The Sexual Intent Perceptions Questionnaire (SIP-Q)

Definition

The Sexual Intent Perceptions Questionnaire (SIP-Q) is a 25-item instrument designed to measure interpretations of women’s sexual willingness communicated via various behaviors. The instrument demonstrates high internal consistency using a 7-point Likert-type scale. Applications of the SIP-Q include assessing observers’ tendency to overperceive women’s sexual interest, testing the effects of drive states such as sexual arousal and feelings of power on ratings of women’s sexual interest, and exploring how variables such as physical attractiveness and actor–observer positionality may be associated with sexual perceptions. Studies employing the SIP-Q revealed that sexual arousal tends to increase ratings of sexual willingness, particularly among single men, and that women’s physical attractiveness can enhance these perceptions, especially when the man himself is the recipient of the woman’s behavior. The instrument is beneficial for examining sources of sexual miscommunication.

1. Introduction

The Sexual Intent Perceptions Questionnaire (SIP-Q) is a 25-item quantitative self-report research instrument used to investigate how social contextual factors can influence the interpretation of women’s ambiguous behaviors that may or may not indicate sexual willingness. Inspired by the problem of sexual miscommunication that may lead to unwanted or illicit sexual advances [1,2], the instrument facilitates the empirical study of sexual overperception [3,4], motivated reasoning [5,6], and actor–observer differences [7] in sexual judgment. Extant scholarship utilizing the SIP-Q demonstrates its high internal consistency and its versatility for examining how relevant factors such as sexual arousal [8,9], social power [10], and physical attractiveness [11,12,13] can influence perceptions of sexual willingness. Findings derived from this research have applications for understanding the sources of misinterpretations of sexual willingness, litigating sexual misconduct allegations, and informing interventions to reduce incidences of sexual assault.

2. Theoretical Foundation and Assumptions Underlying the SIP-Q

The SIP-Q is a crucial instrument for psychological and applied research due to the prevalence of miscommunication in sexual interactions, which can lead to disputes of sexual consent. People often use indirect nonverbal behavior to convey their sexual interest or disinterest in a potential partner [14,15,16,17]. Preferences for indirect communication in sexual contexts may stem from the communicator’s desire to maintain plausible deniability about his or her intentions in the event that sexual interest is not reciprocated [18]. For example, men may communicate sexual intentions nonverbally to avoid the embarrassment of rejection, whereas women may do so to avoid appearing overeager. Despite the face-saving benefits of indirect communication of sexual interest, this strategy risks misinterpretations of sexual intent that may be less likely to result from direct verbal statements [19,20,21]. Disputed interpretations of sexual willingness are often the subject of sexual misconduct litigation during which neutral third parties such as judges, jurors, and Title IX officers decide whether the accused could have reasonably perceived ambiguous behavior as consent, even if that perception was incorrect [22]. Responses to the SIP-Q provide insight regarding the extent of potential miscommunications resulting from various nonverbal behaviors that may or may not indicate sexual intent. The instrument specifically measures perceptions of willingness to engage in penile–vaginal sexual intercourse rather than other forms of sexual activity broadly (e.g., mutual masturbation, oral sex) via behaviors that vary in sexual suggestiveness.

Preferences for indirect communication of sexual intent can invite misinterpretations in part because men tend to overperceive sexual interest from women’s ambiguous behaviors [3,4]. For example, a man may misinterpret a woman’s attempts to appear friendly, such as by sitting or standing close to him at a party or initiating conversation, as sexual interest [23]. Such behaviors, although likely intended to convey friendliness only, may be perceived by men as a signal of sexual interest—a pattern in social judgment referred to as the sexual overperception bias [4]. Indeed, compared to women, men tend to rate women’s behavior as more indicative of sexual willingness [24,25]. The SIP-Q measures the extent to which respondents perceive 25 ambiguous behaviors to indicate sexual intent.

