Exploring the role of sex-seeking apps and websites in the social and sexual lives of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Background The objective of this study was to explore the relationship between online sex-seeking, community/social attachment and sexual behaviour. Methods Respondent-driven sampling was used to recruit 774 sexually active gay and bisexual men in Vancouver, Canada, aged ≥16 years. Multivariable logistic regression compared men who had used online sex-seeking apps/websites in the past 6 months (n = 586) with those who did not (n = 188). Results Multivariable results showed that online sex seekers were more likely to be younger [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.95, 95% CI: (0.93–0.96)], college educated [aOR = 1.60, 95% CI: (1.07, 2.40)], have more Facebook friends [aOR = 1.07, 95% CI: (1.01, 1.13)], spend more social time with other gay men [aOR = 1.99, 95% CI: (1.33–2.97)], and were more likely to identify emotionally with the gay community [aOR = 1.08, 95% CI: (1.01–1.16)]. Further, they had displayed high sensation-seeking behaviour [aOR = 1.08, 95% CI: (1.03–1.13)], were more likely to engage in serodiscordant/unknown condomless anal sex [aOR = 2.34, 95% CI: (1.50–3.66)], use strategic positioning [aOR = 1.72, 95% CI: (1.08–2.74)], ask their partner’s HIV-status prior to sex [aOR = 2.06, 95% CI: (1.27–3.37)], and have ever been tested for HIV [aOR = 4.11, 95% CI: (2.04–8.29)]. Conclusion These findings highlight the online and offline social behaviour exhibited by gay and bisexual men, pressing the need for pro-social interventions to promote safe-sex norms online. We conclude that both Internet and community-based prevention will help reach app/web users.

An Event-Level Analysis of the Interpersonal Factors Associated With Condomless Anal Sex Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men (MSM) With Online-Met Partners

“…As greater sexual sensation seeking and partner frequency have been associated with online sex seeking (Card et al, 2016), these factors likely moderate the relationship between internet dating and CAS (Horvath, Beadnell, & Bowen, 2006; Matarelli, 2013). Likewise, higher treatment optimism and substance use have also been associated with both online sex seeking and risky sexual behavior (Grosskopf, Harris, Wallace, & Nanin, 2011; Rendina et al, 2015; Shilo & Mor, 2015).…”

“…In examining which factors might underlie the association between CAS and online sex seeking, we have previously compared men who seek sex online with those who do not (Card et al, 2016). These earlier findings indicated that online sex seeking MSM tended to be younger, had more Facebook friends, spent more social time with other gay men, were more emotionally attached with the gay community, and had lower communal sexual altruism scores.…”

The use of geosocial networking smartphone applications and the risk of sexually transmitted infections among men who have sex with men: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…With the proliferation of apps, increased use of these apps may facilitate finding casual sexual partners, resulting in unsafe sexual practices [ 6 ]. Prior work has shown that MSM who use these apps (app-users) tend to have more sexual encounters, more frequent anal intercourse, more unprotected sex, and a larger number of sexual partners known to have HIV and other STIs [ 7 – 10 ]. This increases their risk for HIV and STIs acquisition/transmission, compared with MSM who used different channels to seek sex partners (non-users) [ 11 , 12 ].…”

Meeting Sexual Partners Through Internet Sites and Smartphone Apps in Australia: National Representative Study (Preprint)

“…[1][2][3][4]17, 20] A number of studies have reported on HIV testing history among gay men and tend to find that men who use apps are more likely to have been tested for HIV. [15,20] Studies in gay men in Australia, suggest that men who use a combination of mobile phone apps, internet websites and offline places to meet partners appear to be at increased risk of STIs or HIV compared with men who use a narrower range of online and offline methods. [21] In women, low annual household income was associated with meeting partners online.…”