↓ Skip to main content

The Critical Role of Intimacy in the Sexual Risk Behaviors of Gay and Bisexual Men

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, June 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#30 of 3,671)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Critical Role of Intimacy in the Sexual Risk Behaviors of Gay and Bisexual Men
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, June 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10461-011-9972-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarit A. Golub, Tyrel J. Starks, Gregory Payton, Jeffrey T. Parsons

Abstract

Research indicates that high numbers of gay and bisexual men report infrequent or inconsistent condom use, placing them at risk for HIV and other STDs. The present study examined positive and negative condom-related attitudes along three dimensions-risk reduction, pleasure reduction, and intimacy interference-and examined their relative predictive power in determining condom use among a sample of sexually risky gay and bisexual men in New York City. In a multivariate model, both risk reduction and intimacy interference attitudes emerged as significant predictors of unprotected sex; however, the variance accounted for by a model including intimacy interference was almost three times that accounted for by a model including risk reduction alone. These data suggest a pivotal role for intimacy in shaping condom attitudes and behavior among gay and bisexual men. HIV prevention interventions should consider incorporating intimacy as a motivating factor for sexual behavior and a potential barrier to condom use.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 64 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 18%
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 26%
Social Sciences 12 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 14 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 109. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2023.
All research outputs
#382,455
of 25,286,324 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#30
of 3,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,231
of 117,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#3
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,286,324 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,671 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 117,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.