Montes, J.M.; Del Vas, L.G.; María, A.T. Spanish adaptation of the Personal Meaning Profile-Brief: Meaning in life, psychological well-being, and distress. Int. J. Clin. Health Psychol. 2020, 20, 151–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Prager, K.J. The Psychology of Intimacy; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Moss, B.F.; Schwebel, A.I. Defining intimacy in romantic relationships. Fam. Relat. 1993, 42, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rokach, A. Love Culturally: How Does Culture Affect Intimacy, Commitment & Love. J. Psychol. 2024, 158, 84–114. [Google Scholar]
- Descutner, C.J.; Thelen, M.H. Development and validation of a Fear-of-Intimacy Scale. Psychol. Assess. 1991, 3, 218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Origlia, G.; Limoncin, E.; Mollaioli, D.; Sansone, A.; Colonnello, E.; Jannini, E.A.; Ciocca, G. Sociosexuality and Capacity to Love: The Influence of Primary Bonds for Disengaged Sexual Behavior. Sex. Cult. 2023, 28, 214–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, K.; Yu, D.; Zhou, R. A Short-Term Longitudinal Investigation of Insecure Attachments and Hooking Up Among Chinese College Students. Sex. Res. Soc. Policy 2022, 19, 1997–2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanghah, H.B.; Samkhaniani, E. Comparison of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Mindfulness-Based Therapy on Relational Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder and Fear of Intimacy in Female Students. J. Adolesc. Youth Psychol. Stud. 2024, 5, 12–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reis, S.; Grenyer, B.F.S. Fear of intimacy in women: Relationship between attachment styles and depressive symptoms. Psychopathology 2004, 37, 299–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scigala, D.K.; Fabris, M.A.; Badenes Ribera, L.; Zdankiewicz Scigala, E.; Longobardi, C. Alexithymia and Self-Differentiation: The Role of Fear of Intimacy and Insecure Adult Attachment. Contemp. Fam. Ther. 2021, 43, 165–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sakman, E.; Urganci, B.; Sevi, B. Your cheating heart is just afraid of ending up alone: Fear of being single mediates the relationship between attachment anxiety and infidelity. Pers. Individ. Differ. 2021, 168, 110366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodrigues, D.; Lopes, D. Sociosexuality, Commitment, and Sexual Desire for an Attractive Person. Arch. Sex. Behav. 2017, 46, 775–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodrigues, D.; Lopes, D.; Pereira, M. Sociosexuality, commitment, sexual infidelity, and perceptions of infidelity: Data from the second love web site. J. Sex Res. 2017, 54, 241–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rodrigues, C.; Blais, M.; Lavoie, F.; Adam, B.D.; Goyer, M.F.; Magontier, C. Passion, intimacy, and commitment in casual sexual relationships in a Canadian sample of emerging adults. J. Sex Res. 2018, 55, 1192–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Simpson, J.A.; Gangestad, S.W. Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1991, 60, 870–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Urganci, B.; Sevi, B. Sociosexuality: Infidelity. In Encyclopedia of Sexual Psychology and Behavior; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 1–3. [Google Scholar]
