{"title":"Self-efficacy and alcohol relapse: concurrent validity of confidence measures, self-other discrepancies, and prediction of treatment outcome.","authors":"Ralf Demmel, Jennifer Nicolai, Dagmar Maria Jenko","doi":"10.15288/jsa.2006.67.637","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Self-efficacy has been shown to predict relapse following treatment for alcohol dependence. Most studies use comprehensive multi-item scales to assess clients' confidence. The development and validation of simple measures may encourage both clinicians and researchers to assess self-efficacy more frequently over the course of treatment. However, the validity of both comprehensive and single-item measures is likely to be threatened by deliberate impression management and self-deception, respectively.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>One hundred and forty-two alcohol-dependent inpatients completed a shortened unidimensional version of the Drug Taking Confidence Questionnaire and a brief questionnaire on background variables and alcohol use. Additionally, clients' confidence and beliefs about the success of others were assessed using various single-item rating scales. Treatment outcome was evaluated 12 weeks following discharge.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Correlations between confidence measures ranged from r=.21 to r=.56. Abstainers (n=54) differed from relapsers (n=88) with respect to age, marital status, abstinence self-efficacy, and abstinence other-efficacy. Although self-efficacy was not related to treatment outcome, clients' beliefs about the success of others predicted posttreatment drinking behavior.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The present findings suggest that other-efficacy beliefs may reflect an individual's true expectations more accurately than explicit measures of self-efficacy. The predictive validity of self-efficacy measures is likely to be limited because of a positive response bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":17092,"journal":{"name":"Journal of studies on alcohol","volume":"67 4","pages":"637-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.15288/jsa.2006.67.637","citationCount":"26","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of studies on alcohol","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15288/jsa.2006.67.637","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26
Abstract
Objective: Self-efficacy has been shown to predict relapse following treatment for alcohol dependence. Most studies use comprehensive multi-item scales to assess clients' confidence. The development and validation of simple measures may encourage both clinicians and researchers to assess self-efficacy more frequently over the course of treatment. However, the validity of both comprehensive and single-item measures is likely to be threatened by deliberate impression management and self-deception, respectively.
Method: One hundred and forty-two alcohol-dependent inpatients completed a shortened unidimensional version of the Drug Taking Confidence Questionnaire and a brief questionnaire on background variables and alcohol use. Additionally, clients' confidence and beliefs about the success of others were assessed using various single-item rating scales. Treatment outcome was evaluated 12 weeks following discharge.
Results: Correlations between confidence measures ranged from r=.21 to r=.56. Abstainers (n=54) differed from relapsers (n=88) with respect to age, marital status, abstinence self-efficacy, and abstinence other-efficacy. Although self-efficacy was not related to treatment outcome, clients' beliefs about the success of others predicted posttreatment drinking behavior.
Conclusions: The present findings suggest that other-efficacy beliefs may reflect an individual's true expectations more accurately than explicit measures of self-efficacy. The predictive validity of self-efficacy measures is likely to be limited because of a positive response bias.