Predictors of Abstinence Self-Efficacy: Examining the Role of HIV-Risk Sexual Behavior

Abstract

Abstinence self-efficacy, or the confidence in ones' beliefs in one's ability to effectively engage in behaviors to maintain substance use abstinence, is a crucial recovery resource. However, little research has been conducted on what predicts increases in this recovery resource. Understanding predictors of abstinence self-efficacy could help social service practitioners in creating effective treatment plans/interventions while extending what is presently known in this small body of research. Predictors of abstinence self-efficacy were analyzed among a sample of ex-offenders (224 men and 46 women) who were completing inpatient treatment for substance use disorders. Hierarchical linear regression was conducted to examine changes in participants' abstinence selfefficacy in relation to factors directly related (HIV-risk drug use behaviors, substance use, 12-step meeting attendance) and indirectly related (HIV-risk sexual behaviors, incarceration histories) to substance use. HIV-risk sexual behaviors and substance use predicted significant decreases in abstinence self-efficacy whereas 12-step meeting attendance predicted significant increases. However, incarceration histories and HIV-risk drug use behaviors were not significant predictors of abstinence self-efficacy. Findings suggest HIV-risk sexual behavior should be considered when assessing relapse prevention for persons with substance use disorders, and that researchers should examine behaviors that are not directly related to substance use when investigating recovery resources.

Predictors of Antiretroviral Adherence Self-efficacy Among People Living With HIV/AIDS in a Canadian Setting

“…Theoretical models, such as the Health Belief model, 25 have been used to support the notion of modifying factors that can influence one’s perceptions of self-efficacy, 26 and Bandura’s social cognitive theory posits that there are four sources of self-efficacy: 17 mastery experience (one’s prior experience with performing a certain task), vicarious experience (learning that comes from the observation of others), verbal assurance, and physical and emotional state. Despite the paucity of studies in this area, some demographic and contextual factors have been implicated as predictors of self-efficacy across various domains 27 – 32 . It is important to note that, to our knowledge, there has been no research that specifically investigated the predictors of ART adherence self-efficacy, and almost no studies that used drug-use as a predictor for self-efficacy.…”

Reducing Economic Disparities for Female Offenders: The Oxford House Model

“…Though not directly measured in this study, past research shows that Oxford House residents social networks improve with at least 6 months stay, and that self-esteem, self-efficacy, and self-regulation increase with LOS as well (Majer, Glantsman, Palmer, & Jason 2014; Majer, Olson, Komer, & Jason 2015; Stone, Jason, Stevens, & Light 2014). These results show that residents with at least 6 months stay have healthier personal and social components, which have been found aid employment outcomes in both healthy and at-risk populations (Calvó-Armengol, & Zenou 2005; Reisig, Holtfreter, & Morash 2002).…”

An Affirmative Coping Skills Intervention to Improve the Mental and Sexual Health of Sexual and Gender Minority Youth (Project Youth AFFIRM): Protocol for an Implementation Study

“…Exploratory outcomes include changes in sexual health self-efficacy and capacity, mental health indicators, internalized homophobia, stress appraisal, proactive and active coping, and hope. These outcomes will be assessed through measures such as: the Sexual Health Capacity Scale [100], the Abstinence and Protection Self-Efficacy Scale [101], the Beck Depression Inventory-II [102], the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-V (DSM-V) Self-Rated Level 1 Cross-Cutting Symptom Measure–Child [103], the Stress Appraisal Measure for Adolescents [104], the Brief COPE [105], the Proactive Coping Inventory for Adolescents-A [106], the Adult Hope Scale [107], the Internalized Homophobia Scale [108], the Current Mood Scale [109], the Everyday Discrimination Scale [110], and the LGBTQ Microaggession Scale [111] (see Table 1).…”

“…All measures are completed at all time points, including demographics, as identities and circumstances are generally very flexible for SGMY because of their developmental stage, marginalized sexual and/or gender identities, and contextual circumstances. Measures include the following: (1) demographics (eg, age, sexual identity, gender identity, ethno-racial identity, and socioeconomic-status); (2) sexual health self-efficacy and capacity , including sexual health capacity [100] and abstinence and protection self-efficacies [101]; (3) mental health , including current mood [109], depression [102], and DSM-V cross-cutting symptoms [103]; (4) coping , including proactive coping [105] and coping strategies such as active coping, denial, and humor [106]; (5) stress appraisal , including perceiving stress as challenge or threat, and seeking out resources to overcome stress [104]; (6) hope , including agency and planning to meet goals [107]; (7) experiences with everyday discrimination [110]; (8) internalized homophobia [108]; (9) microaggressions, including interpersonal and environmental microaggressions [111]; (10) AFFIRM Satisfaction Survey, a 20-item questionnaire developed for AFFIRM completed after intervention delivery, which includes questions regarding (1) satisfaction, (2) overall experience, and (3) suggestions for improvement. For details of adaptation of existing survey measures, please see Table 1.…”