Minority College Women’s Views on Condom Negotiation

TyWanda McLaurin-Jones, Maudry-Beverly Lashley and Vanessa Marshall
Additional contact information
TyWanda McLaurin-Jones: Department of Community & Family Medicine, Howard University College of Medicine, 520 W Street, NW, Washington, DC 20059, USA
Maudry-Beverly Lashley: Department of Psychology, Medgar Evers College, 1650 Bedford Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11235, USA
Vanessa Marshall: Department of Community & Family Medicine, Howard University College of Medicine, 520 W Street, NW, Washington, DC 20059, USA

IJERPH, 2015, vol. 13, issue 1, 1-12

Abstract: This study utilized quantitative and qualitative methods to (1) investigate the relationship between frequency of condom use and negotiation strategies and (2) evaluate experiences with condom negotiations among sexually active, heterosexual, African American college women. One hundred female students from a Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) completed a questionnaire that included the Condom Influence Strategies Scale (CIS) and participated in a focus group. An ANOVA was conducted to compare differences between never, inconsistent, and consistent condom users. Consistent condom users scored higher than never users on the “withholding sex” subscale of the CIS (4.88 vs. 3.55; p < 0.001) as well as endorsed items more strongly on the “direct request” subscale of the CIS (4.63 vs. 3.82, p < 0.05) than never users. A thematic analysis of open discussions identified overarching themes. Similarly, refusing sex and/or having direct communications with partner emerged as primary strategies. Threats to negotiation included deciding the “right timing” of discussion and having a previous history of sexual intercourse without a condom with their partner. Other key concepts that contribute to condom negotiation are the views that condoms are a male’s responsibility and stigma of women who carry condoms.

Keywords: minority college women; condom use; sexually transmitted infections; sexual behavior; negotiation strategies (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/1/40/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/13/1/40/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:13:y:2015:i:1:p:40-:d:60991

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().