Publication: Differences of sexual behavior predictors between sexually active and nonactive female adolescents in congested communities, Bangkok metropolis
Issued Date
2008-04-01
Resource Type
ISSN
01252208
01252208
01252208
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-44249107352
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand. Vol.91, No.4 (2008), 542-550
Suggested Citation
Arpaporn Powwattana, Pantip Ramasoota Differences of sexual behavior predictors between sexually active and nonactive female adolescents in congested communities, Bangkok metropolis. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand. Vol.91, No.4 (2008), 542-550. Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/19704
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Differences of sexual behavior predictors between sexually active and nonactive female adolescents in congested communities, Bangkok metropolis
Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Objective: To test the differences among the predictors between sexually active and non-active female adolescents. Study Design: Descriptive research. Material and Method: The participants included 581 Thai female adolescents: 262 sexually non-active and 319 sexually active (average age = 19.7 years). They completed questionnaires measuring self-discrepancy, depression, power in relationships (decision making dominance and relationship control), sexual self-efficacy (ability to say no, assertiveness, precaution), cognitive strategies (gain thinking: relationship, development, curiosity; punishment avoidance thinking: negative consequence, ethical-related, fear-related), and sexual behavior. The t-test and the Hierarchical Regression were employed for data analyses. Results: Among the sexually active, 68.8% had vaginal or anal sexual intercourse (11.7%) without using a condom. Significant enabling predictors among the sexually active included sexual self-efficacy (precaution), and gain thinking (relationship), whereas punishment avoidance thinking (negative consequence) had a negative influence: it accounted about 11.0%. Among sexually non-active, alcohol consumption, power in a relationship (decision making dominance), and gain thinking (relationship) accounted for 26.9% of the variance in explaining sexual behavior. Conclusion: A specific link between sexual self-efficacy and cognitive strategies will be drawn to develop a program for the sexually active. Implications for behavioral modification addressing alcohol drinking and power in a relationship should be discussed among the sexually non-active.