- Penke, L.; Asendorpf, J.B. Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2008, 95, 1113–1135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alvarez, M.J.; Pereira, C.R.; Godinho, C.A.; Luz, R. Clear-cut terms and culture-sensitive characteristics of distinctive casual sexual relationships in Portuguese emerging adults. Sex. Cult. 2021, 25, 1966–1989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wentland, J.J.; Reissing, E.D. Taking casual sex not too casually: Exploring definitions of casual sexual relationships. Can. J. Hum. Sex. 2011, 20, 75–91. [Google Scholar]
- Tholander, M.; Tour, N. Lessons in casual sex: Narratives of young Swedish women. Sex. Cult. 2020, 24, 1397–1417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wongsomboom, V.; Burleson, M.H.; Webster, G.D. Women’s orgasm and sexual satisfaction in committed sex and casual sex: Relationship between sociosexuality and sexual outcomes in different sexual contexts. J. Sex. Res. 2020, 57, 285–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wei, F.; Wang, C.; Jia, Y.; Zhang, B.; Wang, W. How sexual behaviors are influenced by personal cognition and control toward sex? Let Chinese university students tell you. Int. J. Psychoanal. 2019, 5, 43. [Google Scholar]
- Weiser, D.A.; Shrout, M.R.; Thomas, A.V.; Edwards, A.L.; Pickens, J.C. “I’ve been cheated, been mistreated, when will I be loved”: Two decades of infidelity research through an intersectional lens. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 2023, 40, 856–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia, J.R.; Gesselman, A.N.; Massey, S.G.; Seibold-Simpson, S.M.; Merriwether, A.M. Intimacy through casual sex: Relational context of sexual activity and affectionate behaviors. J. Relat. Res. 2018, 9, e12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gana, K.; Arshakyan, D. Relationship between sociosexuality and condom use frequency among young French college students. Eur. J. Psychol. 2023, 19, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Laan, E.T.; Klein, V.; Werner, M.A.; van Lunsen, R.H.; Janssen, E. In pursuit of pleasure: A biopsychosocial perspective on sexual pleasure and gender. Int. J. Sex. Health 2021, 33, 516–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schmitt, D.P. Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behav. Brain Sci. 2005, 28, 247–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Delgado Amaro, H.; Alvarez, M.J.; Ferreira, J.A. Portuguese college students’ perceptions about the social sexual double standard: Developing a comprehensive model for the social SDS. Sex. Cult. 2021, 25, 733–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grello, C.M.; Welsh, D.P.; Harper, M.S. No strings attached: The nature of casual sex in college students. J. Sex. Res. 2006, 43, 255–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wesche, R.; Claxton, S.E.; Waterman, E.A. Emotional outcomes of casual sexual relationships and experiences: A systematic review. J. Sex. Res. 2021, 58, 1069–1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ingersoll, T.S.; Norvilitis, J.M.; Zhang, J.; Jia, S.; Tetewsky, S. Reliability and validity of the fear of intimacy scale in China. J. Pers. Assess. 2008, 90, 270–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Segovia, A.N.; Maxwell, J.A.; DiLorenzo, M.G.; MacDonald, G. No strings attached? How attachment orientation relates to the varieties of casual sexual relationships. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2019, 151, 109455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cortoni, F.; Marshall, W.L. Sex as a coping strategy and its relationship to juvenile sexual history and intimacy in sexual offenders. Sex. Abus. A J. Res. Treat. 2001, 13, 27–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yadav, S.; Khanam, A. Exploring the effect of casual sexual behavior and emotional intimacy on the self-esteem of young adults. Int. J. Interdiscip. Approaches Psychol. 2024, 2, 1252–1282. [Google Scholar]
