AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 15, Supplement 1, pp 91–100 | Cite as

The Future of Internet-Based HIV Prevention: A Report on Key Findings from the Men’s INTernet (MINTS-I, II) Sex Studies

  • B. R. Simon RosserEmail author
  • J. Michael Wilkerson
  • Derek J. Smolenski
  • J. Michael Oakes
  • Joseph Konstan
  • Keith J. Horvath
  • Gunna R. Kilian
  • David S. Novak
  • Gene P. Danilenko
  • Richard Morgan
Original Paper

“Until recently sexuality and technology have been seen in the social sciences as two distinct and unrelated realms. This has meant that the ways in which technology has produced or configured sexuality, how technology has become sexualized and how sexuality has in turn configured technology in society and history have, to date, largely remained unexplored”—López and Cleminson, Techno-Sexual Landscapes [1, p. 11].


The Internet and other new media have changed how men who have sex with men (MSM) find and interact with sexual partners. This social phenomenon, paired with growing evidence that use of the Internet increases MSM’s risk for HIV infection, makes it crucial that innovative technology-based HIV prevention interventions are developed for this population. In this commentary we explain why technology-based HIV prevention interventions are urgently needed; we then highlight findings from some of the first Internet-based HIV prevention for MSM studies that show the...


Sexual Health Sexually Transmitted Infection Sexually Transmitted Infection Clinic Internet Porn Online Partner 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Gordo Lopez AJ, Cleminson RM. Techno-sexual landscapes: changing relations between technology and sexuality. London: Free Association Books; 2004.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rosser BRS, West W, Weinmeyer R. Are gay communities dying or just in transition? An international consultation from the eighth AIDS impact conference examining structural change in gay communities. AIDS Care. 2008;20(5):588–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rosser BRS, Brady S, Erickson D, et al. Understanding the effects of web-based media on virtual populations: the sexually explicit media (SEM) study. In: Paper presented at: society for the scientific study of sex annual conference; November 4–7, 2010, Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rosser BRS, Miner MH, Bockting WO, et al. HIV risk and the Internet: Results of the Men’s INTernet Study (MINTS). AIDS Behav. 2009;13(4):746–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rosser BRS, Oakes JM, Horvath KJ, Konstan JA, Danilenko GP, Peterson JL. HIV sexual risk behavior by men who use the Internet to seek sex with men: Results of the Men’s INTernet Sex Study-II (MINTS-II). AIDS Behav. 2009;13(3):488–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cooper A. Sex and the Internet: a guidebook for clinicians. New York: Brunner-Routledge; 2002.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liau A, Millett G, Marks G. Meta-analytic examination of online sex-seeking and sexual risk behavior among men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Dis. 2006;33:576–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chiasson MA, Parsons JT, Tesoriero JM, Carr P, Hirshfield S, Remein RH. HIV behavioral research online. J Urban Health. 2006;83(1):73–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chiasson MA, Hirschfield S, Remein RH, Humberstone M, Wong T, Wolitski RJ. A comparison of on-line and off-line sexual risk in men who have sex with men: An event-based on-line survey. J AIDS. 2007;44(2):235–43.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bull SS, McFarlane M, Rietmeijer CA. HIV and sexually transmitted infection risk behaviors among men seeking sex with men on-line. Am J Public Health. 2001;91(6):988–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bull SS, McFarlane M. Soliciting sex on the Internet: What are the risks for sexually transmitted diseases and HIV? Sex Transm Dis. 2000;27(9):545–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hospers HJ, Kok G, Harterink P, de Zwart O. A new meeting place: chatting on the Internet, e-dating and sexual risk behaviour among Dutch men who have sex with men. AIDS. 2005;19:1097–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    DW Purcell, C Johnson, Lansky A, et al. Calculating HIV and syphilis rates for risk groups: estimating the national population size of men who have sex with men. In: 2010 national STD prevention conference, Atlanta, GA. Latebreaker #22896. Presented March 10, 2010. Accessed December 1, 2010.
  14. 14.
