Assessing behavioral economic biases among young adults who have increased likelihood of acquiring HIV: a mixed methods study in Baltimore, Maryland.
Assessing behavioral economic biases among young adults who have increased likelihood of acquiring HIV: a mixed methods study in Baltimore, Maryland.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12981-023-00521-3
复制
发表时间：
2023-05-07
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
行为经济学（BE）的偏见已经在许多健康状况的背景下进行了研究，但在艾滋病毒预防领域的研究不足。本研究的目的是量化四种常见的BE偏见的流行，目前的偏见，信息显着性，过度乐观，损失厌恶，有关安全套的使用和艾滋病毒检测的经济脆弱的年轻人谁获得艾滋病毒的可能性增加。我们还定性地研究了参与者对这些偏见的看法。43名参与者参加了这项研究。通过访谈收集数据，使用定量调查工具嵌入定性问题，以表征响应。访谈记录和分析使用描述性统计和演绎归纳内容分析。56%的参与者存在当前偏见，不成比例地将未来的奖励视为较小的即时奖励。51%的人表示，考虑到财务需求，他们更有可能消费而不是储蓄。与安全套使用有关的现在偏见较低，28%的人报告说他们会进行无安全套的性行为，而不是等待一天才能获得安全套。考虑到风险，大多数参与者（72%）愿意等待安全套支持的性行为。只有35%的人认识艾滋病毒感染者，但67%的人认识接受过艾滋病毒检测的人，74%的人说他们经常考虑预防艾滋病毒（例如，高显着性）。然而，47%的人报告说，他们乐观地计划使用避孕套，与伴侣讨论艾滋病毒问题，或进行检测，但未能坚持自己的决定。大多数（98%）也不愿意（B = 9.4，SD ±.9）失去HIV阴性状态。选择次优安全套或测试的定性原因是已经等待找到性伴侣，感到尴尬，恐惧，或不记得当时的计划。最佳决策定性归因于自我保护的想法，建立常规护理，站在自己的，并认为有人受到艾滋病毒的不利影响。44%的参与者更喜欢延迟的货币奖励（例如，未来偏见），定性归因于担心不明智地花钱或需要时间来计划。混合方法BE评估可能是一个有价值的工具，了解因素，有助于最佳和次优的艾滋病毒预防决策。未来的艾滋病毒预防干预措施可能会受益于整合储蓄产品，损失框架，承诺合同，线索或激励措施。
Behavioral economic (BE) biases have been studied in the context of numerous health conditions, yet are understudied in the field of HIV prevention. This aim of this study was to quantify the prevalence of four common BE biases—present bias, information salience, overoptimism, and loss aversion—relating to condom use and HIV testing in economically-vulnerable young adults who had increased likelihood of acquiring HIV. We also qualitatively examined participants’ perceptions of these biases. 43 participants were enrolled in the study. Data were collected via interviews using a quantitative survey instrument embedded with qualitative questions to characterize responses. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using descriptive statistics and deductive-inductive content analyses. 56% of participants were present-biased, disproportionately discounting future rewards for smaller immediate rewards. 51% stated they were more likely to spend than save given financial need. Present-bias relating to condom use was lower with 28% reporting they would engage in condomless sex rather than wait one day to access condoms. Most participants (72%) were willing to wait for condom-supported sex given the risk. Only 35% knew someone living with HIV, but 67% knew someone who had taken an HIV test, and 74% said they often think about preventing HIV (e.g., high salience). Yet, 47% reported optimistically planning for condom use, HIV discussions with partners, or testing but failing to stick to their decision. Most (98%) were also averse (b = 9.4, SD ±.9) to losing their HIV-negative status. Qualitative reasons for sub-optimal condom or testing choices were having already waited to find a sex partner, feeling awkward, having fear, or not remembering one’s plan in the moment. Optimal decisions were attributed qualitatively to self-protective thoughts, establishing routine care, standing on one’s own, and thinking of someone adversely impacted by HIV. 44% of participants preferred delayed monetary awards (e.g., future-biased), attributed qualitatively to fears of spending immediate money unwisely or needing time to plan. Mixed methods BE assessments may be a valuable tool in understanding factors contributing to optimal and sub-optimal HIV prevention decisions. Future HIV prevention interventions may benefit from integrating savings products, loss framing, commitment contracts, cues, or incentives.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Linnemayr S;Stecher C
通讯作者：
Stecher C
影响因子：
8.5
作者：
Chard AN;Metheny N;Stephenson R
通讯作者：
Stephenson R
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
Taylor NK;Buttenheim AM
通讯作者：
Buttenheim AM
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Jennings L;Mathai M;Linnemayr S;Trujillo A;Mak'anyengo M;Montgomery BEE;Kerrigan DL
通讯作者：
Kerrigan DL
DOI：
10.1017/s1742058x11000130
发表时间：
2011-04
期刊：
Du Bois review : social science research on race
影响因子：
--
作者：
Gee GC;Ford CL
通讯作者：
Ford CL