A Social Media Personalized Normative Feedback Intervention for Heavy Drinking College Students

NCT05608109 | Completed

• 2 other identifiers: 2022/05/12R00AA025394
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 401
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 3

Brief Summary

This study seeks to evaluate the unique and synergistic efficacy of social media-specific personalized normative feedback targeting the reduction of alcohol use among heavy-drinking college students who post alcohol-related content on social media. Hypothesis: Alcohol personalized normative feedback, social media-specific personalized normative feedback, and the Alcohol personalized normative feedback+ social media-specific personalized normative feedback conditions will be more effective in reducing drinking than the attention control condition.

Conditions

Alcohol Consumption

Keywords

social media

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (6)

• Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (B-YAACQ) - change is being assessed

  The B-YAACQ is a 24 item assessment which measures consequences in 8 domains over a given time frame. Subscales include: Social/Interpersonal, Academic/Occupational, Risky Behavior, Impaired Control, Poor Self-Care, Diminished Self-Perception, Blackout Drinking, and Physiological Dependence. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 24; Higher scores indicate more alcohol-related problems.

  Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

• Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) - change is being assessed

  The AUDIT is a 10 item tool which assesses a participant's drinking habits and alcohol-related consequences. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 40; Higher scores indicate worse outcomes. A score of 15 or more indicates the likelihood of alcohol dependence.

  Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

• Rutgers Alcohol Problems Index (RAPI) -change is being assessed

  The RAPI is a 25-item questionnaire that measures problem drinking. Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from none (0) to more than five times (4). Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 100; Higher scores indicate more alcohol-related problems.

  Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

• Quantity/Frequency/Peak Index (QFI) -change is being assessed

  The QFI consists of five items which assess participants' typical alcohol consumption patterns. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 24; Higher scores indicate more alcohol use.

  Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

• Daily Drinking Questionnaire (DDQ) -change is being assessed

  The DDQ is a 9 item tool which assesses participants' drinking over the past 3 months. Participants report how much they drank on an average over the past 3 months by indicating the number of drinks they consumed on each day of the week. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 175 (windsorized to 25 drinks per day); Higher scores indicate more alcohol use.

  Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

• Drinking Norms Rating Form (DNRF) -change is being assessed

  The DNRF is a 5 item questionnaire that assesses an individual's view on the drinking habits of other individuals attending the same university. It was adapted from the Daily Drinking Questionnaire to assess perceptions of drinking norms on campus. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 175 (windsorized to 25 drinks per day); Higher scores indicate students perceive their peers to engage in more alcohol use.

  Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

Study Arms (4)

Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants will receive feedback about their consumption, what they think the average student at their university drinks, and actual drinking statistics at their university. Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.

Behavioral: Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)

Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants will receive feedback about their consumption and alcohol related consumption posts, what they think the average student at their university drinks, and actual drinking statistics at their university. Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.

Behavioral: Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)

Alcohol and social media personalized normative feedback (APNF + SMPNF)

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants will go through the alcohol personalized normative feedback process and the social media personalized normative feedback. Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.

Behavioral: Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF); Behavioral: Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)

Attention control

NO INTERVENTION

Participants will receive feedback about their consumption of desserts, what they think their peers consume, and actual dessert consumption statistics are for individuals in their age group in the United States. Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey/feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys and feedback interventions at 3-months and 6-months.

Interventions

Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF) BEHAVIORAL

Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) drinking days per week, (b) average drinks per occasion, (c) drinks per week, and (d) drinking percentile rank.

Alcohol and social media personalized normative feedback (APNF + SMPNF); Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)

Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF) BEHAVIORAL

Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's alcohol related content posts on social media and drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) alcohol related posting days per week, (b) average alcohol related posting per week, (c) posting percentile rank, (d) drinking days per week, (e) average drinks per week, and (f) drinking percentile rank.

Alcohol and social media personalized normative feedback (APNF + SMPNF); Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 26 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64)

You may qualify if:

• College students recruited across three universities: Duquesne University, Miami University, and University of Houston (DU, MU, UH)
• Undergraduate college students 18 to 26 years old
• Meet heavy drinking (4+ drinks in one sitting for individuals assigned female at birth, 5+ drinks in one sitting for individuals assigned male at birth in the past month) and ARC (alcohol-related content) posting criteria (2+ ARC posts in the last 30 days for individuals assigned female at birth, 1+ for individuals assigned male at birth, on either Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, or TikTok)

You may not qualify if:

• Pregnant or of another protected population

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Duquesne University: lead
• National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA): collaborator

Study Sites (3)

Miami University

Oxford, Ohio, 45056, United States

Location

University of Houston

Houston, Pennsylvania, 77204, United States

Location

Duquesne University

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15282, United States

Location

Related Publications (32)

• Wallace JM Jr, Bachman JG, O'Malley PM, Schulenberg JE, Cooper SM, Johnston LD. Gender and ethnic differences in smoking, drinking and illicit drug use among American 8th, 10th and 12th grade students, 1976-2000. Addiction. 2003 Feb;98(2):225-34. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00282.x.

