'I'm less at risk than most guys': gay men's unrealistic optimism about becoming infected with HIV

Abstract

Among the self-justifications that gay men use when engaging in high-risk sex is the thought that they are less at risk than most gay men. Two explanatory models of such 'unrealistic optimism' (UO) have been proposed: while the motivational account holds that UO arises because it serves the function of bringing comfort, the cognitive account holds that UO serves no particular function, being simply a by-product of normal cognitive strategies. This study investigated predictions derived from the motivational account. Gay men uninfected with HIV (n = 88) answered two test questions, requiring them to estimate, respectively, their own risk of becoming infected and that of the average gay man. The questions were presented in the two possible orders, and were either separated or not separated by unrelated filler material. The great majority of the men (89%) exhibited UO. Neither question order nor the interpolation of filler material affected responses to either test question. The results were inconsistent with the motivational account, but explicable in terms of the cognitive account. It seems that the cognitive account provides the better explanation of at least that form of UO measured in this study. Implications for AIDS educators are discussed.

Sexually Transmitted Infections in Switzerland: Return of the Classics

“…On the one hand there is a declining readiness for ‘safer sex’, especially in young adults who have not experienced the first prevention campaigns and therefore lack adequate information [45]. Well-informed gay men engaging in high-risk sex was explained by their unrealistic optimism about becoming infected [46]. Furthermore, the advances in HIV therapy and in postexposure prophylaxis have led to an unjustifiable blind confidence in HIV-negative as well as in HIV-positive people [47].…”

Does the Optimism Bias Affect Help-Seeking Intentions for Depressive Symptoms in Young People?

“…These results are congruent with the work of Raviv et al (2000), who found that a sample of young people were more willing to refer another person and less likely to refer themselves for assistance for depressive symptoms. Previous authors have explained the service gap in terms of motivation to preserve a positive self-image (e.g., Gold & Aucote, 2003). An individual may perceive a greater threat to selfimage as depressive symptoms increase in severity.…”

“…This phenomenon is referred to as the "shared circumstances effect" and, in the context of a perceived "easy" task, results in optimism bias. Gold and Aucote (2003) state that this bias exists partly to preserve self-esteem and to minimize anxiety around an aversive event. This phenomenon may also involve efforts to preserve one's image through denial of vulnerability (Prentice, Gold, & Carpenter, 2005) and attempts to project a favorable representation of self (Jansen, 2006).…”

“…Previous authors have suggested several reasons for the existence of optimism bias. For instance, some research identifies the desire to maintain a favorable impression of oneself (Gold & Aucote, 2003;Jansen, 2006), while others cite the need to control internal states and processes (e.g., Helweg-Larsen & Shepperd, 2001). Because negative attitudes towards mental illness prevail (Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Service, 1997), an individual may expect disclosure of symptoms to result in unfavourable outcomes, such as negative evaluations by others (Spendelow, 2004).…”

The link between judgments of comparative risk and own risk: Further evidence

“…Weinstein (1980) accordingly dubbed the belief ''unrealistic optimism'' (UO). UO has been documented for many health outcomes, for example, contracting breast cancer (Absetz, Aro, Rehnberg, & Sutton, 2000), contracting skin cancer (Clarke, Williams, & Arthey, 1997), becoming infected with HIV (e.g., Gold & Aucote, 2003), having a heart attack (e.g., Weinstein & Klein, 1995), contracting mononucleosis (Chandran & Menon, 2004), becoming addicted to drugs (e.g., Cohn, Macfarlane, Imai, & Yanez, 1995), having an unwanted pregnancy (e.g., Burger & Burns, 1988), and developing smoking-related illness (e.g., Reppucci, Revenson, Aber, & Reppucci, 1991). From an applied perspective, the phenomenon is important because thinking one is at less risk than others may make one less inclined to engage in preventive behaviours (Helweg-Larsen & Shepperd, 2001;Klein & Weinstein, 1997).…”