|
Interventions for safer sex behaviors among college
students.
|
|
|
|
|
| Abstract: | Safer sex behaviors (monogamy, sexual abstinence, correct and consistent condom usage) are important for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/AIDS among college students. The purpose of this article was to review studies addressing interventions for safer sex behaviors among college students. A search of seven databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, ERIC, Academic Search Premier, Scopus, Web of Science, and Social Sciences Citation Index) was conducted for the time period between 1990 and February 2010. A total 11 intervention studies related to safer sex behaviors were extracted. Information-motivation-behavioral skills model was commonly used for interventions promoting safer sex. |
|
|
|
| Subject: |
College students
(Sexual behavior) College students (Health aspects) Disease transmission (Health aspects) AIDS (Disease) (Health aspects) Sex (Health aspects) Safe sex (Health aspects) Condoms (Health aspects) HIV (Viruses) (Health aspects) |
| Authors: |
Kanekar, Amar Sharma, Manoj |
| Pub Date: | 06/22/2010 |
| Publication: | Name: American Journal of Health Studies Publisher: American Journal of Health Studies Audience: Professional Format: Magazine/Journal Subject: Health Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2010 American Journal of Health Studies ISSN: 1090-0500 |
| Issue: | Date: Summer, 2010 Source Volume: 25 Source Issue: 3 |
| Topic: | Canadian Subject Form: Sexual behaviour |
| Product: | Product Code: E197500 Students, College; 3069770 Prophylactics & Diaphragms NAICS Code: 326299 All Other Rubber Product Manufacturing SIC Code: 3069 Fabricated rubber products, not elsewhere classified |
| Accession Number: | 308741511 |
| Full Text: |
INTRODUCTION Safer sex is important for protection against STDs (sexually transmitted diseases) and HIV/AIDS (Human Immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome). Consistent and correct condom usage along with a monogamous relationship are two important aspects for STD and HIV/ AIDS prevention. The HIV/AIDS epidemic has grown to alarming proportions. At the start of 2010, there were an estimated 59 million HIV/AIDS cases in 194 reporting countries and territories. Of the 35 million living with HIV infection worldwide, about 3% live in the United States (Stine, 2010). Young adults continue to be a vulnerable population affected by HIV/AIDS. In 2009, about 22,000 adolescents aged 13-24 became infected with the HIV virus (Stine, 2010). Determinants for engaging in HIV/AIDS related risky sexual behavior in college students are multiple such as low-self esteem and emotional distress (Ethier et al., 2006), gender along with improper social norms and inadequate condom use skills (Dilorio, Dudley & Soet, 2007), and various personality and demographic factors(Mehrotra, Noar, Zimmerman & Palmgreen, 2009). Some of the risk behavior pattern among adolescents' whites and blacks could be differentiated based on factors such as binge drinking, substance use, injection drug use and tobacco use (Hallfors, Iritani, Miller, & Bauer, 2007). Behavioral interventions in the form of HIV/ AIDS prevention messages significantly improved the likeliness of condom usage among some Indonesian participants but didn't succeed in actual behavioral change (Turk, Ewing, & Newton, 2006). Harm-reduction approaches in HIV/AIDS counseling among adolescents address the barriers they have for engaging in safer sex, focus on perceptions that might affect risky behaviors, focus on safe sex planning and end in referral making (Pinto, 2000). It is in this backdrop that the purpose of this review article is to present studies addressing interventions for safer sex behaviors among college students. METHODS The criteria for inclusion of studies were (1) publication in English language, (2) publication between 1990 and February 2010, (3) location of studies anywhere in the world, and (4) relating to interventions involving college students. Exclusion criteria were publications in languages other than English and studies published prior to 1990. A total of 11 studies met these criteria for interventions related to safer sex behaviors. RESULTS The studies that conducted interventions related to promotion of safer sex among college students are presented in Table I chronologically. The first interventional study (Turner, Korpita, Mohn, & Hill, 1993) was a randomized control trial which used a comprehensive health education intervention to alter risky behaviors towards safer sex behaviors which included increased condom usage and sexual abstinence. Te second study (Bryan, Aiken, & West, 1996) used a randomized experimental design to maintained greater sustainability of condom usage behaviors