The Stereotypes About Male Sexuality Scale<\/strong> (SAMSS) is a comprehensive psychometric instrument engineered to evaluate endorsement of pervasive cultural, cognitive, and interpersonal myths regarding masculine sexual functioning, desires, and relational obligations. Developed by William E. Snell, Jr.<\/a>, Sharyn S. Belk, and Raymond C. Hawkins II in 1986, the instrument operationalizes the clinical and socio-cognitive insights articulated by sex therapist Bernie Zilbergeld<\/a> in his landmark treatise Male Sexuality<\/em> (1978). The SAMSS systematically measures ten distinct cognitive belief domains across a total of 60 items, with six items dedicated to each subscale: (a) Inexpressiveness, (b) Sex Equals Performance, (c) Males Orchestrate Sex, (d) Always Ready for Sex, (e) Touching Leads to Sex, (f) Sex Equals Intercourse, (g) Sex Requires Erection, (h) Sex Requires Orgasm, (i) Spontaneous Sex, and (j) Sexually Aware Men.<\/p>\n Respondents evaluate statements using a balanced 5-point Likert-type scale anchored from +2 (Agree<\/em>) to −2 (Disagree<\/em>), with 0 representing Neither Agree nor Disagree<\/em>. The instrument exhibits robust internal consistency, yielding subscale Cronbach’s alpha coefficients spanning from .63 to .93 with an aggregate mean of .80 across normative undergraduate and adult samples. Construct and concurrent validity evaluations demonstrate strong associations with traditional masculine gender-role socialization, restrictive emotionality, performance-oriented sexual scripting, hypermasculinity, and maladaptive relational influence strategies. Furthermore, analog studies of clinical trainees underscore that endorsement of these rigid cognitive scripts inversely relates to clinician-rated adult psychological health. The SAMSS provides researchers, sex therapists, and clinicians with a nuanced operationalization of the cognitive schemas underlying masculine sexual dysfunction, performance anxiety, intimacy avoidance, and coercive relationship dynamics.<\/p>\n Stereotypes About Male Sexuality Scale, SAMSS, William E. Snell Jr., male sexuality, sexual scripts, gender role conflict, performance anxiety, Bernie Zilbergeld, masculine sexual myths, sexual self-concept, psychometrics, erectile dysfunction cognitive factors, sexual attitudes<\/p>\n The Stereotypes About Male Sexuality Scale was developed and validated through collaborative investigations led by:<\/p>\n The primary purpose of the Stereotypes About Male Sexuality Scale (SAMSS) is to provide an empirically sound, multidimensional self-report inventory that operationalizes cognitive schemas, rigid socio-cultural expectations, and stereotypic myths regarding masculine sexuality. Historically, psychosexual assessment instruments concentrated predominantly on physiological symptoms (e.g., frequencies of erection, ejaculation latency) or generalized sexual attitudes (e.g., broad permissiveness vs. conservatism). Prior to the construction of the SAMSS, there existed a critical empirical void concerning instruments capable of measuring the cognitive distortions and thematic scripts specifically dictating how men believe they must<\/em> behave, feel, and perform sexually.<\/p>\n Clinical and research applications of the SAMSS span multiple psychological disciplines:<\/p>\n The SAMSS operationalizes the overarching construct of stereotypic male sexual cognition<\/em>, defined as an internalized network of rigid cultural mandates, normative expectations, and cognitive heuristics that prescribe how men experience, enact, and regulate their sexuality. This construct is broken down into ten granular dimensions, each tapping a specific thematic myth:<\/p>\n This dimension measures adherence to the mandate that men must restrict their emotional and vulnerable communication during intimate encounters. Influenced by traditional masculine emotional constriction, items assess beliefs that men should remain stoic, conceal insecurity, avoid vulnerability, and refrain from expressing tender emotional needs (e.g., believing that expressing deep emotional needs or vulnerability is unmanly).<\/p>\n Reflecting the cultural framing of sexuality as an athletic or achievement-oriented endeavor, this subscale quantifies the belief that sexual interactions are tests of competence, stamina, and skill. Men scoring high on this dimension evaluate the success of an encounter based on perceived execution and prowess rather than mutual connection, emotional bonding, or mutual enjoyment.