  PMID: 12534428 BACKGROUND

• Rinker DV, Diamond PM, Walters ST, Wyatt TM, DeJong W. Distinct Classes of Negative Alcohol-Related Consequences in a National Sample of Incoming First-Year College Students: A Latent Class Analysis. Alcohol Alcohol. 2016 Sep;51(5):602-8. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agw036. Epub 2016 Jun 20.

  PMID: 27325885 BACKGROUND

• Curtis BL, Lookatch SJ, Ramo DE, McKay JR, Feinn RS, Kranzler HR. Meta-Analysis of the Association of Alcohol-Related Social Media Use with Alcohol Consumption and Alcohol-Related Problems in Adolescents and Young Adults. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2018 Jun;42(6):978-986. doi: 10.1111/acer.13642. Epub 2018 May 22.

  PMID: 29786874 BACKGROUND

• Collins RL, Parks GA, Marlatt GA. Social determinants of alcohol consumption: the effects of social interaction and model status on the self-administration of alcohol. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1985 Apr;53(2):189-200. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.53.2.189. No abstract available.

  PMID: 3998247 BACKGROUND

• Read JP, Kahler CW, Strong DR, Colder CR. Development and preliminary validation of the young adult alcohol consequences questionnaire. J Stud Alcohol. 2006 Jan;67(1):169-77. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2006.67.169.

  PMID: 16536141 BACKGROUND

• Saunders JB, Aasland OG, Babor TF, de la Fuente JR, Grant M. Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO Collaborative Project on Early Detection of Persons with Harmful Alcohol Consumption--II. Addiction. 1993 Jun;88(6):791-804. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x.

  PMID: 8329970 BACKGROUND

• Martens MP, Neighbors C, Dams-O'Connor K, Lee CM, Larimer ME. The factor structure of a dichotomously scored Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2007 Jul;68(4):597-606. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2007.68.597.

  PMID: 17568966 BACKGROUND

• Dimeff, L. A. (Ed.). (1999). Brief alcohol screening and intervention for college students (BASICS): A harm reduction approach. Guilford Press.

  BACKGROUND

• Lindgren KP, Neighbors C, Teachman BA, Baldwin SA, Norris J, Kaysen D, Gasser ML, Wiers RW. Implicit alcohol associations, especially drinking identity, predict drinking over time. Health Psychol. 2016 Aug;35(8):908-918. doi: 10.1037/hea0000396.

  PMID: 27505215 BACKGROUND

• Cooper ML. Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: development and validation of a four-factor-model. Psychological Assessment. 1994; 6(2): 117-128.

  BACKGROUND

• Przybylski, AK, Murayama, K, DeHaan, CR, Gladwell, V. Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior. 2013; 29: 1814-1848.

  BACKGROUND

• Shensa A, Sidani JE, Escobar-Viera CG, Switzer GE, Primack BA, Choukas-Bradley S. Emotional support from social media and face-to-face relationships: Associations with depression risk among young adults. J Affect Disord. 2020 Jan 1;260:38-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.08.092. Epub 2019 Aug 29.

  PMID: 31493637 BACKGROUND

• Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, Amtmann D, Bode R, Buysse D, Choi S, Cook K, Devellis R, DeWalt D, Fries JF, Gershon R, Hahn EA, Lai JS, Pilkonis P, Revicki D, Rose M, Weinfurt K, Hays R; PROMIS Cooperative Group. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Nov;63(11):1179-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.011. Epub 2010 Aug 4.

  PMID: 20685078 BACKGROUND

• Radloff, LS. The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement. 1977; 1(3): 385-401.

  BACKGROUND

• Lang FR, John D, Ludtke O, Schupp J, Wagner GG. Short assessment of the Big Five: robust across survey methods except telephone interviewing. Behav Res Methods. 2011 Jun;43(2):548-67. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0066-z.

  PMID: 21424189 BACKGROUND

• Hays RD, DiMatteo MR. A short-form measure of loneliness. J Pers Assess. 1987 Spring;51(1):69-81. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5101_6.

  PMID: 3572711 BACKGROUND

• Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092.

  PMID: 16717171 BACKGROUND

• Andreassen CS, Torsheim T, Brunborg GS, Pallesen S. Development of a Facebook Addiction Scale. Psychol Rep. 2012 Apr;110(2):501-17. doi: 10.2466/02.09.18.PR0.110.2.501-517.

  PMID: 22662404 BACKGROUND

• Baer JS, Stacy A, Larimer M. Biases in the perception of drinking norms among college students. J Stud Alcohol. 1991 Nov;52(6):580-6. doi: 10.15288/jsa.1991.52.580.

  PMID: 1758185 BACKGROUND

• Sobell LC, Sobell MB. 2012. Timeline Follow-Back. In: Litten R.Z., Allen J.P. (eds) Measuring Alcohol Consumption. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0357-5_3

  BACKGROUND

• Zimmerman GL, Olsen CG, Bosworth MF. A 'stages of change' approach to helping patients change behavior. Am Fam Physician. 2000 Mar 1;61(5):1409-16.

  PMID: 10735346 BACKGROUND

• Neighbors C, Dillard AJ, Lewis MA, Bergstrom RL, Neil TA. Normative misperceptions and temporal precedence of perceived norms and drinking. J Stud Alcohol. 2006 Mar;67(2):290-9. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2006.67.290.

  PMID: 16562412 BACKGROUND

• Kahler CW, Hustad J, Barnett NP, Strong DR, Borsari B. Validation of the 30-day version of the Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire for use in longitudinal studies. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2008 Jul;69(4):611-5. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2008.69.611.

  PMID: 18612578 BACKGROUND

• Moussas G, Dadouti G, Douzenis A, Poulis E, Tzelembis A, Bratis D, Christodoulou C, Lykouras L. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): reliability and validity of the Greek version. Ann Gen Psychiatry. 2009 May 14;8:11. doi: 10.1186/1744-859X-8-11.

  PMID: 19442281 BACKGROUND

• Earleywine M, LaBrie JW, Pedersen ER. A brief Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index with less potential for bias. Addict Behav. 2008 Sep;33(9):1249-53. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.05.006. Epub 2008 May 13.

  PMID: 18547738 BACKGROUND

• Webb GR, Redman S, Gibberd RW, Sanson-Fisher RW. The reliability and stability of a quantity-frequency method and a diary method of measuring alcohol consumption. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1991 May;27(3):223-31. doi: 10.1016/0376-8716(91)90005-j.

  PMID: 1884665 BACKGROUND

• Mange J, Mauduy M, Senemeaud C, Bagneux V, Cabe N, Jacquet D, Leconte P, Margas N, Mauny N, Ritz L, Gierski F, Beaunieux H. What really matters in binge drinking: A dominance analysis of binge drinking psychological determinants among University students. Addict Behav Rep. 2021 Apr 8;13:100346. doi: 10.1016/j.abrep.2021.100346. eCollection 2021 Jun.

  PMID: 33997251 BACKGROUND

• Arterberry BJ, Martens MP, Cadigan JM, Smith AE. Assessing the Dependability of Drinking Motives via Generalizability Theory. Addict Res Theory. 2012 Oct 1;45(4):292-302. doi: 10.1177/0748175612449744.

  PMID: 24696672 BACKGROUND

• Osberg TM, Atkins L, Buchholz L, Shirshova V, Swiantek A, Whitley J, Hartman S, Oquendo N. Development and validation of the College Life Alcohol Salience Scale: a measure of beliefs about the role of alcohol in college life. Psychol Addict Behav. 2010 Mar;24(1):1-12. doi: 10.1037/a0018197.

  PMID: 20307107 BACKGROUND

• Xu S, Qiu D, Hahne J, Zhao M, Hu M. Psychometric properties of the short-form UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) among Chinese adolescents. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Sep;97(38):e12373. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012373.

  PMID: 30235699 BACKGROUND

• Zhong QY, Gelaye B, Zaslavsky AM, Fann JR, Rondon MB, Sanchez SE, Williams MA. Diagnostic Validity of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder - 7 (GAD-7) among Pregnant Women. PLoS One. 2015 Apr 27;10(4):e0125096. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125096. eCollection 2015.

  PMID: 25915929 BACKGROUND

• Carey KB, Carey MP, Maisto SA, Henson JM. Temporal stability of the timeline followback interview for alcohol and drug use with psychiatric outpatients. J Stud Alcohol. 2004 Nov;65(6):774-81. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2004.65.774.

  PMID: 15700516 BACKGROUND

Related Links

• National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Questionnaire

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Alcohol Drinking

Interventions

Ethanol

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Drinking Behavior; Behavior

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Alcohols; Organic Chemicals

Study Officials

• Mai-Ly N Steers, PhD

  Duquesne University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: October 24, 2022
• First Posted: November 8, 2022
• Study Start: January 9, 2022
• Primary Completion: July 30, 2024
• Study Completion: December 28, 2024
• Last Updated: February 3, 2025

Record last verified: 2024-11

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

US (3)