while the third interventional study (Ploem, & Byers, 1997) used information and communication skills training to enhance condom use sustainability. Information-motivation-behavioral skills model was used in the fourth study (Fisher, Fisher, Misovich, Kimble, & Malloy, 1998) for discussing AIDS preventative behaviors and in the fifth study (Singh, 2003) for enhancing self-efficacy towards condom usage. The sixth study (Chernoff, & Davison, 2005) used normative feedback with an unintended effect of decrease in number of sexual partners in women receiving the intervention. The seventh study (Kiene, & Barta, 2006) used computer-tailor based IMB (information-motivation-behavior skills) model to increase safer sex preparatory behaviors. The eight study (Sanderson, & Yopyk, 2007) used condom promotion videotape for enhancing self-efficacy towards condom usage and the ninth study (Labrie, Pederson, Thompson, & Earleywine, 2008) used decisional balance motivational enhancement intervention to increase condom use scores. The tenth study (Schmiege, Levin, Broaddus & Bryan, 2009) used group interventions to reduce HIV/STD risk. This randomized controlled study concluded that group--based psychosocial intervention with an added component of motivational enhancement therapy is better in reducing risky sexual behaviors. The last study (Kanekar, Sharma, Cottrell, Succop, & Bernard, 2010) addressed a vulnerable population of African-American college students. It concluded that there was no difference between a brief theory-based safer sex intervention and a comparison knowledge-based intervention in promoting safer sex behavior. As shown in Table 2, effects sizes were calculated for all the 11 studies using G-Power analysis software 3.1.2(Erdfelder, Foul, & Buchner, 1996). Sample size, alpha values and power (0.80) were used to conduct the desired calculations. DISCUSSION The purpose of this article was to review studies addressing interventions for safer sex behaviors among college students and also to identify studies addressing interventions conducted among a target population of college students to promote safer sex behaviors (such as sexual abstinence, practicing monogamy and consistent and correct condom usage) between 1990 and February 2010. Based on this review of intervention literature for safer sex among college students a total of 11 studies could be identified in last 20 years which used some kind of interventional strategy to change attitudes and behaviors of college students towards safer sex. The dearth of intervention literature in population of college students is surprising as we would expect a large number of interventions in these students. All the 11 studies used an experimental design in their interventional approach. A little less than 50 %(5 out of the 11) studies (Fisher, Fisher, Misovich, Kimble, & Malloy, 1998; Kiene, & Barta, 2006; Labrie, Pederson, Thompson, & Earleywine, 2008; Schmiege, Levin, Broaddus, & Bryan, 2009; Singh, 2003) identified, used the information-motivation-behavioral skills enhancement model and motivational component as a part of safer sex promotion tool. The remaining 6 studies used multicomponent (Bryan., Aiken, & West, 1996), normative feedback (Chernoff, & Davison, 2005), information about safer sex (Ploem, & Byers, 1997), condom promotion videotape (Sanderson, & Yopyk, 2007), and a comprehensive health education (Turner, Korpita, Mohn, & Hill, 1993), and theory-based components (Kanekar, Sharma, Cottrell, Succop, & Bernard, 2010). It seems that the IMB (information-motivation-behavioral skills model has been the most popular model tried among college students to promote safer sex behaviors. This model has been well validated over 15 years of research with diverse populations and cross--cultural settings (Fisher, & Fisher, 2000). It has also shown promise in adults where it builds skills for risk reduction along with lower rates of unprotected intercourse and fewer sexually transmitted infections. Literature on using this model also supports a full model usage against a single component such as information only. (Cornman, Schmiege, Bryan, Benziger, & Fisher, 2007; Kalichman et al., 2005). Also what was evident from this review was that despite use of theory based predictors for safer sex such as social cognitive variables (O'Leary, Goodhart, Jemmott, & Boccher-Lattimore, 1992 ; Raj, 1996) and health belief model constructs (Boone, & Lefkowitz, 2004), no theory-backed intervention for safer sex among college students could be extracted. Using a theoretical framework is essential when devising interventions as this provides a common language of views and ideas across researchers in safer sex and HIV prevention research. It is extremely important to examine interventions which emphasize key