Advertisement

Towards an Information Motivation and Behavioral Skills Model for New Sex Partners: Results of a Study of Condom Use as an HIV Prevention Method for Emerging Adults Who Met Partners on Dating and Sex-Seeking Platforms or Offline

  • Shana M. GreenEmail author
  • DeAnne Turner
  • Julie A. Baldwin
  • Eric R. Walsh-Buhi
  • Cheryl A. Vamos
  • Getachew Dagne
  • Stephanie L. Marhefka
Original Paper
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

The information, motivation, behavioral Skills (IMB) model was used to identify factors that affect condom use with new sex partners that were met offline or online. Mixed methods data were collected from adults between the ages of 18 and 29 years who reported a new sex partner. A model was composed of participants’ IMB scale scores to determine the effect of these variables on condom use. A subset of 20 survey participants completed interviews exploring how IMB model elements may have influenced their condom use. Mixed methods results showed condom use skills were influential for condom use during the first sexual encounter between new partners. Qualitative findings suggest the information and motivation may also influence condom use with new sex partners. The IMB model for new partners may be relevant model for the development of interventions that encourage emerging adults to use condoms at first sex with new sex partners.

Keywords

Information motivation behavioral skills model HIV STI Online dating 

Notes

Funding

This study was not funded.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board of the University of South Florida and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

10461_2018_2349_MOESM1_ESM.docx (20 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 19 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Finer LB, Zolna MR. Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(S1):S43–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in the United States. Contraception. 2011;83(5):397–404.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sonfield A, Kost K. Public costs from unintended pregnancies and the role of public insurance programs in paying for pregnancy and infant care: estimates for 2008. Guttmacher Inst. 2013;11:1–13.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. Condoms and STDs: Fact Sheet for Public Health Personnel. 2013 Mar pp. 1–3. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/docs/condoms_and_stds.pdf.
  5. 5.
    Weller SC, Davis-Beaty K. Condom effectiveness in reducing heterosexual HIV transmission. The Cochrane Library. New York: Wiley; 2002.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. HIV among youth. www.cdc.gov. 2017. P. 1–2.
  7. 7.
    Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. HIV in the United States: At A Glance. 2016 Nov, P. 1–2. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/statistics/overview/hiv-at-a-glance-factsheet.pdf.
  8. 8.
    Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance. Atlanta; 2016 Oct, P. 1–176. https://www.cdc.gov/std/stats15/std-surveillance-2015-print.pdf.
  9. 9.
    Kann L, McManus T, Harris WA, Shanklin SL, Flint KH, Hawkins J, et al. Youth risk behavior surveillance—United States, 2015. vol. 65, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2016 Jun, P. 1–180.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Blanford A. Are dating apps responsible for a syphilis spike in North Carolina? ABC 11. Wake Forest County; 2015 May 20.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldman D. Tinder and hookup apps blamed for rise in STDs. CNNMoney.com. New York; 2015. http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/26/technology/rhode-island-tinder-stds/. Accessed 16 Feb 2017.
  12. 12.
    Hatch H. Swipe right for chlamydia: How Tinder is sending STD rates skyrocketing. Salt Lake; 2015. http://kutv.com/news/local/swipe-right-for-chlamydia-how-tinder-is-sending-std-rates-skyrocketing.
  13. 13.
    Arnett JJ. Emerging adulthood: what is it, and what is it good for? Child Dev Perspect. 2007;1(2):68–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pew Research Center. 15% of American adults have used online dating sites of mobile dating apps. 2016 Feb, P. 1–12. www.pewresearch.org.
  15. 15.
    McFarlane M, Kachur R, Bull SS, Rietmeijer CA. Women, the internet, and sexually transmitted infections. J Women’s Health. 2004;13(6):689–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Buhi ER, Cook RL, Marhefka SL, Blunt HD, Wheldon CW, Oberne AB, et al. Does the internet represent a sexual health risk environment for young people? Sex Transm Dis. 2012;39(1):55–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Driscoll C, Gregg M. Broadcast yourself: moral panic, youth culture and internet studies. Youth Media in the Asia Pacific Region. 2008.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Garland D. On the concept of moral panic. Crime Media Cult. 2008;4(1):9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pitpitan EV, Kalichman SC, Garcia RL, Cain D, Eaton LA, Simbayi LC. Mediators of behavior change resulting from a sexual risk reduction intervention for STI patients, Cape Town, South Africa. J Behav Med. 2015;38(2):194–203.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    John SA, Walsh JL, Weinhardt LS. The information-motivation-behavioral skills model revisited: a network-perspective structural equation model within a public sexually transmitted infection clinic sample of hazardous alcohol users. AIDS Behav. 2016;21(4):1208–18.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bryan A, Fisher J, Fisher W, Murray D. Understanding condom use among heroin addicts in methadone maintenance using the information-motivation-behavioral skills model. Subst Use Misuse. 2000;35(4):451–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Crosby RA, Salazar LF, Yarber WL, Sanders SA, Graham CA, Head S, et al. A theory-based approach to understanding condom errors and problems reported by men attending an STI clinic. AIDS Behav. 2008;12(3):412–8.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-007-9264-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fisher J, Fisher W. Changing AIDS-risk behavior. Psychol Bull. 1992;111(3):455–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Marhefka SL, Valentin CR, Pinto RM, Demetriou N, Wiznia A, Mellins CA. “I feel like I’m carrying a weapon”. Information and motivations related to sexual risk among girls with perinatally acquired HIV. AIDS Care. 2011;23(10):1321–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mittal M, Senn TE, Carey MP. Intimate partner violence and condom use among women: does the information, motivation, behavioral skills model explain sexual risk behavior? AIDS Behav. 2011;16(4):1011–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Robertson AA, Stein JA, Baird-Thomas C. Gender differences in the prediction of condom use among incarcerated juvenile offenders: testing the information-motivation-behavior skills (IMB) model. J Adolesc Health. 2006;38(1):18–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Scott-Sheldon LAJ, Carey MP, Vanable PA, Senn TE, Coury-Doniger P, Urban MA. Predicting condom use among STD clinic patients using the information—motivation-behavioral skills (IMB) model. J Health Psychol. 2010;15(7):1093–102.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105310364174.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tucker JS, Wenzel SL, Golinelli D, Kennedy DP, Ewing B, Wertheimer S. Understanding heterosexual condom use among homeless men. AIDS Behav. 2012;17(5):1637–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Walsh JL, Senn TE, Scott-Sheldon LAJ, Vanable PA, Carey MP. Predicting condom use using the information-motivation-behavioral skills (IMB) model: a multivariate latent growth curve analysis. Ann Behav Med. 2011;42(2):235–44.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-011-9284-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Misovich SJ, Fisher J, Fisher W. Close relationships and elevated HIV risk behavior: evidence and possible underlying psychological processes. Rev Gen Psychol. 1997;1(1):72–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Harman JJ, Amico KR. The relationship-oriented information-motivation-behavioral skills model: a multilevel structural equation model among dyads. AIDS Behav. 2009;13(2):173–84.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-007-9350-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rocha V. Tinder demands removal of L.A. billboard that tells dating app users to get STD test. LA Times. Los Angeles; 2015 Sep 28;1–3. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-tinder-billboard-std-test-20150928-story.html.
  33. 33.
    Creswell J, Clark V, Gutmann M, Hanson W. Advanced mixed methods research designs. In: Tashakkori A, Teddlie C, editors. Advanced sampling designs in mixed research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc; 2003. p. 209–40.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Axinn WG, Perrin PB. Mixed method data collection strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Qualtrics. Provo, Utah. http://www.qualtrics.com.
  36. 36.