- Greszta, E.; Jastrzębski, J.; Izdebski, Z.; Kowalska-Dąbrowska, M.; Januszkiewicz, A. Attachment style, love components and sociosexual orientation of men and women in different types of heterosexual relationships. Pol. Forum Psychol. 2016, 21, 490–513. [Google Scholar]
- Wizła, M.; Lewczuk, K. The Associations Between Attachment Insecurity and Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder or Problematic Pornography Use: The Mediating Role of Emotion Regulation Difficulties. Arch. Sex. Behav. 2024, 53, 3419–3436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schachner, D.A.; Shaver, P.R. Attachment dimensions and sexual motives. Pers. Relatsh. 2004, 11, 179–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Townsend, J.M.; Jonason, P.K.; Wasserman, T.H. Associations between motives for casual sex, depression, self-esteem, and sexual victimization. Arch. Sex. Behav. 2020, 49, 1189–1197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sherman, M.; Hackathorn, J. Keeping it casual: Stripping behaviors in non-sex worker populations. Sex. Cult. 2020, 24, 1218–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koike, M.; Loughnan, S.; Stanton, S.C. Virtually in love: The role of anthropomorphism in virtual romantic relationships. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 2023, 62, 600–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Courtice, E.L.; Shaughnessy, K. Technology-mediated sexual interaction and relationships: A systematic review of the literature. Sex. Relat. Ther. 2017, 32, 269–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eleuteri, S.; Terzitta, G. Sexuality during the COVID-19 pandemic: The importance of Internet. Sexologies 2021, 30, 55–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lehmiller, J.J.; Garcia, J.R.; Gesselman, A.N.; Mark, K.P. Less Sex, but More Sexual Diversity: Changes in Sexual Behavior during the COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic. Leisure Sci. 2021, 43, 295–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obeid, S.; Sacre, H.; Haddad, C.; Akel, M.; Fares, K.; Zakhour, M.; Hallit, S. Factors associated with fear of intimacy among a representative sample of the Lebanese population: The role of depression, social phobia, self-esteem, intimate partner violence, attachment, and maladaptive schemas. Perspect. Psychiatr. Care 2020, 56, 486–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vossler, A.; Moller, N.P. Internet affairs: Partners’ perceptions and experiences of internet infidelity. J. Sex Marital Ther. 2020, 46, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Muniruzzaman, M.D. Transformation of intimacy and its impact in developing countries. Life Sci. Soc. Policy 2017, 13, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pearce, E.; Machin, A.; Dunbar, R.I. Sex differences in intimacy levels in best friendships and romantic partnerships. Adapt. Hum. Behav. Physiol. 2021, 7, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wharton, A.S.; Erikson, R.J. Managing the emotions on the job and at home: Understanding the consequences of multiple emotional roles. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1993, 18, 347–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spielmann, S.S.; Nehmeh, S.; Cantarella, I.A. Worth the risk? Fear of being single and willingness to make risky health decisions in sex and dating contexts. