Table 5.

Logistic regression analyses predicting high intention (0 = no, 1 = yes) to use condoms with casual sex partners (N = 188)

	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3			Model 4			Model 5
	B	OR	95% CI	B	OR	95% CI	B	OR	95% CI	B	OR	95% CI	B	OR	95% CI
Step 1
Antiviral treatmenta	.99	2.7**	1.4–5.2	.74	2.1	.88–5.0	1.1	2.9*	1.1–7.3	1.1	3.1*	1.2–8.4	1.2	3.3*	1.2–9.2
Step 2
Attitudinal beliefs				1.2	3.2**	1.4–7.5	.84	2.3	.92–5.8	.32	1.4	.50–3.8	.25	1.3	.45–3.6
Subjective norms				1.1	2.9**	1.3–6.5	.90	2.5	1.0–6.1	.86	2.4	.91–6.1	.39	1.5	.50–4.4
Self-efficacy				1.5	4.2***	2.3–7.9	1.1	2.9**	1.5–5.9	.86	2.4*	1.1–5.0	.53	1.7	.76–3.8
Step 3
ACSb							.24	1.3	.85–1.9	.25	1.3	.85–2.0	.13	1.1	.72–1.8
ACOc							.34	1.4	.89–2.2	.34	1.4	.88–2.2	.34	1.4	.86–2.3
ARd							1.1	3.0*	1.2–7.5	1.1	3.0*	1.1–7.9	.64	1.9	.65–5.5
Step 4
Sexual motives										−.61	.54**	.35–8.3	−.57	.57*	.36–.89
Step 5
Personal norms													1.3	3.8**	1.6–8.9
Nagelkerke R2	.06			.52			.60			.63			.68
Model χ2	8.9			91.4			111.8			120.5			132.3

Note. At each step, variables were included in the equation simultaneously.

^aVariable coding: 0 = no, 1 = yes.

^bAwareness consequences self.

^cAwareness consequences others.

^dAscription of responsibility.

^*p <.05.

^**p <.01.

^***p <.001 (two-tailed).