Glad you like my work on differentiation. The data cited is not “fake data” as opposed to “real data.” If you’re suggesting people who visit tend to be looking for help I wouldn’t disagree. But that doesn’t make them different from a large portion of Internet users. “Sexual problems” and variants are one of the most common Google searches. You’ll also be hard-pressed to find another sex study with 20,000 respondents. (National studies often have less than 2,000 subjects.) Or an international data set (we also have responses from 3000 Germans in a translated version).

Thanks for grouping me with Hendrix, Gottman,, but I doubt this collective would produce a better instrument or cough up the money for a sex and intimacy study. It sure would be great to have funding to commission a high-powered research organization to do sophisticated population sampling. The condom companies will fund this kind of research the same day they finally manage to get a condom ad on TV.

Your comments suggest you’ll welcome the news that our newly developed Crucible Differentiation Scale (CDS), pilot tested on over 4,000 subjects, has been accepted for publication by Journal of Marriage & Family Therapy. We’re awaiting a firm publication date, several dissertations are in the works, and we will make the instrument available so others can generate “real data” too. Is this a better place to hang my hat?

More Posts