A Behavioral Economic Examination of Sexual Behaviors in the Era of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis via Explanatory Sequential Mixed Methods.

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use may be associated with condom use decisions. The current investigation examined sexual decision-making in the context of PrEP among young adult men who have sex with men (MSM) between 18 and 30 years old, using an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. For the quantitative aim, 99 MSM currently taking PrEP (i.e., PrEP-experienced) and 140 MSM not currently taking PrEP (i.e., PrEP-naive) completed an online survey, including the Sexual Delay Discounting Task (SDDT), which captures likelihood of condom use. For the qualitative aim, 15 people from each group were interviewed about their (1) conceptualizations of risky sex and (2) ways they manage their sexual risk. Participants were, on average, 25.69 years old (SD = 3.07) and 64% White. Results from the quantitative aim revealed, controlling for covariates, PrEP-experienced participants exhibited significantly lower likelihood of (1) using an immediately available condom and (2) waiting for a delayed condom (i.e., sexual delay discounting) compared to PrEP-naive participants. Qualitative themes explaining what young adult MSM consider to be risky sex included: (1) any sex as risky sex, (2) risky sex as "sex without a conversation," and (3) risky sex as sex with risk for physical harm. Themes on ways young adult MSM manage sexual risk were classified as proactive, reactive, and passive. Results suggest that PrEP use is related to condom use decisions. Taken together, quantitative differences in sexual delay discounting, but qualitatively similar conceptualizations and management of risky sex, suggest that the SDDT may be a useful tool in sex research to capture processes (i.e., delay discounting) underlying sexual decision-making that may be missed by traditional self-reports. Implications of results, including potentially providing (good quality) condoms with every PrEP prescription, and future research topics are discussed.

A hypothetical lottery task to assess relative resource allocation toward alcohol and cannabis.

OBJECTIVE: Relative spending on substances (vs. alternatives) is predictive of several substance use outcomes, but it can be challenging to assess. We examined a novel method of assessing relative resource allocation through the use of a hypothetical lottery task wherein participants assume they collected $100,000 United States dollars in lottery winnings and were tasked with allocating their winnings across spending categories (e.g., savings, leisure, alcohol, cannabis). We hypothesized relative allocation of funds toward alcohol and cannabis would be positively associated with more use and problems of each substance. METHOD: College students (N = 479; Mage = 19.9 [SD = 2.2]) reported on their substance use and problems, alcohol and cannabis demand, and the hypothetical lottery task. RESULTS: Relative resource allocation toward alcohol and cannabis on the lottery task positively correlated with alcohol and cannabis demand indices (intensity, breakpoint, Omax, and elasticity [negatively]), respectively. Using zero-inflated modeling, greater relative allocation toward alcohol positively related to alcohol use and problems in models that controlled for alcohol demand indices. For cannabis, relative resource allocation was also positively associated with cannabis use, but not problems, independently from cannabis demand indices. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide initial support for the hypothetical lottery task as an indicator of relative resource allocation toward substances. Generally, these results extend previous behavioral economic research demonstrating the utility of relative resource allocation as a unique predictor of clinically relevant outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).