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 2023, 17, e12834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaspar, M.; Grey, C.; Wells, A.; Hull, M.; Tan, D.H.; Lachowsky, N.; Grace, D. Public health morality, sex, and COVID-19: Sexual minority men’s HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) decision-making during Ontario’s first COVID-19 lockdown. Crit. Public Health 2022, 32, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hackathorn, J.M.; Malm, E. The experience of sex guilt: The roles of parenting, adult attachment, and sociosexuality. Sex. Cult. 2022, 26, 204–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holt-Lunstad, J. Social connection as a public health issue: The evidence and a systemic framework for prioritizing the “social” in social determinants of health. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2022, 43, 193–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Döring, N.; Krämer, N.; Mikhailova, V.; Brand, M.; Krüger, T.H.; Vowe, G. Sexual interaction in digital contexts and its implications for sexual health: A conceptual analysis. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 769732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hülür, G.; Macdonald, B. Rethinking social relationships in old age: Digitalization and the social lives of older adults. Am. Psychol. 2020, 75, 554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doi, S.C.; Thelen, M.H. The Fear-of-Intimacy Scale: Replication and extension. Psychol. Assess. 1993, 5, 377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingersoll, T.S.; Poulin, J.; Deng, R.; Shan, X.; Witt, H.; Swain, M. Fear of intimacy with helping professionals scale: Reliability and validity of English and Mandarin versions. J. Evid. Based Soc. Work 2012, 9, 317–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lyvers, M.; Edwards, M.; Thorberg, F. Alexithymia, attachment and fear of intimacy in young adults. J. Psychol. Behav. Sci. 2017, 3, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phillips, T.M.; Wilmoth, J.D.; Wall, S.K.; Peterson, D.J.; Buckley, R.; Phillips, L.E. Recollected parental care and fear of intimacy in emerging adults. Fam. J. 2013, 21, 335–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rohner, R.P.; Filus, A.; Melendez-Rhodes, T.; Kuyumcu, B.; Machado, F.; Roszak, J.; Roy, K. Psychological maladjustment mediates the relation between remembrances of parental rejection in childhood and adults’ fear of intimacy: A multicultural study. Cross-Cult. Res. 2019, 53, 508–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Senese, V.P.; Miranda, M.C.; Lansford, J.E.; Bacchini, D.; Nasti, C.; Rohner, R.P. Psychological maladjustment mediates the relation between recollections of parental rejection in childhood and adults’ fear of intimacy in Italy. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 2020, 37, 1968–1990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sherman, M.D.; Thelen, M.H. Fear of Intimacy Scale: Validation and extension with adolescents. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 1996, 13, 507–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashcroft, R.E. The declaration of Helsinki. In The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2008; pp. 141–148. [Google Scholar]
- Beaton, D.E.; Bombardier, C.; Guillemin, F.; Ferraz, M.B. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000, 25, 3186–3191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Parker, C.; Scott, S.; Geddes, A. Snowball sampling. SAGE Res. Methods Found. 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neto, F. Psychometric properties of a Portuguese version of the revised sociosexual orientation inventory. J. Relatsh. Res. 2016, 7, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kline, R.B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 5th ed.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
- Schreiber, J.B.; Nora, A.; Stage, F.K.; Barlow, E.A.; King, J. Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. J. Educ. Res. 2006, 99, 323–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis; Erlbaum: Hillsdale, MI, USA, 1988; pp. 56–102. [Google Scholar]
- Tabachnick, B.G.; Fidell, L.S. Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th ed.; Pearson Education, Limited: Boston, MA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, L.T.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hooper, D.; Coughlan, J.; Mullen, M.R. Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Struct. Equ. Model. 2008, 6, 53–60. [Google Scholar]
- McNeish, D.; Wolf, M.G. Dynamic fit index cutoffs for confirmatory factor analysis models. Psychol. Methods 2023, 28, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, I.; Huang, Y.; Chen, J.; Benesty, J.; Cohen, I. Pearson correlation coefficient. In Noise Reduction in Speech Processing; Benesty, J., Ed.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2009; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calkins, F.C.; Gervais, S.J.; Sáez, G.; Martin, M.J.; Davidson, M.M.; Brock, R.L. An integrated conceptual framework linking attachment insecurity to increased risk for both enacting and experiencing objectification. Psychol. Women Q. 2023, 47, 365–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ka, W.L.; Bottcher, S.; Walker, B.R. Attitudes toward consensual non-monogamy predicted by sociosexual behavior and avoidant attachment. Curr. Psychol. 2020, 41, 4312–4320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ribeiro, F.N.; Sousa-Gomes, V.; Moreira, D.; Moreira, D.S.; Oliveira, S.; Fávero, M. The Relationship Between Romantic Attachment, Intimacy, and Dyadic Adjustment for Female Sexual Function. Sex. Res. Soc. Policy 2022, 19, 1920–1934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kansky, J. What’s love got to do with it? Romantic relationships and well-being. In Handbook of Well-Being; Diener, E., Ed.; DEF Publishers: Salt Lake City, UT, USA, 2018; pp. 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- Jorgensen-Wells, M.A.; James, S.L.; Holmes, E.K. Attachment development in adolescent romantic relationships: A conceptual model. J. Fam. Theory Rev. 2021, 13, 128–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hmidan, A.; Weaver, A.D. Sex dreams: Gender, erotophilia, and sociosexuality as predictors of content, valence, and frequency. Can. J. Hum. Sex. 2019, 28, 177–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, J.; Lorenz, H.; Perilloux, C.; Lee, A. Creative casanovas: Mating strategy predicts using—But not preferring—Atypical flirting tactics. Evol. Psychol. Sci. 2018, 4, 443–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hudson, N.W.; Fraley, R.C. Adult attachment and perceptions of closeness. Pers. Relatsh. 2017, 24, 17–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rong, Z.; Wen, Z.; Maoxu, L.; Ya, L.; Song, F.; Hui, W.; Yunli, Y. Relationship between childhood sexual abuse and attitudes toward premarital sexual permissiveness among middle school students in Luzhou, China. BMC Public Health 2022, 22, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koch, R.; Miles, S. Inviting the stranger in: Intimacy, digital technology and new geographies of encounter. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2021, 45, 1379–1401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
