Advertisement

Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 269–279 | Cite as

Sexual Scripts of Women: A Longitudinal Analysis of Participants in a Gender-Specific HIV/STD Prevention Intervention

  • Shari L. DworkinEmail author
  • Sharlene T. Beckford
  • Anke A. Ehrhardt
Original Paper

Abstract

Project FIO (The Future Is Ours) was a three arm randomized controlled HIV prevention intervention trial carried out with heterosexually-active women in a high seroprevalence area of New York City. The trial was effective and women in the eight-session intervention arm were significantly more likely to report decreased unsafe sex or no unsafe sex compared to controls at one month and one year post-intervention. The current investigation was a qualitative analysis of women’s sexual scripts at baseline and one year follow-up for a randomly selected subsample of participants in Project FIO. We examined the domains of sexual initiation, pace setting, sexual decision-making, communication about sexual needs, and the timing of condom introductions in the experimental and control arms at baseline and one year follow-up. At one year follow-up, among both the experimental and control arms, results showed changes away from male-dominated and toward female-dominated sexual initiation and sexual decision-making. Among both the experimental and control arms, results also showed that trial participants shifted from a late condom introduction (right before intercourse) toward much earlier mention of condoms (e.g. during a date). The fact that shifts in sexual scripts at one year follow-up occurred in both groups is likely reflective of the degree to which a lengthy assessment interview facilitated comfort with discussing and imagining new sexual behaviors, even for control group participants who did not receive the intervention. The value of empirically assessing sexual scripts in HIV/AIDS prevention and doing so longitudinally is assessed in light of the goals of HIV prevention interventions.

Keywords

Sexual scripts Gender-specific HIV/AIDS prevention interventions Qualitative methods Women 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by center grants P50-MH43520 and P30-MH43520 from NIMH to the HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral Studies, Anke A. Ehrhardt, Ph.D., Principal Investigator, and by NRSA training grant T32-MH19139, to Behavioral Sciences Research in HIV Infection. The opinions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect those of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. We thank the study participants for their involvement. The authors gratefully acknowledge comments provided by the Editor and anonymous reviewers. We are also grateful to Susie Hoffman, Theresa Exner, Cheng-Shiun Leu, Mike Stirratt, post-doctoral research fellows at the HIV Center, and the careful editing and assistance provided by Vanessa Haney, Iymaani Aytes, Myra Garcia, and Pat Warne.

