User:7eeer/sandbox

Early classification schemes
One of the earliest sexual orientation classification schemes was proposed in the 1860s by Karl Heinrich Ulrichs in a series of pamphlets he published privately. The classification scheme, which was meant only to describe males, separated them into three basic categories: dionings, urnings and uranodionings. An urning can be further categorized by degree of effeminacy.These categories directly correspond with the categories of sexual orientation used today: heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual. In the series of pamphlets, Ulrichs outlined a set of questions to determine if a man was an urning. The definitions of each category of Ulrichs' classification scheme are as follows:


 * Dioning1


 * Urning2
 * Mannling3
 * Weibling4
 * Zwischen5
 * Virilised6


 * Urano-Dioning7


 * 1) Comparable to the modern term "heterosexual"
 * 2) Comparable to the modern term "homosexual"
 * 3) A manly urning
 * 4) An effeminate urning
 * 5) A somewhat manly and somewhat effeminate urning
 * 6) An urning that sexually behaves like a dioning
 * 7) Comparable to the modern term "bisexual"

From at least the late nineteenth century in Europe, there was speculation that the range of human sexual response looked more like a continuum than two or three discrete categories. Berlin sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld published a scheme in 1896 that measured the strength of an individual's sexual desire on two independent 10-point scales, A (homosexual) and B (heterosexual). A heterosexual individual may be A0, B5; a homosexual individual may be A5, B0; an asexual would be A0, B0; and someone with an intense attraction to both sexes would be A9, B9.

Kinsey scale
The Kinsey scale, also called the Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale was first published in Sexual Behaviour in the Human Male (1948) by Alfred Kinsey, Wardell Pomeroy, and Clyde Martin and also featured in Sexual Behaviour in the Human Female (1953). The scale was developed to combat the assumption at the time that people are either heterosexual or homosexual and that these two types represent antitheses in the sexual world. Recognizing that a large portion of population is not completely heterosexual or homosexual and people can experience both heterosexual and homosexual behaviour and psychic responses, Kinsey et al., stated: "Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. Not all things are black nor all things white... The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects. The sooner we learn this concerning human sexual behaviour, the sooner we shall reach a sound understanding of the realities of sex."

The Kinsey scale provides a classification of sexual orientation based on the relative amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience or psychic response in one's history at a given time. The classification scheme works such that individuals in the same category show the same balance between the heterosexual and homosexual elements in their histories. The position on the scale is based on the relation of heterosexuality to homosexuality in one's history, rather than the actual amount of overt experience or psychic response. An individual can be assigned a position on the scale in accordance with the following definitions of the points of the scale:

The Kinsey scale has been praised for dismissing the dichotomous classification of sexual orientation and allowing for a new perspective on human sexuality. However, the scale has been criticized because the scale is still not a true continuum. Despite seven categories being able to provide a more accurate description of sexual orientation than a dichotomous scale it is still difficult to determine which category individuals should be assigned to. In a major study comparing sexual response in homosexual males and females, Masters and Johnson discuss the difficukt of assigning the Kinsey ratings to participants. Particularly, they found it difficult to determine the relative amount heterosexual and homosexual experience and response in a person's history when using the scale. They report finding it difficult to assign ratings 2-4 for individuals with a large number of heterosexual and homosexual experiences. When there is a lot of heterosexual and homosexual experiences in one's history it becomes difficult for that individual to be fully objective in assessing the relative amount of each.

Weinrich et al. (1993) and Weineberg et al. (1994) criticized the scale for lumping individuals who are different based on different dimensions of sexuality into the same categories. When applying the scale, Kinsey considered two dimensions of sexual orientation: overt sexual experience and psychosexual reactions. Valuable information was lost by collapsing the two values into one final score. A person who has only predominantly same sex reactions is different from someone with relatively little reaction but lots of same sex experience. It would have been quite simple for Kinsey to have measured the two dimensions separately and report scores independently to avoid loss of information. Furthermore, there are more than two dimensions of sexuality to be considered. Beyond behaviour and reactions, one could also assess attraction, identification, lifestyle etc. This is addressed by the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid.

A third concern with the Kinsey scale is that it inappropriately measures heterosexuality and homosexuality on the same scale, making one a tradeoff of the other. Research in the 1970's on masculinity and femininity found that concepts of masculinity and femininity are more appropriately measured as independent concepts on a separate scale rather than as a single continuum, with each end representing opposite extremes. When compared on the same scale, they act as tradeoffs such, whereby to be more feminine one had to be less masculine and vice versa. However, if they are considered as separate dimensions one can be simultaneously very masculine and very feminine. Similarly, considering heterosexuality and homosexuality on separate scales would allow one to be both very heterosexual and very homosexual or not very much of either. When they are measured independently, the degree of heterosexual and homosexual can be independently determined, rather than the balance between heterosexual and homosexual as determined using the Kinsey Scale.