constructs of a theory (Glanz, Rimer, & Vishwanath, 2008). In promoting safer sex a meta-analyses of interventions conducted to increase condom use found that many key constructs of commonly used theories were changed by interventions. (Albarracin et al., 2005). These can be then further explored or rejected (Beaty, Wheeler, & Gaiter, 2004). CONCLUSION This review clearly establishes need for more interventions to promote safer sex behaviors among college students. Knowledge-behavior gap seems to be an important component to be addressed when researchers plan to devise a safer sex intervention. Theory-backed interventions should be seen more for promoting safer sex in the form of increasing condom usage, promoting sexual abstinence or sexual partner reductions (monogamous relationships). RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE INTERVENTIONS There is a large need of conducting interventions which change the attitudes and behaviors of college students towards safer sex. These interventions should promote protective factors at the same time work towards minimizing risky factors for safe sex behaviors. Future interventions should be based on behavioral change theories which must measure the constructs before and after the intervention to give credence to a theoretical approach as opposed to an atheoretical approach. Intervention researchers use multiple theoretical approaches and it is important that they develop psychometrically robust instruments to measure changes in the theoretical constructs. In models and theories of health behavior change, a linear relationship is often implied when one assumes that change in constructs of knowledge, attitude, and behavior would lead to a corresponding changed behavior outcome. Complex systems and chaos theory complement the linear effect of behavior change in terms of alternative approaches of addressing any health behavior problem such as quitting tobacco, engaging in physical activity or risk-reduction and substance abuse behaviors (Resnicow, & Page, 2008). Future studies should address this paradigm in a quantitative or a qualitative way to promote healthy behavior change especially in the context of safer sex promotion to prevent sexually transmitted infections including HIV/AIDS among college students. REFERENCES Albarracin, D., Gillette, J. C., Earl, A. N., Glasman, L. R., Durantini, M. R., & Ho, M. H. (2005). A test of major assumptions about behavior change: A comprehensive look at the effects of passive and active HIV prevention interventions since the beginning of the epidemic. Psychological Bulletin, 131(6), 856-897. Beatty, L. A., Wheeler, D., & Gaiter, J. (2004).HIV prevention research for African-Americans: Current and future directions. Journal of Black Psychology, 30(1), 40-58. Boone, T. L., & Lefkovitz, E. F. (2004). Safer sex and health belief model: considering the contributions of peer norms and socialization factors. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 16(1), 51-68. Bryan, A. D., Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1996). Increasing condom use: Evaluation of a theory-based intervention to prevent sexually transmitted diseases in young women. Health Psychology, 15(5), 371-382. Chernoff, R. A., & Davison, G. C. (2005). An evaluation of a brief HIV/AIDS prevention intervention for college students using normative feedback and goal setting. AIDS Education and Prevention, 17(2), 91-104. Cornman, D. H., Schmiege, S. J., Bryan, A., Benziger, T. J., & Fisher, J. D. (2007). An information motivation-behavioral skills model-based HIV prevention intervention for truck drivers in India. Social Science & Medicine, 64(8), 1572-1584. Dilorio, C., Dudley, W. N., & Soet. J. (2007). Predictors of HIV risk among college students: A CHAID Analysis. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 3(2), p 119. Erdfelder, E., Foul, F., & Buchner, A. (1996). G POWER: General power analysis program. Behavior research methods, instruments, and computers, 28, 1211. Ethier, K., Kershaw, T., Lewis, J., Milan, S., Niccolai, L., & Ickovics, J. (2006).Self-esteem, emotional distress and sexual behavior among adolescent females: Inter-relationships and temporal effects. Journal of Adolescent Health, 38(3), 268. Fisher, J. D, & Fisher, W. A. (2000). Theoretical approaches to individual-level change in HIV-risk behavior. In: J. Peterson and R. Diclemente. Editors, HIV prevention handbook, Plenum, New York, 3-55. Fisher, J. D., Fisher, W. A., Misovich, S. J., Kimble, D. L., & Malloy, T. E. (1996). Changing AIDS risk behavior: Effects of an intervention emphasizing AIDS risk reduction information, motivation, and behavioral skills in a college student population. Health Psychology, 15(2), 114-123. Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., Viswanath, K. (2008). Health behavior and health education, theory, research, and practice (4th ed).San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hallfors, D. D., Iritani, B. J., Miller, W. C., & Bauer, D. J. (2007). Sexual and drug behavior patterns and HIV and STD racial disparities: the need for new directions. American Journal of Public Health, 97(1), 125-132. Kalichman, S. C., Cain, D., Weinhardt, L., Benotsch, E., Presser, K., Zweben, A. et al. (2005). Experimental components analysis of brief theory-based HIV/AIDS risk-reduction counseling for sexually transmitted infection patients. Health Psychology, 24(2), 198-208. Kanekar, A. S., Sharma, M., Cottrell, R., Succop, P., & Bernard, A. (2010). Theory-based safer sex intervention among African-American College Students. American Journal of Health Studies, 25(1), 52-59. Kiene, S. M., & Barta, W. D. (2006).A Brief individualized computer delivered sexual risk reduction intervention increases HIV/AIDS preventive behavior. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39, 404-410. Labrie, J. W., Pederson, E. R., Thompson, A. D., & Earleywine, M. (2008). A brief decisional balance intervention increases motivation and behavior regarding condom use in high-risk heterosexual college men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 330-339. Mehrotra, P., Noar, S. M., Zimmerman, R. S., & Palmgreen, P. (2009) Demographic and personality factors as predictors of HIV/STD partner-specific risk perceptions: Implications for interventions. AIDS Education and Prevention, 21(1), 39. O'Leary, A., Goodhart, F., Jemmott, L. S., & Boccher-Lattimore, D. (1992). Predictors of safer sex on the college campus: A social cognitive theory analysis. Journal of American College Health, 40(6), 254-263. Pinto, R. M. (2000).HIV prevention for adolescent groups: A six-step approach. Social Work with Groups, 23(3), 81-99. Ploem, C., & Byers, E. S. (1997).The effects of two AIDS risk-reduction interventions on heterosexual college women's AIDS related knowledge, attitudes and condom usage. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 9(1), 1-24. Raj, A. (1996). Identification of social cognitive variables as predictors of safer sex behavior and intent in heterosexual college students. Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 22(4), 247-258. Resnicow, K., & Page, S. E. (2008). Embracing chaos and complexity: A quantum change for public health. American Journal of Public Health, 98(8), 1382-1388. Sanderson, C. A., & Yopyk, D. J. A. (2007). Improving condom use intentions and behavior by changing perceived partner norms: An evaluation of condom promotion videos for college students. Health Psychology, 26(4), 481-487. Schmiege, S. J., Levin, M., Broaddus, M. R., Bryan, A. D. (2009). Randomized Trial of Group Interventions to reduce HIV/STD Risk and Change Theoretical Mediators among Detained Adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77(1), 38-50. Singh, S. (2003). Study of the effect of information, motivation and behavioral skills (IMB) intervention in changing the AIDS risk behavior in female university students. AIDS CARE, 15(1), 71-76. Stine, G. J. (2010). Aids Update 2010: An annual overview of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. McGrawHill, New York. Turk, T., Ewing, M., & Newton, F. J. (2006). Using ambient media to promote HIV/AIDS protective behavior change. International Journal of Advertising, 25(3), 333-359. Turner, J. C., Korpita, E., Mohn, L. A., & Hill, W. B. (1993). Reduction in sexual risk behaviors among college students following a comprehensive health education intervention. Journal of American College Health, 41(5), 187-194. Amar Kanekar, MBBS, MPH, CHES, CPH, PhD Manoj Sharma, MBBS, PhD Amar Kanekar, MBBS, MPH, CHES, CPH, PhD, is an Assistant Professor of the Department of Health Studies, East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania, 200 Prospect Street, East Stroudsburg, PA, 18301-2999. Phone: (570)-422-3748. Fax: (570)-422-3848. E-mail: akanekar@po-box.esu.edu. Manoj Sharma, MBBS, PhD, is a Professor of the Health Promotion & Education, University of Cincinnati, PO Box 210068, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0068. Phone: (513) 556-3878. Fax: (513) 556-3898. E-mail: manoj.sharma@uc.edu Table I. Interventions for promoting safer sex behaviors in college
students
Study Purpose Intervention/Design
Turner study (Turner The purpose of this This was a non-
et al., 1993). study was to assess randomized controlled
sexual behaviors of trial where
college students participants either
following a received a
comprehensive health comprehensive health
education education
intervention intervention
(didactic lectures,
small group
discussions,
prevention strategies
for safer sex) or no
seminar intervention.
