Weinrich et al. (1993) and Weinberg 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 behavior and reactions, one could also assess attraction, identification, lifestyle etc. This is addressed by the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid. COUNT 5
QSN1 What did both Weinrich and Weinberg critisize the KInsey scale for? ANS1 lumping individuals who are different based on different dimensions of sexuality into the same categories. QSN2 What caused valuable information to be lost while using the KInsey scale? ANS2 collapsing the two values into one final score QSN3 Why was collapsing the two values into one score a problem? ANS3 A person who has only predominantly same sex reactions is different from someone with relatively little reaction but lots of same sex experience QSN4 How could Kinsey have avoided losing this crucial information? ANS4 to have measured the two dimensions separately and report scores independently to avoid loss of information QSN5 Besides behavior and reactions what else could have been used in the KInsey scale? ANS5 one could also assess attraction, identification, lifestyle