M | SD | σ2 | Sk (SD 0.09) | β2 (SD 0.19) | ± | VIF | Scale Mean If Item Deleted | Scale Variance If Item Deleted | Corrected Total Item Correlation | α If Item Deleted | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total | 2.31 | 0.59 | 0.35 | 0.16 | −0.62 | 0.908 (total) | |||||
FoIS1 | 2.32 | 1.21 | 1.46 | 0.58 | −0.71 | 0.59 | 1.69 | 78.65 | 404.46 | 0.45 | 0.906 |
FoIS2 | 2.58 | 1.27 | 1.61 | 0.47 | −0.84 | 0.61 | 1.64 | 78.58 | 402.08 | 0.46 | 0.905 |
FoIS3 | 1.78 | 1.05 | 1.09 | 1.17 | 0.38 | 0.72 | 1.38 | 78.31 | 404.77 | 0.38 | 0.907 |
FoIS4 | 2.32 | 1.19 | 1.42 | 0.57 | −0.63 | 0.89 | 1.24 | 79.11 | 411.30 | 0.31 | 0.907 |
FoIS5 | 1.93 | 1.21 | 1.46 | 1.30 | 0.68 | 0.53 | 1.90 | 78.57 | 395.36 | 0.61 | 0.903 |
FoIS6 | 2.32 | 1.13 | 1.27 | 0.67 | −0.26 | 0.64 | 1.56 | 78.96 | 402.75 | 0.44 | 0.906 |
FoIS7 | 1.95 | 1.02 | 1.04 | 1.08 | 0.75 | 0.50 | 2.01 | 78.58 | 400.36 | 0.53 | 0.904 |
FoIS8 | 2.23 | 1.29 | 1.67 | 0.69 | −0.72 | 0.54 | 1.86 | 78.94 | 405.54 | 0.46 | 0.905 |
FoIS9 | 2.48 | 1.16 | 1.34 | 0.44 | −0.66 | 0.63 | 1.60 | 78.66 | 401.10 | 0.44 | 0.906 |
FoIS10 | 2.43 | 1.28 | 1.65 | 0.43 | −0.96 | 0.54 | 1.86 | 78.42 | 399.42 | 0.54 | 0.904 |
FoIS11 | 2.13 | 1.14 | 1.30 | 0.81 | −0.15 | 0.542 | 1.85 | 78.47 | 395.37 | 0.56 | 0.904 |
FoIS12 | 2.63 | 1.33 | 1.77 | 0.31 | −1.10 | 0.53 | 1.87 | 78.76 | 396.38 | 0.62 | 0.903 |
FoIS13 | 2.61 | 1.32 | 1.74 | 0.39 | −1.03 | 0.80 | 1.25 | 78.27 | 408.97 | 0.28 | 0.908 |
FoIS14 | 2.76 | 1.34 | 1.78 | 0.23 | −1.10 | 0.73 | 1.37 | 78.29 | 405.66 | 0.34 | 0.907 |
FoIS15 | 3.02 | 1.33 | 1.78 | 0.03 | −1.13 | 0.63 | 1.59 | 78.14 | 399.70 | 0.45 | 0.906 |
FoIS16 | 2.63 | 1.34 | 1.79 | 0.33 | −1.07 | 0.77 | 1.30 | 77.87 | 406.53 | 0.32 | 0.908 |
FoIS17 | 2.42 | 1.20 | 1.45 | 0.53 | −0.62 | 0.66 | 1.52 | 78.26 | 401.04 | 0.43 | 0.906 |
FoIS18 | 2.52 | 1.18 | 1.38 | 0.39 | −0.73 | 0.38 | 2.65 | 78.48 | 395.55 | 0.60 | 0.903 |
FoIS19 | 1.62 | 0.94 | 0.89 | 1.50 | 1.53 | 0.32 | 3.16 | 78.37 | 392.71 | 0.68 | 0.902 |
FoIS20 | 2.48 | 1.16 | 1.35 | 0.40 | −0.73 | 0.66 | 1.58 | 79.28 | 407.98 | 0.44 | 0.906 |
FoIS21 | 1.88 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 1.00 | 0.37 | 0.49 | 2.03 | 78.42 | 400.10 | 0.52 | 0.905 |
FoIS22 | 2.14 | 1.11 | 1.22 | 0.70 | −0.34 | 0.45 | 2.24 | 79.01 | 402.61 | 0.56 | 0.904 |
FoIS23 | 2.85 | 1.28 | 1.63 | 0.15 | −1.05 | 0.54 | 1.87 | 78.75 | 397.44 | 0.61 | 0.903 |
FoIS24 | 2.52 | 1.09 | 1.19 | 0.28 | −0.62 | 0.67 | 1.50 | 78.05 | 405.55 | 0.36 | 0.907 |
FoIS25 | 2.48 | 1.26 | 1.59 | 0.44 | −0.80 | 0.46 | 2.16 | 78.37 | 399.46 | 0.58 | 0.904 |
FoIS26 | 1.76 | 0.98 | 0.95 | 1.36 | 1.42 | 0.75 | 1.34 | 78.42 | 406.99 | 0.34 | 0.907 |
FoIS27 | 1.37 | 0.82 | 0.67 | 2.40 | 5.45 | 0.43 | 2.32 | 79.14 | 403.70 | 0.54 | 0.905 |
FoIS28 | 1.89 | 1.08 | 1.16 | 1.19 | 0.70 | 0.67 | 1.49 | 79.52 | 413.89 | 0.33 | 0.907 |
FoIS29 | 1.86 | 1.01 | 1.02 | 1.12 | 0.67 | 0.44 | 2.26 | 79.01 | 399.74 | 0.58 | 0.904 |
FoIS30 | 2.70 | 1.40 | 1.95 | 0.20 | −1.24 | 0.44 | 2.28 | 79.04 | 401.92 | 0.56 | 0.904 |
FoIS31 | 2.69 | 1.36 | 1.85 | 0.19 | −1.19 | 0.84 | 1.19 | 78.19 | 415.38 | 0.15 | 0.911 |
FoIS32 | 2.27 | 1.30 | 1.70 | 0.63 | −0.80 | 0.63 | 1.60 | 78.20 | 401.35 | 0.41 | 0.906 |
FoIS33 | 2.77 | 1.39 | 1.92 | 0.20 | −1.22 | 0.59 | 1.69 | 78.63 | 400.51 | 0.45 | 0.906 |
FoIS34 | 2.34 | 1.39 | 1.93 | 0.62 | −0.94 | 0.74 | 1.35 | 78.12 | 411.48 | 0.22 | 0.909 |
FoIS35 | 2.25 | 1.10 | 1.20 | 0.53 | −0.53 | 0.64 | 1.57 | 78.55 | 400.23 | 0.42 | 0.906 |
RMSEA CI 90% | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
χ2 | DF | χ2/DF | IFI | TLI | CFI | GFI | SRMR | RMSEA | LO90 | HI90 | |