    Ross MW, Tikkanen R, Månsson S-A. Differences between Internet samples and conventional samples of men who have sex with men: implications for research and HIV interventions. Soc Sci Med. 2000;51:749–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McFarlane M, Bull SS, Rietmeijer CA. The Internet as a newly emerging risk environment for sexually transmitted diseases. JAMA. 2000;284:443–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim A, McFarland W, Yu F, Klausner J. sexual networks over the Internet, Silicon Valley, 1999–2000. In: Paper presented at: XIII international AIDS conference; 9–14 July, 2000, Durban, South Africa.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Klausner JD, Wolf W, Fischer, Ponce L, Zolt I, Katz MH. Tracing a syphilis outbreak through cyberspace. JAMA. 2000;284:447–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tashima K, Alt EN, Harwell JI, Fiebich-Perez DK, Flanigan TP. Internet sex-seeking leads to acute HIV infection: A report of two cases. Int J STD AIDS. 2003;14:285–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Turner CF, Ku L, Rogers SM, Lindberg LD, Pleck JH, Sonenstein FL. Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: increased reporting with computer survey technology. Science. 1998;280:867–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bull SS, Lloyd L, Reitmeijer CA, McFarlane M. Recruitment and retention of an online sample for an HIV prevention intervention targeting men who have sex with men: the smart sex quest project. AIDS Care. 2004;16(8):931–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Elford J, Bolding G, Sherr L. Seeking sex on the Internet and sexual risk behaviour among gay men using London gym. J AIDS. 2001;15(11):1409–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Smolenski DJ, Ross MW, Risser JM, Rosser BRS. Sexual compulsivity and high-risk sex among Latino men: the role of internalized homonegativity and gay organizations. AIDS Care. 2009;21(1):42–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ross MW, Rosser BRS, Stanton J. Beliefs about cybersex and Internet-mediated sex of Latino men who have Internet sex with men: relationships with sexual practices in cybersex and in real life. AIDS Care. 2004;16:1002–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rosser BRS, Oakes JM, Jones-Webb R, et al. The possible impact of law on alcohol-related HIV/STI risk behavior: results from the SILAS study. In: Paper presented at: 2009 national HIV prevention conference, August 23–26, 2009, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Konstan J, Rosser BRS, Stanton J, Brady P, Gurak L. Protecting subject data privacy in Internet-based HIV survey research. In: Paper presented at: STD/HIV prevention and the internet conference; August 25–27, 2003, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Konstan J, West WG. Chapter 16. Using technology and the Internet in research. In: Pequegnat W, Stover E, editors. How to write a successful research grant application. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2010.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Konstan JA, Rosser BRS, Horvath KJ, Gurak L, Edwards W. Protecting subject data privacy in Internet-based HIV/STI prevention survey research. In: Conrad FG, Schober MF, editors. Envisioning the survey interview of the future. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2008.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Konstan JA, Rosser BRS, Ross MW, Stanton J, Edwards WM. The story of subject naught: a cautionary but optimistic tale of internet survey research. J Comput Mediat Commun. 2005;10(2):Article 11. http://jcmc.indiana/edu/vol10/issue2/konstan.html.
  29. 29.
    Rosser BRS, Oakes JM, Bockting WO, Babes G, Miner M. Capturing the social demographics of hidden sexual minorities: An Internet study of the transgender population in the United States. Sex Res Social Policy. 2007;4(2):50–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rosser BRS, Gurak L, Horvath KJ, Oakes JM, Konstan J, Danilenko G. The challenges of ensuring participant consent in Internet-based sex studies: A case study of the Men’s INTernet Sex (MINTS-I and II) studies. J Comput Mediat Commun. 2009;14:606–26.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rosser BRS, Burger J, Leary M. Getting past “no” when dealing with socially sensitive, complex and/or sophisticated research. (Plenary panel). In: Paper presented at: social, behavioral education research conference: annual conference of public responsibility in medicine and research, May 9, 2007, Denver, CO.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ross MW, Rosser BRS, McCurdy S, Feldman J. The advantages and limitations of seeking sex online: A comparison of reasons given for online and offline sexual liaisons by men who have sex with men. J Sex Res. 2008;44(1):59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ross MW, Rosser BRS, Coleman E, Mazin R. Misrepresentation on the Internet and in real life about sex and HIV: A study of men who have sex with men. Cult Health Sex. 2006;8(2):133–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ross MW, Rosser BR, Stanton J, Konstan J. Characteristics of Latino men who have sex with men on the Internet who complete and drop out of an Internet-based sexual behavior survey. AIDS Educ Prev. 2004;16(6):526–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rosser BRS, Horvath K. Ethical issues in Internet-based HIV primary prevention research. In: Loue S, Pike E, editors. Case studies in ethics and HIV research. New York: Springer; 2007.