Department of Psychology, Niagara University, Niagara, New York, USA.
University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Subst Use Misuse. 2021;56(14):2242-2251. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2021.1981392. Epub 2021 Sep 27.
College alcohol beliefs (e.g. "College is a time for experimentation with alcohol") are highly predictive of heavy drinking and its consequences. Yet, current college alcohol interventions do not address this belief system even though researchers have recommended that these beliefs be targeted. Using a mixed methods approach, we conducted two studies to generate arguments against the college drinking culture and to evaluate the effectiveness of such arguments. In Study 1, freshman students ( = 104, 65% women) wrote an essay to a fictitious roommate presenting arguments against the college drinking culture. Responses were reliably coded into a 19-category scheme. The most common arguments included that (1) one's focus should be on academics, (2) drinking will lead to academic consequences, and (3) drinking is not a rite of passage in college. In Study 2, college students ( = 488) rated the effectiveness of prototype arguments drawn from each Study 1 category. According to their ratings, the most effective arguments were that (1) one's focus should be on academics, (2) drinking could have a negative impact on one's career, and (3) one could do potential harm to others. The student-generated arguments against the college drinking culture identified in his research have inherent ecological validity and will help inform the development of new interventions to counter such beliefs. We offer suggestions for translating our findings into clinical interventions.The problem of college student drinking has been long-standing (Kilmer et al., 2014) and remains a significant public health issue today (Hingson et al., 2017). Decades of research on college student drinking and its consequences have identified key cognitive factors that underlie drinking and its consequences, such as the misperception of norms for drinking (Borsari & Carey, 2003) and the positive expectancies students hold about the effects of drinking (Jones et al., 2001; Monk & Heim, 2013). The robust relationships between these cognitive variables and alcohol consumption among college students have led to the development of interventions that target these variables. Social norms marketing campaigns (DeJong et al., 2006), personalized normative feedback (Lewis & Neighbors, 2006), and expectancy challenge techniques (Scott-Sheldon et al., 2012) have been a part of interventions designed to correct students' misperceptions about the percentage of and amount students drink and the effects that alcohol has on their functioning in social situations. Reviews of the literature have demonstrated that interventions containing these components are effective for first year students (Scott-Sheldon et al., 2014) and mandated students (Carey et al., 2016), except for interventions targeting student members of Greek letter organizations (Scott-Sheldon et al., 2016). Effect sizes in most interventions across freshman and mandated students tend to be modest and not very durable in the long-term (Carey et al., 2016; Scott-Sheldon et al., 2014). However, recent research reveals that a variety of new intervention strategies may be useful in addressing the problem of college student drinking (Dunn et al., 2020; Kazemi et al., 2020; King et al., 2020; Magill et al., 2017; Pedrelli et al., 2020; Young & Neighbors, 2019). Aside from social norms and positive alcohol expectancies, another cognitive variable has been found to be a very robust predictor, mediator, and moderator of college student drinking and its consequences - (Crawford & Novak, 2006; Osberg et al., 2010).
高校酒精信念(例如,“高校是尝试饮酒的时期”)是大量饮酒及其后果的高度预测因素。然而,目前的高校酒精干预措施并没有针对这一信念体系,尽管研究人员已经建议针对这些信念进行干预。本研究采用混合方法,进行了两项研究来生成反对高校饮酒文化的论据,并评估这些论据的有效性。在研究 1 中,一年级学生(n=104,65%为女性)给虚构室友写了一篇关于反对高校饮酒文化的文章。回应被可靠地编码到 19 个类别中。最常见的论点包括:(1)人的注意力应该集中在学业上,(2)饮酒会导致学业后果,以及(3)饮酒不是高校的成人礼。在研究 2 中,大学生(n=488)对从每个研究 1 类别中提取的原型论据的有效性进行了评估。根据他们的评分,最有效的论点是:(1)人的注意力应该集中在学业上,(2)饮酒可能会对一个人的职业产生负面影响,以及(3)一个人可能会对他人造成潜在的伤害。研究中识别出的反对高校饮酒文化的学生生成论据具有内在的生态有效性,并将有助于为新的干预措施提供信息,以对抗这些信念。我们提供了将我们的发现转化为临床干预措施的建议。高校学生饮酒问题由来已久(Kilmer 等人,2014),至今仍是一个重大的公共卫生问题(Hingson 等人,2017)。几十年来对高校学生饮酒及其后果的研究已经确定了一些关键的认知因素,这些因素是饮酒及其后果的基础,例如对饮酒规范的误解(Borsari 和 Carey,2003)以及学生对饮酒影响的积极期望(Jones 等人,2001;Monk 和 Heim,2013)。这些认知变量与高校学生饮酒之间的强有力关系,导致了针对这些变量的干预措施的发展。社会规范营销活动(DeJong 等人,2006)、个性化规范反馈(Lewis 和 Neighbors,2006)和期望挑战技术(Scott-Sheldon 等人,2012)一直是旨在纠正学生对他们饮酒的百分比和数量以及酒精对他们在社交场合中的功能的影响的误解的干预措施的一部分。文献综述表明,含有这些成分的干预措施对一年级学生(Scott-Sheldon 等人,2014)和被强制要求的学生(Carey 等人,2016)是有效的,除了针对希腊字母组织学生成员的干预措施(Scott-Sheldon 等人,2016)。大多数针对一年级和被强制要求的学生的干预措施的效果大小往往是适度的,在长期内并不持久(Carey 等人,2016;Scott-Sheldon 等人,2014)。然而,最近的研究表明,各种新的干预策略可能有助于解决高校学生饮酒问题(Dunn 等人,2020;Kazemi 等人,2020;King 等人,2020;Magill 等人,2017;Pedrelli 等人,2020;Young 和 Neighbors,2019)。除了社会规范和积极的酒精期望之外,另一个认知变量已被发现是高校学生饮酒及其后果的一个非常强大的预测因素、中介因素和调节因素-(Crawford 和 Novak,2006;Osberg 等人,2010)。