Exploring and Adapting a Conceptual Model of Sexual Positioning Practices and Sexual Risk Among HIV-Negative Black Men Who Have Sex With Men

Published in: The Journal of Sex Research [Epub February 2018]. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2018.1433287

Posted on RAND.org on April 26, 2018

by Derek Dangerfield, Allison J. Ober, Laramie R. Smith, Steven Shoptaw, Ricky N. Bluthenthal

Read More

Access further information on this document at Taylor & Francis

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Estimates show a 50% lifetime human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) risk among Black men who have sex with men (BMSM) in the United States(U.S.). Studying the dynamics of sexual positioning practices among BMSM could provide insights into the disparities observed among U.S. groups of men who have sex with men (MSM). This study explored sexual positioning dynamics among HIV-negative BMSM and how they aligned with a theoretical model of sexual positioning and HIV/sexually transmitted infection (STI) risk among MSM. In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 29 HIV-negative BMSM between ages 25 and 35 in Los Angeles. Comments related to sexual behaviors were reviewed for relevance regarding oral or anal sexual positioning practices. Data presented represent the range of themes related to decision making regarding sexual positioning. Personal preference, partner attraction, HIV avoidance, and feeling obligated to practice partner preferences influenced sexual positioning. Drug use also affected decision making and was sometimes preferred in order to practice receptive anal intercourse. These variables build on the conceptual model of sexual positioning practices and sexual risk, and add understanding to the relationship between preferences, practices, and risk management. Future research on risk among HIV-negative BMSM should quantify the relative impact of personal preferences, partner attraction, partner type, compromise, and substance use on sexual positioning practices and risk.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

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.