Limits...
How Target and Perceiver Gender Affect Impressions of HIV Risk.

Barth A, Schmälzle R, Hartung FM, Renner B, Schupp HT - Front Public Health (2015)

Bottom Line: In male targets, only trustworthiness predicts HIV risk.The present findings characterize intuitive impressions of HIV risk and reveal differences according to both target and perceiver gender.Considering gender differences in intuitive judgments of HIV risk may help devise effective strategies by shifting the balance from feelings of risk toward a more rational mode of risk perception and the adoption of effective precautionary behaviors.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Konstanz , Konstanz , Germany.

ABSTRACT

Background: People do not use condoms consistently but instead rely on intuition to identify sexual partners high at risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The present study examined gender differences of intuitive impressions about HIV risk.

Methods: Male and female perceivers evaluated portraits of unacquainted male and female targets regarding their risk for HIV, trait characteristics (trust, responsibility, attractiveness, valence, arousal, and health), and willingness for interaction.

Results: Male targets were perceived as more risky than female targets for both perceiver genders. Furthermore, male perceivers reported higher HIV risk perception for both male and female targets than female perceivers. Multiple regression indicated gender differences in the association between person characteristics and HIV risk. In male targets, only trustworthiness predicts HIV risk. In female targets, however, HIV risk is related to trustworthiness, attractiveness, health, valence (for male perceivers), and arousal (for female perceivers).

Conclusion: The present findings characterize intuitive impressions of HIV risk and reveal differences according to both target and perceiver gender. Considering gender differences in intuitive judgments of HIV risk may help devise effective strategies by shifting the balance from feelings of risk toward a more rational mode of risk perception and the adoption of effective precautionary behaviors.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Mean HIV ratings rank-ordered for the four groups defined by the factors “Target Gender” and “Perceiver Gender.”
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4593940&req=5

Figure 1: Mean HIV ratings rank-ordered for the four groups defined by the factors “Target Gender” and “Perceiver Gender.”

Mentions: To examine gender differences it is necessary to demonstrate that the four groups defined by the factors of “Perceiver Gender” and “Target Gender” show substantial variation in ascribed HIV risk. As shown in Figure 1, in each group mean HIV risk ratings increased from very low (minimum = 1.26) to very high (maximum = 5.84). Furthermore, participants in all four groups used the full range of the scale (x = 5.0) and showed substantial variance (s2 = 1.76) in perceived HIV risk. Overall, providing the grounds to examine gender differences, these analyses demonstrate that perceived HIV risk showed substantial variance for female and male target pictures as well as female and male perceivers.


How Target and Perceiver Gender Affect Impressions of HIV Risk.

Barth A, Schmälzle R, Hartung FM, Renner B, Schupp HT - Front Public Health (2015)

Mean HIV ratings rank-ordered for the four groups defined by the factors “Target Gender” and “Perceiver Gender.”
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4593940&req=5

Figure 1: Mean HIV ratings rank-ordered for the four groups defined by the factors “Target Gender” and “Perceiver Gender.”
Mentions: To examine gender differences it is necessary to demonstrate that the four groups defined by the factors of “Perceiver Gender” and “Target Gender” show substantial variation in ascribed HIV risk. As shown in Figure 1, in each group mean HIV risk ratings increased from very low (minimum = 1.26) to very high (maximum = 5.84). Furthermore, participants in all four groups used the full range of the scale (x = 5.0) and showed substantial variance (s2 = 1.76) in perceived HIV risk. Overall, providing the grounds to examine gender differences, these analyses demonstrate that perceived HIV risk showed substantial variance for female and male target pictures as well as female and male perceivers.

Bottom Line: In male targets, only trustworthiness predicts HIV risk.The present findings characterize intuitive impressions of HIV risk and reveal differences according to both target and perceiver gender.Considering gender differences in intuitive judgments of HIV risk may help devise effective strategies by shifting the balance from feelings of risk toward a more rational mode of risk perception and the adoption of effective precautionary behaviors.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Konstanz , Konstanz , Germany.

ABSTRACT

Background: People do not use condoms consistently but instead rely on intuition to identify sexual partners high at risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. The present study examined gender differences of intuitive impressions about HIV risk.

Methods: Male and female perceivers evaluated portraits of unacquainted male and female targets regarding their risk for HIV, trait characteristics (trust, responsibility, attractiveness, valence, arousal, and health), and willingness for interaction.

Results: Male targets were perceived as more risky than female targets for both perceiver genders. Furthermore, male perceivers reported higher HIV risk perception for both male and female targets than female perceivers. Multiple regression indicated gender differences in the association between person characteristics and HIV risk. In male targets, only trustworthiness predicts HIV risk. In female targets, however, HIV risk is related to trustworthiness, attractiveness, health, valence (for male perceivers), and arousal (for female perceivers).

Conclusion: The present findings characterize intuitive impressions of HIV risk and reveal differences according to both target and perceiver gender. Considering gender differences in intuitive judgments of HIV risk may help devise effective strategies by shifting the balance from feelings of risk toward a more rational mode of risk perception and the adoption of effective precautionary behaviors.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus