How does the Brief CEOA match with self-generated expectancies in mandated students?
Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University, Box G-S121-5, Providence, RI 02912, United States. Electronic address: .Addictive behaviors (Impact Factor: 2.76). 01/2013; 38(1):1414–1417. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.07.009
Alcohol expectancies, defined as a person's beliefs about the effects of drinking, can influence alcohol consumption and help predict problem drinking in college students. However, there are concerns that current expectancy measures do not adequately capture mandated student expectations about alcohol use. This study examined the correspondence of 412 self-generated expectancies from mandated students (n = 64) to items on the Brief Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol (B-CEOA; Ham, Stewart, Norton, & Hope, 2005). Self-generated expectancies were reviewed by raters who attempted to match each expectancy with a single B-CEOA item based on the qualitative essence of each statement. Most mandated student expectancies were not represented by the B-CEOA. All expectancies were then classified into 6 categories based on themes and categories from the alcohol expectancy literature. Mandated student expectancies emphasized the physiological aspects of drinking, whereas the B-CEOA assesses expectancies about intrapersonal factors. The findings suggest the B-CEOA may exclude alcohol expectancies that are important and relevant to this population. Self-generated alcohol expectancies from the target population should be considered when developing or administering expectancy questionnaires.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "This cumulative, quantitative value may be an ideal predictor of behaviour change in future studies. Similarly, it may be useful to incorporate self-generated expectancies into assessments and feedback, as students may expect negative consequences that are not captured in current assessments (Peterson, Borsari, Mastroleo, Read, & Carey, 2013 "
ABSTRACT: Although personalised feedback interventions (PFIs) for alcohol misuse among college students have demonstrated reliable efficacy, effect sizes are modest and little improvement in efficacy has been observed in the last 15 years. More systematic and explicit application of theory may enhance our understanding of PFI mechanisms and lead to incremental improvements in efficacy. The current review identified intervention trials of PFIs (N = 93), the theoretical frameworks (N = 20) on which they were based, the extent to which theory was utilised in development and evaluation of the intervention, and the principles of behaviour change implicated in each of those theories. Though the majority of studies identified a theoretical framework for interventions, theory is not being tested uniformly across current studies of PFIs. A review of the most commonly cited theories resulted in identification of 11 theoretical principles of behaviour change: alternatives to behaviour, autonomy, commitment, expectancies, goals/change plan, interpersonal discrepancy, intrapersonal discrepancy, awareness of contingent outcomes, self-efficacy, skills necessary to overcome barriers and therapeutic relationship. Potential applications of these theoretical principles in PFI development and testing are discussed.Addiction Research and Theory 01/2015; 23(4). DOI:10.3109/16066359.2014.1001840 · 1.03 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.