Self-report assessment of alcohol sensitivity: An examination of the effects of different probes.

Abstract

Objective: Level of response (LOR) to alcohol is associated with several alcohol-related risk factors and outcomes. However, existing self-report measures of LOR have important limitations. For example, the Self-Rating of the Effects of Alcohol Scale assesses a limited range of alcohol-related effects. Although the Alcohol Sensitivity Questionnaire (ASQ) samples a broader range of effects, it uses different probes across effects, confounding type of effect with method variation associated with the use of different probes. Focusing on the ASQ, we systematically evaluate variation in estimated LOR as a function of how number of drinks to achieve an effect is probed. Our approach addresses a major limitation of existing LOR measures which fail to account for sensitivity variability across drinking occasions. Method: This study randomized 732 adult drinkers into one of four versions of the ASQ that assessed sensitivity to 15 alcoholrelated effects, systematically varying the follow-up probes. Results: Accounting for (a) the minimum number of drinks consumed before feeling an effect and (b) the maximum number of drinks consumed without feeling an effect for all effects is superior to the original ASQ approach in predicting relevant outcomes. Conclusions: Assessments of sensitivity should probe for minimum and maximum number of drinks across each of the effects. If impractical to probe for both, consistently probing for maximum number of drinks is desirable. Public Health Significance StatementLevel of response (LOR) to alcohol is associated with a range of alcohol-related risk factors and outcomes. The present study demonstrates the value of refining the assessment of LOR by considering variability in sensitivity across drinking occasions. Improved assessment can lead to improved detection of those with low LOR who may be at the most risk for alcohol dependence and related problems.

Interpretations and experiences of subjective effects for alcohol alone and when combined with cannabis: A mixed-methods approach.

“…Finally, participants were asked about their “typical” alcohol and cannabis use behaviors. Such retrospective reports may be subject to recall biases and may mask important differences in alcohol sensitivity (Boness & Sher, 2023) and alcohol and/or cannabis tolerance. Relatedly, only number of hits were assessed for cannabis use, which may be difficult to quantify for certain types (e.g., cannabis concentrates) or routes of cannabis use (e.g., edibles) and ignores level of potency, which may strongly impact level of impairment and effects experienced.…”

“…Features such as speed of intoxication and amount consumed throughout a use episode can serve as a key momentary intervention target (Fairbairn & Kang, 2019; Piasecki, 2019). While such objective measures are highly useful markers of risk, they can be challenged by inaccuracies in self-reported amount of alcohol use and/or delays in alcohol sensors detecting level of intoxication (Karns-Wright et al, 2018), as well as intraindividual variations in the experience of subjective effects across use occasions (Boness & Sher, 2023) and wearable sensors for cannabis use have yet to be developed. The majority of momentary assessments of subjective effects to date have focused on intoxication language, including sliders of “how intoxicated do you feel” or “how drunk do you feel” on a two-anchored 0 ( completely sober or not at all drunk ) to 100 ( extremely intoxicated or drunkest I’ve ever felt ) metric (e.g., Heinz et al, 2013; Quinn & Fromme, 2012).…”