Error management theory provides an account of men’s cognitive bias toward overperceiving women’s sexual intent [26]. Derived from the evolutionary psychology framework, the theory assumes that interpretations of ambiguous behavior entail the possibility of error: A man could perceive sexual intent from a woman’s behavior when no such intent is present (i.e., a false positive) or he could fail to perceive a woman’s genuine sexual interest (i.e., a false negative). The theory assumes that a false negative is a more costly error because the man would overlook a reproductive opportunity. Alternatively, the more minimal cost of a false positive may be embarrassment when his sexual advance is refused. The sexual overperception bias may result from men’s implicit weighing of these potential errors against one another, leading to a tendency to prefer rejection rather than a missed sexual opportunity. The SIP-Q provides a structured assessment to measure this bias by presenting respondents with a range of ambiguous behaviors for interpretation under various contexts determined by researchers.

Researchers may choose to measure SIP-Q responses under conditions that mimic real-world contexts in which people interpret sexual willingness from ambiguous behaviors. For example, such interactions often involve alcohol intoxication [27,28,29], a heightened state of sexual arousal for one or both parties [9,30], or feelings of social power over others [10,31,32]. The presence of each of these influences can systematically alter social perception by directing attention toward cues that seem to confirm one’s goal of obtaining sex [5,6,33]. The SIP-Q allows researchers to measure how cognitive states influence ratings of sexual intent underlying ambiguous behaviors.

Positionality—that is, whether the rater is the person enacting or observing the ambiguous behavior—may be another source of men’s tendency to overperceive sexual interest. Actor–observer differences refer to an attributional pattern by which people tend to explain their own behavior in terms of situational influences, whereas observers tend to explain others’ behavior in terms of dispositional influences [7,34]. For example, a woman who does not resist when a man initiates sexual intercourse may attribute her behavior to being overpowered by her partner (i.e., a situational attribution), whereas a man observing the same behavior may attribute it to her desire to engage in sex (i.e., a dispositional attribution). Men may appear to overperceive sexual interest compared to women because men are often in a position to observe women’s behavior, whereas women are often in a position to interpret the meaning of their own behavior. Supporting this interpretation, women who take the perspective of an observer rather than an actor tend to offer ratings more similar to men’s [35,36]. The SIP-Q offers a reliable approach to quantifying the extent to which sex differences in perceptions of sexual intent may be attributable to actor–observer effects.

3. Structure and Content of the SIP-Q

In its original formulation [9], the SIP-Q was developed from a scale measuring how definitive a given behavior was in determining a woman’s sexual intentions [37]. Like its source material, the SIP-Q used a 3-point scale to assess the extent to which participants believed a given behavior was either something women often do when they are not willing to have intercourse, something women sometimes do when they are not willing to have intercourse, or a something women never do unless willing to have intercourse. Participants rated 25 behaviors representing a spectrum of definitive sexual interest, with items intended to capture a range of behaviors that might convey more or less sexual intent [9].

Table 1. SIP-Q scale items. Standard instructions read, “Imagine that a woman engages in each of these behaviors. Then, indicate how likely it is that this behavior means she wants to have sex.” Participants rate each behavior on a scale from 1 (this behavior does NOT AT ALL mean she wants to have sex) to 7 (this behavior DEFINITELY means she wants to have sex).

Item
She acts very affectionate toward a man at a party.
She approaches a man to initiate conversation.
She becomes intoxicated with alcohol at a party and leaves the party with a man she just met.
She becomes intoxicated with alcohol at a party without a date.
She becomes intoxicated with alcohol on a date with a man she has not had sex with before.
She does not resist when a man initiates intercourse.
She dresses very sexily.
She drinks alcohol with a man she just met.
She gives a man her phone number.
She goes out to lunch with a man.
She goes to a man’s residence during a date to be alone.
She invites a man to her house for dinner.
She leans up against a man.
She lets a man perform oral sex on her.
She lets a man touch her breasts through her clothes.
She says yes to an invitation to watch a movie at a man’s residence.
She sends a man nude pictures.
She sits or stands close to a man.
She spends the night at a man’s residence.
She takes off her pants/skirt and underwear around a man.
She takes off her shirt and bra around a man.
She tells a man how great he looks.
She touches a man’s bare genitals.
She uses marijuana on a date with a man she has not had sex with before.
She wears perfume.

contains the complete 25-item scale. On the more highly definitive end, items such as “she touches a man’s bare genitals” and “she takes off her pants/skirt/underwear around a man” both averaged a score over 2.5 on the 3-point scale. On the less definitive end, items such as “she wears perfume” and “she goes out to lunch with a man” both of which averaged under 1.45 on the 3-point scale. In a secondary study, the questionnaire items remained consistent but researchers modified the response scale to a 7-point continuous measure to provide greater opportunity for variability. Modified scale endpoints aided participant comprehension. In the secondary study [9], and in each subsequent data collection to date, a response of 1 meant, “This behavior does NOT AT ALL mean she wants to have sex” and 7 meant “This behavior DEFINITELY means she wants to have sex”.

