Protective behavioral strategies, alcohol expectancies, and drinking motives in a model of college student drinking.

Abstract

An extensive body of research asserts alcohol expectancies, or beliefs regarding the effects of alcohol, as an important influence on drinking. However, the extent to which expectancies are related to drinking motives and protective behavioral strategies (PBS) has yet to be examined. Existing alcohol mediational models suggest associations between expectancies and drinking motives as well as positive drinking motives and PBS use. Thus, it is possible that drinking motives and PBS use act as intervening factors in the relationship between expectancies and alcohol outcomes. Consequently, the present cross-sectional study aimed to test the indirect effect of expectancies (i.e., social facilitation) on alcohol outcomes through drinking motives and PBS use. Participants were 520 (358 female) college student drinkers with a mean age of 20.80 (SD = 4.61) years old. Students completed measures of expectancies, drinking motives, PBS use, alcohol use, and alcohol-related problems. Results from structural equation modeling indicated that drinking motives and PBS mediated the relationship between social expectancies and alcohol use. In particular, expectancies were associated with greater positive drinking motives, drinking motives were associated with less PBS use, and PBS was associated with less alcohol use and fewer alcohol-related problems. Given the key role of PBS in explaining drinking outcomes in our model, active efforts to incorporate PBS in alcohol interventions may be particularly beneficial for college students. Further, our findings support the consideration of PBS use as a part of the motivational model of alcohol use in future work.

Testing a model of caffeinated alcohol-specific expectancies

“…This is consistent with prior research examining alcohol-only outcome expectancies, such that positive beliefs about the effects of alcohol were negatively associated with PBS use (Bonar et al, 2012; Linden et al, 2014; Madson et al, 2013). In the case of CAB use, a similar pattern is observed with ANC expectancies.…”

“…Protective behavioral strategies (PBS) are cognitive-behavioral techniques one can use in order to limit alcohol use and problems (Martens, Ferrier, Sheehy, Corbett, Anderson, & Simmons, 2005). PBS use is negatively associated with drinking (Linden, Lau-Barraco, & Milletich, 2014) and drinking-related harms (Martens, Taylor, Damann, Page, Mowry, & Cimini, 2004). Stronger endorsement of positive alcohol expectancies has been shown to relate to less PBS use (Linden et al, 2014) and more negative drinking consequences (Madson, Moorer, Zeigler-Hill, Bonnell, & Villarosa, 2013).…”

“…PBS use is negatively associated with drinking (Linden, Lau-Barraco, & Milletich, 2014) and drinking-related harms (Martens, Taylor, Damann, Page, Mowry, & Cimini, 2004). Stronger endorsement of positive alcohol expectancies has been shown to relate to less PBS use (Linden et al, 2014) and more negative drinking consequences (Madson, Moorer, Zeigler-Hill, Bonnell, & Villarosa, 2013). These findings support PBS as a relevant factor to consider in understanding the link between expectancies and drinking.…”

The potential individual- and population-level benefits of encouraging drinkers to count their drinks

“…Previous studies examining the relationship between PBS enactment and alcohol consumption have reported inconsistent results, which is likely due to the differing methods used to examine PBS use (e.g., in aggregate vs individually; cross-sectionally vs longitudinally; college student vs general adult population samples). In studies examining PBSs in aggregate in college student samples, enactment has typically been found to be associated with lower levels of alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm (Kenney & Labrie, 2013; Linden, Lau-Barraco, & Milletich, 2014; Ray, Turrisi, Abar, & Peters, 2009), although with some exceptions (e.g., Sugarman & Carey, 2007). By comparison, studies with adult drinkers assessing individual PBSs suggest that not all strategies contribute to reduced alcohol consumption, and some may actually increase alcohol intake (Dekker et al, 2018; Jongenelis et al, 2016).…”

Are protective behavioral strategies associated with fewer negative consequences on high-intensity drinking days? Results from a measurement-burst design.

“…Several sub-types of strategies exist, including strategies for limiting the amount of alcohol consumed (e.g., pre-plan the number of drinks to consume before going out), modifying the way of drinking (e.g., avoid drinking games, drink more slowly), reducing the likelihood of experiencing serious harms (e.g., use a designated driver), or planning activities to avoid drinking (e.g., avoid situations where alcohol is likely) (Martens, Ferrier, Sheehy, Corbett, Anderson, & Simmons, 2005; Novik & Boekeloo, 2011; Sugarman & Carey, 2007). More frequent use of such strategies is generally found to be negatively associated with amount of alcohol consumed and alcohol-related harms in cross-sectional comparisons (e.g., Araas & Adams, 2008; Benton, Schmidt, Newton, Shin, Benton, & Newton, 2004; Linden, Lau-Barraco, & Milletich, 2014; Pearson, Kite, & Henson, 2012) and as a mechanism of change within an intervention context (e.g., Barnett, Murphy, Colby, & Monti, 2007). Sub-types of strategies tend to have differential associations with alcohol use outcomes.…”