Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jun 3.
Published in final edited form as: J HIV AIDS Soc Serv. 2013 Jun 3;12(2):146–159. doi: 10.1080/15381501.2013.768949

Table 3. Between-Arm Comparisons of ARRM-Related Outcomes Immediately Post-Intervention.

Intervention Group Control Group
p1 N Mean % N Mean %
ARRM Stage I Variable
 Knowledge (Protective/Protection Function) .006 131 6.32 -- 133 5.83 --
 Knowledge (Living with HIV/STI) .005 131 4.05 -- 133 3.62 --
 Perceived HIV risk2 .016 131 -- 69.5 133 -- 54.1
 Perceived STI risk2 .008 131 -- 71.8 133 -- 54.1
ARRM Stage II Variable
 Condom attitudes (Usage/Importance) .253 130 3.40 -- 133 3.33 --
 Condom attitudes (Protective Function) .943 131 3.51 -- 133 3.50 --
 Peer norms (Situational) .113 118 3.49 -- 115 3.35 --
 Peer norms (Behavioral) .181 109 3.48 -- 95 3.36 --
 Intentions to use condoms (Vaginal Sex)3 .041 131 -- 71.0 133 -- 57.1
 Intentions to use condoms (Oral Sex)3 .066 126 -- 68.3 133 -- 52.6
 Intentions to use condoms (Anal Sex)3 .377 125 -- 70.4 133 -- 63.9
ARRM Stage II Variable
 Intentions to test for HIV4 .242 128 -- 74.2 133 -- 66.9
 Intentions to test for STIs4 .238 129 -- 76.0 133 -- 68.4
ARRM Stage III Variable
 Sexual communication5 .346 57 2.16 -- 66 2.27 --
1

P-value is for the Intervention Group vs. Control Group difference derived from regressing the variable on group and is based on robust standard errors calculated to accommodate clustering by friendship group (as defined by the index case). Dichotomous variables required logistic regression instead of linear regression.

2

% worried or very worried

3

% always use condoms

4

% somewhat likely or very likely

5

Sexually inactive excluded