<\/p>\n This subscale captures traditional script expectations concerning initiative, agency, and sexual leadership. It evaluates the cognitive assumption that the male partner must be the primary architect of sexual activity, responsible for initiating contact, dictating timing, choosing positions, and directing the progression of intimacy.<\/p>\n This construct assesses the myth of constant, unflagging male libido. It taps the internalized script that a “real man” possesses an imperative, driven sexual appetite that is instantly triggered regardless of contextual factors, stress levels, fatigue, emotional states, or physical environment.<\/p>\n This subscale evaluates the instrumentalization of physical affection, capturing the assumption that non-genital contact (e.g., hugging, cuddling, hand-holding, kissing) is solely a prelude or transactional gateway to sexual intercourse, rather than a self-sufficient medium for interpersonal warmth and comfort.<\/p>\n This dimension measures a phallocentric definition of sexual intimacy, whereby any sensual, playful, or erotic activity that does not culminate in penile-vaginal penetration is deemed incomplete, deficient, or non-gratifying.<\/p>\n Targeting the physiological focal point of masculine anxiety, this subscale measures the belief that rigid penile erection is the indispensable prerequisite for sexual activity. Endorsement of this belief posits that the loss or attenuation of an erection invalidates the encounter and represents catastrophic failure.<\/p>\n This construct evaluates the cognitive imperative of climax. It reflects the assumption that sexual encounters must invariably conclude with ejaculation and explosive orgasm to provide gratification, reinforcing an end-state teleology that delegitimizes plateau-phase pleasure and non-orgasmic sensual intimacy.<\/p>\n This subscale operationalizes the romanticized myth that satisfying sex must be completely instinctual, unplanned, and spontaneous. Endorsement reflects resistance to sexual communication, planning, or deliberate pacing, framing intentional preparation as artificial or unpassionate.<\/p>\n This dimension evaluates the presumptive belief that modern men possess innate, progressive, and comprehensive knowledge regarding sexuality, anatomy, and technique. Paradoxically, this script inhibits men from admitting ignorance, seeking sexual education, or asking intimate partners for guidance.<\/p>\n The theoretical architecture of the SAMSS synthesizes three primary paradigms: cognitive-behavioral sex therapy, sexual script theory<\/a>, and the sociology of gender-role socialization.<\/p>\n The foundational clinical framework for the SAMSS derives directly from the seminal work of Bernie Zilbergeld (1978, 1992, 1999). In Male Sexuality<\/em> (and its later revision, The New Male Sexuality<\/em>), Zilbergeld described the cultural “Fantasy Model of Sex,” a socio-cultural archetype perpetuated by media, peer groups, and folklore. This model presents a highly distorted caricature of masculine capability, which Zilbergeld summarized in cultural scripts such as: “A real man is always interested in and ready for sex,” “Sex is centered on a hard penis,” “Real sex means intercourse,” and “A man should know what to do without asking.” Zilbergeld posited that these myths function as rigid cognitive imperatives that burden men with unrealistic standards, inevitably fostering performance anxiety, spectatoring, relationship conflict, and secondary erectile or ejaculatory dysfunctions.<\/p>\n Snell, Belk, and Hawkins grounded the SAMSS within Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT)<\/a>, formulated by Albert Ellis, and Aaron Beck’s cognitive therapy. According to REBT, psychological and emotional disturbances stem not from external events, but from irrational, absolutistic cognitive beliefs characterized by dogmatic “musts,” “shoulds,” and “oughts.” The ten domains of the SAMSS represent cognitive distortions (e.g., dichotomous thinking, catastrophizing, and demand-making) applied to the sexual arena. When a man internalizes the belief that he must always<\/em> maintain an erection, or that sex must always<\/em> end in intercourse, any deviation from this standard prompts irrational inferences of unworthiness, leading directly to autonomic sympathetic arousal, which biochemically inhibits the parasympathetic processes essential for erectile tumescence.