Document 0142
 DOCN  M9590142
 TI    Preventing unprotected anal intercourse in gay men: a comparison of two
       intervention techniques.
 DT    9509
 AU    Gold RS; Rosenthal DA; Deakin University, Victoria, Australia.
 SO    Int J STD AIDS. 1995 Mar-Apr;6(2):89-94. Unique Identifier : AIDSLINE
       MED/95298907
 AB    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.
 DE    Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/*PREVENTION & CONTROL  Adolescence
       Adult  Comparative Study  *Homosexuality, Male  Human  Male  Middle Age
       Self-Evaluation Programs  Sex Education/*METHODS  Support, Non-U.S.
       Gov't  JOURNAL ARTICLE

       SOURCE: National Library of Medicine.  NOTICE: This material may be
       protected by Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.Code).