Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Measuring Sexual Risk-Taking: A Systematic Review of the Sexual Delay Discounting Task

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Archives of Sexual Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Sexual Delay Discounting Task (SDDT; Johnson & Bruner, 2012) is a behavioral economic task that assesses sexual risk-taking by measuring likelihood of immediate and delayed condom use. The SDDT is ecologically valid and has been used to test effects of various substances on sexual risk-taking. However, considerable variety in implementation, analysis, and reporting of the SDDT may limit rigor and reproducibility of findings. The current review synthesized studies that used the SDDT to evaluate these possible variabilities systematically. A two-step search (citation-tracking and keyword-based search) was conducted to identify studies that met inclusion criteria (i.e., used the SDDT). Eighteen peer-reviewed articles met inclusion criteria. The SDDT has been implemented primarily in three populations: individuals who use cocaine, men who have sex with men, and college students. Comparable results across diverse populations support the SDDT’s validity. A few studies administered substances before the SDDT. Evidence suggests that while cocaine and alcohol increased sexual risk-taking under some conditions, buspirone decreased preference for immediate condomless sex. There was also heterogeneity in the determination of data orderliness (i.e., outliers) and inconsistent reporting of task design and analysis. Considerable differences present in methodologic approaches could influence results. Reducing variation in the administration, analysis, and reporting of the SDDT will enhance rigor and reproducibility and maximize the task’s tremendous potential.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under University of Florida Clinical and Translational Science awards TL1 TR001428 and UL1 TR001427 to NMG, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism awards F31 AA028751 to NMG and UH2/UH3 AA02614 to RFL, the state of Florida and the Mary F. Lane Endowed Professorship. MSB’s time was supported in part by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) grant K01DA052673. JCS’s time was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse award T32 DA007209.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nioud Mulugeta Gebru.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. NMG, MSB, MA, and RFL contributed to the design of this project. MA designed and conducted the literature searches. NMG, MSB, MK, RFL conducted the initial and full article reviews. JCS reviewed extracted information. All authors contributed to manuscript preparation, revised the manuscript, and approved for publication. All authors report no conflicts of interest.

Ethics Approval and Informed Consent

This study was a systematic review and did not directly involve human subjects, and thus did not necessitate ethical board approval or informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 25 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gebru, N.M., Kalkat, M., Strickland, J.C. et al. Measuring Sexual Risk-Taking: A Systematic Review of the Sexual Delay Discounting Task. Arch Sex Behav 51, 2899–2920 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02355-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02355-y

Keywords

Navigation