Does the Theory of Planned Behaviour Explain Condom Use Behaviour Among Men Who have Sex with Men? A Meta-analytic Review of the Literature
- 1.4k Downloads
The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore whether the constructs in the theory of planned behaviour (TPB; i.e., attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, intention) explain condom use behaviour among men who have sex with men (MSM). Electronic databases were searched for studies that measured TPB variables and MSM condom use. Correlations were meta-analysed using a random effects model and path analyses. Moderation analyses were conducted for the time frame of the behavioural measure used (retrospective versus prospective). Attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control accounted for 24.0 % of the variance in condom use intention and were all significant correlates. Intention and PBC accounted for 12.4 % of the variance in condom use behaviour. However, after taking intention into account, PBC was no longer significantly associated with condom use. The strength of construct relationships did not differ between retrospective and prospective behavioural assessments. The medium to large effect sizes of the relationships between the constructs in the TPB, which are consistent with previous meta-analyses with different behaviours or target groups, suggest that the TPB is also a useful model for explaining condom use behaviour among MSM. However, the research in this area is rather small, and greater clarity over moderating factors can only be achieved when the literature expands.
KeywordsTheory of planned behaviour Condom Meta-analysis MSM
Thanks are due to BJ Rye, Dirk Franssens, John de Wit and Wolfgang Stroebe for providing information or data for this meta-analysis.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no sources of funding or conflicts of interest to disclose.
- 1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV in the United States: at a glance 2013 [updated 3 December, 2013; cited 2014 24 February]. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html].
- 2.European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control/WHO Regional Office for Europe. HIV/AIDS surveillance in Europe 2012. Stockholm: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, 2013.Google Scholar
- 3.The Kirby Institute. HIV, viral hepatitis and sexually transmissible infections in Australia annual surveillance report. 2013. The Kirby Institute, The University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052.Google Scholar
- 5.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HIV Surveillance Report, 2013 2015 [updated July 9 2015; cited 2015 July 10]. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/library/reports/surveillance/.
- 8.De Wit J, Adam P. Revolution or evolution? What can approaches based on the use of antiretroviral drugs contribute to HIV prevention in gay communities in high-income countries. In: Eaton LA, Kalichman SC, editors. Biomedical advances in HIV prevention. TBA. New York: Springer; 2014.Google Scholar
- 9.World Health Organisation. HIV/AIDS: Key Facts 2014 [updated October 2013; cited 2014 20 February]. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs360/en/.
- 22.Conner M, Sparks P. Theory of planned behaviour and health behaviour. In: Conner M, Norman P, editors. Predicting health behaviour. 2nd ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2005. p. 170–222.Google Scholar
- 27.De Wit JB, Stroebe W, De Vroome EM, Sandfort TG, Van Griensven GJ. Understanding AIDS preventive behavior with casual and primary partners in homosexual men: the theory of planned behavior and the information-motivation-behavioral-skills model. Psychol Health. 2000;15(3):325–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Fishbein M. A theory of reasoned action: some applications and implications. Nebr Symp Motiv. 1979;27:65–116.Google Scholar
- 30.Sutton S. The past predicts the future: interpreting behaviour-behaviour relationships in social psychological models of health behaviour. In: Rutter D, Quine L, editors. Social psychology and health: European perspectives. Brookfield: Averbury/Ashgate Publishing Co; 1994. p. 71–88.Google Scholar
- 35.Albarracin D, Gillette J, Earl A, Glasman L, Durantini M, Ho M. 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. Psychol Bull. 2005;131(6):856–97.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 51.Biostat. Comprehensive meta-analysis. 2nd ed. Englewood: Biostat; 2005.Google Scholar
- 52.Arbuckle JL. Amos (Version 22.0) [Computer Program]. Chigaco: SPSS; 2013.Google Scholar
- 61.Fisher R. On the ‘probable error’ of a coefficient of correlation deduced from a small sample. Metron. 1921;1:1–32.Google Scholar
- 73.Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Predicting and changing behavior: the reasoned action approach. New York: Psychology Press; 2010.Google Scholar
- 76.Schwarzer R. Self-efficacy in the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors: theoretical approaches and a new model. In: Schwarzer R, editor. Self-efficacy thought control of action. Washington, DC: Hemisphere; 1992. p. 217–43.Google Scholar