The impact of motives-related feedback on drinking to cope among college students
Introduction
Motives for using alcohol are psychological reasons for drinking that may provide insight into characteristics of drinkers and the consequences they experience (Kuntsche, E., et al., 2005, Kuntsche, E., et al., 2006). The most commonly measured drinking motives include coping with negative affect, conformity with others, enhancement of positive affect, and social experience (Cooper, 1994). Motives for alcohol use are associated with distinct antecedents and consequences of use in a variety of populations (e.g., Cooper, M.L., et al., 1992, Cooper, M.L., 1994, Kuntsche, E., et al., 2005, Kuntsche, E., et al., 2006). Using alcohol to cope with negative affect has received the most empirical attention and has been associated with the most negative consequences (Ham, L. S. and Hope, D. A., 2003, Kuntsche, E., et al., 2005, Merrill, J. E., et al., 2014). The current study is an initial attempt to examine whether a brief personalized feedback intervention (PFI) targeting drinkers who use to cope augments the impact of existing interventions.
Preliminary evidence indicates that targeting motives may be useful in reducing problematic use and highlights the importance of motives (Banes, K.E., et al., 2014, Conrod, P.J., et al., 2011, Conrod, P. J., et al., 2006, Conrod, P. J., et al., 2000, LaBrie, J.W., et al., 2008). Conrod, P. J., et al., 2000, Conrod, P. J., et al., 2006, Conrod, P.J., et al., 2011 showed that a PFI matched to participant personality profiles reduced drinking motives consistent with the personality-targets, as well as the negative consequences associated with alcohol use (Conrod, P. J., et al., 2000, Conrod, P. J., et al., 2006, Conrod, P.J., et al., 2011). For example, the intervention designed for individuals with anxiety sensitivity personality profile reduced levels of anxiety sensitivity, coping motives, and negative outcomes over time. Results from a brief PFI for female drinkers indicated that the intervention, which incorporated a discussion on motives, was associated with significant reductions in use and consequences as compared to the intervention without motives information (Labrie et al., 2008). A study focused on adult marijuana users found a change in motives for marijuana use following participation in a motivational enhancement and cognitive-behavioral treatment (Banes et al., 2014). They reported associations between reductions in coping motives and reductions in negative outcomes of marijuana use, suggesting that motives for use may be a mechanism of change.
Despite the work that has established that motives for use are associated with rates of use and consequences (c.f. Kuntsche, E., et al., 2005, Kuntsche, E., et al., 2006), no known treatment study has tested a brief, individualized PFI that directly targets specific motives for use. The Conrod studies utilized a group format to introduce coping strategies specific to each personality profile (Conrod, P. J., et al., 2000, Conrod, P. J., et al., 2006, Conrod, P.J., et al., 2011). LaBrie et al. (2008) utilized motives information in a brief format, but did not provide specific personalized feedback based on the motives that the individual specifically endorsed.
The goal of the current study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a coping motive-specific PFI that provides information and feedback on drinking to cope. The specific hypotheses are: (1) the PFI incorporating coping motives-related feedback and information will reduce coping motives for alcohol use, quantity of alcohol consumed, and associated negative consequences compared to a standard PFI; (2) the intervention will be associated with reductions in quantity of alcohol use and consequences of use indirectly through drinking to cope; (3) coping motives measured at baseline will moderate the effect of the intervention such that those with higher levels of the coping motive will show the largest reductions in alcohol use and related problems in the coping motive intervention condition.
Section snippets
Participants
Participants were undergraduates who were enrolled in psychology classes at a large southeastern university. In an effort to recruit individuals who drank regularly but not necessarily problematically, eligibility criteria included alcohol use on two or more days of a typical week. Additionally, participants were required to be at least 18 years of age. Eligibility criteria was explicitly stated in all recruitment materials. Of the 174 participants who attended a screening session, a total of
Preliminary analyses
Examination of the distributions of measures indicated adequate variation at both time points and no evidence of floor or ceiling effects. Data were examined for normality via Shapiro–Wilk testing and exhibited positive skew (p < .01). Thus, variables were log-transformed for GLM and indirect effects analyses. No participants answered more than one of the five careless reporting items incorrectly and, thus, no participants were excluded from analyses based on careless reporting. Comparisons of
Discussion and conclusions
The present study showed that providing feedback on using alcohol to cope reduced reports of using alcohol to cope with anxious and depressed affect in comparison to a more traditional personalized feedback intervention that did not incorporate motives feedback. Significant reductions in quantity of alcohol use and alcohol-related problem were also evident at follow-up, but did not differ significantly as a function of the coping motives feedback. However, there were indirect effects of
Role of funding source
Funding for this study was provided by a grant through the Virginia Tech Graduate Research Development Program (GRDP); the GRDP had no further role in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the paper for publication.
