These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Examining self-justifications for unsafe sex as a technique of AIDS education: the importance of personal relevance.
    Author: Gold RS, Rosenthal DA.
    Journal: Int J STD AIDS; 1998 Apr; 9(4):208-13. PubMed ID: 9598747.
    Abstract:
    In an earlier study, we found that sexual risk-taking in gay men was reduced by getting them to evaluate the self-justifications for having unsafe sex which they had used on a specific occasion when they 'slipped up' (broke their safe sex rules by having unprotected anal intercourse). This study investigated whether the earlier finding occurred simply because recalling vividly a specific encounter in which a slip-up took place brought the men's risk-taking home to them very strongly and whether the intervention would still work if translated into posters suitable for the mass media. Gay men (n=92) who had slipped up kept diaries of their sexual behaviour for 16 weeks. After 4 weeks, they were allocated to one of 3 conditions: Specific Encounter (detailed reconstruction of a slip-up, but without any questions about self-justifications); Posters (examination of posters, specially designed for the study, that focused on self-justifications); and Control (no intervention). All 3 groups slipped up to the same extent in the post-intervention period. The results for the Specific Encounter group indicate that the earlier finding is not attributable to the alternative explanation above, while those for the Posters group suggest the importance of ensuring personal 'ownership' of the self-justifications presented. Implications for AIDS education are discussed. Previous research indicated that sexual risk-taking in homosexual Australian men was reduced by having them evaluate through a questionnaire the self-justifications used on occasions when they broke their safe sex rules and had unprotected anal intercourse. The present study sought to determine whether the earlier finding occurred simply because the process of recalling vividly a specific encounter in which a "slip-up" took place was sobering in and of itself and whether the process of examining one's self-justifications would remain effective when translated into posters suitable for the mass media. 92 gay men who reported unprotected anal intercourse were enrolled and instructed to keep diaries of their sexual encounters for 16 weeks. After 4 weeks, they were allocated to one of the following conditions: 1) specific encounter--detailed reconstruction of an unprotected sexual encounter, but without any questioning on self-justifications; 2) posters--examination of posters focused on the self-justification process; or 3) control--no intervention. The posters emphasized the discrepancy between rationalizing in the immediate pre-intercourse period and thinking after unprotected intercourse. The proportion of men who slipped up at least once in the postintervention period was 56% among controls, 58% in the specific encounter group, and 66% in the posters group. It was concluded that the posters employed in the present study were not as good as the questionnaire used in the previous study at inducing the participants to see their self-justifications as personally relevant. To the extent that the men did not perceive the information on the posters as personally salient, they may have attended instead to the pornographic depictions of intercourse on the posters.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]