目的：
　　為再次檢驗台灣第一套性侵害加害人評估工具：K式兩性關係量表（KSRS）的信效度，本研究進行以下工作：（一）收集大量樣本以進行信效度檢驗，（二）測量受測者社會期許傾向，以探討其對KSRS反應之影響，（三）比較不同犯罪特徵之性侵害組的KSRS資料，以詳細檢驗其效度。
研究方法：
　　以性犯罪受刑人369名，非性犯罪受刑人324名，高中職學生222名為研究對象，團體施測以下工具：KSRS量表2003版【KSRS（2003）】、馬康二氏社會期許量表簡式C版（MCSD-C）及基本人口學變項問卷，並收集性犯罪組犯罪史及犯行特徵、精神病理資料。以SPSS統計套裝軟體中所附之t檢定、ANOVA、共變數分析以及區辨分析對所得資料進行組間得分差異性的分析。
結果與討論：
　　增加大量樣本數量後，資料顯示KSRS（2003）各因素量尺具中至高的內部一致性，以及良好的兩週再測信度。24個因素量尺中有10個為單一建構，顯示其建構效度在可接受範圍，支持柯氏在1999年提出的信效度資料。研究者也對信效度較不理想的因素量尺提出建議修改的方式。本次性侵害組仍有與柯氏1999年研究中相似的否認表現，以社會期許變項探討其原因，發現犯罪組的社會期許傾向較其他組強，相關分析顯示社會期許傾向顯著地影響性犯罪組在KSRS的得分表現，但共變數分析顯示社會期許變項並無法完全解釋性侵害組在KSRS表現出的防衛機轉。此外，社會期許變項對各因素量表影響程度及方向不一，提醒我們在解釋KSRS分數時需加留意。再進一步以性犯罪組犯行特徵分組比較，發現被害者是否同意性交、被害者年齡以及司法處遇階段等較明顯地影響性犯罪組在KSRS的得分。組間比較整理結果顯示，藥物使用經驗、反社會人格傾向及社會期許傾向是KSRS最具效度的因素量尺。而以KSRS所有因素量尺加上社會期許變項來區辨性侵害組最具效力，本研究並得出三組個案的區辨函數，可供臨床工作者應用參考。研究者建議KSRS臨床應用應同時施測社會期許量表，以了解個案的社會期許傾向與KSRS得分間的相關，並作更準確且有效的臨床判斷。
未來研究建議：
　　應進一步探討除社會期許以外影響KSRS表現之因素，以及收集不同司法處遇的性侵害組資料以建立較為完整的測驗常模。

　　Objectives: To re-explore the reliability and validity of Ko’s Sexual Relation Scale (KSRS, 1999), which is the first instrument designed to assess sexual offender in Taiwan, we did the following things: (1) collected a large number of data to test the reliability and validity, (2) to obtain the social desirability score of each subject in order to see it’s influence on the KSRS scores, (3) to compare sexual offender subgroups divided by offense characteristic on KSRS scores in order to exam their validity.
　　Method: Subjects included 369 sexual offense prisoners, 324 non-sexual offense prisoners, and 222 students attending senior high schools. KSRS (2003), MCSD-C and demographic questionnaire were administrated to all subjects. In the same time, criminal history, offense details, and psychiatric information of sexual offense prisoners were collected for further data analysis. t test, ANOVA, co-variance analysis and discriminant analysis were used to analyze our data.
　　Result and discussion: With the present enlarged sample size, subscales of KSRS were found to have median to high internal consistency and good 2 weeks test-retest reliability. Factor analysis showed only one factor could be abstracted from each of the ten KSRS subscales, which suggests that many KSRS scales have acceptable construct validity, confirmed Ko’s 1999 study result. Some suggestions were given about how to improve the reliability and validity of other KSRS scales. It was found that the sexual offender subjects in the present study showed similar strong denial KSRS response tendency as shown in 1999 study. Sexual offense group had stronger social desirability tendency than other two groups in the present study. Social desirability scores were significantly correlated to sexual offenders’ scores on KSRS. Although covariance analysis was performed, the result showed that social desirability tendency alone could not fully explain all denial tendency showed by the sexual offenders on KSRS. Besides, the intensity and direction of correlation between social desirability and different KSRS scores were different, which remind us that the interpretation of the KSRS results should be cautiously conducted. Having compared KSRS scores of sexual offender subgroups divided by criminal offense characteristics, we found that victim’s consent to have sexual relation, victim’s age, and the offender’s legal disposition stage significantly correlated to KSRS responses. Experience of drug usage, antisocial personality tendency, and social desirability tendency were showed to be the most effective subscales of KSRS in our research. The result of discriminant analysis using 24 KSRS subscales scores and MCSD-C score as variables showed that this set of these variables could make 80% correct classification of subjects on each of the three subject groups in the present study. A different discrimination function was established for each group of the present study. The very necessity of administrating the KSRS along with MCSD-C in order to understand the relation between social desirability intensity and KSRS score was strongly emphasized.
　　Further research recommendation: Further examination on other reasons of sexual offender’s denial tendency on the KSRS was suggested. Norms of KSRS also should be created by collecting more data of sexual offenders in different legal disposition stage.

