Abstract
Despite recurrent efforts to prevent sexually transmitted diseases through the use of condoms, HIV infections are still prevalent across Europe. Recent research framed by the regulatory focus theory has shown that prevention (vs. promotion)-focused individuals are more likely to adopt strategies to protect their health. Therefore, these individuals should also be more motivated to use condoms, because they are more likely to perceive greater health threats. In two cross-sectional preregistered studies (combined N = 520 Portuguese participants; databases available at https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/zzkc2), we developed the new Regulatory Focus in Sexuality scale (Study 1), and tested if the association between prevention focus and intentions to use condoms was mediated by the perception of health threat (Study 2). Results from Study 1 suggested that the scale is reliable and valid. Results from Study 2 showed, as expected, that a predominant focus on prevention was associated with more condom use intentions with casual and regular sexual partners, because individuals perceived greater threat to their health. Additional exploratory analyses further showed that this mediation occurred only for individuals without a romantic relationship and was independent of how salient the condom use norm was. In contrast, for romantically involved individuals, there was no evidence for the mediation by perceived health threat. Instead, a predominant focus on prevention was positively associated with condom use intentions with the regular partner, but only when the condom use norm was more salient. Taken together, these results emphasize the importance of examining individual motivations for safe sex practices.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alaei, K., Paynter, C. A., Juan, S.-C., & Alaei, A. (2016). Using preexposure prophylaxis, losing condoms? Preexposure prophylaxis promotion may undermine safe sex. AIDS, 30, 2753. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0000000000001262.
Albarracín, 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, 856–897. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.856.
Albarracín, D., Kumkale, G. T., & Johnson, B. T. (2004). Influences of social power and normative support on condom use decisions: A research synthesis. AIDS Care, 16, 700–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540120412331269558.
Arnett, J. (2012). New horizons in emerging and young adulthood. In A. Booth, S. Brown, N. Landale, W. Manning, & S. McHale (Eds.), Early adulthood in a family context (pp. 231–244). New York, NY: Springer.
Arnett, J. (2015). Socialization in emerging adulthood: From the family to the wilder world, from socialization to self-socialization. In J. Grusec & P. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 85–108). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Aryee, S., & Hsiung, H.-H. (2016). Regulatory focus and safety outcomes: An examination of the mediating influence of safety behavior. Safety Science, 86, 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.02.011.
Avraham, R., Dijk, D. V., & Simon-Tuval, T. (2016). Regulatory focus and adherence to self-care behaviors among adults with type 2 diabetes. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 21, 696–706. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2015.1112413.
Bentler, P. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238.
Berkowitz, A. D. (2004). The social norms approach: Theory, research, and annotated bibliography. Trumansburg, NY: Author.
Birenbaum, A., & Sagarin, E. (1976). Norms and human behavior. New York, NY: Praeger.
Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 445–455. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2404_4.
Byrne, B. (2012). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York, NY: Routledge Academic.
Cesario, J., Grant, H., & Higgins, E. (2004). Regulatory fit and persuasion: Transfer from “feeling right”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 388–404. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.388.
Chen, Y., Li, X., Zhou, Y., Wen, X., & Wu, D. (2013). Perceived peer engagement in HIV-related sexual risk behaviors and self-reported risk-taking among female sex workers in Guangxi, China. AIDS Care, 25, 1114–1121. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2012.750709.
Cialdini, R. B., Demaine, L. J., Sagarin, B. J., Barrett, D. W., Rhoads, K., & Winter, P. L. (2006). Managing social norms for persuasive impact. Social Influence, 1, 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510500181459.
Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reeevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 201–234). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60330-5.
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015.
Conley, T. D., Matsick, J. L., Moors, A. C., & Ziegler, A. (2017). Investigation of consensually nonmonogamous relationships: Theories, methods, and new directions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 205–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616667925.
Conley, T. D., Moors, A. C., Ziegler, A., & Karathanasis, C. (2012). Unfaithful individuals are less likely to practice safer sex than openly nonmonogamous individuals. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 9, 1559–1565. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2012.02712.x.
de Visser, R. (2005). One size fits all? Promoting condom use for sexually transmitted infection prevention among heterosexual young adults. Health Education Research, 20, 557–566. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyh015.
DGS. (2015). Atitudes e comportamentos da população portuguesa face ao VIH [Attitudes and behaviors of Portuguese individuals regarding HIV]. Lisboa, PT: DGS. Retrieved December 19, 2017 from http://www.pnvihsida.dgs.pt/estudos-e-estatisticas111111/estudos11/estudo-marktest-2015-pdf.aspx.
ECDC. (2017). HIV/AIDS surveillance in Europe 2016. Stockholm, SE: ECDC. Retrieved December 19, 2017 from https://ecdc.europa.eu/sites/portal/files/documents/20171127-Annual_HIV_Report_Cover%2BInner.pdf.
Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2001). The effects of promotion and prevention cues on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 1001–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.6.1001.