References

  1. Ahlemeyer, H., & Ludwig, D. (1997). Norms of communication and communication as the norm in the intimate social system. In L. Van Campenhoudt, M. Cohen, G. Guizzardi, & D. Hausser (Eds.), Sexual interaction and HIV risk: New conceptual perspectives in European research (pp. 22–43). London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  2. Amaro, H. (1995). Love, sex, and power: considering women’s realities in HIV prevention. American Psychologist, 50, 437–447.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amaro, H., & Raj, A. (2000). On the margin: Power and women’s HIV risk reduction strategies. Sex Roles, 42, 723–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, P. B., & Aymami, R. (1993). Reports of female initiation of sexual contact: Male and female differences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 22, 335–343.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson, P. B., & Sorensen, W. (1996). Male and female differences in reports of women’s heterosexual initiation and aggression. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 28, 243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beach, F. (1976). Sexual attractivity, proceptivity, and receptivity in female mammals. Hormones and Behavior, 7, 105–138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berg, B. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  8. Blanc, A. (2001). The effect of power in sexual relationships on sexual and reproductive health: An examination of the evidence. Studies in Family Planning, 32, 189–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell, C. A. (1995). Male gender roles and sexuality: Implications for women’s AIDS risk and prevention. Social Science and Medicine, 41, 197–210.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell, C. A. (1999). Women, families, and HIV/AIDS. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2002). HIV and AIDS cases reported through December 2001. HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, 13, 1–44.Google Scholar
  12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2003). HIV and AIDS cases in the United States, 2003. HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report, 15, 1–46.Google Scholar
  13. Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis: A user-friendly guide for social scientists. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Djulbegovic, B. (2001). Placebo-controlled trials. Annals of Internal Medicine, 135, 62–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Dworkin, S. L., Exner, T., Melendez, R. M., Hoffman, S., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2006). Revisiting “success”: Post-trial analysis of a gender-specific HIV/AIDS prevention intervention. AIDS and Behavior, 10, 41–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dworkin, S. L., & O’Sullivan, L. F. (2005). Actual versus desired initiation patterns: Tapping disjunctures within and departures from traditional male sexual scripts. Journal of Sex Research, 42, 150–158.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ehrhardt, A. A., & Exner, T. M. (2000). Prevention of sexual risk behavior for HIV infection with women. AIDS, 14(Suppl. 2), S53–S58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Ehrhardt, A. A., Exner, T. M., Hoffman, S., Silberman, I., Yingling, S., & Adams-Skinner, J. (2002). HIV/STD risk and sexual strategies among women family planning clients in New York: Project FIO. AIDS and Behavior, 6, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ehrhardt, A. A., Exner, T. M., Hoffman, S., Silberman, I., Leu, C.-S., Miller, S., et al. (2002). A gender-specific HIV/STD risk reduction intervention for women in a health care setting: short and long-term results of a randomized clinical trial. AIDS Care, 14, 147–161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ehrhardt, A. A., Yingling, S., Zawadski, E., & Martinez-Ramirez, M. (1992). Prevention of heterosexual transmission of HIV: Barriers for women. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 5, 37–67.Google Scholar
  22. Exner, T. M., Gardos, P. S., Seal, D. W., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (1997). Heterosexual men in the AIDS epidemic: The forgotten group. AIDS and Behavior, 3, 347–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Exner, T. M., Hoffman, S., Dworkin, S. L., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2003). Beyond the male condom: The evolution of gender-specific HIV interventions for women. Annual Review of Sex Research, 14, 114–136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Fishbein, M. H., Triandis, H. C., Kanfer, F. H., Becker, M. H., Middlestadt, S. E., & Eichler, A. (2001). Factors influencing behavior and behavior change. In A. Baum, T. R. Revenson, & J. E. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of health psychology (pp. 3–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Fullilove, M. T., Fullilove, R. E., Haynes, K., & Gross, S. (1990). Black women and AIDS prevention: A view towards understanding the gender rules. Journal of Sex Research, 27, 47–64.Google Scholar
  26. Gagnon, J. H. (1990). The explicit and implicit use of the scripting perspective in sex research. Annual Review of Sex Research, 1, 1–43.Google Scholar
  27. Gómez, C. A., & VanOss Marín, B. (1996). Gender, culture and power: Barrier to HIV-prevention strategies for women. Journal of Sex Research, 33, 355–362.Google Scholar
  28. Gupta, G. R. (2001). Gender, sexuality and HIV/AIDS: The what, the why and the how. SIECUS Report, 29, 6–12.Google Scholar
