Center on Alcohol, Substance use, and Addictions, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
Subst Use Misuse. 2023;58(8):1062-1068. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2023.2205539. Epub 2023 May 4.
: The Transtheoretical Model supports that readiness to change should predict actual substance-related behavior change. This relationship is surprisingly modest. Across several behavioral domains, individuals tend to have unrealistic expectations regarding the amount of effort and time required to successfully change one's behaviors, dubbed the False Hope Syndrome. : Based on False Hope Syndrome, we expect the standard method of measuring self-reported readiness to change is overestimated. To test this hypothesis, we experimentally manipulated level of cognitive effort prior to completing readiness to change measures. College students from a large southwestern university who reported using substances in the past 30 days ( = 345) were recruited from a psychology department participant pool and randomized to one of three conditions: 1) standard, low effort condition, 2) medium effort condition (selected likes/dislikes of substance use and negative consequences of changing one's use), and 3) high effort condition (also provided written responses to how they would handle difficult situations related to changing their substance use). We conducted one-way ANOVAs with Tukey post-hoc comparisons to examine differences on three measures of readiness to change: the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment (URICA) scale as well as readiness and motivation rulers. : Contrary to our hypothesis, all significant statistical tests supported higher cognitive effort conditions reporting higher readiness to change. Although effect sizes were modest, higher cognitive effort appeared to increase self-reported readiness to change substance use. : Additional work is needed to test how self-reported readiness to change relates to actual behavior change when assessed under the different effort conditions.
: 跨理论模型支持,改变的准备程度应该可以预测实际的与物质相关的行为改变。这种关系令人惊讶地适中。在几个行为领域中,个体往往对成功改变行为所需的努力和时间有不切实际的期望,这被称为虚假希望综合征。: 基于虚假希望综合征,我们预计衡量自我报告改变准备程度的标准方法被高估了。为了检验这一假设,我们在完成改变准备度测量之前,实验性地操纵了认知努力的水平。从一所大型西南大学心理学系的参与者中招募了过去 30 天内使用过物质的大学生(=345 人),并将他们随机分配到三种条件之一:1)标准、低努力条件,2)中等努力条件(选择喜欢/不喜欢的物质使用和改变使用的负面后果),3)高努力条件(还提供了关于他们将如何处理与改变物质使用相关的困难情况的书面回复)。我们进行了单向方差分析,并进行了 Tukey 事后比较,以检查三种改变准备度测量的差异:罗得岛大学改变评估(URICA)量表以及准备和动机标尺。: 与我们的假设相反,所有显著的统计检验都支持更高认知努力条件报告的更高改变准备度。尽管效应大小适中,但更高的认知努力似乎增加了自我报告的改变物质使用的准备度。: 需要进一步的工作来测试在不同努力条件下评估时,自我报告的改变准备度与实际行为改变的关系。