Gailliot, M., & Baumeister, R. (2007). Self-regulation and sexual restraint: Dispositionally and temporarily poor self-regulatory abilities contribute to failures at restraining sexual behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206293472.
Hart, T., Peterson, J. L., & Community Intervention Trial for Youth Study Team. (2004). Predictors of risky sexual behavior among young African American men who have sex with men. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 1122–1124.
Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.962683.
Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Higgins, E. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280.
Higgins, E., Friedman, R., Harlow, R., Idson, L., Ayduk, O., & Taylor, A. (2001). Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versus prevention pride. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.27.
Holmes, K., Levine, R., & Weaver, M. (2004). Effectiveness of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted infections. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82, 454–461.
Hynie, M., Macdonald, T. K., & Marques, S. (2006). Self-conscious emotions and self-regulation in the promotion of condom use. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1072–1084. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206288060.
Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1984). LISREL 6: User’s guide. Mooresville, IN: Scientific Software International.
Kiene, S. M., Barta, W. D., Zelenski, J. M., & Cothran, D. L. (2005). Why are you bringing up condoms now? The effect of message content on framing effects of condom use messages. Health Psychology, 24, 321–326. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.24.3.321.
Latkin, C. A., Forman, V., Knowlton, A., & Sherman, S. (2003). Norms, social networks, and HIV-related risk behaviors among urban disadvantaged drug users. Social Science and Medicine, 56, 465–476.
Leder, S., Florack, A., & Keller, J. (2015). Self-regulation and protective health behaviour: How regulatory focus and anticipated regret are related to vaccination decisions. Psychology & Health, 30, 165–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2014.954574.
Ludolph, R., & Schulz, P. J. (2015). Does regulatory fit lead to more effective health communication? A systematic review. Social Science and Medicine, 128, 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.01.021.
Martins, H. (2017). Infeção VIH e SIDA: A situação em Portugal a 31 de dezembro de 2016 [HIV and AIDS infection: Data from Portugal at December 31, 2016]. Lisboa: Instituto Nacional de Saúde Doutor Ricardo Jorge. Retrieved December 19, 2017 from http://repositorio.insa.pt/bitstream/10400.18/4846/5/VIH_SIDA_2016.pdf.
Melnyk, V., van Herpen, E., Fischer, A. R. H., & van Trijp, H. C. M. (2013). Regulatory fit effects for injunctive versus descriptive social norms: Evidence from the promotion of sustainable products. Marketing Letters, 24, 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-013-9234-5.
Miner, M. H., Peterson, J. L., Welles, S. L., Jacoby, S. M., & Rosser, B. R. S. (2009). How do social norms impact HIV sexual risk behavior in HIV-positive men who have sex with men? Multiple mediator effects. Journal of Health Psychology, 14, 761–770. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105309338976.
Mogilski, J., Memering, S., Welling, L., & Shackelford, T. (2017). Monogamy versus consensual non-monogamy: Alternative approaches to pursuing a strategically pluralistic mating strategy. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46, 407–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0658-2.
Molden, D. C., & Higgins, E. T. (2004). Categorization under uncertainty: Resolving vagueness and ambiguity with eager versus vigilant strategies. Social Cognition, 22, 248–277. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.22.2.248.35461.
Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2012). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Okun, M. A., Ruehlman, L., Karoly, P., Lutz, R., Fairholme, C., & Schaub, R. (2003). Social support and social norms: Do both contribute to predicting leisure-time exercise? American Journal of Health Behavior, 27, 493–507.
Penke, L., & Asendorpf, J. (2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113–1135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.5.1113.
Protogerou, C., & Johnson, B. T. (2014). Factors underlying the success of behavioral HIV-prevention interventions for adolescents: A meta-review. AIDS and Behavior, 18, 1847–1863. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-014-0807-y.
Reno, R. R., Cialdini, R. B., & Kallgren, C. A. (1993). The transsituational influence of social norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 104–112. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.1.104.
Rodrigues, D. L., & Lopes, D. (2013). The Investment Model Scale (IMS): Further studies on construct validation and development of a shorter version (IMS-S). Journal of General Psychology, 140, 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2012.710276.
Rodrigues, D. L., & Lopes, D. (2017). Sociosexuality, commitment, and sexual desire for an attractive person. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46, 775–788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0814-3.
Rodrigues, D. L., Lopes, D., & Kumashiro, M. (2017a). The “I” in us, or the eye on us? Regulatory focus, commitment and derogation of an attractive alternative person. PLoS ONE, 12, e0174350. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174350.
Rodrigues, D. L., Lopes, D., & Pereira, M. (2016). “We agree and now everything goes my way”: Consensual sexual nonmonogamy, extradyadic sex, and relationship satisfaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19, 373–379. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0114.
Rodrigues, D. L., Lopes, D., & Pereira, M. (2017b). Sociosexuality, commitment, sexual infidelity, and perceptions of infidelity: Data from the Second Love web site. Journal of Sex Research, 54, 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1145182.
