The recent growth in diary and experience sampling research has increased research attention on how people change over time in natural settings. Often however, the measures in these studies were originally developed for studying between-person differences, and their sensitivity to withinperson changes is usually unknown. Using a Generalizability Theory framework, the authors illustrate a procedure for developing reliable measures of change using a version of the Profile of Mood States (POMS; McNair, Lorr, & Droppleman, 1992) shortened for diary studies. Analyzing two data sets, one composed of 35 daily reports from 68 persons experiencing a stressful examination and another composed of daily reports from 164 persons over a typical 28-day period, we demonstrate that three-item measures of anxious mood, depressed mood, anger, fatigue, and vigor have appropriate reliability to detect within-person change processes.Keywords diary studies; daily mood; within; person change; reliability; Generalizability Theory Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to James A. Cranford, Addiction Research Center and Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, 2025 Traverwood Drive, Suite A, Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2194; e-mail: jcranfor@med.umich.edu; Patrick E. Shrout, 6 Washington Place, Mail Room 416b, Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY, 10003; e-mail: pat.shrout@nyu.edu; or Niall Bolger, 406 Schermerhorn Hall, 1190 Amsterdam Avenue, Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, 10027; e-mail: nb2229@columbia.edu. James A. Cranford, Addiction Research Center, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan; Patrick E. Shrout and Masumi Iida, Department of Psychology, New York University; Eshkol Rafaeli, Psychology Department, Barnard College, Columbia University; Tiffany Yip, Department of Psychology, Fordham University; Niall Bolger, Department of Psychology, Columbia University. 2 In principle, it is possible to estimate the between-person reliability coefficient for mood by averaging a randomly selected set of days (R KR ). Because this is not a design that has obvious advantages, the generalizability coefficient is not presented here, but it is R KR available from the authors on request. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptPers Soc Psychol Bull. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2008 June 6. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptDaily diary designs are increasingly recommended for studying dynamic psychological processes such as emotional states, self-regulation, and appraisals of social situations (Bolger, Davis, & Rafaeli, 2003;. They have the potential to provide high-resolution information about evolving psychological processes, and they minimize retrospection artifacts and biases. Yet, they are not without their own methodological difficulties . Diary studies impose substantial demands on participants, and the burden imposed by protocols that require frequent self-reports may lead to biases in samples of participa...

Objectives-To explore the illicit use of specific prescription stimulants among college students and add to our understanding of reasons (motives) and routes of administration associated with illicit use of these drugs.Methods-A random sample of 4580 college students self-administered a Web-based survey. The survey contained a variety of items pertaining to the illicit use of prescription stimulants. An extensive list of prescription stimulants was provided, and students were asked to select all the specific prescription stimulants that they had used illicitly. Items were also included to assess the motives and routes of administration associated with illicit use of prescription stimulants.Results-Lifetime and past-year prevalence rates for illicit use of prescription stimulants were 8.3% (382 students) and 5.9% (269 students), respectively. Approximately three fourths (75.8%) of the 269 past-year illicit users of prescription stimulants reported using an amphetaminedextroamphetamine combination agent (e.g., Adderall) in the past year, and approximately one fourth (24.5%) reported using methylphenidate (e.g., Ritalin, Concerta, Metadate, Methylin). Past-year illicit use of prescription stimulants was more than 3 times more likely among Caucasians (odds ratio [OR] 3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5-6.6) and Hispanics (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.6-9.3) compared with African-Americans, and more than twice as likely among Caucasians (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3-3.4) and Hispanics (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.4-5.1) compared with Asians. The most commonly reported motives for illicit use were to help with concentration (65.2%), help study (59.8%), and increase alertness (47.5%). Other motives included getting high (31.0%) and experimentation (29.9%). Nearly every illicit user (95.3%) reported oral administration, and 38.1% reported snorting prescription stimulants.Conclusion-Illicit use of amphetamine-dextroamphetamine is more prevalent than illicit use of methylphenidate formulations among college students.

To assess the prevalence and motives for illicit use of prescription stimulants and alcohol and other drugs (AODs), associated with these motives, the authors distributed a self-administered Web survey TO a random sample of 9,161 undergraduate college students. Of the study participants, 8.1% reported lifetime and 5.4% reported past-year illicit use of prescription stimulants. The most prevalent motives given for illicit use of prescription stimulants were to (1) help with concentration, (2) increase alertness, and (3) provide a high. Although men were more likely than women were to report illicit use of prescription stimulants, the authors found no gender differences in motives. Regardless of motive, illicit use of prescription stimulants was associated with elevated rates of AOD use, and number of motives endorsed and AOD use were positively related. Students appear to be using these prescription drugs non-medically, mainly to enhance performance or get high.

These results indicate that nonmedical use of prescription opioids represents a considerable problem for particular subgroups of college students. While additional research is needed, the present study offers important new directions for policy and research regarding prescription opioid misuse.

