Table1.
M | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unknown Partner Risk (n = 78) | |||||||||
1. General Intention: Unprotected Sex | 1.82 | 1.24 | -- | ||||||
2. Expectancy Effect Contrast | -- | -- | −0.22 | -- | |||||
3. Pharmacological Effect Contrast | -- | -- | 0.09 | −0.39* | -- | ||||
4. Primary Appraisal: Sexual Potential | 3.59 | 1.33 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.25* | -- | |||
5. Secondary Appraisal: Impelling Cog. | 1.58 | 0.59 | 0.22 | −0.06 | 0.20 | 0.57* | -- | ||
6. Assertive Condom Request | 4.79 | 1.52 | −0.28* | −0.06 | 0.09 | −0.18 | −0.37* | -- | |
7. Unprotected Sex Likelihood | 1.81 | 1.85 | 0.26* | 0.05 | 0.00 | 0.21 | 0.44* | −0.52* | -- |
| |||||||||
Low Partner Risk (n = 76) | |||||||||
1. General Intention: Unprotected Sex | 2.04 | 1.49 | -- | ||||||
2. Expectancy Effect Contrast | -- | -- | 0.18 | -- | |||||
3. Pharmacological Effect Contrast | -- | -- | −0.09 | −0.41* | -- | ||||
4. Primary Appraisal: Sexual Potential | 3.75 | 1.10 | 0.15 | 0.13 | 0.37* | -- | |||
5. Secondary Appraisal: Impelling Cog. | 1.77 | 0.61 | 0.41* | −0.04 | 0.16 | 0.40* | -- | ||
6. Assertive Condom Request | 4.41 | 1.62 | −0.59* | −0.29* | 0.11 | −0.10 | −0.46* | -- | |
7. Unprotected Sex Likelihood | 2.52 | 1.98 | 0.41* | 0.07 | 0.05 | 0.25* | 0.54* | −0.58* | -- |
| |||||||||
High Partner Risk (n = 76) | |||||||||
1. General Intention: Unprotected Sex | 2.27 | 1.49 | -- | ||||||
2. Expectancy Effect Contrast | -- | -- | −0.01 | -- | |||||
3. Pharmacological Effect Contrast | -- | -- | −0.08 | −0.42* | -- | ||||
4. Primary Appraisal: Sexual Potential | 3.42 | 1.26 | 0.21 | −0.21 | 0.24* | -- | |||
5. Secondary Appraisal: Impelling Cog. | 1.51 | 0.62 | 0.36* | 0.04 | −0.10 | 0.35* | -- | ||
6. Assertive Condom Request | 4.91 | 1.34 | −0.35* | 0.00 | −0.15 | −0.10 | −0.35* | -- | |
7. Unprotected Sex Likelihood | 1.95 | 2.06 | 0.35* | 0.02 | 0.12 | 0.34* | 0.53* | −0.67* | -- |
p < .05.