內政部警政署（民92）。 統計資料：九十二年警政統計資料，全般刑案、暴力犯罪及竊盜之發生數，破獲數、破獲率。[全球資訊網] 取自：http://www.npa.gov.tw/count/xls/right1_1.xls
內政部警政署（民92）。 統計資料：警政統計通報，92年第023號（九十二年一至四月暴力犯罪概況）。[全球資訊網] 取自：http://www.npa.gov.tw/count/doc/9223.doc
內政部警政署（民92）。 統計資料：性侵害犯罪嫌疑犯性別統計。[全球資訊網] 取自：http://www.npa.gov.tw/count/xls/right4_7.xls
內政部警政署（民92）。 統計資料：性侵害犯罪件數—按發生時間別、犯罪場所別。[全球資訊網] 取自：http://www.npa.gov.tw/count/xls/right4_8.xls
內政部警政署（民92）。 統計資料：性侵害各案類嫌疑犯統計。 [全球資訊網] 取自：http://www.npa.gov.tw/count/xls/right4_10.xls
內政部警政署（民92）。 統計資料：台閩地區性侵害犯罪—主嫌疑犯與受害人關係破獲件數。[全球資訊網] 取自：http://www.npa.gov.tw/count/xls/right4_16.xls
柯永河（民88）。 「性侵害加害人心理狀態評估工具編制」研究。 台北市，內政部性侵害防治中心。
法務部（民92）。 法務統計分析：性侵害犯罪統計分析。 [全球資訊網] 取自：http://www.moj.gov.tw/f7_frame.htm
陳若璋（民89）。 性犯罪心理學：心理治療與評估。 台北市，張老師文化。
黃軍義（民88）。 強姦行為之心理動態分析。 台大心理所，博士論文。
謝敏芳（民88）。 十年有成，性自主新頁。[生命力公益新聞網]。取自：
http://vita.fju.edu.tw/ShowNewsDetail.asp?no=2001519142524
Tony Morrison, Marcus Erooga, and Richard C. Beckett ; foreword by Valerie Howarth.(1994) Sexual offending against children : assessment and treatment of male abusers.
黃世杰、王介暉、胡淑惠（譯）。 兒童性侵害：男性性侵害者的評估與治療。 臺北市：
心理出版社。
Andrews, P. & Meyer, R.G. (2003). Marlowe – Crowne social desirability scale and short form C: Forensic norms. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59 (4), 483-492 Bardwell, W.A., Ancoli-Israel, S., & Dimsdale, J.E.(2001). Response bias influences mental health symptom reporting in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 23(4), 313-317
Birenbaum, M. & Montag, I.(1989). Style and subtance in social desirabilty scales. European Journal of Personality, 3, 47-59
Crowne, D.P. & Marlowe, D.(1960). A New Scale of Social Desirability Independent of Psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24(4), 349-354
Grossman L.S. & Cavanauch J.L. (1990). Psychopathology and Denial in Alleged Sex Offender. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 178(12), 739-744
Grossman L.S., Martis, M. & Fichtner, C.G.(1999). Are sex offenders treatable? A research overview. Psychiatric services, 50(3), 349-361
Hall, G.C. & Hirschman, R. (1991). Toward a theory of sexual aggression: a quadripartite model. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 59(5):662-9
Hanson, R.K.(2000). Will they do it again? Presicting sex-offense recidivism. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 106-109
Hanson, R.K.(2002). Recidivism and age: Follow-up data from 4673 sexual offenders. Journal of Interpersonal violence, 17(10), 1046-1062
Haywood, T.W. et al. (1993). Denial and social desirability in clinical evaluations of alleged sex offenders. Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 181(3):183-8
Hunt, M., Auriemma J. & Cashaw A. C. A.(2003) Self-report bias and underreporting of depression on the BDI-II. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80(1), 26-30
Macdonald, J.M.(1995). Rape: Controversial issues: criminal profiles, date rape, false reports and false memories. Illinois, Charles C Thomas
Meston, C.M., Heiman, J.R, Trapnel, P.D. & Paulhus, D.L.(1998). Social desirable responding and sexuality self-reports. The Journal of Sex Research. New York, 35(2), 148-157
Paulhus, D.L.(1984). Two-Component Models of Social Desirable Responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(3), 598-609
Plaud, J.J & Bigwood, S.J.(1997). The Relationship of Male Self-Report of Rape Supportive Attitudes, Sexual Fantasy, Social Desirability and Physiologucal Arousal to Sexually Coercive Stimuli. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 53(8), 935-942
Reynolds, W.M.(1982). Development of Reliable and Valid Short Forms of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38(1), 119-125
Robinette, R.L.(1991). The Relationship Between the Marlowe-Crowne Form C and the Validity Scales of the MMPI. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 47(3), 396-399
Strahan, R. & Gerbasi, K.C.(1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191-193
Streenivasan, S., Kirkish, P., Garrick, T., Weinberger L.E., & Phenx, A.(2000). Actuarial risk assessment models: a review of critical issues related to violence and sex-offender recidivism assessments. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry & the Law, 28(4), 438-448
Thornhill, R. & Palmer, C.T.(2000). Why men rape. The Sciences, January/February, 30-36
Thomton D.(2002). Constructing and testing a framework for dynamic risk assessment. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research & Treatment. 14(2), 139-53; discussion 195-7
Wood, R.M, Grossman, L.S & Fichtmer, C.G.(2000). Psychological assessment, treatment, and outcome with sex offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law 18, 23-41