Bryan study (Bryan et The purpose of this Randomized
al., 1996) study was to experimental design.
hypothesise that Participants either
condom promotion received one 45-min
intervention will multicomponent safer
produce changes in sex intervention or
correlates of condom one 45-min stress
use as per the management
psychosocial model intervention
unrelated to STDs
Ploem study (Ploem, & The purpose of this Participants were
Byers, 1997) study was to assess randomly assigned to
the effect of two information group,
AIDS risk reduction combination group and
interventions on pretest-posttest
college womens AIDS control groups
related knowledge,
attitudes towards
condom and actual
condom use at one
month follow-up
period
Fisher study (Fisher The purpose of this Pre and post
et al., 1998) study is to design, experimental design
implement and was used and the
evaluate an AIDS risk intervention
reduction consisted of three
intervention among 2-hr sessions using
college students the information-
motivation and
behavioral skills
model. (IMB model
Singh study (Singh, The purpose of this 3 sessions
2003) study was to examine (information,
the effect of an motivation and
intervention based on behavioral skills) of
information/ intervention program
motivation / were given to
behavioral skills to participants in the
facilitate AIDS risk experimental group
reduction behavior and the control group
among college/ without intervention
university students
Chernoff The purpose of this Participants were
study (Chernoff, and study was to develop assigned to the
Davison, 2005) and evaluate a brief intervention group
intervention using (normative feedback
normative feedback in and goal setting
order to increase instrument) and
risk-reduction among control group
college students (information related
to AIDS prevention
Kiene study (Kiene, The purpose of this The experimental
& Barta, 2006) study was to develop group had an HIV
and evaluate a prevention
computer--delivered intervention which
theory-based tailored was based on the
HIV/AIDS risk information,
reduction motivation and
intervention behavioral skills
model while the
control group a
nutrition education
tutorial
Sanderson study The purpose of this Participants were
(Sanderson, & study was to examine randomly assigned to
Yopyk, 2007) the effectiveness of receive one of two
two condom promotion 30-min condom
videotapes on promotion videotape
self-efficacy, or to a wait-list
intentions and control condition.
behavior This study had an
immediate and 4 month
follow-up
Labrie study (Labrie The purpose of this Within--subjects
et al., 2008) study was to design was used and
determine if participants were
decisional balance randomly assigned to
with motivational safer-sex
interviewing promotes intervention group or
safer sex practices alcohol-target
during one meeting. intervention group.
Decisional balance
motivational
enhancement
intervention
Schmiege study The purpose of this A randomized
(Schmiege, Leven, study was to evaluate controlled design was
Broaddus, & Bryan, three used. A total of 484
2009) interventions ethnically diverse
(group-based theory adolescents were
driven psychosocial randomized to three
intervention (GPI), different groups.
GPI + Group based Data was collected at
motivational pretest, post-test
enhancement therapy, and at 3-month
and a control )based follow-up.
as a harm reduction
strategy in
preventing risky
sexual behaviors
Kanekar study The purpose of this A randomized
(Kanekar, Sharma, study was to controlled design was
Cottrell, Succop, determine to what used where one group
Bernard, 2010) extent constructs of (n=73) of college
Social Cognitive students were offered
Theory (i.e. a theory/based
situational intervention and the
perceptions for safer other group (n=68)
sex, expectations for were given a
safer sex, knowledge/based
self-efficacy for intervention focusing
safer sex, self- on HIV/AIDS and
efficacy in sexually transmitted
overcoming barriers diseases.
for safer sex and
self-control for
safer sex) were
changed after an
SCT-based intervention
compared to a
non-theory
(knowledge-based)
intervention.
Study Salient results Conclusion
Turner study (Turner Experimental group A comprehensive
et al., 1993). men reported a health education
statistically intervention among
significant increase college students can
in sexual abstinence successfully alter
(p<0.05). Number of sexual risk behaviors
experimental group towards safer sex
women who reported behaviors such as
always using condoms increased condom
increased compared to usage and sexual
control group women abstinence.
who showed a
decrease. The
difference at 3
months was
significant (p=0.05).
Bryan study (Bryan et (Analysis of The intervention
al., 1996) covariance) showed increased
significant effects intervention to use
in predicted condoms at posttest
directions for all as well as 6 weeks
constructs except and 6 months later. A
susceptibility and one-time intervention
severity (p<0.001). with no booster
At 6-weeks-more sessions induced
participants in behavioral change
experimental group that was maintained
carried condoms even 6 months after
(p<0.01), told intervention
partners to use
condoms (p<0.05).
Ploem study (Ploem, & MANCOVA (Multiple An intervention
Byers, 1997) analysis of supplementin AIDS
covariance) were information with
conducted followed by condom eroticization,
univariate analysis condom normalization
of covariance. and communication
Combination group had skills training
significantly more showed a sustained
positive attitudes effect at improving
towards condom use attitudes and
than information sustained use of
group. A significant condoms
interaction between
intervention and
change in condom use
Fisher study (Fisher was found (p<0.002). Findings from the use
et al., 1998) The IMB model of this IMB model
significantly were consistent with
affected scores on model's emphasis on
both indicators of identifying
the information empirically
construct, the identified deficits
motivation construct in AIDS risk
and the behavioral reduction
construct at information,
individual and group motivation and
level (p<0.0001). behavioral skills in
Condom used increased efforts to change
significantly along behavior.
with discussion about
AIDS preventative
behaviors
Singh study (Singh, Analysis of The findings in the
2003) covariance was used present research
for analysis which shows that
showed the following information,
results: Personal and motivation and
social motivation to behavioral skills
engage in AIDS risk essentially
reduction behavior contribute to AIDS
increased risk reduction
considerably (p<0.05) behavior
and there was a
reduced perceived
difficulty to engage
in AIDS risk
reduction (p<0.01)
and also engagement
in AIDS risk
reduction behavior
increased
significantly
(p<0.01).
Chernoff MANCOVA (multiple Men in the
study (Chernoff, and analysis of intervention group
Davison, 2005) covariances) were reported a
significant for significant increase
condom usage for in condom usage with
vaginal intercourse vaginal intercourse
(p<0.001), number of whereas unexpectedly
sexual partners women showed a
(p<0.001), and significant reduction
discussion of safer in the number of
sex (p<0.001). . partners. The second
effect was not
expected given the
brevity of the
intervention
Kiene study (Kiene, Analysis of This IMB
& Barta, 2006) covariance was used (Information-
which yielded the motivation-
following important behavioral skills
findings: Treatment model based computer
group showed an tailored intervention
increase in frequency showed increased
of condom use condom use knowledge
information compared and preparatory
to the controls sexual behaviors
(P<0.01). There was
also an increase seen
in the frequency
of condom usage
Sanderson study Analysis of
(Sanderson, & covariance was Condom promotion
Yopyk, 2007) conducted. Self- videos may be a
efficacy for useful way of
suggesting condom use increasing self-
to a partner showed efficacy for condom
significance use and intention to
(p<0.03). Refusal to use condom and
have sex without a reported condom use
condom showed behavior among
significant effect of college students.
condition (p=0.03)
and also intention to
use condoms showed
significant effect of
condition (p=0.03).