    Mustanski B, Starks T, Newcomb ME. Methods for the design and analysis of relationship and partner effects on sexual health. Arch Sex Behav. 2013;43(1):21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika. 1986;73(1):13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lee W, Stone KM, Macaluso M, Buehler JW, Austin H. Condom use and risk of gonorrhea and Chlamydia: a systematic review of design and measurement factors assessed in epidemiologic studies. Sex Transm Dis. 2006;33(1):36–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Carey MP, Schroder KEE. Development and psychometric evaluation of the brief HIV knowledge questionnaire. AIDS Educ Prev. 2002;14(2):172–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Reisen CA, Poppen PJ. Partner-specific risk perception: a new conceptualization of perceived vulnerability to STDs. J Appl Soc Pyschol. 1999;29(4):667–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Anderson ES, Wagstaff DA, Heckman TG, Winett RA, Roffman RA, Solomon LJ, et al. Information-motivation-behavioral skills (IMB) model: testing direct and mediated treatment effects on condom use among women in low-income housing. Ann Behav Med. 2006;31(1):70–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bryan A, Fisher J, Fisher W. Tests of the mediational role of preparatory safer sexual behavior in the context of the theory of planned behavior. Health Psychol. 2002;21(1):71–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    IBM Corp. SPSS Statistics. 24 ed. Armonk, NY: Macintosh.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Collins K. Advanced sampling designs in mixed research. In: Tashakkori A, Teddlie C, editors. Handbook of mixed methods in social behavioral research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Inc; 2010.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Onwuegbuzie AJ. Sampling designs in qualitative research: making the sampling process more public. Qual Rep. 2007;12(2):238–54.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Guba EG. Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. ECTJ. 1981;29(2):75.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications; 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough? Field Methods. 2006;18(1):59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Brod M, Tesler LE, Christensen TL. Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(9):1263–78.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    MAXQDA: Qualitative data analysis software | windows & Mac. 12 ed. Consult—Sozialforschung GmbH. Berlin, Germany; 2016. www.maxqda.com.
  51. 51.
    Guest G, MacQueen K, Namey E. Applied thematic analysis. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Inc; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Misovich SJ, Fisher JC, Fisher W. Perceived AIDS-preventive utility of knowing one“s partner well: a public health dictum and individuals” risky sexual behaviour. Can J Hum Sex. 1996;5(2):83–90.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Swann WB, Silvera DH, Proske CU. On “knowing your partner”: dangerous illusions in the age of AIDS? Person Relationsh. 1995;2(3):173–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Berger CR, Calabrese RJ. Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Hum Comm Res. 1975;1(2):99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Leary MR, Kowalski RM. Impression management: a literature review and two-component model. Psychol Bull. 1990;107(1):34–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Siegel K, Meunier T, Lekas H-M. Accounts for unprotected sex with partners met online from heterosexual men and women from large US Metropolitan Areas. AIDS Patient Care STDs. 2017;31(7):315–28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Fisher W, Fisher J, Harman JJ. The information-motivation-behavioral skills model: a general social psychological approach to understanding and promoting health behavior. In: Suls J, Wallston KA, editors. Social psychological foundations of health and illness. Malden: Malden; 2003. p. 82–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Stoner BP, Whittington WLH, Aral SO, Higgins JP, Handsfield HH, Holmes KK. Avoiding risky sex partners: perception of partners’ risks v partners’ self reported risks. Sex Trans Infect. 2003;79(3):197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Brady SS, Tschann JM, Ellen JM, Flores E. Infidelity, trust, and condom use among latino youth in dating relationships. Sex Transm Dis. 2009;36(4):227–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Fortenberry JD, Tu W, Harezlak J, Katz BP, Orr DP. Condom use as a function of time in new and established adolescent sexual relationships. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(2):211–3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    He F, Hensel DJ, Harezlak J, Fortenberry JD. Condom use as a function of number of coital events in new relationships. Sex Trans Dis. 2016;43(2):67–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Hock-Long L, Henry-Moss D, Carter M, Hatfield-Timajchy K, Erickson PI, Cassidy A, et al. Condom use with serious and casual heterosexual partners: findings from a community venue-based survey of young adults. AIDS Behav. 2012;17(3):900–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Mullinax M, Sanders SA, Dennis B, Higgins JA, Fortenberry JD, Reece M. How condom discontinuation occurs: interviews with emerging adult women. J Sex Res. 2016;2:1–9.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Haines M, Spear SF. Changing the perception of the norm: a strategy to decrease binge drinking among college students. J Am Coll Health. 2010;45(3):134–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Perkins HW. Social norms and the prevention of alcohol misuse in collegiate contexts. J Stud Alcohol Suppl. 2002;14:164–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    National Research Council, Institute of Medicine. Defining the scope of prevention. In: OConnell ME, Boat T, Warner KE, editors. Preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people. Washington, DC; 2009. pp. 1–592.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Higgins JA, Smith NK, Sanders SA, Schick V, Herbenick D, Reece M, et al. Dual method use at last sexual encounter: a nationally representative, episode-level analysis of US men and women. Contraception. 2014;90(4):399–406.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Higgins JA, Cooper AD. Dual use of condoms and contraceptives in the USA. Sex Health. 2012;9(1):11–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Hood JE, Hogben M, Chartier M, Bolan G, Bauer H. Dual contraceptive use among adolescents and young adults: correlates and implications for condom use and sexually transmitted infection outcomes. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2014;40(3):200–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kottke M, Whiteman MK, Kraft JM, Goedken P, Wiener J, Kourtis AP, et al. Use of dual methods for protection from unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases in adolescent african american women. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol. 2015;28(6):543–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Manlove J, Welti K, Wildsmith E, Barry M. Relationship types and contraceptive use within young adult dating relationships. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2014;46(1):41–50.  https://doi.org/10.1363/46e0514.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Higgins JA, Popkin RA, Santelli JS. Pregnancy ambivalence and contraceptive use among young adults in the united states. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2012;44(4):236–43.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Brückner H, Martin A, Bearman PS. Ambivalence and pregnancy: adolescents’ attitudes, contraceptive use and pregnancy. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2004;36(06):248–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Bowleg L, Lucas KJ, Tschann JM. “The ball was always in his court”: an exploratory analysis of relationship scripts, sexual scripts, and condom use among African American women. Psychol Women Q. 2004;25(28):70–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    East L, Jackson D, O’Brien L, Peters K. Condom negotiation: experiences of sexually active young women. J Adv Nurs. 2010;67(1):77–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shana M. Green
    • 1
    Email author
  • DeAnne Turner
    • 1
  • Julie A. Baldwin
    • 2
  • Eric R. Walsh-Buhi
    • 3
  • Cheryl A. Vamos
    • 1
  • Getachew Dagne
    • 4
  • Stephanie L. Marhefka
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Community and Family HealthUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA
  2. 2.Center for Health Equity ResearchNorthern Arizona UniversityFlagstaffUSA
  3. 3.Division of Health Promotion and Behavioral ScienceSan Diego State UniversitySan DiegoUSA
  4. 4.Department of Epidemiology and BiostaticsUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA

Personalised recommendations