Rodrigues, D. L., Lopes, D., & Smith, C. V. (2017c). Caught in a “bad romance”? Reconsidering the negative association between sociosexuality and relationship functioning. Journal of Sex Research, 54, 1118–1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1252308.
Rothman, A. J., & Updegraff, J. A. (2010). Specifying when and how gain-and loss-framed messages motivate healthy behavior: An integrated approach. In G. Keren (Ed.), Perspectives on framing (pp. 257–278). London, UK: Psychology Press.
Rusbult, C., Martz, J., & Agnew, C. (1998). The Investment Model Scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x.
Sakaluk, J. K., & Gillath, O. (2016). The causal effects of relational security and insecurity on condom use attitudes and acquisition behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0618-x.
Shaw, A., Rhoades, G., Allen, E., Stanley, S., & Markman, H. (2013). Predictors of extradyadic sexual involvement in unmarried opposite-sex relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 50, 598–610. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2012.666816.
Sheeran, P., Abraham, C., & Orbell, S. (1999). Psychosocial correlates of heterosexual condom use: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 90–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.1.90.
Smith, R. D., Delpech, V. C., Brown, A. E., & Rice, B. D. (2010). HIV transmission and high rates of late diagnoses among adults aged 50 years and over. AIDS, 24, 2109–2115. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0b013e32833c7b9c.
Updegraff, J. A., & Rothman, A. J. (2013). Health message framing: Moderators, mediators, and mysteries. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 668–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12056.
Uskul, A. K., Keller, J., & Oyserman, D. (2008). Regulatory fit and health behavior. Psychology & Health, 23, 327–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/14768320701360385.
von Sadovszky, V., Draudt, B., & Boch, S. (2014). A systematic review of reviews of behavioral interventions to promote condom use. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 11, 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/wvn.12017.
Winterheld, H. A., & Simpson, J. A. (2011). Seeking security or growth: A regulatory focus perspective on motivations in romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 935–954. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025012.
Workowski, K. A., & Bolan, G. A. (2015). Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines, 2015. MMWR Recommendation Report, 64, 1–137.
Yuan, K., & Bentler, P. (2000). Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology, 30, 165–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/0081-1750.00078.
Zhou, Q., Wu, Y., Hong, Y. A., Yang, C., Cai, W., Zhu, Y., et al. (2017). Association between perceived social norm and condom use among people living with HIV/AIDS in Guangzhou, China. AIDS Care, 29, 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2016.1198752.
Acknowledgements
Part of this research was partially funded by Fundação Portuguesa para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) with Grants awarded to CIS-IUL, ISCTE-IUL (UID/PSI/03125/2013), to DLR (SFRH/BPD/73528/2010), MP (IF/00402/2014) and to MVG (PTDC/MHC-PCN/5217/2014), and by a Marie Curie fellowship (FP7-PEOPLE-2013-CIG/631673) awarded to MVG.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix 1: Regulatory Focus in Sexuality (RFS): Medida Original (Português)
INSTRUÇÕES
Por favor leia as frases que se seguem e indique em que medida cada frase se adequa a si, indicando o número que melhor representa a sua reposta.
INSTRUÇÕES DE COTAÇÃO
Inverta a cotação dos itens 1, 4, e 7, e calcule o índice para a sub-escala de RFS_prevenção através da média destes itens.
Calcule o índice para a sub-escala RFS_promoção através da média dos itens 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 e 9.
Calcule o índice global de RFS pela subtração dos resultados de RFS_promoção aos de RFS_prevenção.
Syntax para SPSS
COMPUTE RFS_prevention = mean(8 - resp_1,8 - resp_4, 8 - resp_7).
COMPUTE RFS_promotion = mean(resp_2,resp_3,resp_5,resp_6,resp_8,resp_9).
COMPUTE RFS_index = RFS_prevention - RFS_promotion.
EXECUTE.
Appendix 2: Regulatory Focus in Sexuality (RFS): English Translation
Instructions
Please read each sentence and indicate to what extent each sentence is true to you by circling the number that best represents your answer.
Scoring Instructions
Reverse-code items 1, 4, and 7, and compute a mean score for RFS_prevention by averaging these items.
Compute a mean score for RFS_promotion by averaging items 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 and 9.
Compute an index of RFS by subtracting RFS_promotion scores from RFS_prevention scores.
Syntax for SPSS
COMPUTE RFS_prevention = mean(8 - resp_1,8 - resp_4, 8 - resp_7).
COMPUTE RFS_promotion = mean(resp_2,resp_3,resp_5,resp_6,resp_8,resp_9).
COMPUTE RFS_index = RFS_prevention - RFS_promotion.
EXECUTE.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rodrigues, D.L., Lopes, D., Pereira, M. et al. Motivations for Sexual Behavior and Intentions to Use Condoms: Development of the Regulatory Focus in Sexuality Scale. Arch Sex Behav 48, 557–575 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1316-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-018-1316-2