One factor, eight error covariances | 2752 | 552 | 4.99 | 0.907 | 0.900 | 0.907 | 0.979 | 0.080 | 0.077 | 0.074 | 0.080 |
Two factors, two error covariances | 2732 | 557 | 4.90 | 0.908 | 0.902 | 0.908 | 0.979 | 0.080 | 0.076 | 0.073 | 0.079 |
Three factors | 1092 | 557 | 1.96 | 0.977 | 0.976 | 0.977 | 0.992 | 0.053 | 0.038 | 0.034 | 0.041 |
χ2 | df | χ2/df | RMSEA (CI) | CFI | IFI | SRMR | Comparisons | Δ RMSEA | Δ CFI | Δ SRMR | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Configural invariance | 1095 | 550 | 1.992 | 0.038 (0.035–0.042) | 0.910 | 0.911 | 0.055 | NA | NA | NA | NA |
Metric invariance | 1124 | 571 | 1.969 | 0.038 (0.035–0.041) | 0.908 | 0.91 | 0.055 | Configural vs. metric | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Scalar invariance | 1136 | 586 | 1.939 | 0.037 (0.034–0.041) | 0.909 | 0.91 | 0.057 | Metric vs. Scalar | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
Error variance invariance | 1316 | 622 | 2.116 | 0.041 (0.038–0.044) | 0.885 | 0.886 | 0.064 | Scalar vs. error variance | 0.004 | 0.024 | 0.007 |
Pearson’s Correlations | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | α | ω | CR | AVE | Mean (SD) | |
0. Total | 0.715 | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.910 | 0.511 | 2.31 (0.59) | |||
1. Factor 1 | 0.852 ** | 0.708 | 0.85 | 0.85 | 0.891 | 0.501 | 2.29 (0.67) | ||
2. Factor 2 | 0.825 ** | 0.463 ** | 0.776 | 0.91 | 0.91 | 0.925 | 0.602 | 2.25 (0.76) | |
3. Factor 3 | 0.577 ** | 0.493 ** | 0.209 ** | 0.758 | 0.70 | 0.70 | 0.852 | 0.574 | 2.55 (0.91) |
Pearson’s Correlations | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | α | ω | CR | AVE | Mean (SD) | |
0. Total | 0.707 | 0.823 | 0.836 | 0.869 | 0.500 | 2.60 (1.40) | |||
1. Sociosexual behavior | 0.615 ** | 0.815 | 0.742 | 0.857 | 0.850 | 0.664 | 0.84 (1.15) | ||
2. Sociosexual attitude | 0.911 ** | 0.430 ** | 0.848 | 0.798 | 0.801 | 0.884 | 0.719 | 4.42 (2.50) | |
3. Sociosexual desire | 0.756 ** | 0.226 ** | 0.520 ** | 0.868 | 0.830 | 0.839 | 0.902 | 0.754 | 2.53 (1.63) |
SOI-R Total | Sociosexual Behavior | Sociosexual Attitude | Sociosexual Desire | |
---|---|---|---|---|
FoIS total | 0.092 * | −0.053 | 0.049 | 0.195 ** |
Imagined Fear of Closeness | 0.112 ** | −0.082 * | 0.110 ** | 0.177 ** |
Imagined Openness | −0.018 | −0.061 | −0.060 | 0.071 |
Past Fear of Closeness | 0.211 ** | 0.092 * | 0.152 ** | 0.267 ** |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Leite, Â.; Azevedo, Â. Cultural Validation of the Fear-of-Intimacy Scale for the Portuguese Population: Exploring Its Relationship with Sociosexual Orientation. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2025, 22, 274. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22020274
Leite Â, Azevedo Â. Cultural Validation of the Fear-of-Intimacy Scale for the Portuguese Population: Exploring Its Relationship with Sociosexual Orientation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2025; 22(2):274. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22020274
Chicago/Turabian StyleLeite, Ângela, and Ângela Azevedo. 2025. "Cultural Validation of the Fear-of-Intimacy Scale for the Portuguese Population: Exploring Its Relationship with Sociosexual Orientation" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 22, no. 2: 274. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22020274
APA StyleLeite, Â., & Azevedo, Â. (2025). Cultural Validation of the Fear-of-Intimacy Scale for the Portuguese Population: Exploring Its Relationship with Sociosexual Orientation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(2), 274. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22020274