No abstract

ABSTRACT. Objective:In this study, we sought to examine the prevalence, correlates, and consequences associated with simultaneous polydrug use and concurrent polydrug use of alcohol and prescription drugs. For purposes of this investigation, simultaneous polydrug use referred to the co-ingestion of different drugs at the same time, and concurrent polydrug use referred to the use of different drugs on separate occasions within the past 12 months. Method: Undergraduate students attending a large public midwestern university in the United States were randomly selected to self-administer a Web survey. The sample consisted of 4,580 undergraduate students, with a mean (SD) age of 19.9 (2.0) years; the sample consisted of 50% women, and the racial breakdown was 65% white, 13% Asian, 7% black, 5% Hispanic, and 10% other race/ ethnicity. The survey assessed simultaneous polydrug use and concurrent polydrug use of alcohol and four classes of prescription drugs: (1) pain medication, (2) stimulant medication, (3) sedative medication, and (4) sleeping medication. Results: The 12-month prevalence for polydrug use involving alcohol and abusable prescription drugs was 12.1% (including 6.9% simultaneous polydrug use). The majority of polydrug use involving alcohol and each class of prescription drugs was simultaneous polydrug use, with the exception of sleeping medication. Simultaneous polydrug use was more prevalent among undergraduate students who were male, were white, and reported early initiation of alcohol use. Simultaneous polydrug use was associated with more alcohol-related and other drug use-related problems than concurrent polydrug use. Conclusions: Based on the high prevalence and increased risk for consequences associated with simultaneous polydrug use of alcohol and prescription drugs, collegiate prevention efforts aimed at reducing substance abuse should clearly focus on co-ingestion of alcohol and prescription drugs. (J. Stud. Alcohol 67: [529][530][531][532][533][534][535][536][537] 2006)

OBJECTIVES-Our goals were to (1) determine adolescents' motivations (reasons) for engaging in the nonmedical (illicit) use of 4 classes of prescription medications and (2) examine whether motivations were associated with a higher risk for substance abuse problems. RESPONDENTS-The2005 sample (N = 1086) was derived from one ethnically diverse school district in southeastern Michigan and included 7th-through 12th-grade students.METHODS-Data were collected by using a self-administered, Web-based survey that included questions about drug use and the motivations to engage in nonmedical use of prescription medication.RESULTS-Twelve percent of the respondents had engaged in nonmedical use of opioid pain medications in the past year: 3% for sleeping, 2% as a sedative and/or for anxiety, and 2% as stimulants. The reasons for engaging in the nonmedical use of prescription medications varied by drug classification. For opioid analgesics, when the number of motives increased, so too did the likelihood of a positive Drug Abuse Screening Test score. For every additional motive endorsed, the Drug Abuse Screening Test increased by a factor of 1.8. Two groups of students were compared (atrisk versus self-treatment); those who endorsed multiple motivations for nonmedical use of opioids (at-risk group) were significantly more likely to have elevated Drug Abuse Screening Test scores when compared with those who were in the self-treatment group. Those in the at-risk group also were significantly more likely to engage in marijuana and alcohol use. CONCLUSION-The findings from this exploratory study warrant additional research because several motivations for the nonmedical use of prescription medications seem associated with a greater likelihood of substance abuse problems. Keywordsnonmedical prescription drug use; adolescents' prescription medication abuse According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2004 data, 1 ∼9% of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years used prescription drugs for nonmedical purposes in the past year, including 7% who used pain medication, 2% stimulant medication, 2% tranquilizers, and 0.5% sedatives; however, the motivations to abuse these prescription drugs were not assessed. In fact, despite

Aims-The present study examined the associations between early onset of non-medical use of prescription drugs (NMUPD) (i.e. sedatives, tranquilizers, opioids, stimulants) and the development of prescription drug abuse and dependence in the United States. Participants-A nationally representative cross-sectional sample of civilian non-institutionalized adults aged 18 years or older in the United States, of whom 52% were women, 71% white, 12% Hispanic, 11% African American, 4% Asian and 2% Native American or of other racial background. Design-DataFindings-A higher percentage of individuals who began using prescription drugs non-medically at or before 13 years of age were found to have developed prescription drug abuse and dependence versus those individuals who began using at or after 21 years of age. Multivariate logistic regression analyses indicated that the odds of developing any life-time prescription drug abuse among nonmedical users was reduced by approximately 5% with each year non-medical use was delayed [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.94, 0.97], and that the odds of developing any lifetime prescription drug dependence were reduced by about 2% with each year onset was delayed (AOR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.96, 1.00) when controlling for relevant covariates.Conclusions-The results of this study indicate that early onset of NMUPD was a significant predictor of prescription drug abuse and dependence. These findings reinforce the importance of developing prevention efforts to reduce NMUPD and diversion of prescription drugs among children and adolescents.