Courtney J B, Russell M A, Conroy D E
Department of Exercise and Sport Science, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Edna Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.
Subst Use Misuse. 2025;60(6):787-797. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2024.2434684. Epub 2024 Dec 9.
Drinking motives predict drinking behaviors and outcomes among adults. Drinking motives are rarely studied using self-determination theory (SDT), which aligns with harm-reduction approaches to alcohol use, but SDT can offer a complementary theoretical framework to existing drinking motives frameworks that may help explain the observed heterogeneity in drinking motives and account for more variance in drinking outcomes. This study examined the associations between five SDT-based drinking motives with drinking frequency, intensity, and consequences. A total number of 630 adults ( = 21.5, 55% female, 88% undergraduates) rated drinking motives using the Comprehensive Relative Autonomy Index for Drinking (CRAI-Drinking) and the Drinking Motives Questionnaire (DMQ), typical alcohol consumption, and negative and positive drinking consequences. Poisson regressions indicated that intrinsic (IRR = 1.13) and identified (IRR = 1.11) regulations were significantly associated with drinking frequency, identified (IRR = 0.94) and positive introjected (IRR = 1.07) regulations were significantly associated with drinking intensity, and amotivation (IRR = 1.16) and intrinsic regulation (IRR = 1.09) were associated with negative and positive consequences, respectively, after controlling for other CRAI-Drinking and DMQ scores, sex, and drinking intensity. After accounting for DMQ scores and sex, CRAI-Drinking scores accounted for 1.7%-9.9% additional deviance in drinking behaviors and consequences. Adults high in autonomous reasons for drinking reported low-risk, high-enjoyment drinking experiences. In contrast, adults with higher scores for amotivation for drinking reported more negative consequences, even after accounting for drinking intensity, suggesting that high amotivation for drinking may be a novel signal for future alcohol-related risks. These findings support the idea that SDT provides a useful framework for understanding drinking motives, behaviors, and consequences.
饮酒动机可预测成年人的饮酒行为及结果。目前很少使用自我决定理论(SDT)来研究饮酒动机,该理论与减少酒精危害的方法相一致,但自我决定理论可为现有的饮酒动机框架提供一个补充性的理论框架,这可能有助于解释观察到的饮酒动机异质性,并解释饮酒结果中更多的方差。本研究考察了基于自我决定理论的五种饮酒动机与饮酒频率、饮酒强度和饮酒后果之间的关联。共有630名成年人(平均年龄=21.5岁,55%为女性,88%为本科生)使用饮酒综合相对自主指数(CRAI-Drinking)、饮酒动机问卷(DMQ)、典型酒精消费量以及负面和正面饮酒后果对饮酒动机进行评分。泊松回归表明,内在调节(IRR = 1.13)和认同调节(IRR = 1.11)与饮酒频率显著相关,认同调节(IRR = 0.94)和积极内摄调节(IRR = 1.07)与饮酒强度显著相关,在控制了其他CRAI-Drinking和DMQ得分、性别和饮酒强度后,无动机(IRR = 1.16)和内在调节(IRR = 1.09)分别与负面和正面后果相关。在考虑了DMQ得分和性别后,CRAI-Drinking得分在饮酒行为和后果中额外解释了1.7%-9.9%的偏差。因自主原因饮酒程度高的成年人报告了低风险、高享受的饮酒经历。相比之下,饮酒无动机得分较高的成年人即使在考虑了饮酒强度后也报告了更多负面后果,这表明饮酒的高无动机可能是未来与酒精相关风险的一个新信号。这些发现支持了自我决定理论为理解饮酒动机、行为和后果提供了一个有用框架的观点。