Relationship Commitment and Its Implications for Unprotected Sex Among Impoverished Women Living in Shelters and Low-Income Housing in Los Angeles County

Cover: Relationship Commitment and Its Implications for Unprotected Sex Among Impoverished Women Living in Shelters and Low-Income Housing in Los Angeles County Click to Read Online

Objective: To examine how relationship commitment among impoverished women is associated with their frequency of unprotected sex.

Design: Cross-sectional analyses were conducted on survey data from a probability sample of 445 women initially sampled from shelters and low-income housing in Los Angeles County.

Main Outcome Measure: Frequency of unprotected sex in a typical month was derived as the product of 2 items: how often the woman had sex with her partner in a typical month and how often a male condom was used.

Results: For both sheltered and housed women, relationship commitment predicted more frequent engagement in unprotected sex with their partner, even after controlling for the type of relationship (primary vs. casual). However, this association could not be accounted for by perceived partner monogamy, ability to refuse unwanted sex, perceived HIV susceptibility, and condom use self-efficacy. Among housed women only, never asking the partner to use a condom partially accounted for more frequent engagement in unprotected sex among women with stronger relationship commitment.

Conclusion: Results emphasize the importance of relationship commitment issues in HIV prevention interventions with impoverished women, and the need for a better understanding of relationship commitment and its influence on condom use in this population.

Reprinted with permission from Health Psychology, Vol. 26, No. 5, Sept. 2007, pp. 644-649. Copyright © 2007 American Psychological Association.

Download Free Electronic Document

Document Details

  • Copyright: American Psychological Association
  • Availability: Web-Only
  • Pages: 6
  • Document Number: RP-1325
  • Year: 2007
  • Series: Reprints

Originally published in: Health Psychology, Vol. 26, No. 5, Sept. 2007, pp. 644-649.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation reprint series. This product is part of the RAND Corporation reprint series. RAND reprints present previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints have been formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy, and are compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity.

Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.