Linked Life Data

7779937

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/7779937

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
2
pubmed:dateCreated
1995-7-18
pubmed:abstractText
This study compared the effectiveness of getting gay men to evaluate the self-justifications they use when breaking their safe sex rules to that of a standard approach to AIDS education. Men (n = 109) who had 'slipped up' (broken their safe sex rules by having unprotected anal intercourse) kept diaries of their sexual behaviour for 16 weeks. After 4 weeks they were allocated to one of 3 conditions, 2 involving brief interventions--Self-justifications (evaluation of self-justifications) and Standard (examination of posters used in AIDS education)--and a Control (diary only). At the time of the intervention, more members of the Self-justifications than the Standard group thought that it would help them not to slip up. In the post-intervention period, the 3 groups did not differ in the incidence of sexual activity or in the proportion who slipped up at least once, but the Self-justifications group were less likely to have had multiple slip-ups. Three possible explanations are offered for the effectiveness of the Self-justifications intervention. This approach may provide a useful alternative to standard techniques of AIDS education.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:issn
0956-4624
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
6
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
89-94
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:articleTitle
Preventing unprotected anal intercourse in gay men: a comparison of two intervention techniques.
pubmed:affiliation
Deakin University, Victoria, Australia.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't