<\/p>\n The scale is further grounded in Gagnon and Simon’s (1973) Sexual Scripting Theory, which argues that human sexual behavior is guided by socially learned, culturally scripted scenarios. These scripts operate at cultural, interpersonal, and intrapsychic levels. The SAMSS specifically captures the intrapsychic internalization of dominant cultural scenarios regarding hegemonic masculinity, demonstrating how macro-level gender expectations become personal cognitive rules governing intimate behavioral interactions.<\/p>\n Extensive psychometric investigations by Snell, Belk, and Hawkins (1986, 1988, 1990) have established substantial empirical support for the construct, concurrent, convergent, and discriminant validity of the SAMSS.<\/p>\n To establish construct validity, Snell et al. (1990) examined the relationship between the SAMSS subscales and established gender-role inventories, including measures of traditional masculinity, masculine gender-role conflict, and restrictive emotionality. The findings revealed that:<\/p>\n In an investigation by Snell, Hawkins, and Belk (1988), the SAMSS was correlated with self-reported social influence strategies utilized within intimate dyadic relationships. The authors hypothesized that individuals adhering to conventional sexual myths would rely on unilateral, coercive, or manipulative influence tactics rather than collaborative, bilateral communication. Consistent with hypotheses, high overall SAMSS scores were negatively associated with bilateral social influence strategies (such as reasoned discussion, mutual compromise, and shared decision-making) and positively associated with unilateral influence strategies (such as withdrawing, demanding, or manipulating).<\/p>\n Snell et al. (1990) conducted a clinical analogue study involving mental health counselors in training. Counselors were instructed to complete the SAMSS from the perspective of an idealized, fully functioning, “mentally healthy adult male.” The results provided strong discriminant validity: counseling trainees of both genders expected mentally healthy males to actively reject traditional sexual stereotypes. Specifically, counselors projected that psychologically healthy men would score significantly lower on Inexpressiveness<\/em>, Males Orchestrate Sex<\/em>, Always Ready for Sex<\/em>, and Sex Equals Intercourse<\/em>, while maintaining realistic self-awareness without endorsing rigid performance imperatives.<\/p>\n The SAMSS has demonstrated acceptable to excellent internal consistency across diverse normative, collegiate, and community samples.<\/p>\n In the original scale development and validation studies conducted by Snell, Belk, and Hawkins (1986) involving over 300 undergraduate men and women, the ten subscales demonstrated Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from .63 to .93, with an overall mean alpha of .80 across the 10 dimensions. Typical internal consistency coefficients for the individual subscales include:<\/p>\n The slightly lower reliabilities observed for Spontaneous Sex<\/em> and Sexually Aware Men<\/em> have been attributed to the nuanced phrasing of items dealing with broader social change versus individual behavioral expectations.<\/p>\n Test-retest reliability evaluations over intervals spanning two to four weeks have yielded stability coefficients ranging between r = .70 and r = .85 across subscales, confirming that the SAMSS measures relatively stable cognitive schemas while remaining sensitive to psychoeducational and therapeutic interventions<\/span>.<\/p>\n The structural validity of the SAMSS was evaluated using both exploratory factor analysis (EFA) during initial item selection and subsequent confirmatory modeling.<\/p>\n During scale development (Snell et al., 1986), an initial pool of over 90 candidate items derived from Zilbergeld’s (1978) theoretical text was administered to normative samples. Principal axis factoring with orthogonal (varimax) and oblique (promax) rotations confirmed that a ten-factor solution best captured the shared variance, cleanly mirroring the theoretical conceptualization of masculine sexual myths. Sixty items showing primary factor loadings exceeding .40 on their designated target factor, alongside minimal cross-loadings (< .25 on non-target factors), were retained to establish the final 60-item instrument<\/span>.