暴露前预防措施的使用和购买安全套的决定。

IF 1.4 3区 心理学 Q4 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior Pub Date : 2024-02-14 DOI:10.1002/jeab.905
Nioud Mulugeta Gebru, Justin C. Strickland, Derek D. Reed, Christopher W. Kahler, Robert F. Leeman
{"title":"暴露前预防措施的使用和购买安全套的决定。","authors":"Nioud Mulugeta Gebru,&nbsp;Justin C. Strickland,&nbsp;Derek D. Reed,&nbsp;Christopher W. Kahler,&nbsp;Robert F. Leeman","doi":"10.1002/jeab.905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prevents human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) but not other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Men who have sex with men (MSM) who take PrEP tend to report reduced condom use, but little is known about the underlying mechanisms. For this study, MSM who take PrEP (i.e., PrEP experienced; <i>n</i> = 88) and MSM who do not (i.e., PrEP naïve; <i>n</i> = 113) completed an online study, including the condom purchase task (CoPT). The CoPT assesses decisions to purchase condoms across escalating prices (range: free–$55) for sex with different types of hypothetical partners: those least likely to have an STD (least STD) and those that participants most want to have sex with (most want sex with). When condoms were free, PrEP-experienced MSM had a lower rate of condom purchasing than did PrEP-naïve MSM. For both partner types, PrEP-experienced MSM reached a price break point (i.e., would not buy condoms) at a lower price than did PrEP-naïve pariticipants. For the most-want-sex-with partner at the price at which participants elected not to buy condoms, only 23% of PrEP-experienced MSM chose to abstain from sex when not purchasing condoms versus 53% among PrEP-naïve MSM. Similar patterns were observed for the least-STD partner. The results support the potential utility of the CoPT in identifying behavioral mechanisms related to condom use and PrEP.</p>","PeriodicalId":17411,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior","volume":"121 2","pages":"233-245"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of preexposure prophylaxis and condom purchasing decisions\",\"authors\":\"Nioud Mulugeta Gebru,&nbsp;Justin C. Strickland,&nbsp;Derek D. Reed,&nbsp;Christopher W. Kahler,&nbsp;Robert F. Leeman\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jeab.905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prevents human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) but not other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Men who have sex with men (MSM) who take PrEP tend to report reduced condom use, but little is known about the underlying mechanisms. For this study, MSM who take PrEP (i.e., PrEP experienced; <i>n</i> = 88) and MSM who do not (i.e., PrEP naïve; <i>n</i> = 113) completed an online study, including the condom purchase task (CoPT). The CoPT assesses decisions to purchase condoms across escalating prices (range: free–$55) for sex with different types of hypothetical partners: those least likely to have an STD (least STD) and those that participants most want to have sex with (most want sex with). When condoms were free, PrEP-experienced MSM had a lower rate of condom purchasing than did PrEP-naïve MSM. For both partner types, PrEP-experienced MSM reached a price break point (i.e., would not buy condoms) at a lower price than did PrEP-naïve pariticipants. For the most-want-sex-with partner at the price at which participants elected not to buy condoms, only 23% of PrEP-experienced MSM chose to abstain from sex when not purchasing condoms versus 53% among PrEP-naïve MSM. Similar patterns were observed for the least-STD partner. The results support the potential utility of the CoPT in identifying behavioral mechanisms related to condom use and PrEP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior\",\"volume\":\"121 2\",\"pages\":\"233-245\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jeab.905\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jeab.905","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

预防性暴露疗法(PrEP)可预防人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV),但不能预防其他性传播感染(STI)。服用 PrEP 的男男性行为者(MSM)往往会报告安全套使用率下降,但人们对其背后的机制知之甚少。在这项研究中,服用 PrEP 的 MSM(即有 PrEP 经验者;n = 88)和没有服用 PrEP 的 MSM(即没有 PrEP 经验者;n = 113)完成了一项在线研究,包括安全套购买任务(CoPT)。CoPT 评估的是在价格不断攀升(范围:免费-55 美元)的情况下购买安全套的决定,以便与不同类型的假想伴侣发生性关系:最不可能感染性传播疾病的伴侣(最不可能感染性传播疾病)和参与者最想发生性关系的伴侣(最想发生性关系)。当安全套免费提供时,有 PrEP 经验的 MSM 购买安全套的比例低于无 PrEP 经验的 MSM。对于这两种伴侣类型,有 PrEP 经验的 MSM 在达到价格断点(即不购买安全套)时的价格低于 PrEP 未尝试者。对于最想与之发生性关系的性伴侣,在参与者选择不购买安全套的价格上,只有 23% 的有 PrEP 经验的 MSM 在不购买安全套的情况下选择放弃性生活,而在没有 PrEP 经验的 MSM 中,这一比例为 53%。在性传播疾病最少的性伴侣中也观察到了类似的模式。这些结果支持了 CoPT 在确定与安全套使用和 PrEP 相关的行为机制方面的潜在作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Use of preexposure prophylaxis and condom purchasing decisions

Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) prevents human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) but not other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Men who have sex with men (MSM) who take PrEP tend to report reduced condom use, but little is known about the underlying mechanisms. For this study, MSM who take PrEP (i.e., PrEP experienced; n = 88) and MSM who do not (i.e., PrEP naïve; n = 113) completed an online study, including the condom purchase task (CoPT). The CoPT assesses decisions to purchase condoms across escalating prices (range: free–$55) for sex with different types of hypothetical partners: those least likely to have an STD (least STD) and those that participants most want to have sex with (most want sex with). When condoms were free, PrEP-experienced MSM had a lower rate of condom purchasing than did PrEP-naïve MSM. For both partner types, PrEP-experienced MSM reached a price break point (i.e., would not buy condoms) at a lower price than did PrEP-naïve pariticipants. For the most-want-sex-with partner at the price at which participants elected not to buy condoms, only 23% of PrEP-experienced MSM chose to abstain from sex when not purchasing condoms versus 53% among PrEP-naïve MSM. Similar patterns were observed for the least-STD partner. The results support the potential utility of the CoPT in identifying behavioral mechanisms related to condom use and PrEP.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
14.80%
发文量
83
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior is primarily for the original publication of experiments relevant to the behavior of individual organisms.
期刊最新文献
The effects of simultaneous point gains and losses on human persistence. Discrimination of highly similar stimuli as members of different equivalence classes. Issue Information Reward deprivation is associated with elevated alcohol demand in emerging adults. Resurgence in a discrete-trial procedure in rats.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1