Measures designed to collect prevalence reports of sexual victimization need to be robust against variations of question context to yield valid findings. Previous research has examined variations in the order in which questions about unwanted sexual acts and questions about coercive tactics are presented. The current study examined potential effects of the order in which coercive tactics are presented on self-reported prevalence rates of sexual victimization. The following two versions of the Sexual Aggression and Victimization Scale (SAV-S), a validated measure for studying sexual aggression victimization and perpetration in college students, were used: (a) the standard version in which the physical-force items were presented first and the items referring to the use of verbal pressure were presented last, and (b) a reversed order in which the verbal-pressure items were presented first and the physical-force items were presented last. Items referring to the exploitation of the victim’s inability to resist were placed in the middle in both versions. In a sample of 856 participants from Germany (475 female, 381 male, mean age of 24 years), most of whom were university students, 80.4% of women and 55.3% of men reported at least one experience of sexual victimization since the age of 14. No order effects on overall victimization rates were found. For both genders, the victimization rate through verbal pressure was higher when this tactic was presented first. Victimization rates through the threat or use of force were higher in the force-first than in the force-last condition for women, but could not be tested for men due to small cell sizes. No order effects were found for both men and women on reports of victimization through exploiting the inability to resist. The implications of the results for the reliable measurement of sexual aggression are discussed.

旨在收集性受害流行率报告的​​措施需要对问题背景的变化具有稳健性，以产生有效的结果。先前的研究已经检查了有关不受欢迎的性行为的问题和有关强制策略的问题的顺序变化。目前的研究检查了强制策略的顺序对自我报告的性受害流行率的潜在影响。使用了以下两个版本的性侵犯和受害量表 (SAV-S)，这是一种用于研究大学生性侵犯受害和实施的经过验证的测量方法：(a) 首先呈现体力项目的标准版本最后介绍了有关使用口头压力的项目，(b) 语言压力项目先呈现，体力项目最后呈现的颠倒顺序。提到利用受害者无法抵抗的项目在两个版本中都放在了中间。在来自德国的 856 名参与者（475 名女性，381 名男性，平均年龄 24 岁）的样本中，其中大多数是大学生，80.4% 的女性和 55.3% 的男性自14. 没有发现对总体受害率的顺序影响。对于两性而言，当首先提出这种策略时，通过口头压力造成的受害率更高。对于女性来说，在先使用武力的情况下，通过威胁或使用武力造成的受害率高于最后使用武力的情况，但由于单元格尺寸小，无法对男性进行测试。没有发现男性和女性在利用无法抵抗而受害的报告中的秩序效应。讨论了结果对可靠测量性侵犯的影响。