Klein sexual orientation grid
In response to the criticism of the Kinsey scale only measuring two dimensions of sexual orientation, Dr. Fritz Klein developed the Klein sexual orientation grid (KSOG), a multidimensional scale for describing sexual orientation. Introduced in Klein's book The Bisexual Option the KSOG uses a 7-point scale to assess seven different dimensions of sexuality at three different points in an individual's life: past (from early adolescence up to one year ago), present (within the last 12 months), and ideal (what would you choose if it were completely your choice).

Scale to measure variables A, B, C, D and E of the KSOG

Scale to measure variables F and G of the KSOG

Klein, while recognizing that the grid explored many more dimensions of sexual orientation than previous scales, criticized it for still leaving out many other aspects of sexual orientation including:
 * Age of partner
 * Love and friendship were not differentiated in the emotional preference variable
 * Sexual attraction does not separate out lust vs limerence
 * Unclear about the meaning of frequency in sexual behaviour, whether referring to number of partners or number of occurrences
 * sex roles as well as masculine and feminine roles are not included

While Klein held the belief that including more dimensions of sexual orientation was better, Weinrich et al. (1993) found that all of the dimensions of the KSOG seemed to be measuring the same construct. The study conducted a factor analysis of the KSOG to see how many factors emerge in two different samples. In both groups, the first factor to emerge loaded substantially on all of the grid's 21 items, indicating that this factor accounted for a majority of the variance. They further found that a second factor emerged containing time dimensions of social and emotional preferences suggesting that those dimensions may have also been measuring something other than sexual orientation. Therefore, despite the scale being helpful in promoting the concept of sexual orientation as being multidimensional and dynamic, the additional dimensions measured do not necessarily reveal any more of an accurate description of one's overall sexual orientation than the Kinsey Scale.

A third concern with the KSOG is that different dimensions of sexual orientation may not identify all people of a certain orientation in the same way. Measures of sexual attraction, sexual behaviour, and sexual identity measures identify different (though often overlapping) populations. Laumann et al (1994) found that of the 8.6% of women reporting some same gender sexuality, 88% reported same gender sexual attraction, 41% reported some same gender sexual behaviour and 16% reported a lesbian or gay identity. Thus, it is not clear what exactly the scale may be measuring as depending on which aspect is taken into consideration, sexual orientation may or not be revealed. See also:Sexual orientation distinguished from sexual identity and behaviour 

The sell assessment of sexual orientation
The Sell Assessment of Sexual Orientation (SASO) was developed to address the major concerns with the Kinsey Scale and Klein Sexual Orientation Grid and as such, measures sexual orientation on a continuum, considers various dimensions of sexual orientation, and considers homosexuality and heterosexuality separately. Rather than providing a final solution to the question of how to best measure sexual orientation, the SASO is meant to provoke discussion and debate about measurements of sexual orientation.

The SASO is comprised of 12 questions. Six of these questions assess sexual attraction, 4 assess sexual behaviour, and 2 assess sexual orientation identity. For each question on the scale that measures homosexuality there is a corresponding question that measures heterosexuality giving 6 matching pairs of questions. Taken all together, the 6 pairs of questions and responses provide a profile of an individual's sexual orientation. However, results can be further simplified into four summaries that look specifically at responses that correspond to either homosexuality, heterosexuality, bisexuality or asexuality.

Of all the questions on the scale, Sell considered those assessing sexual attraction to be the most important as sexual attraction is a better reflection of the concept of sexual orientation which he defined as "extent of sexual attractions toward members of the other, same, both sexes or neither" than either sexual identity or sexual behaviour. Identity and behaviour are measured as supplemental information because they are both closely tied to sexual attraction and sexual orientation. Major criticisms of the SASO have not been established, but a concern is that the reliability and validity remains largely unexamined.

Difficulties with assessing sexual orientation
Research focusing on sexual orientation uses scales of assessment to identify who belongs in which sexual population group. It is assumed that these scales will be able to reliably identify and categorize people by their sexual orientation. However, in reality it is difficult to determine an individual's sexual orientation through scales of assessment, due to ambiguity regarding the definition of sexual orientation. Generally, there are three components of sexual orientation used in assessment. Their definitions and examples of how they may be assessed are as follows:

Though sexual attraction, behaviour, and identity are all components of sexual orientation, if a person defined by one of these dimenisons were congruent with those defined by another dimension it would not matter which was used in assessing orientation, but this is not the case. There is "little coherent relationship between the amount and mix of homosexual and heterosexual behaviour in a person's biography and that person's choice to label himself or herself as bisexual, homosexual, or heterosexual". Individuals typically experience diverse attractions and behaviours that may reflect curiosity, experimentation, social pressure and is not necessarily indicative of an underlying sexual orientation. For example, a woman may have fantasies or thoughts about sex with other women but never act on these thoughts and only have sex with opposite gender partners. If sexual orientation was being assessed based on one's sexual attraction then this individual would be considered homosexual, but her behaviour indicates heterosexuality.

