Late adolescence (ie, 16 -20 years of age) is a period characterized by escalation of drinking and alcohol use problems for many and by the onset of an alcohol use disorder for some. This heightened period of vulnerability is a joint consequence of the continuity of risk from earlier developmental stages and the unique neurologic, cognitive, and social changes that occur in late adolescence. We review the normative neurologic, cognitive, and social changes that typically occur in late adolescence, and we discuss the evidence for the impact of these transitions on individual drinking trajectories. We also describe evidence linking alcohol abuse in late adolescence with neurologic damage and social impairments, and we discuss whether these are the bases for the association of adolescent drinking with increased risks of mental health, substance abuse, and social problems in adulthood. Finally, we discuss both the challenges and successes in the treatment and prevention of adolescent drinking problems. I N THE UNITED States, alcohol involvement sometimes starts but more often escalates between 16 and 20 years of age, when youths are also experiencing dramatic physical, emotional, and social changes. Specifically, a variety of forms of hazardous drinking emerge during middle to late adolescence and, for many youths, these problematic patterns of drinking continue to escalate through 18 to 20 years of age, the period of greatest risk for the onset of an alcohol use disorder (AUD).In seeking to understand youth development and alcohol involvement, it is important to consider all dimensions of functioning, because the interrelated cognitive, biological, social, and affective changes that occur during adolescence not only affect each another but also influence an individual's risk of problem drinking. In particular, the timing, sequence, and synchrony of developmentally specific transitions can affect how well youths master new roles, as well as continuities and discontinuities in their behavior. Therefore, developmental models representing a range of theoretical orientations, including systems theory, behavioral genetics, and developmental psychopathology, hold great promise for advancing our understanding of the processes that underlie adolescent changes, including the emergence of alcohol use and abuse.The need for developmental approaches is underscored by the existence of a consistent body of research showing that the escalation in drinking and the emergence of AUDs in middle and late adolescence have behavioral, social, and biological roots from earlier developmental stages. Moreover, it is becoming increasingly clear that alcohol involvement in adolescence has both short-and long-term effects on health and well-being at later developmental stages. Importantly, the consequences of adolescent drinking seem to differ from those associated with adult drinking, because there is increasing evidence that adolescents are especially vulnerable to the adverse effects of heavy alcohol use on both biological and socia...

Many prospective clinical studies have concluded that craving does not reliably predict relapse and that the concept is of little or no clinical utility. Contrary to earlier more simplistic clinical models of addiction, more recent models do not require that craving be present for relapse to occur. New approaches to study human craving may enhance its predictive validity and yield more knowledge of its nature, course, behavioural sequelae and regulatory function in alcohol/drug consumption. These approaches include empirical research that focuses on: (1) the elucidation of the domains of craving (i.e. subjective experience, physiological responses, behavioural sequelae and their inter‐relationships); (2) the temporal dynamics of craving (i.e. its course over minutes or days, as well as its natural history over the course of a drinking career); (3) the factors that may mediate/moderate/determine the development and resolution of craving; (4) studies of the predictive validity of craving measures; and (5) the development of valid methods of measuring the different domains of craving. The conclusions are that future craving research should: (1) incorporate more sophisticated general theories of behaviour (conditioning, cognitive social learning, neurobiological, and genetic); (2) apply more sophisticated and standardized measurement methods and experimental paradigms, including studies in which alcohol is made available to human subjects; and (3) effective development of new pharmacological and behavioural therapies for relapse prevention depend on greater understanding of the nature and measurement of craving.

Many prospective clinical studies have concluded that craving does not reliably predict relapse and that the concept is of little or no clinical utility. Contrary to earlier more simplistic clinical models of addiction, more recent models do not require that craving be present for relapse to occur. New approaches to study human craving may enhance its predictive validity and yield more knowledge of its nature, course, behavioural sequelae and regulatory function in alcohol/drug consumption. These approaches include empirical research that focuses on: (1) the elucidation of the domains of craving (i.e. subjective experience, physiological responses, behavioural sequelae and their inter-relationships); (2) the temporal dynamics of craving (i.e. its course over minutes or days, as well as its natural history over the course of a drinking career); (3) the factors that may mediate/moderate/determine the development and resolution of craving; (4) studies of the predictive validity of craving measures; and (5) the development of valid methods of measuring the different domains of craving. The conclusions are that future craving research should: (1) incorporate more sophisticated general theories of behaviour (conditioning, cognitive social learning, neurobiological, and genetic); (2) apply more sophisticated and standardized measurement methods and experimental paradigms, including studies in which alcohol is made available to human subjects; and (3) effective development of new pharmacological and behavioural therapies for relapse prevention depend on greater understanding of the nature and measurement of craving.

The Relapse Replication and Extension Project (RREP) was a multisite study to replicate and extend Marlatt's taxonomy of relapse precipitants. In addition to replicating Marlatt's original taxonomic system, three independent research teams utilized prospective designs to identify additional predictors of relapse and developed and evaluated two alternative systems for assessing high risk relapse situations. This overview describes the replication methodology, summarizes seven RREP studies completed by the three research groups, and discusses five cross-cutting conclusions emerging from the studies. These conclusions are: (1) reliability of Marlatt's taxonomic system was variable both within and across the three research sites; (2) Marlatt's taxonomic system showed little predictive validity in analyses that used pretreatment relapse data to predict post-treatment relapse, but there are important unresolved issues; (3) an alternative taxonomy provided little more predictive validity than the original taxonomy even though it measured more dimensions of relapse situations and provided greater analytic flexibility; (4) the Reasons for Drinking Questionnaire appeared to be a successful psychometric transformation of Marlatt's taxonomy, one which did demonstrate predictive validity; and (5) Marlatt's taxonomy was based on a time-intensive model of relapse prediction whereas RREP prospective analyses represented time-extensive models of relapse prediction. Coping responses are noted to be effective predictors of relapse under both models.