<\/p>\n Inter-factor correlations among the ten subscales reveal modest to high positive correlations, indicating that while each subscale captures an empirically distinct facet of male sexual cognition, they share underlying variance attributable to a higher-order latent construct of Traditional Phallocentric Sexual Ideology<\/em>. Subscales such as Sex Equals Intercourse<\/em>, Sex Requires Erection<\/em>, and Sex Equals Performance<\/em> exhibit strong intercorrelations (r > .55), whereas Sexually Aware Men<\/em> and Spontaneous Sex<\/em> demonstrate greater conceptual independence<\/span>.<\/p>\n The Stereotypes About Male Sexuality Scale (SAMSS) is structured as follows:<\/p>\n The Stereotypes About Male Sexuality Scale was first published in 1986 by Dr. William E. Snell, Jr., Sharyn S. Belk, and Raymond C. Hawkins II through Social and Behavioral Sciences Documents<\/em> (Ms. No. 2747), followed by extended empirical validations in 1988 and 1990. The instrument is considered an open-access psychometric instrument for academic, non-commercial research, and clinical educational purposes, provided appropriate scholarly attribution is cited. Researchers and clinicians wishing to reproduce or adapt the scale for proprietary or commercial electronic delivery systems should seek authorization through the estate of Dr. William E. Snell, Jr., or the original publishing bodies.<\/p>\n Doyle, J. A. (1989). The male experience<\/em> (2nd ed.). Wm. C. Brown Publishers.<\/p>\n Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality<\/em>. Aldine Publishing Company.<\/p>\n Gould, R. (1982). Sexual functioning in relation to the changing roles of men. In K. Solomon & N. B. Levy (Eds.), Men in transition: Theory and therapy<\/em> (pp. 165–173). Plenum Press. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/978-1-4684-4160-4_10<\/a><\/p>\n Gross, A. E. (1978). The male role and heterosexual behavior. Journal of Social Issues<\/em>, 34(1), 87–107. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1540-4560.1978.tb02542.x<\/a><\/p>\n Herek, G. M. (1987). On heterosexual masculinity: Some psychical consequences of the social construction of gender and sexuality. In M. S. Kimmel (Ed.), Changing men: New directions in research on men and masculinity<\/em> (pp. 68–82). Sage Publications.<\/p>\n Mosher, D. L., & Anderson, R. D. (1986). Macho personality, sexual aggression, and reactions to guided imagery of realistic rape. Journal of Research in Personality<\/em>, 20(1), 77–94. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/0092-6566(86)90111-X<\/a><\/p>\n Mosher, D. L., & Sirkin, M. (1984). Measuring a macho personality constellation. Journal of Research in Personality<\/em>, 18(2), 150–163. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/0092-6566(84)90026-6<\/a><\/p>\n Snell, W. E., Jr., Belk, S. S., & Hawkins, R. C., II. (1986). The Stereotypes About Male Sexuality Scale (SAMSS): Components, correlates, antecedents, consequences, and counselor bias. Social and Behavioral Sciences Documents<\/em>, 16, 10 (Ms. No. 2747).<\/p>\n Snell, W. E., Jr., Belk, S. S., & Hawkins, R. C., II. (1990). Cognitive beliefs about male sexuality: The impact of gender roles and counselor perspectives. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy<\/em>, 8(4), 249–265. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/BF01072976<\/a><\/p>\n2. Keywords<\/h2>\n
3. Authors<\/h2>\n
\n
4. Purpose<\/h2>\n
\n
5. Psychological Construct<\/h2>\n
1. Inexpressiveness<\/h3>\n
2. Sex Equals Performance<\/h3>\n
3. Males Orchestrate Sex<\/h3>\n
4. Always Ready for Sex<\/h3>\n
5. Touching Leads to Sex<\/h3>\n
6. Sex Equals Intercourse<\/h3>\n
7. Sex Requires Erection<\/h3>\n
8. Sex Requires Orgasm<\/h3>\n
9. Spontaneous Sex<\/h3>\n
10. Sexually Aware Men<\/h3>\n
6. Theoretical Framework<\/h2>\n
Zilbergeld’s Model of Male Sexuality<\/h3>\n
Cognitive Theory and Ellis’s Rational-Emotive Model<\/h3>\n
Social Constructionist and Sexual Scripting Theory<\/h3>\n
7. Validity<\/h2>\n
Construct and Convergent Validity: Gender-Role Socialization<\/h3>\n
\n
Concurrent Validity: Social Influence Strategies<\/h3>\n
Discriminant and Clinical Analogue Validity: Counselor Perspectives<\/h3>\n
8. Reliability<\/h2>\n
Internal Consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha)<\/h3>\n
\n
Temporal Stability<\/h3>\n
9. Factor Analysis<\/h2>\n
Initial Extraction and Structure<\/h3>\n
Inter-Factor Correlations and Higher-Order Structure<\/h3>\n
10. Instrument \/ Measurement Tool<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year<\/h2>\n
12. References<\/h2>\n