No abstract

Problem drinking during the college years is a significant public health concern. The goal of the current review was to examine the primary psychosocial factors that predict problem drinking in college students. Variables examined included demographic variables, personality, drinking history, alcohol expectancies, drinking motives, stress and coping, activity involvement, and peer and family influence. Evidence from studies of college drinking indicated that the variables associated with college drinking seem to vary at levels dealing with one's personality and coping mechanisms, one's thought processes about drinking, and the environment. It seems that expectancies and drinking motives may serve as explanations for the pathways from certain personality types (i.e., sensation seeking and neurotic) to problem drinking in the college setting. Factors that predicted future drinking problems after college were also examined. Overall, it seems that interventions and prevention programs would need to reach college students at all three levels--the environment, individual personality traits, and cognitive processes. Future research should address the limitations in the previous research as well as test comprehensive models of college drinking.

Background: This article presents results of the acute treatment phase of a 2-site study comparing cognitive behavioral group therapy (CBGT) and treatment with the monoamine oxidase inhibitor phenelzine sulfate for social phobia.

Forty-nine patients participated in a study comparing cognitive-behavioral group treatment (CBGT) for social phobia with a credible placebo control. CBGT consisted of exposure to simulated phobic events, cognitive restructuring of maladaptive thoughts, and homework for self-directed exposure and cognitive restructuring between sessions. Control patients received a treatment package consisting of lecture-discussion and group support that was comparable to CBGT on measures of treatment credibility and outcome expectations. At pretest, posttest, and 3-and 6-month follow-ups, patients completed assessments that included clinician ratings, self-report measures, and behavioral physiological and cognitive-subjective measures derived from a behavioral simulation of a personally relevant phobic event. Both groups improved on most measures, but, at both posttest and follow-up, CBGT patients were rated as more improved than controls and reported less anxiety before and during the behavioral test. At follow-up, CBGT patients also reported significantly fewer negative and more positive self-statements than controls on a thought-listing task following the behavioral test. Regardless of treatment condition, follow-up changes in clinician-rated phobic severity were significantly related to changes on the thought-listing measure.