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Carballo-Dieguez A. The uses of information technology in behavioral aspects of biomedical trials. In: Abstracts of the III Eastern Europe and Central Asia AIDS conference, October 28–30, 2009, Moscow, Russia.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Davidovich U, de Wit JB, Stroebe W. The effect of an Internet intervention for promoting safe sex between steady male partners—results and methodological implications of a longitudinal randomized controlled trial online. In: Paper presented at: international AIDS conference; July 11–16, 2004, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kok G, Harterink P, Vriens P, De Zwart O, Hospers HJ. The gay cruise: developing a theory—and evidence-based Internet HIV-prevention intervention. Sex Res Social Policy. 2006;3:52–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bowen AM, Horvath KJ, Williams ML. A randomized control trial of Internet-delivered HIV prevention targeting rural MSM. Health Educ Res. 2007;22:120–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Robinson BB, Bockting WO, Rosser BR, Miner M, Coleman E. The sexual health model: application of a sexological approach to HIV prevention. Health Educ Res. 2002;17:43–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rosser BRS, Coleman E, Ohmans P. Safer sex maintenance and reduction of unsafe sex among homosexually active men: A comprehensive therapeutic approach. Health Educ Res. 1993;8(1):19–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Robinson BE, Uhl G, Miner M, et al. Evaluation of a sexual health approach to prevent HIV among low income, urban, primarily African American women: Results of a randomized controlled trial. AIDS Educ Prev. 2002;14(3):S81–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rosser BRS, Bockting WO, Rugg DL, et al. A randomized controlled intervention trial of a sexual health approach to long-term HIV risk reduction for men who have sex with men: Effects of the intervention on unsafe sexual behavior. AIDS Educ Prev. 2002;14(Supplement A):59–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Fogg BJ. Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann; 2003.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Rosser BRS, Oakes JM, Konstan J, et al. Reducing HIV risk behavior of men who have sex with men through persuasive computing: Results of the Men’s INTernet Study-II. AIDS. 2010;24(13):2099–107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wilkerson JM, Danilenko GP, Smolenski DJ, Meyer BB, Rosser BRS. The role of critical self-reflection on assumptions in an online HIV intervention for men who have sex with men. AIDS Educ Prev. (in press).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rogers EM. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bennett S, Maton K, Kervin L. The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. Br J Educ Tech. 2008;5(39):775–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Wilkerson JM, Smolenski DJ, Horvath KJ, Danilenko GP, Rosser BRS. Online and offline sexual health-seeking patterns of HIV-negative men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav. 2010;14(6):1362–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hooper S, Rosser BRS, Horvath KJ, Oakes JM, Danilenko G, Men’s INTernet Sex II (MINTS-II) Team. An online needs assessment of a virtual community: What men who use the Internet to seek sex with men want in Internet-based HIV prevention. AIDS Behav. 2008;12:867–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Rainie L. Internet, broadband, and cell phone statistics. Pew Internet. January 5, 2010. Accessed December 1, 2010.
  52. 52.
    Jordans F. World’s poor drive growth in global cellphone use. USA Today. March 2, 2009. Accessed December 1, 2010.
  53. 53.
    Giridharadas A. Where a cellphone is still cutting edge. New York Times. April 10, 2010. Accessed December 1, 2010.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. R. Simon Rosser
    • 1
    Email author
  • J. Michael Wilkerson
    • 1
  • Derek J. Smolenski
    • 1
  • J. Michael Oakes
    • 1
  • Joseph Konstan
    • 2
  • Keith J. Horvath
    • 1
  • Gunna R. Kilian
    • 1
  • David S. Novak
    • 3
  • Gene P. Danilenko
    • 1
  • Richard Morgan
    • 1
  1. 1.HIV/STI Intervention and Prevention Studies (HIPS) Program, Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public HealthUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA
  3. 3.Online Buddies, Inc.CambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations