Michael B. Madson

This study psychometrically evaluated the Protective Behavioral Strategies Scale-20 (PBSS-20) in a nationally recruited sample of sexual and non-sexual minority students. Participants included 1,730 college students ( M _age = 19.41) from 12 universities, who were predominantly White non-Hispanic (63.6%), female (70%), and heterosexual (67.6%). Participants reported demographics and completed measures of hazardous alcohol use, alcohol-related negative consequences, and alcohol protective behavioral strategy use. Exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) and bifactor ESEM revealed an adequate model fit of the PBSS-20, supporting the hypothesized factor structure. Invariance testing revealed a similar factor structure for both sexual and non-sexual minority students. The PBSS-20 total and subscale scores were negatively associated with all alcohol outcome measures for all groups. This study provides additional support for the generalizability and utility of the PBSS-20, with suggestions for further refinement of the measure. This study has implications for measuring safe drinking behaviors among sexual and non-sexual minority college students.

Pregaming places college students at a higher risk for experiencing alcohol related negative consequences likely through less use of alcohol protective behavioral strategies. This study compared college students who did and did not endorse pregaming behaviors on their use of specific alcohol protective behavioral strategies. Participants were 331 traditional-age college students (Mage = 19.86, 64.8% White, 85.2% Female, 76.1% pregamed in past year) who completed measures assessing alcohol use, alcohol related negative consequences, pregaming, and alcohol protective behavioral strategies. Analysis of variance results showed college students who pregamed used fewer strategies aimed at modifying how one drinks, perhaps due to their potential for limiting pregaming behaviors (i.e., drinking heavily and quickly). Future research and clinical implications are discussed.

This study investigated differences in alcohol protective behavioral strategy (PBSA) use and negative consequences (ARNC) experienced among heavy alcohol users and non-heavy alcohol users, and risky and non-risky drinkers. Participants were from 12 universities in the United States ( n = 2,163 college students, M_age= 19.47), predominantly identified as White (74%), and female (68.7%), who completed measures of typical weekly drinking, risky drinking, ARNC, and PBSA use. ANOVAs revealed that the heavy alcohol users and risky drinkers reported significantly fewer total PBSA, subtype strategy use, and greater negative consequences than their counterparts. Harm reduction interventions may benefit from identifying and targeting college students who are engaging in heavy alcohol use and risky drinking regardless of sex.

Underage drinking disengagement (UDD; cognitive restructuring/minimizing agency) measures attitudes about the acceptability and responsibility of drinking. We examined demographic correlates of UDD, as well as the moderating effects of legal drinking status on the association between UDD and drinking. College student drinkers (n = 893; Mage = 19.48, range = 18-25; White = 74.1%; female = 68.1%) from a multi-site study. An online confidential survey included the UDD Scale for College Students and the AUDIT-C. White and multiracial, underage students, or those living with others endorsed greater cognitive restructuring disengagement than Hispanic students, legal-age students, or those living alone or with parents, respectively. Greek membership and greater "party school" perceptions were related to more cognitive restructuring and minimizing agency. The associations between UDD and alcohol use were not moderated by legal drinking age status. Identifying and educating students at risk for UDD on the ramifications associated with underage drinking could combat drinking.

To adapt an existing measure of underage drinking disengagement among adolescents for use with university students and establish convergent validity.University students who drank or used a substanc...

Existing measures of reasons for limiting alcohol use are over 30 years old or don’t distinguish between limiting drinking/abstinence and limiting heavy drinking. The present study describes the de...

Introduction: College students—including those of Hispanic backgrounds—are at risk for hazardous drinking. Research has shown robust group differences between Hispanic and White individuals in alcohol use outcomes. The ability to resist alcohol consumption can be leveraged to reduce hazardous drinking; however, little research has examined Hispanic-White differences and whether drinking refusal self-efficacy accounts for group differences in hazardous drinking. Considering Hispanic individuals make up the largest ethnic/racial minority group in the United States, it is important to identify malleable psychological factors that prevent and reduce drinking problems. Method: Hispanic and White college students at two predominantly White institutions (N = 389; 58.6% women, M_age= 20.22) completed measures assessing drinking refusal self-efficacy, hazardous drinking, and negative drinking consequences. Results: Hispanic students reported lower levels of hazardous drinking, alcohol-related problems, and drinking refusal self-efficacy than White students. Drinking refusal self-efficacy was found to partially explain Hispanic-White differences in the levels of hazardous drinking and drinking-related problems. Specifically, drinking refusal self-efficacy was associated with alcohol use outcomes only among White students and not Hispanic students. Conclusion: The correspondence between drinking refusal self-efficacy and actual behaviors to turn down drinks, ethnic/racial distinctiveness in ratings of self-efficacy and cultural orientations, and situational contexts that surround drinking should be examined in future research.

College students—including those of Hispanic backgrounds—are at risk for hazardous drinking. Research has shown robust group differences between Hispanic and White individuals in alcohol use outcomes. The ability to resist alcohol consumption can be leveraged to reduce hazardous drinking; however, little research has examined Hispanic-White differences and whether drinking refusal self-efficacy accounts for group differences in hazardous drinking. Considering Hispanic individuals make up the largest ethnic/racial minority group in the United States, it is important to identify malleable psychological factors that prevent and reduce drinking problems. Hispanic and White college students at two predominantly White institutions (N = 389; 58.6% women, Mage = 20.22) completed measures assessing drinking refusal self-efficacy, hazardous drinking, and negative drinking consequences. Hispanic students reported lower levels of hazardous drinking, alcohol-related problems, and drinking refusal self-efficacy than White students. Drinking refusal self-efficacy was found to partially explain Hispanic-White differences in the levels of hazardous drinking and drinking-related problems. Specifically, drinking refusal self-efficacy was associated with alcohol use outcomes only among White and not Hispanic college students. The correspondence between drinking refusal self-efficacy and actual behaviors to turn down drinks, ethnic/racial distinctiveness in ratings of self-efficacy and cultural orientations, and situational contexts that surround drinking should be examined in future research.

Purpose To assess the quality of curricular research on the Screening Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) approach and determine the presence of useful training modalities, particularly motivational interviewing (MI) training, across health care training curricula. Method The authors conducted a systematic review of published, peer-reviewed studies in PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL, Ovid HealthSTAR, and PsycINFO databases through March 2021 for English-language studies describing SBIRT, a curriculum for health care trainees, and curricular intervention outcomes. After the records were independently assessed, data were extracted and 20% of the studies were double-coded for interrater reliability. Results Of 1,856 studies, 95 were included in the review; 22 had overlapping samples and were consolidated into 10 nested studies, leaving 83 total. Interrater reliability ranged from moderate (κ = .74, P < .001) to strong (κ = .91, P < .001) agreement. SBIRT training was delivered to trainees across many professions, including nursing (n = 34, 41%), medical residency (n = 28, 34%), and social work (n = 24, 29%). Nearly every study described SBIRT training methods (n = 80, 96%), and most reported training in MI (n = 54, 65%). On average, studies reported 4.06 (SD = 1.64) different SBIRT training methods and 3.31 (SD = 1.59) MI training methods. Their mean design score was 1.92 (SD = 0.84) and mean measurement score was 1.89 (SD = 1.05). A minority of studies measured SBIRT/MI skill (n = 23, 28%), and 4 studies (5%) set a priori benchmarks for their curricula. Conclusions SBIRT training has been delivered to a wide range of health care trainees and often includes MI. Rigor scores for the studies were generally low due to limited research designs and infrequent use of objective skill measurement. Future work should include predefined training benchmarks and validated skills measurement.