The assessment of protective behavioral strategies: Comparing the absolute frequency and contingent frequency response scales.

Abstract

The purpose of the present studies was to examine the effects of response scale on the observed relationships between protective behavioral strategies (PBS) measures and alcohol-related outcomes. We reasoned that an ‘absolute frequency’ scale (stem: “how many times…”; response scale: 0 times to 11+ times) conflates the frequency of using PBS with the frequency of consuming alcohol; thus, we hypothesized that the use of an absolute frequency response scale would result in positive relationships between types of PBS and alcohol-related outcomes. Alternatively, a ‘contingent frequency’ scale (stem: “When drinking…how often…”; response scale: never to always) does not conflate frequency of alcohol use with use of PBS; therefore, we hypothesized that use of a contingent frequency scale would result in negative relationships between use of PBS and alcohol-related outcomes. Two published measures of PBS were used across studies: the Protective Behavioral Strategies Survey (PBSS) and the Strategy Questionnaire (SQ). Across three studies, we demonstrate that when measured using a contingent frequency response scale, PBS measures relate negatively to alcohol-related outcomes in a theoretically consistent manner; however, when PBS measures were measured on an absolute frequency response scale, they were non-significantly or positively related to alcohol-related outcomes. We discuss the implications of these findings for the assessment of PBS.

Clarifying observed relationships between protective behavioral strategies and alcohol outcomes: The importance of response options.

“…The problem of conflated PBS use with frequency of drinking has already been identified in the literature (Kite et al, 2013; Pearson, 2013; Pearson et al, 2012; Prince et al, 2013). However, by controlling for the number of drinking occasions in postsurvey calculations rather than in the stem of the item, the current adjustment allows for a more precise measure of PBS use (e.g., specific number of times) rather than broad categories (e.g., never, sometimes, always ).…”

“…This indicates the explanation for these inconsistent findings may lie in the response scale rather than the content the items used. To determine whether the differences in the estimated associations between PBS and alcohol use between the SQ (often used with absolutely frequency responses) and the PBSS (often used with contingent frequency responses) were due to the content of the items or the type of response scale, Kite and colleagues (2013) added the alternative response scale options to the traditional administration. They found that contingent response options yielded the expected negative associations between PBS and alcohol use and problems, regardless of whether the SQ or the PBSS was used.…”

Use of alcohol protective behavioral strategies among college students: A critical review

“…It is important to note that some of these studies included multiple samples (Benton et al, 2007; Kite, Pearson, & Henson, 2013) and some of the samples were used in multiple reports (e.g., Harris, Walters, & Leahy, 2008; Walters, Roudsari, Vader, & Harris, 2007; Walters, Vader, Harris, & Field, 2009; Walters, Vader, Harris, & Jouriles, 2009), so it is difficult to know exactly how many independent samples were reported across these studies.…”

“…Finally, the yes/no responses were used to describe the use of each PBS on a specific day or occasion. Considering the effects of these variations on validity is important because previous work has demonstrated strong concurrent validity of PBS use when assessed using a contingent frequency response scale, but not with an absolute frequency response scale (Kite, Pearson, & Henson, 2013). Presumably, this difference occurs because an absolute frequency response scale conflates frequency of alcohol use with frequency of PBS use.…”

“…Further, a CFA also found that the factor structure of the SQ failed to fit adequately in an independent sample (Pearson et al, 2012a). However, it should be noted that based on three studies that manipulated the response scale used for the SQ and the PBSS, it appears that the positive relationship between the SQ Strategies Used While Drinking subscale and alcohol-related outcomes is due to the use of the original absolute frequency response scale, which conflates the frequency of alcohol use with the frequency of PBS use (Kite, Pearson, & Henson, 2013). Using the same contingent frequency response scale as used with the PBS measures reviewed above, the SQ showed promise of having equal or stronger relationships with alcohol-related outcomes than the PBSS.…”