TABLE 1.

Measures Used in the Study

Concept Measuring and Interpretation	Name of the Scale and No. of Items	Rating	What the Scale Is Measuring	Score Range	Validity	Reliability	Cronbach’s Alpha
Sexual relation ship power (SRP), higher scores represent higher SRP	SRP Scale (Pulerwitz et al., 2000); 23 items with 2 subscales: 15 (Relationship Control Scale [RCS]); 8 (Decision Making Dominance Scale [DMDS])	RCS: a 4-point rating scale of 1 = strongly agree to 4 = strongly disagree; DMDS: a 3-point rating scale of 1 = your partner, 2 = both of you equally, and 3 = you	RCS: how the partner reacts to various daily and sex-related behaviors DMDS: who has more say about various activities/dealings that couples encounter	1–4, compute using formulas developed by Pulerwitz et al. (2000)	Good reported validity: face validity with minority women and construct validity significant with consistent condom use	Cronbach’s α = .85 (English); .89 (Spanish)	Men: .82; women: .81
Sexual communication, higher score corresponds to higher quality and more openness toward sexual communication	Dyadic Sexual Communication Scale (DSCS; Catania, 1998); 13 items	A 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = disagree strongly to 6 = agree strongly	Respondents’ perceptions of their sexual communication process with their partners (quality of sexual communication)	13–78	Construct validity: a single factor was obtained from factor analysis; consistent condom use was associated with high DSCS score among minority adolescent girls. Used in high-risk STI/HIV population	Cronbach’s α = .87 (high risk STI/HIV population and young adults)	Men: .70; women: .74
General communication, higher score indicates better communication between couples	Communication with Partner Scale (Stuart & Jacobson, 1987); 13 items	A 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = almost never to 5 = almost always	Respondents’ communication styles and how they perceive general communication with their partners on frequency (quantity) and quality of communication in general	13–65	Criterion-related validity was established using the measure of the same dimension as the CPCI and had correlations between 0.77 and 0.96.	This scale is a component of the CPCI. Only the Cronbach’s alpha of the CPCI is available, .91.	Men: .72; women: .83
Relationship satisfaction, higher scores indicate higher relationship quality	Dyadic Adjustment Scale 7-Item Short Form (DAS-7; Spanier, 1976)	A 6-point Likert scale: 0 = always disagree to = 5 always agree & 0 = never to 5 = more often; last question: a 7-point Likert scale (overall relationship satisfaction) 0 = extremely unhappy to 6 = perfect	Degree of relationship satisfaction: 3 questions are about value agreement, 3 questions are about frequency of activities together, 1 question is about overall happiness with the current relationship	0–36	Concurrent validity: >0.9 (correlation between DAS in English and in Spanish). Good construct validity: FACES II and on DAS (correlations were between 0.26 and 0.46; Youngblut, Brooten,& Menzies, 2006)	Cronbach’s alpha: 0.67–.93	Men: .67; women: .68
Relationship commitment, higher scores indicating more commitment to the relationship	Relationship Commitment Scale (Harvey, 2009); 8 items	A 9-point Likert scale: 0 = do not agree at all to 8 = agree completely	How much each person is committed to the existing relationship with his or her current partner	0–128	Construct validity: significant correlation with perceived vulnerability (r = −0.2, p < .05) and with condom use decision making (r = 0.13, p < .05)	.77 (S. M. Harvey, personal communication, April 24, 2011)	Men: .67; women: .62
Sexual decision making, higher score indicates more active involvement with sexual decision making	Sexual Decision-Making Scale (Harvey, 2009); 6 items	A 5-point Likert scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = a great deal	Subjects’ participation/involvement in sexual decision making with their partner	12–60	Construct validity: significant increase in sexual decision making among those who were in a couple intervention study, F = 27.15, p = .001	.82 (S. M. Harvey, personal communication, April 24, 2011)	Men: .9; women: .89
Attitude toward contraception, higher score indicates more barriers toward contraception use	Contraception Attitudes and Perception Scale (CA&P; Harvey, 2009); 21 item	A 5-point Likert scale from 1 = do not agree at all to 5 = completely agree	Measure different aspects of contraception, including denial/knowledge/ambivalence, norms, partner, side effects, hassle, and cost	21–105	Construct validity: exploratory factor analysis yielded on seven factors, accounting for 37% of the variance in scores	.76 (S. M. Harvey, personal communication, April 24, 2011)	Men: .86; women: .65

Note. CPCI = Couple’s Pre-Counseling Inventory; STI = sexually transmitted infection; FACES = Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale.