A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
Content available from Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Profiles of Transdermal Alcohol Concentration and Their Prediction of
Negative and Positive Alcohol-Related Consequences in Young Adults’
Natural Settings
Veronica L. Richards
1, 2
, Kimberly A. Mallett
3
, Robert J. Turrisi
3, 4
,
Shannon D. Glenn
3, 4
, and Michael A. Russell
3, 4
1
TSET Health Promotion Research Center, Stephenson Cancer Center, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences
2
Department of Health Promotion Sciences, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences
3
Edna Bennett Pierce Prevention Research Center, College of Health and Human Development, The Pennsylvania State University
4
Department of Biobehavioral Health, The Pennsylvania State University
Objective: Transdermal alcohol concentration (TAC) sensors provide a multidimensional characterization
of drinking events that self-reports cannot. These profiles may differ in their associated day-level alcohol-
related consequences, but no research has tested this. We address this using multilevel latent profile analysis.
Method: Two hundred twenty-two young adults who regularly engage in heavy drinking (M
age
=22.3, 64%
female, 79% non-Hispanic White) responded to surveys and wore TAC sensors for 6 consecutive days.
We tested whether four previously identified TAC profiles: (1) high-fast (8.5% of days), (2) moderate-
fast (12.8%), (3) low-slow (20.4%), and (4) little-to-no-drinking days (58.2%) differed in numbers
of negative and positive consequences and in the odds that both consequence types occurred on the
same day. Results: High-fast (incident rate ratio [IRR
low-slow
]=6.18; IRR
little-to-no-drinking
=9.47) and
moderate-fast (IRR
low-slow
=3.71; IRR
little-to-no-drinking
=5.68) days contained more negative consequences
compared to low-slow and little-to-no-drinking days. High-fast (IRR =2.05), moderate-fast (IRR =1.88),
and low-slow (IRR =1.43) days contained more positive consequences than little-to-no-drinking days. The
odds of having only positive consequences were highest on low-slow, χ
2
(3) =9.10, p<.05, days but the
odds of experiencing both consequence types increased on moderate-fast and high-fast days, χ
2
(3) =39.63,
p<.001. Conclusions: Compared to little-to-no-drinking days, TAC profiles indicative of drinking (high-
fast, moderate-fast, and low-slow) contained more negative and positive consequences. However, the odds
of experiencing only positive consequences were highest among low-slow days and decreased on moderate-
fast and high-fast days as the odds of negative consequences rose. These findings provide novel evidence
reinforcing harm reduction approaches that seek to maximize positives and minimize negatives of alcohol
consumption through emphasis on slow-paced, low-volume drinking.
Public Health Significance Statement
We used profiles of objective intoxication (transdermal alcohol concentration; TAC) from a wearable
sensor to predict alcohol-related consequences among 222 regularly heavy drinking young adults
(average age =22.3). Our results showed that high-speed, high-peak TAC days and high-speed,
moderate-peak TAC days were associated with the most risk (e.g., more days with negative
consequences and fewer days with only positive consequences). These findings suggest that these
days are clear targets for harm reduction interventions.
Keywords: young adult drinking, alcohol-related consequences, transdermal alcohol concentration,
multilevel latent profile analysis
Supplemental materials: https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0001054.supp
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This article was published Online First January 13, 2025.
Christian Hendershot served as action editor.
Veronica L. Richards https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1391-0607
This research was funded in part by pilot mentoring and professional
development awards through P50DA039838 awarded to Michael A. Russell
(National Institute on Drug Abuse, Principal Investigator: Collins) and the
Social Science Research Institute at Penn State, in addition to departmental
funds awarded to Michael A. Russell. Veronica L. Richards and Shannon D.
Glenn were supported by the National Institutes of Health (T32 DA017629;
multiple principal investigators: J. Maggs and S. Lanza). The content is
solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the
official views of the National Institutes of Health.
Veronica L. Richards played a lead role in conceptualization, formal
analysis, writing–original draft, and writing–review and editing and an
equal role in methodology. Kimberly A. Mallett played a supporting role
in writing–original draft and writing–review and editing. Robert J. Turrisi
played a supporting role in conceptualization and writing–review and
editing. Shannon D. Glenn played a supporting role in writing–review and
continued
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors
© 2025 American Psychological Association 2025, Vol. 39, No. 2, 163–172
ISSN: 0893-164X https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0001054
163