• Tim Bogg, Michelle R Marshbanks, Heather K Doherty, and Phuong T Vo.
• Wayne State University, Department of Psychology, United States. Electronic address: tdbogg@gmail.com.
• Addict Behav. 2019 Mar 1; 90: 151-157.

BackgroundThe goal of the present study was to test the drink and harm reduction effects of a novel educational commitment (EC) module as a complement to a standard brief MI protocol (i.e., the Brief Alcohol Screening and Intervention for College Students; BASICS, Dimeff, Baer, Kivlahan, & Marlatt, 1999).MethodsUsing a randomized trial design, 180 university students were assigned to one of three conditions: Information, BASICS, or BASICS+EC. Participants completed an alcohol consumption interview and measures of alcohol-related problems, partying decision-making, subjective student role investment, and self-control-related traits at baseline and at two- and nine-month follow-ups.ResultsLinear models showed significant condition effects for two-month and nine-month drink quantity, but not for alcohol problems/consequences. Secondary outcome analyses showed significant condition effects for two-month high-risk high-reward partying decision-making and nine-month conscientiousness. Somewhat larger-sized decreases in consumption were observed at two months for the BASICS+EC condition compared to the BASICS condition, although these differences were not present at nine months.ConclusionsThe differential efficacy between the BASICS and BASICS+EC conditions compared to the Information condition reinforces the utility of in-person feedback modalities as more intensive indicated prevention strategies for at-risk college drinkers. The limited differential efficacy for BASICS+EC compared to BASICS suggests a brief MI module for the academic/vocational aspects of the student role is not associated with greater long-term drink and harm reduction. Future research should examine more intensive educational commitment modalities, the utility of on-going academic goal and action feedback, and mechanisms of differential efficacy across intervention groups.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

24 keywords...

hide…