Self-Medicating With Alcohol During the COVID-19 Pandemic: COVID-19 Stresses Classify People Into Nondrinkers, Moderate Drinkers, and Binge Drinkers.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Andrew Lac
{"title":"Self-Medicating With Alcohol During the COVID-19 Pandemic: COVID-19 Stresses Classify People Into Nondrinkers, Moderate Drinkers, and Binge Drinkers.","authors":"Andrew Lac","doi":"10.1080/15504263.2025.2558178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> People may consume alcohol as a self-medicating strategy to cope with the stressors of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study evaluated COVID-19 stresses in distinguishing nondrinkers, moderate drinkers, and binge drinkers as guided by the self-medication hypothesis. <b>Methods:</b> Adults (<i>N</i> = 484) answered a question assessing drinker type (nondrinkers vs. moderate drinkers vs. binge drinkers) and completed the COVID-19 Stress Scales embodied by the subscales of danger and contamination stress, socioeconomic stress, xenophobia stress, traumatic stress, and compulsive checking stress. <b>Results:</b> Discriminant function analysis using the set of five COVID-19 stress subscales as predictors statistically classified participants into nondrinkers, moderate drinkers, and binge drinkers for the male and female samples. Afterward, 2 (gender: males vs. females) × 3 (drinker status: nondrinkers vs. moderate drinkers vs. binge drinkers) factorial multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and analyses of variance (ANOVAs) scrutinized mean differences. Specifically, males compared to females experienced significantly higher socioeconomic stress, xenophobia stress, traumatic stress, and compulsive checking stress, but no gender difference was exhibited for danger and contamination stress. Furthermore, binge drinkers compared to nondrinkers reported significantly higher scores on all the COVID-19 stress subscales. Binge drinkers compared to moderate drinkers endorsed significantly higher scores on all the COVID-19 stress subscales. Moderate drinkers compared to nondrinkers exhibited significantly higher scores on all COVID-19 subscales except for danger and contamination stress. <b>Conclusions:</b> The findings are consistent with the self-medication, such that people experiencing more COVID-19 pandemic stresses are more likely to consume alcohol in heavier quantities.</p>","PeriodicalId":46571,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dual Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dual Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15504263.2025.2558178","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: People may consume alcohol as a self-medicating strategy to cope with the stressors of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study evaluated COVID-19 stresses in distinguishing nondrinkers, moderate drinkers, and binge drinkers as guided by the self-medication hypothesis. Methods: Adults (N = 484) answered a question assessing drinker type (nondrinkers vs. moderate drinkers vs. binge drinkers) and completed the COVID-19 Stress Scales embodied by the subscales of danger and contamination stress, socioeconomic stress, xenophobia stress, traumatic stress, and compulsive checking stress. Results: Discriminant function analysis using the set of five COVID-19 stress subscales as predictors statistically classified participants into nondrinkers, moderate drinkers, and binge drinkers for the male and female samples. Afterward, 2 (gender: males vs. females) × 3 (drinker status: nondrinkers vs. moderate drinkers vs. binge drinkers) factorial multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and analyses of variance (ANOVAs) scrutinized mean differences. Specifically, males compared to females experienced significantly higher socioeconomic stress, xenophobia stress, traumatic stress, and compulsive checking stress, but no gender difference was exhibited for danger and contamination stress. Furthermore, binge drinkers compared to nondrinkers reported significantly higher scores on all the COVID-19 stress subscales. Binge drinkers compared to moderate drinkers endorsed significantly higher scores on all the COVID-19 stress subscales. Moderate drinkers compared to nondrinkers exhibited significantly higher scores on all COVID-19 subscales except for danger and contamination stress. Conclusions: The findings are consistent with the self-medication, such that people experiencing more COVID-19 pandemic stresses are more likely to consume alcohol in heavier quantities.

在COVID-19大流行期间用酒精自我治疗:COVID-19的压力将人们分为不饮酒者,适度饮酒者和酗酒者。
目的:人们可能将饮酒作为一种自我治疗策略,以应对COVID-19大流行的压力源。该研究在自我用药假设的指导下,评估了区分不饮酒者、适度饮酒者和酗酒者的COVID-19压力。方法:成人(N = 484)回答了饮酒者类型评估问题(不饮酒者、适度饮酒者、酗酒者),并完成了由危险和污染压力、社会经济压力、仇外心理压力、创伤压力和强迫性检查压力子量表组成的COVID-19压力量表。结果:使用五种COVID-19压力子量表作为预测因子的判别函数分析将男性和女性样本的参与者分为不饮酒者、适度饮酒者和酗酒者。随后,2(性别:男性vs女性)× 3(饮酒者状况:不饮酒者、适度饮酒者、狂饮者)多因素方差分析(MANOVA)和方差分析(ANOVAs)仔细检查了平均差异。具体而言,男性的社会经济压力、仇外心理压力、创伤压力和强迫性检查压力显著高于女性,但在危险压力和污染压力方面没有性别差异。此外,与不饮酒者相比,酗酒者在所有COVID-19压力子量表上的得分都要高得多。与适度饮酒者相比,酗酒者在所有COVID-19压力子量表上的得分都要高得多。除了危险和污染压力外,适度饮酒者在所有COVID-19子量表上的得分都明显高于不饮酒者。结论:这些发现与自我用药一致,即经历更多COVID-19大流行压力的人更有可能大量饮酒。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
13.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Journal of Dual Diagnosis is a quarterly, international publication that focuses on the full spectrum of complexities regarding dual diagnosis. The co-occurrence of mental health and substance use disorders, or “dual diagnosis,” is one of the quintessential issues in behavioral health. Why do such high rates of co-occurrence exist? What does it tell us about risk profiles? How do these linked disorders affect people, their families, and the communities in which they live? What are the natural paths to recovery? What specific treatments are most helpful and how can new ones be developed? How can we enhance the implementation of evidence-based practices at clinical, administrative, and policy levels? How can we help clients to learn active recovery skills and adopt needed supports, clinicians to master new interventions, programs to implement effective services, and communities to foster healthy adjustment? The Journal addresses each of these perplexing challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信