An empirical study of ordinal condom use measures

Journal of Sex Research

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 353-358

  Cecil, Heather ^a   Pinkerton, Steven D ^b   Bogart, Laura M ^c   Pavlovic, Jelena ^d   Kimball, Allison M ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

^c RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

^d KENT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COLLEGE STUDENT; CONDOM; FEMALE; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; RELIABILITY; SEXUAL INTERCOURSE; SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 28244472787     PISSN: 00224499     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00224490509552291     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Baddeley, A. M. (1990). Human memory: Theory and practice. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
2. Biehl, M., & Halpern-Felsher, B. L. (2001). Adolescents' and adults' understanding of probability expressions. Journal of Adolescent Health, 28, 30-35.
3. Bogart, L. M., Cecil, H., Wagstaff, D. A., Pinkerton, S. D., & Abramson, P. R. (2000). Is it "sex"?: College students' interpretations of sexual behavior terminology. The Journal of Sex Research, 37, 108-116.
4. Catania, J. A., Binson, D., Van Der Straten, A., & Stone, V. (1995). Methodological research on sexual behavior in the AIDS era. Annual Review of Sex Research, 6, 77-125.
5. Catania, J. A., Gibson, D. R., Chitwood, D. D., & Coates, T. J. (1990). Methodological problems in AIDS behavioral research: Influences on measurement errors and participation bias in studies of sexual behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 339-362.
6. Gates, W. Jr. (2001). The NIH condom report: The glass is 90% full. Family Planning Perspectives, 33, 231-233.
7. Cecil, H., Bogart, L. M., Wagstaff, D. A., Pinkerton, S. D., & Abramson, P. R. (2002). Classifying a person as a sex partner: The impact of contextual factors. Psychology and Health: An International Journal, 17, 221-234.
8. Cecil, H., & Zimet, G. D. (1998). Meanings assigned by undergraduates to frequency statements of condom use. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 493-505.
9. Chesson, H. W., & Gift, T. L. (2000). The increasing marginal benefit of condom usage. Annals of Epidemiology, 10, 154-159.
10. Crosby, R. A. (1998). Condom use as a dependent variable: Measurement issues relevant to HIV preventing programs. AIDS Education & Prevention, 10, 548-557.
11. Finkelstein, M. A., & Brannick, M. T. (2000). Making decisions about condoms: Whose attitude is it anyway? Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 539-553.
12. Fortenberry, J. D., Cecil, H., Zimet, G. D., & Orr, D. P (1997). Concordance between self-report questionnaires and coital diaries for sexual behaviors of adolescent women with sexually transmitted infections. In J. Bancroft (Ed.), Researching sexual behavior. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 237-249.
13. Hannon, R., Hall, D. S., Nash, H., Formati, J., & Hopson, T. (2000). Judgments regarding sexual aggression as a function of sex of aggressor and victim. Sex Roles, 43, 311-322.
14. Holmes, K. K., Levine, R., & Weaver, M. (2004). Effectiveness of condoms in preventing sexually transmitted infections. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82, 454-461.
15. Holtgrave, D. R., & Pinkerton, S. D. (2000). Consequences of HIV prevention interventions and programs: Spectrum, selection, and quality of outcome measures. AIDS, 14(suppl. 2), S27-S33.
16. Hooper, R. R., Reynolds, G. H., Jones, O. G., Zaidi, A., Wiesner, P. J., Latimer, K. P., et al. (1978). Cohort study of venereal disease. I: The risk of gonorrhea transmission from infected women to men. American Journal of Epidemiology, 108, 136-144.
17. Institute of Medicine. (1997). The hidden epidemic: Confronting sexually transmitted diseases. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
18. Jaccard, J., McDonald, R., Wan, C. K., Dittus, J., & Quinlan, S. (2002). The accuracy of self-reports of condom use and sexual behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1,863-1,905.
19. Kauth, M. R., St. Lawrence, J. S., & Kelly, J. A. (1991). Reliability of retrospective assessments of sexual HIV risk behavior: A comparison of biweekly, three-month, and twelve-month self-reports. AIDS Education and Prevention, 3, 207-214.
20. rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
21. Langley, R. (1968). Practical statistics. New York: Dover.
22. Laswad, P., & Mak, Y. T. (1997). Interpretations of probability expressions by New Zealand standard setters. Accounting Horizons, 11, 16-23.
23. Marascuilo, L. A., & Serlin, R. C. (1988). Statistical methods for the social and behavioral sciences. New York: W. H. Freeman & Co.
24. McLaws, M. L., Oldenburg, B., Ross, M. W., & Cooper, D. A. (1990). Sexual behaviours in AIDS-related research: Reliability and validity of recall and diary measures. The Journal of Sex Research, 27, 265-281.
25. Mullen, P., Ramirez, G., Strouse, D., Hedges, V. L., & Sogolow, E. (2002). Meta-analysis of the effects of behavioral HIV prevention interventions on the sexual risk behaviors of sexually experienced adolescents in controlled studies in the United States. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 30, 594-S105.
26. Ohnishi, M. Fukui, T., Matsui, K., Hira, K., Shinozuka, M., Ezaki, H., et al. (2002). Interpretation of and preference for probability expressions among Japanese patients and physicians. Family Practice, 19, 7-11.
27. Pinkerton, S. D., Holtgrave, D. R., Leviton, L. C., Wagstaff, D. A., & Abramson, P. R. (1998a). Model-based evaluation of HIV prevention interventions. Evaluation Review, 22, 155-174.
28. Pinkerton, S. D., Holtgrave, D. R., Leviton, L. C., Wagstaff, D. A., Cecil, H., & Abramson, P. R. (1998b). Toward a standard sexual behavior data set for HIV prevention evaluation. American Journal of Health Behavior, 22, 259-266.
29. Ramjee, G., Weber, A. E., & Morar, N. S. (1999). Recording sexual behavior: Comparison of recall questionnaires with a coital diary. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 26, 374-380.
30. Schaeffer, N. C. (1991). Hardly ever or constantly? Group comparisons using vague quantifiers. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 395-423.
31. Sheeran, P., & Abraham, C. (1994). Measurement of condom use in 72 studies of HIV preventive behavior: A critical review. Patient Education and Counseling, 24, 199-216.
32. Sheeran, P., Abraham, C., & Orbell, S. (1999). Psychosocial correlates of heterosexual condom use: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 90-132.
33. Stephenson, J. M., Imrie, J., & Sutton, S. R. (2000). Rigorous trials of sexual behaviour interventions in STD/HIV prevention: What can we learn from them? AIDS, 14 (Suppl. 3), S115-Sl24.
34. Warner, L., Newman, D. R., Austin, H. D., Kamb, M. L., Douglas, J. M. Jr., Malotte, C. K., et al. (2004). Condom effectiveness for reducing transmission of gonorrhea and chlamydia: The importance of assessing partner infection status. American Journal of Epidemiology, 159, 242-251.
35. Weir, S. S., Roddy, R. E., Zekeng, L., Ryan, K. A., & Wong, E. L. (1998). Measuring condom use: Asking "Do you or don't you" isn't enough. AIDS Education and Prevention, 10, 293-302.