  29. Gupta, G. R., & Weiss, E. (1993). Women’s lives and sex: Implications for HIV prevention. Medicine and Psychiatry, 17, 399–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kamen, P. (2003). Her way: Young women remake the sexual revolution. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  31. Laumann, E. O., & Gagnon, J. H. (1995). A sociological perspective on sexual action. In R. G. Parker & J. H. Gagnon (Eds.), Conceiving sexuality: Approaches to sex research in a postmodern world (pp. 183–214). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. H. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  33. Logan, T. K., Cole, J., & Leukefeld, C. (2002). Women, sex, and HIV: Social and contextual factors, meta-analysis of published interventions, and implications for practice and research. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 851–885.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mahay, J., Laumann, E. O., & Michaels, S. (2001). Race, gender, and class in sexual scripts. In E. O. Laumann & R. T. Michael (Eds.), Sex, love, and health in America. Private choices and public policies (pp. 197–238). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Miller, S., Exner, T. M., Williams, S. P., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2000). A gender-specific intervention for at-risk women in the USA. AIDS Care, 12, 603–612.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Misovich, S. J., Fisher, J. D., & Fisher, W. A. (1997). Close relationships and HIV risk behavior: Evidence and possible underlying psychological processes. General Psychology Review, 1, 72–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Newman, T. B., Browner, T. B., Cummings, S. R., & Hulley, S. B. (2001). Designing an observational study: Cross-sectional and case-control studies. In S. B. Hully, S. R. Cummings, W. S. Browner, D. Grady, N. Hearst, & T. B. Newman (Eds.), Designing clinical research (pp. 107–121). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
  38. Ortiz-Torres, B., Williams, S. P., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2003). Urban women’s gender scripts: Implications for HIV. Culture, Health, & Sexuality, 5, 1–17.Google Scholar
  39. O’Sullivan, L. F., & Byers, E. S. (1993). Eroding stereotypes: College women’s attempts to influence reluctant male sexual partners. Journal of Sex Research, 30, 270–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. O’Sullivan, L. F., & Byers, E. S. (1996). Gender differences in responses to discrepancies in desired level of sexual intimacy. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 8, 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Paiva, V. (2000). Gendered scripts and the sexual scene: Promoting sexual subjects among Brazilian teenagers. In R. Parker, R. M. Barbosa, & P. Aggleton (Eds.), Framing the sexual subject: The politics of gender, sexuality, and power (pp. 216–240). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  42. Parsons, H. M. (1974). What happened at Hawthorne? Science, 183, 922–932.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Pulerwitz, J., Gortmaker, S. L., & DeJong, W. (2000). Measuring sexual relationship power in HIV/STD research. Sex Roles, 42, 637–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rivers, K., & Aggleton, P. (1999). Men and the HIV epidemic. New York: UNDP HIV and Development Programme.Google Scholar
  45. Seal, D. W., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2003). Masculinity and urban men: Perceived scripts for courtship, romantic, and sexual interactions with women. Culture, Health, and Sexuality, 5, 295–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Seal, D. W., Wagner-Raphael, L. I., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2000). Sex, intimacy, and HIV: An ethnographic study of a Puerto Rican social group in New York City. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 11, 51–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Segal, L. (1995). Straight sex: Rethinking the politics of pleasure. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  48. Segal, L. (1997). Slow motion: Changing masculinities, changing men. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1984). Sexual scripts. Society, 22, 53–60.Google Scholar
  50. Simon, W., & Gagnon, J. H. (1987). A sexual scripts approach. In J. H. Geer & W. T. O’Donohue (Eds.), Theories of human sexuality (pp. 363–383). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  51. Sobo, E. (1993). Inner-city women and AIDS: The psychosocial benefits of unsafe sex. In A. S. Rossi (Ed.), Sexuality across the lifecourse (pp. 63–97). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  52. Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  53. Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative data analysis for social scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. Wagner, L. I., Seal, D. W., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2001). Close emotional relationships with women versus men: A qualitative study of 56 heterosexual men living in an inner-city neighborhood. Journal of Men’s Studies, 9, 243–256.Google Scholar
  56. Whittier, D., & Melendez, R. M. (2004). Intersubjectivity in the intrapsychic sexual scripting of gay men. Culture, Health, & Sexuality, 6, 131–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Williams, S. P., Gardos, P. S., Ortiz-Torres, B., Tross, S., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2001). Urban women’s negotiation strategies for safer sex with their male partners. Women & Health, 33, 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wingood, G. M., & DiClemente, R. J. (2000). Application of the theory of gender and power to examine HIV-related exposures, risk factors, and effective interventions for women. Health Education and Behavior, 27, 539–565.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shari L. Dworkin
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Sharlene T. Beckford
    • 1
  • Anke A. Ehrhardt
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.HIV Center for Clinical and Behavioral StudiesNew York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychiatryColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations