Evaluating a brief alcohol intervention with fraternities.

Larimer, Mary E.; Turner, Aaron P.; Anderson, Britt; Fader, Jonathan S.; Kilmer, Jason R.; Palmer, Rebekka S.; Cronce, Jessica M.

doi:10.15288/jsa.2001.62.370

Cited by 321 publications

(322 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

306

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Aside from individual-level deliveries, three studies combined feedback with group interventions (Larimer et al, 2001;Walters, 2000;. One study (Larimer et al, 2001) found that the combination of an in-person and group meeting with feedback was better than control, but in another , a group session appeared to detract from the effect of mailed feedback.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One study (Larimer et al, 2001) found that the combination of an in-person and group meeting with feedback was better than control, but in another , a group session appeared to detract from the effect of mailed feedback. These results, compared with other studies that did not include a group component, suggest that a group meeting may add little or nothing to the feedback effect and may, in some cases, detract from the effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At a 1-year follow-up, intervention participants reduced their average DPW from 15.42 to 12.27, while control participants increased from 15.56 to 17.51. Importantly, peer interviewers were as effective as professionals across all outcome variables for men (Larimer et al, 2001). Borsari and Carey (2000) randomized heavy drinking students to either a single MI session with feedback, or a no-treatment control condition.…”

Section: In-person Feedback Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…At 3 months, they found a reduction in drinking for the heaviest 50% of the sample who received BASICS, as compared to those assigned to an educational intervention or control. Finally, Larimer et al (2001) randomized fraternity and sorority pledges to a BASICS intervention with individual and housewide feedback components or control. This study used both professionals and undergraduate peers to deliver the intervention.…”

Section: In-person Feedback Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Feedback interventions for college alcohol misuse: What, why and for whom?

Walters¹,

Neighbors

2005

Addictive Behaviors

302

308

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In response to the persistent problem of college drinking, universities have instituted a range of alcohol intervention programs for students. Motivational feedback is one intervention that has garnered support in the literature and been adopted on college campuses. This article reviews published outcome studies that have utilized feedback as a major component of an alcohol intervention for college students. Overall, 11 of the 13 reviewed studies (77%) found a significant reduction in drinking as compared to a control or comparison group. While the studies varied widely in terms of population, follow-up period, and feedback content, it appears that feedback can be effective whether delivered by mail, the Internet, or via a face-to-face motivational interview. Feedback seems to change normative perceptions of drinking and may be more effective among students who drink for social reasons. The addition of a group or individual counseling session does not appear to increase the short-term impact of the feedback.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: In-person Feedback Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: In-person Feedback Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Feedback interventions for college alcohol misuse: What, why and for whom?

Walters¹,

Neighbors

2005

Addictive Behaviors

302

308

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One interpretation of this consistent lack of effectiveness is that risky drinking represents not a lack of knowledge but rather a lack of motivation to change. Therefore, interventions that enhance motivation for risk reduction are needed to assist the students who are already drinking heavily.Several published studies indicate that in-person brief motivational interventions (BMIs) lead to reduced drinking in college students (Baer et al, 1992;Borsari & Carey, 2000;Larimer et al, 2001;Marlatt et al, 1998;Murphy et al, 2004;Murphy et al, 2001). These BMIs typically consist of one or two 45-min sessions that provide personalized feedback and incorporate motivational interviewing (Miller & Rollnick, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Two brief alcohol interventions for mandated college students.

Borsari

Carey

2005

Psychology of Addictive Behaviors

201

225

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Encouraging but limited research indicates that brief motivational interventions may be an effective way to reduce heavy episodic drinking in college students. At 2 campuses, students (83% male) mandated to a substance use prevention program were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 individually administered conditions: (a) a brief motivational interview (BMI; n = 34) or (b) an alcohol education session (AE; n = 30). Students in the BMI condition reported fewer alcohol-related problems than the AE students at 3-and 6-month assessments. Trends toward reductions in number of binge drinking episodes and typical blood alcohol levels were seen in both groups. Process measures confirmed the integrity of both interventions. The findings demonstrate that mandated BMIs can reduce alcohol problems in students referred for alcohol violations. Keywords mandated; student; alcohol; college; brief interventionThe search continues for effective and innovative interventions to curtail heavy episodic (binge) drinking. Binge drinking is defined as having five or more drinks in a single occasion for men (four or more drinks for women; Wechsler et al., 2002). Roughly 4 out of 10 college students (including close to half of the men) binge drink at least once every 2 weeks (O'Malley & Johnston, 2002;Wechsler et al., 2002), and negative consequences frequently result from such drinking, including damage to self, others, and property (Perkins, 2002). Educational programs designed primarily to teach students about the risks associated with excessive drinking have frequently failed to achieve desired reductions in alcohol use (Hingson, Berson, & Dowley, 1997;Wechsler et al., 2002). One interpretation of this consistent lack of effectiveness is that risky drinking represents not a lack of knowledge but rather a lack of motivation to change. Therefore, interventions that enhance motivation for risk reduction are needed to assist the students who are already drinking heavily.Several published studies indicate that in-person brief motivational interventions (BMIs) lead to reduced drinking in college students (Baer et al., 1992;Borsari & Carey, 2000;Larimer et al., 2001;Marlatt et al., 1998;Murphy et al., 2004;Murphy et al., 2001). These BMIs typically consist of one or two 45-min sessions that provide personalized feedback and incorporate motivational interviewing (Miller & Rollnick, 2002). Personalized feedback is designed to engage students and heighten the self-relevance of the educational information; such feedback, when coupled with normative comparisons, develops a sense of discrepancy that can motivate risk reduction. The motivational interviewing style cultivates active collaboration and reinforces self-determination and freedom of choice as participants explore ambivalence regarding current drinking behavior. However, BMIs have yet to be compared with groups that receive sessions of similar length and format. Although the content of previous control Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Brian Borsari, who is no...

show abstract

Social norms interventions to reduce alcohol misuse in University or College students

Moreira

Smith

Foxcroft

2009

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

215

157

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

WF and IFF are probably effective in reducing alcohol misuse. No direct comparisons of WF against IFF were found, but WF impacted across a broader set of outcomes and is less costly so therefore might be preferred. Significant effects were more apparent for short-term outcomes (up to three months). For mailed and group feedback, and social norms marketing campaigns, the results are on the whole not significant and therefore cannot be recommended.

show abstract

Evaluating a brief alcohol intervention with fraternities.

Cited by 321 publications

References 0 publications

Feedback interventions for college alcohol misuse: What, why and for whom?

Feedback interventions for college alcohol misuse: What, why and for whom?

Two brief alcohol interventions for mandated college students.

Social norms interventions to reduce alcohol misuse in University or College students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About