This meta-analysis examines whether contact with HIV-prevention interventions follows self-validation or risk-reduction motives. Dunlap, Cortina, Vaslow, and Burke (1996). These procedures were used by Albarracn et al. (2003, 2005) in the same context. Coding of Moderators Independent raters coded relevant features from the reviews and strategies found in the scholarly research. After the preliminary training, the entire intercoder contract was 95%. Periodic disagreements were solved by discussion and additional study of the scholarly 2C-I HCl supplier studies. For all factors, reliabilities were more advanced than correlations, and kappa was .70. History knowledge, inspiration, and condom make use of Assessment of understanding of HIV or Helps typically comprises some statements how the participant evaluates as accurate or fake (e.g., The Helps virus could be captured through common close social get in touch with, such as seated next for an contaminated person; Rigby, Dark brown, Anagnostou, Ross, & Rosser, 1989, p. 2C-I HCl supplier 149). Understanding ratings in every complete instances were calculated by processing the percentage of queries a participant answered correctly. Based on the informationCmotivationCbehavioral-skills platform, we created the average inspiration index and utilized it in analyses (among factors = .77). This index included procedures of intentions, behaviour, norms, and self-efficacy.3 We included self-efficacy within motivation skills rather than behavioral skills based on past research displaying high associations of self-efficacy with intentions (= .59 and .60 in Glasman & Albarracn, 2003). Procedures of motives assessed the determination or purpose to make use of condoms in the foreseeable future. Typical items had been In the foreseeable future, do you intend to make use of condoms? (Eldridge et al., 1997, p. 67) or Within the next six months, how likely do you think it is that you will start using a condom every time you have vaginal sex with your main partner? (CDC Community Demonstration Projects Research Group, 1993, p. 11). 2C-I HCl supplier In terms of attitudes, we included only attitudes toward condom use rather than attitudes toward HIV. Attitudes toward condom use were typically measured with semantic-differential types of scales, for example, Do you think using a condom every time you have vaginal sex with your main partner would be pleasant or unpleasant? And would you say it would be (and number of days between the treatment and the posttest. Finally, we recorded the incentives and facilitators used to increase participation. Incentives were the amount of money paid for the study as well as the reception of services such as free health care and HIV counseling and testing. Facilitators involved the provision of child care and transportation to the intervention site. Analytic Strategy We first calculated weighted-mean odds as estimates of the degree of acceptance and retention and performed corrections for sample-size bias. As described before, proportions of acceptance and retention were converted into odds, and then the odds were log transformed (see Haddock, Rindskopf, & Shadish, 1998). We used Hedges and Olkin’s (1985) procedures to correct the effects for sample-size bias4 as well as to calculate weighted-mean effect sizes, CIs, and homogeneity statistics. Calculations of the between-subjects variance followed procedures developed by Hedges and Olkin (1985). Computations Rabbit Polyclonal to ZNF460 of effect sizes were performed with fixed- and random-effects procedures (Hedges & Olkin, 1985; Hedges & Vevea, 1998; Rosenthal, 1995; Wang & Bushman, 1999; but see Hunter & Schmidt, 2000; Raudenbush, 1994). The weights for fixed-effects models followed Hedges and Olkin’s (1985) computational formulas, whereas the weights for random-effects models followed Lipsey and Wilson’s (2001) approach. Unless otherwise indicated, for display purposes we present back-transformed proportions.