Labrie study (Labrie Participants The decisional
et al., 2008) significantly balance intervention
increased their helps in increasing
condom use scores motivation to change
from baseline at risky sexual behavior
post-intervention among college
(p<0.001) and at students.
30-day follow up
(p<0.001). Forty
percent who used
condoms less than
ninety percent of
times showed 100%
usage.
Schmiege study A significant main Group based theory
(Schmiege, Leven, effect was seen on driven psychosocial
Broaddus, & Bryan, each of the intervention (GPI)
2009) theoretical mediators and GPI +
in the arm getting motivational
the GPI + enhancement therapy
motivational are superior harm
enhancement therapy reduction strategies
components in for prevention of
reduction in risky risky sexual
sexual behavior behaviors among
(p<0.05 & P<0.001). ethnically diverse
Intentions populations.
significantly
predicted later risky
sexual behaviors.
Model fit the data
adequately and
explained 21% of the
variance.
Kanekar study The main effect of The dose of the
(Kanekar, Sharma, time was significant theory-based
Cottrell, Succop, (p<0.04) for the intervention was
Bernard, 2010) construct of found to be
self-efficacy in insufficient to
overcoming barriers. promote safer sex
Having been ever behaviors in a sample
diagnosed with a of African-American
sexually transmitted college students.
disease (p<0.02) and Future interventions
year in school need to increase the
(p<0.01) were dose.
significant
demographic
covariates for
construct of
self-efficacy in
overcoming barriers
and having been ever
diagnosed with
sexually transmitted
disease (p<0.03) and
ever having taken a
sexuality class
(p<0.01) were
significant
covariates for
self-control for
safer sex.
Table 2. Effect size calculation of all the reported
studies between 1990-February 2010 using G-Power
3.1.2
Name of the study Sample size Calculated
Effect Size
1) Turner study N = 571 d = 0.06
(Turner et
al, 1993)
2) Bryan study N = 198 d = 0.28
(Bryan et
al., 1996)
3) Ploem study N = 112 d = 0.41
(Ploem, &
Byers, 1997)
4) Fisher study N = 744 d = 0.06
(Fisher et
al., 1998)
5) Singh study N = 200 d = 0.22
(Singh,
2003)
6) Chernoff study N = 155 d = 0.36
(Chernoff, and
Davison, 2005)
7) Kiene study N = 157 d = 0.31
(Kiene, &
Barta, 2006)
8) Sanderson study N = 220 d = 0.36
(Sanderson,
& Yopyk, 2007)
9) Labrie study N = 315 d = 0.11
(Labrie et
al., 2008)
10) Schmiege study N = 484 d = 0.33
(Schmiege, Leven,
Broaddus, & Bryan,
2009)
11) Kanekar N = 141 --
study (Kanekar,
Sharma, Cottrell,
Succop, Bernard,
2010)
Name of the study Type of Significance
behavior
1) Turner study Abstinence p < 0.05
(Turner et behavior
al, 1993)
2) Bryan study Telling p < 0.05
(Bryan et partners
al., 1996) to use
condoms
3) Ploem study Condom use p < 0.05
(Ploem, & behavior
Byers, 1997)
4) Fisher study Condom use p < 0.01
(Fisher et behavior
al., 1998)
5) Singh study Behavioral p < 0.05
(Singh, intention
2003) to engage
in AIDS
risk
reduction
6) Chernoff study Condom use p < 0.01
(Chernoff, and at vaginal
Davison, 2005) intercourse
7) Kiene study Condom use p < 0.05
(Kiene, &
Barta, 2006)
8) Sanderson study Condom use p < 0.01
(Sanderson, self-efficacy
& Yopyk, 2007)
9) Labrie study Condom use p < 0.01
(Labrie et intent
al., 2008)
10) Schmiege study Risky p < 0.05
(Schmiege, Leven, sexual
Broaddus, & Bryan, behavior
2009)
11) Kanekar Safer sex No
study (Kanekar, behavior significance
Sharma, Cottrell,
Succop, Bernard,
2010) |
| Gale Copyright: | Copyright 2010 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. |