The SIP-Q is constructed generally such that it can be easily adapted to fit different research contexts. For example, each item in the original formulations refer to “a woman” performing a behavior with “a man.” In research addressing whether the target of a woman’s behavior affects men’s interpretation of the behavior [12,13], the item “She touches a man’s bare genitals” is easily adapted to “She touches your bare genitals.” Those same studies also specified a woman performing the behaviors to manipulate the physical attractiveness of the performer of the behavior (e.g., “Alicia touches a man’s bare genitals”). Other research has made subtle changes to the behavioral items and the response scales to assess women’s reporting of their sexual interest for their own behaviors for men in general as well as specific men [11]. For example, instead of, “she wears perfume around a man” with the usual response scale, the item reads “you wear perfume around a man” and “you wear perfume around Ben.” The response scale for questions like these matched the items such that women rated their own sexual intentions from 1 (this behavior does NOT AT ALL mean I want to have sex) to 7 (this behavior DEFINITELY means I want to have sex).

Using any combination of subtle changes to the questionnaire items and the response scale, researchers can assess changes in perceptions of sexual intent in response to experimental manipulations of the receiver of a behavior’s characteristics, the performer of the behavior’s characteristics, or the context in which the behavior is evaluated.

4. Scale Reliability

The SIP-Q has demonstrated internal consistency in each of its uses. In data collected among college students from universities in the Western U.S., the Southern U.S. [13], and from nationwide samples using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk [11], Cronbach’s alpha (α) has been α = 0.92 or higher with one exception. In study two of Rerick and colleagues [9], the researchers used a subset of the 10 highest variability items as a composite measure for some analyses. Even using a smaller amount of items and intentionally choosing high variability items, both of which naturally deflate Cronbach’s alpha, the internal consistency of the smaller subscale remained acceptable at α = 0.86. The SIP-Q remains reliable when assessing perceptions of sexual willingness across manipulation conditions (e.g., attractiveness, sexual arousal, felt power), whether the respondents are male or female, and regardless of subtle changes to the behavioral items or response scale to address different research questions.

5. Research Findings Using the SIP-Q

The original application of the SIP-Q was to assess whether sexual arousal increased the degree to which men interpreted sexual intent behind women’s behaviors [9]. Data from three studies with three different samples demonstrated that sexual arousal increased men’s perceptions of women’s sexual intent [8,9]. Also consistent across all three studies, the effect of sexual arousal on men’s perceptions of women’s sexual willingness was strongest among men who reported their relationship status as single (vs. non-single), which might be interpreted through a scarcity lens: The people for whom a resource is scarcest might have the strongest motivation to perceive the presence of that resource. Though research has long documented men’s mistaking women’s friendliness for sexual interest [3], research manipulating sexual arousal indicates that sexual arousal might exacerbate men’s overperception of women’s sexual intent. Given that many intentionally ambiguous sexual signals are interpreted under conditions of sexual arousal on the part of at least one party, this research represents an important extension of the sexual overperception bias.

Because the overperception bias itself is well documented [3,4], the SIP-Q has only been used once test it directly. In the lone test where men and women evaluated identical behaviors using the same response scale, men reported greater interpretation of sexual interest in women’s behavior than women did, providing evidence for the concurrent validity of the SIP-Q [10]. The same study indicated that like sexual arousal, feelings of felt power function to increase perception of women’s sexual intent, but only for women. That is, high-power women answered similarly to low- and high-power men, and all three groups indicated more sexual interest in women’s behavior than low-power women.

