OBJECTIVE The present study documented, compared, and contrasted the test-retest reliabilities of the victimization and perpetration forms of a Tactic-first Sexual Experiences Survey (T-SESs) and the Post-Refusal Sexual Persistence Scales (PRSPSs). METHODS 243 Mechanical Turk workers (116 women, 124 men) completed four questionnaires in a randomized order via anonymous web survey at Time 1 and approximately one week later at Time 2. RESULTS There were consistent gender differences in test-retest estimates. When assessing a history of victimization in women, both the T-SES and the PRSPS demonstrated evidence of minimal to good reliability (κ > .61, ICC = .86-92) while for men the PRSPS (κ = .64) was more consistent than the T-SES (κ = .59). When assessing a history of perpetration, there were fewer gender differences although post-hoc analyses suggest potential gender differences in assessing substance use facilitated perpetration (κ .48-.83) but were limited by few cases. Continuous scoring approaches were the most reliable, dichotomous scores were mostly reliable, and categorical scores generally did not meet minimal acceptable standards. For the rape victimization acknowledgment items, we found strong evidence of reliability for women (κ = .89, n = 31) and suggestive evidence of reliability for men (n = 7). There were few differences in reliability between standard and extended versions of the questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS All four questionnaires exhibited good evidence of one-week test-retest reliability when scored continuously. Evidence of reliability was strongest with the populations and constructs most well studied - victimization history among women and perpetration history among men.

中文翻译：

---

四个策略优先的性暴力历史问卷的重测信度。

目的 本研究记录、比较和对比了策略优先性经历调查 (T-SES) 和拒绝后性持续量表 (PRSPS) 的受害和犯罪形式的重测信度。方法 243 名 Mechanical Turk 工人（116 名女性，124 名男性）在时间 1 和大约一周后的时间 2 以随机顺序通过匿名网络调查完成了四份问卷。结果在重测估计中存在一致的性别差异。在评估女性受害史时，T-SES 和 PRSPS 均显示出最低至良好可靠性的证据 (κ > .61, ICC = .86-92)，而男性的 PRSPS (κ = .64) 更高与 T-SES (κ = .59) 一致。在评估犯罪历史时，尽管事后分析表明在评估物质使用助长犯罪方面存在潜在的性别差异（κ .48-.83），但性别差异较少，但受到少数病例的限制。连续评分方法是最可靠的，二分法评分最可靠，分类评分通常不符合最低可接受标准。对于强奸受害确认项目，我们发现了女性可靠性的有力证据（κ = .89，n = 31）和男性可靠性的暗示性证据（n = 7）。标准版和扩展版问卷的可靠性几乎没有差异。结论 当连续评分时，所有四份问卷都显示出良好的一周重测信度证据。