As there is no research indicating which of the three components is essential in defining sexual orientation, all three are used independently and provide different conclusions regarding sexual orientation. Savin Williams (2006) discusses this issue and notes that by basing findings regarding sexual orientation on a single component, researchers may not actually capture the intended population. For example if homosexual is defined by same sex behaviour, gay virgins are omitted, heterosexuals engaging in same sex behaviour for other reasons than preferred sexual arousal are miscounted, and those with same sex attraction who only have opposite-sex relations are excluded. Because of the limited populations that each component captures, consumers of research should be cautious in generalizing these findings.

One of the uses for scales that assess sexual orientation is determining what the prevalence of different sexual orientations are within a population. Depending on subject's age, culture and sex, the prevalence rates of homosexuality vary depending on which component of sexual orientation is being assessed: sexual attraction, sexual behaviour, or sexual identity. Assessing sexual attraction will yield the greatest prevalence of homosexuality in a population whereby the proportion of individuals indicating they are same sex attracted is two to three times greater than the proportion reporting same sex behaviour or identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. Furthermore, reports of samesex behaviour usually exceed those of gay, lesbian, or bisexual identification. The following chart demonstrates how widely the prevalence of homosexuality can vary depending on what age, location and component of sexual orientation is being assessed:

The variance in prevalence rates is reflected in people's inconsistent responses to the different components of sexual orientation within a study and the instability of their responses over time. Laumann et al., (1994) found that among U.S. adults 20% of those who would be considered homosexual on one component of orientation were homosexual on the other two dimensions and 70% responded in a way that was consistent with homosexuality on only one of the three dimensions. Furthermore, sexuality is fluid such that one's sexual orientation is not necessarily stable or consistent over time but is subject to change throughout life. Diamond (2003) found that over 7 years 2/3 of the women changed their sexual identity at least once, with many reporting that the label was not adequate in capturing the diversity of their sexual or romantic feelings. Furthermore, women who relinquished bisexual and lesbian identification did not relinquish same sex sexuality and acknowledged the possibility for future same sex attractions and/or behaviour. One woman stated "I'm mainly straight but I'm one of those people who, if the right circumstance came along, would change my viewpoint". Therefore, individuals classified as homosexual in one study might not be identified the same way in another depending on which components are assessed and when the assessment is made making it difficult to pin point who is homosexual and who is not and what the overall prevalence within a population may be.

A definition and different aspects of sexual orientation are discussed more in depth in an online brochure written by the American Psychological Association

Implications
Depending on which component of sexual orientation is being assessed and referenced, different conclusions can be drawn about the prevalence rate of homosexuality which has real world consequences. Knowing how much of the population is made up of homosexual individuals influences how this population may be seen or treated by the public and government bodies. For example, if homosexual individuals constitute only 1%  of the general population they are politically easier to ignore or than if they are known to be a constituency that surpasses most ethnic and ad minority groups. If the number is relatively minor then it is difficult to argue for community based same sex programs and services, mass media inclusion of gay role models, or Gay/Straight Alliances in schools. For this reason, in the 1970's Bruce Voeller, the chair of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force perpetuated a common myth that the prevalence of homosexuality is 10% for the whole population by averaging a 13% number for men and a 7% number for women. Voeller generalized this finding and used it as part of the modern gay rights movement to convince politicians and the public that "we [gays and lesbians] are everywhere"

Proposed solutions
In the paper Who's Gay? Does It Matter?, Ritch Savin-Williams proposes two different approaches to assessing sexual orientation until well positioned and psychometrically sound and tested definitions are developed that would allow research to reliable identify the prevalence, causes, and consequences of homosexuality. He first suggests that greater priority should be given to sexual arousal and attraction over behaviour and identity because it is less prone to self- and other-deception, social conditions and variable meanings. To measure attraction and arousal he proposed that biological measures should be developed and used. There are numerous biological/physiological measures that exist that can measure sexual orientation such as sexual arousal, brain scans, eye tracking, body odour preference, and anatomical variations such as digit-length ratio and right or left handedness. Secondly, Savin-Williams suggests that researchers should foresake the general notion of sexual orientation altogether and assess only those components that are relevant for the research question being investigated. For example:


 * To assess STDs or HIV transmission, measure sexual behaviour
 * To assess interpersonal attachments, measure sexual/romantic attraction
 * To assess political ideology, measure sexual identity