29.06.2013 Views

Télécharger la revue en format "pdf". - UQAM

Télécharger la revue en format "pdf". - UQAM

Télécharger la revue en format "pdf". - UQAM

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

SEX<br />

Perceptions of personal risk from sexual transmission of HIV 41<br />

TABLE 1<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>tage who perce ive themselves to be susceptible to HIV<br />

infection and X 2 statistics indicating signifcance of re<strong>la</strong>tionships<br />

Perc<strong>en</strong>t who perceive<br />

themselves ...<br />

not<br />

susceltible susceltible<br />

N X 2<br />

male 53 47 3 0 .948<br />

female 53 47 5<br />

Ql<br />

participated in no 49 51 3 2.52 .113<br />

AIDS education yes 55 45 5<br />

heard of no 51 49 312 .408 .523<br />

Safer Sex yes 54 46 5<br />

"contact - fri<strong>en</strong>d no 55 45 6 7.41 .007<br />

tested for HIV yes 44 56 182<br />

contact - self- no 54 46 8 19.90 .000<br />

tested for HIV yes 14 86 :<br />

EXPERIENCE<br />

coitally active no 56 4 376 3.00 .083<br />

yes 50 50 4<br />

participated in no 51 49 412 .45 .503<br />

anal intercourse yes 46 54 74<br />

no. of partners 1 60 40 205 11.65 .001<br />

>1 43 57 21<br />

SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP CQNTEXT<br />

in re<strong>la</strong>tionship no 40 60 146 7.46 .006<br />

yes 54 46 3<br />

Table 2 reports results for the first stage of logit analysis in which the<br />

main and interactive effects of hypothesized cues on the odds of risk<br />

perception were tested. As se<strong>en</strong> in the R2 analogues, cues alone and i<br />

interaction had a re<strong>la</strong>tively weak association with perceived<br />

susceptibility for both m<strong>en</strong> and wom<strong>en</strong>. The only interaction which<br />

showed promise was that betwe<strong>en</strong> coital experi<strong>en</strong>ce and contact with<br />

people tested for HIV. This is evid<strong>en</strong>t wh<strong>en</strong> comparing the<br />

improvem<strong>en</strong>t in models repres<strong>en</strong>ted in the R2 analogues, particu<strong>la</strong>rly<br />

for models 2 and 7.<br />

P

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!