Silberman School of Social Work, Hunter College at the City University of New York, New York, NY 10035, USA.
Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2019 Nov 1;204:107472. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.04.038. Epub 2019 Aug 30.
Mechanisms of behavior change (MOBC) within Motivational Interviewing (MI) are thought to operate via both relational and technical elements. These elements are hypothesized to increase client motivation and self-efficacy for change and subsequently decrease drinking. Only partial support for this causal chain exists, particularly when using within-session change talk as the primary intervening variable. This study explored whether commitment to moderate or abstain from drinking and confidence to moderate drinking in the next day measured via ecological momentary assessment (EMA) provided alternative support for the theory. Data were from a pilot randomized controlled trial testing active ingredients of MI. Problem drinkers (N = 89) seeking to moderate their drinking were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions: 1) MI; 2) Spirit only MI (SOMI), consisting of non-directive elements of MI, e.g., reflective listening; and 3) a non-therapy control. Participants completed daily EMA that measured confidence, both types of commitment, and drinks per day for a week prior to and during seven weeks of treatment. Hypotheses were not supported, and results were unexpected. Participants in SOMI were more likely to have higher daily confidence than those in MI; there were no condition differences for either type of commitment. All daily measures significantly predicted drinking; however, the MI group did not demonstrate a stronger relationship between the intervening variables and drinking, as hypothesized. Instead, participants in SOMI yielded the strongest relationship between daily commitment to abstain and drinking compared to the other two conditions. Multiple possible explanations for the unexpected findings are discussed.
动机访谈(MI)中的行为改变机制(MOBC)被认为是通过关系和技术元素起作用的。这些元素被假设可以提高客户的动机和改变的自我效能感,从而减少饮酒量。仅部分支持这种因果关系链存在,特别是当使用会话内变化谈话作为主要干预变量时。本研究探讨了通过生态瞬时评估(EMA)测量的适度或戒酒承诺以及次日适度饮酒的信心是否为该理论提供了替代支持。数据来自测试 MI 有效成分的试点随机对照试验。寻求适度饮酒的问题饮酒者(N=89)被随机分配到以下三种条件之一:1)MI;2)仅含精神元素的 MI(SOMI),包含 MI 的非直接元素,例如反映性倾听;3)非治疗对照组。参与者在治疗前一周和治疗期间的七周内每天完成 EMA,测量信心、两种类型的承诺以及每天的饮酒量。假设未得到支持,结果出人意料。SOMI 组参与者的每日信心高于 MI 组;两种类型的承诺在条件上没有差异。所有每日测量均显著预测饮酒量;然而,与假设相反,MI 组并未显示出干预变量与饮酒量之间更强的关系。相比之下,与其他两种条件相比,SOMI 组参与者在每日戒酒承诺与饮酒量之间显示出最强的关系。讨论了对意外发现的多种可能解释。