Brief Alcohol Interventions With Mandated or Adjudicated College Students

Abstract

This article summarizes the proceedings of a symposium presented at the 2003 RSA Meeting in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, organized and chaired by Nancy Barnett. The purpose of the symposium was to present information and efficacy data about approaches to brief intervention with students who get into trouble on their campuses for alcohol and as a result are required to attend alcohol education or counseling. The data presented in this symposium indicated that students who are evaluated or disciplined for alcohol use are on average heavy drinkers who drink more heavily than their closest peers. Brief intervention approaches described by the speakers included group classroom sessions, individual motivational intervention, individual alcohol education, and computerized alcohol education. Reductions in consumption and problems were noted across the various intervention groups. Brief motivational intervention as a general approach with mandated students shows promise in that it reduced alcohol problems in a group of mandated students who were screened for being at risk (in the Borsari and Carey study) and increased the likelihood that students would attend further counseling (in the Barnett study). KeywordsCollege; Brief Intervention TENS OF THOUSANDS of alcohol and drug arrests occur on U.S. campuses each year. According to a recent large survey of U.S. college administrators, more than one half of violations of campus policies involve alcohol (Anderson and Gadaleto, 2001). Students who receive a citation for violating university rules concerning alcohol use may be at particular risk for problematic alcohol involvement, as they compose a disproportionate number of heavy drinkers and alcohol abusers compared with nonadjudicated samples (Caldwell, 2002;O'Hare, 1997). Most colleges have mandatory sanctions for alcohol violations such as alcohol education classes or alcohol counseling (from 55% in 1985 to 84% in 2001Anderson and Gadaleto,

Reducing high-risk drinking in mandated college students: Evaluation of two personalized normative feedback interventions

“…Similarly, those in the CWF group reported no change in binge drinking frequency compared to a 90% increase in in the SWF group. These findings are consistent with research indicating brief interventions providing in-person normative feedback are effective for mandated students (Barnett et al, 2004;Borsari and Carey, 2005;White et al, 2007). Although results were not significant for peak alcohol consumption or alcohol-related consequences, those in the CWF group reported a 14% reduction in peak alcohol consumption compared to no change in the SWF group, and a 10% reduction in reported alcohol-related consequences compared to a 14% increase in the SWF group.…”

“…This body of literature generally supports the short-term efficacy of personalized normative feedback interventions for mandated students whether delivered in person (Barnett et al, 2004;Borsari & Carey, 2005;White et al, 2006), by mail (White et al, 2006), or online (Doumas, McKinley, & Book, 2009;Doumas, Workman, Smith, & Navarro, in press). Results of studies with longer follow-up periods, however, are mixed.…”

Evaluation of two Web-based alcohol interventions for mandated college students

“…Additionally, the majority of studies examining the efficacy of programs for mandated students have used a single-group design (see Barnett & Read, 2005), limiting the ability to determine whether changes in drinking and alcohol-related problems are related to the intervention or to the alcohol sanction itself. To date, only three studies examining brief motivational interventions for mandated students using a randomized controlled design with a comparison group have been published (Barnett et al 2004;Borsari & Carey, 2005;White et al, 2006); two of these also published data from long-term follow-up assessments (Barnett, Murphy, Colby, & Monti, 2007;White, Mun, Pugh, & Morgan, 2007). Overall, these studies suggest brief interventions providing personalized normative feedback are effective in reducing drinking and alcohol-related problems in mandated students.…”

“…In a larger study with a longer follow-up period, Barnett et al (2004;2007) examined the efficacy of two interventions for mandated students referred following a disciplinary hearing for an alcohol infraction or medical evaluation for intoxication. The study compared two conditions: a one-session brief motivational interview (BMI; n = 112) and a 45 minute session reviewing an educational CD (Alcohol 101; n = 113).…”

“…To date, however, no studies have examined the efficacy of a web-based personalized normative feedback program with mandated students. Although Barnett et al (2004;2007) used a computerized program, the program was primarily educational and it is not clear from the study whether or not an optional personalized feedback component available in the program was viewed by the students. Similarly, although White et al (2006;2007) examined differences between in-person and written feedback, for both, the feedback was given during a second session occurring approximately one week after the assessment session.…”