Individuals consume alcohol for a variety of reasons (motives), and these reasons may be differentially associated with the types of drinking outcomes that result. The present study examined whether specific affect-relevant motivations for alcohol use (i.e., coping, enhancement) are associated with distinct types of consequences, and whether such associations occur directly, or only as a function of increased alcohol use. It was hypothesized that enhancement motives would be associated with distinct problem types only through alcohol use, whereas coping motives would be linked directly to hypothesized problem types. Regularly drinking undergraduates (N= 192, 93 female) completed self-report measures of drinking motives and alcohol involvement. Using structural equation modeling, we tested direct associations between Coping motives and indirect associations between Enhancement motives and eight unique alcohol problem domains: Risky Behaviors, Blackout Drinking, Physiological Dependence, Academic/Occupational problems, Poor Self-care, Diminished Self-perception, Social/Interpersonal problems, and Impaired Control. We observed direct effects of Coping motives on three unique problem domains (Academic/Occupational problems, Risky Behaviors, and Poor Self-care). Both Coping and Enhancement motives were indirectly associated (through Use) with several problem types. Unhypothesized associations between Conformity motives and unique consequence types also were observed. Findings suggest specificity in the consequences experienced by individuals who drink to cope with negative affect versus to enhance positive affect, and may have intervention implications. Findings depict the coping motivated student as one who is struggling across multiple domains, regardless of levels of drinking. Such students may need to be prioritized for interventions.Keywords drinking motives; alcohol-related consequences; college students Many college students drink alcohol heavily (Johnston, O'Malley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2005). The types of negative alcohol consequences that they thus may encounter range from relatively mild (e.g., vomiting, Kahler, Strong, & Read, 2005) O'Neill & Sher, 2000;Vik, Carrello, Tate, & Field, 2000). A focus on the antecedents of specific types of alcohol problems could inform targeted preventive interventions.Social Learning Theory (SLT; Bandura, 1977Bandura, , 1986Maisto, Carey, & Bradizza, 1999) offers a comprehensive framework through which to understand alcohol use and consequences. SLT suggests that cognitive factors are important mechanistic predictors of behavioral outcomes (e.g., drinking consequences), and a common pathway through which more distal factors exert influence (Sher, Trull, Bartholow, & Vieth, 1999). One cognitive variable widely observed to be proximally important to drinking is motivation for drinking (Kuntsche, Knibbe, Gmel & Engels, 2005). Among the many factors that may motivate drinking, the regulation of affect is a prominent one (Cox & Klinger, 1990; Lang, Patrick, & S...

ABSTRACT. Objective: Although college students experience a diverse range of alcohol consequences, most studies focus on global, rather than distinct, consequence types. One predictor of unique consequencesdrinking motives-has been studied only cross-sectionally. We aimed to examine the prediction of unique alcohol consequence domains (social/ interpersonal, academic/occupational, risky behavior, impaired control, poor self-care, diminished self-perception, blackout drinking, and physiological dependence) by coping and enhancement motives over the course of one year. We hypothesized that coping motives would directly predict and that enhancement motives would indirectly (through alcohol use) predict unique consequences. Method: Web surveys were administered to a sample of college students (n = 552, 62% female) at the beginning of the fall semester for 2 consecutive academic years. Structural equation modeling was used to test direct and indirect paths from motives to consequences. Results: The data supported hypothesized direct, prospective paths from coping motives to several alcohol consequences (impaired control, diminished self-perception, poor self-care, risky behaviors, academic/occupational, and physiological dependence). These associations were not mediated by alcohol consumption. Enhancement motives were indirectly associated with all eight consequence domains by way of increased alcohol use at follow-up. Models were invariant across gender, year in school, and symptoms of posttraumatic stress. Conclusions: Findings suggest that whether motives act as a fi nal common pathway to problem drinking may depend on which motives and which drinking outcomes are examined. As coping motives demonstrate a direct link to unique alcohol problem types over time, individuals endorsing these motives may need to be prioritized for intervention. (J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs, 75, 93-102, 2014)

Findings highlight the risk associated with pregaming, due to selection effects and to event characteristics. The unique reasons for pregaming must be further understood and addressed in targeted interventions.

Objective College matriculation begins a period of transition into adulthood, one that is marked by new freedoms and responsibilities. This transition also is marked by an escalation in heavy drinking and other drug use, and a variety of use-related negative consequences. Trauma and symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may affect alcohol and drug problems, and thus may be a point of intervention. Yet no studies have examined trauma, PTSD, and alcohol and drug problem associations during this developmental period. The present study provides such an examination. Method Matriculating college students (N=997) completed surveys in September (T1) and at five subsequent time points (T2-T6) over their first year of college. With latent growth analysis, trajectories of alcohol and drug-related consequences were modeled to examine how trauma (No Criterion A Trauma, Criterion A Only, No PTSD symptoms) and PTSD (partial or full) symptom status predicted these trajectories. Results Results showed substantial risk for alcohol- and other drug-related negative consequences that is conferred by the presence of PTSD at matriculation. Those with both partial and full PTSD started the year with more alcohol and drug consequences. These individuals showed a steeper decrease in consequences in the first semester, which leveled off as the year progressed. Both alcohol and drug consequences remained higher for those in the PTSD group throughout the academic year. Hyper-arousal symptoms showed unique effects on substance consequence trajectories. Risk patterns were consistent for both partial and full PTSD symptom presentations. Trajectories did not vary by gender. Conclusions Interventions that offer support and resources to students entering college with PTSD may help to ameliorate problem substance use and may ultimately facilitate a stronger transition into college and beyond.