Brian Mustanski1. 1. University of Illinois at Chicago, IL 60608, USA. bmustanski@psych.uic.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the influence of state and trait affect on HIV risk behaviors. DESIGN: Men who have sex with men (N = 155) completed reports of trait affect and daily reports of affect and sexual behaviors each night for up to 30 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Analyses focused on the role of state and trait positive activation (PA), negative activation (NA), anxious arousal (AA), and sexual activation (SA) on sexual risk taking, operationalized as having a sex partner, a partner-related risk composite, and an HIV risk behavior composite. RESULTS: State SA was positively associated with having a sex partner and HIV risk behaviors; trait SA was positively associated with partner-related risk. State AA was negatively associated with having a sex partner and positively associated with HIV risk behaviors. Trait AA had a negative association with partner-related risk and moderated the effects of state AA. State PA was negatively associated with HIV risk behaviors, and trait PA had a main effect on having a sex partner. NA had no significant trait or state effects. CONCLUSION: These data suggest a role for multiple affective states in sexual risk taking. Models of HIV risk-taking behaviors should be extended to include affective processes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved).
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the influence of state and trait affect on HIV risk behaviors. DESIGN:Men who have sex with men (N = 155) completed reports of trait affect and daily reports of affect and sexual behaviors each night for up to 30 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Analyses focused on the role of state and trait positive activation (PA), negative activation (NA), anxious arousal (AA), and sexual activation (SA) on sexual risk taking, operationalized as having a sex partner, a partner-related risk composite, and an HIV risk behavior composite. RESULTS: State SA was positively associated with having a sex partner and HIV risk behaviors; trait SA was positively associated with partner-related risk. State AA was negatively associated with having a sex partner and positively associated with HIV risk behaviors. Trait AA had a negative association with partner-related risk and moderated the effects of state AA. State PA was negatively associated with HIV risk behaviors, and trait PA had a main effect on having a sex partner. NA had no significant trait or state effects. CONCLUSION: These data suggest a role for multiple affective states in sexual risk taking. Models of HIV risk-taking behaviors should be extended to include affective processes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Lisa Hightow-Weidman; Kate Muessig; Joseph R Egger; Sara LeGrand; Alyssa Platt Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2020-01-25 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Corina Lelutiu-Weinberger; John E Pachankis; Kristi E Gamarel; Anthony Surace; Sarit A Golub; Jeffrey T Parsons Journal: AIDS Behav Date: 2015-07