The SIP-Q has also been used to assess perceptions of sexual behavior toward differing targets. Men tend to interpret the behavior of attractive versus unattractive women as more indicative of sexual intent, and this process appears to be mediated by sexual arousal. A more attractive performer of the behavior, manipulated via headshot photos, induced more sexual arousal in men, and this increase in sexual arousal in turn increased perceptions of sexual intent [12,13]. However, this process only occurred when men evaluated the behaviors in the context in which they themselves are the recipients (e.g., “Alicia spends the night at your residence” versus “Alicia spends the night at a man’s residence”). In a similar study measuring women’s ratings that manipulated the attractiveness of the man the behavior was directed toward and the performer of the behavior (e.g., “You spend the night at Ben’s residence” versus “A woman spends the night at Ben’s residence), women indicated that general women’s behavior was more indicate of sexual interest when Ben was attractive versus unattractive. Like for men, this process was mediated by sexual arousal: The more attractive behavioral target elicited greater sexual arousal which in turn led to higher sexual intent interpretations. Unlike for men, this process only occurred when women evaluated the behavior of other women, but not their own behavior. This line of research varying the target and performer of behaviors suggested that specific contextual cues as well as the characteristics of the people involved in the interaction might underlie biases in sexual perception. These findings also supported the argument that sexual overperception may be partially attributable to actor–observer differences rather than, or in addition to, sex differences. The original misperception studies compared men’s interpretations of women’s behavior to women’s interpretations of their own behavior [3,4]. However, when women evaluate the behavior of women other than themselves, they respond more similarly to men [35,36]. More research is needed to address this question, especially in light of recent evidence that women underreport their own sexual intent [38].

Finally, both men’s and women’s ratings of self-perceived physical attractiveness were positively related to SIP-Q responses. For men, the more attractive they rate themselves, the greater their average perception of women’s sexual interest in them [13]. For women, the more attractive they rate themselves, the greater sexual intent they report in their own behaviors [39]. Thus, beliefs about one’s own attractiveness and other individual difference variables might influence responses on the SIP-Q.

6. Applications of the SIP-Q

Research utilizing the SIP-Q is instrumental in understanding honest misinterpretations of sexual willingness, especially when the observer is sexually aroused or in a position of social power. Findings can inform practical interventions to reduce the risk of sexual assault resulting from miscommunications of sexual intent. Some estimates suggest that approximately 1-in-5 students experience sexual assault during their time at university [40]. Many of these victims attribute their assault to miscommunication [41,42]. These findings suggest that educational interventions designed to address the sources of miscommunication of sexual intent may reduce incidents of sexual assault among this high-risk population. Given that sexual arousal can increase observers’ perceptions of others’ sexual willingness [8,9], universities might consider offering training opportunities to help participants identify their own visceral affective states as a potential source of bias in sexual judgment. Prior educational interventions tended to emphasize affirmative consent strategies whereby both parties were responsible for communicating their continuous agreement to engage in sexual activity [43]. Under this approach, neither silence nor a lack of resistance to sex should be interpreted by the initiator as sexual consent. Although well intended, affirmative consent policies can place burden on potential victims to communicate with clarity to an initiator who may be motivated to misperceive ambiguity as sexual willingness. Interventions that instead train initiators to recognize sexual arousal as a risk factor for sexual assault can shift the burden from the recipient to the initiator to discern and counteract biased judgments [8].

Despite the prospect of educational interventions that alert potential aggressors to the sources of biased sexual perceptions, explicit verbal communication of sexual willingness remains a valuable tool to avoid misunderstandings [17,19,20]. Factors including gender, relationship status, feelings of power, sexual arousal, and physical attractiveness are associated with perceptions of sexual intent from ambiguous behavior [9,10,11,13], suggesting that strategies for reducing ambiguity can mitigate harm. Populations at risk of sexual assault should practice and normalize explicit verbal communication of sexual intent. Such approaches can complement educational interventions that emphasize the potential for visceral states to beget sexual misperceptions.

Findings from the SIP-Q suggest that neutral third parties could intervene to prevent sexual assault. Bystanders whose social judgments may not be influenced by visceral states could have a less biased interpretation of ambiguous cues, highlighting the potential benefits of bystander intervention programs among at-risk populations such as university students [44]. Educational interventions that emphasize the effects of factors such as sexual arousal on perceptions of sexual intent could empower bystanders to notice and interrupt unwanted sexual advances.

Parties tasked with adjudicating sexual misconduct allegations can benefit from insights gleaned from the SIP-Q. Judges, jurors, Title IX officers, administrative panels, and others involved in deciding how to address sexual misconduct often review sterilized evidence post hoc [11]. Without knowledge of the systematic effects of factors such as sexual arousal on perceptions of sexual intent, it may be difficult for these evaluators to fully consider a mistake-of-fact defense, which argues that the defendant did not have criminal intent because he honestly and reasonably misunderstood the circumstances of the alleged offense [45]. In the evaluators’ sober state, a lack of sexual consent may be clear; but from the perspective of the accused, cognitive biases associated with affective states at the time of the alleged offense might lead a reasonable person to misinterpret ambiguous cues. To ensure that the accused receive a fair hearing, decision-makers should consider influences on sexual perception evidenced by the SIP-Q. Title IX administrators should implement novel approaches to addressing sexual misconduct allegations, such as restorative justice meetings that bring victims and aggressors together for direct dialog and apologies [46,47]. These meetings might help to resolve miscommunications by allowing victims to describe their personal accounts to the accused.

7. Limitations and Future Directions

Future research can address present limitations and advance the study of sexual intent perceptions in novel contexts. Continued investigations should vary the social context in which participants interpret sexual willingness from ambiguous behaviors. Experimental research that manipulates whether the ambiguous behaviors occur at a party among strangers, on a date with an acquaintance, or between short-term or long-term relationship partners can help to develop a clearer understanding of how these factors influence ratings of sexual intent.

Extant research utilizing the SIP-Q examined opposite-sex interactions exclusively among samples of self-described heterosexual research participants. Future investigations can test ratings of sexual intent in same-sex interactions among homosexual participants to examine whether current patterns of results replicate among a broader sample. For example, it may be worthwhile to explore whether homosexual men tend to report greater sexual intent from ambiguous behaviors compared to homosexual women, a sex difference observed in prior research among heterosexual participants.

Participants’ current relationship status (i.e., single vs. non-single) was associated with perceptions of sexual intent in prior work [8,9], suggesting that demographic or individual difference variables could be associated with SIP-Q scores. Future research might test whether other relevant individual differences such as attitudes toward casual sex, rape myth acceptance, impulsivity, attachment style, or loneliness can influence perceptions of sexual willingness.

Future research should examine how traits associated with high self-perceived mate value–one’s belief that he or she is desirable to potential partners [48,49]–might influence ratings of sexual willingness. Physical attractiveness, one component of mate value, was associated with perceptions of sexual willingness in prior investigations [11,12,13]. It remains unknown whether other traits that enhance one’s desirability to potential partners such as humor, intellect, or empathy may influence perceptions of sexual intent.

Present conclusions and implications drawn from studies utilizing the SIP-Q are limited by a lack of published work reporting on its factor structure. To address this limitation, researchers could perform exploratory and/or confirmatory factor analysis on the present instrument. A test of the scale’s factor structure and replicability across samples can provide further evidence of its construct validity. Future research might also perform additional analyses of reliability utilizing indicators such as McDonald’s [50] omega, as Cronbach’s [51] alpha can misestimate scale reliability [52]. Further psychometric analysis utilizing structural equation modeling can additionally reveal to degree to which observed differences in SIP-Q scores reflect actual differences between groups versus random variance.

Future research should measure the extent to which SIP-Q scores predict relevant behavior such as efforts to obtain explicit sexual consent or the types of sexual activities participants pursue. Such investigations could first assess participants’ self-reports of past behavior to establish the strength and nature of any associations between SIP-Q scores and behavior beyond ratings of social perceptions.

8. Conclusions

The Sexual Intent Perceptions Questionnaire (SIP-Q) is a valuable tool for understanding the multifactorial problem of sexual overperception and associated behavior, such as sexual coercion or assault. Cognitive and affective states such as feeling powerful or sexually aroused, as well as situational factors such as physical attractiveness and actor–observer differences, may bias sexual perceptions. The SIP-Q is a versatile instrument for quantifying the influence of these variables on ratings of perceived sexual willingness. These findings can help to inform educational interventions and policies on university campuses and beyond that aim to reduce the prevalence of sexual miscommunication and misconduct.