Contributors
CB and RS conceived, designed, and implemented the trial. CB and RS conceived the aims of this paper. CB performed the statistical analyses and wrote the initial draft of the manuscript. All authors discussed the results and contributed to and have approved the final manuscript.
Conflict of interest
No conflict declared.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Thomas Ollendick, Ph.D., Jungmeen Kim-Spoon, Ph.D., George Clum, Ph.D., and Steven Lash, Ph.D., whom were instrumental in study design.
References (30)
- et al.
Changing motives for use: Outcomes from a cognitive-behavioral intervention for marijuana-dependent adults
Drug and Alcohol Dependdence
(2014) - et al.
The role of anxiety sensitivity and drinking motives in predicting alcohol use : A critical review
Clinical Psychology Review
(2011) - et al.
Psychometric evaluation of the five-factor modified drinking motives questionnaire—Revised in undergraduates
Addictive Behaviors
(2007) - et al.
College students and problematic drinking: A review of the literature
Clinical Psychology Review
(2003) - et al.
Why do young people drink? A review of drinking motives
Clinical Psychology Review
(2005) - et al.
Who drinks and why? A review of socio-demographic, personality, and contextual issues behind the drinking motives in young people
Addictive Behaviors
(2006) - et al.
Efficacy of cognitive-behavioral interventions targeting personality risk factors for youth alcohol misuse
Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology
(2006) - et al.
Efficacy of brief coping skills interventions that match different personality profiles of female substance abusers
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
(2000) - et al.
Long-term effects of a personality-targeted intervention to reduce alcohol use in adolescents
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
(2011) Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: Development and validation of a four-factor model
Psychological Assessment
(1994)
Development and validation of a three-dimensional measure of drinking motives
Psychological Assessment
The validity of self-reports of alcohol consumption: state of the science and challenges for research
Addiction
Motivation for change and alcoholism treatment
Alcohol Research & Health : The Journal of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences
Behavior Research Methods
Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach
Cited by (43)
Understanding the relationship between depression and alcohol among students
2021, The Neuroscience of Depression: Features, Diagnosis, and TreatmentMotivations for the nonmedical use of prescription drugs in a longitudinal national sample of young adults
2020, Journal of Substance Abuse TreatmentCitation Excerpt :Our results support both the self-medication hypothesis (Duncan, 1974; Khantzian, 1985, 1997) and Arnett's (2005) theory on recreational substance use in emerging adulthood, and are similar to prior cross-sectional research of young adults (for a review, see Drazdowski, 2016) and to other population-based studies on NMUPD motives across adulthood (e.g., Compton et al., 2018; Han et al., 2017; Hughes et al., 2016). Our findings also support the use of personalized feedback as an intervention for NMUPD, similar to prior studies of alcohol interventions in college students (Blevins & Stephens, 2016). According to GEE models, motivations to engage in NMUPD were relatively stable over time.
Alcohol-related harm among college students: Past issues and future directions
2020, Three Facets of Public Health and Paths to Improvements: Behavior, Culture, and EnvironmentSecondary effects of myPlaybook on college athletes’ avoidance of drinking games or pregaming as a protective behavior strategy: A multisite randomized controlled study
2019, Social Science and MedicineCitation Excerpt :The reasons for this study's null intervention effects are not entirely clear; yet, it is possible that some student-athletes may not always be able to extrapolate beyond what is directly presented to them in the intervention. As such, myPlaybook could be adapted in such a way that it specifically addresses DG and pregaming behaviors by incorporating social norming (Merrill et al., 2016; Pedersen and LaBrie, 2008) and motivation-matched intervention strategies (e.g., Blevins and Stephens, 2016; Canale et al., 2015; cf. Zamboanga et al., 2018) around these specific behaviors. More emphasis could be placed on the use of specific protective behavioral strategies that are particularly relevant in reducing risk for harm in the context of DGs and pregaming (e.g., use of alternate alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages while playing DGs or pregaming).
The future of reward and relief drinking profiles: Considerations for social motives, stability of profiles, and tailored interventions
2024, Alcohol, Clinical and Experimental ResearchLongitudinal examination of alcohol use motives, item-level protective behavioral strategies, and alcohol-related consequences
2024, Alcohol, Clinical and Experimental Research