{"title":"根据避孕套的可获得性和性传播感染的风险,决定不同的避孕套使用意图","authors":"David L Rodrigues","doi":"10.1080/19317611.2023.2212651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Regulatory Focus Theory suggests that goal pursuit is driven by two separate and fundamental motives. Being more focused on prevention motivates people to enact safer behaviors and avoid negative outcomes (e.g., to prevent diseases), whereas being more focused on promotion motivates people to take risks and pursue pleasurable experiences (e.g., condomless sex).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quasi-experimental study (<i>N</i> = 476) examined if differences in regulatory focus (i.e., prevention <i>vs.</i> promotion) determined condom use intentions with a prospective casual partner, depending on condom availability delay and STI risk cues.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants focused on prevention (<i>vs.</i> promotion) were less likely to consider having condomless sex across condom availability delays conditions. However, STI risk cues changed condom use intentions. When STI risk was lower, condom use intentions decreased as condom availability delays increased (particularly for participants focused on promotion). When STI risk was higher, condom use intentions were stronger and consistent across condom availability delays (particularly for participants focused on prevention).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings highlight the importance of distinct sexual motives when examining sexual health practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":46855,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sexual Health","volume":"35 1","pages":"341-351"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10903688/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Focusing on Safety or Pleasure Determine Condom Use Intentions Differently Depending on Condom Availability and STI Risk.\",\"authors\":\"David L Rodrigues\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19317611.2023.2212651\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Regulatory Focus Theory suggests that goal pursuit is driven by two separate and fundamental motives. Being more focused on prevention motivates people to enact safer behaviors and avoid negative outcomes (e.g., to prevent diseases), whereas being more focused on promotion motivates people to take risks and pursue pleasurable experiences (e.g., condomless sex).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A quasi-experimental study (<i>N</i> = 476) examined if differences in regulatory focus (i.e., prevention <i>vs.</i> promotion) determined condom use intentions with a prospective casual partner, depending on condom availability delay and STI risk cues.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants focused on prevention (<i>vs.</i> promotion) were less likely to consider having condomless sex across condom availability delays conditions. However, STI risk cues changed condom use intentions. When STI risk was lower, condom use intentions decreased as condom availability delays increased (particularly for participants focused on promotion). When STI risk was higher, condom use intentions were stronger and consistent across condom availability delays (particularly for participants focused on prevention).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings highlight the importance of distinct sexual motives when examining sexual health practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46855,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Sexual Health\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"341-351\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10903688/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Sexual Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19317611.2023.2212651\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sexual Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19317611.2023.2212651","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Focusing on Safety or Pleasure Determine Condom Use Intentions Differently Depending on Condom Availability and STI Risk.
Objective: Regulatory Focus Theory suggests that goal pursuit is driven by two separate and fundamental motives. Being more focused on prevention motivates people to enact safer behaviors and avoid negative outcomes (e.g., to prevent diseases), whereas being more focused on promotion motivates people to take risks and pursue pleasurable experiences (e.g., condomless sex).
Methods: A quasi-experimental study (N = 476) examined if differences in regulatory focus (i.e., prevention vs. promotion) determined condom use intentions with a prospective casual partner, depending on condom availability delay and STI risk cues.
Results: Participants focused on prevention (vs. promotion) were less likely to consider having condomless sex across condom availability delays conditions. However, STI risk cues changed condom use intentions. When STI risk was lower, condom use intentions decreased as condom availability delays increased (particularly for participants focused on promotion). When STI risk was higher, condom use intentions were stronger and consistent across condom availability delays (particularly for participants focused on prevention).
Conclusions: These findings highlight the importance of distinct sexual motives when examining sexual health practices.
期刊介绍:
As the official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health, the International Journal of Sexual Health promotes sexual health as a state of physical, emotional, mental, and social well-being through a positive approach to sexuality and sexual rights. The journal publishes peer-reviewed scientific papers, editorials, and reviews, using quantitative and qualitative methods, descriptive and critical analysis, instrument development, surveys, and case studies to examine the essential elements of this broad concept. Leading experts from around the world present original work that covers a variety of disciplines, including sexology, biology, medicine, psychology, sociology, anthropology, history, and religion.